• 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!

Super Cub versus Husky

eski

Registered User
I new to the web site and previously owned a Scout. I want to replace it with a S.C. or a Husky. I am looking for opinions/facts on what would be better for back country flying and any issues with either aircraft. If a Cub is a 180 better than a 160 or is the weight trade off not worth the H.P. Speed is not an issue but a slow landing speed and stable flight are.

Thanxs Eric
 
Eric

Welcome to the site. As you may discover by digging around on this site it is really really active. The question you have asked has been the subject of tons of discussion, debate, name calling, mud slinging, theorizing, haggling, haranguing, etc etc. The debate got so heated at one point I think some folks left the site in disgust. Thus the posts above in response to your question.

Here are just a couple of threads that answer your question....


http://www.supercub.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=4824&highlight=huskey+landing

http://www.supercub.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=2150&highlight=husky

http://www.supercub.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=2761&highlight=husky

On the front home page of this site you can click on the box " Discussion Forums" and at the top of that page you will see the word "search". If you click on the search word you can type in a word or words (using "and" between them) and you can find almost anything. Type in Husky and you will get 670 threads that have the word Husky in there somewhere.

Again, welcome to the best aviation web site there is.

Bill
 
ESKI, if slow landing speed and stable slow flight are the most important qualities to you, a J-3, PA-11, or 18-95 would be a better choice than either a Husky or an 18-150 (150, 160, or 180 HP).

Light wing loading equals slow landing speed. J-3's and PA-11's can be had under 800 pounds empty. They have the same wing area as an 18-150, but the 18-150 will weigh over 1100 pounds empty, on average. That extra 300 pounds makes a HUUUGGE difference on landing speed and slow-flight qualities.

DAVE
 
Huskies Are not Cubs, Cubs are not Huskies! Maule's suck!
There, that should just about do it! :onfire: :onfire: :onfire: Cessna's rock! :peeper
 
That's one of them planes that has some resale value after it wrecks you can make beer cans out of'em! :drinking: :drinking: :drinking:
 
Best thing about a Husky is that you can sell it and make a down payment on a 185.

Oops- did I just say that?

If the Super Cub wasn't the king, everyone would not be trying to achieve it's abilities. How may times have you heard "it gets off almost like a Super Cub" or "Super Cub like performance"

As for re-sale, anything other than a Super Cub will most always depreciate, while the good ole' PA-18 maintains it's value or appreciates.

Get a light PA-18-150 and have fun. Just my 2 cents.
 
Just get a lite 150/160 PA-18 and add all the AK mods. Then you won't have to listen to a bunch of BS about what a piece of crap your airplane is from people that have never owned one. :D

Seriously, check the links above and do the search, you will find lots of rhetoric. If you want an unbiased opinion from someone that has owned and loved both airplanes you can contact me directly.
 
oops sorry I know its apples to oranges

I agree that the S.C. is king however I have some worries about high airframe times. Even a great rebuild does not zero out airframe. I appreciate all the threads and info. Please excuse my ignorance. Second question can all S.C. be converted to toe brakes is it worth the effort. Has anybody tried the Mackey Slat Kit.

I appreciate the advice
Eski
 
Re: oops sorry I know its apples to oranges

eski said:
Second question can all S.C. be converted to toe brakes is it worth the effort.

Boy you know how to get these guys cranked up :)

Simple answer... DON"T DO IT !!! Heels are easy to get used to and superior!
 
Re: oops sorry I know its apples to oranges

eski said:
I agree that the S.C. is king however I have some worries about high airframe times. Even a great rebuild does not zero out airframe. I appreciate all the threads and info. Please excuse my ignorance. Second question can all S.C. be converted to toe brakes is it worth the effort. Has anybody tried the Mackey Slat Kit.

I appreciate the advice
Eski

Eski..... Whats your real name?


This is a great place for info. A great way to get it is the search function. Type in "toe brakes" with the "include all words check and you will get some great info.

Airframe times are about useless on cubs...you can wear one out in 2000 hours if you never maintain it. Or you can have one with 20,000 hours on it with all new parts. If you have some bucks you should go see David Foster in Tx. , he has a nice widebody for sale.

Decent prices on Supercubs are hard to find these days. Good luck.

Tim
 
ESKI, I second what Tim said, worry about high airframe times if you don't have an experienced Cub guy to tell you how clapped-out the frame is. A knowledgeable Cub mechanic can tell how beat up the airplane is.

