Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 81 to 120 of 121

Thread: SuperStol VS Supercub Pros/Cons...Im looking to buy

  1. #81

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Dawson Creek, BC, Canada...Mile Zero of the Alaska Hwy
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    Ive burned AV gas on long trips in my Rotax 80 hp 912...i just use the decaline lead scavenger additive to help reduce the build up. What did they have for engines in the S7's? What do you have for an engine in your cub?

    Quote Originally Posted by thaefeli View Post
    Two guys here with S-7's. We do a lot of goofing around together. Solo. the S-7 will kick my butt on takeoff and landings. Put a passenger or bags into the equation and everything changes. When we go camping, guess who gets to carry all the extra stuff ( belly pod)? Oh yeah, two precautionary landings now with the 912 crowd (realistically, one carb shutdowns, meaning they have the choice of where to land but not going too far since they are running on two cyls) Apples and oranges for sure.
    They also brag about the 3.5 gph fuel burn. Awesome! They have to drive 14 miles to get premium, non ethanol fuel with lots of five gallon cans in the back of an SUV to do so. They are retired, keeps them, out of trouble.......

  2. #82

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Dawson Creek, BC, Canada...Mile Zero of the Alaska Hwy
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    What engine do you have? You fly a Rans S7 ?

  3. #83

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Dawson Creek, BC, Canada...Mile Zero of the Alaska Hwy
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    I was trying to "reply with quote" to the couriorguy with the pic...still getting used to this site...and my computer was locking up when i tried to reply with quote...must been because of the big photo
    , thanks for all the replies guys

    Quote Originally Posted by Backpacker View Post
    What engine do you have? You fly a Rans S7 ?

  4. #84

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Valdez, Alaska
    Posts
    638
    Post Thanks / Like
    Good stuff BDA...
    “Safety is a big one for me, I have not been able to get the XL to wing over yet. The slats just keep it flying.”
    I have heard several guys claim that regarding their cub with slats as well. However I have slats on my cub and find that I can still wing over if I choose, as well as enter a spin...maybe I am just that good at being bad...to spin you really have to get the thing “ugly”...and it will enter a spin...however when flying normal, and even getting a bit uncoordinated in a tight turn it will NOT spin... However, we all did see the exp cub in Talkeetna STOL comp start to fall out of the sky...technically the beginning of a spin...

    on another issue...I do not feel stats add to surface area for wing loading as one poster posted...if I understand they force air over the wing, aiding it to hold on logs...thus creating a better vacuum...I could be wrong...

    again...good stuff...be safe everyone!
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  5. #85

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Down low in the hills of Vermont USA
    Posts
    878
    Post Thanks / Like
    Handley Page style slats add wing area.
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Southern Aero, Backpacker liked this post

  6. #86

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Valdez, Alaska
    Posts
    638
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlieN View Post
    Handley Page style slats add wing area.
    I guess I respectfully disagree from a couple standpoints...one the structural integrity of carbon fiber stats would not withstand “load”, but can withstand horizontal pressure due to aerodynamic design - unless they were positively connected to the spar which mine are not...leading edge. Next in my research of slats prior to putting on my cub I reviewed hours and hours of Handley page information and studies. I believe in my reading H.P. slots did contribute to surface area and wing load...however they also contributed to increases drag...Page first tried slots on the
    H.P. 17. around 1917. In 1919 Page developed the H.P. 20, which were fitted with what he first called controllable slots, and later became know as slats Slots and slats do increase lift coefficient when deployed in takeoff or landing configurations at high angle of attacks.

    As as usual I could be completely wrong, but feel pretty confident my slats, the carbon fiber version would rip off if they were a significant factor in surface area for wing loading purposes.

    Fun discussion...for what it’s worth on the original topic, I am a cub guy, but have been intrigued by the numbers of small STOL type aircraft. I feel they are WAY overpriced, but pretty neat planes...on that note I feel many cubs a way overpriced as well.

