Off airport in Bolivia PA14-220?

Hey guys,

What would you think of an experimental PA14 copy with extended wings and flaps, VGs, stretcher carrier with a 220 Franklin and CS prop on a zero thrustline mount...on BWs of course?

Well such a thing exists, minus the BWs-bring your own-here in Bolivia.

My Director wants to know if this airplane would be a beastly off airport machine. We are both in love with bush type flying but since I am the big wheel-supercub addict and lurker on this forum for that last couple years he asked me to investigate.

He wants to use it on the gravel bars in the mountains of Boliva 3,000-10,000ft and on the flat tundra near La Paz 14,000ft to do medivac and humanitarian work.

I know the Franklin would scare a lot of people-including me-but the owner swears by it.

A lot of you are going to say Turbo C185. But what could this airplane do in the hands of a okay pilot. Turbo C185 is a distant option but would cost a lot more and take a lot more time to import and equip.

Weighs 1350 on 800X6s with a gross around 2550.

We are thinking it has a LOT of power for its weight and wing so that it might do okay even without a turbo.

Do we need to upgrade to double puck brakes and boosters if we go with 31s and if so how hard is that.

DJ said:

Hey guys,

What would you think of an experimental PA14 copy with extended wings and flaps, VGs, stretcher carrier with a 220 Franklin and CS prop on a zero thrustline mount...on BWs of course?

Well such a thing exists, minus the BWs-bring your own-here in Bolivia.

My Director wants to know if this airplane would be a beastly off airport machine. We are both in love with bush type flying but since I am the big wheel-supercub addict and lurker on this forum for that last couple years he asked me to investigate.

He wants to use it on the gravel bars in the mountains of Boliva 3,000-10,000ft and on the flat tundra near La Paz 14,000ft to do medivac and humanitarian work.

I know the Franklin would scare a lot of people-including me-but the owner swears by it.

A lot of you are going to say Turbo C185. But what could this airplane do in the hands of a okay pilot. Turbo C185 is a distant option but would cost a lot more and take a lot more time to import and equip.

Weighs 1350 on 800X6s with a gross around 2550.

We are thinking it has a LOT of power for its weight and wing so that it might do okay even without a turbo.

Do we need to upgrade to double puck brakes and boosters if we go with 31s and if so how hard is that.

Click to expand...

C-180 with p-ponk engine sounds about right and would cost less than A PA-14 with the mods on it.

It seems to me that a 6 cylinder 220 Franklin with a c/s prop would be way too much weight to hang on the nose of a 12/ 14/ 18 clone. You would have a forward CG problem under most loading conditions. It would require a lot of ballast at the tail post to control the cg.

I would agree with skywagon. We built and currently fly a wag aero 2+2 (experimental PA-14). We built it very basic, with a 0-360 and a 82/45 borer. We incorporated most Alaskan mods in the fuselage, gear, squared off wings with extended flaps. With all this we came in at an empty weight of 1301 lbs with oil, at a 2300 lb gross weight. If you go with a larger engine, heavier prop, likely needing larger tanks for more range, you will end up with one heavy airplane. And I think ours is on the heavy side. Our airplane performs good with the 0-360, and I would be more inclined to try and shave some weight as apposed to putting in a larger engine. My two cents.

From reading, it sounds like you own the aircraft, is that true?

With one or two pilots that are smooth on the controls, a Franklin is a great engine, but needs run often.

All that being said, the front weight is an issue. A beast yes, but nose heavy.

You will want/need double puck breaks, and put VG's on for goodness sakes!

Find places to pull weight off the engine... light starter? get rid of the Vaccume system, light alternator- 8 amp maybe?

Now the flying... I seem to have some time this winter and could come down and do some instruction. I am sure that AWB would prepare a pair of tires to bring with me.

Have passport, will travel :lol: :lol:

(PM me if interested)

pa-14 exp.

I agree with Leniuk I also have a 2+2 with the io-360 and hartzel prop, c of g on these planes is +9 to +21 and mine being at 10.78 at 1330 lbs.so I would think that with the Franklin engine, there must be some ballast somewhere.
I have turbine cub wings with long range tanks 68 gallons

Just my input

Gerry

pa-14 exp.

Hey can you post some pics of this plane !!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Gerry

Hey guys thanks for the imput, especially you PA-12 and PA-14 guys.

Maybe I was a little unclear.

My Director is looking to buy the airplane, we don´t own it yet but it is already built, sitting in a hangar in Santa Cruz, Bolivia.

It has extended wings, extended flaps, and VGs already. I don´t know how big the tanks are. The owner claims a 9gph burn so maybe they aren´t too big.

I too am a fan of very simple light airplanes and I would love to go no electric with it but a 220hp might be a lot to hand prop. Paul Claus is my hero with his stripped Cub. I think part of my love for simple light airplanes comes from the lazy mechanic side of me. I am flying a fat,(1770 lbs. empty on 600x6s) stock 182J here in Bolivia and all the extra stuff weighs on my mind (no pun intended). It is still a great machine, I have a lot of respect for the Cessna 18- series and the C206.

