Build a CUB options

[dalec]

Bill

Reading this is killing me, I am right on the edge of doing one from scratch myself. If I take the plunge it won't be from a kit either. The more I fly mine and the more I have done to it in the name of "legal" improvements, the more apparent it becomes that getting it just the way you want it is far easier and cheaper as an experimental. I just hope that building an experimental doesn't leave me a mental case.

 

[Marty57]

The more I fly mine and the more I have done to it in the name of "legal" improvements, the more apparent it becomes that getting it just the way you want it is far easier and cheaper as an experimental. I just hope that building an experimental doesn't leave me a mental case.

Trust me ....... it will ...... but that's half the fun!
Marty57

 

[D.A.]

...I am right on the edge of doing one from scratch myself. If I take the plunge it won't be from a kit either...

Enough plywood for a jig table and tubing to tack together a fuselage doesn't cost that much and if you later decide to pass on the project you could easily get rid of the frame, especially on this forum.

I started my "Plunge" a few months ago and I'm just starting the steel work. Too bad all of us "Scratch Hopefuls" don't live on the same block.......

 

[Bill Rusk]

Folks

I went up to Brainerd MN yesterday to visit Javron. Here is my report.

I drove to Anoka airport just on the North side of the Minneapolis metroplex. There I borrowed Dr Randy's Cub, and flew up to Brainerd. Jay DeRosier picked me up at the airport and took me to his shop. We met up with Brad (Cubus Maximus, great guy and VERY knowledgeable) and got the tour. A little background.
Jay owns a machine shop. That is really his primary business but he is an airplane nut (like so many of us on this site) and several years ago he was at Oshkosh thinking it might be fun to pick up a little extra work. Well, he met Nick Smith, they hit it off, and a few weeks later Jay was welding up PA-12 kits for Nick Smith. When Turbine Cubs (now Backcountry Cubs) bought out Nick they contracted for Jay to continue welding up fuselages including the PA-18 model. Jay welded about 60 kits together and the feedback in this period was exceptionally positive. Backcountry decided to pull everything into one location and so they no longer needed Jays services. There may have been a little turbulence in the transition, as is often the case when significant physical moves are undertaken in a manufacturing concern. I think that is about the time Paul Fisher got his kit. Here is an older thread with a few pro's and cons. http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?32921-TCOW-PA-12-Kit/page2&highlight=tcow+welded
At any rate I believe that all issues have been resolved and that both Javron and Backcountry Cubs are producing quality products at this time. After Backcountry discontinued subcontracting to Javron, Jay thought it would be fun to get back in the business so he built all new jigs (as opposed to using Nick Smiths) as close to the original Piper drawings as possible. Jay is a machinest by trade so he works in thousandths of an inch. His jigs are all super-accurate and to Piper specs. So any part you buy from Atlee, Stoddards, Univair etc. will fit with Javron stuff. Jay is trying really hard to get back as close as possible to the Piper specs. Nick beafed up a lot of stuff. Jay is going back to the original as much as possible.
So...... you can purchase a kit from Javron which is comparable in parts count to Backcountry but it will be closer to a Stock Supercub than say Backcountry. The Backcountry Cub and SQ2 kits are pretty highly modified Cubs with a specific mission goal. Javron will have some mods but it will be closer to stock.
Javron will also sell parts, partial kits, and pretty much anything you want. So if you want a tacked fuselage (Ala Spraker) he will sell it that way. You build what you want but if you decide you don't feel like welding the seat, for example, you can just buy one from Javron. Mix and match all you want and it should fit as long as you are building from the plans/Northland CD.
Jay is still getting up to speed on all this and his product is not as refined or mature as Backcountry at this time. He has no builders manual yet and may not have the depth of knowledge currently at Backcountry. Wayne Mackey is there pretty much full time and that is a HUGE asset to Backcountry.
Jay is VERY flexible and will build whatever you want. I have also heard NOTHING but positive feedback on his customer service. I hope he can maintain that after he gets overwhelmed with orders. Jay is very weight conscious and that is a trait I admire as you may remember from my thread on building a Smith Kit
http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?22553-Building-a-Smith-Cub
In a nutshell I was VERY impressed with Jay and Javron and I am excited to see another kit company out there. I think once he gets fully up to speed it will be an awesome addition to the marketplace. The more options the better. Here are a few pictures.

