PDA

View Full Version : Beringer ALG vs. Acme Aero for FX3



Pages : [1] 2

hawgdrvr
09-30-2020, 06:00 PM
I have a FX3 on order for next May/June. I'm an experienced pilot (3K hours) but inexperienced TW with now over 10 hours and increasing in the months ahead including TacAero formal training in TX. I want to outfit my FX3 with the best and safest configuration for landings as this is where it seems the incidents occur. Quite a few ground loops with FX3's and have also seen some with broken Acme shocks. I'm being told Beringer is the best, it is pricey, but so is the cost of repair. I'm told the 3X3 design is from the 1940's and that FX3's are heavier and newer with the design essentially outdated and a better gear design is needed. Beringer appears to answer that call.

What is the recommendation for gear on a FX3 without cost being a factor? I am also planning on Beringer wheels and brakes as that does seem to be proven to be the best so this question is only about the landing gear system.

cubdriver2
09-30-2020, 06:20 PM
The 1940s design is still here because it still works just fine.

Glenn

DENNY
09-30-2020, 09:23 PM
The gear is not the issue, and throwing money at a aircraft will do little to prevent a ground loop. The best and safest configuration is for the pilot to have been properly trained. If you get a chance do some time in a pacer with a good instructor. Also learn to SLOW DOWN.
DENNY

stewartb
09-30-2020, 10:09 PM
Don't take the words of guys who haven't flown the new breed of Cub suspension. Myself? I had the chance to use Porter style gear. Not interested. I like Cub gear. In concert with TK-1 shocks? Light years ahead of what was previously available. I'm positive my enthusiasm would be the same with Acme. You're getting a state of the art Cub. A modern marvel. These are the days. Don't get stuck in the old days.

KevinJ
09-30-2020, 10:27 PM
I’m speaking a bit out of turn but I’ve seen a carbon cub with the Beringer gear and it looked like any kind of xwind landing would be sporty. Think Wilga, Helio or Fairchild with one gear leg mushy and compressed and the other being picked up and extended on the upwind side. The travel is impressive but now you’re taking an extremely fast cub and hanging a bunch of droopy gear out in the wind.

As far as the brakes and wheels, they are lighter and it sounds like the brakes work well. Are they that much better considering the price?

Before you pass judgement on the Acmes, call out there and talk to those guys. I was skeptical also until a buddy and I bought a set. They are heads above most everything else out there. Dump your flaps at 3-4’ and see what happens. You’ll have a smile on your face.....Butch Kingston runs a set on his carbon cub I think. Talk to him or watch his runs at the Gainsville STOL deal this last spring. Doesn’t suck!

Whats your mission? 130mph to a grass strip or big rocks, long props? If it’s the later I’d feel bad using a 330k cub as a shoehorn

mike mcs repair
09-30-2020, 11:24 PM
The gear is not the issue, and throwing money at a aircraft will do little to prevent a ground loop. The best and safest configuration is for the pilot to have been properly trained. If you get a chance do some time in a pacer with a good instructor. Also learn to SLOW DOWN.
DENNY

Agree.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93960)

skywagon8a
10-01-2020, 05:46 AM
It's not the landing gear, it's the pilot. Money doesn't make the pilot better. In some cases it is just the opposite.

stewartb
10-01-2020, 08:46 AM
If money's no object perhaps you should look into Airframes' titanium gear. It won't do anything their steel gear won't do but it weighs less and costs a lot. That fits the FX3 mindset pretty well. ;)

Whichever way you go you're going to have a blast. Have you started on your parts yet? I'd enjoy hearing about the FX process from your perspective. It's a very interesting program.

tedwaltman1
10-01-2020, 08:50 AM
I have over 1,400 landings on the Acme Aero Gen 3 shocks. They are awesome!

As several stated above, itís not the plane or the shocks, it is a LOT of careful practice. Go out and do 5, 10 or more landings EVERY time you fly. Make yourself hit a specific spot on the runway that you identify while on downwind. Make yourself hit the centerline on every landing. Go around if you miss either the spot or the centerline!

South Fork
10-01-2020, 09:11 AM
I agree with Ted lots of practice makes the difference .I too also have well over a thousand landings on Acme Aero shocks I changed over from AOSS Five years ago I installed them on my FX2 and had no issues, did the builders assist on a FX3 last December completed the plane first of March installed a new set on Acme Aero Gen 3 & the Acme Aero Tailwheel suspension I do lots of Backcountry Flying in the Wrangell Mountains and would highly recommend the Shock Package I’m running 35s ABW on this FX3 with 3x3 gear great combination.

aeroaddict
10-01-2020, 09:39 AM
I think the key here is not the gear (no rhyme intended), but stick time. The first year (at very high insurance rates) I did numerous, hundreds of landings on 8.50' tires (3X3 gear, Acme Black Ops, T3 TW). Then I put on BW's. WOW what a difference. BUT I also think that the 8.50's tires keep you honest. I would not be surprised if the ground loops of CC's are a result of big tires without a lot of TW time. BW's are forgiving and you can get sideways with the BW's before realizing it's to late.

But to answer your question; I don't like a gear that droops. I need all the help I can get and tires that are basically vertical before I land makes sense to me.

stewartb
10-01-2020, 10:31 AM
I'm guessing in 3000 airplane hours you weren't landing sideways. Don't start now and you'll do fine. If you do loop one? Damage happens. Deal with it.

Somebody mentioned Butch. I was hoping to see his new Acme gear but he had a tough end of season. It's fun to see Butch and Toby take off with motorcycles strapped to their gear. I presume that's what the big arm was for on the Acme gear in their video. I guess I'll see it next year. One more gear consideration. Get what works for YOU.

40m
10-01-2020, 11:32 AM
Follow Denny's advise, SLOW DOWN!
I'll bet the vast majority of landing incidents in CC aircraft are with pilots coming from far faster aircraft. Gear, tires might delay or even reduce the severity of damage but sooner or later you will be bitten. Carbon Cub, EX, FX they still land at 32mph or less.

hawgdrvr
10-02-2020, 07:37 AM
Thanks for the responses all. I've done the research I feel needed and decided to go with the Acme Aero shocks and Beringer wheels & brakes.

40m
10-02-2020, 08:57 AM
Thanks for the responses all. I've done the research I feel needed and decided to go with the Acme Aero shocks and Beringer wheels & brakes.

Don't forget a T3:lol:

hawgdrvr
10-02-2020, 09:13 AM
Educate me on T3 vs. Acme Stinger please...was planning on the Stinger. Sales rep says stock TW is good which I believe, I just want anything to reduce shock to the fuselage.

stewartb
10-02-2020, 10:12 AM
What's going to stress your tailwheel? The best reason to have a tailwheel suspension would be to reduce tail spring rebound when you hit tail first. I doubt that'll be a problem for you, especially at first.

hawgdrvr
10-02-2020, 10:14 AM
I just figured there were forces relayed up through the tailwheel to the fuselage from any use and I'm trying to minimize what is passed to the fuselage. If the stock TW is sufficient I'll stay with that. If there are advantages in the T3 or Stinger I'm all ears. 3 point landings will probably be what I do most.

stewartb
10-02-2020, 10:24 AM
Taxiing over rough terrain with a heavy load is tough on the tail section. Average ops on groomed strips aren't a problem. I have a slat wing Cub that can and does hit tail first with power on and slow and I can tell you the rebound with my Pawnee spring will get my attention. I'm not in a hurry to get a tail suspension. I'll take off the Baby Bushwheel and go back to the standard little tailwheel first. Loss of AOA is a problem with big tailwheels. Tail suspensions compound it. Different strokes for different folks.

DENNY
10-02-2020, 11:04 AM
Stewart covered it pretty well. They do protect you tail especially if you are doing a lot of tail first landings. But they do hurt your AOA. For starters just get a small tailwheel and stock springs. If you find a need down the road you can upgrade if the mission calls for it. I would expect you will need to re-arch you tail spring after a year or two do to too many hard tail first landings. Not a big deal it comes with learning. Do a search on tailwheel castor angle. A bit of thread drift but I saw a crack in the door, Learn to do a tail low wheel landing. It can be done just as slow as a 3 point and it is much better than a 3 point in most situations. Actually get good at all types, is the best advice.
DENNY

KevinJ
10-02-2020, 01:51 PM
Simple seems better. I’d run a tail skid if the cub was easy to move and it didn’t tear up my strip. That said, the AOA can be adjusted on the acme along with several other angles. Flattening it and using a small tailwheel seems appealing for stol comps. They are race car guys and probably understand more about wheel set up than most.

skywagon8a
10-02-2020, 03:16 PM
..... Beringer wheels & brakes.
Just a heads up. This Beringer system is relatively new. It uses a floating brake disk within the wheel. Only time will tell us how well it stands up. In the past this sized general aviation wheel brakes were of the floating type. After a period of time the ones using a single floating disc became sloppy. They clattered in the wheel throwing retaining clips and sometime the brake pucks themselves. Even rendering the wheel unairworthy by expanding the rim of the wheel. The assemblies using multiple discs were more durable. Cleveland came up with the current very reliable fixed disc brakes which have been very successful for decades. By making the choice you have made, you are being the test case.

I have no knowledge of how the Beringers will stand up in the long run. Past experience is telling me to stand back and let someone else be the tester. Good luck with yours.

wireweinie
10-02-2020, 06:53 PM
Remember Goodyear wheels/brakes on the Otters?

Web

RaisedByWolves
10-02-2020, 07:12 PM
Just a heads up. This Beringer system is relatively new. It uses a floating brake disk within the wheel. Only time will tell us how well it stands up. In the past this sized general aviation wheel brakes were of the floating type. After a period of time the ones using a single floating disc became sloppy. They clattered in the wheel throwing retaining clips and sometime the brake pucks themselves. Even rendering the wheel unairworthy by expanding the rim of the wheel. The assemblies using multiple discs were more durable. Cleveland came up with the current very reliable fixed disc brakes which have been very successful for decades. By making the choice you have made, you are being the test case.

I have no knowledge of how the Beringers will stand up in the long run. Past experience is telling me to stand back and let someone else be the tester. Good luck with yours.

Coming from traditional disc brakes on cubs the berringers are a pain in the rear. They donít seem to work that much better than Cleveland disc brakes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JeffP
10-02-2020, 08:04 PM
Thanks for the responses all. I've done the research I feel needed and decided to go with the Acme Aero shocks and Beringer wheels & brakes.

While i dont drive a Carbon Cub I do run an exp cub and replaced my Cleveland brakes and wheels with Beringer rims and brakes while swapping to Acme Black Ops at the same time. My experiance is simple, I feel there simply isnt a better wheel and brake system than the Berringer as they hold full WOT run ups and with the large diameter rotor deliver smooth reliable braking that simply isnt matched as no other system uses such a large diameter rotor.
My feelings on the Acme products are also simple and solid. They Acme soaks up rough terrian and dropping it in so well I can not see a reason to look no further as they do everything and more that i could ask for. One comment about big tires long gear and suspension is you must land without side loads. In other words land inline straight ahead and you will not break anyones gear/suspension. Like many folks I have to land on pavement as well as off airport. Because of the pavement I feel the scrubbing the tires would take with the Berringer ALG would cost more in tires than I am willing to endure. If I was 90% off pavement I would absolutly look at the ALG.
One more thing on Acme vs Shock Monster, the Acme will get you home even if you had seal failures as they would simplyy turn into a mech spring shock, the shock monster provides redudency by adding a second shock. This is at least what it appears to me, others with more Shock Monster experiance may chime in.

JeffP
10-02-2020, 08:06 PM
Coming from traditional disc brakes on cubs the berringers are a pain in the rear. They don’t seem to work that much better than Cleveland disc brakes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can assure you on my plane there was/is no comparison Berringer all the way hands down everytime. Have you run Berringer 10" brakes?

stewartb
10-02-2020, 08:25 PM
So, if my Grove brakes and ABW wheels hold 240-ish HP twisting a CS prop at full power on 35s.... why should I change? Serious question.

akwing
10-02-2020, 08:26 PM
I want to outfit my FX3 with the best and safest configuration for landings as this is where it seems the incidents occur.

Youíre mistaken - most incidents occur when the pilot runs out of good judgement and skill before the plane comes to a safe stop. Them incidents have nothing to do with landing gear configuration, NONE.



Iím being told Beringer is the best

Not by anyone that knows anything.



it is pricey, but so is the cost of repair.

avgas is cheaper than beringer and the cost of repair.



I'm told the 3X3 design is from the 1940's and that FX3's are heavier and newer with the design essentially outdated and a better gear design is needed. Beringer appears to answer that call.

*sigh*



What is the recommendation for gear on a FX3 without cost being a factor?

Acme, AOSS or hydrasorbs - not necessarily in that order.



I am also planning on Beringer wheels and brakes as that does seem to be proven to be the best.

lol..only a few years in the making, not field-tested by the masses - thatís pretty far short of being proven the best. Whatís proven is Cleveland wheels and brakes, standard and 3Ē extended gear, hydrasorbs and AOSS. Everything else is hype.

mike mcs repair
10-02-2020, 09:35 PM
Youíre mistaken - most incidents occur when the pilot runs out of good judgement and skill before the plane comes to a safe stop. Them incidents have nothing to do with landing gear configuration, NONE.


Not by anyone that knows anything.


avgas is cheaper than beringer and the cost of repair.


*sigh*


Acme, AOSS or hydrasorbs - not necessarily in that order.


lol..only a few years in the making, not field-tested by the masses - thatís pretty far short of being proven the best. Whatís proven is Cleveland wheels and brakes, standard and 3Ē extended gear, hydrasorbs and AOSS. Everything else is hype.

Thanks. Original poster is listening to the sales persons selling them the new unproven stuff...best look at what is actually proven, in action


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93960)

stewartb
10-02-2020, 09:59 PM
When innovation stops we all lose. Slats, Keller flaps, big power, cool prop, G3X... I'm invested in new tech. God bless the innovators! Beringer may change the world. They may not. Either way I applaud the effort. Innovation requires courage and conviction. Two principles we need more of these days.

JeffP
10-02-2020, 10:28 PM
So, if my Grove brakes and ABW wheels hold 240-ish HP twisting a CS prop at full power on 35s.... why should I change? Serious question.

It sounds like for your applicationyour brakes are doing everything you need them to do, plus you already have them on the plane. The OP is starting with a clean slate, so imho why wouldnt wouldnt he go with the lightweight powerfull option such as Beringer? I did not have Grove on my plane but rather Cleveland set ups. For me they would not hold my IO540 with CS prop so I made the change and now have the ability to hold even WOT if I choose to.

Maybe the Grove brakes would have worked, but I have zero regrets with Beringer. BTW Beringer isnt exactly new to the brake world either.

While bugees are well proven you will never convince me to remove my Acme and Install them. Come to think of magnetos are well proven too but it did not stop me from putting electronic ignition in either. Did I mention I am removing the well proven vacuum pump and going with a elctronic dash.

In the end we all get to decide how and what we build, after all isn't that the fun part, I mean besides flying of course.

stewartb
10-02-2020, 10:33 PM
Is your plane a Cub?

Whose master cylinders are you using?

JeffP
10-03-2020, 12:47 AM
Is your plane a Cub?

Whose master cylinders are you using?
Exp Cub and it has the Beringer master cyl's

skywagon8a
10-03-2020, 05:25 AM
Is your plane a Cub?

Whose master cylinders are you using?


Exp Cub and it has the Beringer master cyl's
It is always important to match the master cylinders to the brakes. A lot of the braking difficulties are because this was not done.

JeffP
10-03-2020, 07:11 AM
It is always important to match the master cylinders to the brakes. A lot of the braking difficulties are because this was not done.

Agree 100%


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93960)

OLDCROWE
10-03-2020, 08:06 AM
hawgdrver

Youíll get good training with TacAero and thatís an important, good call. From my observation the problem with buying/transitioning to a high performance CC product is that after you endure the wait to get a new one, youíll be eager to dive right in and your former flying experience may let your brain tell you ďIíve got thisĒ before you do. Problem is that if you bend your bird and many, even experienced TW pilots have (been there got ďthe HatĒ), it my take even longer to get it fixed than it did to originally get it because the repair industry has not expanded with the growth in the market and factory parts come off the same production line as new planes.

I donít personally know that any landing gear options will making your FX3 safer, unless there are some bad ones out there, but I still fly bungee gear, that comes with 100LL thru the tanks so be patient. In the beginning Iíd recommend placing firm wind limits on yourself that your head will call you a wimp over, especially if youíre doing the fly-off in Yakima (been some get torn up in that process) and especially if youíre not but plan on ferrying it home.

Be safe, land into the wind and enjoy your new bird.

