View Full Version : More info on Mountain Goat....

09-05-2004, 11:51 AM
Notice the heater/defroster are not standard??? Cost for these two things are $1000. I didn't know any aircraft came without a heater, especially in Alaska...

Bill Montagne here.
Working with several investors to get FAA certification going.

To whom it may concern;

Due to requests by customers, we have been asked to arrange a deposit program in which customers can lock in a purchase position for a Mountain Goat aircraft. We are building complete experimental planes while seeking funding for certification and increasing production. With requests to purchase 1,565 planes, we are seeking funding to address this high demand. Kit planes are not available at this time, but will be in the future. Those interested in kit planes should check our web site occasionally.



On this date _____________________________

Name of purchaser_________________________________________ ____ is depositing into Montagne Aircraft LLC. account the amount of $ 3,000.00 ( three thousand dollars ) for a position in order to have a Mountain Goat experimental aircraft built. The deposit will put this purchaser in front of future manufacture positions providing that purchaser conforms to all terms and details of the Purchase Agreement in the manner of time required by Montagne Aircraft LLC. Purchaser will be notified within thirty days of receipt of deposit, what manufacture position this deposit covers. This position is transferable to any other party. The deposit is fully refundable up until finalizing the Purchase Order. This deposit will be deducted from the down payment of the actual purchase order when that order is made. Purchaser of this position will be notified by mail or email when manufacture will commence. Within 30 days of that notice, all terms in the Purchase Agreement of the aircraft will be finalized, and all deposits will be made. It is anticipated that manufacture will commence in blocks of ten orders or more, but availability of certain parts, or the company may determine a different schedule or block of orders. All prices are subject to change before finalizing the purchase order for the aircraft.

Purchaser signature_________________________________________ _______

Street or Post office box____________________________________________

City____________________ State_________________ Zip Code___________


Montagne Aircraft LLC.

P.O. Box 2842

Palmer, Ak. 99645-2842

By Bill Montagne


This agreement is being entered into between Montagne Aircraft LLC and the Buyer,

________________________________, on this___________day of _________________, 20____. Montagne Aircraft LLC is selling one Mountain Goat Kit Plane, fully assembled with 4130 Steel frame and ( other modifications ), as stated in Exhibit ? B ? for the sum of $150,000.00, plus the cost of any extra?s or additions. Buyer must deposit $85,500.00 plus the cost of extras and additions to start manufacture of this aircraft. All deposits must be made in the Montagne Aircraft LLC account. The Purchaser will be notified in writing when the wings are assembled, fuselage and tail are welded, and the machined parts are complete. Within 15 days of this notification, the Purchaser will be required to deposit 25 % of the total purchase price in our account. The final 18 % of the purchase price will be due within 15 days of completion or upon delivery, whichever comes first. Options may be added at a later time than this agreement, and those costs will be determined and added at that time. We will notify you what your serial numbers are for the fuselage and wings after your deposit is received. All purchased items are your property as soon as they are paid for. This deposit is transferable, but is not refundable.

All pieces for the Mountain Goat will be produced to the best of our ability with, in our opinion, the best materials available. This plane is not FAA certified. We are not liable for what you or anyone does with your Mountain Goat plane. It is your obligation to seek out proper flight training, and maintain your aircraft properly. Do not exceed limits for Normal Category FAA requirements. The pilot in command is solely responsible for operating the aircraft within those limits, or the pilot?s limits, whichever is the lesser. If the aircraft is not maintained properly, the pilot in command should make the necessary repairs and adjustments before flight.

Purchaser signature_________________________________________ ___________

__________________________________________________ _____________________

Seller Montagne Aircraft LLC_________________________________________

P.O. Box 2842

Palmer, Alaska 99645-2842 907-745-7597

All items without price are standard equipment

1. Flight instruction

2. Float Mounts, Lift Fittings and ski mounts $600.00

3. Doors, Both Sides, with Full Windows

4. Titanium fuselage frame, Wide Fuselage $ 15,000.00

5. 4130 Steel fuselage frame, Wide Fuselage Standard

6. Single lift struts, Titanium, with Aluminum Fairing $ 3,000.00

7. 26 X 10.5 Goodyear tires

8. Individual parking brakes

9. Removable rear seat $ 200.00

10. Tapered tubular spring landing gear

11. Counterbalanced crankshaft on IO 360 engine $2,600.00

12. McCauley fixed pitch prop

13. Light weight starter motor

14. K & N racing air filter, washable element

15. Ram Air Intake with Alternate Source

16. 4 into 1 tuned exhaust with merge collector

17. Oil Cooler

18. Electric fuel boost pump

19. 65 gallon fuel capacity

20. Cloth Seats standard

21. Leather Seats $600.00

22. Scott 3200 Tail Wheel Standard

23. Wide tail wheel $ 1,000.00

24. Heavy duty Titanium tail wheel spring $ 150.00

25. Vision Microsystems VM 1000 engine management display

26. Altimeter

27. Airspeed

28. Compass

29. Vertical Speed Indicator $300.00

30. B & C 40 amp Alternator Standard

31. B & C high output alternator $1,000.00

32. light weight battery

33. Portable ACK ELT

34. Transponder

35. ACK Mode C

36. Moving map GPS / Com

37. Nav lights and landing light

38. Electric Turn & Bank gyro. RC Allen $550.00

39. Artificial Horizon, Electric RC Allen $2,015.00

40. Defroster $300.00

41. Heater $700.00

42. Inboard fuel caps for floats $550.00

43. Gun / Antler rack $400.00 ea

44. Metal belly, Standard

45. Cargo Door $500.00

46. Grab Handle on Cowling per Pair $500.00

47. Intercom Call for price

48. Constant Speed Propeller Call for price

49. FADEC ( engine control ) $ 14,000.00

09-05-2004, 08:28 PM
requests for 1500+ airplanes. OK thats believable :wink:

09-06-2004, 08:02 AM
Actually, it may not be so unbelievable given the fact it was in a TV piece on bush flying a while back. Even my father-in-law told me about this airplane that could out perform any other. When I tried to explain that my 180hp supercub would kick it's rear, he said, "well, you need to see this program". When he dropped us off at the airport, I told him (those words no pilot should say) "watch this". I took the last intersection (about 250' left) at KJLN, into a 15kt headwind and was up up and away in about 50 feet. Only time he has ever called me on the phone was after seeing that... Mountain Goat my %$$


Steve Pierce
09-06-2004, 08:51 AM
The kids want to know why I am laughing out loud. :lol:

09-06-2004, 09:09 AM
I'll wait and buy a used one after they get the bugs rattled out.

Do you own a airplane now?

09-06-2004, 09:32 PM
The kids want to know why I am laughing out loud. :lol:No kidding. Why go to Alaska when we can get ripped off right here in Texas? :nutz:

Steve Pierce
09-06-2004, 10:03 PM
Craig, Is that fuel running out of your avatar?

09-07-2004, 05:10 AM
I am sure the folks at Mountian Goat aircraft are working hard to build airplanes. They have claims of titanium fuselages but I don't know of anyone who has seen one yet (would love to see someone build cub tail feathers and fuselages out of titanium). I did read the numbers they had posted but they of a partialy loaded aircraft and never showed the numbers of a fully loaded aircraft. I think they have a long why to go before they truly become a aircraft manufacter in the mean time I will keep flying my cub.


09-09-2004, 09:48 AM
We are building complete experimental planes while seeking funding for certification and increasing production.

Notice that they don't mention what experimental category the planes are certificated in. Seeing as they are building complete aircraft for sale, they cannot be licensed as experimental/amateur-built. This leaves experimental/exhibition as the best of several not-so-good options. Further, the only good fit within experimental/exhibition would be group 4 ("Other Aircraft"), unless the folks at Mountain Goat can convince the FAA that it's a "performance competition aircraft" and get them in group one.

This makes a MAJOR difference in the operation of the aircraft, because group four aircraft are restricted to landings and takeoffs only at their home base except when going to an exhibition that is listed on the aircraft's program letter. Group 1 aircraft can land at any airport within their proficiency flying area (typically 300 nm radius from home base) when not going to a registered exhibition.

Either way, the aircraft owner must file an annual program letter with the local FSDO, and must stay within the proficiency flying area except when going to/from an exhibition that's listed on the program letter. If the airplane is in group 4, being restricted to landing and taking off only at home base except for going to/from the exhibitions really limits the utility of a "bush" airplane.

I'd suggest anyone who's seriously considering buying one of these birds carefully check into the certification of the aircraft. You might not be getting what you think you're paying for.


09-10-2004, 12:03 AM
I've seen the titanium goat fuselages. Titanium is far to cost ineffective for Cubs. Maybe for a one off.

12-20-2004, 11:43 AM
A friend sent this link recently. It contains a new article on Bill Montagne's Mountain Goat.


12-20-2004, 12:13 PM
Those are fighting words,calling supercubs junk.Steve if montagne posts on your site,please move it to the rant section,so i dont get into trouble.I must be nuts to work extra to pay for flying these junks.Looks like another cub copy,like the husky.Ill keep my money on gordon taylor,jamoneau,and wm piper.P.s. If you watch his video,you will see most cubs will get off better than that.

12-20-2004, 12:40 PM
The article was in the Sunday Fairbanks paper as well. I'll give Montange credit: He's a great sales person.

Oh, wait, he's been going to have this certified any second now for what, fifteen years?

Anybody that puts money up on the claims that he makes without verifying his "data" a bit deserves to lose their behind.