    Respectfully,
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes flyrite, Backpacker liked this post

  7. #87

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Down low in the hills of Vermont USA
    Posts
    878
    Post Thanks / Like
    If you think your slats would rip off you had better do a major rethink of your engineering and material properties.
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Southern Aero, Backpacker liked this post

  8. #88
    flyrite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Lyons,GA
    Posts
    457
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by J5Ron View Post
    I guess I respectfully disagree from a couple standpoints...one the structural integrity of carbon fiber stats would not withstand “load”, but can withstand horizontal pressure due to aerodynamic design - unless they were positively connected to the spar which mine are not...leading edge. Next in my research of slats prior to putting on my cub I reviewed hours and hours of Handley page information and studies. I believe in my reading H.P. slots did contribute to surface area and wing load...however they also contributed to increases drag...Page first tried slots on the
    H.P. 17. around 1917. In 1919 Page developed the H.P. 20, which were fitted with what he first called controllable slots, and later became know as slats Slots and slats do increase lift coefficient when deployed in takeoff or landing configurations at high angle of attacks.

    As as usual I could be completely wrong, but feel pretty confident my slats, the carbon fiber version would rip off if they were a significant factor in surface area for wing loading purposes.

    Fun discussion...for what it’s worth on the original topic, I am a cub guy, but have been intrigued by the numbers of small STOL type aircraft. I feel they are WAY overpriced, but pretty neat planes...on that note I feel many cubs a way overpriced as well.

    Respectfully,

    Ron , ya might want to rethink your mindset on the slats adding to the wing area. Good post , Would love to see some pic’s of your bird.
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  9. #89

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Valdez, Alaska
    Posts
    638
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by flyrite View Post
    Ron , ya might want to rethink your mindset on the slats adding to the wing area. Good post , Would love to see some pic’s of your bird.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DBDD2F24-FD9C-4886-AE20-F887E52CA93A.jpeg 
Views:	48 
Size:	173.1 KB 
ID:	44415Click image for larger version. 

Name:	8A80673C-E4DF-468F-837D-5E01CB31AB7F.jpeg 
Views:	49 
Size:	224.6 KB 
ID:	44416
    Mine basic Carbon concept slats, with a minor change in positive connection to the leading edge...my exp cub is basic cub design...lots of carbon fiber parts. I can only imagine flyrite you have vast experience with these slats...I am poised to learn...would love some pics of your slat equipped plane. I am here to learn...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	87763EEC-5DEF-49FA-9EDC-A18676848E72.jpeg 
Views:	43 
Size:	59.3 KB 
ID:	44417  
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes flyrite, bda, Backpacker liked this post

  10. #90
    flyrite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Lyons,GA
    Posts
    457
    Post Thanks / Like
    Wow, Like the plane. Ya got it setup right, belly pod, slats, Do you have the VG’s as well?
    On the slats adding to wing area, Obviously slats add to the cord so that adds wing area.I Like the trailing edge adjustable slats like yours and the Backcountry planes, Got to help cruise. Simpliar and lighter to install , Unlike the Super Stol and the Helios that retract , Reducing cord.
    Mine are fixed , Wasn’t that concerned bout the cruise hit so kept it as simple as possible. Below is a link to my Vimeo page that tells about my plane.

    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes J5Ron, Chicken Hawk, bda, courierguy, Sam D and 1 others liked this post

  11. #91

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Inkom, Idaho
    Posts
    1,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Wow, ya got a lot going on there flyrite! Viva la experimental!

    I see Joe Dory now has slats on his cub, not sure what type, but I would really like to pick his brain as to exactly how they have changed his off airport ops. As in, landing shorter places, getting off shorter, whatever, out in the real world as it were, not just in STOL demos at paved airports.

    I know Bruce of Back Country Cubs has slats on the Rans S-7 he uses as a coyote getter, and I heard that he had tried them earlier, but with the stock Rotax 912S they for some reason could not reach their full potential. Then he had the engine hot rodded and had enough "extra" power to make them work real well. Which got me thinking, I get in pretty darn short right now and don't want or need to get in so short I can't get out, so what the ratio is between getting you in AND back out is my interest. Pic is from a couple days, rocks were camoed real well, blended right in from the air, not so bad where I landed but up at the turnaround....damn.

