• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Beringer ALG vs. Acme Aero for FX3

turbopilot said:
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.
Click to expand...

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


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 

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!
 
Steve Pierce said:
Look at the 5 minute mark and then shoot us a video and we can talk.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
Mauleguy said:

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!
Click to expand...

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
 
Mauleguy said:

Here this one shows a pretty good beating on cub gear
Click to expand...
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.
 
DENNY said:
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
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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 didn’t fail? Doesn’t that go against your argument of weak gear???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
RVBottomly said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Some of our off camber turning landing areas.
Screenshot_20201103-065506.jpg
Screenshot_20201103-065523.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20201103-065506.jpg
    Screenshot_20201103-065506.jpg
    49.6 KB · Views: 153
  • Screenshot_20201103-065523.jpg
    Screenshot_20201103-065523.jpg
    51.5 KB · Views: 148
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*

 
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.
 
Crash said:
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*

Click to expand...
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.
 
Crash said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
Steve Pierce said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
stewartb said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

IMG_4556-L.jpg
 
So, run your car into a brick wall at 40 mph. Is the damage caused by the failure of the bumper?
 
mam90 said:
So, run your car into a brick wall at 40 mph. Is the damage caused by the failure of the bumper?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Steve Pierce said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.

Steve Pierce said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
turbopilot said:
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.
Click to expand...
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?
 
Steve Pierce said:
Back to you and your Carbon Cub, where do you fly and what is your main mission?
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
TK1 vs. Acme Aero (SEP 2020)
4 5 6
Replies
175
Views
56K
stewartb
S
Farmboy
Reports of a Carbon Cub Rookie
Replies
21
Views
7K
Farmboy
Farmboy
sj
Super Cub Purchase Spousal Approval Document
Replies
6
Views
5K
Anne
Anne
CloudDancer
Chains and Padlocks
Replies
8
Views
14K
CloudDancer
CloudDancer
Iflylower
Wow, a letter from the LEE BOTTOM folks about the EAA and Oshkosh.....
Replies
20
Views
6K
stearmann4
stearmann4
Back
Top