Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 41 to 60 of 60

Thread: New exhaust wrecks FX-3?

  1. #41
    hotrod180's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Port Townsend, WA
    Posts
    3,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by soyAnarchisto View Post
    So engine quit upwind but low enough that he couldn't make the turn back to the field? I'm trying to understand how he had to put it down between two trees if he was still in the pattern.
    Some pilots I've seen seem to like flying their pattern in a different zip code than the airport.
    Not saying that's the case here, just saying.
    Cessna Skywagon-- accept no substitute!

  2. #42
    soyAnarchisto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Posts
    610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Thanks, Steve. I'm not trying to disparage anyone. I dream of building an experimental, and quite possibly an EX-3, so I often go through the mental exercise of how I might mitigate risk during the testing phase of flight. Hell, every time my plane comes back from annual I think about this..... I just started towing gliders, with some exciting maintenance situations so have recently become even more keenly aware of the glide distance to the field... of a supercub.

    Good on your buddy for limiting the damage and not hurting himself. I love cubs because when something goes wrong it's far better to mush down in the low 30's than to have a breaking stall in the 50's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    I have his phone number if you want to ask him. I would guess he thought all was good and got a bit further from the airport than he wanted. I have also test flown several Super Cubs/Carbon Cubs recently after having replaced cams and lifters and there is a point on takeoff that I cannot land back on the airport trying not to do a steep climb. Sometimes you do everything you can, pray and cross your fingers.
    Likes tedwaltman1 liked this post

  3. #43
    Flyingde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    60
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    I have a lot of time in the FX3 and never noticed it being loud, actually seems quiet to me. I am using a Bose headset though.
    We have a new to the area carbon cub that has been practicing at our strip lately. I’m not sure about on the inside but from the outside aka on the ground it is the loudest airplane of it’s type in the area that I can think of as far as what appears to be engine noise. Now my neighbors’s 185 barks but that’s a different beast.

    Maybe I need to wear my Bose on the ground. Lol….

    I’m just glad no one was hurt.

  4. #44

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    273
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinJ View Post
    The last power off practice at my home strip would have ended two ways. Once in the power line and once in the six wire cedar post fence. Lesson taken away was that my pattern was not high enough and my key is nearly over my strip. Could have been worse than two fruit trees.
    I tried a few simulated engine failure turn backs in the FX-3. I need less than 300 ft in the PA-28 but I only made one work with 500 ft in the FX-3. Quite an eye opener and I need to do some more to optimize my technique.

  5. #45
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    11,711
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by frequent_flyer View Post
    I tried a few simulated engine failure turn backs in the FX-3. I need less than 300 ft in the PA-28 but I only made one work with 500 ft in the FX-3. Quite an eye opener and I need to do some more to optimize my technique.
    You need to keep in mind that there is always a "surprise factor" when an engine actually quits. Varies with the individual, but it's a few seconds at the least. Whereas during "practice" engine failures, the pilot knows it's going to happen, and when.

    I'd be really skeptical about trying a turn back from 300 agl in most any plane, if it were an actual, unplanned engine failure. But, good for you for comparing planes, that's certainly more useful.

    In any case, give yourself some "cushion" so to speak before attempting a turn around for real.

    I've had three engine "failures" (two roll backs to idle and one crankshaft failure), and each was a unique surprise.

    MTV
    Likes RaisedByWolves, 40m liked this post

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    King Salmon, AK
    Posts
    123
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by soyAnarchisto View Post
    So engine quit upwind but low enough that he couldn't make the turn back to the field? I'm trying to understand how he had to put it down between two trees if he was still in the pattern.
    Hood River airport has noise abatement procedures that involve a pretty extended departure leg for airplanes taking off to the west, in part due to the rising terrain beneath aircraft taking off in that direction. A summary of those procedures can be found in the linked attachment from a public meeting, though you have to dig through a lot of other information to find it.

    https://portofhoodriver.com/wp-conte...-meeting-2.pdf
    Thanks soyAnarchisto thanked for this post

  7. #47

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    273
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mvivion View Post
    I'd be really skeptical about trying a turn back from 300 agl in most any plane, if it were an actual, unplanned engine failure. But, good for you for comparing planes, that's certainly more useful.
    Well you did say "plane" but a lot of my experience is in gliders. Simulated rope break turn backs at 200 ft are a routine part of aerotow glider training so I don't have the fear of doing them in airplanes that most pilots seem to have.

    The big time wasters are deciding if a turn back is possible and deciding which way to turn. Both should have been considered before starting takeoff roll. But, yes, I do understand that practice is not the same as a real emergency.
    Thanks soyAnarchisto thanked for this post
    Likes tedwaltman1 liked this post

  8. #48
    mvivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Bozeman,MT
    Posts
    11,711
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by frequent_flyer View Post
    Well you did say "plane" but a lot of my experience is in gliders. Simulated rope break turn backs at 200 ft are a routine part of aerotow glider training so I don't have the fear of doing them in airplanes that most pilots seem to have.

