• 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!

tail pull handles

hotrod180

FRIEND
Port Townsend, WA
I was on a trip last week, and saw this mod on a couple different Supercubs used as trainers by a fairly well known t/w flight school.
Never seen this before, but I can see how they might be an improvement (in certain situations anywy)
over the the standard pull loops mounted down on the lower longerons.
Those were still in place BTW.
Both airplanes had them on both sides.

horiz stab pull handle on cub.jpg
 

Attachments

  • horiz stab pull handle on cub.jpg
    horiz stab pull handle on cub.jpg
    236.5 KB · Views: 256
Dumb question here, but wouldn’t there be a fair amount of extra stress on the jackscrew? Maybe not, but might not want the stress through the stabilizer?? Remember - I said dumb question.....
 
Dumb question here, but wouldn’t there be a fair amount of extra stress on the jackscrew? Maybe not, but might not want the stress through the stabilizer?? Remember - I said dumb question.....

Not only that but the rotational shear loading on the bolt that holds the stabs on in the front. Not a good solution at all.

Much better to not have goofy strakes on that block the lift handles. Or have a handle welded to the upper longeron like Mike said.
 
That handle attached to the front of the stabilizer looks pretty scary to me. I always try to avoid pushing or lifting the stabilizer when moving the tail of the plane. My mechanic liked to replace the lifting handle with a larger one, so you could use both hands or do it in the winter with heavy mitts. The ergonomics of lifting the tail with one hand and from one side are bad. Twenty years ago it wasn't a problem for me. Now, not so good. Facing the side of the plane, grabbing with both hands and lifting with my legs is better. I like the idea of a handle on the upper longeron, if I were 20 years younger or 4 inches taller.

I've always wondered why we didn't put on the retractable tube-type lifting handles like you see on Cessnas. Though there are damn few Cessnas I that could pick the tail up. But they do seem handy for pushing the plane back, without pushing on the horizontal stabilizer.

Jim
 
I have seen them welded to the top longerons but from what I remember they can't be welded at a cluster like the bottom handles?
 
Cessna handles on a Cub? Some of us do. I 'd still like handles on the lower longeron but that ship has sailed.
 

Attachments

  • D7D179F2-86B5-43AA-A8D8-0E3B676D3402.jpg
    D7D179F2-86B5-43AA-A8D8-0E3B676D3402.jpg
    64.8 KB · Views: 216
I'm also committed to a simple receptacle with a straight tube to fit inside, kind of like the Cessna handles. I don't like the hand twist involved with the standard handles.

I'm with Crash Jr. and Jim above on the handle on the stabilizer. That looks like something bad waiting to happen. Imagining people horsing that handle around and what it does to the cross-tube gives me the heebies.
 
Huskys have handles there. Last week an AD was announced about cracks back there. I've labeled my handles do not push, pull, or lift.
 
BAS tail pull handles are the best thing since sliced bread for Cessna. I put them on a 172 with the Bolen TW conversion years ago. The 170 I own now doesn’t have them yet. They will be added.

Rich
 
Dumb question here, but wouldn’t there be a fair amount of extra stress on the jackscrew? Maybe not, but might not want the stress through the stabilizer?? Remember - I said dumb question.....

Not really. Put a camera pointing back at your tail in a rocky beach landing. Things are just flapping around back there....

Only encountered one bent jack screw,but that was on a wreck I patched up for ferry where fuselage was bent in half... and one elevator dug into the tundra.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 
Stewart, now that you’ve had the tubular BAS handles in there a while, thoughts on whether it was worth it? I’m considering top and bottom handles both sides for our Legend build for ease of movement on skis and, well, frankly I’m not getting younger…

I like simplicity of normal handles but do enjoy the BAS handles on our Cessna.
 
Notice the upper longeron is up top. The center tube isn’t structural and can’t support a handle. I can’t say these work any better or worse than D handles. They’re a solution. It’s nice that they slide in flush but D handles never bothered me. I do appreciate the location. I’m a fan of old man handles. I never used lower longeron handles when I had them.
 
Last edited:
.... I’m considering top and bottom handles both sides for our Legend build for ease of movement on skis and, well, frankly I’m not getting younger…

I like simplicity of normal handles but do enjoy the BAS handles on our Cessna.
Ask yourself "Will the BAS handles also perform extra duty as alternate tie down attach locations?". I once carried a spreader bar for a set of EDO 6470s tied to the outside of a Cub. Without that lift handle at the tail, I don't know how I could have secured the cargo.
 
The time I wished the lower longeron handle on my FX-3 was higher up I simply threaded a strop through it and over my shoulder.
 
Installed mine just because my back hurts when I bend over.
IMG_9289.JPG


Transmitted from my FlightPhone on fingers… [emoji849]
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9289.JPG
    IMG_9289.JPG
    177 KB · Views: 67
I’m installing two hoop handles on each side - one lower and one upper.
The weight and complexity are minimal compared to the BAS and we’re welding on a bare, unpainted frame now so easy to do. Am sure I will appreciate it when the tail and my legs are buried in snow.
J
 
Back
Top