Experimental Carbon Cub fly's by us today

[Larry G]

This new looking Experimental Carbon Cub fly's by us today when we were out for nice flight today. It's #N66DN on it!!!!!!!! then straight up it went.

[Tim]

Ha, that looks like Deano's ( sodak ) new ride, probably on his way back from Arkansas

[sodak]

Yep, dog is gone, back in the cub family

[SteveE]

Looks nice Deano... Hope to see it soon..

Steve

[jjack]

Awesome Deano! Looks Good!
JJ

[Iflylower]

Good looking rig Deano. Bet your having fun with that difference in runway required

[Anne]

Wow - it's gorgeous! I hope it flies as well as it looks! Congratulations, Dean!

Anne.

[Bill Rusk]

Congrats Dino. Looking good!!

Bill

[Bugs66]

I agree with everyone else, awesome ship. Is this one E-AB? Nice

One thing funny, the N# is a former jet, as was mine!

[sodak]

Thank you everyone for the kind words, did not realize how much fun flying was been missing this.
Buggs your right the N# used to belong to a lear35, bout the same speed! It is a E=AB 1320 lbs gross

Sodak

[spinner2]

Very nice Sodak. Building is fun but flying is more fun.

If you don't mind, what is your empty weight?

[sodak]

1005 # with oil, 3 gal. fuel 40 gal tanks 3+3 gear extended baggage 80x50 catto prop

[spinner2]

1005 # with oil, 3 gal. fuel 40 gal tanks 3+3 gear extended baggage 80x50 catto prop

Im just about the same with my EX. I also have the 44 gallon tanks and 3" gear and the same prop. With my latest battery I'm a few pounds under 1000 including oil but no fuel.

[S2D]

Nice Dean
I'm expecting a flyby next year!!! (or sooner)

[Jim Miller]

Thank you everyone for the kind words, did not realize how much fun flying was been missing this.
Buggs your right the N# used to belong to a lear35, bout the same speed! It is a E=AB 1320 lbs gross

Sodak

Sodak
Could you breakdown your weights for me? I am trying to build a E=AB 1320 lbs gross and can't find anyone in authority who truly
understands the issues involved and maybe I don't either. The 1005lbs is that aircraft with oil and full 40 gals fuel? If so that leaves
315 for pilot and passenger/baggage-about what I expect to see with my plane when finished. If my assumptions are correct did you
get any hassle for not having enough payload to carry two 170 lb people plus some baggage.

Thanks
Jim Miller

[Jim Miller]

I went to the cubcrafter website and now more confused than ever. They list the LSA carbon cub with empty weight 894. Add in full fuel 25 gal or 150lb
and you get 1044. Now add in two 190 lb people and 1/2 lb of baggage per horsepower 180/2 or 90 lbs and now you are over 1500lbs. What am I doing
wrong or how does this qualify as a Factory LSA or a EAB 1320 gross.

Jim Miller

[okmike]

Dino
We hope to see you at Gaston's May 23-25

[soyAnarchisto]

What am I doing
wrong

Putting 2 190 lbers with full fuel and 90lbs of luggage. Nothing about the lsa rules say you have to stuff 2 people and full fuel to be under max gross. There's no room for 90lbs of luggage anyway.

you can set the max gross higher is you are EAB - it's just not LSA

[sodak]

The E-AB. Builder sets his gross wt. when he or she do there first wt and balance.

[mvivion]

I went to the cubcrafter website and now more confused than ever. They list the LSA carbon cub with empty weight 894. Add in full fuel 25 gal or 150lb
and you get 1044. Now add in two 190 lb people and 1/2 lb of baggage per horsepower 180/2 or 90 lbs and now you are over 1500lbs. What am I doing
wrong or how does this qualify as a Factory LSA or a EAB 1320 gross.

Jim Miller

Jim,

Don't look for logic in the LSA rule. The Carbon Cub can be had in one of three certifications: S-LSA, E-LSA and E-AB.