I mean: pzink, even a Husky could whup this thing's arse at gross.

Har Mateys, couldn't resist,


Big AK
12-20-2004, 02:42 PM
Until about a month ago, I was sure that this Montagne fellow was full of patuti.

I got a report from an individual that has spent alot of time in the goat and is quite impressed. I'm not sure of this individual's Cub experience level.

He said that next to a 160 horse Cub with one aboard, the Goat will get in the air shorter(with two souls, fuel, and who really knows how much load), and will climb away from the Cub both steeper and faster. The Cub in question is owned by a guy in the valley (Mat-Su Valley, Alaska) who is having a Goat built for him.

I've also heard from some 185 jockeys that the goat is able to stay with them in cruise. All of this with a fixed-pitch prop.

I will wait til I've been in the thing before I open my mouth against the guy again.

Anyone else out there with direct experience or who's made an attempt to contact Bill M. and get a checkout??

12-20-2004, 02:54 PM
Hey anyone know of a repair facility that can weld their titanium fuselage if it gets damaged? Titanium has to be welded in an inert atmosphere otherwise it's junk. Are they welding them in an inert atmosphere to begin with? I used to weld for USAir and I can weld titanium, but I certainly don't want a tubing fuselage made out it.

Christina Young
12-20-2004, 02:56 PM
Is there a place to go to see a MG? I will be in Palmer in May, and would like to check one out.

Are any of them currently made out of titanium, or is this something that is planned in the future? Titanium weighs about half as much as steel, and won't corrode. Very hard & strong, but also very brittle - I had some of my dive gear custom made out of it, had a couple of cracking problems in the past at stress points. Around here (NJ) it costs ~ $32 per lb for tubing.

Cubus Maximus
12-20-2004, 03:07 PM
In the for-what-it's-worth department, I know at least one guy in ANC who is a long time Cub owner (Joe Lomonaco). He checked out in the Goat (3 years ago). Loved the Goat and planned to sell his 160hp Cub when (and if) it became available.


12-20-2004, 03:29 PM
Maybe the goat is good,but in his article he calls cubs junk.I think that is a strong statement for a palne that has done as much work as a cub.

12-20-2004, 03:38 PM

12-20-2004, 04:11 PM
As with many of you I first saw the MG at Gulkana in the very early '90s. Not much has changed since then. Same MG and same talk. I wonder if his numbers are at gross weight as are the cub's. The cub certainly has room for improvment, but on balance economics/performance it is working for many. I have to put the MG in the 'I'll believe it when I see it' catagory.pak

12-20-2004, 04:19 PM

This is the issue I have with the propaganda. There are always a few little loose ends with this airplane it seems. Some years ago, I asked him about something on the plane, and questioned whether he could get it certified that way, and he said, "Oh, no, the FAA would never permit that, but we can just change it when we go into production". Okay, so why wouldn't you fix it before you demonstrated it, and what will this thing actually look like, weigh and perform like as a production airplane?

Gross weight is whatever he says it is--its experimental. Build your own airplane and you too can establish a gross weight. And the experimental TC issue is very real. The only way he could get one into a reasonable category would be to homebuild it himself, then offer it for sale as a homebuilt experimental. Maybe he didn't get far enough into the regs to figure that issue out yet.

Last I heard, he would not let other people fly the airplane, but he would take other people for a ride in it. Has this changed? I know at least one pilot who was seriously interested in flying it, and he told him he could ride in the back with no controls, but he couldn't fly it. The guy said thanks anyway, I'll stick with what I got.

If he's changed his mind on that, it would be interesting to hear from someone who HAS ACTUALLY FLOWN the airplane, as opposed to these, "I have a friend, who said it was really cool", etc.

He's looking for someone to put up a huge chunk of change to fund a factory, which is fine, but I think his production numbers and the numbers of people he purports to hire are pretty ridiculous. His performance numbers need to be examined in that context, or documented by some sort of certification process, as opposed to "it stalls at 23 mph". Based on the same data acquisition process, I've got a Cessna 170 that stalls at 0 mph. That's what the indicator says, anyway. With ten gallons of fuel, and just me in it.

Last I heard, he'd built two of them, but may be more now. It would be interesting to hear from someone who has actually flown one.

Anybody out there?


12-20-2004, 04:23 PM
Titanium becomes very brittle if welded incorrectely.It also does not like chlorinated solvents, so you have to be careful what you use. titanium also has a relatively low modulus of elasticity, which means that, given equal dia. and wall thickness tubes, the titanium tube will bend more. this means that the titanium tube has to be either bigger in dia. or wall thickness to have the same rigidity as 4130 steel. Even though titanium is stronger than steel , the disadvantages of all of the above. far outweigh the light weight and strength.
I would like to know how they are welding the titanium. Do they have a fully enclosed inert atmosphere chamber or what.

12-20-2004, 04:34 PM
Montagne Aircraft TELEPHONE INQUIRIES: (907) 745 - 7597

Montagne Aircraft EMAIL INQUIRIES (CLICK FOLLOWING LINK): mtgoatacft@ak.net

There you go, boys. Now you can call him. Talk's cheap.


Cubus Maximus
12-20-2004, 04:53 PM
Hey Mike,

I have a friend who said the Goat was really cool! 8)

Why would you ever want anything more than that? :D


12-20-2004, 05:33 PM
I'm pretty much with TJ and MV on this one. Considering the complexity and cost, I seriously doubt the MG will ever get certified. About the only way we will see any numbers of MG's would be if they were made into a 51% rule kit. As far as performance numbers, anyone can claim anything. When you see the actual performance reports of several MG's, then you could believe them. Until that time, I remain a skeptic.
If the MG designer was smart, he would get the 51% kits going quickly. Then he would have the money for the certification process, and generate widespread demand by the planes being flown and discussed in actual flying circles.

Just my 2 bits worth (inflation, you know?)


12-20-2004, 08:18 PM
What I gather from talking with Bill at the Airmans Show and over an hour on the phone. Some of this stuff just doesn't ad up in my book.

1) He moved to Alaska 4 years ago and hasn't worked (a regular job) a day since he arrived.

2) Has taken quite a bit of deposit money on two planes. The customers have nothing to show for the money.

3) Says his Mt Goat will fly circles around a 180hp PA-18. Slow flys down to 25 mph. Cruises at 160 mph. Continual climb at over 3,000 foot per minute. All of this with a stock fuel injected O-360-180hp engine out of a low end Mooney. The prop by the way is a fixed pitch Sensenich 76/66 pitch. Yes that's right, 66 pitch!

4) Said he took the rate of climb indicator out because it scared him how high the climb numbers were. Said it was over 3,000' per minute.

5) Said a GPS won't work in a plane to tell how fast it is going or climbing. Said the satellites get confused. You must use an ultralight airspeed indicator mounted on the lift strut to get real numbers. He said this after I asked if I could bring my Garmin 196 along for a demo ride.

6) Said his wife left him and screwed him over. Knowing women, we can all believe this one.

7) Said he sent money to material suppliers but they went out of business and kept his money.

8) I asked him how many complete planes he had delivered and were flying, he sad "two". "One to a guy in Pennsylvania and one to a guy in New York". I searched the FAA data base and can only find one Mountain Goat, period. It belongs to Bill.

He's a nice guy to talk to, but I don't know as I'd give him $50K or so as a deposit. You might just be buying his groceries for the next year. Crash

12-20-2004, 11:56 PM
I agree with CRASH, plus I had a similar experince.

Interestingly enough a Doctor friend of mine from here, Dillingham AK, has worked extensively with Montagne. Apparently the guy has some background in dealing w/ road-race cars before diving into the airplane business to build a machine "better than a Cub".

Heck....why does EVERYONE compare to a CUb then?

Anyway, my doctor freind put up a considerable amount of doug$ to have a MG built. One thing lead to another, my buddy was lifted for some more doug$ under the pretense that he'd have a titanium fuselage built.

Then one day last summer a new planed showed up right here in Dillingham and it was the buzz of the town. Realize Dlg. is 350 air-miles off the road system, a small bush town.
Of course I couldn't wait to see this new Goat, included the titanium frame. Well, after some quick-talk it became apparent that this was only the "proto-type", and my buddies new plane wouldn't be done for some time.
Still excited, I hovered around the machine and ask if I could take it for a ride around the patch. Heck...you would have thought I told him I wanted to make love to his wife! So I politey ask if I could go for a ride, and of course offered to pay all expence, incluing his time. No deal....he knew I flew Super Cubs and there was NO WAY I was going for a ride!

My buddy is out somewhere around 80k at this point, I'm sure there are others out there in the same boat. I smell class-action lawsuit coming, and view this is all talk, and LOTS of it, with little action!

Besides, like someone else......calling a CUB, a proven machine, a pile of Junk is flat wrong. TJ made a good point....maybe when I'm need of another Cub I'll call him to build be a new one, only 140k :)

Good Flying...>Byron

12-21-2004, 12:10 AM
As I recall, many years ago, Mr. M. showed up at the Gulkana Air show with his "original" Mt Goat, which was purported at least as superior as his current version, but no titanium fuselage.

He flew in the short t/o contest. I seem to recall he got beat by at least one box stock Cub, and several other modified Cubs. Or something like that. He didn't do well, at least.


Ursa Major
12-21-2004, 02:05 AM
As I recall, many years ago, Mr. M. showed up at the Gulkana Air show with his "original" Mt Goat, which was purported at least as superior as his current version, but no titanium fuselage.


