Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 80

Thread: Working CarbonCub

  1. #1
    Scouter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Exeter Maine
    Posts
    1,522
    Post Thanks / Like

    Working CarbonCub

    One of the old scuffers at a local field who hasnt flown for more than 20 years was looking over my Sport Cub last week and proclaimed these planes arent built strong enough to be a working cub. Normally I listen to the old boys, and I should have let it lay instead of questioning the way he was dressed, but it got me thinking--
    Is anyone working a Carbon Cub somewhere? Guide, Fish & Wildlife? How is it standing up?

    jim

  2. #2
    scout88305's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Northern Minnesota
    Posts
    1,571
    Post Thanks / Like
    Great question, one I asked when shopping. Price point a factor and most working cubs live outside. Hard to overcome those and insurance costs. Avemco and others quote for CC pretty brutal.
    Last edited by scout88305; 03-12-2017 at 07:42 AM.
    Thank a sheepdog today for they are standing guard!
    Likes WWhunter liked this post

  3. #3
    SJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Kansas City, USA
    Posts
    13,400
    Post Thanks / Like
    Would depend on your definition of "working" I suppose. Remember, those 50's and 60's Super Cubs were brand new also at one point (and quite expensive for the day) and it was probably hard to leave them outside initially as well.

    sj
    "Often Mistaken, but Never in Doubt"
    ------------------------------------------

  4. #4
    RaisedByWolves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    3,090
    Post Thanks / Like
    Joe doesn't work his, but it's got to be one of the higher or highest carbon cubs, and its holding up better than i expected

  5. #5
    Scouter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Exeter Maine
    Posts
    1,522
    Post Thanks / Like
    Joe may not have to use it to haul groceries, but it sure hauls you know what .
    good example Tom. He gets every ounce from it and it comes back for more

    jim
    Likes Farmboy liked this post

  6. #6
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    16,456
    Post Thanks / Like
    Carbon Cubs are not type certified so it is my understanding that they cannot be used commercially unless it is still certified SLSA and is used for flight instruction.

    In my opinion after rebuilding and maintaining old worn out Super Cubs and doing some work on Carbon Cubs I do not see a Carbon Cub holding up like a Super Cub after 60 years and 10K hours. The Carbon Cub is built lighter and we all know everything in aviation is a compromise. I think the Carbon Cub is a good airplane but it is not a Super Cub.

    Sent from my SM-N900V using SuperCub.Org mobile app
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes WWhunter, SteveE, C-FIJK, WanaBNACub, Xargos liked this post

  7. #7
    cubdriver2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    upstate NY
    Posts
    7,943
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by RaisedByWolves View Post
    Joe doesn't work his, but it's got to be one of the higher or highest carbon cubs, and its holding up better than i expected
    Well that was a safe answer

    Glenn
    "Optimism is going after Moby Dick in a rowboat and taking the tartar sauce with you!"
    Likes RaisedByWolves liked this post

  8. #8
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    16,456
    Post Thanks / Like
    I should probably clarify, I am talking wear and tear items, I don't see any structural issues, time will tell.

    Sent from my SM-N900V using SuperCub.Org mobile app
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes WWhunter, Jim Hann liked this post

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    2,436
    Post Thanks / Like
    I wouldn't expect to see commercial operators lining up to buy a $200K plus experimental Cubs. If they did I'd bet on a Mackey variant getting the nod over a Carbon Cub. I don't expect many will buy $300K plus X Cubs, either. Expensive new planes don't offer a revenue advantage that justifies the investment.
    Last edited by stewartb; 03-12-2017 at 09:01 AM.
    Likes skywagon8a liked this post

  10. #10
    aktango58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    18AA
    Posts
    8,093
    Post Thanks / Like
    But if the new expensive plane will carry the payload...

    The reason cubs were exchanged for huskys by the Government was a weight issue, not having the useful load on cubs. MTV, can you confirm?

    I do know of a CC being used for instruction, replaced the J-3
    I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!

  11. #11
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    16,456
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by aktango58 View Post
    But if the new expensive plane will carry the payload...

    The reason cubs were exchanged for huskys by the Government was a weight issue, not having the useful load on cubs. MTV, can you confirm?

    I do know of a CC being used for instruction, replaced the J-3
    The government is the main buyer of the Top Cub.

    Sent from my SM-N900V using SuperCub.Org mobile app
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes WanaBNACub liked this post

  12. #12
    aktango58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    18AA
    Posts
    8,093
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    The government is the main buyer of the Top Cub.