A couple words about the engine. I just read an article that said the 220 Franklin is only 35lbs more than the 200hp IO-360 (think Arrow and Mooney) and the article quoted the weight at 367lbs. Still sounds kinda heavy to me and the engine mount must be quite long as the nose is very long.

A word about the CG, thanks for the heads up. Just remember that this is designed to carry a stretcher on top of the frame behind the cockpit. I expect that would put the CG back a ways, but still I hear that it might be nose heavy. More importantly, how would I tell when I fly it. I also don´t know if this is a true copy of a 14. Having only seen a 14 once in my life I wouldn´t know if they have built a longer fuselage or done other things to fix the CG.

I already talked to my director about trying to strip this airplane down but isn´t 1350 pretty light for something like this. I don´t really know what we could ditch.

I am figuring bushwheels will put it up to 1400lbs.

Unfortunately I don´t have pics yet. I´ll ask my director to send me some.

pa-14 exp.

Here is my PA-14 copy , I hardly ever have to use the trim it sits right in the middle, so when you fly the 14 look back at the tail and see where the tail feather are sitting, fly it alone if possible with little fuel, when landing the stick should not be in your lap with no power on

DJ wrote

sitting in a hangar in Santa Cruz, Bolivia.

Click to expand...

If it's the airport that SAM flies out of, I've been there in 2001. Rode in a 206 about 2 hrs. south and landed at an airstrip at a natural gas pump station.

I don't know from nothin', but it seems like an airplane designed to carry a pretty heavy aft load (like a stretcher) might need to have the empty CG crowding the front of the limits. Is it already set up with a "sleeper cab" for the stretcher or would you need to cut into it?
Them Franklin engines have some pretty neat features (sleeved cylinders, peek-a-boo inspection cover on top of the case) and get a lot of power (220hp) out of not too many cubic inches (350). High rpm & high compression is how. Pretty light for the power- compare the weight to an O-470. You hear mixed reviews on them, but usually the guys that actually run them seem to like them.

Eric

I get to fly a couple Franklin powered 170B's now and then. I really like the power!

Three considerations:

Prop costs should you bend it.

100 LL only (big time compression #'s)

DON'T pull the power to idle on short final. They like a bit of power on all the time.

different beast

I spent a little time in your area and only remember a couple things. One was the DA was ridiculously high the entire time. The other I'm ashamed to repeat.
In your case I would rather have a plane with forward cg and a big motor and c/s prop. You can always haul a five gallon bag of water in the tail when you go get the patient. Then pour it out.
I honestly don't know anyone who lands cubs regularly at that DA. Typical cub flying its not.
Isn't this about your conditions?? Lapaz is around 12 feet ish and it goes on up in the neighboring hills! Temps get pretty warm and it was gets humid. DA is crap. (how's my 10yr memory bank?)
That motor would be a requirement I'd think. For what you are doing, it may just be a hot ticket. You are operating in a different environment than anyone else I know of. I'd see if you could get a few hours in it locally and see how it does. Report here of course!

PS What is your ground roll out of Lapaz in that 182?!!?

Hey guys, thanks for all the replies.
My director got a negative response from a pilot who had flown out of La Paz, the guy said he would want a turbo.
Yes La Paz is at 14000 feet, that is three zeros!!! I have never been there with the 182, I don´t know how it would do. I do know that some loco dude flies a C152 around the pattern there for training. I hear that it just barely flies, good thing the runway is really long.
The owner of this beast mentioned that it IS noseheavy.

So has anyone ever heard of a turbo STC for a C180. Maybe that would do the job.

Yes the density altitudes are high here but I have only flown in the Beni so far, that is, the lowlands (read flat as a pancake) and only 500ft elevation.

Every so often I go to Rurrenabaque right at the base of the moutains and it makes me drool. Someday maybe.
All the runways in the Beni are built for the C206s so the 182 does fine. They are all pretty long, at least 400 or 500 meters and often more.
But in the mountains there are no runways that is why we need an airplane that can handle hot, high, short and rough.

Getting AVGAS isn´t easy but using auto gas isn´t an option here the octane is WAY low. So having the Franklin wouldn´t be any different from a IO520 or even O470

DJ, I saw an early 180 at Oshkosh two years ago with a turbo. A guy from Georgia had it. I think it still had a carburetor but wouldn't swear to it. Don't know about STC's.

A friend of mine had a turbo 180 years ago. He popped two cylinders on it before he found out that it was supposed to be turbo-normalized, not turbo-boosted. Meaning that if you fly it within the normal (non-turbo) limitations, that you should be OK. Bob thought that it was OK for him to cruise around at 30+" Hg all day, and it almost got him.