I was at the same Gulkana show and snapped a picture of the Mountain Goat (N101MG). He brought the same (N101MG) airplane to the AK trade show last spring. At least it sure looked like the same airplane. I suppose it could have been a different plane, but if it was , why the same N number? Something smells fishy.

12-21-2004, 02:17 AM
I searched the FAA data base upside down and backward, from every angle to give this guy the benefit of the doubt. There is only one Mountain Goat listed by the FAA, and you guessed it, N101MG. Crash

12-21-2004, 11:00 AM

One thing you have to understand is that the "manufacturer" of a homebuilt airplane can give it any name they want, so searching databases can be tough, but I'm sure you knew that.

So it is possible that he built another one and called it a "Montagne Super Cub"?

Sorry, couldn't resist.


12-21-2004, 11:00 AM
It would be pretty hard to find it in the FAA registry unless you had the N# if there were other planes out there. As the builder of a experimental you are the manufacturer, you get to name the model, you get to make up the serial number. I don't know if there are other MG in this case but doing a search without knowing who bought the kit or what he is calling it would be pointless. My airplane is a lot like a Maule but the Model is Bushwacker.


12-21-2004, 01:07 PM
Ya, you're right. It could be all of those things. I'll mail off my $50K deposit check this morning. :crazyeyes: Crash

Big AK
12-21-2004, 07:08 PM
OK. So lots of speculation on our part about this untried by us and much bragged-about-by-him aircraft.

Let me qualify my previous post along with this one by by saying that in the past I have spoken LOUDLY about how much of a puker this Bill M. must be to say such huge stuff about his airplane. I'm saying now that I will suspend talking negatively about him until I've been shown the truth.

What I will say is that the same guy that told me he'd spent much time (40 hours) in the back of the goat (hunting and playing), is that Bill M. has apparently sold something to a corporation for a LOTTT of money and they will be building the thing. The figure mentioned had 6 zero's behind the 3 other numbers that were ahead of them..... ???,000,000.

Somebody with alot of money believe's the story.

Also, not to refute the knowledge of any of you other poster's but.....I know of 3 different high-end bicycle manufacturers with frames built of titanium that utilize the flexing of the frame for mountain-bike suspension. What I'm talking about is an engineered flex in the frame that has a shock absorber to dampen the flexing. One of these frames has 5 inches of rear suspension travel. All of this without any sort of pivot or bearing, but simply the flex in a set of titanium tubes.

I'm no expert on titanium, I'm just trying to say that maybe blanket statements about the brittleness of Ti are not fairly informative.

....and what other industry has as much need for lightness and strength as aviation does?......cycling.

also, One of the most "chee-chee" items one could ever own would be a lightweight snowmobile tube-truss-chassis. I know of one built of Titanium....yeah, another industry that loves strong and light items.

Yes, I've thought of many of the reasons why I'd not like to repair a titanium a/c frame in the field. I've thought of many of the same arguments as you guys over the years since this goat came to light.

I simply think enough of the guy that told me these goat stories to cease slandering the designer until I know for sure what's up.

PS I appreciate Crash's post that he had actually talked to Bill M. on the phone.

I'd sure like to get to the bottom of this.

12-21-2004, 07:15 PM
What I will say is that the same guy that told me he'd spent much time (40 hours) in the back of the goat (hunting and playing), is that Bill M. has apparently sold something to a corporation for a LOTTT of money and they will be building the thing. The figure mentioned had 6 zero's behind the 3 other numbers that were ahead of them..... ???,000,000.

I hear he's a good talker...but com'on..what did he sell..the state of Alaska! :lol:

Big AK
12-21-2004, 07:50 PM
...Just got off the phone will Bill M.

The deal is not yet done. He's working on it now, today.

His strip has some snow on it and he's not had the goat on skis, so he says he'll not risk skis or snow on wheels right now but would rather wait til the deal has been made and flight testing can begin...so...I'll not get a ride unless the snow melts.

No outrageous claims unless I am to flatly disbelieve what a guy says.

Yes, I've been around airplanes awhile and my ears will twitch a little when a guy makes outrageous statements about his airplane that seem unreal.

Did I say that some Cessna 185 guys that hunted with this guy claimed that he could cruise with them easily?

I just did the math on a 66 inch pitch propeller at 2400 RPM....150MPH assuming no slippage.

Bill says the goat is slippery (no, not the prop) and that the flaps aren't draggy at the last notch like a Cub. They just make more lift, I inserted "like a HUsky".

I guess the thing has the same area as a Cub with squared tips. Same chord, same span. Maybe just more efficient airfoil section, etc.

Before you guys all crucify me, remember, I had a lot negative statements about this guy until I started hearing positive things about this airplane from people I respect.

PS I love Cubs, especially lightweight ones.

If this ends up being a rat, we'll all know.

12-21-2004, 08:26 PM

I think its important to note that, at least in my opinion, nobody on this site has slandered Mr. Montagne in any way. A number of people have questioned his numbers, and simply stated that they are unproven. That's not slander.

When Mr. Montagne builds and demonstrates an airplane, we'll all be able to look at the demonstrated, flight test proven statistics and say "Gee!!". But until then, its pretty much just claims by someone who's a "self taught engineer" according to the newspaper.

By the way, did you ask him how many of these airplanes have been built?

Just curious.


12-21-2004, 08:36 PM
I hope there's a VERY large volume of them already in process, secured deposits for all of them and computerized welding robots and cnc tube cutters etc...housed in a very large facility... to go along with that $xxx,000,000 sale price!! :o

Never had his machine on skis? How many years has it been around and he doesn't fly it on skis? Does he spend summers in the Caribbean on customer deposits? Something doesn't smell right.

12-21-2004, 09:21 PM
Hi Guys,

This thread makes me think there is more need for someone?,,,, to do a cub type kit,,, with, WITH!< improvements for us builders.
I built a North Star,,,, It is GREAT but hard to buy, and too long to receive the kit,,,, The North Star is THE BEST, kit ie,,,// improved SC Cub Kit, , on the market. Toe breaks and lots of up grades.
Wow I wish some one would get a Super Cub kit on the market, and make it available/ complete/ reasonable in price.

12-21-2004, 09:55 PM
Hi Guys,

This thread makes me think there is more need for someone?,,,, to do a cub type kit,,, with, WITH!< improvements for us builders.
I built a North Star,,,, It is GREAT but hard to buy, and too long to receive the kit,,,, The North Star is THE BEST, kit ie,,,// improved SC Cub Kit, , on the market. Toe breaks and lots of up grades.
Wow I wish some one would get a Super Cub kit on the market, and make it available/ complete/ reasonable in price.
The NS >may< very well be the best Jay...but I bet you got pretty close to the psych ward trying to get everything you paid for out of Morgan! Living even a mile away can be hell...can't imagine trying to get stuff to Texas! Great guy..great design...just a little short on logistics. The Smith's also do a VERY nice SC kit. Cheaper and from what it appears equally matched +/- to the North Star. Numerous theads on this already exist if you do a search! This Goat is supposed to be sold as a certified aircaft somewhere in it's life....so we're not talking apples to apples!

Oh yah...I'd also be careful on this forum stating toe brakes are an upgrade! From what I've seen most here won't agree with you and it can get ugly ! :lol:


12-21-2004, 11:31 PM
If I recall correctly, the Mountain Goat showed up in Gulkana for the first time in '93. This was after a large controversy caused by Mr. Montagne advertising in advance an airplane that would "Kick a stock Cub's Ass!".
It didn't, this I'm sure I recall correctly, and I especially recall the large amounts of glee expressed. It did make it to the Super Bush challenge in '95 I believe, though it came in 3rd Place and not even close to the other two loaded Supercubs. I have all this on video (thanks to Jerry Burr) and will give specific numbers in a forthcoming post. (Take-off light, and take-off with 300 lbs.)
As Crash mentioned, there is only one registered Mountain Goat, and it has the same tail number as the one in Gulkana did back in '93-- N101MG.
Interesting stuff that Crash discovered while talking to him, maybe I'll give him a call also, sounds like from what he's been trying to sell for the last fifteen years is the perfect replacement for the ever so old, out of date, piece of junk Super Cub that makes me a living! :o
I wonder if he'd trade my old 160 Cub across the board for 101MG? :lol:
I am not bashing Mr. Bill, only would be nice if he would have let me FLY the dang thing the 4 or 5 times that I've asked him over the years!
Stand by for the take-off and landing numbers (in Feet) after I go and dig out the film and watch it.


Steve Pierce
12-22-2004, 12:31 AM
MGs will go into mass product, set the Super Cub world on it's ear and Super Cubs will be a dime a dozen and we can all own several. 8)

12-22-2004, 01:09 AM
I will probably get BEAT UP again but I live and work in Kotzebue, Alaska. I DO NOT see any mountain goats working out there. Most, if not all the guides and professionals use pretty much STOCK Super Cubs. Why is that?

12-22-2004, 01:38 AM
Parts availability. The same reason the Husky, Scout, Arctic Tern, Taylor Craft and all the other JUNK that didn't make it. Crash

12-22-2004, 02:26 PM
Plus it's alot easier to safety-wire a Cub back together and fly it out than trying to find angles on other such "clean" airframes to attach the wire and duct tape. :lol:
Not that I would EVER even think of doing such a thing myself...! 8)
Either way, I'm all for Mr. Pierce's Dime-A-Dozen-Grab-a-Couple-Cubs plan. :o
It must be wintertime, looks like we're all succumbing to the seasonal PDS. (Pipe Dream Syndrome). :P :drinking:


12-22-2004, 02:54 PM
It must be wintertime, looks like we're all succumbing to the seasonal PDS. (Pipe Dream Syndrome). :P :drinking:


Red Baron, don't you mean Piper Dream Syndrome?