As far as toe brakes or not, any Cub pilot will tell you that toe or heel brakes do not make or break the usefulness of these a/c. A pilot who cannot handle heel brakes is likely to have very little heel brake time, and may also have poorly-rigged rudder pedals and heel brake pedals. Heel brakes are great for feel, pressure modulation, and the ability to rudder and brake at the same time-or not at the same time, with good precision. This may not be necessary for everyone, but it keeps me from hitting rocks, logs, holes, falling off ledges, etc., when landing on unimproved areas and braking aggressively. My opinion is worth what you paid for it, so remember that, any of you heel brake haters :D

Wayne Mackey slats, yes. They work. I installed them in conjunction with a bunch of other aerodynamic mods which also work. I can say for sure that the slats alone make that wing fly and keep it flying. They are forcing air to stay on top of the wing and it is as if the wing will not stall. AMAzing. Any Cub guy can appreciate what these things do. This a/c will fly so slow that it will do turns around a point in about a 100 foot radius with out a problem and solid as can be. It is a safety and fun-to-fly improvement that everyone should check out. I had questioned, before flying them, whether I would use them on my next airplane or not. Now there is no question that my next Cub WILL have them. DAVE
 
I love how there has been a million posts on this subject, but every time it comes up it is one of the most popular threads. When the site gets slow you can always count on the old standby; Super Cub vs. Husky.
 
Yeah. But we need to put that toe brake thing to bed. Is there anybody who has a hundred or more Cub hours with heel brakes who would rather have toe brakes? Anybody?
 
Bob,

Yep, me--I hate heel brakes, and I've got several thousand hours behind them. They work, but, as Dave noted, it is REAL easy to have some dipstick rig them or the rudder pedals all wrong, the result being something that is virtually unworkable, variable to just plain uncomfortable.

Part or perhaps all of the problem---I was blessed with size 8 feet--my feet look sorta like small snowshoes--short and wide (EEE). As a consequence, when the shit really hits the fan, and I've got full rudder deflection in to fix something, I have to take my foot OFF the rudder pedal and pull it back to catch the brake pedal. Give that a try when a student gets the thing going toward the lights sometime, and let me know how it works for you.

At least for guys with short feet, heel brakes may not be the best deal. Note that virtually ALL modern aircraft use toe brakes. That could be a clue as to preferences.

Oh, and Huskys--I've flown them about as much as Cubs. Check the archives for my opinions. Short version: They are both great airplanes. Your mileage will depend largely on what your specific mission is.

Go ahead guys--hose away... :drinking:
\
MTV
 
Flew a Husky 2007 A1B today. Winds were 18, gusting to 25. It was a very stable, solid platform. Having said that, I need to mention that you don't do ANYTHING without having your left hand on the trim wheel. Having owned a A!A model, I'd forgotten how heavy the controls are and how trim dependent you are. It's not that the trim helps a maneuver, it's just almost impossible to maneuver without leading with the trim wheel. In a cub, being out of trim is a "fix it when I get time" situation. In a Husky, you almost need a 3rd Hand on a go-around. The salesman let me go down to my place where we had a direct crosswind. I have to say The Husky handled it very well, the solid feel really helped. I'm going to try to get a demo flight in a CC Top Cub to compare, the 150 cub I used to have would have handled today's conditions as well but with more of a one on one feel instead of steering a heavy weight around. I've been told that a Top Cub is a little more solid that a stock PA-18. A stock PA-18 is a delight on the low end. Bill
 
Since I'm a mechanic, and an airplane lover, period, I treat each bird that I fly the way it likes to be treated, and I trim them and set them up to do all that I am able to make them do.

Anyway, that means that as a mechanic, if I have poorly rigged heel brakes, I fix 'em. My size 8.5 feet do fine with 'em. If I weren't a mechanic, I guess I'd have to side with MTV on this or squawk the airplane and educate the maintenance techs.

I personally do not like that on toe brakes I must remove my heel from the floor (which is a great reference point for neutral when modulating heel brakes) and thus, I find that my feel, pressure modulation, and thus, precision suffer with toe brakes. Yes, I've flown Cubs with heel brakes and Cubs with toe brakes. I suppose MTV could be the only :) toe brake holdout when every other Cub guy would rather have heel brakes.

As far as Huskies go, I agree with Bill that flying a Husky well demands attention to the trim wheel. When flaring for landing, (a time when a guy needs good pitch feel) that spring is fooling you about how much nose up pitch you can get. Yes, it can be learned and the Husky is a fine airplane when flown at gross weights versus a Cub, but very slow it ain't the same........still haven't been in the latest version of Husky with the longer flap/shorter aileron, which is reported to be impressive. Maybe George Mandes will chime in here.

PS MikeV, I swear that I don't go around thinking of ways to opine in opposition of you, but golly does it seem that we are often at opposite ends of the spectrum, and I respect you very much, so it amazes me that you and I would come to opposite conclusions so often. DAVE
 
I really like the toe brakes on my Husky but I would not convert a Cub. I have size 9 feet and with 3/4 in blocks and the right set up, I loved my L21B Cub.
The Husky trim will always be it's single worst design flaw. IMHO
 
I fly floats and skis and have never had toe brake problems. :lol:


Hey i did not know so many people have problems with toe brakes!! I have size 11.5 shoes. I usually wear red wings. I am also over 6ft. I have just a ton of trouble getting full rudder without any brake. If i run my seat really low and slid back then it helps the geometry, but if my seat is located really high and forward then by the time i get to the full rudder range i have to get my foot tilted way back to stay off the brakes. I like to have my seat forward and high so i can see over the nose. BTW this is on a 170. I do like the heal brakes when flying cubs!
 
