190 Question

[Panther_99FS]

I thought both the long-nose and radial engine model had fixed/castor tailwheels - Am i incorrect in this

[heloguy]

If you mean that they didn't retract, then no. All models of FW-190 had semi-retractable tail-wheels. 109's however, went through a period from F-0 to G-4 where they were semi-retractable, then fixed from G-6 to G-14 where they were fixed. The 109 K was the only 109 I know of that had a fully retractable tail wheel. If that's not what you meant, then I guess I just wasted a bunch of wind.

[Panther_99FS]

LoL thanks for the answer - I meant that castored as in non-steerable....

[heloguy]

Oh, okay. Then yeah, they were castor wheels, but they weren't fixed. They were lockable in the straight position for take off, but when unlocked, they spun freely. The force of the prop wash over the rudder turned the aircraft, not the actual input of the rudder pedals to a steerable wheel.

[Panther_99FS]

Oh, okay. Then yeah, they were castor wheels, but they weren't fixed. They were lockable in the straight position for take off, but when unlocked, they spun freely. The force of the prop wash over the rudder turned the aircraft, not the actual input of the rudder pedals to a steerable wheel.

Coger ropy that....

[al tom]

They were lockable in the straight position for take off, but when unlocked, they spun freely. The force of the prop wash over the rudder turned the aircraft, not the actual input of the rudder pedals to a steerable wheel.[/quote]

Additional
At low speed and without the force from the prop, the left and right wheel brakes where used for steering.

al tom

[Panther_99FS]

Additional
At low speed and without the force from the prop, the left and right wheel brakes where used for steering.

al tom

Right: The aircraft seems a bit too steerable at low speeds WITHOUT using differential braking....

[heloguy]

I'll attest to that too. Never thought of it before.