Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 160 of 308

Thread: Beringer ALG vs. Acme Aero for FX3

  1. #121
    www.SkupTech.com mike mcs repair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    chugiak AK
    Posts
    11,750
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by turbopilot View Post
    A typical gear collapse in an FX with prop damage, engine teardown and one or two wings damaged can run north of $60k. Insurance is getting impossible to get. Just got a quotes on a new SS. I have 10 years of experience in tail draggers and no accident. 2 bids. One would only insure 2/3 of hull value for about twice what I have been paying. The other want 4X the hull rate to insure it fully. The insurance market is nuts and getting worse for many reasons but the losses they are seeing with the cub gear collapses in recent model airplanes is not helping. New pilots with no tail dragger experience are having a hard time finding insurance, so this issue hitting the resale market.
    You just donít GET IT!!! You are making a comparison that when you roll your car the windshield breaks, and that the windshield is to weak!!! Donít do dumb **** and you might not beak stuff. Spend you effort getting some good training, because you obviously donít UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUíRE DOING.... with that said Iíll gladly take your money when you ball up your plane to unball it....


    Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app

  2. #122
    RaisedByWolves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,290
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    Not just CCs! That pesky weak gear! https://www.facebook.com/groups/Bigt...7778887082561/
    Wait. You can stall a wing with slats? They have a critical angle of attack too?? Noooooo


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #123
    Mauleguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    763
    Post Thanks / Like


    Here this one shows a pretty good beating on cub gear

    Oh I did not see the go-fund me page, ha like I am going to pay to help rebuild his 200K dollar airplane!
    Likes RaisedByWolves, 40m liked this post

  4. #124
    RVBottomly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Asotin County Washington (KLWS)
    Posts
    967
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    Look at the 5 minute mark and then shoot us a video and we can talk.
    Wow! So, to put all this in context, obviously the gear held up to that side-load. I shudder to think what would have happened if the tire actually rolled under.

    But I'm trying to understand if the question is will the Beringer gear, with it hanging lower unloaded, collapse in this scenario?

    Also, was the Bushwheel bending like that because of differential braking? It sure looked like it did everything it could to try to fail, but failed at it.
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  5. #125
    RVBottomly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Asotin County Washington (KLWS)
    Posts
    967
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    Not just CCs! That pesky weak gear! https://www.facebook.com/groups/Bigt...7778887082561/
    Yup. Total gear failure. Maybe add some wheels on the wingtip too?

    But, it did look like the gear took a lot of shock away from the airframe.
    Thanks barrow pilot, Eddy Lewis thanked for this post
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  6. #126
    Mauleguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    763
    Post Thanks / Like


    Not sure why people spend 10K dollars for landing gear when they are landing short on paved runways... This was my cub with 3" extended gear and my own shock set-up. I will say that the Acme gen 4 shocks would have made it feel smoother of course they were not around back then.

  7. #127

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,237
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mauleguy View Post


    Here this one shows a pretty good beating on cub gear

    Oh I did not see the go-fund me page, ha like I am going to pay to help rebuild his 200K dollar airplane!
    Just to make it clear to everyone!! The pilot did not start the go fund me page!! This was started by others to help support the rebuild.
    DENNY
    Likes Crash, Jr., wireweinie liked this post

  8. #128
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    10,855
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mauleguy View Post


    Here this one shows a pretty good beating on cub gear
    Take a good look at the rudder. It never moved from neutral until the impact threw the pilot's weight against the pedals.
    The first flight control which should be moved when a wing drops in a stall should be opposite rudder. Tricycle geared airplane pilots for a large part, must learn that the rudder pedals are not foot rests. When coupled with airplanes which have well designed ailerons with little or no adverse yaw, pilots tend to forget (if they ever learned) what the rudder pedals are supposed to do. A Cub is not one of these planes.
    N1PA
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  9. #129

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    5,806
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DENNY View Post
    Just to make it clear to everyone!! The pilot did not start the go fund me page!! This was started by others to help support the rebuild.
    DENNY
    And if memory serves? The following year the same pilot and plane won the gross weight STOL contest at the same, although revised, event. Nice guy. Good pilot. I gave him a set of Cub gear.

  10. #130

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    347
    Post Thanks / Like
    We all moan about how newer tailwheel pilots should take things slower, but they are not. They are not. So CC does what it has to do to survive. After the Cessna gear, they did the NX in case the insurance situation gets worse. I just don't see a bush pilot wannabe choosing a nosewheel unless driven to it by insurance. If their efforts reduce the accident numbers, we all benefit.
    I agree with the beater theory. I had a couple of 20K TW beaters before going crazy with an expensive TW. But I realize this is the culture of just do it, why wait, go for the gold, ad nauseum. Mfg's will adapt while we yell "get off the lawn", er, I mean paved runway.
    What's a go-around?
    Likes 40m liked this post

  11. #131
    RaisedByWolves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,290
    Post Thanks / Like
    So if cub gear is so weak, how come when that cub stalled, and crashed down on them, side loading the crap out of them, they didnít fail? Doesnít that go against your argument of weak gear???


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Likes skywagon8a, supercrow liked this post

  12. #132
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    20,381
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by RVBottomly View Post
    Wow! So, to put all this in context, obviously the gear held up to that side-load. I shudder to think what would have happened if the tire actually rolled under.

    But I'm trying to understand if the question is will the Beringer gear, with it hanging lower unloaded, collapse in this scenario?

    Also, was the Bushwheel bending like that because of differential braking? It sure looked like it did everything it could to try to fail, but failed at it.
    The camber of the bar and he is actually going around a corner. Bushwheels will absorb a lot of abuse (side load in this case). I was in the back seat of my brother's Super Cub when he slid down a hill sideways on 35s and made an imprint in the dirt at the bottom of the axle nut. He tagged the wing tip. We flew home and later found that it had bent the 1 1/4" axle. I lost sight of the tire went it went under the fuselage and out of view from the back seat. He was on hydrosorbs with bungee cords. Took a new axle welded into the gear and a new rear spar.

    My question on the Beringer gear system is to see what it does on an off camber landing area while going around a corner. We do that a lot around here. My only experience with it is seeing Greg Simmons in the Rat Cub stall a wing and how the gear wallowed around. Reminded me of a Champ or the Franken Maule. I know the valving is better but still would like to see the gear operated in the note conditions.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  13. #133
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    20,381
    Post Thanks / Like
    Some of our off camber turning landing areas.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screenshot_20201103-065506.jpg 
Views:	51 
Size:	49.6 KB 
ID:	52045
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screenshot_20201103-065523.jpg 
Views:	51 
Size:	51.5 KB 
ID:	52046
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes tedwaltman1, RVBottomly liked this post

  14. #134
    Crash, Jr.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    353
    Post Thanks / Like
    Had a short discussion with a friend who runs the Beringer gear last night about off-camber situations and sideloads. Apparently when the Beringer gear is fully at rest with aircraft weight on it, the shock is actually fairly bottomed out and sitting on a bumper. Basically, the issue is not so much that the outboard shock is compressing in a turn but the inboard shock is extending. Where the gear gets it's ability to absorb hits is from extending on takeoff and then giving up that travel when landing. Again, the rolling tendency of the plane when turning is not the outboard shock compressing, but the inboard one extending slightly. While it can be disconcerting to feel, the plane isn't in any danger because the loaded side is on a stop and cannot compress any more.

    He said in crosswind landing situations it's definitely slightly less stable than conventional gear but the key is to just get the weight on the gear with some aggression rather than finessing the plane onto the ground like you would normal gear. When taxiing in a wind the plane does have a tendency to pick up the windward wing slightly but while disconcerting, it's not really a danger.

    Standard or "legacy" gear is certainly more stable in ground handling but the Beringer gear is definitely impressive in the hits it can take. Sorry to flip flop, I'm definitely not the customer that's going to line up to plunk my $10k down but having seen what it can do it's pretty cool. Personally I'll take ACMEs but I don't think they're quite at the level the Beringers are for ham fisted abuse.

    *disclaimer: Airframes no longer sells Beringer products as they are available direct from Beringer USA so I have no agenda here, this is an old video*

    Likes DENNY, mike mcs repair liked this post

  15. #135
    tedwaltman1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    503
    Post Thanks / Like
    I have over 1,700 landings on my Acme Aero Gen-3 shocks. 99% off pavement. Gravel bars, sand, beaches, mountain tops, meadows, Idaho, Montana, Alaska. Great product, outstanding customer service. 35” Bushwheels.
    Likes Steve Pierce, jrussl liked this post

  16. #136
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    20,381
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Crash, Jr. View Post
    Had a short discussion with a friend who runs the Beringer gear last night about off-camber situations and sideloads. Apparently when the Beringer gear is fully at rest with aircraft weight on it, the shock is actually fairly bottomed out and sitting on a bumper. Basically, the issue is not so much that the outboard shock is compressing in a turn but the inboard shock is extending. Where the gear gets it's ability to absorb hits is from extending on takeoff and then giving up that travel when landing. Again, the rolling tendency of the plane when turning is not the outboard shock compressing, but the inboard one extending slightly. While it can be disconcerting to feel, the plane isn't in any danger because the loaded side is on a stop and cannot compress any more.

    He said in crosswind landing situations it's definitely slightly less stable than conventional gear but the key is to just get the weight on the gear with some aggression rather than finessing the plane onto the ground like you would normal gear. When taxiing in a wind the plane does have a tendency to pick up the windward wing slightly but while disconcerting, it's not really a danger.

    Standard or "legacy" gear is certainly more stable in ground handling but the Beringer gear is definitely impressive in the hits it can take. Sorry to flip flop, I'm definitely not the customer that's going to line up to plunk my $10k down but having seen what it can do it's pretty cool. Personally I'll take ACMEs but I don't think they're quite at the level the Beringers are for ham fisted abuse.

    *disclaimer: Airframes no longer sells Beringer products as they are available direct from Beringer USA so I have no agenda here, this is an old video*

    That is not a good testament to me, 35s and suppose to be good shocks and it bounced. Watching these Acmes I am not seeing that.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes tedwaltman1 liked this post

  17. #137

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    46
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Crash, Jr. View Post
    Standard or "legacy" gear is certainly more stable in ground handling but the Beringer gear is definitely impressive in the hits it can take. Sorry to flip flop, I'm definitely not the customer that's going to line up to plunk my $10k down but having seen what it can do it's pretty cool. Personally I'll take ACMEs but I don't think they're quite at the level the Beringers are for ham fisted abuse.
    Your friend got it right about the Beringer ALG and your video clearly demonstrated how these gear perform. I have not found the Beringer "less stable" in crosswinds but they do feel different as the up wind strut extents. No matter how you through the airplane down, it sticks.

    The value equation is separate discussion. I am changing from the legacy cub gear on a new CC with a nominal hull value between $250,000 and $400,000 depending on whether it is an SS or FX. Insurance companies now want to add up to $6,000 per year in premium costs to fully insure these machines while other insurance companies are charging 30% of that cost to insure the hull for 2/3 of the value. Appears to be a new game by the insurance companies. The majority of the accidents in the SS and FX are on or near the runway. Many involve collapse of the legacy cub landing gear. So it is value decision when you can get better gear on an expensive new SS or FX and pay for that investment by taking the risk on the lower cost hull insurance option and hedging that risk with a better gear. Aside from that after using the Beringer ALG for three years, through three generations of struts I would never go back. They handle differently on the ground and take a while to get used to but they handle anything you throw at them with a soft cushy feel.

    It would make no sense to put these gear on a "beater" cub where the investment might be worth a third of the airplane value.

  18. #138

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    5,806
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Beringer struts are near end of travel when static? That sure seems odd. Maybe that's why that Cub's tail drops so hard? Because the shocks bottomed? I think the tail hitting is what made the mains bounce.
    Likes mike mcs repair liked this post

  19. #139
    Crash, Jr.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    353
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    That is not a good testament to me, 35s and suppose to be good shocks and it bounced. Watching these Acmes I am not seeing that.
    Yeah, the bounce is less than ideal for sure but in fairness I think those were an earlier revision of the shocks. That was also just a full on 500fpm descent rate into the ground which would have just blown the (stock) gear straight off my cub. If the ACMEs would have done better on an identical style of approach I'd be very impressed in them. Maybe they do, I just haven't had the direct experience with them that others have. The only planes I see eating up that style of chop and drop landing are the purpose built SuperSTOL/Storch style gear.

    Turbopilot I have to say I fully reject your hypothesis that Beringer gear is going to save the plane where "legacy" gear will fail. For one you're going about it all wrong as multiple people have said; whether the gear fails or not is beside the point, the pilots need to develop skills so they're not getting sideways and ripping gear off in the first place! Secondarily even if hypothetically a Beringer gear system would survive a ground loop you're still going to be dragging wings on the ground, probably getting the prop, engine, and tail. The only difference is your wrecked plane will be sitting on blown out tires and intact gear while the rest of it is totaled. Nobody is walking away from these Carbon Cub wrecks without forking out money for repairs. Only skill will prevent aircraft damage, not it's undercarriage.

    I'm somewhat fully behind the off airport capability of the Beringer landing gear system but don't fool yourself, it's not a cure all for lack of skill. Despite what these Carbon Cub pilots think you can't transfer skill from your bank account into your aircraft.
    Likes mike mcs repair, Travelair3000 liked this post

  20. #140

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    46
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    The Beringer struts are near end of travel when static? That sure seems odd. Maybe that's why that Cub's tail drops so hard? Because the shocks bottomed? I think the tail hitting is what made the mains bounce.
    The Beringer spec is between 37 and 40 mm of strut showing static. You vary nitrogen pressure to get the right inflation. Based on watching the dust ring on the "O" ring sweep down the cylinder in 3 years I have never seen it close to the bottom. On the other hand I am not sure where the rubber bumper ends the sweep since my struts have always been pressurized. You can see the dust line from the "O" ring in this image. Because my SS is so light I run my struts with less pressure than the specification around 270 psi.


  21. #141

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Southern NH
    Posts
    779
    Post Thanks / Like
    So, run your car into a brick wall at 40 mph. Is the damage caused by the failure of the bumper?

  22. #142
    Gordon Misch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Toledo, Wa (KTDO)
    Posts
    3,770
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mam90 View Post
    So, run your car into a brick wall at 40 mph. Is the damage caused by the failure of the bumper?
    Weak mortar? Improperly fired bricks? Sorry, couldn't help myself.
    Gordon

    N4328M KTDO
    My SPOT: tinyurl.com/N4328M (case sensitive)
    Likes mam90, mike mcs repair liked this post

  23. #143
    RVBottomly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Asotin County Washington (KLWS)
    Posts
    967
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mam90 View Post
    So, run your car into a brick wall at 40 mph. Is the damage caused by the failure of the bumper?
    I put a railroad tie on the front and back of an old one ton just for that purpose....well, sort of. For some reason it discouraged tailgaters, at least.

  24. #144
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    20,381
    Post Thanks / Like
    turbopilot, can you tell us something about yourself, your experience and your mission. I think I am an open book and posted about me again recently on the Cub Crafters thread. I am always curious about who I am taking advise from.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes Eddie Foy, tedwaltman1 liked this post

  25. #145

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    5,806
    Post Thanks / Like
    1-1/2" of suspension available after static weight is on the gear is different than what I'm used to seeing. There must be valving at work in the initial part of the compression stroke to control rate? With their geometry 1-1/2" of available compression means 1-1/2" of available compression travel. With typical Cub gear TK-1s offer approx 4" of compression that translates to 12" of travel at the wheel. Very different.
    Likes Dave Calkins liked this post

  26. #146

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Yes, there would have to be a lot of compression damping if the (effective) spring rate allows so much sag. It seems to be designed for the initial impact, and Bushwheels take care of the rest.
    What's a go-around?
    Likes Dave Calkins liked this post

  27. #147

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    46
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    turbopilot, can you tell us something about yourself, your experience and your mission. I think I am an open book and posted about me again recently on the Cub Crafters thread. I am always curious about who I am taking advise from.
    I have been flying for 50 years both military and civilian. 4,000 hours in all types, 500 in tail wheel. Been flying the Carbon Cub SS for the last 10 years. In that time I have built and flown two EAB aircraft, a BD-4 and one of the very first VariEze aircraft. My current aircraft is an ELSA Carbon Cub. Most of my flying is in the southwestern US. Based out of KTRM.

  28. #148
    Eddie Foy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    3,678
    Post Thanks / Like
    We seem to get alot of folks who show up here voicing opinions and ideas. It would be nice to know something about them other than a screen name. People rarely fill out their profile.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    turbopilot, can you tell us something about yourself, your experience and your mission. I think I am an open book and posted about me again recently on the Cub Crafters thread. I am always curious about who I am taking advise from.
    "Put out my hand and touched the face of God!"

