• 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!

Moac

Flew in the STOL demo with Darren in the proto MOAC at the Tullahoma AOPA event. Cool looking plane!

sj
 
it’s opinionated like choices in color, but I think Bo’s straight tail cub is carrying the current crown of looks and seems like excellent performance. It’s different, and I like it. There, I opened the door.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
 
He build one of the legend cubs and they put a square tail to match his 180

c8bdf471fcdc3b59b3c93bbaebbf960d.jpg

bbcedd56e12750865e8b8124e6404434.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Does anyone know what the slatted wing MOAC’s weigh? They look like good performers and I like the way they load.
 
As you can see from their website, the Sherpa project has lost its way. These are hazy memories, but I think they engaged a Russian contractor to do the structure, but onsite visits seemed to confirm that the work was not at the top of their list. Byron's eyesight was failing and the project lost momentum.
 
They were across from my fathers hangar in scapoose....thought it was a cool airplane since the 90s.
they have moved the operation to some T hangars or something in Hillsboro I had heard. There old hangar looks pretty empty.
 
Similar question about the MOAC on the BCP site. I posted this comment there but feel it came be posted here also.

I looked at the Legend very extensively. Visited the factory and if the funds allowed, I would have one. Personally, I think the Legend is a little better build that the CC. I have nothing to base this on other than having looked at both brands quite a bit. Also, Darin Hart (Owner of Legend) is a heck of a guy, and a very down to earth type. I didn't get the same type of feelings when talking with the CC gang.

Ask the Legend factory to put on an option or something you want modded, they will do their best to accommodate your dream.

I've got no experience with the Back Country line other than looking at them and liking what I saw. I have not heard anything bad about them.

If money is no object, get which ever suits you. I would check on insurance for either brand also. When I checked, the CC insurance was considerably higher. I sure hear of quite of few CC getting buggered up and I suspect this has a lot to do with their high insurance premium.

Good Luck and keep up posted.
 
I would think the Cub Crafters kit is much more complete and thought out from all reports plus better instructions/builder support. The numbered little bags of hardware and step by step instructions from CC is pretty amazing.

Personally I'd take a light Carbon Cub over a nose heavy O-390 powered cub every day of the week.
 
Crash said:
I would think the Cub Crafters kit is much more complete and thought out from all reports plus better instructions/builder support. The numbered little bags of hardware and step by step instructions from CC is pretty amazing.

Personally I'd take a light Carbon Cub over a nose heavy O-390 powered cub every day of the week.
Click to expand...
I've seen a Legend kit. It too comes with all the little do-dads marked and wrapped in individual packages. Very complete. I would have no hesitation ordering one of their kits.
 
I think the completeness of the kit and detail of the instructions was the gist of Johnny's inquiry. I'm curious, too. I reached out to Legend when I was buying a kit. They never replied so I moved on. The MOAC hadn't been released yet. If I was doing another exp Cub the MOAC would definitely be a contender.

Gabe, how many IO-390 Cubs have you flown? How were they configured? Mine sure doesn't feel nose heavy. The other IO-390/IO-409 owners I know say the same but they're all extended airframes like mine. The guys I know who've flown the 393i in the X Cub say the balance is excellent but I have no idea how CC dealt with CG in that plane.

I'd love to hear a pirep from anyone who's flown a 393i Carbon Cub in tail dragger configuration.
 
Stewart, yours is also a larger plane with an extended tail and all of the goodies to balance out a 390 on the nose. I would really call the Backcountry cubs the "MOAC". Now imagine taking your old PA-12 and strapping an IO-390 on the nose. Does that sound like a nice balanced sweet flying little plane still?

The Legend cub is a pretty small airframe in comparison with that big old 390 on the front. All I'm saying is there's a point of diminishing returns on a standard size cub airframe when you put that big engine on the front. The MOAC looks like just that, a company adding more of a good thing making for an imbalanced package.

And no, I haven't flown an IO-390 cub; only a 360 powered one. It's already a nose heavy plane. Can't imagine adding a constant speed, fuel injection, and a bigger block helps much.
 
I spoke with Darin @ Legend this past week and he reported that the kit does indeed come with all parts needed for assembly.

However, and this a big point, the kit ships with engineering drawings and not an assembly manual (e.g. CubCrafters).

For a first time builder such as myself, having step-by-step guidance would be reassuring. After all, I’m going to be flying my fly fishing maniac of a daughter into some tight spots in the plane and I need to be sure it’s put together well.

We are considering the factory assist option, where you go there for a month or two and work under some seasoned supervision.

skywagon8a said:
I've seen a Legend kit. It too comes with all the little do-dads marked and wrapped in individual packages. Very complete. I would have no hesitation ordering one of their kits.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Good points.
The IO-390 is somewhere around 308 lbs dry, correct?

The MOAC ( https://legend.aero/moac/ ) is set up for the Titan O-340 and O-370, with high or low compression pistons. You can go into their options menu and look at the recommended prop pairings.

Titan engine models spec sheet showing weights, etc. http://www.continental.aero/uploade...s/Experimental_-_Kit_Engines/CM_TitanSpec.pdf

Crash said:
Stewart, yours is also a larger plane with an extended tail and all of the goodies to balance out a 390 on the nose. I would really call the Backcountry cubs the "MOAC". Now imagine taking your old PA-12 and strapping an IO-390 on the nose. Does that sound like a nice balanced sweet flying little plane still?

The Legend cub is a pretty small airframe in comparison with that big old 390 on the front. All I'm saying is there's a point of diminishing returns on a standard size cub airframe when you put that big engine on the front. The MOAC looks like just that, a company adding more of a good thing making for an imbalanced package.

And no, I haven't flown an IO-390 cub; only a 360 powered one. It's already a nose heavy plane. Can't imagine adding a constant speed, fuel injection, and a bigger block helps much.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
skywagon8a said:
A Cub is a Cub, take a look at this.
https://www.supercub.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/PA-18-Manual-Sept2009-v5.pdf
Click to expand...

Just a quick scan of the manual and its full of typos, incorrect call outs and hillbilly slang. One would think that when you spend this kind of $$ you would get a manual that doesn't look like a Chinese translation.

Figure 397 and the written description don't jive (tq called out)

Figure 458 and 459. Soldering aluminum tubing? The "Aluminum" tubing sure does have a funny copper color to it.

I am sure I could pick this one apart further but these just jumped out at me on a quick glance.
 
So little response to the MOAC. I’m surprised. That’s a very sexy Cub. I’m looking at a very similar Cub out my window. And the wheels are turning.
 
stewartb said:
So little response to the MOAC. I’m surprised. That’s a very sexy Cub. I’m looking at a very similar Cub out my window. And the wheels are turning.
Click to expand...

Heh, heh! Mine, too. Crash, Jr's comments on engine weights and flight characteristics were thought provoking.

A ground adjustable Whirlwind on the Titan 340 might make for a good lightweight combo on the MOAC.
 
akavidflyer said:
Just a quick scan of the manual and its full of typos, incorrect call outs and hillbilly slang. One would think that when you spend this kind of $$ you would get a manual that doesn't look like a Chinese translation.

Figure 397 and the written description don't jive (tq called out)

Figure 458 and 459. Soldering aluminum tubing? The "Aluminum" tubing sure does have a funny copper color to it.

I am sure I could pick this one apart further but these just jumped out at me on a quick glance.
Click to expand...
While one can pick apart someone else's manual for perhaps good reasons when building up an airplane, it is important that the builder have some decent mechanical abilities and be able to see through questionable written words. If not, then perhaps he should leave the actual building to someone else. Manuals such as these are meant to be guides. These are not Heathkits where every single action had a box to check when the operation was finished.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Garmin Introduces Radar
Replies
4
Views
856
AZinAK
AZinAK
skagwaypilot
General Aviation and a Difficult Future Ahead
2 3
Replies
80
Views
35K
nanook
nanook
cubdriver2
Don't throw your sectional away
Replies
6
Views
1K
md11freighter
M
S
Oops? Or WTF???
Replies
12
Views
2K
skywagon8a
skywagon8a
N
No,no,no,no, You fly away from thunder storms.
Replies
10
Views
3K
OVEREASYGUY
OVEREASYGUY
Back
Top