    I did something I never needed to do before, after walking my takeoff slot, I realized there were some real embedded tire rippers out there, and I have brand new Airstreaks, so I took short pieces of toilet paper (never fly without it, unused) and marked my departure lane, which worked well.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_20190909_090803088.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	109.1 KB 
ID:	44425   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_20190909_090737971_HDR.jpg 
Views:	42 
Size:	142.6 KB 
ID:	44426  
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  12. #92

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,555
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by J5Ron View Post
    I guess I respectfully disagree from a couple standpoints...one the structural integrity of carbon fiber stats would not withstand “load”, but can withstand horizontal pressure due to aerodynamic design - unless they were positively connected to the spar which mine are not...leading edge. Next in my research of slats prior to putting on my cub I reviewed hours and hours of Handley page information and studies. I believe in my reading H.P. slots did contribute to surface area and wing load...however they also contributed to increases drag...Page first tried slots on the
    H.P. 17. around 1917. In 1919 Page developed the H.P. 20, which were fitted with what he first called controllable slots, and later became know as slats Slots and slats do increase lift coefficient when deployed in takeoff or landing configurations at high angle of attacks.

    As as usual I could be completely wrong, but feel pretty confident my slats, the carbon fiber version would rip off if they were a significant factor in surface area for wing loading purposes.

    Fun discussion...for what it’s worth on the original topic, I am a cub guy, but have been intrigued by the numbers of small STOL type aircraft. I feel they are WAY overpriced, but pretty neat planes...on that note I feel many cubs a way overpriced as well.

    Respectfully,
    Think TOP of the wing. My Back Country slats move the LE forward approx 7". The LE to aft aileron edge is 74" and they're extended in length. They're huge compared to stock wings. Longer, deeper, and the slats energize the flow on top of the wing. Triple whammy!
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  13. #93
    Southern Aero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    kcco/1ga2
    Posts
    175
    Post Thanks / Like
    Coming soon ...…………………… WIP passive slat based on Piper style construction with 31" spar centers

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1670.JPG 
Views:	71 
Size:	59.0 KB 
ID:	44427Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1668.JPG 
Views:	71 
Size:	107.6 KB 
ID:	44428
    ......... It doesn't cost any more to go first class! You just can't stay as long.
    Thanks CharlieN, Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes CharlieN, Farmboy, flyrite, bda, CamTom12 and 1 others liked this post

  14. #94
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,287
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Aero View Post
    Coming soon ...…………………… WIP passive slat based on Piper style construction with 31" spar centers

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1670.JPG 
Views:	71 
Size:	59.0 KB 
ID:	44427Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1668.JPG 
Views:	71 
Size:	107.6 KB 
ID:	44428
    That looks very interesting. I assume based upon the Helio design? I like the idea of being totally retracted creating no drag in cruise conditions. What is your plan for the ailerons, flaps and wing span? It looks as though you also have a considerable gross weight beef up as well.
    N1PA
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  15. #95
    Southern Aero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    kcco/1ga2
    Posts
    175
    Post Thanks / Like
    Sky

    I guess I put this in the wrong place but the discusion turned to slats/slots .................... I'll probly get spanked. This particular wing is 165" spar, short wing, extended slightly but going on an extended fuselage. …… has already been referred to as a "bastard", I've heard. ………….. might be its new name! Also building another wing with the "standard" 17' spar. Helio was the inspiration, obviously, but I have never seen this done to a rag wing so had to do it. ……………...…… been a challenge. Larger chord flaps and ailerons with ailerons moved outboard to tip. Spoilers too, for low speed roll control and plus descent rate.
    ......... It doesn't cost any more to go first class! You just can't stay as long.
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post

  16. #96
    flyrite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Lyons,GA
    Posts
    457
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by courierguy View Post
    Wow, ya got a lot going on there flyrite! Viva la experimental!