    The big time wasters are deciding if a turn back is possible and deciding which way to turn. Both should have been considered before starting takeoff roll. But, yes, I do understand that practice is not the same as a real emergency.
    I think we agree.

    Sometimes a cautionary note may (or may not) be warranted.

    MTV
    Likes tedwaltman1 liked this post

  9. #49
    soyAnarchisto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Boulder, CO
    Posts
    610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Another big time waster is following a lot of our training about only making shallow turns. If you decide to do the impossible turn, you don't have the luxury of making a shallow turn which increases the time you are turning and the size of your arc. Yank it over and git'er pointed back to where you need to be. Just don't stall it in the process. I think this requires practice to make this decision faster and safer.

    Quote Originally Posted by frequent_flyer View Post
    Well you did say "plane" but a lot of my experience is in gliders. Simulated rope break turn backs at 200 ft are a routine part of aerotow glider training so I don't have the fear of doing them in airplanes that most pilots seem to have.

    The big time wasters are deciding if a turn back is possible and deciding which way to turn. Both should have been considered before starting takeoff roll. But, yes, I do understand that practice is not the same as a real emergency.

  10. #50

    Join Date
    May 2021
    Location
    Arizona, USA
    Posts
    273
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by soyAnarchisto View Post
    Another big time waster is following a lot of our training about only making shallow turns. If you decide to do the impossible turn, you don't have the luxury of making a shallow turn which increases the time you are turning and the size of your arc. Yank it over and git'er pointed back to where you need to be. Just don't stall it in the process. I think this requires practice to make this decision faster and safer.
    Agree. Immediate 45 degree banked turn just above stall speed and with the ball centered will give minimum altitude loss and best chance of making it back to the runway. Also - forget about best glide speed. It's completely irrelevant until the turn has been completed. The goal is to complete the turn with minimum altitude loss.
    Likes soyAnarchisto liked this post

  11. #51

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    7,599
    Post Thanks / Like
    Me too. I teach turnbacks. We have target altitudes and direction of turn scoped out for each aircraft and each runway, and when possible fly patterns that allow landing on the airport property with engine failure at any point. The Cherokees do not pay attention to such things - a two mile stabilized approach is de rigueur, and they ask for a short approach when they want a one mile final.

    One student had a total engine failure at 400', followed by a successful turnback. He had less than 20 hours total time. I said "nice job." He said "just did what you showed me last week."

    Secret is to get the nose down, then turn. Absolutely must have a target altitude in mind. Doesn't work on some strips with obstacles.
    Thanks flynlow thanked for this post
    Likes soyAnarchisto, tedwaltman1 liked this post

  12. #52

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    King Salmon, AK
    Posts
    123
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Pierce View Post
    My buddy is the DOM at Tac Aero and was the pilot. Just got off the phone with him. Customer had a glass pack, long swiss style muffler made by an aircraft exhaust company cause he didn't like the smell or the sound of the stock FX3 system. They installed the exhaust which had a titanium can to offset the weight of the long muffler. He got 900 to 1000 feet up and the prop stopped. The inner can which is perforated was rolled against the grain and cracked between the holes. The glass in the front of the muffler peeled aft and stopped up the tail end and shut off the exhaust. To quote him the tail pipe looked like a cat's ass.
    In light of the comments regarding turnback, worth pointing out that the airport elevation is 638. Assuming departure to the west, the terrain climbs underneath the departure leg, but even just considering airport elevation, the height AGL at 900 feet is less than 300 feet...so not sure if he was indicating 900 MSL or 900 AGL, but those would be pretty different. Regardless, worth pointing out that the guys that fly for Tac Aero are a pretty high quality group of pilots, so it might be worth giving them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.
    Likes tedwaltman1 liked this post

  13. #53
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    21,199
    Post Thanks / Like
    He was flying all the OX5 powered stuff at WAAM over the weekend. He is a good stick, no doubt.
    Steve Pierce

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

  14. #54
    Farmboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Glens Falls, NY
    Posts
    2,759
    Post Thanks / Like
    A bit of speculation on my part due to a large lack of time in any Cherokee, but I see two large differences in relation to power loss on climb out.
    Typical Cherokee profile will be less angle, faster, and less drag. Typical cub will have a greater aoa, slower, and way more drag.
    Chop the power in the cub you’d better be busting knuckles. Chop the power in the Cherokee you maybe have another second to think about it.


    Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
    Likes 40m liked this post

  15. #55

    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    ANC
    Posts
    117
    Post Thanks / Like
    I too follow the FX3 accidents with great interest. It has a very high accident rate. Loss of control on the ground accounts for at least 50% of those. Surely the airplane cannot be blamed, although perhaps it possesses some characteristics that make it more difficult to control than other cubs (forward CG, relatively heavy weights on legacy gear, more HP/torque/left turning tendency). Obviously you can't really blame the airplane for this accident with the exhaust problem. I am glad I ordered earlier this year, as the prices for everything CC sells have gone up 10% over the summer.