The published weight you are looking at is for the S-LSA airplane, which must meet the LSA maximum empty weight criterial for the category, which it does, just barely. But, that airplane has essentially ZERO options.....no long range tanks, NO big tires, NO fancy glass cockpit, etc, etc. As in NADA, because virtually anything added to that airplane would put it over it's required maximum gross weight.

So, MOST production Carbon Cubs are immediately changed to E-LSA classification. That classification is a factory built airplane, but is experimental in nature, including most of the experimental category regulations, like NO use for compensation or hire. BUT, the E-LSA classification has NO maximum empty weight requirement. So, you can buy the S-LSA and convert it to E-LSA (or just buy the E-LSA from the factory) and equip it with big tires, fancy panel, etc, etc. because there is no maximum empty weight requirement. BUt, it's now an Experimental aircraft, if that matters, and it probably doesn't to most buyers.

Finally, you can purchase a KIT for the carbon cub from CC, and build one yourself. I believe this kit is now considered to meet the 51% rule. IN this case, the airplane does not have to meet any minimum empty weight rule either. So, again, the builder or buyer of one of these can equip it as suits them, and if there's no way they can legally fly it with one person and full fuel.....so be it.

The Carbon Cub kit also comes in two versions: One that's designed for the LSA market, and one that is designed to operate at a gross weight of 1500 pounds GW, thus NOT legal for LSA. These two kits do have some different components, so the S-LSA and E-LSA airplanes aren't exactly like the E-AB kit that's designed for 1500 lbs. though the factory claims to have tested "the airplane" to 1500 lbs.

Frankly, the issue that nobody seems to be willing to discuss in this whole LSA mess (and I am NOT singling out Cub Crafters in this--there are lots of examples in LSA) is "Don't ask, Don't tell". I would bet that many LSA owners are operating these aircraft in excess of legal gross weight at least occasionally. Frankly, an aircraft with a 300 pound useful load (gas, pilot, passenger) is simply GOING to be operated heavier than 1320 at some point, I'm betting.

To me, that's one of the unfortunate dillemas of the LSA rule. The maximum GW should have been set at some REASONABLE and ACHIEVABLE figure from the git go.

I'm not suggesting that it isn't safe to operate these things at heavier weights, mind you, so please don't assume I'm trying to call the FAA down on all LSA types. I could care less what you do with your airplane on your time. And, there ARE a few LSA airplanes that CAN be operated legally with two LIGHT persons and some gas.

Fargo Jet Center has sent their Sport Pilot applicants 70 miles north for checkrides with a DPE who's a LOT lighter than their DPE in FAR. It's pretty bad when your check airman can't legally fly with most of your applicants and actually have legal fuel in the plane.

MTV

[Amy]

Jim,

Don't look for logic in the LSA rule. The Carbon Cub can be had in one of three certifications: S-LSA, E-LSA and E-AB.

The Carbon Cub kit also comes in two versions: One that's designed for the LSA market, and one that is designed to operate at a gross weight of 1500 pounds GW, thus NOT legal for LSA. These two kits do have some different components, so the S-LSA and E-LSA airplanes aren't exactly like the E-AB kit that's designed for 1500 lbs. though the factory claims to have tested "the airplane" to 1500 lbs.

MTV

CC Carbon Cub EX was tested to 1,865 lbs. The Legend Cub's kit sister, the Texas Sport, was tested to allow a gross weight of 1,600 lbs.

--Amy

[mvivion]

Amy, good catch....too early in the AM, and we just leaped forward You're right, the CC was tested to 1865, not 1500.

But, frankly, that's simply an acknowledgement that many are going to fly these airplanes at weights higher than legal.

And, again, there are two versions of the CC KIT airplane, so things get a little confusing as to what was tested to what weight. I am NOT suggesting that these airplanes are unsafe or that CC is doing anything underhanded. My point is simply that the LSA regulations do not provide for a high enough GW to realistically operate a structurally robust airframe AND a very practical useful load.

MTV

[sodak]

Mike you really hurt my feeling,s, can,t believe you would be betting against me

Dean

[soyAnarchisto]

MTV is spot on - don't look for logic - the 1320 rule and most other rules are somewhat arbitrarily set. And people are playing games in the grey area. Good old American ingenuity.

If the 180hp medical exemption comes through - people will start caring again about certificated planes and EAB/SLSA/ELSA - not sure how much - but it will have some affect on CC resale prices.

The 300lb useful load is on a plane that is clearly designed to do far, far more with a wink-wink, nudge-nudge. If I were building (cant' justify buying new) I'd set the GW at 1320 until the 180 rule passes - then max it out like it was intended.

[Jim Miller]

MTV
Very good explaination. Based on the carbon cub whether built as E-LSA or EAB-1320gw my cub project is a no brainer for approval. The problem is trying
to bring the FAA and some DAR's to understand their own rules. I have never asked for much. To me a plane at 1320 Max GW that can't even haul one average
size pilot and full fuel is almost always going to flying in a "overloaded" condition and be subject FAA penalities and probably void insurance in the case of
an accident. In my worse case scenerio I should have a empty weight in the area of 900 to 925, hopefully even less. I could therefore have a useful load of around
400lbs and with full fuel (18gal-108lbs) a payload of 300lbs. At 155 and my wife 115lbs we should be a ok. Not so says our DAR and the FAA won't even
hazard a guess. I am not worried about the DAR he will not be consulted but i am dissapointed that the FAA won't take the time to try and understand their
own rules.

[courierguy]

Lots of lsa's out there with useful legal payloads, the ones that weigh 650 to 750 lbs. None of these are lyc or cont powered though.

[spinner2]

Amy, good catch....too early in the AM, and we just leaped forward You're right, the CC was tested to 1865,

And, again, there are two versions of the CC KIT airplane, so things get a little confusing as to what was tested to what weight. I am NOT suggesting that these airplanes are unsafe or that CC is doing anything underhanded. My point is simply that the LSA regulations do not provide for a high enough GW to realistically operate a structurally robust airframe AND a very practical useful load.

MTV

Another clarification. There is just one version of the kit; the EX. The kit is slightly different than the factory built planes, tail feathers for one. But the kits are all the same.

The kit builder can get the plane registered as an EAB with a 1320 gross weight and be LSA legal. Or he can register it with any higher gross weight that he wants. CC recommends an 1865 gross in this case but as the builder you can go with any weight you want. In this case it is an EAB still but not LSA legal.

The reason the kit is different than the factory planes is because they don't know which weight the builder will opt for. And some builders may change their mind before they're finished too. All the factory planes though are 1320 gross.

[centmont]

Mike: There is only one version of the CarbonCub kit. It has been tested to 1865 lbs. As the builder of an EAB, one can register your aircraft at any weight you want. The basic structures of this kit and the factory produced S-LSA are all the same... there are some subtle differences in the tail feathers/fabric in places, etc.

The aircraft off the line start at 894# ... if you opt for performance paint you are down to 883# giving you about 20# to play with and remain below the S-LSA max of 902#. There are actually quite a few options or combinations of options you can add within this range (glass panel, leather seats, led lights, fancy PA systems, extended baggage, etc). It is true, 26" or larger tires puts you over...but not by much. Cub Crafters will not play games....if you want to go over, you have three choices.... single seat, converting to E-LSA, or two weight/balance sheets and placard (one (2 up) for when you are on small tires, one (single seat) for large tires). To me (opinion from here out), these LSA weight limits have done more to promote new innovations in aircraft than we have seen for decades...and we have discovered just how fantastic a lightweight aircraft can perform (though Jerry Burr showed us over and over again through the years). It is amazing what active creative and supported minds, using modern materials and methods applied to a tried and true design can do. Enjoy Deano my friend.... even if the proposed 180hp/medical rule is passed, you will still have the best performing, enjoyable, and good looking ride out there. Ralph

Poop... after writing this, I discovered that Dan L. said it better in fewer words, below.

[mvivion]

Thanks for the clarification, Dan and Ralph. And, Ralph, you'll note that I've been careful to note that I'm not suggesting that Cub Crafters is involved in ANY hanky-panky....they are simply following the rules as written. No complaints there.

i agree that lightening up these airplanes is a worthy cause, but frankly, I suspect that would have happened if the LSA GW had been set at say, 1600. It is exciting to see innovation in aviation again. Then again, Piper built a really light airplane some 60 years ago, and we've managed to "option" those pretty impressively

MTV

[Jim Miller]

I always thought that a S-LSA had to meet the LSA concensus standards of full fuel , two 190lb people, plus baggage. Is the S-LSA
a single seat? Also does not the E-LSA version of the same aircraft have to be built exactly like the manufacturer specifies, with any
deviation dropping it into the EAB category and 51% rule. At 900lbs empty weight, 380 pilot and passenger, only 40 lbs left for baggage
and fuel in the S-LSA. I know I am missing something here.

Thanks
Jim Miller

[centmont]

Jim: All S-LSA's are required to meet LSA consensus standards and FAA standards. The consensus weight standards do not directly include baggage/fuel. The formula looks like this. Empty weight = 1320 - (190 lbs per seat + half the cruise horsepower). So; an aircraft designed with two seats and 80 hp (cruise) must have an empty weight less than 1320 - (190 + 190 + 40) or, 900 lbs. If you purchase an aircraft from Cubcrafters and option it so that it weighs empty more than 900 lbs, then it won't meet LSA consensus standards and you can't have it as 2 seat S-LSA. You are given the three options I mentioned earlier at that point. Converting from S-LSA to E-LSA relieves you of the empty weight limit....other aspects of LSA remain in place. E-LSA means that you have assumed from CubCrafters, the responsibility of deciding what future equipment and alterations are made on the aircraft...if you go to LSA school (16 hrs?), you can also complete your own annual inspections. This conversion (S-LSA to E-LSA) is not the same as EAB because the registration will indicate that the aircraft was originally manufactured by CubCrafters and not by an individual as a kit. Mike is right, this is confusing. Give me a call if I have just confused you more. We have completely hijacked this thread ...sorry.... Congratulations Deano... R

[Jim Miller]

Centmont, MTV
Thanks both for the info. I have been missing a very important point that you just clarified. I was logically thinking if you specify the weights of passengers
and baggage it would automatically include the fuel necessary to fly them. This is good news to me and and the fact that the carbon cub can qualify as a S-LSA
or E-LSA is good for us all who wants to operate as a sport pilot now or in the future.

JM

[neck101]

Here's my question. Let's say I build the kit version ("EX") and register it E-AB under current LSA standards (1320# GW). Then in the future the FAA modifies the LSA standard to the more broadly proposed 180HP rule, can I re-register my plane to the higher gross weight of 1865# and keep the LSA designation as far as the medical is concerned?
I seem to recall discussions on other websites where, as it stands right now, if you built an aircraft to the LSA standard you could re-register it to simply experimental to utilize a higher GW, but not the other way around. IOW, once you register an aircraft at some GW above 1320, you could never change it to LSA in the future. Have I got this right?
Thanks

[soyAnarchisto]

can't keep the lsa designation if you raise the gw to 1865 - but you can fly it as a private pilot without the 3rd class medical. They are not proposing any changes to lsa - either planes or pilots - that all stays the same.

you can go up in the gross weight, but not down. Once you take the plane above 1320 it will never again be an LSA. I wouldn't do it - especially if you ever want to sell it. If you want to occasionally fly it over gross who would know?

[neck101]

I agree that as the rules are written right now that raising the GW above 1320 will permanently keep it out of LSA. I am not up to speed on the proposed attempt concerning the 180hp restriction though. From what I have heard, the goal is to make any 180hp aircraft "medical-free". That is what my concern is for the future.