    Sent from my SM-N900V using SuperCub.Org mobile app
    Which was designed with a much higher useful load than the original cub, and I believe it is higher than the husky?
    I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by aktango58 View Post
    Which was designed with a much higher useful load than the original cub, and I believe it is higher than the husky?
    And the factory says that the Carbon Cub is stronger than the Top Cub. Can anyone point out where the Carbon Cub is weaker than a 1960's Super Cub? I'm building a Carbon Cub EX now and am just starting to cover, so there's still time to add some tweaks if needed.

    Gregg

  14. #14
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    9,339
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by aktango58 View Post
    But if the new expensive plane will carry the payload...

    The reason cubs were exchanged for huskys by the Government was a weight issue, not having the useful load on cubs. MTV, can you confirm?

    I do know of a CC being used for instruction, replaced the J-3
    No, that was really not the reason at all.

    MTV

  15. #15
    Eddie Foy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    2,259
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mvivion View Post
    No, that was really not the reason at all.

    MTV
    Eddie Foy
    "Put out my hand and touched the face of God"
    Likes sub3, Joseph206 liked this post

  16. #16
    RaisedByWolves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    3,090
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by aktango58 View Post
    Which was designed with a much higher useful load than the original cub, and I believe it is higher than the husky?
    2300 GW. 1300 empty. Stock SC 1750 GW 1050 empty. roughly.
    2250 GW and probably 1300 empty on New A1C huskys.

  17. #17
    nanook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    northern alaska
    Posts
    1,494
    Post Thanks / Like
    After flying and working on the Carbon Cub, I would agree with Steve's assessment. They perform well but not made for the rough and tough world.

  18. #18
    hotrod180's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    Posts
    1,438
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    ....Expensive new planes don't offer a revenue advantage that justifies the investment.
    This same conclusion was arrived at in a discussion here not long ago,
    about the price of new C206's vs the price of old legacy ones.
    I don't expect CC is aiming the X Cub (or the Carbon Cub) at the working-airplane market.
    Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!
    Likes Dave Sherwood, 40m liked this post

  19. #19
    Scouter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Exeter Maine
    Posts
    1,522
    Post Thanks / Like
    I was thinking more of a guy who works it for himself. A farmer or rancher, or a mining guy maybe. I use mine for my work most weeks in summer, but it usually just hauls my lunch, cellphone and the paychecks. I thought I read on Cubcrafters they had one towing gliders in AUS., and one in fish and wildlife work somewhere.
    I hadnt considered the TC issue Steve P, makes sense

    jim

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Why? What is different on a Carbon Cub that makes them not suitable for the rough and tough world?

  21. #21

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    8
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by nanook View Post
    After flying and working on the Carbon Cub, I would agree with Steve's assessment. They perform well but not made for the rough and tough world.
    This was meant for a nanook.

    Why? What is different on a Carbon Cub that makes them not suitable for the rough and tough world? Nobody seems to be able to answer this question.

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    121
    Post Thanks / Like
    If a piece of rough cargo puts a scratch or spiderweb into those prissy carbon panels, not the same as a gear leg coming off. What would keep a CC from getting home? Or requiring more maint?
    What's a go-around?

  23. #23
    AdirondackCub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Ballston Spa, NY
    Posts
    75
    Post Thanks / Like
    If somebody knows of a Carbon Cub being used heavier than Carbon Cub Joe in Sullivan, NY, please come forward. I think his is used as hard as any I have seen. Maybe Joe will comment here and share with you what he has done and where he has been with his CC. His capabilities and that of the CC show what it can do.
    Mark Keneston
    Cub Crafters
    Northeast Reagion Sales
    Ballston Spa, NY
    Likes Joseph206 liked this post

  24. #24
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    16,456
    Post Thanks / Like
    A Super Cub is somewhat over built maybe. I have seen the top longerons under the headliner rusted out so bad I could stick 4 fingers in them, the rear door post the same. Cub Crafters lightened up everything to get their empty weight as low as possible. They until recently using light weight fabric on the Carbon Cubs, doesn't last and starts wearing through along stringers etc. They didn't gusset a reinforcement in the stabilizer like Piper did and they started cracking. Jury strut attach brackets are cracking. Shrink wrap intake hoses blow off. How many times can you remove, scrape and reinstall interior panels that are held in with double sided tape. There are quite a few service bulletins of issues that have been found thus far and the problems addressed and I am sure more that have yet to be found since the fleet is so young. I have had to address worn lift strut attach fittings at the fuselage on the two Carbon Cubs that I maintain with less than 200 hours on them. These airplanes are being flown off grass strips and not pounding around in Tundra on 35" Bushwheels at gross weight plus. I am not saying this isn't normal for a new design just that building something light has a trade off.