I have an old (1979) Air Progress magazine at home that has an article featuring a C-180 turbo-normalized via a pair of Rajay turbo's with manual waste-gate control. The article doesn't mention whether it was done with an STC, a field-approval, or just what.
That airplane (N7757C) is still on the FAA registry. If someone's really interested, maybe the current owner could be contacted for more info or a copy of the aircraft records obtained to check the turbo paperwork.

Oops, double posted that one trying to add a last minute edit

I friend of mine bought 7757C in the mid-80s from the fellow who had the turbo units installed in it. The engine was turbo'd because the original owner used it for mapping photography and wanted to be able to climb to 18,000 feet. The plane also had a trapdoor in the cabin floor that a large format camera mounted into.
As I recall, the mod added a lot of weight and the airplane was somewhat of a dog in performance. That may also have been because the engine was very high time. My friend talked about pulling the turbo-charged engine off the airplane and going back to the original engine, but he ended up selling it before he got around to doing that. As I recall, it was a manual waste gate and when you were using the turbos, it really had an appetite for avgas. It seems to me that Jim went through quite a few cylinders while he owned that airplane.
I was living in SLC, Utah when my friend came up there to but 57C and we flew it around for a couple days before he took it home to El Paso. I got to fly it a few other times and was never really impressed with the airplane. It would climb to higher altitudes faster than a stock 180, but when it was flown along side a couple other 180s, it couldn't keep up in cruise flight.
If I recall correctly, the mod was done with a field approval and never had an STC for the engine.

Turbine Maule.

Great performance, and can handle the heat!

Big door, cabin large enough for strecher.

Well, I got digging in some old photo albums and discovered that the old steel trap has a few rusty braincells in it and I mis-remembered the N-number of that turbo charged 180.
It was actually N2411C that my friend bought ... and here's a photo of it with the new owner just after the money had changed hands.

My 185's original engine was converted with a turbocharger and inter-cooler rated at 310 hp. on a STC. It certainly had the power for your application. I had it on amphib floats for all of the time that the turbo was installed so I can't verify what the wheel performance would be at a 14,000 foot airport, However, I did fly it at 17,000, at heavy weights, and it did just fine. So I would think that on wheels at La Paz it would be great. When I removed it I weighed all of the extra parts that were used for the modification and it came to 60 pounds, all ahead of the firewall. It was a maintenance headache though.

What about a staight up Super Cub?

Hi Guys,

Thanks for all your help.
The info about turbo 180s was really appreciated.
I´ve searched the archives for info on turbocharged super cubs and there is very little. My boss has been up to La Paz again and is really interested in getting something that can handle the conditions up there. Even if it was only a two seater.
So Paul Claus seems to get his cubs way up there. He has commented on multiple landings at 15000ft and get to 20,000ft many times.

I am a huge fan of light and simple and am willing to use and armstrong starter and do without almost everything. So the big question remains can we run a normally aspirated, very light, 160 or 180 cub up there.

As far as I know the plains around La Paz are very flat and dry tundra. There are no runways but lots of open space. From the plains, most everything is down hill. Yes there are 20000ft mountains but I don´t think we would ever need to be more than 17000ft for anything.

I am sure TO performance would be sad at best. But think on the bright side....super good true airspeeds :lol:

Is there any body out there with lots of high altitude experience.

PA-14

I operated our 180 PA-12 for 3 years in Mexico City at 8,102 MSL. My short field rocket needed a lot of runway there. Tires singing with high GS on take off. On the other hand our supercharged 600 Ag-Cat barely knew the difference being able to pull about 30" on take off out of 36" normal.

Weight is the enemy especially at altitude. Why not turbo-charge an O-360 even a 200 HP model? Make 200 HP at high altitude and keep the weight down.

The PA-18 in Florida with the O-540 is flown from the back seat like a J-3 with the engine sticking into the cockpit.

DJ,
If I understand you right you will be operating out of La Paz, which is 13169 feet elevation, as well as other off field operations around there.

I think you need not only a turbo charged motor, but perhaps a turbine engine.

Your normally aspirated engines will be very weak at field elevation. The cub at Santa Cruz is based at a just over 1200 feet..... perhaps you should take it for a test flight up to La Paz, and just see how is does,,, the HP will be great at the lower altitudes, but it too will suffer that high.

I flew a turbo-normalized C180 some years ago... it was great to have sea level power for take off at 8000+ feet. We didn't normally cruise at high altitudes....the few times I did it did use more fuel, we just used it to fly climbers in to the glaciers in the Alaska Range. It would out preform the C185 (normal aspirated) on wheel skis at altitude.. And yes it required a lot of maintenance. But I wasn't twisting the wrenches.

A friend of mine is building on a PA-12 that he is putting turbo's on, he will be doing high altitude work with it in the AK range. I think a Turbo'ed Cub would do you great.

Good luck on your quest..

Kem

http://www.ykmaerosport.com/
http://www.ykmaerosport.com/gallery.asp
http://www.ykmaerosport.com/gallery.asp