Page 4 of 56 FirstFirst ... 234561454 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 160 of 2212

Thread: Lowrider LSA

  1. #121
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Sky,

    Thanks for the site...good info!!

    Aft CG is best once you get her on the step and planed out. I never used to worry about aft CG until the South Central Beech 1900 pancaked in at HOM in I think '88 with a lot of deer meat in the rear locker. It flew just fine until it picked up some ice and during the flare the tail stopped flying...killed all on board. I flew on that plane in the same condition from Kodiak to Homer the day before loaded the same way....with no ice.

    Marty,

    Thanks for the pictures!! I picked up wood this morning for my table so I'm going to use some of your ideas on mine. I'll look at your site this evening. Thanks again!!
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  2. #122
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,268
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Lowrider View Post
    ..... Beech 1900 pancaked in at HOM in I think '88 with a lot of deer meat in the rear locker. It flew just fine until it picked up some ice and during the flare the tail stopped flying...killed all on board.
    Like I said, "within tested limits".
    N1PA

  3. #123
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    I took a look at the Carbon Cub last night and it gets wonderful performance out of an "LSA" with a 180 hp that weights in under 900 lbs and I can't think of a good reason that the BH LSA can't be built to do the same thing with an 0-320 and flaps. It is difficult to determine the weight savings gained in using the carbon parts they call out on their site but it is probably significant. I have heard they use smaller and less tube in the fuselage than the Piper Cub but I don't have a way to verify this or find out what tube is actually used. If we have any CC owners/builders out there it would be great if you could share fuselage tube info with us. Also, anyone who has done any research on the CC structure, I'd be interested in that as well.

    My table is half done and will finish it today. I ordered tail ribs from BH and they are 3 month out so I'm going to start with the layout of the fuselage bottom first.
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  4. #124
    C130jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    380
    Post Thanks / Like
    CC fuselage has the top longeron on the top of the fuse. All the metal above the top longeron on a piper is gone saving weight without giving up strength. Some of the tubing on the tail feathers is smaller diameter on the factory CC vs the Top Cub/piper. Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	116 
Size:	116.8 KB 
ID:	10452

    Hope this helps,

    Jake
    building a CC EX

  5. #125
    Cub junkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    My Moms basement
    Posts
    2,053
    Post Thanks / Like
    Sure a nice looking toy Jake. Keep us posted on your build.
    Last edited by Cub junkie; 02-27-2013 at 01:53 PM.

  6. #126

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Hot Springs, SD
    Posts
    360
    Post Thanks / Like
    HI Jake, Do us all a favor and weigh you Carbon Cub fuselage. I'd like to know exactly how much lighter they made it.

  7. #127
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks Jake!! A picture is worth a lot!! I'll second CLint's request for weight if you can get it and also how many ribs are there in the wings? I keep picking up tid bits on the CC with no way to confirm them and it is really great to find someone who has one under construction. That's gunna be a fine looking bird when you get done!!

    Thanks again!!
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  8. #128
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Oh, I forgot....bench is done and I ordered the tube for the LSA from API. They are cheaper than the local by a wide margin but they do have an 8' limit on tube. Layout of the fuselage bottom starts tomorrow.
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  9. #129
    7shannon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Deer Park, WA
    Posts
    16
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Lowrider View Post
    Oh, I forgot....bench is done and I ordered the tube for the LSA from API. They are cheaper than the local by a wide margin but they do have an 8' limit on tube. Layout of the fuselage bottom starts tomorrow.
    WOW their control cable is less than HALF what I just paid from ACS

  10. #130
    C130jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thirteen ribs...with extended fuel, the #3&5 rib are doubled an #2 is replaced with a bar along the bottom.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	image.jpg 
Views:	108 
Size:	772.4 KB 
ID:	10455
    The wing tips, floor, side panels, stringers and door are carbon. I will try to weigh the fuse by itself when I get a chance. Just looking at the Top Cub fuse side by side at the factory, it looked much heavier. Lots of extra bits welded here and there. CC says they reduced the fuse 200# by redesigning the frame and using carbon fiber stringers.


    Jake

  11. #131
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks Jake...again!!

    Those are slick looking wing tips and I bet they are feather light too. I talked to a fellow who used to work at Boeing and he felt the vast majority of recent designs in the general aviation arena were over designed to compensate for potential law suits. It looks like maybe the folks in Yakama have overcome that hurdle. If the stringers saved 20 pounds or so, I wonder where the other 180 cames from? Are the fuel tanks carbon too?
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  12. #132
    C130jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    380
    Post Thanks / Like
    The weight savings are everywhere. The fuselage part count was cut in half from the Top Cub/Piper design. Elec trim vs the old crank and cables saves a few pounds for example. The front seat support is molded into the carbon floor board. Anything that was wood in a cub is carbon. You are right, the wing tips weigh nothing. Fuel tanks are aluminum. Fuel lines and fittings are pex instead of aluminum. Every fitting on the wing is CNC milled to be as light as possible. Some guys are trying out 3lb LiFe batteries with up to 1100 cranking amps.

    Once you add extended range tanks, extended baggage, lights, big wheels etc, some of the weight savings disappears.

    Jake

  13. #133
    Cub junkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    My Moms basement
    Posts
    2,053
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks for posting Jake. I definately have Carbon Cub envy. Cub Crafters left no stone unturned in developing this airplane. They spent a lot of money doing it. They owe me a hat from the defunct Super Cub pilots newsletter, I'm not sending them a big check till I get that hat. That last line is a joke by the way, that 25 bucks has been gone a long time.

  14. #134
    Crash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Nikiski Alaska
    Posts
    2,695
    Post Thanks / Like
    The problem often over looked with a bigger engine like an O-320 / O-340 in an LSA is fuel burn. To make the plane useful it has to have a decent range.

    This is a problem the Carbon Cub had in it's original form. Great power and performance but no range with its small stock tanks. Cub Crafters then offered larger tanks ($3,500.00 option) but with the added weight, when filled, the plane then became (legally) a single person plane under the current LSA weight restrictions.

    With the fuel burn of an O-200 or O-233 you can get by with smaller, lighter tanks which when full, still give you the ability to haul a passenger with a decent range.

    I remember a few year back a guy built up a slatted wing, wide body Super Cub with an O-360 and 30.5 gallon Dodge tanks. The EW came in at around 1,350 lbs. Now think about it. The legal gross weigh of a Super cub is 1750 lbs. That leaves him 400 lbs of "useful load". Now fill the tanks (61 gallons @ 6 lbs per gallon = 366 lbs) and the "remaining" useful load is ONLY 34 lbs. He can't even get in the plane and fly legally, let alone haul a passenger and gear.

    So just saying, LSA "empty weight" is only half the equation.

    Take care,

    Greg
    Last edited by Crash; 02-28-2013 at 01:19 PM.
    Thanks pfm thanked for this post

  15. #135
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,268
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Crash View Post
    The legal gross weigh of a Super cub is 1760 lbs.
    I'm not picking on you. Just correcting the numbers, 1760 on floats and 1750 on wheels.
    N1PA

  16. #136
    8GCBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Oahu
    Posts
    1,636
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thread creep....

    Under restricted category an 8GCBC can GW 2600#. That is fick'n heavy for 1400# empty.
    2018 R44
    IA/A&P, ATP, SES, CFII, MEI, Rotor PPL (2500 TT)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXI48e1heuo

  17. #137
    Crash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Nikiski Alaska
    Posts
    2,695
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by skywagon8a View Post
    I'm not picking on you. Just correcting the numbers, 1760 on floats and 1750 on wheels.
    Thanks for the clarification.

    He puts this plane on floats, although the 1,350 lbs was EW on wheels, but I changed my post to reflect a legal PA-18 GW on wheels.

    Take care,

    Greg

  18. #138
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Jake,

    Thanks again!!

    Greg,

    Yip, I understand the extra fuel burn but if I can build the LSA under 900 lbs it will be a one person full fuel and 2 sandwiches plane that should get me a 3 hour, 400 mile plane (at 8 gph) and I can't hold it that long anyway. My wife hasn't been in a size 4 in years and I've outgrown my tool belt, but it will still make a good 1+ hour sight seeing plane with her on board and light fuel. 90% of my flying will be to off-airport strips, a lot of which are high elevation sites and in some cases short as well and I am having a hard time talking myself into the 0-200 when I can have 50+ hp for 50 extra pounds...I think.

    Not that I would ever do it...I could pull the throttle back and burn less gas with the 0-320 too. Couple folks have asked, why not just go for an 0-360...hmmm.

    I want to steal some CC ideas and try to make up the extra engine weight by simple and hopefully light things like the carbon seat and floor panels and maybe a cowl and wingtips if I can make it look right. I'm pretty good with fiberglass too so that's another option possibly.

    Table is done and I'm laying out the top fuselage after breakfast and I'll take all the advise you folks have!!
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  19. #139
    C130jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    380
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Crash View Post
    The problem often over looked with a bigger engine like an O-320 / O-340 in an LSA is fuel burn. To make the plane useful it has to have a decent range.

    This is a problem the Carbon Cub had in it's original form. Great power and performance but no range with its small stock tanks. Cub Crafters then offered larger tanks ($3,500.00 option) but with the added weight, when filled, the plane then became (legally) a single person plane under the current LSA weight restrictions.

    With the fuel burn of an O-200 or O-233 you can get by with smaller, lighter tanks which when full, still give you the ability to haul a passenger with a decent range.

    So just saying, LSA "empty weight" is only half the equation.

    Take care,

    Greg

    Gregg,

    I agree on the LSA weights getting eaten up with the options. (136lbs if you get them all and 29" tires)

    I'm building to the 1800lb limit and should have a 900# plane when done. The CC340 engine helps quite a bit from an O320/360. 180hp for take off and is 40# lighter than a stock O320. The light speed electronic ignition is lighter vs magnetos for example and gives 5-6 gph at cruise and smooth running at any rpm. So even with the stock tanks, it will out fly my bladder.

    Jake

  20. #140
    Cub junkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    My Moms basement
    Posts
    2,053
    Post Thanks / Like
    Im sure there has never been a cub flown over gross weight, especially in Alaska.

  21. #141
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Cub junkie View Post
    Im sure there has never been a cub flown over gross weight, especially in Alaska.
    Perish the thought...that would violate the FAR's and everything your mother taught you!!!
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  22. #142
    8GCBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Oahu
    Posts
    1,636
    Post Thanks / Like
    Last time I went against my mom she wrote me out of a big part of the trust! Never again!

  23. #143
    irishfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Penetanguishene, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    2,944
    Post Thanks / Like
    Well the FAA has never trusted you.. so what's the worry! LOL

  24. #144
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Well, the first part of my tube order arrived from API and it is very nicely done. Made in FRG, lightly oiled, well packaged and arrived on time....well...2 out of 3 packages arrived on time. One bundle is AWOL but will probably arrive tomorrow. Also got refills on the A/O tanks and fired up the Smith Aviation torch which is functioning as designed and I'm ready to go in the morning with the fishmouthing (is that a word?) and tacking the LSA fuselage bottom. Still waiting for tail ribs and I just ordered a set of LSA wing ribs which I'm told delivery is 3 weeks out. Probably just another day for you veteran Cub creators but I'm excited!! If I knew how to post pictures I'd post a shot of the layout table and progress. Maybe one of my offspring can help.

    Stay tuned...film at 11:00.....
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  25. #145
    Cub junkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    My Moms basement
    Posts
    2,053
    Post Thanks / Like
    Sounds like you've been busy. BH hydroformed wing ribs are a bargain and are very nice. On the tail ribs its nice to buy them if you can. They were not available when I built my tail feathers. By buying them preformed you eliminate all that dam carpenter work of building those individual form blocks. Who is API ? You say you are starting with the fuselage bottom ?

  26. #146
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Air Parts, Inc. (www.airpartsinc.com) They seem to have good prices and service...ordered tube Thursday and got it Tuesday...well 2 of 3 anyway which is the Brown Truck's fault I suspect. Yes, I'm on the bottom and if no one bothers me too much I will have it done quickly once the other package of tube comes. Goal is fuselage together by the end of the month...we'll see.
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  27. #147
    Cub junkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    My Moms basement
    Posts
    2,053
    Post Thanks / Like
    OK, never heard to them refered to as "API" I know them well since I'm from Kansas City and was a customer from the begining when Frank and Ethel started with their first bucket of surplus from wichita. I was spoiled then as I would go buy tubing in mill lengths so I didn't have to deal with wind chimes created by 8 ft max shipping length on the brown truck. Airparts has shipped me 12 ft lengths by airfreight and it wasn't bad on price. You going to build the bottom, then take it out of the jig, reconfigure and build the top, reconfigure the jig, put the bottom back in then put the top on? Please post pictures.

  28. #148
    Dave Calkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Lowrider, please post pictures. It's easy after you've done it once! Your kids will know how to figure it out if you need help

    It's basically a "click" to select the photos you have on your computer, with another "click" to "upload" the bunch to SuperCub.org

    Glad to hear you are starting.

  29. #149
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    10,434
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Lowrider View Post
    I took a look at the Carbon Cub last night and it gets wonderful performance out of an "LSA" with a 180 hp that weights in under 900 lbs and I can't think of a good reason that the BH LSA can't be built to do the same thing with an 0-320 and flaps.
    Think again on the weights of the Carbon Cub. There's a thread on here right now where two owners of the CC in E/AB form state their airplanes weigh slightly over 1000 pounds. Even the factory carbon Cub is listed right at 900, without big tires, or any of a LOT of options that most folks are buying. To go there, folks are having to switch to E/LSA to make the plane legal, since E/LSA and E/AB don't require the maximum empty weight that S-LSA does.

    And, note that the engine used in the Carbon Cub is NOT a stock lycoming engine, by any means, so you'd need to plan electronic ignition, small oil sump, etc, etc. to get close to that weight. I seriously doubt anyone could build a Carbon Cub with electrics at less than 900 pounds, and most are going to be more like 1000 I'd bet.

    MTV

  30. #150
    8GCBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Oahu
    Posts
    1,636
    Post Thanks / Like
    I would simply break the law every day IF flying LSA, so I choose a regular aircraft(s). I wanted the ticket, but wife saw W/B, and put project on indefinite hold.
    2018 R44
    IA/A&P, ATP, SES, CFII, MEI, Rotor PPL (2500 TT)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXI48e1heuo

  31. #151

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,789
    Post Thanks / Like
    I seriously doubt anyone could build a Carbon Cub with electrics at less than 900 pounds, and most are going to be more like 1000 I'd bet.
    I don't think that's correct. A couple of guys I know with Carbon Cubs that weigh 1000# have long range tanks and 31" Bushwheels. Those two items add about 100#. They also have some other nice additions that could be left out. A 900# Carbon Cub is definitely realistic. A careful builder could do a well appointed Carbon Cub on 29" Airstreaks at under 900#, at least that's what my research is indicating.

    Lowrider, have you asked CC if they'll sell you their CC340 engine?

  32. #152
    spinner2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Crash View Post
    The problem often over looked with a bigger engine like an O-320 / O-340 in an LSA is fuel burn. To make the plane useful it has to have a decent range.

    This is a problem the Carbon Cub had in it's original form. Great power and performance but no range with its small stock tanks. Cub Crafters then offered larger tanks ($3,500.00 option) but with the added weight, when filled, the plane then became (legally) a single person plane under the current ...

    Take care,

    Greg
    The CC O340 is a very efficient engine. I plan for 5-6 gph with mine and at sub 2000 rpm it'll be closer to 4. Even with the standard 26 gallon tanks that's a pretty good range. I have the 44 gallon tanks and have gone over 7 hours several times and topped off putting in +/- 35 gallons. The big tanks add about 25 pounds to the empty weight.
    "Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything." Wyatt Earp

  33. #153
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    My other tube showed up today thanks to Brown so I'm ready to build a fuselage.

    I spent an hour or so with an IA who used to build engines for race planes years ago. He says I should put the 0-320 with some improvement work in the LSA...no sweat...getting 180 hp out of an 0-340. He described spending hours on the mill and lathe taking weight off the race engines but it's not necessary on a normal plane. The 0-340 is just an 0-320 with a new crank and bigger jugs and who doesn't like bigger jugs.

    He seemed to think a less than 900lb LSA with 0-320/0-340 and flaps was entirely possible and would be a fine airplane. He thought a well built 0-320 at reduced power would equal or better an 0-200 on fuel burn and produce the same cruise and still be able to do 2000 fpm climbs when desired.

    Regarding flaps...no reason not to have flaps, just use a proven design for the flaps and controls and the DAR should be just fine with adding them to the BH LSA.

    All in all, a very positive and fruitful discussion.

    Pictures...oh yeah...pictures....it's snowing hard and maybe in the morning I'll take some and try to post them.
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  34. #154
    spinner2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mvivion View Post
    Think again on the weights of the Carbon Cub. There's a thread on here right now where two owners of the CC in E/AB form state their airplanes weigh slightly over 1000 pounds. Even the factory carbon Cub is listed right at 900, without big tires, or any of a LOT of options that most folks are buying. To go there, folks are having to switch to E/LSA to make the plane legal, since E/LSA and E/AB don't require the maximum empty weight that S-LSA does.

