Wing Selection for Rebuild?

[Roger Gross]

Which wings would you pick for a new project if money was not the issue and you had to buy a new set of wings?

Should be interesting.

Later, Roger

[nanook]

stock wings with atlee's strut attach beef-up and univair or dakota ribs..Also if you use your cub in the winter, out and about camping or skiing in the mountains and you need to put wing covers on, it's a no brainer on the VG's, leave them off, you don't need them anyway.

[Roger Gross]

Hey,

Twenty Seven votes out of nearly 1000 members. Hmmmm?

[Crash]

If I could lay my hands on a set, I would get late model ('77-84') Piper PA-18 wings that had never been over on their back, or beat on with a broom (flattened ribs), original cover (no one has ever screwed with). I would cut the cover off, power wash them off with low pressure, install a set of Dakota 24 gallon tanks, cover them with Ceconite 101 and butyrate dope up through color. They won't let you do it anymore (I got the last set signed off Sept. 30th) but I would extend the leading edge back 14" to keep the scallop out of the fabric between the ribs (makes it 5 mph faster, better aileron control, lower stall speed). Second choice is a new set of Dakota Cub wings complete with ailerons, flaps and 24 gallon tanks. The Dakota's are a more practical choice because the ribs are stronger then Piper's. They won't flatten out by beating snow off the wings with a push broom. When you go over on your back they will take more abuse and you can get replacements where as Piper ribs are non existent. Crash

[diggler]

delete

[cub_driver]

I believe piper developed a good wing, its performance can be enhanced with the VGs. When I say performance being enhanced I am referring to better aileron control at slow speeds and turns. The VGs will give you a more stable aircraft when flying slow and that helps getting in and out of short strips. As for increase of cruise speed or decrease of stall speed I never really noticed any difference. I just put my wing covers on today and have to say putting them on over my VGs is pretty trouble free I would not let that be part of your discission making when deciding to install VGs. Myself I would keep the wing length and tips stock. I would install the Dakota ribs for the reasons Crash mentioned.

I have never heard of anyone extending the leading edge back before, interesting idea has anyone else done that to there aircraft?

Cub_Driver

[Crash]

Diggler: they (extended leading edges) weigh 3 lbs per side and are made of .020 2024 T3.

Cub Driver: The top rebuilders in Alaska have been installing extended leading edges for years. Ask Dan Hollingsworth (Dan's Aircraft) Crash

[cubpilot2]

I did it to mine and would do it again. In fact I want to on my current project but sounds like wishfull thinking for FA. Didn't Dan have a multiple use 337 for that one?

[Crash]

No, there is not a multiple 337 that I know of for the extended leading edges. Everyone just did it and some got them signed off as a field approval. I was told that they would never sign off another set until someone did the engineering on them to show stress loads etc. I only got mine signed off because it was a work in progress when they changed the rules. Crash

[Frank T]

Are these just extended back 14 inches from the rear of the front spar, and screwed to the top of the ribs? Any bend at the rear top edge?

[Crash]

They are cut 14" wide by 48" long. Brake a 90 degree 1/2" lip on the rear edge for stiffness. Brake a 3/16" 5 degree shamfer on the front edge. Install by overlaping the standard leading edge by 1/2"(I use full wrap leading edges all the way out). Attach with Marston rivets to the leading edges and flat pk screws to the ribs. Cut out a notch for each rib and drill 3/8" holes in the sheet metal where the rib stitching goes through. Put the twist in the wing before you attach everything because it will not flex much after you tighten everything down. One degree is the right amount of twist if the wing is on saw horses for a PA-18. Crash

[nanook]

Cub-driver: Next time you're out in the great outdoors, in two/ three feet of snow, the wind is blowing and you're freezing your ass off-- trying to get the covers on-- by yourself- -over your VG's. think of your last statement.

[RedEye]

Nanook, couldn't agree more. For myself here in northern MN would stick with a stock Dakota Cub wing with 24 gal. tanks. Thats what I went with when I rebuilt last year. The Super Cub performs so well anyway the little you gain with the VGs isn't worth the extra expense, or hassle when removing snow or ice. Sure there are those that can justify them for their particular situation, but for me its just not practical. Just my 2 cents.