Jay machines all his parts in house. This is a photo of one of many shelves, this one with pulleys on it.

This is Jay with the old pulley in his left hand and his new pulley in his right hand. Did I mention he is VERY weight conscious?

Jay redesigned the overhead trim crank to a double ball bearing unit that is light, strong and REALLY smooth. Very nice.

A little blurry (I have not replaced my camera yet (it went down the river) so this is from my Iphone) but this is Jays CAD cutter table.

Fuselage jig. Jay can do J-3's, PA-11's, and PA-18's both narrow and wide body.

Another jig shot.

A fuselage in progress.

Hope this helps (and folks please remember this is just one opinion, not gospel)

Bill
(A huge thanks to Windonhisnose for letting me borrow his horse, and bum a couch for a night.)

 

[Bill Rusk]

I also went to Cub Crafters last week.

Report

I was looking at the Carbon Cub EX model specifically. Cub Crafters is clearly the leader in having a highly refined cub kit. I doubt anyone else has anywhere near the engineering, testing, test flying, and data that CC does, including Piper. It is a top notch operation in every respect. The only limitation with a CC kit might be the lack of flexibility. I doubt you could get them to make a bunch of changes to the way they weld things up, for example, it comes with toe brakes, I don't think heel brakes are an option unless you want to get crazy and start cutting and welding on their frame. Even then, they have done such a fantastic job of integrating things that you would very quickly hit a wall. You can not hang their wings on a stock fuselage. The flaps hinge into the fuselage, the flap handle and mechanism is different, the fuselage attach points are different. The interior floor is now structural so you can't just take it out and do your own. In a nutshell you pretty much have to build it as is. Changes would be a real mess.
The good news is is an exceptionally complete kit. It costs more but you get more.

I went to CC with three concerns and they answered all three.

1 I wanted more fuel. They now have extended range tanks as an option that takes the wings up to 43 gals useable.
2 I wanted more baggage area. They have an expanded baggage mod now. Its huge.
3 I wanted more gross weight. You can set it where ever you want as an experimental. There are a couple of things you could do to the wings that I think would make me comfortable setting a GW at 2100 or higher. CC will not support that obviously, but at any rate, I feel I could address this to my own personal comfort level. Might not work for someone else. It is an experiment after all.

It is my opinion that this kit would fit my requirements; however it has a few things that I don't care for. Just me and my opinion, some folks like blue some like green...... so take this for what is, one persons opinion....

I do not like sharp stuff in the cockpit near my head. I feel flap handles, overhead trim handles, headset hooks, etc. are all just things that could split your skull wide open in a mishap. So for me the only thing I want up there are the tubes. You could do the CC airbags to help alleviate this concern or wear a helmet but it is just a personal thing for me. I do not like sharp objects, sharp angles, and things like that in the cockpit. My panel was very flat with no protrusions for that reason as well. Personal problem.

I prefer heel brakes in cubs.

I really like the lack of holes in the floor for things to fall into but I don't care for the plastic look.

So....thinking....it has tons of good points and only a few drawbacks, the question becomes, are those downsides so pervasive to me personally that I can not overlook them.

Great kit and a great company

Bill

 

[spinner2]

Bill, I don't think you'll find a Cub with a larger baggage area than the EX kit. Here's an image of mine without the rear seat in place. And behind that I put in my own extended baggage similar to their sub-kit but made from Kydex and with a large outside door. And remember that the CC floor is the same level all of the way back, it doesn't rise up to clear elevator cables like a PA-18 does.



The clamshell door is 50% longer too so you have easy access behind the seat.




More of the Kydex extended baggage area and it includes a 36" long, 6" diameter fishing rod tube.