John Scott

Big AK
12-22-2004, 02:56 PM
We WILL get to the bottom of this Goat thing. The thing will either "fly" or fall on it's face. I intend to talk to some others that are close to this project.

I'm all for an improvement if it is, in fact, an improvement.

Any of you guys fly Beavers or been around them much? Lots of Beavers flying around on stock wings. Not alot of them using the improved wing or even the Baron-Stol, but both of these design improvements are exactly that, improvements. The stock wing is fine within the limitations of the airfoil section design.

I love Cubs, but I'll probably NEVER quit dinking around with how to improve them. I love stuff that flies. My pride will not be hurt because some guy with an improved a/c beats my "proverbial" Top Cub or Top Pig, or whatever overpriced or dreamed up widget I'm driving.

Yes, I can understand talking down a guy who brags about his appparently unrealistic and unrealized a/c design. No problem. I understand it.

I really did mean, for myself, that I'd not slander the guy, or is it "libel"(since it's written)........until I have firsthand experience.

As I said before, even recently I have spoken loudly and negatively about this goat. Now I just need to get more info and fly the thing instead of busting the guy up on the computer.

Any of you guys fly a Husky much? 8)

Vivion, landing and take-off, they'll smoke a 180 Cub if both are gross at 2K, huh?


Cub Kid
12-22-2004, 04:56 PM
I will probably get BEAT UP again but I live and work in Kotzebue, Alaska. I DO NOT see any mountain goats working out there. Most, if not all the guides and professionals use pretty much STOCK Super Cubs. Why is that?


I am pretty sure that photo you took of your house and Vette weren't in Kotz... looked more like FAI to me!

Big AK Dave,

I agree with you on all your points, except the part about libel...my law profs always said that it isn't libel if it is true... I look forward to hearing more about it, as you investigate further...heck this could be a really good thing, or a complete flop (as everyone seems to think). I will wait to put money into it though (probably because I don't have much money)

Steve and Andy,

I am right with ya as soon as those cubs are cheap, I will have one for each day of the week


12-23-2004, 10:50 AM

This is a MOUNTAIN GOAT thread. I'm not about to jump in with data from other airplanes.

And Merry Christmas to you!


12-23-2004, 12:40 PM

After re-reading your post, I guess a better response would be that there is test data, and written, proven data, with all test parameters noted, for Huskys, Scouts, and even some for Super Cubs. They have met certification standards, which are stringent, though have changed over the years.

For example, the Husky model A-1B flight manual states that at sea level, standard conditions, airplane at gross weight, the airplane will takeoff and climb over a 50 foot obstacle in 690 feet from a standstill. Rate of climb, standard conditions, sea level, is 1400 fpm, at gross weight (2000 pounds). Stall speed at gross weight, power off, flaps deployed, standard conditions is 53 mph indicated.

That is data that has been flight tested, documented and certified. Note that none of this is with any performance enhancing mods, like VG's big props, etc, which are available.

I don't have similar numbers for a 2000 pound cub handy, but there are some if not all of these types of data available(its a CAR 3 airplane, and they didn't require a lot of the data points then that they do now). Stall speed, as I recall, is 52 mph, though. The airplane has been flight tested, and was designed by an engineer, and certified by DER.

Further, if you go to any of a dozen or so Husky dealers, they will all not only take you up in the plane, they'll actually let you fly one. I'm guessing there are at least a couple dozen places around where you can actually fly a Super Cub, including probably Cub Crafters, who are building them today.

My point was that the Mountain Goat has no test data available. Stall speed is given with no qualifying parameters, such as weight, or how he measured the stall speed. Same for cruise numbers. The plane has not been engineered to verify load factors or strength of the airframe, let alone been subjected to the rigors of certification.

So, the point is, he can claim anything he likes. It is meaningless information in comparison to any certificated aircraft, for which there is actual data.

Hey, if its such a great airplane, why won't he allow anyone else to actually fly it?

Who knows?

Anyway, you can compare apples to oranges all week, but until the guy provides some actual flight test data, and some suggestion that it has had someone look at the structures, Who cares?


12-23-2004, 01:02 PM
This Mountain Goat topic has been around for years with no data, just talk. Until we have actual data, LET'S GET OFF IT! It's a waste of time and space

Big AK
12-23-2004, 01:34 PM
Mike V., the Husky quip was just bait for the guys who don't like 'em. I'm trying to share my sense of humor. Thanks for your response.

I generally like and enjoy the Husky. Gear changes are a pain in the arse, though. And some other maintenance stuff that I hammered FlaGold with some years back on this same site.

CubUnltd, what more perfect a "forum" to "talk" about the goat than here, at sCub.org? We're here because we have time and there's plenty of space. PS I've enjoyed reading some of your responses and ideas since I've been back spending some of my "winter" time in front of the computer. It's always nice to have another experienced and active rebuilder in the bandwidth.


12-23-2004, 02:19 PM
Thanks Dave,
Didn't mean to be nasty, Just that I've heard all this stuff before years ago and we seam to be rehashing the same things over and over again. I realize there's new people on this site that haven't heard this before so I apologize for my impatience.
Every once in awhile we all need a knock upside the head to bring us to our senses.

Thanks; :rock:

12-23-2004, 03:19 PM
Cubunltd ------- As much as you help ANYONE that asks on this site, I think your intitled to go off once in awhile!

12-23-2004, 03:24 PM
Without dreamers we'd have no innovation. Without innovation we'd be walking. I prefer flying.

I hope the Goat is a smashing success. I hope it does everything Bill says. If so, everybody wins. If not, Bill Montagne loses. Whether it's a success or not, I applaud the energy and effort invested in the project. It takes guts and perserverance. And that alone earns my respect.


Dave Calkins
12-23-2004, 03:42 PM
If the thing does half the things that he says, it will be a success. Maybe not a Cub beater, but a success nontheless. Especially so if he can get the design sold and make money on his "idea".

Any of you guys been in the thing?

12-23-2004, 03:43 PM

You are right there, and if the airplane performs as he claims, I'll be the first to congratulate him. After all, I'm the guy who has made a switch, so its not like I'm not open to different approaches or machines.

I've said time and again here that I'll fly what they give me the keys to.

There are dreamers and schemers, and P.T. Barnum gave us a great quote years ago, and it applies just as well today as it did then.

If he offers flights, I'd be happy to go fly it.

Nice paint scheme, if nothing else,


12-23-2004, 04:11 PM
Some of you guys obviously aren't reading the hole thread on this subject. There have been numerous people that have said he flatly refuses to let anyone fly the Mountain Goat.
I'm the first one to promote innovation and dreamers. I'm one myself, but talk is talk, especially when it's been talk for 10 years.

It's beer thirty around here so enjoy the rest of the forum and I'm outta here. :drinking: :Beer

"Where's the love"

12-23-2004, 04:25 PM
Actually, I have read the WHOLE thread. I've also met Bill Montagne. And sat in the plane (in a hangar.) And have seen it fly many times, including the last time late this summer when the departure ground roll and climb angle were spectacular. (I've seen a few Cubs taking off before, too.)

Cheap shots are just that. If you haven't flown it, you have no basis to criticize it. If I was in Bill's shoes, in the promotion stage of "selling" the project, I wouldn't let you fly it, either. Too risky. Unless you had the money to fund production. Money talks, BS walks.


bob turner
12-23-2004, 04:46 PM
I was drug to this thread kicking and screaming - a buddy dropped by for breakfast and told me about the performance of a Goat. I hadn't been paying attention.
My impression is that even certified aircraft can have exaggerated performance data - my Super Decathlon is a case in point. It will never cruise at 133 kts, let alone the higher speeds one can find in past advertising. I love it anyway. A quarter-century ago we were choosing between a Maule (160mph on 10 gph) and a C-180, at maybe 130 kts at 13 gph. Perhaps stupidly, we opted for a Mooney, and now cannot touch a good 180. There may be a Maule that can outrun a 180, but I haven't flown it.
Yes, I really like the Husky, and yes, I'd rather have a stock 160 hp Cub. Without the bungees. And no, I don't believe the Goat performance numbers.

12-23-2004, 04:52 PM
Ok SB, You're right. A cheap shot is just that. Nobody said his airplane didn't perform and I personally haven't seen it, only a picture. I've been hearing about it for years. From what I understand, he won't even let you touch the controls if he takes you for a ride. Nobody is suggesting that they fly it themselves, just let me feel the controls with you. No wonder he has no backers. I wouldn't give anybody any money if I wasn't allowed to touch the thing. I seriouly hope it works out for him. I'm just skeptical because it's been a long time. If it was half as good, why can't he get backers? Is it the plane or is it his business sense?

Anyway enough is enough. Hope it works out. Have a nice Holiday SB.

12-23-2004, 04:59 PM
I wasn't looking to pick, either. I just think the entire aviation community should support and encourage the entire aviation community.

It's all good.