Utah-Jay
10-03-2020, 08:25 AM
I have been reading this thread with interest as I am always trying to learn being a newly minted TW student solo pilot. Of course with my primary training in a Rans S-20 tailwheel I don’t have the bad habit of coming in fast and my preference is to bring it in low and slow and add power to drag it over the fence if necessary... and this allows for very slow landing speeds. With 17.3 hours and 79 landings it is not an issue if you come in slow. The only times I have had minor issues is if I carry 3-5 mph extra speed over the numbers.

I am sure the OP will be fine with good speed control.

But what do I know as a newbie :-?

stewartb
10-03-2020, 09:04 AM
It is always important to match the master cylinders to the brakes. A lot of the braking difficulties are because this was not done.

How do we do that? Stock diaphragm brakes lacked pressure. Your North River boosters helped dramatically. I had them and they worked great. Then Steve's and Dakota Cub came out with vented masters. I've never seen any comparison between the three regarding pressure but it seems like pressure is where the magic happens. It's sure true with my own brakes and the transition from not good to really excellent. All I changed was the masters. Bottom line, and it applies to Carbon Cubs more than most based on weight, Cub's aren't very hard to stop. Cubs like to nose over from aggressive use of brakes. That's why 3" forward gear exists.

Scouter
10-03-2020, 09:22 AM
Lots of info at CubCrafters forum site on beringer landing gear

http://forum.cubcrafters.com/showthread.php/2905-Beringer-Alaskan-Landing-Gear-System?highlight=beringer

Jim

skywagon8a
10-03-2020, 10:06 AM
How do we do that? Stock diaphragm brakes lacked pressure. Your North River boosters helped dramatically. I had them and they worked great. Then Steve's and Dakota Cub came out with vented masters. I've never seen any comparison between the three regarding pressure but it seems like pressure is where the magic happens. It's sure true with my own brakes and the transition from not good to really excellent. All I changed was the masters. Bottom line, and it applies to Carbon Cubs more than most based on weight, Cub's aren't very hard to stop. Cubs like to nose over from aggressive use of brakes. That's why 3" forward gear exists.
That is basically it. Pressure and volume requirements. The original Cub expander tube brakes required a higher volume of fluid than the Clevelands and only 350 lbs of pressure. The smaller piston on the Clevelands required higher pressures and lower volume.

turbopilot
10-31-2020, 10:50 PM
Lots of info at CubCrafters forum site on beringer landing gear

http://forum.cubcrafters.com/showthread.php/2905-Beringer-Alaskan-Landing-Gear-System?highlight=beringer

Jim

That was I thread I started over on the CubCrafters forum. Here (http://forum.cubcrafters.com/showthread.php/3797-Safety-cables-on-FX-3?p=25615&viewfull=1#post25615) is my latest update after 3 years with the Beringer ALG System, ALIR controller and Beringer brakes and wheels. The Beringer ALG is a stout replacement for the now 80 year old legacy cub landing gear system.

Brad Damm posted (http://cubcrafters.com/c/2017/09/field-test-xcub-landing-gear/) a very frank assessment of the "legacy-type gear on the cub" back in 2017 with the introduction of the new XCub landing gear. There are many problems with the legacy cub gear but the biggest issue involves how it fails. This is what Brad said and he is right.

"One weakness of the legacy-type gear on a Cub is that when a landing load reaches the limit of the suspension, the gear will often fail completely, or the excess landing load will be transferred into the airframe causing damage. In either case, it will be difficult and expensive to repair."

The Beringer ALG is a very strong landing gear system. I am running it on a Carbon Cub SS so it is way over built for this light Cub. As tough as it is the full Beringer ALG system and braking system with ALIR is, it weighs 5 lbs less than the legacy cub gear with AOSS that I replaced.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-kZ6vCtV/0/9bd2c5c3/XL/unnamed-XL.jpg

DENNY
11-01-2020, 01:58 AM
So perhaps pilots should learn to fly the plane!! Then the gear would not matter when it failed. Ya but the way if the gear fail because the pilot has an issue, you will have to look at engine, wing, tail, and fuselage. Throwing money at a plane will not help a poor pilot. LEARN TO FLY!!!!!
DENNY

turbopilot
11-01-2020, 09:56 AM
So perhaps pilots should learn to fly the plane!! Then the gear would not matter when it failed. Ya but the way if the gear fail because the pilot has an issue, you will have to look at engine, wing, tail, and fuselage. Throwing money at a plane will not help a poor pilot. LEARN TO FLY!!!!!
DENNY

Better proficiency helps but the problem (as clearly stated by CubCrafters) is the the legacy cub gear tends to fail catastrophically when pushed beyond design limits. Modern gear systems should fail locally when overstressed to avoid collateral damage to the prop, engine and the wings. That is the issue. These are airplanes that operate in areas where gear damage is part of normal operation. The gear system should fail by local breaks and bends, not full collapse. The heavier CubCrafters FX-3's seem to be especially prone to full collapse, most often with big tires operating on paved surfaces.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-8NVTcN6/0/9723f9e0/XL/Screen%20Shot%202020-10-03%20at%203.04.46%20PM-XL.jpg

RaisedByWolves
11-01-2020, 10:28 AM
So what happens when you touch down at 70 and get the berringer gear sideways? That will fail too. The problem isnít the landing gear thatís been around for 80 years. The problem is the people flying the airplane. How come most failures of the gear happen so early on? Is this the gears fault too?

https://youtu.be/ZNwfgbnFrZs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

turbopilot
11-01-2020, 10:39 AM
So what happens when you touch down at 70 and get the berringer gear sideways?

Not on my list to test. Everything will fail. The issue is the failure mode. Part of the solution are stronger components that take the loads with better energy dissipation. Dissipation loads vertically through hydraulics or laterally with shock absorbers.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CarbonCub316/i-23bZzng/0/c5ad744a/XL/IMG_4480_Painterly-XL.jpg

Mauleguy
11-01-2020, 10:41 AM
it is interesting that these pictures show a hard runway either below or behind the aircraft. I have been landing off airport in very rough places for almost 20 years now and never seen gear fail landing a rough spot.

Well one exception to that statement. I was landing testing out my new extended gear and had the rear tube bend allowing the left wheel to come up vertical into the strut, no damage other then the gear leg. This gear leg was undersized tube. I went from 1 1/4" diameter tube to 1 1/2" diameter same wall thickness and never failed a gear leg because it was not stout enough. I broke and axle off but it had a crack through it and was bound to fail with the sleeved design (also just poor engineering on my part).

If you look back at the places Loni and I were landing our airplanes in Big Rocks Long Props Vol. 1. He was in a cub with 3" extended gear and hydrosorbs and I was in a experimental Maule with 5" extended gear that I made. We did put side loads occasionally but for the most part we kept the aircraft over the wheels and going straight never had a problem. I would love to see video of why these CC are failing the gear system at a paved airport. This just blows my mind, I typically go out and do 40-50 landings a week in rough places and never worry about the gear failing. Something is going on an no amount of money or fandangled suspension is going to make it better for some of these guys buying the CC.

turbopilot
11-01-2020, 10:52 AM
would love to see video of why these CC are failing the gear system at a paved airport. This just blows my mind, I typically go out and do 40-50 landings a week in rough places and never worry about the gear failing. Something is going on an no amount of money or fandangled suspension is going to make it better for some of these guys buying the CC.

My theory is the extended gear, with heavier weights, big tires and paved surfaces all conspire to create lateral loads in excess of design limits for the legacy cub gear. These big tundra tires with high wetted surface area do no slide on a nice asphalt runway with grooves. They just stick when loaded laterally. Same combination on dirt, the tires will just slide.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-V5NNbZn/0/b1db1541/L/Screen%20Shot%202020-09-29%20at%203.16.49%20PM-L.jpg

skywagon8a
11-01-2020, 11:00 AM
.... Something is going on an no amount of money or fandangled suspension is going to make it better for some of these guys buying the CC.
All of this discussion about damaging CCs and Beringer gear reminds me of the old often stated stories about Doctors and Bonanzas.
Lots of $$$$ don't make a pilot.

jrb
11-01-2020, 11:05 AM
A wise man once told me... Itís a poor workman who blames the tools.

mike mcs repair
11-01-2020, 11:48 AM
haven't read who thread yet, but after reading a few at end of this thread, the words of my first instructor comes right back.... "keep your ass behind you and the plane will take a ton of abuse... if you don't it will bend..."

Crash, Jr.
11-01-2020, 12:38 PM
Better proficiency helps but the problem (as clearly stated by CubCrafters) is the the legacy cub gear tends to fail catastrophically when pushed beyond design limits.

Hmmm imagine that, something will fail when pushed beyond it's design limits....

Looks like a bunch of people with more money than skill getting behind on the rudder and ripping gear off. Yes, Bushwheels on pavement can grip hard and rip the plane around which is why you don't do that specific thing until you are comfortable with getting the plane slow and keeping things going in a straight line. I don't see how the softer shocks on the Beringer gear would help with this except perhaps allow you to drag a wing even harder before it departs the aircraft.

skukum12
11-01-2020, 12:50 PM
Excellent point from MauleGuy. Where are the pictures of collapsed gear where the landing was conducted away from the hard surface? Grass/gravel/dirt is very forgiving. Asphalt/concrete is not. Grass/gravel/dirt allow the tires to spin up at touchdown at a somewhat slower rate which will help eliminate some of the shock load to the gear. Big tires were NOT designed for pavement pounding.

An interesting study would be to see if there is a correlation of gear collapse incidents and multi aircraft owners. IE: persons who own a Cub type plane and a Cirrus. I have owned a 12 and a C180 concurrently for years and found my 12 skills deteriorating rapidly and approaching and landing faster.

I don't think there is a problem with "legacy" gear just like there isn't a problem with a three on the tree in your old pickup. We ALL must learn the limitations of our equipment. It's been said before, "There are folks that can break an anvil with a rubber mallet."

turbopilot
11-01-2020, 01:19 PM
I don't think there is a problem with "legacy" gear just like there isn't a problem with a three on the tree in your old pickup. We ALL must learn the limitations of our equipment. It's been said before, "There are folks that can break an anvil with a rubber mallet."

I can't keep up with all the old sayings, but I do have a fair amount of data the collaborates the CubCrafter position (http://cubcrafters.com/c/2017/09/field-test-xcub-landing-gear/).

CubCrafters very clearly stated the legacy gear was the problem in 2017. I took their position seriously.


Out of 91 Carbon Cub FX-3's in the FAA database, 11 have made it to the NTSB reports web site in 2.5 years of operation. Here is the bottom line from the NTSB.

8 landing ground loop / loss of control1 takeoff loss of control
7 on paved RWY’s
2 on dirt/grass RWY’s
1 engine out
6 gear collapses
No injuries

So I think CubCrafters got it right in 2017 when they moved to the new XCub aluminum spring gear. For all the cubs running on the old legacy gear there needs to be a solution. However, there are very few choices. Changing shock absorbers between the axle and the V cabane does not work and may actually make the problems worse depending on type.

Here is the only FX-3 landing accident in the NTSB database with a partial failure of the legacy cub gear. This one was on pavement too. This aircraft had wing damage but not damage to the prop and engine. If the gear all failed like this it would be a different matter. But they don't normally fail in this manner.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-tZ5ZPmw/0/9cd660df/XL/Screen%20Shot%202020-10-03%20at%202.56.54%20PM-XL.jpg

RaisedByWolves
11-01-2020, 02:40 PM
All of this discussion about damaging CCs and Beringer gear reminds me of the old often stated stories about Doctors and Bonanzas.
Lots of $$$$ don't make a pilot.

Exactly. Seems to me when a new person gets in a cub they arenít ready for the airplane to fly so soon. Same thing on landing. They arenít used to going that slow. When they touch down fast and get a bounce and it starts to get out of sorts. If they landed 20mph slower it wouldnít have bounced. Thatís my experience from
Sitting in the back with a new cub driver up front


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Crash, Jr.
11-01-2020, 02:54 PM
Last pic looks like another ground loop damaged landing gear. Yeah, that happens if you loop the plane.

CC didn't go to spring steel gear because it was stronger but because it is more aerodynamic and the Xcub was built to go fast. The strength and resistance to side loads is just a happy coincidence that marketing can capitalize on. Don't forget that the bending force has to go somewhere so it won't be a surprise when ground looped Xcubs start bending axles or twisting fuselages when their skilled pilots get sideways.

RoddyM
11-01-2020, 03:07 PM
There is a tendency to land too fast, I see it all the time. If you land fast, you’ve got to be extra good at keeping the thing straight for a longer period of time, leaving you open longer for a ground loop. Followed by heavy side load and down she comes. Why the fast landings?? Make it easy - land slower! When asking the new pilot “why did the plane bounce”, they reply almost always “I touched down too hard”. No. You touched down too fast significantly above the stall speed.
When last did you see anyone air taxi? No one does that. Learning to air taxi is a must- fly that things as low and slow as you can without touching down. Keep that thing straight as an arrow. Pick your spot and ease off on the throttle and hold that thing in the air a foot high and touch down with your flying speed all but gone.
What’s with these things smacked on asphalt runways with fat tires? I see lots of grass to land on. Want to avoid unnecessary costs and lower you’re landing risk, land on gravel or grass! As much as possible. Go way out of your way to avoid pavement! Your tires and plane will love you for it. And, land that thing slow and straight.

turbopilot
11-01-2020, 03:12 PM
CC didn't go to spring steel gear because it was stronger but because it is more aerodynamic and the Xcub was built to go fast. The strength and resistance to side loads is just a happy coincidence that marketing can capitalize on. Don't forget that the bending force has to go somewhere so it won't be a surprise when ground looped Xcubs start bending axles or twisting fuselages when their skilled pilots get sideways.

My goodness. Read before you type. That is exactly what Brad Damm said in this (http://cubcrafters.com/c/2017/09/field-test-xcub-landing-gear/) blog that I provided in the post above documenting CubCrafters position. Yes, the aluminum spring gear will bend and distort depending on maximum loads but it does not tend to fail catastrophically like the legacy cub gear. That is the whole idea, provide a gear that will locally fail at the extremes but not bring the airplane down on the belly, no matter how bad the pilot may be.

DENNY
11-01-2020, 04:07 PM
WOW!! If only someone had told all the pilots in Alaska that spring gear was Soooooo much better than than cub gear for rough work. Good to know, now I will send in the Cessna pilots first to check out a strip so I won't hurt my weak cub gear. Oh ya buy the way just how does that long lever arm work when you get a big front load on spring gear compared to cub gear? DENNY

DENNY
11-01-2020, 04:12 PM
So what happens when you touch down at 70 and get the berringer gear sideways? That will fail too. The problem isn’t the landing gear that’s been around for 80 years. The problem is the people flying the airplane. How come most failures of the gear happen so early on? Is this the gears fault too?

https://youtu.be/ZNwfgbnFrZs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This video shows one of my pet peeves!!! Get clear of the runway when you stop!! Worst place to be is at the middle right at the edge of the runway with the prop turning when other planes are landing/taking off.
DENNY

RaisedByWolves
11-01-2020, 04:32 PM
How many X cubs with spring gear have been groundlooped? A lot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

skukum12
11-01-2020, 04:47 PM
. That is the whole idea, provide a gear that will locally fail at the extremes but not bring the airplane down on the belly, no matter how bad the pilot may be.


Oy Vey.
Auto land, AOA indicators, ADSB.....Let's just replace the pilot with a computer. Better yet, just s&&t can aviation altogether

Steve Pierce
11-01-2020, 05:06 PM
:smile: :smile: :smile: I broke my anvil, its the hammers fault.

AkPA/18
11-01-2020, 05:11 PM
Out of 91 Carbon Cub FX-3's in the FAA database, 11 have made it to the NTSB reports web site in 2.5 years of operation. Here is the bottom line from the NTSB.

8 landing ground loop / loss of control1 takeoff loss of control
7 on paved RWYís
2 on dirt/grass RWYís
1 engine out
6 gear collapses
No injuries

Sure seems like there is a problem somewhere. 10% of the fleet wrecking on runways in in 2.5 yrs.
Do Supercubs have this problem also?

Steve Pierce
11-01-2020, 05:36 PM
I am sorry but from my experience a lot of people who can afford these $300K plus Super Cubs have a different mindset. They are not ones to train to get the skills or to take the time to bet proficient at the craft. I am not saying all but a good part. They remind me of warbird owners 20 years ago. There is a ferry pilot who delivers the airplane and picks it up. They don't want to talk about what you found or fixed. Just want the bill and go on. I prefer the personal relationships with SuperCub owners myself.

As far as the Berringer gear, I remember Greg Simmons on the edge at the Hondo STOL contest and that thing touching on one side and wallowing around. Every thing has a limit, know what they are and stay away from it. I have been pretty close and was amazed not to have found it.