[heavylift]

What's the deal about the wing covers on VG's. In the last 6 years since I've installed them I've never had any problems putting or taking off the covers. And this is while freezing my butt in 4 inches of snow. I agree with cub-driver about low speed control. VG's are worth every penny.
J.C.

[Crash]

David, why are you holding your bait up in the picture? Crash

[RedBaron]

LOL. OUCH that was funny! :D Only a true Alaskan could write and interperet such comedies.

RB

[Steve Pierce]

Ditto, made my morning.

[RedEye]

Crash, gotta admitt that was funny! Ontario walleyes are all poured from the same mold, 16-18 inchers, but if they've got 2 sides & fit in the fryin' pan they're good enough for me. One of these days I'll make it up to your neck of the woods & catch some real fish. Now I'm gonna have to go thru my pics for a better one & then try to figure out that AVATAR thing again, sure make things rough on a guy Crash.

[Cubus Maximus]

Gotta' back you up Dave! These poor Alaskans have no knowledge of the beloved Walleye, that fish worth its weight in gold, the very best tasting fish in the world. A fish that when named brings a hush to any conversation and a far-away look in the eye of their pursuers. Their slings and arrows are made by Nerf. :D

Brad

(That said, I am a hypocrit having pretty much given up on them in Minnesota for fishing Halibut, Silvers and Kings in Andy and Crash's neck of the woods 8) )

[Big AK]

Walleye??

In Alaska, the salmon have clear eyes and will look right at you as you thump 'em.

Never have any problems putting on wing covers with VG's, Micro or BLR....on either of my airplanes. Never had 'em wear into the covers, either.

On the extended leading edge skins, even Dan H. at Dan's Aircraft just says that his customers with extended leading edges seem to like them. He doesn't give me the impression that he has an opinion on them. One aerodynamicist who patronizes this site says they're bunko. They definitely strengthen the wing in torsion, but who cares?

If your flying tends toward needing slower approaches and shorter takeoffs, you need extended wings with the ailerons extended all the way out to the tips. Watch out for those big droop tips, though, because they tend to drive a wing down when slipping an approach or performing a flat turn.

If you fly where the wind is strong alot, or don't need the slow-speed advantage of the longer wing, just go with stock. Everything is a trade-off.

Both of these configurations go well with vortex generators. TheVG's increase aileron authority, soften the stall, and generally provide greater safety margins for those still learning the aircraft, round tip or extended squared-off.

DMC

PS......We're all still learning the aircraft, right?? If not, disregard, and, condolensces to your family and the familys of your passengers.

[FlipFlop]

PS......We're all still learning the aircraft, right?? If not, disregard, and, condolensces to your family and the familys of your passengers.

Right on Dave!...

[cub_driver]

Nanook

I can understand your concerns I thought wing covers over VGs would be a pain in the butt I could only think of them catching on everything and getting torn off the wing. Then I watched a friend pull his covers on and off over his VGs at that point I realized I was wrong so I had the VGs installed and after two winters have yet to have one come off. In the wind they actually seem to help keep the cover from sliding off the wing. I always start at the tip of the wing and pull the covers to the wing root. If you take it easy and don't man handle your covers over the VGs you should never have a problem.

Just my two cents free advice can be worth what you pay for it.

Cub_Driver

[Roger Gross]

Cub driver,

It has been my experience that most of the time the advice you pay for is not worth a shct either. Therefore, free advice sure feels better.

Roger

[Crash]

David

There is nothing wrong with your avatar. Sorry I dissed your catch. Its a fine looking bunch of fish and your plane looks nice also. My friends know I'm a smart ass and sometimes a smart ass comment will just slip out before I think about it. I occasionally get south and have caught and eaten Walleye, Bass and Crappie, they are all excellent fair. We have some big fish up here but I still love catching 16-18" grayling on a 5 wt fly rod with a dry fly best. Sorry for the laughs at your expense. Crash

[nanook]