    I have 11,000 hours of flight time, most of which is irrelevant to flying a cub, and am not going to be able to get insurance in my FX3 until I obtain 50 hours in type most likely. I'm not complaining, it's just the facts. I only have 20 hours tailwheel and about 10 in PA-18's though. Even once I get 50 hours in fX3's I expect to be paying $10k/year. That's OK, I'll give myself a 5 knot crosswind/15 knot total wind limit, stay off the pavement for landings for awhile and just carry liability until I hit 50. If I wreck the airplane even after taking the tac-aero course and putting hard wind limits on myself, I deserve what I get. From talking to my insurance co. time in type is king, generic tailwheel time helps a little but until you get 50 hours in type they probably aren't going to write a policy for an experimental taildragger (at least my present company won't). No, they won't count PA-18 as time in type for a carbon cub.

    People up here are charging $250-$400 to rent PA-18's plus an extra $75-$200/hr for instructors. Tac-Aero does training in actual FX-3's for almost same price, problem is you have to go there. You can rent an R44 with an instructor for about the same as some outfits charge for cub training around here. I'm told that some of these PA-18 training outfits are self-insuring now.

    Anyway, just glad to have some FX3 discussions even if it's not all rainbows, sunshine, and unicorns. I take a fair amount of crap from people up here if they find out I ordered one saying it's not going to hold up. I didn't tell anyone except the guys I'm partnering in my Cessna with since I'm trying to sell my share of that one, but pilots are super good at gossiping.
    Likes tedwaltman1 liked this post

  16. #56
    aktango58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    18AA
    Posts
    9,598
    Post Thanks / Like
    any new piece of equipment takes time to learn the nuances. Maules have a bad rap because they are not forgiving and quickly punish those that get behind it on take off, landing or go around.

    Any time you put lots of power up front with that light of a plane, you can expect some learning curve.

    Lake aircraft finally had to require factory training... so it doesn't fly just like a cub? They do sound fun!
    I don't know where you've been me lad, but I see you won first Prize!
    Likes tedwaltman1, Narwhal liked this post

  17. #57
    skywagon8a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SE Mass
    Posts
    11,443
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by aktango58 View Post
    Lake aircraft finally had to require factory training... so it doesn't fly just like a cub? They do sound fun!
    And the insurance companies required an annual check ride with one of the approved instructors on the insurance company's list.
    Yes George, they are fun.
    N1PA
    Likes Narwhal liked this post

  18. #58
    Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Graham, TX
    Posts
    21,199
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Narwhal View Post
    Anyway, just glad to have some FX3 discussions even if it's not all rainbows, sunshine, and unicorns. I take a fair amount of crap from people up here if they find out I ordered one saying it's not going to hold up. I didn't tell anyone except the guys I'm partnering in my Cessna with since I'm trying to sell my share of that one, but pilots are super good at gossiping.
    You will love it, it is a great flying airplane and the little "new airplane" quirks have been addresses so far. I maintain one with 800 plus hours so far and those are not easy hours as this is the dealers demo airplane. We had a few issues early on but Cub Crafters has addressed them on new production. Don't let any of those old Cub drivers fly it because they won't want to give it back.
    Steve Pierce

    Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.
    Will Rogers

  19. #59

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    7,599
    Post Thanks / Like
    People up here are charging $250-$400 to rent PA-18's plus an extra $75-$200/hr for instructors. Tac-Aero does training in actual FX-3's for almost same price, problem is you have to go there. You can rent an R44 with an instructor for about the same as some outfits charge for cub training around here. I'm told that some of these PA-18 training outfits are self-insuring now.

    I have been self-insuring a J3 hull for years. My liability insurer said this year that I can keep doing it so long as my students have 25 hrs make/model and a private license with tailwheel endorsement. Yeah, right!

    It is really getting complicated - my SAFE liability will not cover me when instructing in aircraft I own, but I can buy liability insurance for instructing in my own airplane from Avemco, with a ten student per year limit.

    We may do that - have to transfer the Cub into my name (then my SAFE insuance doesn't work) and off we go - we have a potential Stearman student with no tailwheel time, and I just insist on 15 hours of J3 pattern time before we even attempt the Stearman.

    Too bad it has gotten so complex and expensive - but a ground loop is no longer a "straighten the prop and go" evolution - it is more like a $50 grand maintenance event. Hull coverage premium = ten grand? I guess I can understand that.
    Thanks Narwhal thanked for this post

  20. #60
    Farmboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Glens Falls, NY
    Posts
    2,759
    Post Thanks / Like
    As you said and steve did as well, it’s not the airplane. It flys fantastic.



    Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
    Likes Narwhal liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Leading Edge Exhaust -- Exhaust Odor in Cabin on Final
    By Darrel Starr in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-01-2011, 09:02 PM
  2. projects/salvage/wrecks
    By kundrakub in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-01-2006, 03:59 PM
  3. Rebuilt Wrecks
    By cobblemaster in forum Cafe Supercub
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-13-2005, 12:15 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
  •