    I know Bruce of Back Country Cubs has slats on the Rans S-7 he uses as a coyote getter, and I heard that he had tried them earlier, but with the stock Rotax 912S they for some reason could not reach their full potential. Then he had the engine hot rodded and had enough "extra" power to make them work real well. Which got me thinking, I get in pretty darn short right now and don't want or need to get in so short I can't get out, so what the ratio is between getting you in.
    Tom, What I can tell you from putting 1000 hours on my wing before them to a little over 1000 since adding them.....They add a small amount of wing area which is a noticeable seat of the pants improvement in carrying the same weight (lower wing loading) !
    Also As Stewart said, They make the wing more effective at ALL angles of attack which is another VERY noticeable improvement by any pilot with a lot of time in the mount there added to!
    These two improvements made the wing so docile at slow speed at any bank angle or angle of attack that my low altitude playing is off the charts . It definitely made my approach’s slower. I can hang it on the slats at high alpha to show off, But don’t do it to get in short. I’m all about performance and balancing the airframe improvements to the negatives (weight added) Slats are right there with flaps in priority!
    Thanks courierguy, bda, Backpacker thanked for this post

  17. #97
    flyrite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Lyons,GA
    Posts
    457
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Aero View Post
    Sky
    Spoilers too, for low speed roll control and plus descent rate.
    Got any photos or drawings of how your going to incorporate the spoilers, Would love to see them?
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  18. #98
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,287
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by flyrite View Post
    Got any photos or drawings of how your going to incorporate the spoilers, Would love to see them?
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Aero View Post
    Spoilers too, for low speed roll control and plus descent rate.
    That sounds as though it could be a rather complicated mechanism with both functions.
    N1PA
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  19. #99
    Southern Aero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    kcco/1ga2
    Posts
    175
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by flyrite View Post
    Got any photos or drawings of how your going to incorporate the spoilers, Would love to see them?
    They will be on stand-offs or pylons on the backside of the front spar holding a bearing/bushing for a torque shaft running behind the spar near the top. Will get some pics up when I get then in place.


    sky....... yep, will be some "trickery" going on behind the front spar..........
    Last edited by Southern Aero; 09-12-2019 at 11:06 PM.
    ......... It doesn't cost any more to go first class! You just can't stay as long.
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes flyrite, CamTom12, avi8tr1364, Backpacker liked this post

  20. #100

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Down low in the hills of Vermont USA
    Posts
    878
    Post Thanks / Like
    I sure know the mechanism I have drawn up for the spoilers going in my plane have a fair bit of trickery involved. Nothing is near being fabricated yet so lord knows they will all get more complex but sometimes less so.
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  21. #101
    RVBottomly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Asotin County Washington (KLWS)
    Posts
    531
    Post Thanks / Like
    Southern Aero; CharlieN--I'm sitting over in the corner watching intently while I still try to work out geometry for simple differential ailerons....

    I really like your ideas.

    Vic
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  22. #102
    Southern Aero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    kcco/1ga2
    Posts
    175
    Post Thanks / Like
    Vic

    With that high lift wing just go with Friese type ailerons and no differential......................
    ......... It doesn't cost any more to go first class! You just can't stay as long.
    Thanks RVBottomly, Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  23. #103

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Down low in the hills of Vermont USA
    Posts
    878
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Aero View Post
    Vic

    With that high lift wing just go with Friese type ailerons and no differential......................
    There is some good logic in that, once I am done with the B-17 tour I am hosting a week form now I will sketch what the bellcrank for the differential motion, once it clicks it is logical.
    Thanks RVBottomly thanked for this post
    Likes flyrite, Backpacker liked this post

  24. #104
    Gordon Misch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Toledo, Wa (KTDO)
    Posts
    3,334
    Post Thanks / Like
    I will sketch what the bellcrank for the differential motion
    Piper already did that, at least in the -12 However, I'll say that the 12 has plenty of adverse yaw, so no doubt can be improved upon.
    Gordon

    N4328M KTDO
    My SPOT: tinyurl.com/N4328M (case sensitive)
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  25. #105

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Dawson Creek, BC, Canada...Mile Zero of the Alaska Hwy
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks for all the comments, it was a tough decision, but I bought a Superstol Kit.