Eski

Regarding toe brakes. One of the most significant disadvantages is in the feel. Heal brakes are not connected to the rudder pedal so when you are on the rudders you have a near perfect, unhindered, connection to the flight control surface.
The brake mechanism is connected to the rudder pedal with toe brakes so every time you push the rudder you are also moving the brake mechanism, brake lines, master cylinder connections and everything else. No matter how it is designed or maintained you are moving a bunch of hardware when you use the rudder which impedes your "feel" of the rudder and the airplane.
Just another consideration.

Bill
 
Dave,

First, I should have noted that I've never flown a Cub with toe brakes, so I was speaking of brake systems in general terms, not specific to one airplane or another.

Dave, I concur with your "mechanic" argument. Not everyone has that ability, though. I worked for an outfit that owned a fleet of aircraft, that were maintained by a number of maintainers and facilities. Management held varying opinions on what was "airworthy". Frankly, I never had a problem caused by heel brakes on those aircraft.

As one of my first instructors told me in response to the stock brakes on my PA-12: "You supposed to FLY the damn thing, not STOP it!!!!" He was VERY German, and a little emotional. I still installed hydraulic brakes later. My next airplane was a 90 hp J-3, which in winter wore Goodyear AIrwheels, and possessed stock mechanical brakes. Which is to say that, for the most part, the heel brakes were simply a place to rest your heels 8) . If you pressed REALLY hard on them, you could sorta tell there was something going on. I spent a lot of time on beaches with that airplane, and never saw much problem with the brakes. I didn't particularly care for them, but they were pretty irrelevant, in any case.

But, again, try sitting in the back of an airplane with heel brakes in a training environment. You're following the student's control movements, and you have to wait patiently for the student to recognize and try to fix something BEFORE you intercede. In that case, reaching for that heel brake can be a pretty interesting program at the very last moment. And, it's not intuitive for the student, who trained in airplanes with toe brakes.

My worst heel brake story: A student and I were flying a Cub, he started some pretty enthusiastic swerving, but was catching them in time, and getting on top of it. Unfortunately, he was wearing slip on shoes, and during one enthusiastic rudder deflection, his foot slid partially out of his shoe, and the back of the shoe caught between the heel brake and the rudder pedal--ie: near full rudder deflection. I stood on the brakes, then tried to figure out what the hey happened.

In general flying, I simply don't care for heel brakes. For instructing, I simply hate them.

As to feel, as Bill describes, sorry, but I've flown so many years wearing hip boots, bunny boots, etc, that "feeling" the rudder inputs this precisely just isnt' in my play book. So, what---You fly around barefoot, Bill :lol: ??

I just don't care for heel brakes, for the reasons noted,, but to each his own. I don't find that precise braking is an issue with toe brakes, it's simply a matter of getting the feel for the system. As to the argument about keeping your heels on the floor, that's basically what I do with toe brake systems. If I need brake, I rotate my ankle and there's some brake.

One down side to toe brakes: Again, in a training environment, a dear old friend of mine who was a great instructor had a "student" get a 180 upside down with him instructing. My friends' words of wisdom afterwards: "There is simply nothing an instructor can do if a student puts those big size 14 boots on the tops of those pedals and pushes hard during a landing." THAT is now a briefing item every time I fly with someone, regardless of what type brakes you have.

Hey, this is all personal preference. I wouldn't CONVERT anything with heel brakes to toe brakes, or vice versa. I also wouldn't purchase or refuse to purchase an airplane because it had one or the other.

And, in my world, I often don't get to make the choice.

Run what ya brung, folks.

MTV
 
Super Cub VS Husky

I built my cub with Scout toe brakes for the front seat only. I love them and would do it again if I was to build another cub. The only think I don't like is that the pedals needed to be move back one inch so there would be enough petal deflection for the brakes with full rudder input. I would relieve the firewall for this problem if I were do do it over. I have a little time in cubs with heel brakes and toe brakes.
Sandy
 
MTV, down here, we put our shoes on AFTER we land. You mean someone actually flies a Cub with shoes on? Bill
 
I had the chance to buy this Husky last year for 60k. 1989, 650 TTSN NDH. I didn't for a couple reasons. 1. Fuel prices were starting to go crazy and didn't want to get stuck with it. 2. Was out of annual and sat for 2 years. There's a AD on the prop hub and didn't want to get hit with that. 3. Since its a A1 it has a low GW and cost to much to do any upgrades to it. 4. Insurance was alot higher than my cub.

89_Husky.jpg

Husky_panel.jpg
 
Back
Top