Ah, then it appears I owe my post a some, many or most!
I would jump at the opportunity to fly an Ercoupe. I forget, is that the “unstallable” plane, or the one without rudder pedals?
Yeah, exceptions to everything, especially here! 
It’s both unstallable, and without rudder pedals. The elevator is limited so you can’t exceed the critical AOA, and the rudders are coupled to the yoke to maintain mostly coordinated flight.
There is a kit to add rudder pedals.
While on this subject, what about takeoff/landing steering? It seems those tiny nosewheels would be awfully touchy at high speeds. How do you keep things on the straight and narrow? (I am referring to large passenger jets here).
The rudder pedals are linked to the nosewheel for small corrections. Once you get fast enough, the rudder becomes effective.
So (a non-pilot here), planes in general manouvre on the taxiways by means of thrust from their engines, right? And next to airport buildings, they’re pushed or pulled around by those little tractors?
Are there any planes that have motors in the wheels for taxiing?
I don’t know of any aircraft that have motors in the wheels. Why would you want to? It just adds weight, and you’ve already got perfectly good engines capable of taxiing the aircraft.
Large aircraft use tugs to move them close to the buildings and to push them back.
Some turboprop aircraft with Beta range propellers can push themselves backwards. All other propeller aircraft can only move forwards.
For really light aircraft like small Cessnas, we actually move them around on the ground by hand, using a towbar attached to the nosewheel. Slightly heavier aircraft can use towbars with a little motorized wheel attached.
When we had to pull small aircraft long distances like across a long ramp area, rather than stress the engine by starting and stoppig it we had a towbar with a long shank and a trailer hitch on the end. We’d use a pickup truck to pull the airplane around.
The Ercoupe has no rudders, the fins are fixed; it strikes me as something really stupid, by the way. I guess landing with cross winds would be hmmm… interesting
Yes, it does have moving rudders.
The gear is designed to be landed in a crab. It’s pretty tough.
You know what?, you´re dead right; a couple months ago I have the chance to see an Ercoupe, and I didn´t notice the rudders, I checked the pictures I took and the hinge line is barely visible.
But it´s still a PITA to land on cross winds, nonetheless. 
As if there weren’t enough exceptions and special cases in this thread already…
Some planes can be turned into seaplanes by mounting large floats on the bottom, and some of those floats have their own landing gear built in so the plane can operate from land or water.
On land, the wheels on the front of the float are free-castering. There’s no practical way to connect them to any sort of steering linkage, but there are hydraulic lines to the main wheels. All ground manouvering is done by braking one side or the other.
On water, there are rudders on the back of the float connected to the rudder controls of the plane. When taxiing on the water, you can steer but you have no brakes.
The water rudders are only used for slow taxiing on water. They’re raised at the beginning of the takeoff run (steering is by the regular air rudder), and only lowered again after landing. You can see them in the raised position here.
This is exactly why the rudder pedals can control the nosewheel steering, but can’t acheive the same deflection as the tiller.
The tiller is used to steer onto the runway and line up on centerline. From that point on the airplane is completely controllable using the primary flight controls only (ie rudder pedals instead of the tiller). Some people use the tiller for the first few hundred feet of the takeoff roll, but it quickly becomes too sensitive for practical use.
On landing, most operators (airlines, the military, etc) set a minimum speed at which nosewheel steering via the tiller can be used. It seems to be around 60 knots, but it varies. Above this speed, the control is too sensitive.
For Sunspace: I don’t know of ANY aircraft that has power to the wheels. The power comes from the engines, and the wheels are used to steer and taxi around. FTR, large aircraft are surprisingly maneuverable. Jets with clamshell-type thrust reversers can even back up under their own power (depending on the type of jet and gross weight, etc).
And…
Twin or multiengine aircraft can be maneuvered by using asymmetric thrust.
Limited effectiveness in a 727 or 337, I’m sure, but the Seminole does it quite handily.
Of course, when I wake up in the morning I’ll find that someone has posted a link to some bizarre wheel-driven airplane with the nosewheel steering connected to the ailerons and an embedded Jeppesen moving-map display!
Exceptions to everything, indeed.
In Aero-101 I did see a pic of an airplane with chain driven wheels, lemme see if I can find it.
And:
Some Twin Aero-Comanders,
Aerostars,
use the first bit of the toe part of the rudder pedal to operate the nose wheel steering and then comes in the brakes.
On some of these you can get the nose wheel almost completely backwards and they will seem to be working backwards.
On many biz-jets, the actual nose wheel steering link is disconnected for movement by tug.
ME-109 had a central post that you pushed a bar on each side as in a pivot arrangement and it steered like a Red Flyer sled, backwards to what American pilots were used to.
Any of you big jet drivers want to have ‘heel’ brakes installed on your birds? he he he
Thankfully, things are becoming more standardized and it is not such a disaster to move from one manufacture to another like it used to be.
Funny. Every Aerostar I’ve driven had a steering wheel.
Really? do you have a cite for that? It’s not so much that I don’t believe you but it sounds unlikely. I’ve talked to a few 109 pilots (young ones) and they’ve never mentioned that little quirk.
I’m not a jet driver, but I’ve done most of the different brake arrangements. Heel, toe, hand, none. The hand brakes were on a Chipmunk and were surprisingly useful. It had notches like a car handbrake (and was in much the same position as a car) so you could pull the brake on a couple of notches and you would get no braking effect with neutral rudder, but when you applied rudder in one direction you would get gentle braking applied to the same wheel. This way you could still keep a hand free for throttle while taxiing.
Berkut: The only Aerostars I have ‘driven’ have all had wings…
1920’s: You got some kids that get to fly ME-109’s? Where? Must be very lucky kids. ::: green with envey :::: 
I have only seen one up close and personal and talked to a few guys who flew them many years ago. Will try to find drawings.
Rummor has it that more pilots of ME-109’s died in gound accidents than did in combat. I would like to talk to a low time pilot that can fly such a rare aircraft without damage and the owner of such that lets them.
Some interesting stuff but no rudder system pics.
http://www.luftwaffe-experten.com/aircraft/day/me109_text.html