  26. #106

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Kenai AK
    Posts
    90
    Post Thanks / Like
    Cool!
    Congrats!!
    What options?

  27. #107

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Dawson Creek, BC, Canada...Mile Zero of the Alaska Hwy
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bda View Post
    Cool!
    Congrats!!
    What options?
    I bought a kit that a guy started on, and he got a 100 hrs into building it. It came with Matco Wheels and Brakes...i may go to Beringer...i thought Beringer was lighter but today i was told they are heavier?? Beringer very expensive but sounds like anybody that tries them loves them for their less effort for excellent braking and excellent feel. It has the ACME shocks front and rear. It has a pre moulded windshield. No engine, but i will probably take the 80 hp Rotax out of my Chinook and have it converted to a 156 hp with the Edge Performance Kit(they install new cylinders, new cam, weld the crank that is press fitted together from Rotax, Turbo, fuel inj)...the very first one with that engine just started flying in Texas a few weeks ago. The wings were quick built at factory and set/squared to fuselodge at factory, im trying to source a Titanium firewall. I plan to use carbon fibre floor boards and dash. I plan to use Oratex. A great kit builder suggested iLevil 3 SW for the lightest instruments...apparantly this links to an i pad, and he also suggested an EIS engine monitor. Im going to try and keep it light. Have 29" Airstreaks for it.
    Likes flyrite, JeffZ, CamTom12 liked this post

  28. #108
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,287
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Backpacker View Post
    Im trying to source a Titanium firewall. I plan to use carbon fibre floor boards and dash.
    Isn't carbon fiber fireproof? Why don't you make your firewall from carbon fiber?
    N1PA

  29. #109

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Dawson Creek, BC, Canada...Mile Zero of the Alaska Hwy
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by skywagon8a View Post
    Isn't carbon fiber fireproof? Why don't you make your firewall from carbon fiber?
    The firewall has to be metal to pass inspection.

  30. #110

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Down low in the hills of Vermont USA
    Posts
    878
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by skywagon8a View Post
    Isn't carbon fiber fireproof? Why don't you make your firewall from carbon fiber?
    The carbon matrix itself is fire resistant but the resin matrix is not. There are formulations available that can perform the task but you will spend allot more than the few hundred for a sheet of Ti at consumer pricing.
    Even working with a ceramic sheet would be light but could be beyond the logic of getting it approved.

  31. #111
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,287
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Backpacker View Post
    The firewall has to be metal to pass inspection.
    Not true, It must be fireproof. It is a "Firewall".

    I've been involved in testing fiberglass cowlings which were on the engine side of the firewall. When a third chemical was added to the two in the resin mix it became fireproof. I do not recall what that chemical was.
    N1PA
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  32. #112

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Down low in the hills of Vermont USA
    Posts
    878
    Post Thanks / Like
    Way back in time I was restoring a '35 cabin Waco that had gone over on it's back. Originally this plane had an aluminum firewall which I wanted to reproduce. Having recently built two Experimental aircraft that were wood/composite construction and utilized 1/8 fiberfrax, a ceramic sheet under the SS sheet.
    So I submitted to engineering to use the ceramic sheet on the back of the aluminum firewall and it got approved.
    I did not finish that project and the poor old plane is cooped up in a museum and I have not had a close look inside to see if it was built that way in the end.
    Might be worth looking into.
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  33. #113

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Dawson Creek, BC, Canada...Mile Zero of the Alaska Hwy
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by skywagon8a View Post
    Not true, It must be fireproof. It is a "Firewall".

    I've been involved in testing fiberglass cowlings which were on the engine side of the firewall. When a third chemical was added to the two in the resin mix it became fireproof. I do not recall what that chemical was.
    Do you live in the USA?...I live in Canada and one builder/inspector in Canada told me about this.

  34. #114

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Dawson Creek, BC, Canada...Mile Zero of the Alaska Hwy
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlieN View Post
    Way back in time I was restoring a '35 cabin Waco that had gone over on it's back. Originally this plane had an aluminum firewall which I wanted to reproduce. Having recently built two Experimental aircraft that were wood/composite construction and utilized 1/8 fiberfrax, a ceramic sheet under the SS sheet.
    So I submitted to engineering to use the ceramic sheet on the back of the aluminum firewall and it got approved.
    I did not finish that project and the poor old plane is cooped up in a museum and I have not had a close look inside to see if it was built that way in the end.
    Might be worth looking into.
    Thanks, I’ll check into it, but Canadian laws are anal, like can’t order certain windproof lighters from USA, and one time I couldn’t order a hunting blind from USA because it didn’t meet the gay fabric fire proof rating of Canadian law...yes a hunting blind, it was a Primos Double Bull Blind...had to have it sent to a friend in USA then he shipped it to me.

  35. #115
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,287
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Backpacker View Post
    Do you live in the USA?...I live in Canada and one builder/inspector in Canada told me about this.
    Yes USA, this is the FAR governing firewalls. Notice that the metal ones can be used without proof testing. Other materials must meet certain requirements.
    Sec. 23.1191 — Firewalls.

    (a) Each engine, auxiliary power unit, fuel burning heater, and other combustion equipment, must be isolated from the rest of the airplane by firewalls, shrouds, or equivalent means.(b) Each firewall or shroud must be constructed so that no hazardous quantity of liquid, gas, or flame can pass from the compartment created by the firewall or shroud to other parts of the airplane.
    (c) Each opening in the firewall or shroud must be sealed with close fitting, fireproof grommets, bushings, or firewall fittings.
    (d) [Reserved]
    (e) Each firewall and shroud must be fireproof and protected against corrosion.
    (f) Compliance with the criteria for fireproof materials or components must be shown as follows:
    (1) The flame to which the materials or components are subjected must be 2,000 ±150 °F.
    (2) Sheet materials approximately 10 inches square must be subjected to the flame from a suitable burner.
    (3) The flame must be large enough to maintain the required test temperature over an area approximately five inches square.
    (g) Firewall materials and fittings must resist flame penetration for at least 15 minutes.
    (h) The following materials may be used in firewalls or shrouds without being tested as required by this section:
    (1) Stainless steel sheet, 0.015 inch thick.
    (2) Mild steel sheet (coated with aluminum or otherwise protected against corrosion) 0.018 inch thick.
    (3) Terne plate, 0.018 inch thick.
    (4) Monel metal, 0.018 inch thick.
    (5) Steel or copper base alloy firewall fittings.
    (6) Titanium sheet, 0.016 inch thick.
    N1PA
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  36. #116
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    9,287
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by CharlieN View Post
    Way back in time I was restoring a '35 cabin Waco that had gone over on it's back. Originally this plane had an aluminum firewall which I wanted to reproduce.
    I did the same with a Fairchild 22 which had an aluminum firewall. The FAA inspector accepted the aluminum even though he questioned it. Probably couldn't get away with that today.
    N1PA
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  37. #117

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Inkom, Idaho
    Posts
    1,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Backpacker View Post
    I bought a kit that a guy started on, and he got a 100 hrs into building it. It came with Matco Wheels and Brakes...i may go to Beringer...i thought Beringer was lighter but today i was told they are heavier?? Beringer very expensive but sounds like anybody that tries them loves them for their less effort for excellent braking and excellent feel. It has the ACME shocks front and rear. It has a pre moulded windshield. No engine, but i will probably take the 80 hp Rotax out of my Chinook and have it converted to a 156 hp with the Edge Performance Kit(they install new cylinders, new cam, weld the crank that is press fitted together from Rotax, Turbo, fuel inj)...the very first one with that engine just started flying in Texas a few weeks ago. The wings were quick built at factory and set/squared to fuselodge at factory, im trying to source a Titanium firewall. I plan to use carbon fibre floor boards and dash. I plan to use Oratex. A great kit builder suggested iLevil 3 SW for the lightest instruments...apparantly this links to an i pad, and he also suggested an EIS engine monitor. Im going to try and keep it light. Have 29" Airstreaks for it.
    Do what I just did: sold my "standard" 29" Airstreaks, and bought new ultralight streaks, same size, just as cushy, but designed for a lighter plane. Saved 12 pounds! Plus, for some reason, they have noticablely less rolling resistance. My little GRT EIS is great, all the info, and then some, I need. Steve Henry turned me on to them, simple, small, and light. Let's see if you can keep that thing under 800 lbs..
    ....
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  38. #118

    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Dawson Creek, BC, Canada...Mile Zero of the Alaska Hwy
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by courierguy View Post
    Do what I just did: sold my "standard" 29" Airstreaks, and bought new ultralight streaks, same size, just as cushy, but designed for a lighter plane. Saved 12 pounds! Plus, for some reason, they have noticablely less rolling resistance. My little GRT EIS is great, all the info, and then some, I need. Steve Henry turned me on to them, simple, small, and light. Let's see if you can keep that thing under 800 lbs..
    ....
    But would the Ultralight Airstreaks be good enough for bush strips? I was told they are much much thinner and designed for grass not rocks and sticks...is anyone using them on bush strips??

  39. #119
    flyrite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Lyons,GA
    Posts
    457
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Backpacker View Post
    But would the Ultralight Airstreaks be good enough for bush strips? I was told they are much much thinner and designed for grass not rocks and sticks...is anyone using them on bush strips??
    land mine all over....harvested corn fields, logging roads, gravel lots. Can’t imagine having a problem with them. Always can have a fluke happening though!
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

  40. #120

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Inkom, Idaho
    Posts
    1,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    My thinking on the lightweight ones, is most of the weight is taken out of the sidewalls, wishful thinking maybe?! They visibly look like they are built different, the sidewalls look different. Just like my last ones, I usually run 3.5 to 4 pounds in them, and the less rolling resistance I mentioned is so noticeable when pushing it out the hangar, I have to think it shortens up the TO a bit also.

    In 32 hours of flying on the new ones, I haven't landed on pavement once, most of my flying is off airport, and we have some brutal rocks in this area. They are high mountain ridge rocks, not water polished and rounded, but jagged. I'm bragging I guess...but I am perversely proud of them! Landing slow and keeping the plane light as possible both help, but the biggie is I NEVER turn around after landing, (which I always have to do as I'm landing uphill most of the time) that's what really is hard on them, or can be. I shut it down, put the parking brake on, and get out and walk back over what I just landed, which is always educational. Then I scope out my turnaround, and in a worst case scenario (like this site pic a couple weeks ago) I have flagged the brush with toilet paper scraps to show the safest route out (an innovation I am claiming....). These pics were all on the new tires, so far so good. If the weight difference wasn't a full 12 pounds, and if I hadn't had a ready buyer for my old heavier ones (sold them for $1000.00, in good shape, 1500+ hrs TT) I wouldn't have done it probably. But TWELVE POUNDS! Couldn't pass that up, easiest weight loss since ditching the Odyssey battery and old style master switch, and going with an EarthX and a firewall mounted mechanical master.
    The mountain top 15 miles away my internet signal comes/goes to (so I'm told) is obscured by a snowstorm, can't put any pictures up before timing out. After the storm....
    Last edited by courierguy; 10-09-2019 at 06:03 PM.
    Thanks Backpacker thanked for this post
    Likes Backpacker liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Airstrip Registration, Pros and Cons
    By Jacob Papp in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-13-2016, 06:00 AM
  2. PROS and CONS - Building Experimental
    By glaciercub in forum Experimental Cubs
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 12-02-2009, 09:58 PM
  3. Widebody Pros and cons
    By Jeff in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-18-2007, 02:59 PM

Tags for this Thread

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
  •