Here is the scenario where the VGs are a pain in the ass! When you land out in deep snow, you make a race course for your skiis to track in. The skiis are riding on your ski packed trail, you on the other hand are sinking down in the unpacked snow, trying to get your wing covers on.( don't any of you guys go anywhere in the winter?) The wings are now a lot higher up, how are you going to carefully put them on now? I don't mean to go off on a rant, but you guys have been sold a bill of goods on the whole VG scam. I used to fly a 78 PA-18-160/stock wings (with the micro VGs) for a 135 operator, I spent quite a bit of time in this cub. I own a 77 PA-18-160/stock wings. I flew both these cubs on a daily basis- off airport/wildlife surveys, whatever. You could not tell a difference between the two cubs flying them in the normal day to day routine. The only time I could tell that there was a difference was when I tried to stall them(departure stall) the VG cub would hang a knot or two longer! The extreme attitude you had to get in to even tell that they were there, tells me that they are worthless for the type of flying that I do. Why anyone would be flying their cub in an extreme nose high attitude for landing is beyond my comprehension. When you are landing off - airport you want to be in a flat attitude so you can see what to avoid. So what do you get for your money? A slower stall speed in an extreme attitude, who cares? If they gave you a gross wt. increase like the PA-31 series, then maybe you could justify it. But for all the gotta- have all the gadgets crowd, you have wasted your money, but, I don't expect you to admit it.

[diggler]

delete

[nanook]

are you another "legend in your own mind" diggler

[diggler]

delete

[cobblemaster]

I have put my wing covers on in lots of wind. Before and after VGs. I had a hard time either way. The fact that you have vgs is irrelevant.

[Crash]

Nanook, I think you're holding back, tell us how you REALLY feel about VG's. Just kidding. I don't have them on either one of my Cubs since I have had to clean 1/4" of rime ice off the wings before and cannot imagine trying to clean out around all those little obstacles. I also own mesh wing covers and think the guy is BS-ing that says they are not in the way when putting on wing covers, unless his are the non-mesh type. The guys I fly with have over 20,000 hours of real Alaska bush time and they don't have them. I don't want to look like a pussy with them on my wings and then have them whoop my keister in a tight spot. Crash

[Crash]

Nanook, I think you're holding back, tell us how you REALLY feel about VG's. Just kidding. I don't have them on either one of my Cubs since I have had to clean 1/4" of rime ice off the wings before and cannot imagine trying to clean out around all those little obstacles. I also own mesh wing covers and think the guy is BS-ing that says they are not in the way when putting on wing covers, unless his are the non-mesh type. The guys I fly with have over 20,000 hours of real Alaska bush time and they don't have them. I don't want to look like a pussy with them on my wings and then have them whoop my keister in a tight spot. Crash

[idscub]

you on the other hand are sinking down in the unpacked snow
Dont you have snow shoes?

[diggler]

delete

[nanook]

OK diggler I'll bite, when I say off-airport that means dropping people off at places where there isn't an airport, gravel bars, dry tundra, decomposed rock on ridge tops, etc... Hikers, rafters, hunters, fisherman, prospectors/geologist, homesteaders and even people who freeze their boats in the river in the middle of nowhere and on and on. When you are doing wildlife surveys you are flying low and slow and (no matter what you say to the biologist about limiting their gear) heavy, if ever there was a time that you could screw up, this is it. All you do is go up to 7000-8000 feet (or higher in mountainous terrain) so you can get a radio collar. Once you acquire the animal you start tracking it, switching between the left and right antenna's to maintain a direction to it. When you get low enough to see something on the ground, you now are tracking with the airplane, looking with your eyes, avoiding big trees, rock bluffs, and trying to get a visual on the ground. If you have your head up your ass, this is when you stall the airplane. the biologist yells he's over there and it all goes downhill from there. Or try counting wolf pups at the den in turbulence, you try to fly as tight a circle, as slow as you can, how's that for fun, anyway, not exactly patrol flying.

[nanook]

idscub, I usually have snowshoes and crosscountry skiis but no matter what you have, the airplane will sit up higher in the snow, its skiis are much bigger than mine. We have very dry light snow up here.