DENNY
11-01-2020, 06:35 PM
Putting spring gear on a cub is not a new ideal. I had one outside my hanger several years ago (I will see if I can find pics) Reported to be about 15 mph faster with the gear if I remember right. Not a bad mod if you want speed. However not a mod to makeup for poor skills. If spring gear was so great we would never have to repair a Cessna after a ground loop, just saying!!
DENNY

EDIT:
FOUND THEM.

mike mcs repair
11-01-2020, 07:05 PM
My goodness. Read before you type. That is exactly what Brad Damm said in this (http://cubcrafters.com/c/2017/09/field-test-xcub-landing-gear/) blog that I provided in the post above documenting CubCrafters position. Yes, the aluminum spring gear will bend and distort depending on maximum loads but it does not tend to fail catastrophically like the legacy cub gear. That is the whole idea, provide a gear that will locally fail at the extremes but not bring the airplane down on the belly, no matter how bad the pilot may be.

You need to study less and go get some training before you just bend that new plane. Listen to what others said above. Donít let it land. Slow down.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93960)

Mauleguy
11-01-2020, 07:19 PM
This video shows one of my pet peeves!!! Get clear of the runway when you stop!! Worst place to be is at the middle right at the edge of the runway with the prop turning when other planes are landing/taking off.
DENNY

This place does not have much good area for parking without walking a mile. I have parked my airplane in that exact spot for a morning of fishing up Lower Loon. I pushed it all the way back to the fence. Did not think much about the guy that is taking off and can't keep it going straight. I am insured so go ahead and run into my airplane:smile:

behindpropellers
11-01-2020, 08:55 PM
I can't keep up with all the old sayings, but I do have a fair amount of data the collaborates the CubCrafter position (http://cubcrafters.com/c/2017/09/field-test-xcub-landing-gear/).

CubCrafters very clearly stated the legacy gear was the problem in 2017. I took their position seriously.


Out of 91 Carbon Cub FX-3's in the FAA database, 11 have made it to the NTSB reports web site in 2.5 years of operation. Here is the bottom line from the NTSB.

8 landing ground loop / loss of control1 takeoff loss of control
7 on paved RWY’s
2 on dirt/grass RWY’s
1 engine out
6 gear collapses
No injuries

So I think CubCrafters got it right in 2017 when they moved to the new XCub aluminum spring gear. For all the cubs running on the old legacy gear there needs to be a solution. However, there are very few choices. Changing shock absorbers between the axle and the V cabane does not work and may actually make the problems worse depending on type.

Here is the only FX-3 landing accident in the NTSB database with a partial failure of the legacy cub gear. This one was on pavement too. This aircraft had wing damage but not damage to the prop and engine. If the gear all failed like this it would be a different matter. But they don't normally fail in this manner.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-tZ5ZPmw/0/9cd660df/XL/Screen%20Shot%202020-10-03%20at%202.56.54%20PM-XL.jpg

35" Tire. Land sideways. Lots of bending moment going on. My guess: if it had 8:50s and you landed it sideways it would chirp and start to skid. The 35 has a lot more surface area on the ground so your load due to friction is huge.

From reading the other threads: Once you fly the newer style of shocks you probably need to learn how to land again when it comes time to jump to a C-180.

Tim

RaisedByWolves
11-01-2020, 09:04 PM
35" Tire. Land sideways. Lots of bending moment going on. My guess: if it had 8:50s and you landed it sideways it would chirp and start to skid. The 35 has a lot more surface area on the ground so your load due to friction is huge.

From reading the other threads: Once you fly the newer style of shocks you probably need to learn how to land again when it comes time to jump to a C-180.

Tim

Ask Steve want a 35 can do down a hill. Just bent an axle. Didnít fold up the gear


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Crash, Jr.
11-01-2020, 10:11 PM
As far as the Berringer gear, I remember Greg Simmons on the edge at the Hondo STOL contest and that thing touching on one side and wallowing around. Every thing has a limit, know what they are and stay away from it. I have been pretty close and was amazed not to have found it.

That's where I'm at on the Beringer gear. Great idea for ideal conditions but too wallowy for use with gusting crosswinds or a turning takeoff or landing like on a beach. Seems a lot like Citabria oleo gear where it can really start to walk around unless you really plant the plane on the gear and load the shocks up. Seems like that's why people prefer the ACME shocks is because they retain the stable ground handling of the stock cub gear but with the next level of ability to take big hits.

No direct experience flying the Beringer gear though and they have made huge improvements in the valving. I've flown with a guy that has the Beringer gear and it's incredible how you can just smash into the ground and the gear eats it up. I'd hesitate to say it takes a sideload better than stock gear however. The gear legs themselves might take it but the load always goes somewhere and the gear fittings and fuselage are all the same.

turbopilot
11-01-2020, 10:27 PM
No direct experience flying the Beringer gear though and they have made huge improvements in the valving. I've flown with a guy that has the Beringer gear and it's incredible how you can just smash into the ground and the gear eats it up. I'd hesitate to say it takes a sideload better than stock gear however. The gear legs themselves might take it but the load always goes somewhere and the gear fittings and fuselage are all the same.

I have been flying Beringer ALG on a CC SS since 2017 when they first came out. You are right, version 1 had valving problems that is totally fixed in version 3 (current shipping version). There were only a few sets of version 1 struts in the US to the best of my knowledge. I have had all three versions on my SS. Beringer replaced the struts twice as they improved them. I have never tried side loading my gear on purpose or by mistake.

Beringer ALG adds a hefty doubler on the V cabana, so in combination with the big axle to cabane strut the Beringer ALG should be very tolerate of heavy side loads. This is the Beringer V cabane doubler. With this design the V cabane can actually fail and the gear should stay together.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-SS2ZDMM/0/3d511baa/XL/IMG_4486-XL.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-sSjKGWp/0/97d95173/L/IMG_4488-L.jpg

RVBottomly
11-01-2020, 10:48 PM
Beringer ALG adds a hefty doubler on the V cabana, so in combination with the big axle to cabane strut the Beringer ALG should be very tolerate of heavy side loads. This is the Beringer V cabane doubler. With this design the V cabane can actually fail and the gear should stay together.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-SS2ZDMM/0/3d511baa/XL/IMG_4486-XL.jpg



The doubler looks impressive. I've never seen struts attached to the cabane like that. What do they connect to? I did a quick search on Beringer gear and didn't see that in other images.

RVBottomly
11-01-2020, 10:54 PM
I think I answered my question finding a French aviation magazine:

https://www.aviation-pilote.com/2016/07/15/lalg-de-beringer-sur-pa-18/

turbopilot
11-01-2020, 10:56 PM
The doubler looks impressive. I've never seen struts attached to the cabane like that. What do they connect to? I did a quick search on Beringer gear and didn't see that in other images.

Here is the back side of the V cabane:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CarbonCub316/i-b8ctvZk/0/7aa400e8/L/IMG_1149_Realistic-L.jpg

The attachment of the V cabane strut to the axle:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CarbonCub316/i-BBgg2hn/0/42815810/L/IMG_1148_Balanced-L.jpg

The view head on:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CarbonCub316/i-KMmFFFB/0/864f8e7d/L/IMG_2805-L.jpg

And the Beringer ALIR braking system:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CarbonCub316/i-sZkzhZB/0/e6cd72a5/L/IMG_1134_Soft-L.jpg

And the entire system is 5 lbs lighter than the original legacy cub gear with AOSS.

turbopilot
11-01-2020, 11:01 PM
This is the full Beringer ALG Carbon Cub landing gear and brake system replacement kit. $10,600.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-nxtV8M2/0/f6551473/XL/IMG_4426-XL.jpg

RVBottomly
11-01-2020, 11:11 PM
This is the full Beringer ALG Carbon Cub landing gear and brake system replacement kit. $10,600.



Gulp....

It all looks very beautiful, especially compared to my torch-welded gear I put together last Fall.

turbopilot
11-01-2020, 11:18 PM
Gulp....

It all looks very beautiful, especially compared to my torch-welded gear I put together last Fall.

After flying two Carbon Cub SS's for 7 years with legacy cub gear and AOSS, the ground handling is outstanding. It takes a few hours to get the feel. Biggest difference taxiing is that the nose angle of attack will rise about 3 degrees on the struts once the air over the wings is more than 10 mph. My SS is only 955 empty. So the struts are over kill built to support up to 2,500 lbs. Rarely a bounce higher than a few inches no mater how hard I drop it in. All CNC machined aluminum. An engineering work of art.

Crash, Jr.
11-02-2020, 12:58 AM
I bet if you weighed $10,600 in cash it would be about 5lbs. Guess that's one way to save weight.

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 07:18 AM
I would like to fly the Beringer to compare. I don't agree with the legacy gear is the issue with all the noted accidents but always like to try new things.

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 07:27 AM
I bet if you weighed $10,600 in cash it would be about 5lbs. Guess that's one way to save weight.
I get a total of $8800 for Airframes gear w/cabane vee, AOSS shock stuts, ABI wheels and brakes, Dakota Cub brake master cylinders and Atlee Dodge safety cables. Doesn't seem so out of line to me.

Skywalker
11-02-2020, 07:47 AM
Those short struts on the cabane V are to keep it in plane, like the jury struts keep the lift struts in column. But they shouldn't be needed until deformation of other pieces. Seems like they're there to keep a cabane collapse from making an existing situation worse.

skywagon8a
11-02-2020, 07:52 AM
Those short struts on the cabane V are to keep it in plane, like the jury struts keep the lift struts in column. But they shouldn't be needed until deformation of other pieces. Seems like they're there to keep a cabane collapse from making an existing situation worse.
It looks as those short struts are used to oppose the torque when the brakes are applied.

Farmboy
11-02-2020, 08:03 AM
>>>>>CubCrafters very clearly stated the legacy gear was the problem in 2017. I took their position seriously.<<<<<<

I donít read it that way. CubCrafters isnít saying that the legacy gear is a problem. In themarketing of the xcub, they state that if you exceed the design loads the traditional gear fails completely. This is because itís worked designed to work together, not separately. Thatís how you get a strong assembly from light parts.

But that aside, CC needed the XCub to be fast. Legacy gear is a straight up drag inducing assembly. They used spring gear for speed.


Transmitted from my FlightPhone on fingers...

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 09:11 AM
I get a total of $8800 for Airframes gear w/cabane vee, AOSS shock stuts, ABI wheels and brakes, Dakota Cub brake master cylinders and Atlee Dodge safety cables. Doesn't seem so out of line to me.

A typical gear collapse in an FX with prop damage, engine teardown and one or two wings damaged can run north of $60k. Insurance is getting impossible to get. Just got a quotes on a new SS. I have 10 years of experience in tail draggers and no accident. 2 bids. One would only insure 2/3 of hull value for about twice what I have been paying. The other want 4X the hull rate to insure it fully. The insurance market is nuts and getting worse for many reasons but the losses they are seeing with the cub gear collapses in recent model airplanes is not helping. New pilots with no tail dragger experience are having a hard time finding insurance, so this issue hitting the resale market.

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 09:20 AM
I do not believe they are gear failures, I believe they are pilot failures. I can build an airplane that the gear won't fail, that doesn't fix the nut behind the wheel. If you believe the Beringer gear is the cats ass and so much better than the legacy set up that is all that matters. Maybe it will be proven that nobody with Beringer gear screws the pooch and fails the gear and it will be the new standard. I have been banging these things around for 25 years and the only gear I have failed was catching a sand dune with my Clipper gear on 700x6 tires which has a .035" wall rear tube. Did the gear fail? Yes it did. Was it the right tool for the job? No it wasn't. Only you can figure out what tools you need. My tools have been working just fine for me. I don't believe the sky is falling.

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 09:21 AM
.... CubCrafters isn’t saying that the legacy gear is a problem.



This is what Cubcrafters said in 2017 (http://cubcrafters.com/c/2017/09/field-test-xcub-landing-gear/). I don't see how you can read it any other way. Long stretch to say this problem is a design feature. I give CubCrafters credit for telling the truth. In 2017 nearly all production was on legacy-type gear. Obviously they were trying to sell the XCub but the statement is true.

"One weakness of the legacy-type gear on a Cub is that when a landing load reaches the limit of the suspension, the gear will often fail completely, or the excess landing load will be transferred into the airframe causing damage. In either case, it will be difficult and expensive to repair."

KevinJ
11-02-2020, 09:23 AM
A typical gear collapse in an FX with prop damage, engine teardown and one or two wings damaged can run north of $60k. Insurance is getting impossible to get. Just got a quotes on a new SS. I have 10 years of experience in tail draggers and no accident. 2 bids. One would only insure 2/3 of hull value for about twice what I have been paying. The other want 4X the hull rate to insure it fully. The insurance market is nuts and getting worse for many reasons but the losses they are seeing with the cub gear collapses in recent model airplanes is not helping. New pilots with no tail dragger experience are having a hard time finding insurance, so this issue hitting the resale market.
Just to put a number on it, something like 6-12k to insure a new SS?

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 09:23 AM
The FX3 that I recently repaired after a ground loop accident did not get the prop. He folded one gear, took out both shock struts, the wing and skinned the elevator. From seeing what happened I can't imagine anything not failing. Momentum gets dissipated somewhere.

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 09:43 AM
Just to put a number on it, something like 6-12k to insure a new SS?

For $280k hull the range was $4k for 2/3 of hull value up to $9k for full hull coverage. I have been paying $2k for an 2014 SS. 500 hrs in type, no accidents, 3,000 TT, instrument rating. The broker said losses in these off road airplanes are driving underwriters higher. New tail dragger pilots are having a hard time getting any coverage.

Does not help that 12% of the brand new, very expensive FX-3 fleet has been involved in an NTSB reportable event since 2017. And the majority of those accidents involved complete gear collapse. By the way not all the FX-3 events have been NTSB reportable and/or reported to the NTSB. I know of several others just locally repaired. So the insurance companies are seeing a bigger picture that is reflected in the NTSB reports.

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 09:49 AM
Does not help that 12% of the brand new, very expensive FX-3 fleet has been involved in an NTSB reportable event since 2017. And the majority of those accidents involved complete gear collapse.
and how many haven't been reported?

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 09:52 AM
and how many haven't been reported?

Correct. I edited my post to reflect that issue.

hawgdrvr
11-02-2020, 10:25 AM
What's the data on the SS? No need to isolate FX3 here.

Mauleguy
11-02-2020, 10:53 AM
This is what Cubcrafters said in 2017 (http://cubcrafters.com/c/2017/09/field-test-xcub-landing-gear/). I don't see how you can read it any other way. Long stretch to say this problem is a design feature. I give CubCrafters credit for telling the truth. In 2017 nearly all production was on legacy-type gear. Obviously they were trying to sell the XCub but the statement is true.

"One weakness of the legacy-type gear on a Cub is that when a landing load reaches the limit of the suspension, the gear will often fail completely, or the excess landing load will be transferred into the airframe causing damage. In either case, it will be difficult and expensive to repair."

One weakness of the legacy-type gear on a Cub is that when a landing load reaches the limit of the suspension. And you don't think that same statement applies to any gear system put on a cub, X Cub, CC, The key work here is "Limit".

You don't think the Beringer gear has a limit or the spring gear has a limit. I do think Super Cubs are built more robust then CC but I doubt I would fail the gear with the proper suspension and tires if I was landing like they are meant to be landed.
Come on, a bunch of low time pilots wreck 300K airplanes and it's the gears shortcomings. That is BS

Crash, Jr.
11-02-2020, 11:10 AM
I get a total of $8800 for Airframes gear w/cabane vee, AOSS shock stuts, ABI wheels and brakes, Dakota Cub brake master cylinders and Atlee Dodge safety cables. Doesn't seem so out of line to me.

That's fair and you have a good calculator. I'm getting $8699.80 with gear legs with steps and powder coating, no cabane (the Beringer reuses the stock one) and no brake lines (included with Beringer's kit). I guess the price isn't all that out of line considering.

Still, it is sold as a replacement to the equipment that comes on the existing aircraft so you're essentially removing and replacing all the items mentioned so for an existing owner it's just a straight $10k out of pocket. The price would only be offset if a kit builder was saving $8800 by not buying gear/wheels/brakes for a kit build.

Guess I'm just cheap. I won't debate you're getting your moneys worth with the Beringer stuff. It is extremely high quality and just absolutely works top notch. I used to work on motorcycles as a mechanic and whenever a bike with Beringer brakes came in the whole shop would take turns feeling the brake lever just amazed at how well calibrated the lever feel and braking rate was. You knew exactly where your traction limit was when braking on a Beringer equipped bike.

Mauleguy
11-02-2020, 11:46 AM
That's fair and you have a good calculator. I'm getting $8699.80 with gear legs with steps and powder coating, no cabane (the Beringer reuses the stock one) and no brake lines (included with Beringer's kit). I guess the price isn't all that out of line considering.

Still, it is sold as a replacement to the equipment that comes on the existing aircraft so you're essentially removing and replacing all the items mentioned so for an existing owner it's just a straight $10k out of pocket. The price would only be offset if a kit builder was saving $8800 by not buying gear/wheels/brakes for a kit build.