    MTV
    Mike and I had this conversation a couple of nights ago at the MT Aviation Conference. It would be easier to get close to 900 pounds with a factory built LSA than an EAB like mine - the EX kit. The kit plane adds about 25 pounds with a few extra fuselage tubes, Univair PA18 tail feathers, 3" gear as standard, medium weight fabric as opposed to LW fabric on the CC-built planes and probably a few other things I'm forgetting. The reason for this is that CC doesn't know if the builder is going to register the plane as a 1340 gross or as an 1865 pound gross like mine.

    Mine also has some heavier extras like 31's, Baby Bushwheel, heavier but more effective brakes I traded with Grove for the LW set that came with the kit, a large extended baggage (not the CC option), Dodge long step, 44 gallon tanks, Pawnee tail spring and no doubt something else or two I'm overlooking.

    My empty weight is about 995. It would be fairly easy to chop 50 pounds off of that with different gear and tire choices and standard tanks. Going with the automatic 25 pound reduction with a non-kit plane would help more. But I think getting under 900 and having tires of any size would be hard.

    That said though, a 1000 pound 180 hp Cub is a great performer.
    "Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything." Wyatt Earp

  35. #155
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Spinner,

    We talked abut the CC today too and the "missing" fuselage tubes. No one seems to know exactly what they left out or why it was OK for an LSA to not have them other than possibly extra gross weight. The fellow showed me some fiberglass covered honeycomb material that could be made using carbon fiber and would result in weight savings and additional strength for something like floor decking or other structural application to reduce weigh.

    Anyway, I know the CC is a redesigned Cub but where are those missing fuselage tubes...are the tubes just spaced out to save a few????
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  36. #156
    spinner2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,724
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Lowrider View Post
    Spinner,

    We talked abut the CC today too and the "missing" fuselage tubes. No one seems to know exactly what they left out or why it was OK for an LSA to not have them other than possibly extra gross weight. ??
    Keep in mind that the CC fuselage is not the same as a PA18 fuselage. The big difference is that the turtle deck is eliminated making the top longeron the top line of the fuselage. This makes for a stonger framework and eliminates sometimes-flimsy turtledeck.

    The 'extra' tubes that come welded into the EX fuselage are on the bottom side under the baggage/rear seat area. I don't think there are any other changes as far as tubes go.
    "Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything." Wyatt Earp

  37. #157
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0107.jpg 
Views:	108 
Size:	704.0 KB 
ID:	10556Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0114.jpg 
Views:	85 
Size:	432.6 KB 
ID:	10557Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0118.jpg 
Views:	94 
Size:	646.0 KB 
ID:	10558

    Thanks to the help of #2 son the above pictures were taken just before we took the bottom of the fuselage out of the jig. We have the top of the fuselage laid out and will begin work in the AM. Some of my tacks got a little more like finished welds, but then I hope nothing needs to be tweeked anyway. We should be able to get most of the top done tomorrow and start the bends and jigging of the upper and lower fuselage parts on Saturday.

    Spinner,

    Thanks for the info on the "missing tubes". That makes perfect sense to loose the stringers and seems like a good solution for mine as well which would help with weight too.
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  38. #158
    irishfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Penetanguishene, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    2,944
    Post Thanks / Like
    Lookin good there LR... but do yourself.. or your son a favour. Just because Orange County Choppers welds in bare hands and T shirts for TV doesn't mean it's right. Get some sleeves on.. and gloves. Skin cancer will come fast enough without the arc tan!

  39. #159
    Lowrider
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Idaho Panhandle
    Posts
    1,683
    Post Thanks / Like
    Good catch Irish!! We do wear jackets and gloves when welding...well mostly...the picture on the left is a set-up photo op for these pictures. I told him...weld something and I'll take your picture. I also learned a long time ago to wear black when welding...white sure reflects that flash back under the helmet.

    Update...couldn't wait until morning so we almost finished the top tonight...4 pieces to go in the morning....then jigging....things really go fast with two people working. It is surprising how much faster the top fuselage went compared to the bottom. Not near as much head scratching and looking at the drawings with a dumb look on our face.
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    There are no new ways to crash an airplane no matter how hard you may try!

  40. #160
    Bugs66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Spokane WA
    Posts
    2,309
    Post Thanks / Like
    Looks like the date on your camera is off Nice work

Similar Threads

  1. What Do You Think of the BearHawk
    By MarkG in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-05-2004, 09:31 AM
  2. 260 Bearhawk
    By cubdrvr in forum Modifications
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-25-2003, 09:59 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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