Merry Christmas,


Christina Young
12-23-2004, 05:00 PM
Well, this quote from the referenced article (see p. 1 of this thread) says there is a dentist in Pennsylvania with one:

"William Shellenberger, a retired dentist from Sharon, Pa., said he and two partners built a Mountain Goat several years ago. Montagne shipped the fuselage to them as part of a kit and they built the rest, with a lot of help from Montagne who has sold two kits for $165,000 each.

"We love it. It is a very unique airplane," Shellenberger said. "It is an airplane that can get on and off a very short or rough field, and climb at an outstanding angle.""

Does anyone know this guy? Maybe he will give rides?

Christina Young
12-23-2004, 05:05 PM
And here it is, from the FAA aircraft registry:

Manufacturer Name GOAT WORKS INC Certificate Issue Date 09/17/2001
Model GW MOUNTAIN GOAT Status Valid
Type Aircraft Fixed Wing Single-Engine Type Engine Reciprocating
Pending Number Change None Dealer No
Date Change Authorized None Mode S Code 53161773
MFR Year 2001 Fractional Owner NO

City SHARON State PENNSYLVANIA Zip Code 16146-2384

Engine Manufacturer LYCOMING Classification Experimental
Engine Model 0-360-A1D Category Amateur Built

A/W Date 10/04/2001

Christina Young
12-23-2004, 05:06 PM
Sorry, the registration number is N93GW.

Christina Young
12-23-2004, 05:12 PM
And phone number for Goatworks is (724) 346-0928. Amazing what you can do with a few minutes on the Internet....

12-23-2004, 05:33 PM
He is sure getting a lot of press lately with it...


Bill Rusk
12-23-2004, 07:01 PM
Unfortunately it is not "all good". Remember Jim Bede? He got a lot of people's money and never delivered and that is VERY common in the experimental category. You need to be very very careful when dealing with new designs. The intentions may be good but that will not make any difference when the company folds up and you try to get your deposit back.


Big AK
12-23-2004, 10:07 PM
With this deal in the works, Bill might be unwilling to risk his one a/c.

I can understand that.

On the other hand, if I'm refused the stick unreasonably, I'll be the first to let it be known.

Someone had said the thing doesn't have duals. That may not be true.

I'd expect that Bill would have duals and also have checked himself out in the back seat.

None of us are gonna be impressed if we can't be up front and really feel what this a/c is like in a realistic flying regime.

I intend to at least get a look at the a/c soon in its' latest configuration.

If there is any magic to this airplane, it will have to be in the airfoil shape. Nothing else about it seems, at least cursorily, to be a new invention.

"Love is an attitude"

Merry Christmas.DAVE

12-23-2004, 10:18 PM
Bill Rusk makes an excellent point, which goes along with my reference to PT Barnum.

Byron Root would let virtually anyone fly his prototype Sherpa aircraft when he was looking for funding to build it as a certified aircraft. They couldn't find funding and have gone the kit plane route. It should be a fantastic airplane.

This is not the same deal.

Salesmen aren't necessarily engineers or airplane designers.

I wish him luck, and if he ever gets a conforming prototype that he will allow anyone to fly, I'd give it a whirl.

In the meantime, it's just talk.


12-23-2004, 11:48 PM
He is sure getting a lot of press lately with it...


Quote: "I spent $4 million of my own money and I only need $6 million more to get it certified". Let's see, a $10 million initial investment to get a two place "Super Cub replacement" certified. Hmm. How many finished planes would he have to build AND sell at a 20% profit margin to replace the $10 million start up capitol? At $165K sale price it would take 330 planes.

In 1993 Piper built the last 13 Super Cubs and it took over a year to sell them out at $73K each. That is only 13 planes. The "two place" bush aircraft market is just not that big.

The Matanuska Susitna Borough looked at his proposal years ago to give financial incentives, money and a manufacturing site for this project. They stepped back from the table after all the numbers were in.

I wish Bill well and he was very gracious with his time on the phone. He did pretty much say my 180hp Cub was a piece of crap and if you wanted a good plane you had to throw the entire design out and start from scratch. He can say this once his Mountain Goat has run the FAA gauntlet and proven its self all over the world like the Super Cub has. Take care. Crash

P.S. I tried to lift the tail at the Ak Airmans Show and about blew out a disk.

12-24-2004, 12:57 AM
It just occured to me that MAYBE Bill isn't much of a pilot, and that would explain why he doesn't, or hasn't, let anyone, or VERY few people ever drive his Mountain Goat. Maybe he is one of those "hangar pilots" who really just talks about flying, but does fly some, and the whole concept of flight is still new enough to him that he really has NO idea of what Cub can do in good hands.

And maybe its' just posible that all of his performance numbers are fabricated on paper only? Do ya think? Daa..........

And maybe, just maybe, because he his desperatlytrying to break-into a VERY competitive and limited 2 place airplane market, that he went right after the Super Cub.

I'm all for inovation, and I think anyone building a new machine, or new part deserves much credit. In this case I don't see anything "new". Some flush rivots to reduce drag, cessnastyle strut, and lots of cub copied other stuff.....there is nothing "new" about this plane. Its a rag-tag copy of a Cub, which has been tried many times before, the most sucessful of which is the dog.....opps, I mean husky dog.

As I said in my first post, I know of at least 1 guy who has around 80k invested right now, and has nothing to show for it. I'd also guess there are other out there. Once again...I smell class-action lawsuit coming.

Merry Christmas..............

12-24-2004, 01:22 AM
I've been following this string for a while. You folks have much better knowledge than me. But let me offer an analogy:

There usta be a sporting goods outfit outa Waseca, MN called Herter's. Heck, I've even got their 1974 catalogue on the bookshelf; time to clean house, eh?

They had lots of good stuff, at good prices, but you had to sort out the "Puffery", "seed catalogue rhetoric," or what one of my farming cousins called "Bovine Byproducts." They once't upon a time even offered their "Chrome Fiberglass" process for recovering aeroplanes; if I recall the guinea pig was the ol' 4-place T-Craft. (Any aviation historians please correct the failing memory). Probably on the Razorback paperwork (q.v.), but I may be wrong, as usual.

My point is there are folks good at promoting their project [at the next flyin, remind me to tell you a couple of Jim Bede stories...], and then there are some good at delivering an actual product. [Remind me to tell a couple other Jim Bede stories....]

I think this is where the thread is trending, and commend those DELIVERING a product, whether PMA, STC, or EXP, as long as it's what they promise.

And thanks to those trying to "Smoke out those hokum artists", as George Leonard Herter said so often.

And I actually hope this is the real deal, just suspending judgement until the facts are in.

12-24-2004, 02:52 AM
Ah, yes!!! Herter's World's Finest.

How could you ever forget a Herter's catalog?


12-24-2004, 05:02 AM
P.S. I tried to lift the tail at the Ak Airmans Show and about blew out a disk.

It sucks to get old. Oh, I get it, you meant the tail was super heavy! :P Sorry Crash, I couldn't resist! :lol:
What I don't understand is why all the SuperCub bashing by Montagne? This SCub bashing (which from here on shall be referred to as SCB) was going on back before the Goat even flew. I remember because there was a lot of folks a little p'o'ed by the time he put in his first appearance at Gulkana. This SCB is not necessary, but for the opposite reason that Goat Bashing (that sounds like some ancient animal practice--sorry! :o ) is also not necessary. The Supercub is a well-proven design, mainly solidified by the cauldron of Time. Sure the Cub has some shortcomings, and there are most definitely sacrifices made when flying the Cub; ie. speed vs. performance.
And the Goat shouldn't be beat to death because it is a relatively unproven design. Prove it, then improve on it, and the bashing will cease.
But I like Bill. I talked to him again this year at the Tradeshow, and gee what a nice fella. But I don't understand why he has always seemed so very Antagonistic toward SuperCubs. Maybe there is something more sinister going on....... 8) :peeper
Anyways, why say that a Cub is outdated junk when without it the Goat could never even have had a basic design template? :o :lol:
Sorry that I do not have the exact Goat numbers from the competetion events yet, what with it being the Holidays and all! :drinking:


12-24-2004, 11:07 AM

Ever meet a Chevy dealer that told you Dodge's and Fords were just as good?

As for the Gulkana thing. When Jerry Burr won the landing event, he had an important piece of equipment aboard. Jerry Burr. Maybe Bill Montagne isn't the best pilot for such competitions.

Guys on this site have been harshly critical of, well let's make a list. Huskys, Champs, Murphys, Cessnas, Arctic Terns, Wilgas, Helios, Scouts, and some I've forgotten. Then there's the 150hp Supercub guys bashing 180hp guys. And Piper guys bashing CubCrafters guys, Lees exhaust, Sutton's prop, Landes' pods. And on, and on, and on. Most of the criticism is heaped on in buckets by guys that have no experience with the equpment they're criticizing. Sounds like election year negative politics. And just like politics, it gets really old. Thank you Bill Gates for the off switch.

Me? I'm just happy with what I've got.

How's the rebuild going?

Merry Christmas,


12-24-2004, 11:24 AM
So how does the Goat differ from the North Star????

12-24-2004, 11:27 AM
Only plane Ive run accross that could out perform a Super Cub is a 135hp Talyorcraft. My buddy built this one using a PA18 frame and installed Taylorcraft L2 wings modified for Husky type flaps and Taylorcraft tail feathers. We were flying around a couple weeks ago and he consistently beat my 160 borer prop cub off the ground and cruises 25 mph faster. To go the same speed im at 2500 and hes at 2050. He has alot of super cub time and the only thing he thinks it cant do as good as a cub is carry a big load as easy.

http://supercub.org/albums/supercubs/ctp.thumb.jpg (http://supercub.org/albums/supercubs/ctp.sized.jpg)

12-24-2004, 12:54 PM
So - is anybody in the PA area gonna give that guy with the N93GW registered Goat a call and see if he will let anybody fly it?