Guess I'm just cheap. I won't debate you're getting your moneys worth with the Beringer stuff. It is extremely high quality and just absolutely works top notch. I used to work on motorcycles as a mechanic and whenever a bike with Beringer brakes came in the whole shop would take turns feeling the brake lever just amazed at how well calibrated the lever feel and braking rate was. You knew exactly where your traction limit was when braking on a Beringer equipped bike.

You will get something out of what you pull off the aircraft. I would guess at least half of new pricing so that would offset the price for Beringer gear.

I personally have never flown Beringer gear so have no real world experience but I really don't like how it hangs down when unloaded. To me that looks more like a problem when landing off camber or even possibly when a new cub driver who gets squirrely in his new low time Carbon Cub and starts a ground loop.

DJ
11-02-2020, 11:48 AM
If spring gear is better/safer for your mission, go for it. There are many options...starting with the XCub. Maybe Cubcrafters will have a spring gear option on the FX/EX planes in the future for guys/gals who want it. Smaller tires will help too[emoji6]

My take away from this thread is not that Cub gear is weak/flawed (I've tested that, oops) but that bushwheels, pavement and poor directional control don't mix. I'll be more careful after seeing these pictures.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using SuperCub.Org mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93960)

Crash, Jr.
11-02-2020, 12:05 PM
I personally have never flown Beringer gear so have no real world experience but I really don't like how it hangs down when unloaded. To me that looks more like a problem when landing off camber or even possibly when a new cub driver who gets squirrely in his new low time Carbon Cub and starts a ground loop.

That's my impression of the gear too. It's like Citabria oleo gear where you really have to land hard on it and get it to squat otherwise it starts to wallow around and get squirrelly on you. Riding passenger in my friend's cub with Beringer gear it was alarming taxiing off the runway as that thing really wanted to lean hard in a turn. I think that was the Gen2 valving at the time, maybe gen 3 is better.

AkPA/18
11-02-2020, 02:17 PM
Out of 91 Carbon Cub FX-3's in the FAA database, 11 have made it to the NTSB reports web site in 2.5 years of operation. Here is the bottom line from the NTSB.

8 landing ground loop / loss of control1 takeoff loss of control
7 on paved RWY’s
2 on dirt/grass RWY’s
1 engine out
6 gear collapses
No injuries

Sure seems like there is a problem somewhere. 10% of the fleet wrecking on runways in in 2.5 yrs.
Do Supercubs have this problem also?

Turbopilot, l was wodering if you looked at the piper pa18 stats on gear collapses on runways. I do not know how to find out but thought you might. Is this a concern for Supercubs as well or just fx3? Were these low time tw pilots or hightime. Something just doesn't quite add up for me. Very curious as I always thought cub gear was pretty good. Are the Huskys that have gone to cub gear wrecking on runways also? I know a lot of questions and I don't have the answers but your posts are slightly alarming.

Edit: The quality of the Berenger gear looks over the top cool!
Thanks
Mark

behindpropellers
11-02-2020, 02:29 PM
I think the key here is not the gear (no rhyme intended), but stick time.

Nope. Landings. Number of landings.

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 02:55 PM
I personally have never flown Beringer gear so have no real world experience but I really don't like how it hangs down when unloaded. To me that looks more like a problem when landing off camber or even possibly when a new cub driver who gets squirrely in his new low time Carbon Cub and starts a ground loop.

Well Mauleguy, then you would not like to fly the F16 or F111. Exactly the same gear geometry that is used on the Beringer ALG. Vertical forces are absorbed through hydraulic struts. Gear hang like this to get the full stroke out of the strut as forces are applied.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-X6dVC3c/0/8b17949e/S/2b2ad128f552228ec7ccb34ea72b5d29-S.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-JSMsCFP/0/e73391d1/L/Screen%20Shot%202020-09-28%20at%2012.52.02%20PM-L.png

behindpropellers
11-02-2020, 02:59 PM
Well Mauleguy, then you would not like to fly the F16 or F111. Exactly the same gear geometry that is used on the Beringer ALG. Vertical forces are absorbed through hydraulic struts. Gear hang like this to get the full stroke out of the strut as forces are applied.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-X6dVC3c/0/8b17949e/S/2b2ad128f552228ec7ccb34ea72b5d29-S.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-JSMsCFP/0/e73391d1/L/Screen%20Shot%202020-09-28%20at%2012.52.02%20PM-L.png


Is that why they built the nosewheel cub?

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 03:01 PM
Is that why they built the nosewheel cub?

Cannot think of any other reason to add the weight and complexity to a good tail dragger than to appeal to the folks who just can't control an airplane that sits on it's tail. And it looks really goofy.

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 03:03 PM
Landed on smooth 10,000 feet asphalt or concrete runways.

I would like to see some video of the Berringer landing on a slope g turng gravel bar or some moguls and see how it works. My gear is a known and proven itself to me time and time again. Prove to me I can't live without your Beringer gear.

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 03:05 PM
The NX Cub was built because there is a market for back country airplanes for those who.lack the skills of operating a tailwheel airplane. That simple.

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 03:08 PM
Riding passenger in my friend's cub with Beringer gear it was alarming taxiing off the runway as that thing really wanted to lean hard in a turn. I think that was the Gen2 valving at the time, maybe gen 3 is better.

Actually the valving was fixed in Gen 2. In Gen 3 they added 2 degrees of camber to the axle block to make the wheels more vertical in the typical range of strut inflation. Beringer recommends 37 to 40 mm of inflation depending on weight and ride preference. My SS is so light I run with 34 mm of strut showing. With that I have less than 1/2 degree of negative camber on the main gear. Wheels are vertical if I pump up to 38 mm.

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 03:17 PM
I would like to see some video of the Berringer landing on a slope g turng gravel bar or some moguls and see how it works. Prove to me I can't live without your Beringer gear.

Look at the information and make up your mind. Like any hydraulic strut landing gear the strut with the most weight will compress further than the strut with less weight. No difference win Beringer. When aircraft is on a slope the down slope gear will compress depending on the angle of the slope. I have never seen more the 5 mm of differential compression.

I have lots of video testing the Beringer but none on slopes. Note the Beringer struts with light SS never get close to the bottom. You can see the struts relax just before the turn when the lift comes off the wings.


https://youtu.be/21FzoSqyOLA

Utah-Jay
11-02-2020, 03:28 PM
Landed on smooth 10,000 feet asphalt or concrete runways.

I would like to see some video of the Berringer landing on a slope g turng gravel bar or some moguls and see how it works. My gear is a known and proven itself to me time and time again. Prove to me I can't live without your Beringer gear.
Steve

Me being a newbie around here you seem to be an expert (sorry to call you that btw), so I wonder what you think of the TK gear? IF I was building a plane I would send you a case of beer with the understanding I got to call and ask you a ton of questions. I am a HUGE believer in not reinventing the wheel

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 03:28 PM
Three foot drop test. If you stop frame the video you will see no more the 1/2 the strut travel takes place during the drop. This will be different for heavier cubs. My SS was about 1,250 lbs gross for this test. Same gear is certified for 2,600 lbs, so lots of reserve.

https://youtu.be/uNMer4b_v2k
https://youtu.be/uNMer4b_v2k

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 03:30 PM
Look at the 5 minute mark and then shoot us a video and we can talk.
https://youtu.be/7t1lyDoo_v0

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 03:40 PM
What's the data on the SS? No need to isolate FX3 here.

Things are different for the SS. 303 SS's in the US since 2010, but only 25 NTSB reported accidents. In that time 2 deaths, 2 serious injuries and 5 minor injuries. The 2 deaths happened in the same accident operated by a high time pilot. One SS appears twice in the same year with different accidents making it to the NTSB.

SS will shed the legacy cub gear but not as much as the FX. For some reason the SS enjoys being on it's back more often than the FX. My guess is it has to do with higher weights of the FX.

Good news for both the FX and SS, deaths and injuries from accidents seem to be very low given the typical mission of the airplane.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-7rs3ckv/0/dfe54b44/M/KathrynsReport-M.jpg

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 04:26 PM
Things are different for the SS. 303 SS's in the US since 2010, but only 25 NTSB reported accidents. In that time 2 deaths, 2 serious injuries and 5 minor injuries. The 2 deaths happened in the same accident operated by a high time pilot. One SS appears twice in the same year with different accidents making it to the NTSB.

SS will shed the legacy cub gear but not as much as the FX. For some reason the SS enjoys being on it's back more often than the FX. My guess is it has to do with higher weights of the FX.

Good news for both the FX and SS, deaths and injuries from accidents seem to be very low given the typical mission of the airplane.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-7rs3ckv/0/dfe54b44/M/KathrynsReport-M.jpg
How much SS time do you have. Easy for me to tell why they end up on their back, light as all get out on the tail. Of course I think the real reason is the brakes are to good, gotta fix that. ;) FX3s have even more weight on the nose with the 363 and CS prop, that is why they come standard with 3X3 gear.

tedwaltman1
11-02-2020, 04:27 PM
The above picture of the CC on its back is from it hitting a line across the Colorado (I believe) river as the pilot was low level and didn't see the cable. Has nothing to do with the landing gear.

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 04:42 PM
The above picture of the CC on its back is from it hitting a line across the Colorado (I believe) river as the pilot was low level and didn't see the cable. Has nothing to do with the landing gear.

Did someone say it was related to the landing gear? Actually the airplane, N89BK, in the previous image was trying to avoid power lines and touched down short of a sandbar and nosed over. N1951B (below) hit power lines, partially burned and landed in a river. Neither accident appeared to be related to landing gear.


https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-5Qx7L2w/0/4b03cb34/M/ss-M.jpg

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 04:55 PM
Ok turbo pilot,been started out that legacy Cub gear is causing landing accidents in Carbon Cubs. Now we are posting pictures of wrecks in rivers. What is your point?

turbopilot
11-02-2020, 05:01 PM
Ok turbo pilot,been started out that legacy Cub gear is causing landing accidents in Carbon Cubs. Now we are posting pictures of wrecks in rivers. What is your point?

If you read the posts above (something that does not seem happen for some posters on this forum), I was asked to summarize the NTSB reports for the SS. I agree it is thread drift, but the point is the SS's are not shedding gear as often as the FX's, they do have a higher incidence of winding up on their backs compared to FX. Of the 12 FX accidents only one ended up on its back.

Steve Pierce
11-02-2020, 05:10 PM
So what do you think this data is saying? What do you think the real issue is?

Eddie Foy
11-02-2020, 05:39 PM
Can't fix stupid. I hit a power line once. Lived thru it. I don't fly down rivers at low altitude anymore unless I know the area.


Did someone say it was related to the landing gear? Actually the airplane, N89BK, in the previous image was trying to avoid power lines and touched down short of a sandbar and nosed over. N1951B (below) hit power lines, partially burned and landed in a river. Neither accident appeared to be related to landing gear.


https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-5Qx7L2w/0/4b03cb34/M/ss-M.jpg

DENNY
11-02-2020, 05:46 PM
I think the NTSB data reports don't show the whole picture. I would say only 1/4 of the incidents I hear about yearly make it to the NTSB. Lower 48 everyone gets excited about a bent plane up here not so much. I would have to say that with poor data (I understand it is all you have) you have poor results. Kind of beating a dead horse but will revive the thread a bit with my previous advice. If you are a no or low time taildragger pilot go get a pacer (or other 30 grand taildragger to learn in) I recommend pacers because they do not tolerate slow feet. Learning to properly fly a tailwheel aircraft will have some bumps along the way, better to take the bumps in a 30 grand plane vs a 300 grand one. Once you get a few runway lights and some ditch running out of the way, go get in the pretty plane. Advice from an older pilot without 18 year old reflexes.
DENNY

stewartb
11-02-2020, 06:19 PM
Not just CCs! That pesky weak gear! https://www.facebook.com/groups/Bigtirepilots/permalink/1497778887082561/

aeroaddict
11-02-2020, 07:29 PM
"Learning to properly fly a tailwheel aircraft will have some bumps along the way, better to take the bumps in a 30 grand plane vs a 300 grand one. Once you get a few runway lights and some ditch running out of the way, go get in the pretty plane."

I think this pretty well sums it up, it's not the gear, it's the pilot.

mike mcs repair
11-02-2020, 07:48 PM
A typical gear collapse in an FX with prop damage, engine teardown and one or two wings damaged can run north of $60k. Insurance is getting impossible to get. Just got a quotes on a new SS. I have 10 years of experience in tail draggers and no accident. 2 bids. One would only insure 2/3 of hull value for about twice what I have been paying. The other want 4X the hull rate to insure it fully. The insurance market is nuts and getting worse for many reasons but the losses they are seeing with the cub gear collapses in recent model airplanes is not helping. New pilots with no tail dragger experience are having a hard time finding insurance, so this issue hitting the resale market.

You just donít GET IT!!! You are making a comparison that when you roll your car the windshield breaks, and that the windshield is to weak!!! Donít do dumb **** and you might not beak stuff. Spend you effort getting some good training, because you obviously donít UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUíRE DOING.... with that said Iíll gladly take your money when you ball up your plane to unball it....


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93960)

RaisedByWolves
11-02-2020, 10:15 PM
Not just CCs! That pesky weak gear! https://www.facebook.com/groups/Bigtirepilots/permalink/1497778887082561/

Wait. You can stall a wing with slats? They have a critical angle of attack too?? Noooooo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mauleguy
11-02-2020, 11:07 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWrG3_YqGZc

Here this one shows a pretty good beating on cub gear

Oh I did not see the go-fund me page, ha like I am going to pay to help rebuild his 200K dollar airplane!

RVBottomly
11-02-2020, 11:21 PM
Look at the 5 minute mark and then shoot us a video and we can talk.
https://youtu.be/7t1lyDoo_v0

Wow! So, to put all this in context, obviously the gear held up to that side-load. I shudder to think what would have happened if the tire actually rolled under.

But I'm trying to understand if the question is will the Beringer gear, with it hanging lower unloaded, collapse in this scenario?

Also, was the Bushwheel bending like that because of differential braking? It sure looked like it did everything it could to try to fail, but failed at it.

RVBottomly
11-02-2020, 11:33 PM
Not just CCs! That pesky weak gear! https://www.facebook.com/groups/Bigtirepilots/permalink/1497778887082561/

Yup. Total gear failure. Maybe add some wheels on the wingtip too?

But, it did look like the gear took a lot of shock away from the airframe.

Mauleguy
11-02-2020, 11:46 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwcNHWqBCkU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucdb0TKu3rk&amp;t=176s
Not sure why people spend 10K dollars for landing gear when they are landing short on paved runways... This was my cub with 3" extended gear and my own shock set-up. I will say that the Acme gen 4 shocks would have made it feel smoother of course they were not around back then.

DENNY
11-02-2020, 11:51 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWrG3_YqGZc

Here this one shows a pretty good beating on cub gear

Oh I did not see the go-fund me page, ha like I am going to pay to help rebuild his 200K dollar airplane!

Just to make it clear to everyone!! The pilot did not start the go fund me page!! This was started by others to help support the rebuild.
DENNY

skywagon8a
11-03-2020, 05:40 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWrG3_YqGZc

Here this one shows a pretty good beating on cub gear
Take a good look at the rudder. It never moved from neutral until the impact threw the pilot's weight against the pedals.
The first flight control which should be moved when a wing drops in a stall should be opposite rudder. Tricycle geared airplane pilots for a large part, must learn that the rudder pedals are not foot rests. When coupled with airplanes which have well designed ailerons with little or no adverse yaw, pilots tend to forget (if they ever learned) what the rudder pedals are supposed to do. A Cub is not one of these planes.

stewartb
11-03-2020, 06:49 AM
Just to make it clear to everyone!! The pilot did not start the go fund me page!! This was started by others to help support the rebuild.
DENNY

And if memory serves? The following year the same pilot and plane won the gross weight STOL contest at the same, although revised, event. Nice guy. Good pilot. I gave him a set of Cub gear.

Skywalker
11-03-2020, 07:10 AM
We all moan about how newer tailwheel pilots should take things slower, but they are not. They are not. So CC does what it has to do to survive. After the Cessna gear, they did the NX in case the insurance situation gets worse. I just don't see a bush pilot wannabe choosing a nosewheel unless driven to it by insurance. If their efforts reduce the accident numbers, we all benefit.
I agree with the beater theory. I had a couple of 20K TW beaters before going crazy with an expensive TW. But I realize this is the culture of just do it, why wait, go for the gold, ad nauseum. Mfg's will adapt while we yell "get off the lawn", er, I mean paved runway.

RaisedByWolves
11-03-2020, 07:41 AM
So if cub gear is so weak, how come when that cub stalled, and crashed down on them, side loading the crap out of them, they didnít fail? Doesnít that go against your argument of weak gear???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Steve Pierce
11-03-2020, 07:54 AM
Wow! So, to put all this in context, obviously the gear held up to that side-load. I shudder to think what would have happened if the tire actually rolled under.