I prefer heel brakes too but I'll see if I can't get by with toe brakes. :smile:

You're really doing your homework on this. I'm sure you'll make the right decision for what's right for you.

 

[kevin]

Hi Bill. These are good reports. Thanks for sharing with us. I too don't like toe brakes in a Cub type of plane.

 

[centmont]

The EX kit is a great way to go... keep it as light as possible if you can. Once you get accustomed to the flap handle where it is, you will never want to go back to reaching the floor in the pattern, or not having left full aileron. I can't wait to see Dan's. Tom Konitz, worked full-time (ca. 40h/wk) assembling his EX and had it completed (beautiful job !!) in less than 4 months. R

 

[Gordon Misch]

Bill, thank you very much for your reports. Did you fly the Carbon Cub? That thing really performs with its low weight and strong horsepower. I was VERY impressed with it, though I haven't seen more than the finished version.

 

[ronmac]

Guys I think a lot of you are paranoid about aircraft weight.When it comes to the severe turbulence we experience in the strong equinoxial winds in New Zealand and the associated rotors,what the hell is 20 pounds extra weight when it comes to aircraft integrity.I will take the heavier aircraft.For some of those who disagree I suggest you will live longer by watching your food intake,the other bonus is the aircraft performs better.

 

[mike mcs repair]

Guys I think a lot of you are paranoid about aircraft weight.When it comes to the......I suggest you will live longer by watching your food intake,the other bonus is the aircraft performs better.

score +2!.......

 

[tempdoug]

I like EQUAL strength but lighter anyday. Especially when its 100 degrees out. Or trees ahead. Or a passenger.

 

[MainlandCub]

I also went to Cub Crafters last week.

Report

I was looking at the Carbon Cub EX model specifically. Cub Crafters is clearly the leader in having a highly refined cub kit. I doubt anyone else has anywhere near the engineering, testing, test flying, and data that CC does, including Piper. It is a top notch operation in every respect. The only limitation with a CC kit might be the lack of flexibility. I doubt you could get them to make a bunch of changes to the way they weld things up, for example, it comes with toe brakes, I don't think heel brakes are an option unless you want to get crazy and start cutting and welding on their frame. Even then, they have done such a fantastic job of integrating things that you would very quickly hit a wall. You can not hang their wings on a stock fuselage. The flaps hinge into the fuselage, the flap handle and mechanism is different, the fuselage attach points are different. The interior floor is now structural so you can't just take it out and do your own. In a nutshell you pretty much have to build it as is. Changes would be a real mess.
The good news is is an exceptionally complete kit. It costs more but you get more.

I went to CC with three concerns and they answered all three.

1 I wanted more fuel. They now have extended range tanks as an option that takes the wings up to 43 gals useable.
2 I wanted more baggage area. They have an expanded baggage mod now. Its huge.
3 I wanted more gross weight. You can set it where ever you want as an experimental. There are a couple of things you could do to the wings that I think would make me comfortable setting a GW at 2100 or higher. CC will not support that obviously, but at any rate, I feel I could address this to my own personal comfort level. Might not work for someone else. It is an experiment after all.

It is my opinion that this kit would fit my requirements; however it has a few things that I don't care for. Just me and my opinion, some folks like blue some like green...... so take this for what is, one persons opinion....

I do not like sharp stuff in the cockpit near my head. I feel flap handles, overhead trim handles, headset hooks, etc. are all just things that could split your skull wide open in a mishap. So for me the only thing I want up there are the tubes. You could do the CC airbags to help alleviate this concern or wear a helmet but it is just a personal thing for me. I do not like sharp objects, sharp angles, and things like that in the cockpit. My panel was very flat with no protrusions for that reason as well. Personal problem.

I prefer heel brakes in cubs.

I really like the lack of holes in the floor for things to fall into but I don't care for the plastic look.

So....thinking....it has tons of good points and only a few drawbacks, the question becomes, are those downsides so pervasive to me personally that I can not overlook them.