Dave Calkins
12-24-2004, 02:13 PM
All good points you guys!

CubScout did not mention any of the Jim Bede stories that end in someone other than Jim Bede manufacturing and successfully marketing the design......there are stories that end like this.

Crash, maybe the deal is with the Chinese and manufacturing costs will be so low that the margin will allow very rapid returns on their investment.

SB, what a bunch of badass arguers and opinion pushers we are when we're able to sit behind a keyboard and push "submit" to send out our next barb :anon ......knowledgeable as he is, anyone ever met Diggler yet??? :snipersmile:

Fobjob, the Northstar is quite nearly a modded Cub. The Goat is an entirely "new" design. Sorry Andy, the "high-wing monoplane" template was taken before the PA-18 arrived as much as we'd like to think otherwise.

...and lastly, Kase, thank you. You may have hit on something very much like the goat with this t-craft-winged -18. If the goat's airfoil shape and droop-aileron system allow both ends of the flight envelope to be stretched...the guy has achieved what he claims.

OK, Pennsylvania guys. Call up these goat owners and get them to fly over and show you their bird. Maybe they have a computer and need to be let loose in SC.org. :peeper


12-24-2004, 02:23 PM
Heck guys,
I hope the MG developer IS successful with his creation, and it does what he says it will do. A new design in the market would be fine with me. Like another Supercubber said, I am happy with what I already have.......


12-24-2004, 02:25 PM
I've read all the posts, and it seems that the most popular question is has anyone flown the Goat.

I've RIDDEN in the backseat several times. I've gotten about 15 minutes straight and level flight time (for what that's worth?)

I have NO measured performance numbers to give you, only observations.

Cruise at 2550 with 66 pitch is 150 mph, both on airspeed indicator and my personal GPS.

There are rear controls but no throttle.

I have watched it stall (airspeed ind) under 27 mph.

My fat butt and Bill and loads of fish and gear on Cub strips the goat gets in and out just fine, even with the 66 fixed pitch.

We passed Cubs in cruise like they are parked, and it will catch 185s.

All of your questions about field repairs, costs, specific numbers, how many are flying, reputation..........all warranted, and hopefully all will be answered.

Untill that day, let's all enjoy the living crap out of our CUBs and 12's :D

12-24-2004, 02:26 PM
I will probably get BEAT UP again but I live and work in Kotzebue, Alaska. I DO NOT see any mountain goats working out there. Most, if not all the guides and professionals use pretty much STOCK Super Cubs. Why is that?


I am pretty sure that photo you took of your house and Vette weren't in Kotz... looked more like FAI to me!


Cub Kid,

You are right. Right now I am in that house in Fairbanks. I work and live HALF of my life in Kotz.

12-24-2004, 03:32 PM
My feeling is ,the mountain goat may be successful.When that happens all your cubs wont be worth much.I am prepared to offer 5.000 dollars for all flying cubs delivered to rumford,me.I know this is at quite a risk to my financial future.This will be very good for you,no more stress wondering if your cub has a future.I will promise if and when the goat does'nt drive the price of your aircraft down,for a small fee you could repurchase a cub from me. This is a way for me to give back to the cubbing world.I have been a taker thus far,and in the spirit of christmas i will sacrifice for once.

12-24-2004, 04:08 PM
My feeling is ,the mountain goat may be successful.When that happens all your cubs wont be worth much.I am prepared to offer 5.000 dollars for all flying cubs delivered to rumford,me.I know this is at quite a risk to my financial future.This will be very good for you,no more stress wondering if your cub has a future.I will promise if and when the goat does'nt drive the price of your aircraft down,for a small fee you could repurchase a cub from me. This is a way for me to give back to the cubbing world.I have been a taker thus far,and in the spirit of christmas i will sacrifice for once.


12-26-2004, 11:13 AM
I am in the Pittsburgh area and I've never seen this thing at any of the flyins. I 've never even heard of anybody talking about it. I will try to contact this dentist and go for a look see. I'm curious myself. I'll try to get a hold of him after the Holiday thing wears off.
I've got his phone number and he is located less than 20 min. flight from me. Seems I should have heard about this Mountain Goat.
I'll post what I find.

12-26-2004, 01:03 PM

Thanks for picking up the ball - I was kinda hoping you would. Be really interesting to hear what you find you - I'll be looking forward to it. Hope Santy Claus was good to you and that you and your family have a geat New Year!

12-26-2004, 08:54 PM
You guys better hurry,once the secret report gets out from pennsylvania your cubs are worthless.This could be like martha stewart (dump em out before the words out),i heard aviats trying to buy him out now.If the dentist in pennsylvania wont talk maybe we could get one of his hygenists drunk and take advantage of her.I think we could make her talk. If they wont talk maybe we can get our teeth cleaned. You guys are very clever,couldnt get your info out of montagne in alaska so your sending someone to pennsylvania.I beleive this is montagnes downfall ,he should have never sold that kit.

12-26-2004, 11:32 PM
Ya, what ever you do, don't let her tie you up first (rule of thumb for all women). You'll be the one doing all the talking. Crash

12-27-2004, 12:34 AM

Now I'm beginning to like the direction of this. It sounds a lot better than the libel/slander stuff.


01-07-2005, 12:21 PM
We are a group of 3 western Pennsylvanians who built and have been flying a ?homebuilt? version of the Mountain Goat.

Many years ago, I enjoyed a ride with Bill Montagne and was so overwhelmed by the airplane and that flight that I bragged about it for months. We practically jumped off the runway and did a quick climb to altitude where he demonstrated a fast cruise, slow cruise, stalls, a very slow climbing turn (I remember seeing 23 on the ASI). The landing was incredibly steep and short. It was, by far, the most fun I?ve ever had in the sky. I returned home and proceeded to sell my partners on the

Several months later, we got lucky. Bill called and said he had a ?bare bones?, tacked fuselage and some wing parts he wanted to be rid of because he wanted to move. Shipping turned out to be a real problem and considerable damage ensued, but we had enough to build on. Several years later, after a lot of work and dollars, and a lot of phone calls to Livermore, Ca., we completed our ?homebuilt? Mountain Goat.

We?ve been flying it now for about 3 years and it is every bit the airplane we hoped for, even though we don?t have many of Bill?s special components. We do not use his induction system, special exhaust system he designed nor his landing gear. We used the Bearhawk LG which we like very much. Our goal was more focused on the STOL end of the speed envelope.

On an average day we can get off the runway in about 200 ft, climb like the veritable angel, and cruise at about 130 mph at 75% power. Landings with flaps produce very short rollouts. Stall speeds are 27 with full flaps, 38 with one notch, and 48 clean(half fuel and 2 people). Stalls are gentle and predictable in all configurations. Cruise is very comfortable. Our engine is a low compression Lyc 0-360(168hp) and our wood prop is a Sterba 76-60. Our empty weight is 1240 lbs w/80 lbs tail weight. His design is extremely unique and a barrel of fun to fly. With performance like we get, its hard to imagine how much better the performance
would be in one of his production models.

There is plenty of room in front and rear seats, and lots of room for many pounds of hunting, fishing and camping gear extending about 5 feet from the back of the rear seat.

We think Bill is an amazing fellow - he is honest, honorable and he has always been very kind and helpful to us - a very good friend.

Shelly and partners--Fred and Jeff
pics at http://shellenberger.net/goatworks/

01-07-2005, 01:12 PM
Sounds to me like you really like your version of the mountaun goat. The pics look good on your site. I am in Western Pa. and would love the opportunity to come and see your aircraft sometime.


01-07-2005, 02:05 PM
Hi Shelly,

Thanks for posting the information about your airplane very interesting and I enjoyed the great photos as well. Just curious what kind of AOA the airplane has at the quoted stall speeds and if the airspeeds you quoted for stall were from the ASI or a GPS.

Welcome to SC.org and I hope you find the place interesting and useful. Be really great to run into you at one of the fly ins and check out your MG up close and personal. Thanks again.

brown bear
01-09-2005, 11:23 AM
Are you the guys building the Pegazair?

Doug in Kansas

:D My plane is not just another "cub" although some times I wish it was! :(

Dave Calkins
01-09-2005, 07:50 PM
OK, now we are getting somewhere.

Thank You Shelly!!

How much Cub experience do you have to compare to this Mountain Goat, Shelly?

It will be good to hear what Cubunltd has to say, also.

Thanks again, DAVE

01-09-2005, 08:23 PM

Always good to get information from the source, although we sure do enjoy speculating around here too...



01-09-2005, 10:41 PM
Okay---now we've verified that there are two of them, sorta. Doesn't sound like this one totally "conforms" to the prototype, eh?


01-09-2005, 10:48 PM
So.......does that mean we still get to take advantage of the drunk hygenist ?????? :lol:

01-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Always take advantage of drunk hygenists - but wait 8 hours before flying them.........

01-10-2005, 01:47 PM
Always take advantage of drunk hygenists - but wait 8 hours before flying them.........

Dr. Gunny-
Is this common practice in your field?