But I'm trying to understand if the question is will the Beringer gear, with it hanging lower unloaded, collapse in this scenario?

Also, was the Bushwheel bending like that because of differential braking? It sure looked like it did everything it could to try to fail, but failed at it.
The camber of the bar and he is actually going around a corner. Bushwheels will absorb a lot of abuse (side load in this case). I was in the back seat of my brother's Super Cub when he slid down a hill sideways on 35s and made an imprint in the dirt at the bottom of the axle nut. He tagged the wing tip. We flew home and later found that it had bent the 1 1/4" axle. I lost sight of the tire went it went under the fuselage and out of view from the back seat. He was on hydrosorbs with bungee cords. Took a new axle welded into the gear and a new rear spar.

My question on the Beringer gear system is to see what it does on an off camber landing area while going around a corner. We do that a lot around here. My only experience with it is seeing Greg Simmons in the Rat Cub stall a wing and how the gear wallowed around. Reminded me of a Champ or the Franken Maule. I know the valving is better but still would like to see the gear operated in the note conditions.

Steve Pierce
11-03-2020, 07:58 AM
Some of our off camber turning landing areas.
52045
52046

Crash, Jr.
11-03-2020, 11:23 AM
Had a short discussion with a friend who runs the Beringer gear last night about off-camber situations and sideloads. Apparently when the Beringer gear is fully at rest with aircraft weight on it, the shock is actually fairly bottomed out and sitting on a bumper. Basically, the issue is not so much that the outboard shock is compressing in a turn but the inboard shock is extending. Where the gear gets it's ability to absorb hits is from extending on takeoff and then giving up that travel when landing. Again, the rolling tendency of the plane when turning is not the outboard shock compressing, but the inboard one extending slightly. While it can be disconcerting to feel, the plane isn't in any danger because the loaded side is on a stop and cannot compress any more.

He said in crosswind landing situations it's definitely slightly less stable than conventional gear but the key is to just get the weight on the gear with some aggression rather than finessing the plane onto the ground like you would normal gear. When taxiing in a wind the plane does have a tendency to pick up the windward wing slightly but while disconcerting, it's not really a danger.

Standard or "legacy" gear is certainly more stable in ground handling but the Beringer gear is definitely impressive in the hits it can take. Sorry to flip flop, I'm definitely not the customer that's going to line up to plunk my $10k down but having seen what it can do it's pretty cool. Personally I'll take ACMEs but I don't think they're quite at the level the Beringers are for ham fisted abuse.

*disclaimer: Airframes no longer sells Beringer products as they are available direct from Beringer USA so I have no agenda here, this is an old video*


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PU2fbi0Zol8

tedwaltman1
11-03-2020, 01:47 PM
I have over 1,700 landings on my Acme Aero Gen-3 shocks. 99% off pavement. Gravel bars, sand, beaches, mountain tops, meadows, Idaho, Montana, Alaska. Great product, outstanding customer service. 35” Bushwheels.

Steve Pierce
11-03-2020, 01:54 PM
Had a short discussion with a friend who runs the Beringer gear last night about off-camber situations and sideloads. Apparently when the Beringer gear is fully at rest with aircraft weight on it, the shock is actually fairly bottomed out and sitting on a bumper. Basically, the issue is not so much that the outboard shock is compressing in a turn but the inboard shock is extending. Where the gear gets it's ability to absorb hits is from extending on takeoff and then giving up that travel when landing. Again, the rolling tendency of the plane when turning is not the outboard shock compressing, but the inboard one extending slightly. While it can be disconcerting to feel, the plane isn't in any danger because the loaded side is on a stop and cannot compress any more.

He said in crosswind landing situations it's definitely slightly less stable than conventional gear but the key is to just get the weight on the gear with some aggression rather than finessing the plane onto the ground like you would normal gear. When taxiing in a wind the plane does have a tendency to pick up the windward wing slightly but while disconcerting, it's not really a danger.

Standard or "legacy" gear is certainly more stable in ground handling but the Beringer gear is definitely impressive in the hits it can take. Sorry to flip flop, I'm definitely not the customer that's going to line up to plunk my $10k down but having seen what it can do it's pretty cool. Personally I'll take ACMEs but I don't think they're quite at the level the Beringers are for ham fisted abuse.

*disclaimer: Airframes no longer sells Beringer products as they are available direct from Beringer USA so I have no agenda here, this is an old video*


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PU2fbi0Zol8
That is not a good testament to me, 35s and suppose to be good shocks and it bounced. Watching these Acmes I am not seeing that.

turbopilot
11-03-2020, 01:55 PM
Standard or "legacy" gear is certainly more stable in ground handling but the Beringer gear is definitely impressive in the hits it can take. Sorry to flip flop, I'm definitely not the customer that's going to line up to plunk my $10k down but having seen what it can do it's pretty cool. Personally I'll take ACMEs but I don't think they're quite at the level the Beringers are for ham fisted abuse.



Your friend got it right about the Beringer ALG and your video clearly demonstrated how these gear perform. I have not found the Beringer "less stable" in crosswinds but they do feel different as the up wind strut extents. No matter how you through the airplane down, it sticks.

The value equation is separate discussion. I am changing from the legacy cub gear on a new CC with a nominal hull value between $250,000 and $400,000 depending on whether it is an SS or FX. Insurance companies now want to add up to $6,000 per year in premium costs to fully insure these machines while other insurance companies are charging 30% of that cost to insure the hull for 2/3 of the value. Appears to be a new game by the insurance companies. The majority of the accidents in the SS and FX are on or near the runway. Many involve collapse of the legacy cub landing gear. So it is value decision when you can get better gear on an expensive new SS or FX and pay for that investment by taking the risk on the lower cost hull insurance option and hedging that risk with a better gear. Aside from that after using the Beringer ALG for three years, through three generations of struts I would never go back. They handle differently on the ground and take a while to get used to but they handle anything you throw at them with a soft cushy feel.

It would make no sense to put these gear on a "beater" cub where the investment might be worth a third of the airplane value.

stewartb
11-03-2020, 02:13 PM
The Beringer struts are near end of travel when static? That sure seems odd. Maybe that's why that Cub's tail drops so hard? Because the shocks bottomed? I think the tail hitting is what made the mains bounce.

Crash, Jr.
11-03-2020, 02:28 PM
That is not a good testament to me, 35s and suppose to be good shocks and it bounced. Watching these Acmes I am not seeing that.

Yeah, the bounce is less than ideal for sure but in fairness I think those were an earlier revision of the shocks. That was also just a full on 500fpm descent rate into the ground which would have just blown the (stock) gear straight off my cub. If the ACMEs would have done better on an identical style of approach I'd be very impressed in them. Maybe they do, I just haven't had the direct experience with them that others have. The only planes I see eating up that style of chop and drop landing are the purpose built SuperSTOL/Storch style gear.

Turbopilot I have to say I fully reject your hypothesis that Beringer gear is going to save the plane where "legacy" gear will fail. For one you're going about it all wrong as multiple people have said; whether the gear fails or not is beside the point, the pilots need to develop skills so they're not getting sideways and ripping gear off in the first place! Secondarily even if hypothetically a Beringer gear system would survive a ground loop you're still going to be dragging wings on the ground, probably getting the prop, engine, and tail. The only difference is your wrecked plane will be sitting on blown out tires and intact gear while the rest of it is totaled. Nobody is walking away from these Carbon Cub wrecks without forking out money for repairs. Only skill will prevent aircraft damage, not it's undercarriage.

I'm somewhat fully behind the off airport capability of the Beringer landing gear system but don't fool yourself, it's not a cure all for lack of skill. Despite what these Carbon Cub pilots think you can't transfer skill from your bank account into your aircraft.

turbopilot
11-03-2020, 02:33 PM
The Beringer struts are near end of travel when static? That sure seems odd. Maybe that's why that Cub's tail drops so hard? Because the shocks bottomed? I think the tail hitting is what made the mains bounce.

The Beringer spec is between 37 and 40 mm of strut showing static. You vary nitrogen pressure to get the right inflation. Based on watching the dust ring on the "O" ring sweep down the cylinder in 3 years I have never seen it close to the bottom. On the other hand I am not sure where the rubber bumper ends the sweep since my struts have always been pressurized. You can see the dust line from the "O" ring in this image. Because my SS is so light I run my struts with less pressure than the specification around 270 psi.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-7XD27vg/0/45fe0b12/L/IMG_4556-L.jpg

mam90
11-03-2020, 03:33 PM
So, run your car into a brick wall at 40 mph. Is the damage caused by the failure of the bumper?

Gordon Misch
11-03-2020, 04:48 PM
So, run your car into a brick wall at 40 mph. Is the damage caused by the failure of the bumper?Weak mortar? Improperly fired bricks? Sorry, couldn't help myself.:roll:

RVBottomly
11-03-2020, 04:59 PM
So, run your car into a brick wall at 40 mph. Is the damage caused by the failure of the bumper?

I put a railroad tie on the front and back of an old one ton just for that purpose....well, sort of. For some reason it discouraged tailgaters, at least.

Steve Pierce
11-04-2020, 07:56 AM
turbopilot, can you tell us something about yourself, your experience and your mission. I think I am an open book and posted about me again recently on the Cub Crafters thread. I am always curious about who I am taking advise from.

stewartb
11-04-2020, 08:10 AM
1-1/2" of suspension available after static weight is on the gear is different than what I'm used to seeing. There must be valving at work in the initial part of the compression stroke to control rate? With their geometry 1-1/2" of available compression means 1-1/2" of available compression travel. With typical Cub gear TK-1s offer approx 4" of compression that translates to 12" of travel at the wheel. Very different.

Skywalker
11-04-2020, 08:34 AM
Yes, there would have to be a lot of compression damping if the (effective) spring rate allows so much sag. It seems to be designed for the initial impact, and Bushwheels take care of the rest.

turbopilot
11-04-2020, 08:55 AM
turbopilot, can you tell us something about yourself, your experience and your mission. I think I am an open book and posted about me again recently on the Cub Crafters thread. I am always curious about who I am taking advise from.

I have been flying for 50 years both military and civilian. 4,000 hours in all types, 500 in tail wheel. Been flying the Carbon Cub SS for the last 10 years. In that time I have built and flown two EAB aircraft, a BD-4 and one of the very first VariEze aircraft. My current aircraft is an ELSA Carbon Cub. Most of my flying is in the southwestern US. Based out of KTRM.

Eddie Foy
11-04-2020, 08:58 AM
We seem to get alot of folks who show up here voicing opinions and ideas. It would be nice to know something about them other than a screen name. People rarely fill out their profile.


turbopilot, can you tell us something about yourself, your experience and your mission. I think I am an open book and posted about me again recently on the Cub Crafters thread. I am always curious about who I am taking advise from.

Steve Pierce
11-04-2020, 09:27 AM
I have been flying for 50 years both military and civilian. 4,000 hours in all types, 500 in tail wheel. Been flying the Carbon Cub SS for the last 10 years. In that time I have built and flown two EAB aircraft, a BD-4 and one of the very first VariEze aircraft. My current aircraft is an ELSA Carbon Cub. Most of my flying is in the southwestern US. Based out of KTRM.
I have about 30-40 hours in a Long-EZ time, never flew the VariEze. I have been flying about 25 years with just under 4000 hours all in tail wheels except the Long-EZ and time in my wife's Tri-Pacer. I fly weekly on gravel bars doing 10-20 landings in one outing on and off different places. If you watched the video that SJ and I did you will see I have some experience in broken airplanes. I have also been fixing them longer than I have been flying them and listening to pilots tell me what is wrong with the airplane. In my experience a few know what they are talking about but most do not. Takes a while sometimes to differentiate them out when they are real good at BS. My point is that when hawgdrvr and turbopilot get on SuperCub.org and start telling me the landing gear that I have a lot of use and abuse on and have yet to fail, is a poor design and prone to failure I would like to know their experience and background. I would love to bolt the Beringer gear on my airplane and give it an honest evaluation in my normal mode of operation just to see how I like it. My airplane has been unique in the fact that it went from a stock Super Cub to where it is now one mod at a time with lots of seat time in between. A lot of the Cubs I am involved with get modded up at a rebuild and it is hard to tell what did what. I have been able to see first hand what each mod did and didn't due to my particular airplane.

Back to you and your Carbon Cub, where do you fly and what is your main mission?

turbopilot
11-04-2020, 09:35 AM
Back to you and your Carbon Cub, where do you fly and what is your main mission?

Most of my Carbon Cub time in the last 10 years has been in and around the San Juan Islands of Washington and for the last 5 years the deserts of the Southwest but mostly the deserts of Southern California. I really miss the grass.

I started on this forum back in 2010 but pulled out after a couple of years as the signal to noise ratio was very high. I see the same thing is still going on. I offer my experience and opinion then whenever I can back it with data. It is very frustrating to do that only to have someone come back with some old saying in rebuttal. Seems to be a lot of that in this thread.

hawgdrvr
11-04-2020, 09:42 AM
...My point is that when hawgdrvr and turbopilot get on SuperCub.org and start telling me the landing gear that I have a lot of use and abuse on and have yet to fail, is a poor design and prone to failure I would like to know their experience and background. I would love to bolt the Beringer gear on my airplane and give it an honest evaluation in my normal mode of operation just to see how I like it...

Let me repost my original post in this thread to remind you and others that I have no experience here, I'm asking a question to sort out information I read and hear about so I can make the best informed decision. I have given no advice or suggestions, I've solicited advice of the members here to help me get educated. I have since made my decision and already ordered TK1's and a T3 tailwheel. My decision process is complete. I do not trust in the design of Acme Aeros and my observation have shown TK1 Shock Monster extremely popular hence my purchase. I am not second guessing this, I am excited to receive and later have installed the TK1's. I am still learning from these posts such as how to keep my FX3 from having incidents such as discussed. I'm an inexperienced TW pilot but an experienced pilot with 3K hours and over 30 years.

My OP:


I have a FX3 on order for next May/June. I'm an experienced pilot (3K hours) but inexperienced TW with now over 10 hours and increasing in the months ahead including TacAero formal training in TX. I want to outfit my FX3 with the best and safest configuration for landings as this is where it seems the incidents occur. Quite a few ground loops with FX3's and have also seen some with broken Acme shocks. I'm being told Beringer is the best, it is pricey, but so is the cost of repair. I'm told the 3X3 design is from the 1940's and that FX3's are heavier and newer with the design essentially outdated and a better gear design is needed. Beringer appears to answer that call.

What is the recommendation for gear on a FX3 without cost being a factor? I am also planning on Beringer wheels and brakes as that does seem to be proven to be the best so this question is only about the landing gear system.

This thread is done for me, my question has been answered, I made my decision and ordered.

Steve Pierce
11-04-2020, 09:47 AM
I guess I am ignorant to what you mean by "It is very frustrating to do that only to have someone come back with some old saying in rebuttal."

As far as data, are you referring to NTSB data. Sorry but my opinion is very skewed in regard to the NTSB findings. Look at the NTSB report on my midair at Sun & Fun in 2002 and then I can show you their own file I got through the Freedom of Information Act and you tell me if the report matches the data. The other thing you might think about is coming into a group that has been flying Super Cubs for decades and someone shows up and starts telling them that their gear is a bad design and prone to failure. NTSB reports etc might show that but our own experience doesn't. I think you are saying we are not receptive to your data? How receptive are you to ours? I am sorry that a bunch of low time guys with $300K to plop down on a Carbon Cub have a high rate of gear failures but knowing and having been around way to many of them I have developed my own opinion. That being said, your Beringer gear might be the cats ass, might be stronger, better and the way to keep these guys from wading up their airplanes. I guess time will tell.

turbopilot
11-04-2020, 10:08 AM
NTSB reports etc might show that but our own experience doesn't. I think you are saying we are not receptive to your data?

The NTSB reports are all that is available to me. As to "your data", I guess I missed those posts. I have seen a bunch of old sayings and a whole bunch of ad hominum attacks but no real data to support other positions. My position is simple. The 80 year legacy cub system has many problems that can be solved with newer technology. It is an opinion shared by the largest manufacturer of legacy cub gear aircraft today. The problem is the choices are few. There is no upgrade path offered by those who continue to make this old gear system.

This thread got started on a wrong premise. The OP asked for a comparison between a complete landing gear system alternative (Beringer ALG) and simple shock absorber offered as a solution to only one of the many problems inherent in the legacy cub landing gear system. There have been many products offered (AOSS, Acme, TK) to compensate for the awful bungees in the legacy cub gear system. Any of them work better than the original bungees. But none of them deal with the lack of a reliable fail safe mode of the legacy cub gear when stressed beyond design limits. That is the issue of most importance, in my opinion. The work around appears to be one of the shock absorber systems with a series of steel cables to hold the legacy gear together in the event of total failure. Apparently that works for a lot of people and appears to be an acceptable solution for an old beater cub.