[diggler]

delete

[nanook]

Diggler, The point I'm trying to make is that the cub doesn't need them. They don't work worth a damn on a cub. They work great on a cruise type airfoil that you are trying to fly slower than what it was designed for. Or in other words, thin wings that are heavily loaded, that need a fast airspeed to maintain the boundary layer,(not high lift airfoils) that is the scenario that VGs shine in, or tails that stall or buffet before the wings stall, need VGs. VGs were invented to fix poorly engineered airfoils or to keep the boundary layer over control surfaces on a poorly designed wing. Cub wings fly so slow, they don't have a boundary layer separation problem. You have full flight control authority to the stall in a cub, it already has a wonderful high lift airfoil. You are wasting your money putting VGs on a stock wing cub, The guys down at Gulkana started this whole rigarmarole (VGs on cubs)when they were trying to win the short take-off and landing competitions. If my memory serves me the Ellis's in their stock wing cubs beat them all anyway, amazing how that works isn't it.

[nanook]

Crash: I think I've spent half my life sweeping wings or putting wing covers on. That is the price you pay for flying for a living in Alaska.(or for fun) I use the cunningham type mesh spoiler covers in windy country and the solid cover in the calm interior. the mesh hangs up on everthing because of all the holes in it. I also think some people on this site are living in denial, saying they don't have problems putting covers on or sweeping snow around VGs. It must be that I was dreaming when I was gluing all those missing VGs on, from wing covers and snow brooms knocking them off over the years. On the Navaho if you are missing more than three you are grounded.

[idscub]

Doesnt the super cub have the highest stall/spin ratio of any aircraft know to man? Isnt this what vgs help with? I guess we dont need borer props and bushwheels the either.

[nanook]

Idscub: Somewhere in your training, (I hope) you should have learned how not to do that. If you think VGs are going to keep you from being a poor pilot, you might be in for a rude awakening. People stall cubs, and you have to have your head up where the sun don't shine to do it. If you want to fly around heavy,slow, making steep turns, because you now have VGs. Well! what can I say, besides, maintaining a safe airspeed when manuvering is what keeps you from spin/stalling any airplane. The bottom line is the stock cub wing will perform well beyond what you need, if you take the time to get familiar with it. The best thing you can do is practice, learn what it's capable of, instead of hanging more gadjets on it to cover up your poor piloting skills. Look at what guys like Sheldon and Wilson did with stock wing cubs and then explain to me why you need VGs...

[Big AK]

I still don't have any problems with my wing covers on my VG'ed wings.

The increased roll authority at slow speeds is something yet to be refuted in this argument.

I'm sure no one will tell us that we should just "learn to live with less control authority" like a stock Cub wing and airfoil, and that's a good enough reason to not have VG's.

Maybe we should all go back to flying 65HP J-3's and then we could really feel like "men" because we're able to work it with less.

The Cub airfoil is not "perfect". More undercamber, greater chord-length, a slot in the LE, and a fully-camberable TE would make it better yet. Then, everythings a compromise, eh??

Nanook, maybe you should call up the Ellis's and ask 'em if they're still flying stock winged Cubs, or even stock Cubs for that matter.

Are you a gub'ment jock??? You sure got a stiffie like many of 'em. But not like Vivion, he seems smooth as they go. What's he think of the VG'ed wing, stock or extended, etc. How 'bout Burr, Mackey, Martel???

DMC

[idscub]

numooks,

I just threw that out there for general conversation. Ive got 9000+ hours spraying with a 150 cub so I think I know a little about the cub airfoil. Unlike you I just dont come on this site and tell everybody how screwed up they are and cant fly and since I fly in AK I know more than the rest of you guys.

[nanook]

If you haven't figured it out yet I'm playing the Devil's advocate on this VGs discussion. Stirring the pot so to speak. When I'm done with this, I'm starting on the Dakota slotted wings(48 extra pounds for what?) Diggler wins the prize for the best argument when he says basically if I'm in a tight spot they may save my ass. Big Alaska you need to go buy one of those IO-720 Sherpa's, extend the wings, droop this, tweak that, man listen to yourself, you need to go easy on the steroids. I still haven't heard anything to change my mind about VG's. In the bush where you are constantly sweeping your wings and having to put wing covers on, they aren't practical. EASY BOY, EASY, DEEP BREATHS. Now who has flown those slotted wings.

[Roger Gross]

Slots, Slats, Micro's, BLR's, extended, stock. S#it, I'm going to use one of each. That should be the new hot ticket.

Seriously, thanks for all the info and time everyone has taken to chime in on this subject. Gotta like the open and frank discussion and I am thinking of selling tickets for the first annual supercub.org smoker. I still have 8 weeks to decide. Gunny will have some good info on the slots in the next week or two.

Later, Roger

"Wooster Head" Spins Again

[diggler]

delete

[PA12driver]

I would cut the cover off, power wash them off with low pressure, install a set of Dakota 24 gallon tanks, cover them with Ceconite 101 and butyrate dope up through color. They won't let you do it anymore (I got the last set signed off Sept. 30th) Crash

Enlighten me? What exactly can't you do now that "everything is the same as before"????

Tim

[StewartB]

Tim,
You can't extend the leading edges back further than the spar cap. Lots of guys have done it in the past, but the FAA absolutely refuses to consider it now. I asked. Thay said "not without engineering." The good news is we all know they fly just fine either way, but you can get more aggressive with a broom when the edges are extended back.
SB

Hey Diggler.......nice tail feathers.

[PA12driver]

Nanook, Shoot the wolves and then throw out the Biologist, and go fly for fun! much lighter load and the cub is a lot more fun to fly when someone isn't yelling in your ear! (just kidding) Used to do the very same kind of flying and you are right.

I agree with the point that a 'stock wing' with a practiced pilot will do it all!
The Vg's are nice, but they will kill you faster if you don't use them as a "margin of saftey" not an extension of the envelope??

The most F##$ked up I ever got my self into was when I 'saw' that 70+ moose and made that stupid snap turn and was behind the curve! It was not the Vg's fault, and they didn't get me out of the trouble, it was the altitude and the regaining of coordination that saved my butt!

As with Crash, A lightweight stock wing with slightly larger tanks and extended Leading edges would be my choice for a 'certified cub'

Experimental: different story--right Wayne??---

Tim

[Gunny]

removed

[nanook]

Gunny: We'll go easy on you for now, at least, until we get the info on the slots.

[Big AK]

....ends up being personal preference and intent of your mission in the end anyway, right?

I'm glad that we all have an opinion to offer.

Gunny, the Fieseler Storch had leading edge SLATS, ala Helio Courier, not slOts, ala Stinson, L-14, Dakota Cub's slotted Cub wing. Slightly different animal, looking for the same end-result....probably not all that important to mention this, except that the LE slAt, ala Helio, effectively adds wing area, and a slot like the Dakota doesn't. Increased wing area leads to lighter wing-loading, which leads to slower flight, which leads to shorter take-offs and landings....assuming your three-point angle of attack is able to match the AOA at the slat's increased performance.

But what do you guys care???? You're all happy flying stock Cub wings. Good for you. You're kind, and thoughtful, and attractive, and Gosh Darnit, people like you...

I like you too, but my opinion is different. My opinion is that performance tradeoffs that improve MY intended scope of operation are worthy.

MY opinion for MY self.

DMC

[Gunny]

removed

[Big AK]

Probably wouldn't surprise any of you/us to find that many of the big names in this game are daily lurkers. I know of at least 3 well-known individuals who keep their mouths to themselves, at least on this type of forum, if not face-to-face with droppers-by at their businesses and residences.

DMC

[cub_driver]

Holy mackerel Diggler what you been catching with that bait?

Cub_Driver

[Crash]

Gunny, should be a heck of a plane for spotting German artillery. As far as getting in and out better then a stock wing, I have my doubts. It adds 58 lbs if you went extended as well. I don't see it producing enough extra lift to over come the extra weight, it only works at a steep angle of attack. A Cub will lift off the ground when the lift of the wing over comes the weight of the airplane. The USA #35 airfoil produces a given lift at a given speed. Getting to that speed the quickest, and lifting the least amount of weight is the key to short take offs. Yes you can digger up the wings to get off a little better but then you loose performance on the other side of the envelope and repairability. Wish you the best, tell me if any Germans are getting close. Crash

[D C]

OK, I just have to ask. How does the leading edge cuff compare to these mods with respect to extra weight, added preformance, and stall characteristics? The people that I know have them sure seem to like them.
Good, bad, indifferent, anyone?

[Gunny]

removed

[Gunny]

removed

[diggler]

delete

[Gunny]

removed

[Steve Pierce]

Congrads Gunny. Now you have to change your avatar.

[Gunny]

removed

[Crash]

Gunny, you asked where I got the 58 lbs additional weight for a set of Dakota extended, slotted wings. I got it from Frank Hendricks who manufactures all the parts from raw materials and builds them here in Soldotna Alaska (I bought a set of stock wings from him). The weight was compared to a set of stock Piper wings with 18 gallon tanks. You forgot the extra weight of extended flaps, extended ailerons, extra hinges, thicker leading edge material, bigger tank lids, 3rd tanks straps, fiber glass tips etc, etc.. It all adds up. Pick up a stock Piper wing, then pick up a Dakota wing, you'll see what I'm talking about. Crash

[RPURCELL]

A couple of years ago I put BLR VG's on my PA-14. No other changes were made at the same time so I had a true before and after comparison. Stall before 43mph indicated with flaps, stall after 38-39mph indicated with flaps. Ailerons much more effective at all speeds, especially slow, I actually had to relearn coordinated turns. 39mph, full flaps, 1500rpm, I can roll aircraft into 45 degree banks, from right and left and back, with ailerons only, rudder centered, and nose gently bobbing in a semi-stall. 39mph, full flaps two people, 30 gallons, and survival gear: at idle 1000fpm decent, 1500rpm 500fpm decent, full throttle immediate 500+fpm climb. What does it prove? I don't know. I am a low time pilot. I just feel much more stable on approaches. I park outside and use wing covers. Never had a problem, didn't damage the covers, didn't knock off any VG's. I am now redoing the aircraft and the BLR VG's are going back on.

[cobblemaster]

2 different weights by 2 guys working for the same company? Whats up with that?

[Gunny]

removed

[Roger Gross]

What does a Cubcrafters 180 with a stock wing weigh?

Roger

[S2D]

I still haven't heard anything to change my mind about VG's.

I'm not sure why anyone would want to change your ming on the VG's except somebody selling them. I had exactly the same opinions you did on them. That is until I broke down and bought a set for my Super Cub. I installed them right in the middle of the my hunting season, so I had a chance to see the difference immediately. The one thing I noticed right off the bat was that it made a huge difference taking off in deep snow on airstreaks. Before I'd have to nurse the stick to get the tail out of the snow and get enough speed to get the aircraft out of the snow without tipping over, then instantly lower the nose to get flying speed to climb out. After the Vg's were installed, I could put the stick in my stomach give it full power and the front wheels would come out of the snow before the tailwheel even left the ground and continue climbing. It was that drastic of a change. Landings made a huge difference also. It feels way more stable coming in with full flaps just above a stall. As for the landing nose low to see whats ahead of you, that might work great if you are just stopping somewhere to take a whiz, but if you are landing right "there", to pick up "that" coyote, you better already know whats ahead of you, cause once you start the flare you are committed.
Now I have no intention of telling anyone how to fly their airplane in their business in their neck of the woods, cause I haven't flown there, but I don't give a diddley squat what anyone thinks of my wussy strips on the wings, I know what they do for me and it was a pretty cheap modification without any work for quite an improvement where I need it most with no adverse affects on other aspects of the flight.

[SuperCub MD]

I'm one of those VG lovin wussies. I am also a Micro dealer, have been since the first kits were available, so take that into consideration. BUT, I don't sell what I don't use myself, and I don't think works. I've never put VG's on, and had the owner complain he got screwed, and wanted his money back. I've had long time Cub pilots tell me that the VG's have probably saved their bacon when they have screwed up and gotten into tight spots. Putting wing covers on yourself in high winds sucks, VG's or not. I've actually found the VG's help to hold the covers on the wing while you fasten the straps. Without them the covers keep sliding off. A push broom sweeping snow will go right over VG's without damaging them. Yes, you need to be more careful with them, but to me it's worth it. If you put them on and don't fly the plane any different, you won't notice much difference. It may take hundreds of hours with them before you really begin to feel them work, and start exploring the true slow speeds they provide. I have no experience with slots/slats, hope to fly them someday to compare. Everything I've heard about them says they do about the same thing as VG's performance wise. But you can hold a full VG kit in your hand and not even feel it weight wise...And how hard is it to get snow out of those slots?