01-10-2005, 02:32 PM
We won't hire them if they don't drink. Wasn't it W. C. Fields that said..."never trust a man (woman) that doesn't drink"

01-11-2005, 06:34 AM

01-12-2005, 01:07 PM
It's nice to be among friends.

John - sure - anytime - email me.


Gunny - normal steep attitudes. No AOA. ASI


Doug - yup! that's us - good to hear from you!


David M - owned a J-5, flew a tandem wheeled Sepercub, built/flew a
Baby Ace, Hiperbipe, Christavia, Hatz, MG, and now a Pegazair.


Steve - you're welcome


MTV - that's about right


David J and Gunny - Don't worry - she does prophylaxes!


Behindprops - If that's common practice, I'll bet Gunny has clean teeth!


Gunny - Trustworthy! I'd bet that applies to all of us!


Thanks for making me (us) feel at home -
Shelly, Fred and Jeff

01-12-2005, 03:02 PM
Shelly, Fred and Jeff - glad to have you here. Great comebacks LMAO!

What I was trying to get at with the AOA/attitude question and ASI vs. GPS on indicated stall speeds is that with a Supercub at high angles of attack the ASI is notoriously inaccurate because of the pitot location. On mine, with the Dakota leading edge slots I can be flying slow (dirtied up with full flaps) nose pitched up 30 - 40 degrees (high AOA) and showing about 25mph on the ASI - when I checked the speed with the GPS in the same configuration we were showing about 34 mph on the GPS - no wind conditions.

Does the location of the pitot on the MG make the ASI potentially susceptible to the same indication error?

Anyway - glad you guys are here - hope you enjoy the site.

01-12-2005, 04:08 PM
I'm sure you'll find all pitot tubes are not accurate at those angles of attack, not just supercubs.

01-12-2005, 04:21 PM
Mr shelly and group, if you people ever get north you are more than welcome at my liitle strip in Maine.Welcome welcome,and i hope you dont tell your hygenist i was joking about her. Phil. P.S. The Goat is welcome also.

Dave Calkins
01-12-2005, 07:33 PM
The pitot tube on Bill M.'s prototype Mountain Goat pivots to stay aligned with the apparent airflow.

It might not be perfectly accurate, but is probably not too far off because of the pivot and the long pitot mast.

Shelly, I'm not sure if a Whittaker-geared Cub qualifies you for making comparisons. :D


01-12-2005, 09:33 PM
Cubunltd, is that green on the cub in your avatar a factory color that was offered? I am interested in a shade of green for the rebuild.

Thanks, Lance

01-13-2005, 03:29 AM
this plane with cub frame, t-craft wing and husky flaps.....

would that be a Super Tasky plane???? :lol:

can't help myself

01-13-2005, 10:03 AM
No it's not a factory color. It's something we came up with while painting another PA18. We were masking off trim stripes and used the new epa friendly green masking tape. Standing back and looking at the tape work, we decided that would be a good color for the new one. It's PPG Delta DGHS47681


01-13-2005, 11:00 AM
Thanks John. I looked thru most of the pics here and found two others with a similar green. I like it!

Thanks for the color #


01-13-2005, 12:40 PM

Thanks for the report, and I can ditto the comments about Bill. I got to know him when he first built the original MG and have flown with him when he was "green" with it. Granted the plane has a lot of potential, but it is not a SC for many of the same reasons, neighter is my modified PA-12.

Those of us that have the fortunate opportunity to fly most all kinds of Bush planes in "real conditions" and as well have modified, rebuilt, wrecked/survived and "still fly" are not easily swayed to another configuration of airplane that is "like a cub" only better?

From my perspective, what Bob was and is attempting (and has done quite well) is to develop an aircraft that will carry a comparitive large load of "family camp gear, along with 2 people" and get you where you want to at a speed that will make flying there take less time then the average VW. AS well be an a/c that will open up the oportunities to the moderately competent TW pilot to that beyond the local tarmac.

While I don't claim to be an engineer, or even have near the welding and construction talent that my friend Bill has, I do have a pretty good handle on what a cub will do, and what pilots that operate them are expecting of them in the the bush!

The NUMBER ONE (1) (uno) first priority to a Bush pilot is that he can work the plane, get it home and do it again, and not If, but when he bends it, that it can be repaired in the sticks, with common tools, flown home, and then repaired with out the need for exodic materials, skills, and or $$$. There is not much on a cub that can't be done by anyone with "homespun roots" I am not sure that can be said for the MG, BH, Rebel, Husky, or even the more exotic TC's?

(just my opinion)


Dave Calkins
01-13-2005, 02:28 PM
Very good point, Tim.

Another thought, and I am guilty of this, is that having done a job a certain way for so long, It makes me feel like someone is telling me I was wrong all these years, when he comes along and tries to show me a "better" way.

Maybe his way IS better, but I don't want to be told I was "wrong" having done it my way.

...just a thought.

So far, there is no proof, that we masses have seen, to verify the Mountain Goat is a better way. When some of us get some stick time, then we can show the proof, better, or worse.


What's a TC?
the MG, BH, Rebel, Husky, or even the more exotic TC's?

Dave Calkins
01-13-2005, 02:29 PM

01-13-2005, 02:33 PM
"Type Certificates"...

Cubus Maximus
01-13-2005, 02:36 PM
Top Cub?

Dave Calkins
01-13-2005, 02:46 PM
Turbo-Charged.......for the Rocky Mountain flyers in the group.

T-crate would fit in Tim's context of "exotic", especially when considering that one that Kase showed.

I'd think that Top Cub would NOT apply to the context. I could see an ego-centric TopCub owner believing his bird was being discussed, though :splat:

01-13-2005, 02:48 PM
Not me! I assumed he meant "other type certificated aircraft"...


Clay Hammond
01-13-2005, 02:51 PM
Turbocharged Saratoga = TC?? Thats what we call them around the office anyway. :D

SuperCub MD
01-13-2005, 03:14 PM
The pitot tube on Bill M.'s prototype Mountain Goat pivots to stay aligned with the apparent airflow.


I wacked the hell out of my pilot tube...broke it loose, it's flopping around, bent mostly up and outboard. It didn't look like it was in danger of falling completely off, so I decided to leave it and fix it when it warms up....it's never been more accurate....maybe I'll leave it flopping.

Dave Calkins
01-13-2005, 10:00 PM
I wacked the hell out of my pilot tube...broke it loose, it's flopping around, bent mostly up and outboard. It didn't look like it was in danger of falling completely off, so I decided to leave it and fix it when it warms up....it's never been more accurate....maybe I'll leave it flopping.

This truly fits in the "emperically-derived information" category.

You're cracking me up, Mark


01-13-2005, 11:33 PM
To be honest I was thinking "Top Cub" but hey looks like most anthing other then a cub would fit. Having owned and rebuilt/modified several T-crafts I consider them pretty simple to work on and fly but they just aren't strong enough to work like a SC.

Dave C. Yeh we are all guilty of your point! I wish Bill the best and would love to get some stick time in one myself. Reminds me of when Bill Dunkin first built the Radial Bushwheels, but they are proving themself for most applications.......


01-13-2005, 11:49 PM

Good to see your posts on the board again, it has been a long time! I have been a little neglectful.

Happy New year,


Cubus Maximus
01-14-2005, 12:09 AM
Ha! 8) See Dave, I was right in that Top Cub DID fit the context of the cryptic missive in question - note Tim's confession above. Not being a Top Cub owner (just have one nearby that I had a chance to fly and drool over) and knowing Tim's preference for bush beater Cubs, I assumed he would think Jim's Yakima creations rather exotic birds. I can hear it now, "Wow! Look at that 4 camlock cowl!"



Dave Calkins
01-14-2005, 04:23 PM
here I am, laughing again..........bush beater Cubs. Four camloc cowls. But I am still of the group that will do a one-off Cub to my specs rather than the TC with some items that I'm not convinced of. Of course, my pride requires this of me...

Yes Tim, I remember when the first Bushwheels were available. Everyone who had even an old rotten set of 'Streaks pooh-poohed the Bushwheels.

Now the 31" radials are IT. I can hardly push a low-PSI 'Streaked Cub into the hangar, but even a Husky on radial 31's is easy as pie. And the way the footprint squishes out, but the things are relatively narrow when they're flying. What a great product they've turned into.

Maybe some day we'll be saying the same thing about the MGoat, or d&e's riblett wing, or somones slat design.

01-14-2005, 04:40 PM
In an effort to better fit into this community, I have removed my four cowl camlocks and replaced them with duct tape. It is not as workable in the 7 degree temps we had today, but it is worth it not to be ostracized...


01-14-2005, 09:26 PM
One of the best things about a Super Cub is it's side cowl latches. CC didn't use them because they cost over a 100 bucks each. Not because twist lock fastners are better. I like the duct tape latch idea on CC cubs. :wink: Crash

06-13-2005, 06:47 PM
I'll have to post on this since I went for a ride. I have 7000+ hours in a Citabria 7ECA and 3500+ hours in C 172M, converted to a taildragger, O360, Sportsman leading edge, 95 gals of fuel, etc... I'm a fishspotter and spend a lot of time in the air with a heavy load.
The MG took off great as far as I'm concerned. 3/4 fuel and us 2, I weigh 175. We then went to an area outside livermores airspace and did some manuevers. I spend a lot of time circling fish. I got to fly the MG in a few circles at about 40 knots. The wing tip hardly even had to come down. Normally we have a lot of wing tip in our way trying to keep an eye on the fish especilly if we are close to the water, 500 feet or less. This thing turned flawlessly. I've been dying to buy one since I flew it about 5+ years ago. All the fuel I need to stay up for 10, 12, 14 hours or what ever. Fast to get to the fishing ground a couple of hundred miles away. The speed we went to this area was as I recall about 140/145 knots indicated on the airspeed indicater. I had no GPS with me. I think it had 8.00 for tires. I have pics of it with me in it somewhere. The plane is beautiful. I hope Bill gets it together to start producing these before I retire. I'm 44 now. My partner also went for ride and is dying to get one also. My partner has about 35,000 hours in 1958 C175 converted to a taildragger, O 360, C/S prop, Sportsman leading edge, 120 gals of fuel, etc...
The High speed to get there and slow speed to ditch is what has us sold. My partner was in Alaska and went to his shop and picked up the Titanium frame. There was 2 of them. He said it was weird to pick up something so big and be so light. Anyway, thats my 2 cents.