But it is now 2020 and there are still a variety of new cubs being made incorporating all sorts of advanced technology. Time for the gear system to catch up. CubCrafters has offered the XCub which is a good start but requires around $500k to enjoy the technology. It would be nice to have retrofit options for the rest of the fleet. It appears there is at least one available now.

Steve Pierce
11-04-2020, 10:28 AM
Actually there has been an STC for years to install spring gear on a Cub and was posted here. Cub Crafters is very good at marketing and the gear strength of the X Cub is a marketing thing. It is all good but depends on your mission. I have an X Cub in my hangar right now. Great airplane for a lot of people's mission just not mine. Every gear has pros and cons just like everything in aviation, it is all a compromise. Spring gear will not meet my mission, bungees meet my mission but not very well, AOSS meets my mission, Acme will, TK will and Beringer might. There are draw backs to each one that have been discussed here. Read and make your own conclusions but don't discount others opinions.

Steve Pierce
11-04-2020, 10:30 AM
I'm told the 3X3 design is from the 1940's and that FX3's are heavier and newer with the design essentially outdated and a better gear design is needed.

You were told wrong, FX3 3X3 gear is nothing like legacy gear except in basic design.

Mauleguy
11-04-2020, 11:03 AM
I have been flying for 50 years both military and civilian. 4,000 hours in all types, 500 in tail wheel. Been flying the Carbon Cub SS for the last 10 years. In that time I have built and flown two EAB aircraft, a BD-4 and one of the very first VariEze aircraft. My current aircraft is an ELSA Carbon Cub. Most of my flying is in the southwestern US. Based out of KTRM.

500 hours in tailwheel aircraft over 10 years, your pretty green I would say, 50 hours a year average... Sorry but I am not going to listen to what you have to say about a gear system unless you put up some real videos about what this gear does in rough stuff not smooth dirt to asphalt.

On another subject that was brought up. If you have ever had a wing start to fly because you were sitting off camber and were not pointing directly into the wind (because it just was not possible) and it was then compounded by a gear that does not support the airplane properly you will know why I would never install this gear on my airplane.

turbopilot
11-04-2020, 11:28 AM
You were told wrong, FX3 3X3 gear is nothing like legacy gear except in basic design.

How do you respond to brilliant logic like this? Back to read only mode.

Crash, Jr.
11-04-2020, 11:30 AM
1-1/2" of suspension available after static weight is on the gear is different than what I'm used to seeing. There must be valving at work in the initial part of the compression stroke to control rate? With their geometry 1-1/2" of available compression means 1-1/2" of available compression travel. With typical Cub gear TK-1s offer approx 4" of compression that translates to 12" of travel at the wheel. Very different.

I think you're missing that the bulk of the travel is from the unloaded position, not the loaded position. You're thinking about this like dirtbike or snowmachine suspension where you have maybe 20% static sag and then 80% travel remaining. The Beringer gear works in the opposite where it's 80% static sag on the ground with only 20% remaining for ground handling "suspension". When the weight comes off of the gear it extends giving you full suspension travel. When you land it's giving up it's entire travel and using all of that available travel to absorb the hit. In effect it's using the suspension's full design travel on landing to give the valving the maximum amount of time to dissipate energy. As we know from rising rate suspension designs on dirtbikes/atv/sno-go's you want to use the maximum amount of shock stroke length whenever possible to maximize the use of shock valving to do it's job.

For the application it's actually pretty smart when you think about it. It's not designed to be a shock absorber for ground handling, it's designed to soak up big hits on landing and it seems to do that pretty well.

Again, still skeptical about the crosswind or turning takeoff/landing scenario but from a purely engineering standpoint I'd say this is superior to ACME's on those terms.

stewartb
11-04-2020, 12:04 PM
I disagree. If the suspension travel is reliant on the wing to unweight the load? I'd rather it can take a hard landing and make it feel soft. Also, I'd rather not have the tire in contact with the ground for any longer than necessary as I take flight. Get into wet, soft, sticky places and all it'll add is drag with no benefit. My airplanes are designed primarily to fly. The landing gear suspension is designed for the transition between flight and static. The shock absorption of my TK-1 setup is so effective it allows the plane to be operated differently than original gear could accommodate. I don't see Beringer being as effective for my plane, and that's just my take on it. I've watched the Beringer gear demo videos and while they offer pretty scenery and the pilot is good in the plane? He could have been on 850s and bungees. There is nothing punishing the gear or airframe. But I like innovative product development and understand that the videos may not show the whole story so I remain curious. And to that, I appreciate guys like Turbo providing pireps.

Steve Pierce
11-04-2020, 12:26 PM
How do you respond to brilliant logic like this? Back to read only mode.

52088

52090

52091

52092

52093

52094

skywagon8a
11-04-2020, 01:09 PM
Again, still skeptical about the crosswind or turning takeoff/landing scenario ....


Also, I'd rather not have the tire in contact with the ground for any longer than necessary as I take flight. Get into wet, soft, sticky places and all it'll add is drag with no benefit.
Two very valid arguments against the Beringer design.

Also only time will tell if their floating brake disc design will stand up any better than previous floating disc designs. Those were high maintenance. The Cleveland fixed disc design was a vast improvement, which is why those early floating ones virtually disappeared.

Gordon Misch
11-04-2020, 01:20 PM
Question for you guys who fly 180s. That gear brings the wheels to zero camber when the full weight of the airframe is on them. It sounds like the Berringer is the same. However the 180 spring gear is not "bottomed out" anywhere near that zero camber position. My question: How much trouble is the 180 gear tucking in off-camber, turning situations. I have no experience with it. Then, how does that relate (or not) to the Berringer setup?

Gordon Misch
11-04-2020, 01:22 PM
Also only time will tell if their floating brake disc design will stand up any better than previous floating disc designs. Those were high maintenance. The Cleveland fixed disc design was a vast improvement, which is why those early floating ones virtually disappeared. Could you please explain more? I've had the Bodell brakes (floating fiber disc) on my -12 for decades, with never a maintenance issue (yet!). Thanks -

skywagon8a
11-04-2020, 01:31 PM
Could you please explain more? I've had the Bodell brakes (floating fiber disc) on my -12 for decades, with never a maintenance issue (yet!). Thanks -
The floating disc which I referred to was a single disc. I've forgotten the make (Goodyear? Goodrich?). Back in the day when I was wrenching for a living, those brakes were a constant problem. Your Bodells are multiple discs as I recall. Multiple discs don't seem to have the same issues as they support each other being separated by semi-fixed discs.

skywagon8a
11-04-2020, 01:41 PM
Question for you guys who fly 180s. That gear brings the wheels to zero camber when the full weight of the airframe is on them. It sounds like the Berringer is the same. However the 180 spring gear is not "bottomed out" anywhere near that zero camber position. My question: How much trouble is the 180 gear tucking in off-camber, turning situations. I have no experience with it. Then, how does that relate (or not) to the Berringer setup?
With any of the spring gear tail wheel Cessnas when in hard turn/ground loop scenarios, the side under buckling load moves toward and under the fuselage center line. This increases the capsizing tendency. The Beringer appears to possess the same characteristic. When this capsizing tendency is then increased further the side loads on the gear legs increase to the point of failure. The stock Piper style gear remains outboard and upright reducing the capsizing tendency.

Crash, Jr.
11-04-2020, 01:46 PM
The floating disc which I referred to was a single disc. I've forgotten the make (Goodyear? Goodrich?). Back in the day when I was wrenching for a living, those brakes were a constant problem. Your Bodells are multiple discs as I recall. Multiple discs don't seem to have the same issues as they support each other being separated by semi-fixed discs.

The floating disc design is used on almost every large aircraft wheel design currently so I doubt it will be an issue. It's only the little airplane guys that use antiquated fixed discs and floating brake calipers.;-)

skywagon8a
11-04-2020, 02:00 PM
The floating disc design is used on almost every large aircraft wheel design currently so I doubt it will be an issue. It's only the little airplane guys that use antiquated fixed discs and floating brake calipers.;-)
Those are multiple disc brakes. Altogether different. The Beringer closely resembles the old poor single disc design. Beringer does appear to have outside angle clips of a different materiel bolted to the wheel. Perhaps these will solve the question? Time will tell.

Gordon Misch
11-04-2020, 02:00 PM
With any of the spring gear tail wheel Cessnas when in hard turn/ground loop scenarios, the side under buckling load moves toward and under the fuselage center line. This increases the capsizing tendency. The Beringer appears to possess the same characteristic. When this capsizing tendency is then increased further the side loads on the gear legs increase to the point of failure. The stock Piper style gear remains outboard and upright reducing the capsizing tendency. Yes, I understand that - I should have been clearer with my question. How much of a problem is that in the tailwheel Cessnas?

stewartb
11-04-2020, 03:09 PM
In Skywagons the side loading may break the gear attach bolt allowing the gear leg to come through the floor and injure the pilot. That's why many guys add a PPonk gear kit even though occurrence is rare. Cessna gear can try to "walk" into a tucked position while rocking in the wind in the tie down.

I've posted this pic before. Big side load on the tire, no problem for the gear. I've intentionally ground looped on straight skis with slick ice. Lots of ice spray, lots of hopping from the skags grabbing and releasing, no issue with the gear. It would have made a good video!

wireweinie
11-04-2020, 04:20 PM
They were Goodyear, single disc, wheel/brake assemblies. And, yes, they sucked when it came to maintenance and parts life. They were factory install on Otters, and maybe Beavers?

You'll notice not many people know about them because they were replaced, usually by Cleveland wheels and brakes.

Web

skywagon8a
11-04-2020, 04:41 PM
They were Goodyear, single disc, wheel/brake assemblies. And, yes, they sucked when it came to maintenance and parts life. They were factory install on Otters, and maybe Beavers?

You'll notice not many people know about them because they were replaced, usually by Cleveland wheels and brakes.

Web
They were very common in the 6" wheel size with a large number of different airplanes.

mam90
11-04-2020, 05:23 PM
Yep, had them on my ragwing 170.. Until I could afford to replace them with Clevelandís and throw them in the inlet!!

AkPA/18
11-04-2020, 06:55 PM
https://www.supercub.org/forum/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by AkPA/18 https://www.supercub.org/forum/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (https://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?p=787443#post787443)
Out of 91 Carbon Cub FX-3's in the FAA database, 11 have made it to the NTSB reports web site in 2.5 years of operation. Here is the bottom line from the NTSB.

8 landing ground loop / loss of control1 takeoff loss of control
7 on paved RWYís
2 on dirt/grass RWYís
1 engine out
6 gear collapses
No injuries

Sure seems like there is a problem somewhere. 10% of the fleet wrecking on runways in in 2.5 yrs.
Do Supercubs have this problem also?


Turbopilot, l was wodering if you looked at the piper pa18 stats on gear collapses on runways. I do not know how to find out but thought you might. Is this a concern for Supercubs as well or just fx3? Were these low time tw pilots or hightime. Something just doesn't quite add up for me. Very curious as I always thought cub gear was pretty good. Are the Huskys that have gone to cub gear wrecking on runways also? I know a lot of questions and I don't have the answers but your posts are slightly alarming.

Edit: The quality of the Berenger gear looks over the top cool!
Thanks
Mark

Turbo, If this is and it probably is a stupid question, Let me know or disregard and I won't ask again. I was really looking for your input here that might clarify my confusion as your points are not adding up to me.

turbopilot
11-04-2020, 07:03 PM
Turbo, If this is and it probably is a stupid question, Let me know or disregard and I won't ask again. I was really looking for your input here that might clarify my confusion as your points are not adding up to me.

I only reviewed SS and FX-3 NTSB reports. I did not look at other cub types. As I recall there was only 25 EX-3 CubCrafters in the FAA database and not many in the NTSB reports. There was one recent fatal accident for the EX version. It would not be hard to do a review of the P18's.

Just to keep things in perspective, there have been more FX-3 accidents that you would expect but the human safety record for the SS/FX cubs is exceptional. I guess this is related to the low energy associated with runway accidents.

AkPA/18
11-04-2020, 07:26 PM
I only reviewed SS and FX-3 NTSB reports. I did not look at other cub types. As I recall there was only 25 EX-3 CubCrafters in the FAA database and not many in the NTSB reports. There was one recent fatal accident for the EX version. It would not be hard to do a review of the P18's.

Just to keep things in perspective, there have been more FX-3 accidents that you would expect but the human safety record for the SS/FX cubs is exceptional. I guess this is related to the low energy associated with runway accidents.

Turbo,
I understand. Just trying to figure out if the legacy gear is that crappy on runways on the legacy aircraft. I really find it hard to believe. Did you jot down the pic times on the ntsb reports?

turbopilot
11-04-2020, 07:37 PM
Turbo,
I understand. Just trying to figure out if the legacy gear is that crappy on runways on the legacy aircraft. I really find it hard to believe. Did you jot down the pic times on the ntsb reports?

I did not do a systemic review of the PIC times in the NTSB accidents but that would be a good idea. No doubt less experienced pilots are over represented. The 80 year legacy cub basic design has made it's way into many airplanes. It certainly makes a significant statement when the gear collapse in a new $400,000 FX-3. When they fail in an old beater cub it is just another day at the office. A full gear collapse in a recent model FX-3 will cost more to repair than the full value of many of the older cub models. This fact has clearly been recognized by the aircraft insurance companies.

AkPA/18
11-04-2020, 08:07 PM
I did not do a systemic review of the PIC times in the NTSB accidents but that would be a good idea. No doubt less experienced pilots are over represented. The 80 year legacy cub basic design has made it's way into many airplanes. It certainly makes a significant statement when the gear collapse in a new $400,000 FX-3. When they fail in an old beater cub it is just another day at the office. A full gear collapse in a recent model FX-3 will cost more to repair than the full value of many of the older cub models. This fact has clearly been recognized by the aircraft insurance companies.

Turbo,
I think these remarks about beater Cubs are kind of off topic to the subject but--- my beater cub that I make a living with has gone uninsured for the first time in 30 yrs. It will not be another day in the office if I wreck especially if I wreck during the season. I suspect it will be more of an impact to me than to an fx3 owner if I wreck my beater cub. I do know I have been priced out of the insurance market partly because of the accidents you describe. No offense to fx3 owners i am sure they are good folks.
Could you post the pic times as it seems that is one of the more important missing links of your data.

turbopilot
11-04-2020, 08:49 PM
Turbo,
I think these remarks about beater Cubs are kind of off topic to the subject but-

I meant no offense to the beater cub community but you picked up on the problem. All these tail draggers are lumped together by the insurance underwriter community. So when all these high end FX/SS crash we all share the expense with higher premiums, or worse no coverage at all.

stewartb
11-04-2020, 08:59 PM
I hear lots of talk of a direct correlation between "these accidents" and insurance prices. Do you have any data on that?

You made a comment earlier that you can insure a $400K FX3. Who's insuring E-AB airplanes in that value range?

behindpropellers
11-04-2020, 09:00 PM
There was one recent fatal accident for the EX version.

What was the N number?

AkPA/18
11-04-2020, 09:02 PM
I hear lots of talk of a direct correlation between "these accidents" and insurance prices. Do you have any data on that?

You made a comment earlier that you can insure a $400K FX3. Who's insuring E-AB airplanes in that value range?

No data just in conversation with my broker, ex broker

Gordon Misch
11-04-2020, 10:28 PM
There's one burr under my saddle, and that is the concept of a component failure causing complete landing gear failure, as compared to partial failure, when the system is stressed beyond design limits - like failure when stressed beyond design limits is bad??? So I've been thinking about that, and haven't been able to really comprehend the notion.

My thinking is the the concept of what I call "balanced design". In other words, each component is designed for the same input loads. I.e. nothing is overbuilt, and nothing is underbuilt. I don't see "progressive failure" for energy absorption as applicable to landing gear, except in a pancaked "landing". Even then, what should fail first? Atlee's safety cables do address that, but that's not inherent to any particular gear arrangement.

Furthermore, what loads should be mitigated? Drop-ins (vertical), obstructions (horizontal), lateral (ground loop, off-camber)? How would one design a gear such none of those would result in failure. Sure, make the gear and attach points bigger/stronger. Then what about the stuff they attach to? There goes the "balanced design" objective - - -

I've made more than my share of really poor (ok, atrocious) landings, and my 80 year old gear design has held up.

Maybe somebody can clarify for me.

Steve Pierce
11-05-2020, 04:47 AM
How can you objectively look at data on gear failures and leave the PIC time out of the equation?

I maintain one of the first FX3s to be built. 400 plus hours in the first year, another 300 plus the second. No gear issues. I know of one X Cub that has been ground looped 4 times by 4 different owners having to go back to the factory each time. Would be interesting to crunch the data on the X Cub and see how inherently bad that landing gear design is using your same analysis theory used on the Carbon Cubs. Then for shits and grins look at the PIC times and see if there is a trend. Nice thing about data, you can look at certain parts of it to come to any conclusion you want. I will be willing to bet if you go back and look at your gear failure data there was also low PIC time that attributed but I could be wrong.

mam90
11-05-2020, 08:08 AM
When you crash, the gear can break. This whole thread is somewhat baffling to me. And I’ve been flying legacy Cub gear, a lot of it in Alaska working, for a long time. Attempts to make airplanes pilot proof to stabilize insurance rates? What’s next, parachutes on airplanes:)?