    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Thanks MainlandCub thanked for this post
    Likes Joseph206, WanaBNACub, Xargos liked this post

  25. #25
    nanook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    northern alaska
    Posts
    1,494
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Skywalker View Post
    If a piece of rough cargo puts a scratch or spiderweb into those prissy carbon panels, not the same as a gear leg coming off. What would keep a CC from getting home? Or requiring more maint?
    All of the fuel draining out of a broken plastic fuel fitting overnight! That's right, plastic fuel lines and fittings.
    Thanks terryhall thanked for this post
    Likes skywagon8a, Joseph206 liked this post

  26. #26
    Farmboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Glens Falls, NY
    Posts
    840
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by AdirondackCub View Post
    If somebody knows of a Carbon Cub being used heavier than Carbon Cub Joe in Sullivan, NY, please come forward. I think his is used as hard as any I have seen. Maybe Joe will comment here and share with you what he has done and where he has been with his CC. His capabilities and that of the CC show what it can do.
    Not to pick on Mark's comment, but so much of this is entirely subjective to the perspective of the viewer.

    When I think of a common aircraft working something hard, I think of loading fertilizer or the like in the back of a cabin with the rear seats removed and shuttling it to an unimproved orchard strip so the dusters can keep working. Not once, but every day, or twice a day, all week.
    I think about stuffing an IO520 in the back of a 206 and running it a few states over so someone else can get back off the ground. Then going back and doing it again for someone else.

    When I think about a true working aircraft, I think back about every crop duster in the country had Ag-Wagon's or a few Thrush's, all of which labored off the runway praying for good air, because there was never such a thing as a balanced field length. And doing this everyday, at gross or higher, for the entire season.

    In the northeast I just don't see "working supercubs".... so I don't think I truly understand what that is. And I can't imagine Joe "working" his cub, unless that means throughly enjoying it.

    pb
    Likes Joseph206, 40m, terryhall liked this post

  27. #27

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    2,436
    Post Thanks / Like
    The "working Cub" anology won't apply to 95% of Cub owners. The other 5% that do "work" their Cubs aren't immune to maintenance and repairs.

    Enjoy your Carbon Cub. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    Likes terryhall liked this post

  28. #28
    68Papa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Chugiak, Alaska
    Posts
    264
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    The "working Cub" anology won't apply to 95% of Cub owners. The other 5% that do "work" their Cubs aren't immune to maintenance and repairs.

    Enjoy your Carbon Cub. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    Ya - no kidding! Have you guys ever looked at an Alaskan hunting guides Super Cub - especially at the end of the season?? Hell, Super Cubs don't hold up to that kind of "working" abuse!
    Likes Farmboy, Joseph206, 40m, DENNY liked this post

  29. #29
    Cub junkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    My Moms basement
    Posts
    1,908
    Post Thanks / Like
    I thought big tires was for looking cool.

  30. #30
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    16,456
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 68Papa View Post
    Ya - no kidding! Have you guys ever looked at an Alaskan hunting guides Super Cub - especially at the end of the season?? Hell, Super Cubs don't hold up to that kind of "working" abuse!
    I thought this was patina.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	101_9293.JPG 
Views:	1315 
Size:	1.62 MB 
ID:	30580
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes Farmboy, 68Papa, NC2252M, Joseph206, Skywalker and 6 others liked this post

  31. #31

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    121
    Post Thanks / Like
    Except for the plastic fuel parts. When I built my EXP's I toss the plastic parts and use a flaring tool to build an AN fuel system. Its really easy, tubing and hdwe all lightweight aluminum, why would anyone dub around with plastic? What about crashworthiness of plastic? Never saw a piece of plastic that didn't get brittle after time or lo temps.

    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    The "working Cub" anology won't apply to 95% of Cub owners. The other 5% that do "work" their Cubs aren't immune to maintenance and repairs.

    Enjoy your Carbon Cub. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
    What's a go-around?

  32. #32
    Mauleguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like
    This was something I noticed on the first Carbon Cub (Doug Kellers). We were each in our own airplane playing around off airport in Alaska using Ultima Thule Lodge as our home base. We had flown up for the Alaskan Airman's show and Valdez STOL and had a week to kill so what better place to be then the Wrangell Mountains. There was still snow on the ground at around 2000 and the temperature was fairly cool in the mornings, probably low 30's. We had park on the strip at the lodge and as I was walking up to Bushwacker to go out for another day of flying I looked over at the Carbon Cub and the fabric was all slack on the side I could see. I walked around to the other side and it look normal. I think Doug pushed the tail around so it was sitting differently then the way he had swung the tail around from the day before and it helped take the sags out of the fabric. What we noticed was the tail just did not seem as sturdy as a stock super cub tail. I know they changed the design of the carbon cub upper longeron and spread them apart farther then a super cub. Maybe the fabric was just not tight enough to begin with or maybe they have increased the strength back in the tail since that first Carbon Cub but it seemed a little weak to me. I also notice the small tubing they used for the Vee brace up front. Cubs are 3/4" and I think the Carbon Cub back then was 1/2". I am all for saving weight but I don't want to loose anything in the fuselage for strength. I learned from an engineer that I do work for that the diameter of the tube is much more important then the wall thickness when I was building the experimental landing gear for my Maule.