PS. I just found this site today looking for cylinders. I don't have a Supercub and never been in one other than sitting in one. I have a few friends who use them as fishspotters and they love them.

Steve Pierce
06-13-2005, 09:16 PM
Welcome. You will figure out we are a pretty diverse crowd.

06-13-2005, 11:54 PM

06-14-2005, 04:07 PM
Fascinating thread, it pretty much reinforces my feeling that Mr. Montagne is nothing more than a snake oil salesman. I used to write for an aviation publication which had an interest in planes such as the mountain goat. The magazine made repeated attempts to test fly, or even to be just taken for a ride as a passenger in the goat. All requests were met with excuses and evasion. This story seems to be repeated over and over, whenever the MG is discussed, Bill does not want to demonstrate the airplane's capabilities to knowledgeable pilots with the means to assess the performance. This begs the question why? If the airplane really can do what he says it can do, one would think that he would welcome the chance to prove it, especially to an aviation publication which many would read. This leads me to believe that the airplane really can *not* do what BM claims it can.

Big AK calculated the theoretical airspeed of a 66 pitch prop at 2400 rpm to be 150mph. That's correct, but as Big AK pointed out, that assumes zero slip, or a prop with 100% efficiency. Real props, of course, are not 100% efficient. Typically, fixed pitch props have efficiencies in the range of 75%-85%. BM claims a 159 mph cruise for the goat, with a perfectly efficient prop, that equates to 2544 rpm. If we generously assume that the goat's prop is operating at the high end of the efficiency range (85%) that means a 66 in pitch prop would have to be to be turning at 2992 rpm to achieve a 159 mph cruise. Given that the redline on a IO-360-B2E is 2700 rpm, a 159 mph cruise seems pretty unlikely, at best.

As for the comment about GPS not being able to measure aircraft speed due to the satellites getting confused....that is just complete bull$hit. I spent a few years at a job where one of my primary responsibilities was using GPS to track aircraft position and velocity. While the equipment used is a little more sophisticated that your average Garmin, it's possible to routinely determine the position of an aircraft in flight to within centimeters and velocities to within small fractions of a knot. Bear in mind that the military uses GPS to control all sorts of guided munitions which are traveling quite a bit faster than a mountain goat. That BM is trying to suggest that aircraft parameters cannot be measured by GPS seems yet another indication that he's trying to hide something.

08-02-2005, 01:38 AM
Anybody that has worked in aviation should know, get the certification before you advertise. If you make it through the Aircraft Certification Office, then you can focus on Manufacturing and selling. Selling is the small portion of the project.

08-23-2005, 11:21 PM
i noticed that as of 2005 innodyne has Montagne Aircraft MOUNTAIN GOAT STOL listed as a "partner" along with others such as smithcub...

12-22-2008, 02:33 AM
Any day now, it's almost here! :lol:

mike mcs repair
12-22-2008, 05:23 AM
Any day now, it's almost here! :lol:

wow it HAS been a while...
nice talkative guy, he came by in ??93 or 4 on his first trip up giving demos, couple of the fish spotters flew it... scared one of them when they stalled/spun? some while bullsheiting with him and goofing off in the pattern, just remember they were surprised and had not intended to do it.... hence maybe his not letting others fly it anymore??

someone broke his flap handle and I made & gas welded up a 4130 piece to replace the fancy cnc'd aluminum one that broke... (wow before had a Tig..)

think he said 9 more months and it be FAA certified....

remember talk of just trying to get him into getting the composite wing as a replacement on a cub....

also saw n101mg in the ntsb things at some point...

Dave Calkins
12-23-2008, 01:27 AM
Mike, The wing is composite??? I did not know that. DAVE

mike mcs repair
12-23-2008, 03:03 AM
Mike, The wing is composite??? I did not know that. DAVE

it was then, complete wings, flaps and ailerons....... no idea now what it has...

12-23-2008, 04:04 AM

12-23-2008, 04:08 AM

12-23-2008, 07:54 AM

That's one of the problems with the MG...it keeps changing. I've seen it with a rag wing, with a composite wing and with an aluminum covered wing.

First time he had it at Gulkana, he'd flown it up there from CA with no carburetor heat (and then it had a carburetor) :o .

Steel tube fuselage, then titanium fuselage, one type tail feathers, then another....etc.

It could be the greatest thing since sliced bread, as Montagne claims, but he's never really left it alone long enough for anyone to determine that.

He was pretty close to convincing some folks in the MatSu that they should build him a production facility there, and the numbers of employees he claimed for production numbers of airplanes were also apparently derived from tea leaves. Fortunately, those folks declined his "offer".

He's sure done a lot of experimenting with the design, but he always seems to want to change it. He's also very reluctant to allow many to fly it. By comparison, the Dakota Cub folks brought their Super 18 around and let pretty much were willing to let anyone fly it.


mike mcs repair
12-23-2008, 11:59 AM
it also had front and rear lift struts when it was here then, though he said it didn't need the rear, but people looking at it wanted it.....

Dave Calkins
12-23-2008, 01:26 PM
When I took the time to look at it closely, it had one lift strut and, I believed, a flush-riveted aluminum wing. I've been wrong before and since, though. :D

mike mcs repair
12-23-2008, 05:14 PM
.....I believed, a flush-riveted aluminum wing. I've been wrong before and since, though. :D

long time ago.... but I am pretty sure it was composite wing, I know the flap and ailerons were...... was some talk that he went to a more standard wing method or something for trying to get it past faa....

long time ago.... but............

12-23-2008, 08:27 PM
First time it was at Gulkana, it had a rag wing. A couple years later, it appeared with either an aluminum wing or a composite wing. Next time I saw it, a few years after that, it had the other.

I've seen three completely different wings on the thing: rag, aluminum, and composite, not to mention different tail arrangements, engines, frames, flaps, etc, etc...

Never fix the design, and you never have to produce.


12-24-2008, 07:01 PM
I flew with Bill Montagne in this Mountain Goat some years ago in Stockton. It had a flush riveted aluminum wing at the time. The first version of 101MG did have a rag wing but it was badly damaged in an incident in the Livermore (CA) hills. I saw a few pieces of it in his hangar but he really didn't want to talk about it. Here is the sales literature he used at the time.



I wonder if he could have avoided either incident with a pair of 31" Bushwheels.

12-24-2008, 09:00 PM
He could have avoided either incident with either a 1) Super Cub, or
2) some piloting skills.


12-24-2008, 09:10 PM
I saw it at livermore in late 2000 and it had a smooth wing, maybe composite.

170MPH cruise at 2700...I'd Like to see that

The Snake Oil comment in hind sight seems pretty accurate.

12-25-2008, 03:55 AM
The Snake Oil comment in hind sight seems pretty accurate.

It is illuminating to compare what Montagne claims here:


....with what he has actually been able to demonstrate with other people watching and measuring:


His demonstrated takeoff run is almost 3 times as long as his claimed takeoff run, and his demonstrated landing roll is well over 2 times as long as his claimed landing roll.

His best takeoff distance was beaten by at least 12 other certificated aircraft, including a C-180 a C-170b a Rallye and a 100 hp Pa-11 in addition to a whole bunch of Cubs

All the competitors in the loaded (300 lb) cub event beat his best *unloaded* takeoff roll

His best landing attempt was beaten by numerous PA-11/12/18s , the Rallye, a 170, a 180, a 182 and a 185. Even a 172 came within 16 feet of beating his landing distance.

A more cynical man than me might conclude that Montagne is just a liar with a mediocre plane.

Me, I'm sure there's a reasonable explanation.

12-25-2008, 10:59 AM
With all of the the shady business deals and skewed performance data aside Montagne has done alot of work and accomplished quite a bit more than most people give him credit for. I am not saying he is a good guy as i do not know him at all but if you look at some of his efforts by trying different things like wing type constuctions ,lifts struts ect it is more than most cub builders (people who assemble pre-made parts)will ever try. I admire people like him for there efforts to try to improve the performance of things. Wayne Mackey is another who has contributed alot to cubs along with cubcrafters. It is people like them and there efforts to improve that get us out of the dark ages at least in the experimental world.

12-25-2008, 11:13 AM
Didn't Montagne have somthing to do with VG development and certification?

I thought I talked to him back in the early 90's about them while at the Holister Airshow. At that time he had his little bird all white, and was focused on short SHORT takeoffs.

But I may have the wrong guy...

The Valdez numbers are a great indication of what a plane can do with appropriate mods, and the right pilot...

Pretty obvious that a cub can get out in 150' with most pilots...