RaisedByWolves
11-05-2020, 11:04 AM
When you crash, the gear can break. This whole thread is somewhat baffling to me. And Iíve been flying legacy Cub gear, a lot of it in Alaska working, for a long time. Attempts to make airplanes pilot proof to stabilize insurance rates? Whatís next, parachutes on airplanes:)?

Didnít you know youíve been flying wrong all these years??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Crash, Jr.
11-05-2020, 11:11 AM
How can you objectively look at data on gear failures and leave the PIC time out of the equation?

100%. Even more important like you mentioned is hours per year, not so much overall logged time. It's really easy to get out of practice when you're only doing 25-50 hours per year and the first thing to go in my experience is yaw control.

mam90
11-05-2020, 11:13 AM
The more time I spend on this site, the more I realize I never knew anything..........

mam90
11-05-2020, 11:23 AM
And I am not opposed to new technology at all. Some of these gear designs are probably great. Where I struggle is when we start using more “forgiving” systems to mask poor technique or skills. If my dog pees in my truck, I want to address the source and clean out the pee, not hang an air freshener to cover up the smell. And blaming “legacy” gear?? Please....

stewartb
11-05-2020, 11:30 AM
My neighbor is a long time pilot who used his planes for remote business transportation. He still has a Cub but it's in need of a rebuild. I asked him why he hasn't started it yet. He says because in his observation any time there's 3-4 Cub pilots around the conversation inevitably turns into a contest to see who has a bigger dick and he has better things to do. I found that comment very interesting. And sad.

40m
11-05-2020, 11:44 AM
My neighbor is a long time pilot who used his planes for remote business transportation. He still has a Cub but it's in need of a rebuild. I asked him why he hasn't started it yet. He says because in his observation any time there's 3-4 Cub pilots around the conversation inevitably turns into a contest to see who has a bigger dick and he has better things to do. I found that comment very interesting. And sad.

That's his reason? Sad it is!

KevinJ
11-05-2020, 12:00 PM
He says because in his observation any time there's 3-4 Cub pilots around the conversation inevitably turns into a contest to see who has a bigger dick and he has better things to do.
Easy answer. Whoever has the smallest tires is the most “gifted”. Mine is on 35s. What size are on yours Stewart?:-P

stewartb
11-05-2020, 12:24 PM
Which airplane? ;)

I hope hawgdriver and turbopilot shrug off the wolves and stick around. Diversity of opinions and experiences is a good thing. We're all here for the same reason. When new (or old) guys get stifled and stop participating all we're left with is the same old guys. They say GA is dying. If we aren't part of the solution, we're part of the problem. And it's never too late to change, or so my wife has been telling me for 35 years.

And let's face it. 3x3 gear DOES look like standard old gear. :)

Crash, Jr.
11-05-2020, 12:48 PM
And let's face it. 3x3 gear DOES look like standard old gear. :)

That's a because it kind of is lol...just 3" farther forward...and with those terrible milled fittings

(It's getting a little to chummy in here, let's argue gear again :lol:)

Steve Pierce
11-05-2020, 01:36 PM
I searched for the accident data and came up with a blank. Curious where turbopilot got the data. I would like to search the CC19-180 X Cub and see what it shows.

mam90
11-05-2020, 01:38 PM
Easy answer. Whoever has the smallest tires is the most “gifted”. Mine is on 35s. What size are on yours Stewart?:-P

So are you saying that size makes up for technique? ;)

stewartb
11-05-2020, 01:44 PM
:)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IkNDzvCswU

Steve Pierce
11-05-2020, 02:24 PM
Just brought an X Cub down to the work hangar from the storage hangar and remembered something. Cub Crafters will not let an X Cub leave the factory on 26" Goodyear's tires because all of the accidents have been with those tires. Now they use 26" Bushwheels.
52132

52133

skywagon8a
11-05-2020, 02:41 PM
Steve, Is the gear leg drilled for the hydraulics? I don't see the brake line.

Steve Pierce
11-05-2020, 02:59 PM
Yes, the gear is gun drilled. Grove makes the gear.
52136

Steve Pierce
11-05-2020, 03:55 PM
I found some pictures from the inspection of the top of the gear leg where the brake line comes out.
52137

52138

S2D
11-05-2020, 07:31 PM
I don't know !!!!! I've seen what we can do to the hardware attaching the Cessna Ag spring gear after a year of improved dirt strips.
Can't imagine what the attach points on those will look like after a few years of unimproved strips.

It's just really hard to beat the beefed up original style Super Cub Landing gear for any type work.

Steve Pierce
11-05-2020, 08:05 PM
turbopilot, can you educate me on where to search out the data?

turbopilot
11-05-2020, 08:20 PM
turbopilot, can you educate me on where to search out the data?

This (https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/index.aspx) is the NTSB (https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/index.aspx) database. This (http://www.aviationdb.com/Aviation/AccidentQuery.shtm) is a commercial service that scrapes the NTSB database and may be easier to use.

Steve Pierce
11-05-2020, 09:26 PM
Thank you. Not much reported. 57 total X Cubs built, 6 accidents reported. 1 ran out of fuel, the rst were lose of control resulting in gear failure, wing and fuselage damage.

Steve Pierce
11-06-2020, 07:22 AM
I forgot to post the interesting parts. Most of these airplanes had 20 or so hours on them with one having just over 100. Time in make and model was 12-30 hrs with total time as PIC 330-7100 hrs. The NTSB evidently doesn't track tailwheel time like the insurance carriers. The other interesting thing is the X Cub I had worked on that had been wreck 4 times has only one NTSB report. A couple of the pilots said they were trying to apply rudder and inadvertently got their foot on top of the pedal and applied brake. There is the data I gathered on the X Cub, I will let the reader dissimilate the way they see fit.

turbopilot
11-06-2020, 09:13 AM
The other interesting thing is the X Cub I had worked on that had been wreck 4 times has only one NTSB report.

Did any of those events result in total landing gear failure in that XCub? Low time pilots and accidents will happen. The whole point of the discussion to date has been (with many off topic diversions) around the subject of landing gear failure leading to complete gear collapse, versus accident events leading to failure of some components but not total failure. Cubcrafters had two stated goals for the XCub aluminum gear: better aerodynamics and more robust protection for other components of the airframe when the gear was taken beyond design limits. Did the NTSB data and your experience suggest that goal has been achieved?

Steve Pierce
11-06-2020, 09:22 AM
All five were compete gear failure, wing and fuselage damage.

turbopilot
11-06-2020, 09:27 AM
All five were compete gear failure, wing and fuselage damage.

Just so I understand you said there were 6 NTSB events out of a fleet of 57 XCubs. Were 5 of those 6 events total gear failure with one fuel exhaustion? What were the 4 events with the single XCub you work on.

Steve Pierce
11-06-2020, 09:43 AM
Actually not all completely failed the gear. Will have to put my data together when I have some time.

OLDCROWE
11-06-2020, 05:46 PM
From my few X-Cub flights I found the spring gear to be really sweet (and I came really close to purchasing one) but then again I (slowly) learned not to land a spring gear taildragger until it is FULLY DONE flying and of equally importance that its a good thing to touch down with a reduced final sink rate. That said I have also burned all documentation of my first 1000 or so 180 landings.

Mix a low time TW or almost as bad (IMO) a low time spring gear pilot with spring gear and bouncy ass 26's and I can understand why CC's would have such a restriction.

Lastly from my time around the camp fire I have heard way more than one pilot blame their ground loop on "gear failure," when in all likelihood I would be willing to wager that the majority of gear failures are the direct result of the ground loop or a sideways landing.

Steve Pierce
11-07-2020, 07:57 AM
Busy sending airplanes off, receiving others and trying to get one out the door today. Search model CC19 in this search engine and you will find the data. http://aviationdb.net/aviationdb/AccidentQuery#SUBMIT

turbopilot
11-07-2020, 09:38 AM
Busy sending airplanes off, receiving others and trying to get one out the door today. Search model CC19 in this search engine and you will find the data. http://aviationdb.net/aviationdb/AccidentQuery#SUBMIT

Apparently you lost interest and buried the headline in the review of the CC19 NTSB Accident reports. Could it be because thus far the NTSB reports underscores the point I was trying to make in all the dialog above? So here is the summary of the 6 reported XCub NTSB accidents. As we know there were probably more not reported to NTSB.

Bottom line there were 6 NTSB reports. One was fuel exhaustion and 5 were ground loops. Of the 5 ground loops, 2 involve partial right main gear collapse. There were no total gear collapses reported. There were no reports of prop or engine damage. This profile is entirely different than the reports involving the cub legacy gear equipped FX-3 aircraft where collapse of the legacy cub gear was the rule, not the exception.

So experience to date completely supports the assertions made by Brad Damm at CubCrafters in 2017 and the point I have been trying to make in this thread. Legacy gear cub tend to totally collapse when stressed beyond normal operating limits. So far XCub aircraft experience partial gear collapse which appears to spare the $12,500 Hartzell composite prop and save the engine from a teardown as well as other aircraft damage associated with total gear collapse.

N97LL - Right ground loop, left wing damage, no gear collapse, no engine/prop damage
N70DD - Fuel exhaustion
N82XX - Left Ground loop, right wing damage, right main gear collapse, no mention of engine/prop damage
N711XC - Left Ground loop, right wing and aileron damage, no gear collapse, no engine/prop damage
N53XC - Right Ground loop, left wing and aileron damage, no gear collapse, no engine/prop damage
N533AL - Left Ground loop, right aileron and empennage damage, right main gear collapse, no engine/prop damage

stewartb
11-07-2020, 09:51 AM
So to bring you back on point, do you have reports of ground-looped CC Cubs with Beringer gear where they had no damage? And can you quantify 'ground loop" to equalize all events as to speed, surface, and severity?

skywagon8a
11-07-2020, 09:52 AM
Legacy gear cub tend to totally collapse when stressed beyond normal operating limits.
What type of landing gear does not collapse when stressed beyond normal operating limits? It is normal to expect a failure of anything when stressed beyond normal operating limits.

40m
11-07-2020, 10:03 AM
"Apparently you lost interest and buried the headline in the review of the CC19 NTSB Accident reports. Could it be because thus far the NTSB reports underscores the point I was trying to make in all the dialog above? So here is the summary of the 6 reported XCub NTSB accidents. As we know there were probably more not reported to NTSB."

Steve, shame on you! How could you put your livelihood ahead of this critical topic?
You like many others here may on occasion offer an opinion but more times than not you take time out of your work day to educated guys like me for free and for that I thank you! Now let's get focused on the gear thing.

turbopilot
11-07-2020, 10:03 AM
What type of landing gear does not collapse when stressed beyond normal operating limits? It is normal to expect a failure of anything when stressed beyond normal operating limits.

Asked and answered repeatedly in this thread. Of course everything will break at some point but we are talking about catastrophic failure versus limited failure. FAIL SAFE FAILURE.

So far with the XCub experience, ground loop induced partial gear collapse would appear to save the cost of replacing a $12,500 composite prop and an engine tear down.

So back to my point and the subject of the this thread. If you have a legacy cub gear system there are two paths to a better landing gear system that is more robust. Sell your airplane and buy a $500k XCub. Or covert your legacy cub gear to a stronger gear, more likely to "fail safe" than totally fail.

One Hartzell Trailblazer composite prop costs $12,500 (found on every FX-3 and XCub). Totally converting a legacy cub gear system to the Beringer ALG costs $10,600. Do the math. So far it looks the odds of a destructive ground loop that in NTSB reportable (we know there are more) is around 12% in the FX-3 and XCub fleet. Overtime that number will grow as fleet time rises.

mam90
11-07-2020, 10:04 AM
My daughter did a school presentation on conformational bias. Conclusions drawn, search facts that support conclusion.

Utah-Jay
11-07-2020, 10:05 AM
This is a very entertaining thread with some education thrown in too

turbopilot
11-07-2020, 10:05 AM
My daughter did a school presentation on conformational bias. Conclusions drawn, search facts that support conclusion.

That door swings both ways. Data rules.

mam90
11-07-2020, 10:07 AM
Yes, and that’s my point.

mam90
11-07-2020, 10:10 AM
Legacy Cub gear has been around since 1937, with how many units delivered? I am not a statistician, but my guess is the sample size of XCub aircraft is not sufficient to draw any significant conclusions. I think we should revisit this in say, 85 years or so....

KevinJ
11-07-2020, 10:18 AM
I just thought of a solution for this whole entire problem! With every new purchase of any CubCrafters aircraft, you receive a “complimentary” (free) clapped-out legacy 65hp J-3 cub. Do with it what you like......give it to the kid/neighbor, shoot it, part it out, but hopefully fly it. After you’ve run it out of fuel, put it on its nose, ground looped it and tore the legacy gear off it you’ll be ready to push your pristine Carbon Cub out of the hangar and appreciate it a little more.

So now, the new price of an FX3 just went from roughly 330k to 348-355k depending on how many silver patches are on the “complimentary” cub.

Can you believe it, in the time it took for one bowel movement, I solved the entire problem. You guys are overthinking this....really!

turbopilot
11-07-2020, 10:23 AM
Legacy Cub gear has been around since 1937, with how many units delivered? I am not a statistician, but my guess is the sample size of XCub aircraft is not sufficient to draw any significant conclusions. I think we should revisit this in say, 85 years or so....

We have been around this merry go round several times in this thread. In 2017 CubCrafters (largest manufacturer of legacy cub gear aircraft) made a clear and unequivocal statement (http://cubcrafters.com/c/2017/09/field-test-xcub-landing-gear/) about the legacy cub gear system. In my opinion they got it right and it was a bold move. Then they introduced a product to solve the problem. If you don't agree with the position, take it up with CubCrafters. I am just the messenger. I took their advice and did what I could do on my 2014 legacy gear SS by exchanging the gear system.

mam90
11-07-2020, 10:24 AM
Right?? My favorite movie is Secondhand Lions. There’s a scene in which Robert Duval says “hell kid, just because somethings not true doesn’t mean you can’t believe it.” We can all believe and buy what we want!
And Turbo, you don’t owe anyone an explanation for what you bought and why, nor need to defend that position here or elsewhere. Theres just a bunch of us on here that have always flown legacy gear, never had a problem and wonder about this stuff when it comes up. These type threads, even when they get a little contentious are good for all of us.

mike mcs repair
11-07-2020, 10:49 AM
Fair comparison to the two idiots in this threads thinking. To bad they donít just learn how to land.
52170


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93960)

hawgdrvr
11-07-2020, 10:57 AM
Red Flag Knock it Off...

Okay folks, this thread is out of control. There are a lot of biases going on here and I don't agree with everything I'm reading and you probably don't either, that's fine. Let me offer my opinion on the matter to this point from my military career as an aviator and over 30 years blah blah blah.

NTSB reports are not accident reports. We don't know the full story and not one person here can or should draw any conclusions from the information read. While I have never been on an accident board nor was I a safety officer in the Air Force I'm sure some of you here have been and feel free to offer your inputs on accident reviews.

Some here have offered PIC time is what's important. NO IT'S NOT. A pilot can have thousand of hours of PIC time or even time in type yet not have flown in the last X days or even the last year. They strap on their mighty cub and their cross check is not there, they fail to fly in conditions that are conducive to their recency, i.e. maybe they chose a high crosswinds day to fly and shouldn't. We've all been rusty, I know what it felt like flying A-10's after taking 30 days leave and being IFR in S. Korea in the clouds from gear up to gear down. Not a pleasant feeling. Did the pilot have a good nights sleep? Is the pilot having personal issues or any stressors. Have they been taking medication to combat a cold? So many human factors to list here, none of which we are privy to.

Did the pilot attempt to fly beyond the published conditions. I've seen enough YouTube videos of pilots flying cubs outside the published crosswind limits. Great example...NOT!

I recently completely my TW checkout and the first day the hurricane had just passed by (at a distance) but we had crazy winds. I asked the instructor if it was good enough to fly, he shook his hand waving it back and forth in the so-so way. We flew, it was fine, thankfully all grass strip work. I videod a J3 landing before it was my time to fly as I was sure it would ground loop in what was probably 15 kt winds (straight windsock) but it didn't, thankfully.

Many aircraft out there have peculiar landing characteristics. The T-38 was a bitch to learn to land with it's tiny wings. Imagine the F-104. P-51 I'm sure as well as the F4U Corsair have some interesting landing characteristics. This is what training is for.

The FX3 has a CS prop and there is word about the flap design blanking the tail at a point in the landing phase. You have to train for and learn these peculiarities and learn to fly the plane you're flying safely.