Jerry Burr has a good thread on VG's with real testing and numbers, and Wayne Mackey has a nice thread about experimental slots, slats, extended LE and things, both under Art and Science of Flying, I think. A big thanks to those guys for sharing their knowledge here, I know I've learned a lot from them. Someone who knows this computer stuff can probably give a link.

You can't say that one wing is perfect for everyone. It depends how you fly. I have two Cubs. They are flown in completely different environments, in completely different ways. One has VG's, and one doesn't, and I wouldn't change either one.

[Cubus Maximus]

The one thing I noticed right off the bat was that it made a huge difference taking off in deep snow on airstreaks.

Now who was it jumping up and down about the horrors of tundra tires in the snow instead of skis?

8)

Brad

[Frank T]

Gunny

You might be interested in what I learned last week during a conversation with the guy at Wipaire who did the structural testing for their 2000GW STC. According to him what limited them the most on the weight increase were the tail surfaces on the 18.

Frank

[cubpilot2]

Hi Guys
Thought as long as everyone else has tossed in the 2 cents worth why not I. Anyway the wing configuration on my A model has been an evolutionary process. When I got it I started with just the droop tips and standard ailerons. It flew poorly. (very sluggish roll rate) sloppy controls at slow speed. Extended the ailerons in 1992 and got rid of the droop tips. (dumpster). Airplane flew 10 times better with good aileron control while staggering at a stall. Later when the Micro VG kits came out I jumped at it. I found them to be very impressive as now low speed control effectiveness was even better and stall recovery was instantaneous. The airplane is on floats mostly and found that I was able to lift one float out of the water much sooner which (in my mind) shortens the takeoff. In 2000 I recovered the wings and added the extended 12 inch leading edge along with the "rest of the VG kit" which put them completely into the wing root and under the tail. I also installed the "heavy" rear struts. It is now a much heavier cub but the interesting part was that its rate of climb is better then before I added the additional weight. It is like it generates more lift at the same speed.
Am I a VG fan? Yes Would I do it again? Yes Do I have problems with wing covers? Yes, but a minor thing. I don't fly all that much in the winter and do not leave covers on unless I have definite plans as they are way to hard on the paint and fabric. Would I do all of the mods to the wings again. No! If it hadn't had the droops on when I bought it I would have left them alone. 95Z is still a very nice, solid flying airplane and plan to keep it around a long time.
My current project cub (nicknamed "spider") will have stock wings and VGs. (wanted to extend the leading edge but am too late. :cry:
Someone earlier mentioned not hearing of the leading edge extension so thought maybe this overhead photo will help.
http://www.supercub.org/copper//displayimage.php?pos=-38
http://www.supercub.org/copper//displayimage.php?pos=-38

[S2D]

The one thing I noticed right off the bat was that it made a huge difference taking off in deep snow on airstreaks.

Now who was it jumping up and down about the horrors of tundra tires in the snow instead of skis?

8)

Brad

I try to stay on tires as long as I possibly can. I did say you have to know how to tell what is underneath if you do stay on tires in snow. That is where the big tires give you a lot more room for error.
I also didn't notice a big difference in takeoffs with the skiis on. Probably because the anle of attack is so low on standard gear. 6" extensions would probably help that a lot.

[Frank T]

Roger

If you go to Cub Crafters Site, there is a download section that has a Weight and Balance for what might be considered a "Typical" Top Cub.

[Gunny]

removed

[Michael E. Butterfield]

My first experience with the vg's was dragging a 30X80 foot billboard around at 40, cause any faster just beat the thing to death. All day long I'm picking up one wing and then the other, just back and forth. CC put on the Boundry Layer, and it was like power steering at those slow speeds, and the the rocking back and forth was gone. Just plain solid as a rock. Had another instructor, who had flown Cubs in ag tell me that on a BFR he volunteered to spin his customers plane for him cause he never had. Told me that he had never not been able to spin a Cub till then. Said that with considerable power he was able to pull off the demonstration of stupidity, but that it would fall out with just a slight release, and fly again. I like the vg's, but after flying the slot, they seem kinda lame...Just my personal opinion...Everbody has one...

[Crash]

Gunny, how did you end up so heavy? Cub Crafters says 1,060 lbs for their 180 hp Cubs on their web site. They used to advertise 1/2 ton capacity with the 2,000 GW increase. Crash

[Gunny]

removed

[CrossedControls]

Supercub MD said

Jerry Burr has a good thread on VG's with real testing and numbers, and Wayne Mackey has a nice thread about experimental slots, slats, extended LE and things, both under Art and Science of Flying, I think. A big thanks to those guys for sharing their knowledge here, I know I've learned a lot from them. Someone who knows this computer stuff can probably give a link.


VG's http://www.supercub.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=1241
Slots http://www.supercub.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=1736
Slots http://www.supercub.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=961
STOL devices http://www.supercub.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=1080

[Gunny]

removed

[StewartB]

Gunny,
In your defense, I don't think your plane is all that heavy. I remember posting a topic about weight, and very few guys would report their plane's weight. Everyone wants the 1000# plane. Where is it? My guess that most of the 180hp Cubs out there are 1200# easy without the hydraulics. Here's to you for being honest enough to say what you knew would be criticized. Where is the honesty of the critics? I'll tell what mine is...as soon as I know!
SB

[Gunny]

removed

[Crash]

A friend next door was building up a PA-18 the same time I was. He bought my extended Piper wings. He was the most conscious about weight as I have ever seen. He used thin washers everwhere he could. Used thin instrument nuts everwhere he could. Cut the bolts off to the shortest allowable length to have two threard showing. Had an Airforce machanic friend get him some titaninum for the fire wall. No front interior panels (used netting). No head liner. Bare basices everywhere. Weighed in at 1130 lbs with an O-320. He was dissapointed in the weight (wanted it to be under 1100 lbs) until he flew it. I've watched him a number of times take off alone and with a passanger. He rolls the length of the fuselage, the tail comes up, he rolls a couple of more lengths then rotates and climbs out at a 45 degree angle. Every time I see it I tell anyone near "those are my old wings". Gunny, I think you'd have your hands full trying to out do this one. These "under 1100 lbs" Cubs are either B.S. or not set up for the bush. Crash

[pak]

Rod M. weighed mine when I rolled it out of the hanger in '96. It was 1152#. Mostly stock with big starter, generator, big battery, boer prop, 25X11X6 multi purpose tires and most of the usual mods. Of course now I have a belly pod and bigger tires so I don't really know what it weighs, especially with the accumulated sand and silt. I agree that any cub properly equipped for off airport stuff with even a hint of an electrical system will be over 1100#.pak

[kase]

I finally got to fly next to a Super Cub with the slotted wings with the same hp and prop as mine. Both cubs are 160 with 8244 props. I was running 2400 and the slot wing cub was 2420 to go the same speed. I had 850s with uncovered gear and the slotted cub had 26 in tires with the gear covered. Wide open I could out run it just a little but I got the round air filter and the slotted cub dosent so maybe thats why I could get a few more rpms if the tachs are correct. So it looks to me like the slotted wing really dosent create alot of drag in cruise.

click to enlarge
http://sparky.supercub.org/photopost/data/512/thumbs/P7270012.jpg (http://sparky.supercub.org/photopost/data/512/medium/P7270012.jpg)

[fobjob]

Just to throw in my .02, the Micro vg's were worth it to me by improving my aileron response. They also reduced spin recovery from 7 turns to 1/3 turn....this was when my wing incidence was zero degrees, resulting in a positive lift requirement on the horizontal stab under all CG loadings and a really nasty stall/spin tendency. :o I like them just for the increased safety margin under a gusty extreme approach. I'm not offended if I don't use them to the max with every flight.