  29. #149
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    20,381
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by turbopilot View Post
    I have been flying for 50 years both military and civilian. 4,000 hours in all types, 500 in tail wheel. Been flying the Carbon Cub SS for the last 10 years. In that time I have built and flown two EAB aircraft, a BD-4 and one of the very first VariEze aircraft. My current aircraft is an ELSA Carbon Cub. Most of my flying is in the southwestern US. Based out of KTRM.
    I have about 30-40 hours in a Long-EZ time, never flew the VariEze. I have been flying about 25 years with just under 4000 hours all in tail wheels except the Long-EZ and time in my wife's Tri-Pacer. I fly weekly on gravel bars doing 10-20 landings in one outing on and off different places. If you watched the video that SJ and I did you will see I have some experience in broken airplanes. I have also been fixing them longer than I have been flying them and listening to pilots tell me what is wrong with the airplane. In my experience a few know what they are talking about but most do not. Takes a while sometimes to differentiate them out when they are real good at BS. My point is that when hawgdrvr and turbopilot get on SuperCub.org and start telling me the landing gear that I have a lot of use and abuse on and have yet to fail, is a poor design and prone to failure I would like to know their experience and background. I would love to bolt the Beringer gear on my airplane and give it an honest evaluation in my normal mode of operation just to see how I like it. My airplane has been unique in the fact that it went from a stock Super Cub to where it is now one mod at a time with lots of seat time in between. A lot of the Cubs I am involved with get modded up at a rebuild and it is hard to tell what did what. I have been able to see first hand what each mod did and didn't due to my particular airplane.

    Back to you and your Carbon Cub, where do you fly and what is your main mission?
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Thanks 40m, barrow pilot thanked for this post
    Likes 40m, skywagon8a liked this post

  30. #150

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    46
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post

    Back to you and your Carbon Cub, where do you fly and what is your main mission?
    Most of my Carbon Cub time in the last 10 years has been in and around the San Juan Islands of Washington and for the last 5 years the deserts of the Southwest but mostly the deserts of Southern California. I really miss the grass.

    I started on this forum back in 2010 but pulled out after a couple of years as the signal to noise ratio was very high. I see the same thing is still going on. I offer my experience and opinion then whenever I can back it with data. It is very frustrating to do that only to have someone come back with some old saying in rebuttal. Seems to be a lot of that in this thread.

  31. #151
    hawgdrvr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    44
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    ...My point is that when hawgdrvr and turbopilot get on SuperCub.org and start telling me the landing gear that I have a lot of use and abuse on and have yet to fail, is a poor design and prone to failure I would like to know their experience and background. I would love to bolt the Beringer gear on my airplane and give it an honest evaluation in my normal mode of operation just to see how I like it...
    Let me repost my original post in this thread to remind you and others that I have no experience here, I'm asking a question to sort out information I read and hear about so I can make the best informed decision. I have given no advice or suggestions, I've solicited advice of the members here to help me get educated. I have since made my decision and already ordered TK1's and a T3 tailwheel. My decision process is complete. I do not trust in the design of Acme Aeros and my observation have shown TK1 Shock Monster extremely popular hence my purchase. I am not second guessing this, I am excited to receive and later have installed the TK1's. I am still learning from these posts such as how to keep my FX3 from having incidents such as discussed. I'm an inexperienced TW pilot but an experienced pilot with 3K hours and over 30 years.

    My OP:

    I have a FX3 on order for next May/June. I'm an experienced pilot (3K hours) but inexperienced TW with now over 10 hours and increasing in the months ahead including TacAero formal training in TX. I want to outfit my FX3 with the best and safest configuration for landings as this is where it seems the incidents occur. Quite a few ground loops with FX3's and have also seen some with broken Acme shocks. I'm being told Beringer is the best, it is pricey, but so is the cost of repair. I'm told the 3X3 design is from the 1940's and that FX3's are heavier and newer with the design essentially outdated and a better gear design is needed. Beringer appears to answer that call.

    What is the recommendation for gear on a FX3 without cost being a factor? I am also planning on Beringer wheels and brakes as that does seem to be proven to be the best so this question is only about the landing gear system.
    This thread is done for me, my question has been answered, I made my decision and ordered.
    Last edited by hawgdrvr; 11-04-2020 at 09:51 AM.
    Thanks Steve Pierce thanked for this post

  32. #152
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    20,381
    Post Thanks / Like
    I guess I am ignorant to what you mean by "It is very frustrating to do that only to have someone come back with some old saying in rebuttal."

    As far as data, are you referring to NTSB data. Sorry but my opinion is very skewed in regard to the NTSB findings. Look at the NTSB report on my midair at Sun & Fun in 2002 and then I can show you their own file I got through the Freedom of Information Act and you tell me if the report matches the data. The other thing you might think about is coming into a group that has been flying Super Cubs for decades and someone shows up and starts telling them that their gear is a bad design and prone to failure. NTSB reports etc might show that but our own experience doesn't. I think you are saying we are not receptive to your data? How receptive are you to ours? I am sorry that a bunch of low time guys with $300K to plop down on a Carbon Cub have a high rate of gear failures but knowing and having been around way to many of them I have developed my own opinion. That being said, your Beringer gear might be the cats ass, might be stronger, better and the way to keep these guys from wading up their airplanes. I guess time will tell.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Thanks Fat Kid thanked for this post

  33. #153

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    46
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    NTSB reports etc might show that but our own experience doesn't. I think you are saying we are not receptive to your data?
    The NTSB reports are all that is available to me. As to "your data", I guess I missed those posts. I have seen a bunch of old sayings and a whole bunch of ad hominum attacks but no real data to support other positions. My position is simple. The 80 year legacy cub system has many problems that can be solved with newer technology. It is an opinion shared by the largest manufacturer of legacy cub gear aircraft today. The problem is the choices are few. There is no upgrade path offered by those who continue to make this old gear system.

    This thread got started on a wrong premise. The OP asked for a comparison between a complete landing gear system alternative (Beringer ALG) and simple shock absorber offered as a solution to only one of the many problems inherent in the legacy cub landing gear system. There have been many products offered (AOSS, Acme, TK) to compensate for the awful bungees in the legacy cub gear system. Any of them work better than the original bungees. But none of them deal with the lack of a reliable fail safe mode of the legacy cub gear when stressed beyond design limits. That is the issue of most importance, in my opinion. The work around appears to be one of the shock absorber systems with a series of steel cables to hold the legacy gear together in the event of total failure. Apparently that works for a lot of people and appears to be an acceptable solution for an old beater cub.

    But it is now 2020 and there are still a variety of new cubs being made incorporating all sorts of advanced technology. Time for the gear system to catch up. CubCrafters has offered the XCub which is a good start but requires around $500k to enjoy the technology. It would be nice to have retrofit options for the rest of the fleet. It appears there is at least one available now.

  34. #154
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    20,381
    Post Thanks / Like
    Actually there has been an STC for years to install spring gear on a Cub and was posted here. Cub Crafters is very good at marketing and the gear strength of the X Cub is a marketing thing. It is all good but depends on your mission. I have an X Cub in my hangar right now. Great airplane for a lot of people's mission just not mine. Every gear has pros and cons just like everything in aviation, it is all a compromise. Spring gear will not meet my mission, bungees meet my mission but not very well, AOSS meets my mission, Acme will, TK will and Beringer might. There are draw backs to each one that have been discussed here. Read and make your own conclusions but don't discount others opinions.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers
    Likes 40m liked this post

  35. #155
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    20,381
    Post Thanks / Like
    I'm told the 3X3 design is from the 1940's and that FX3's are heavier and newer with the design essentially outdated and a better gear design is needed.
    You were told wrong, FX3 3X3 gear is nothing like legacy gear except in basic design.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  36. #156
    Mauleguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    763
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by turbopilot View Post
    I have been flying for 50 years both military and civilian. 4,000 hours in all types, 500 in tail wheel. Been flying the Carbon Cub SS for the last 10 years. In that time I have built and flown two EAB aircraft, a BD-4 and one of the very first VariEze aircraft. My current aircraft is an ELSA Carbon Cub. Most of my flying is in the southwestern US. Based out of KTRM.
    500 hours in tailwheel aircraft over 10 years, your pretty green I would say, 50 hours a year average... Sorry but I am not going to listen to what you have to say about a gear system unless you put up some real videos about what this gear does in rough stuff not smooth dirt to asphalt.

    On another subject that was brought up. If you have ever had a wing start to fly because you were sitting off camber and were not pointing directly into the wind (because it just was not possible) and it was then compounded by a gear that does not support the airplane properly you will know why I would never install this gear on my airplane.
    Thanks Fat Kid thanked for this post
    Likes skywagon8a, Steve Pierce, alaskaoe liked this post

  37. #157

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    46
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    You were told wrong, FX3 3X3 gear is nothing like legacy gear except in basic design.
    How do you respond to brilliant logic like this? Back to read only mode.
    Likes stewartb liked this post

  38. #158
    Crash, Jr.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    353
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by stewartb View Post
    1-1/2" of suspension available after static weight is on the gear is different than what I'm used to seeing. There must be valving at work in the initial part of the compression stroke to control rate? With their geometry 1-1/2" of available compression means 1-1/2" of available compression travel. With typical Cub gear TK-1s offer approx 4" of compression that translates to 12" of travel at the wheel. Very different.
    I think you're missing that the bulk of the travel is from the unloaded position, not the loaded position. You're thinking about this like dirtbike or snowmachine suspension where you have maybe 20% static sag and then 80% travel remaining. The Beringer gear works in the opposite where it's 80% static sag on the ground with only 20% remaining for ground handling "suspension". When the weight comes off of the gear it extends giving you full suspension travel. When you land it's giving up it's entire travel and using all of that available travel to absorb the hit. In effect it's using the suspension's full design travel on landing to give the valving the maximum amount of time to dissipate energy. As we know from rising rate suspension designs on dirtbikes/atv/sno-go's you want to use the maximum amount of shock stroke length whenever possible to maximize the use of shock valving to do it's job.

    For the application it's actually pretty smart when you think about it. It's not designed to be a shock absorber for ground handling, it's designed to soak up big hits on landing and it seems to do that pretty well.

    Again, still skeptical about the crosswind or turning takeoff/landing scenario but from a purely engineering standpoint I'd say this is superior to ACME's on those terms.

  39. #159

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Wolf Lake, AK
    Posts
    5,806
    Post Thanks / Like
    I disagree. If the suspension travel is reliant on the wing to unweight the load? I'd rather it can take a hard landing and make it feel soft. Also, I'd rather not have the tire in contact with the ground for any longer than necessary as I take flight. Get into wet, soft, sticky places and all it'll add is drag with no benefit. My airplanes are designed primarily to fly. The landing gear suspension is designed for the transition between flight and static. The shock absorption of my TK-1 setup is so effective it allows the plane to be operated differently than original gear could accommodate. I don't see Beringer being as effective for my plane, and that's just my take on it. I've watched the Beringer gear demo videos and while they offer pretty scenery and the pilot is good in the plane? He could have been on 850s and bungees. There is nothing punishing the gear or airframe. But I like innovative product development and understand that the videos may not show the whole story so I remain curious. And to that, I appreciate guys like Turbo providing pireps.
    Likes Crash, Jr. liked this post

  40. #160
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    20,381
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by turbopilot View Post
    How do you respond to brilliant logic like this? Back to read only mode.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20201104_172109158.MP.jpg 
Views:	189 
Size:	100.2 KB 
ID:	52088

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20201104_171948137.jpg 
Views:	188 
Size:	103.7 KB 
ID:	52090

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20201104_172158115.jpg 
Views:	185 
Size:	91.8 KB 
ID:	52091

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20201104_172005976.jpg 
Views:	184 
Size:	99.0 KB 
ID:	52092

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20201104_172138283.jpg 
Views:	185 
Size:	93.7 KB 
ID:	52093

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20201104_172144189.jpg 
Views:	183 
Size:	91.8 KB 
ID:	52094
    Last edited by Steve Pierce; 11-04-2020 at 01:00 PM.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

Similar Threads

  1. Acme black ops
    By JeremyLee89 in forum Piper: PA-18 Super Cub (and L18C & L21)
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 11-24-2020, 08:13 AM
  2. FS: Acme Aero Shocks
    By Hgr3029e in forum Parts and Pieces
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-09-2018, 01:05 AM
  3. Acme Aero Bush Shock 2
    By slowjunk in forum Experimental Cubs
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 11-16-2017, 05:26 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
  •