Big wheels little wheels shocks whatever, they have their purpose but in no way replace the FLYING of the aircraft properly. I loved flying the A-10 fast around the final turn, probably 20 kts over the actual speed. 145'ish felt unsafe especially with turbines slow to spool up (hence why it has speed brakes out in the final turn). You can't do that in these airplanes, adding kts for mom, pop, the kids, and dog. You have to set these down on speed and aligned with the runway to avoid sideloads. I'm in no position to be instructing but that's what I've learned, it's not rocket science.

Each system has pro's and con's, I'm not completely sold on the Beringer design and that's why I bought TK1. Heck, I'd be fine with the stock bungees as again this is about flying your airplane properly. It's Beringer's problem to market and prove their product. Right now from all I've discussed with but one they are not on board with Beringer landing gear. Yes to their wheels and brakes, but not shocks.

No one will sell me on the NTSB data, it does not tell the real story like accident reports and full investigations do. There are a lot of factors involved here much of which we don't know about. Faulty shock designs are a factor in some cases, pilot error in most cases.

Banter all you want, sell your choice all you want, for anyone in the market such as I have been with my FX3 coming next May/June do your research.

turbopilot
11-07-2020, 11:21 AM
No one will sell me on the NTSB data, it does not tell the real story like accident reports and full investigations do.

It is all we have. Otherwise we are left with anecdotal one off stories by mechanics and owners.

By the way I served on 5 Air Force Aircraft Accident Investigation Boards (T33, F4 (times 2), A7 and F111) and participated in smoking hole initial investigations in many other Air Force accidents and I often stay in Holiday Inns. I know the drill.

And I will say it one more time for all the folks who want to argue based on marginal information. The largest manufacturer of legacy cub landing gear has taken a position (http://cubcrafters.com/c/2017/09/field-test-xcub-landing-gear/). If you think that position was solely based on the desire to leverage XCub sales, then that is about all that can be said. The data suggests their position is spot on.

@hawgdrvr, you are about to take delivery of an airplane with legacy cub gear system, that the manufacture has clearly stated has some problems. Fancy high priced shock absorbers will do nothing to change that problem and may actually make it worse. Of course they would like to convert your position from an FX-3 to an XCub, much more margin. But it appears, based on the data, that they are on solid ground in taking the position. Data rules.

skywagon8a
11-07-2020, 11:59 AM
This is interesting, here we have two highly experienced military aviators telling the civilians, some of whom have in excess of 60 years of experience in all types and sizes of airplanes what is best for their airplanes. Not all the military aviators are so opinionated.

RaisedByWolves
11-07-2020, 12:13 PM
Asked and answered repeatedly in this thread. Of course everything will break at some point but we are talking about catastrophic failure versus limited failure. FAIL SAFE FAILURE.

So far with the XCub experience, ground loop induced partial gear collapse would appear to save the cost of replacing a $12,500 composite prop and an engine tear down.

So back to my point and the subject of the this thread. If you have a legacy cub gear system there are two paths to a better landing gear system that is more robust. Sell your airplane and buy a $500k XCub. Or covert your legacy cub gear to a stronger gear, more likely to "fail safe" than totally fail.

One Hartzell Trailblazer composite prop costs $12,500 (found on every FX-3 and XCub). Totally converting a legacy cub gear system to the Beringer ALG costs $10,600. Do the math. So far it looks the odds of a destructive ground loop that in NTSB reportable (we know there are more) is around 12% in the FX-3 and XCub fleet. Overtime that number will grow as fleet time rises.

So you canít ground loop the berringer gear?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Crash, Jr.
11-07-2020, 12:14 PM
This thread sure strayed far from Beringer vs ACME. Now it's looking like Cub gear vs spring gear.

I'd still like to see how the Beringer gear fails under a sideloaded condition. Their axles are aluminum which has been shown to bend on Cessnas under sideloads as well as the gear itself attaches to the stock cabane vee and even further uses that cabane partially in a compression load state where it was meant to be loaded in tension. Unfortunately we do not have any data to show the Beringer gear would survive a ground loop of the type that is being discussed. My guess would be that the load is transferred up the gear and collapses the cabane vee causing the gear legs to tuck. Maybe not as bad as stock landing gear but it's still a failure.

Just postulation/stirring the pot. I'd like to see what the real thoughts are behind the idea that Beringer's ALG would not collapse in a sideload where stock gear would fail. So far it has only been shown that stock -18 landing gear would fail but there has been no evidence to show that Beringer gear would NOT fail under the same circumstances.

turbopilot
11-07-2020, 12:36 PM
Just postulation/stirring the pot. I'd like to see what the real thoughts are behind the idea that Beringer's ALG would not collapse in a sideload where stock gear would fail. So far it has only been shown that stock -18 landing gear would fail but there has been no evidence to show that Beringer gear would NOT fail under the same circumstances.

Good questions. There just are not enough Beringer ALG in the cub community to draw any conclusions. I have never seen a cub with Beringer ALG after a ground loop. I am trying to avoid that data point if I can.

As to side loading failure, until last year the Beringer ALG system for the cub included two extra struts from the V cabane back to the aft gear attach. This was obviously done to stabilize the V cabane during side loading. These struts have now been deleted by Beringer in currently shipping gear sets. I talked to an engineer at Beringer about this change. He said during the process of obtaining the STC for the SuperCub it was determined that this strut was structurally not necessary. They did leave the very beefy V cabane doubler.

Here is an image of the aft V cabane struts:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-F6gNmpv/0/7bb48631/XL/rearstrut-XL.jpg

mam90
11-07-2020, 12:56 PM
https://generalaviationnews.com/2017/03/29/the-doctor-killer/

Any parallels here?

aeroaddict
11-07-2020, 04:21 PM
Dang, that is one clean plane in the pic. Guess I better get to work on cleaning mine.

tempdoug
11-07-2020, 06:28 PM
Good questions. There just are not enough Beringer ALG in the cub community to draw any conclusions. I have never seen a cub with Beringer ALG after a ground loop. I am trying to avoid that data point if I can.

As to side loading failure, until last year the Beringer ALG system for the cub included two extra struts from the V cabane back to the aft gear attach. This was obviously done to stabilize the V cabane during side loading. These struts have now been deleted by Beringer in currently shipping gear sets. I talked to an engineer at Beringer about this change. He said during the process of obtaining the STC for the SuperCub it was determined that this strut was structurally not necessary. They did leave the very beefy V cabane doubler.

Here is an image of the aft V cabane struts:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Airplanes/CC435/i-F6gNmpv/0/7bb48631/XL/rearstrut-XL.jpg


i like the brake line holder, who makes them like that?

skukum12
11-07-2020, 06:32 PM
Not velcro. It's an over/under clip.

turbopilot
11-07-2020, 06:44 PM
i like the velcro brake line holder, who makes them like that?

Cable Clips (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08D3C29FP/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1)

Peel off the cheap sticky stuff than comes with clips. The use 3M VHB tape instead.

3M VHB Heavy Duty Mounting Tape (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007Y7H56E/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1)

turbopilot
11-07-2020, 06:46 PM
Dang, that is one clean plane in the pic. Guess I better get to work on cleaning mine.

Getting it cleaned up. It will be for sale in December or January.

aeroaddict
11-07-2020, 07:15 PM
Selling it because of the gear? :-P Just kidding, no flaming please.

S2D
11-07-2020, 08:04 PM
Berringer looks like a glorified Champ gear . Does it feel like champ gear or does it have a solid feel?
To me mushy gear sucks when working in trying conditions.

stewartb
11-07-2020, 08:47 PM
Those CC airplanes sound like pieces of sheet. The data suggests they turn average pilots into Fuktards. Why would a guy buy one?

mike mcs repair
11-07-2020, 09:27 PM
next up for them... finding rudders with stronger tops for when they flip them......

Steve Pierce
11-07-2020, 10:35 PM
Apparently you lost interest and buried the headline in the review of the CC19 NTSB Accident reports. Could it be because thus far the NTSB reports underscores the point I was trying to make in all the dialog above? So here is the summary of the 6 reported XCub NTSB accidents. As we know there were probably more not reported to NTSB.

Bottom line there were 6 NTSB reports. One was fuel exhaustion and 5 were ground loops. Of the 5 ground loops, 2 involve partial right main gear collapse. There were no total gear collapses reported. There were no reports of prop or engine damage. This profile is entirely different than the reports involving the cub legacy gear equipped FX-3 aircraft where collapse of the legacy cub gear was the rule, not the exception.

So experience to date completely supports the assertions made by Brad Damm at CubCrafters in 2017 and the point I have been trying to make in this thread. Legacy gear cub tend to totally collapse when stressed beyond normal operating limits. So far XCub aircraft experience partial gear collapse which appears to spare the $12,500 Hartzell composite prop and save the engine from a teardown as well as other aircraft damage associated with total gear collapse.

N97LL - Right ground loop, left wing damage, no gear collapse, no engine/prop damage
N70DD - Fuel exhaustion
N82XX - Left Ground loop, right wing damage, right main gear collapse, no mention of engine/prop damage
N711XC - Left Ground loop, right wing and aileron damage, no gear collapse, no engine/prop damage
N53XC - Right Ground loop, left wing and aileron damage, no gear collapse, no engine/prop damage
N533AL - Left Ground loop, right aileron and empennage damage, right main gear collapse, no engine/prop damage



12 hour day but the airplane is on its way at first light so it was a good day. Looks like it has been lively here today.
To your comment:
Yep, I guess I assumed if the wing hit the ground the gear was damaged. The groundlooped X Cub I saw didn't collapse the gear but it broke the axle off and bent the tail pretty good. The FX3 with legacy gear I picked up off the runway and posted the pictures of didn't get the prop either.

I guess it is all priorities. I don't choose my landing gear based on what it does when somebody can't keep it straight down the runway, so far that hasn't been an issue for me.

Rob
11-07-2020, 11:25 PM
It is my opinion that neither religion, nor politics shall be the end of the earth.... I suspect it will more likely be statistics and semantics. Because it is regularly proven that you can skew either to screw the other....

I have absolutely no hard data to confirm or deny anything related to this thread, but as I read through it a few years of interaction with a close friend comes to mind.

This gentleman was looking for a place to practice flying about 8 or 9 years ago. He reached out through the net, and since winter flying where he was from was kind of a PITA, he was looking towards somewhere warm and out of the way. I have no idea what precipitated the discussion, but somewhere along the way he found himself heading towards our place, and I (not the most social critter) had myself wondering what we were in for :oops:.

Turns out he wanted to brush up on his landing skills, in practice for some kind of STOL event....:roll: Oh boy.... not another one of these weekend wannabe, you tube disasters I hoped... I don't really mean that as condescending as it sounds, but winters are my time to make hay, and while I would most certainly answer the call if someone hit the SOS button, doing it for a foreseeable event wasn't high on my bucket list.

So the dude shows up, and is hell bent on whooping up on this STOL thing.... oh boy... we got a live one here..lol.... airplane is in the trailer, and it probably took him and his wonderful wife a whopping 30 minutes to have the cute little thing unzipped and snapped together. Great.... going to show the world, AND a snap together airplane :roll:


...And then he started to shoot circuits...


Now I gotta tell you, when I'm running hard, I average a take off and landing every 18 minutes, so while they may not be pretty, I have a clue as to what pretty should look like. And I gotta say, I have no idea why he just drove 3000 miles to practice landing? I mean, this dude could fly, but more importantly, he knew what a proper landing should start with, end with and everything in between. He just gets it. I think he shot 3000 landings to a full stop that winter. Why? because he knew that just like your airspeed indicator can't tell the difference between 18mph and 19mph, neither can the average stick determine the differences between a good approach, and a stellar one, but those differences are real and they are there. Side load the gear? are you shizzing me? we're discussing how to fix a gear leg problem because you side loaded it?

Why am I babbling? here's why; I am absolutely certain that the above gentleman could get in his cub right now, your cub, anyone's cub. And barring a complete mechanical or meteorological anomaly, it would be simply impossible for him to ground loop. Theoretically, yes, likely? I'd say the odds would be in the neighborhood of 1 in a million.

Why? because he would at any moment be able to tell you (within 6 or 8 inches) where he will touch his first wheel down, which one will lead, where it will track, how fast it will roll and how far it will go. And no, he's not magic, nor alone. He's just well practiced. VERY well practiced.

Why should this matter to you? simple, buy the super duper xyzzy shock, long travel, titanium whizz bucket .... yep it might help your mega cub. but at the end of the day, his approach, (one I hope to emulate well) will help every plane he intends to land.

FWIW, the gentleman I'm thinking of as I write this, has some very innovative birds, with cool shocks and landing gear, but could land a J3 with a gear leg whittled out of bamboo in places most of todays you tube wonders would like to build a whole 'I wrecked it and survived' series on. All the cool toys in the world aren't going to fix that....


Take care, Rob

Skywalker
11-08-2020, 06:56 AM
My first instructor told me to push the stick forward once you know you're going to flip. "Then you only have to rebuild the vertical, not the whole tail". First lesson. I wonder how many instructors tell the truth to people who've only seen success.

skywagon8a
11-08-2020, 08:26 AM
My first instructor told me to push the stick forward once you know you're going to flip. "Then you only have to rebuild the vertical, not the whole tail". First lesson. I wonder how many instructors tell the truth to people who've only seen success.
You'll have to explain that in more detail. Does pushing the stick forward cause the tail to hit softer or harder? Did your instructor also tell you to get your heavy feet off the brakes?

mam90
11-08-2020, 08:41 AM
I posted a link to a story about the Bonanza issues early on. They also talk about the Cirrus. There are also SFAR’s for the R22 and the MU-2. All of these related to higher than normal accidents, and all were addressed by training. Cubcrafters has done a wonderful job of delivering a product and at the same time helping to develop and expand the new hobby (notice I didn’t say sport) of backcountry flying/STOL competitions. But, not all of the people with the money have the experience and/or training to jump right in and go. And, the accidents that have been discussed are on runways, not off airport uneven, rough surfaces. Easier to control the fate of your product by trying to make it pilot proof than to assure everyone jumping into one is properly qualified. Here’s a quote from the article I linked:

“And as you know, in general aviation aircraft, there are often going to be people who are flying airplanes for which they are not properly trained or they try to fly them in an environment for which it is not certified and capable of withstanding.

tempdoug
11-08-2020, 09:02 AM
Apparently you lost interest and buried the headline in the review of the CC19 NTSB Accident reports. Could it be because thus far the NTSB reports underscores the point I was trying to make in all the dialog above? So here is the summary of the 6 reported XCub NTSB accidents. As we know there were probably more not reported to NTSB.

Bottom line there were 6 NTSB reports. One was fuel exhaustion and 5 were ground loops. Of the 5 ground loops, 2 involve partial right main gear collapse. There were no total gear collapses reported. There were no reports of prop or engine damage. This profile is entirely different than the reports involving the cub legacy gear equipped FX-3 aircraft where collapse of the legacy cub gear was the rule, not the exception.

So experience to date completely supports the assertions made by Brad Damm at CubCrafters in 2017 and the point I have been trying to make in this thread. Legacy gear cub tend to totally collapse when stressed beyond normal operating limits. So far XCub aircraft experience partial gear collapse which appears to spare the $12,500 Hartzell composite prop and save the engine from a teardown as well as other aircraft damage associated with total gear collapse.

N97LL - Right ground loop, left wing damage, no gear collapse, no engine/prop damage
N70DD - Fuel exhaustion
N82XX - Left Ground loop, right wing damage, right main gear collapse, no mention of engine/prop damage
N711XC - Left Ground loop, right wing and aileron damage, no gear collapse, no engine/prop damage
N53XC - Right Ground loop, left wing and aileron damage, no gear collapse, no engine/prop damage
N533AL - Left Ground loop, right aileron and empennage damage, right main gear collapse, no engine/prop damage




sortve looks like when you buy one, your hoping it will take you for an airplane ride.

aeroaddict
11-08-2020, 11:00 AM
"Those CC airplanes sound like pieces of sheet. The data suggests they turn average pilots into Fuktards. Why would a guy buy one?"

Well I whish I would have known this before spending 3 years to build a plane (EX-2) that flies incredible and comes with the HD 3X3 death gear.

tempdoug
11-08-2020, 11:07 AM
"Those CC airplanes sound like pieces of sheet. The data suggests they turn average pilots into Fuktards. Why would a guy buy one?"

Well I whish I would have known this before spending 3 years to build a plane that flies incredible and comes with the HD 3X3 death gear.


i had a 1996 dodge 3/4 ton pickup that had the death wobble, i know where your coming from. you were along for the ride until you got stopped.

skukum12
11-08-2020, 11:15 AM
i had a 1996 dodge 3/4 ton pickup that had the death wobble, i know where your coming from. you were along for the ride until you got stopped.

"Death Wobble," I had a skateboard like that.