    I have flown the carbon cub and it is a great airplane but I do not think it would hold up one season as a working cub for hire in Alaska without a serious make over needed at the end.
    Likes 68Papa, Joseph206, WanaBNACub liked this post

  33. #33
    40m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Shoreham, VT
    Posts
    251
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Cub junkie View Post
    I thought big tires was for looking cool.
    Mine are and they sure do!

    From Genesis: "And God promised men that good and obedient wives would be
    found in all corners of the earth."

    Then he made the earth round... and He laughed and laughed and laughed!
    Likes Farmboy liked this post

  34. #34
    Eddie Foy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    2,259
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Cub junkie View Post
    I thought big tires was for looking cool.

    Lagniappe!
    Eddie Foy
    "Put out my hand and touched the face of God"

  35. #35
    wireweinie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    1,549
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    I thought this was patina.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	101_9293.JPG 
Views:	1315 
Size:	1.62 MB 
ID:	30580
    Wow! A headliner!

    Web
    Life's tough . . . wear a cup.
    Likes alaskadrifter liked this post

  36. #36
    Joseph206's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Liberty, NY
    Posts
    11
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Cub junkie View Post
    I thought big tires was for looking cool.
    Some People are Posers !!!!! lmao !!!
    Thanks 105 Special thanked for this post
    Likes 40m liked this post

  37. #37
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    16,456
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph206 View Post
    Some People are Posers !!!!! lmao !!!
    That describes you doesn't it Joe?
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  38. #38
    cubdriver2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    upstate NY
    Posts
    7,943
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by AdirondackCub View Post
    Maybe Joe will comment here and share with you what he has done and where he has been with his CC. .



    Glenn
    "Optimism is going after Moby Dick in a rowboat and taking the tartar sauce with you!"

  39. #39
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    16,456
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mauleguy View Post
    This was something I noticed on the first Carbon Cub (Doug Kellers). We were each in our own airplane playing around off airport in Alaska using Ultima Thule Lodge as our home base. We had flown up for the Alaskan Airman's show and Valdez STOL and had a week to kill so what better place to be then the Wrangell Mountains. There was still snow on the ground at around 2000 and the temperature was fairly cool in the mornings, probably low 30's. We had park on the strip at the lodge and as I was walking up to Bushwacker to go out for another day of flying I looked over at the Carbon Cub and the fabric was all slack on the side I could see. I walked around to the other side and it look normal. I think Doug pushed the tail around so it was sitting differently then the way he had swung the tail around from the day before and it helped take the sags out of the fabric. What we noticed was the tail just did not seem as sturdy as a stock super cub tail. I know they changed the design of the carbon cub upper longeron and spread them apart farther then a super cub. Maybe the fabric was just not tight enough to begin with or maybe they have increased the strength back in the tail since that first Carbon Cub but it seemed a little weak to me. I also notice the small tubing they used for the Vee brace up front. Cubs are 3/4" and I think the Carbon Cub back then was 1/2". I am all for saving weight but I don't want to loose anything in the fuselage for strength. I learned from an engineer that I do work for that the diameter of the tube is much more important then the wall thickness when I was building the experimental landing gear for my Maule.

    I have flown the carbon cub and it is a great airplane but I do not think it would hold up one season as a working cub for hire in Alaska without a serious make over needed at the end.
    I have had the loose fabric issue on med weight Poly fiber installed on a Super Cub as well. Seems to be a dry to cold wet climate thing.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  40. #40
    Joseph206's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Liberty, NY
    Posts
    11
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    That describes you doesn't it Joe?
    Nice

Similar Threads

  1. Building a Carboncub with dad
    By C130jake in forum Member Projects in Progress
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 08-03-2016, 12:58 PM
  2. Carboncub announcement at Oshkosh
    By Taildraggaah in forum In The News
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-20-2007, 11:52 AM
  3. Airlines working together
    By AlaskaAV in forum Alaska Av Memories
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-12-2004, 04:38 AM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •