This is spot on. I've owned a Maule for several months (and 200+ hours) now and I use the "Jeep with Wings" descriptor often.

With a "slow airplane" Alaska trip scheduled for July of this year...I settled on a Maule after deciding that I wanted a C180, but couldn't rationalize the budget that it would take to buy what I wanted in a C180 (and keep a civilized traveling airplane fed too).

The airframe that I own was the FIFTH airplane I seriously considered...long story short, it seems that Maule owners take something of a "Jeep/Tractor/airport car" approach to maintenance. I considered only the 540/235 variants and would have liked to have found a M6/MX7/M7, but eventually found a M5-235 in excellent condition with a fresh (reputable shop) overhaul and bought it. Mine even has the rare (so I'm told) "Observer Windows" in the second row in addition to the (more common) lower "Patrol" in the front doors.

At gross weight (2500lbs, going to Alaska for three weeks), its a 600ft/50ft obstacle "off" airplane at lower density altitudes. 300ft "on" is totally doable too, if brakes are used...but 500ft with little to no brakes is my normal landing roll.

At light weights (me, no gear, half fuel)...well, its silly. Power on, lift the tail, rotate at 45MPH, pitch for 60MPH...giggle...and you've used maybe 300ft of ground roll and are now climbing at 2,200FPM.

As for flying characteristics...its definitely not a docile C170 or J-3, but most of us didn't learn to fly to keep flying trainers. With my mediocre piloting skills as the standard, I'm convinced that any moderately experienced tailwheel pilot CAN learn to fly a Maule with confidence...its just another airplane that has its own nuances and gotcha's. Good instruction is available if you go looking, I wouldn't just hop in with any tailwheel CFI (but I'm a big believer in type specific training anyway). Takeoff is standard tailwheel (plenty of low speed rudder authority), cruise is routine (easily trims hands-off), and landings are as exciting as you want them to be. Sink rate is probably the single biggest gotcha, at least in my short-winged M5...the "arrival" back on earth can easily be more firm that desired if one becomes complacent. For "hand flying" fun level, it's definitely not a Bonanza...but its very communicative and also ton's more fun to touch than my SR22.

The Alaska trip went off without a hitch and with a couple hundred hours of "Maule" time (had 50-60 prior to acquiring mine), I'm very happy with my "Flying Jeep"...hell, even my wife likes the "toy" airplane.

I'm currently running Aero Classic 850 "Tundra" tires (which are a tremendous value)...but when winter rolls around, I'll be installing a set of Alaska Bushwheel's 4-inch extended gear, double-puck brakes, and a set of 31" Alaska Bushwheels...because all Jeep's "need" a lift and big fat tires, right?

Chris

Chris,

Did the tundra tires give the plane a better stance for a 3 point landing? When I have seen Maules landing it looked to me like the tail wheel touched down while the mains were still about a foot from touchdown. I thought the mains should be a little longer... (?)

Generally, yes. Having flown another M5 on 26" Bushwheels (both with standard gear and after installing ABI 4" extended gear), I generally prefer the higher angle of attack on the ground. Its not so much that my standard gear and 22" Aero Classics are bad, just that the other just feels better.

Regarding landings: In the Maule, standard procedure (for me, anyway) has become the 3-point, often with the tailwheel touching just before the mains. Flying most other STOL-type taildraggers I've almost always felt ambivalent toward landing methods, but the Maule just feels more comfortable in the 3 point. However, it is no problem to wheel land if that's your thing.

Chris

I know a gentleman, let's call him Chad, based on the other side of town, who had maybe a 1,000 hours in Piper Dakota, RANS S-18, and, of all things, a gyroplane. He bought a Maule because he wanted to go to backcountry strips.

First he tipped it a wing in while taxiing and did $10,000+ in damage, because the spar in his Maule extended into the wingtip, where conventional airplanes only have a fiberglass cap. A bent spar basically meant a wing had to be replaced. Then, he enjoyed it for about a year and wrote it off in a ground looping accident at a paved airport. During that year, he was flying home from a fly-in at D*** **** and got under low overcast at S*******. He made something like 7 approaches to land. Because of the overcast, he had to make final approaches at an unexpected angle and the airplane was getting away from him, starting to porpoise.

I think that Chad is not a bad pilot. But Maule is picky about its friends, it appears. Abysmal handling or not, it's not for everyone.

Sounds like the definition of a bad pilot, or at least a very careless one.

I know a gentleman, let's call him Chad, based on the other side of town, who had maybe a 1,000 hours in Piper Dakota, RANS S-18, and, of all things, a gyroplane. He bought a Maule because he wanted to go to backcountry strips.

First he tipped it a wing in while taxiing and did $10,000+ in damage, because the spar in his Maule extended into the wingtip, where conventional airplanes only have a fiberglass cap. A bent spar basically meant a wing had to be replaced. Then, he enjoyed it for about a year and wrote it off in a ground looping accident at a paved airport. During that year, he was flying home from a fly-in at D*** **** and got under low overcast at S*******. He made something like 7 approaches to land. Because of the overcast, he had to make final approaches at an unexpected angle and the airplane was getting away from him, starting to porpoise.

I think that Chad is not a bad pilot. But Maule is picky about its friends, it appears. Abysmal handling or not, it's not for everyone.