Great kit and a great company

Bill

Thanks for all the reports Bill!

Earlier you expressed a dislike of the Widebody Cub. How did the extra width of the Cub Crafters Carbon Cub strike you?

Cheers,
Andrew.

 

[Bill Rusk]

Northstar

I somewhat overlooked the Northstar option in the original post. They have been doing this kit for over ten years now and seem to have a pretty good following and reputation.

Here is a link to their website http://www.customflightltd.com/

Advantages include a number of refinements to the basic Cub concept. Good builders manual/instructions and good parts list and hardware details. I have been fortunate to fly Lytles Northstar and it flies quite well indeed. The airplane is pretty beefy but a 0-360 helps mitigate that. Lots of cargo room, a little wider cockpit, much more adjustable seat and lots of removable panels to assist with maintenance. Downside.....heavy. Upside....if you want a plane that you can thrash around in the bush, work hard and put up wet, and generally use it like an old pick up truck, this may be just the ticket for you. As you know Jay Pratt has one and flies it often and recommends it. Jay has a LOT of experience building airplanes and his words carry great credibility.
Another option.

Lytle (currently in Alaska flying Beavers) with his Northstar in my backyard

Painted with Stewarts System

Panel

 

[Bill Rusk]

Dakota Cub

As you may know Amy and the folks at Dakota Cub are working on updating their website. But to help them out I will post some of the stuff that they sent me. They have (basically) three kits. A small engine kit that you should be able to get into the light sport class, the traditional 160hp Supercub kit and the Super 180hp kit. All are basically the same airframe with different engines. The big advantage that Dakota cub has is the fact that they are built to PMA FAA standards. You are for all practical purposes building a "factory" supercub. They also say if you did not finish your project you could sell the parts off to certified folks and perhaps not loose as much of your invested capitol. But the biggest advantage to Dakota Cub kits remains the certified status. The kit looks to be very complete and there is no doubt as to what you are getting or how well it will perform. It falls under the guise of experimental but the reality is there is not much experimental about it. You know exactly what you are getting and how it will fly.
Downside... Cost and flexibility. You will not be able to get them to start making lots of changes to the kit to accommodate your unusual request for a oversize this, undersize that, new one of these here and get rid of that there. If you like the Supercub pretty much the way it is and want all the assurance of time tested strength and utility, this may be perfect for you.

I tried to post the info Amy sent me to this thread but I could not get it to format properly so it came out in a mess. It is a very complete kit and the listed price was about 64K but I understand that that may be an old price and that it may be higher now. This would make it the most expensive kit option but also in many respects the least "experimental". Sometimes you get what you pay for.

Hope this helps

Bill

 

[Bill Rusk]

Folks

Now for the controversial part. Cost.

This is the hard part. It is not easy to compare apples to apples and to get a really firm idea of the cost of all this. I can tell you that building will cost more than you think and take longer. That is just the way it works. Get that idea firmly in your head.

As already discussed the lowest cost is to scratch build. This also has the advantage of the lowest entry or start up cost and the advantage of a "pay as you go" type build. The kits will significantly speed up your build time but they will also require a significant down payment. I know several folks including Christian that have a very nice flying custom Supercub for 50K. It can be done but it will take a LOT of time and determination. Completion rate will be very low. Most folks think they are tough enough to make it to the finish but the reality is fewer than about 1 in 5 will make it to the end. Time will be a minimum of about 3 years and usually closer to 8 or 10 years when all is said and done. Remember..... "it will take longer and cost more than you think"
The kit building completion rate is much higher. Perhaps because there is so much money invested you just can't quit as the resale value of a partially completed project is usually quite low. This would be less true of CC, Dakota kits, Backcountry, and the more established and complete kits. (that list is probably in order). Also once you start customizing your kit you reduce the market. Someone else may not want your goofy mods.

Cub Crafters sells their kits in several pieces that may help a little. Roughly 22K for wing, 22K for fuselage and 22k for finishing. You really can't buy just the wing kit and not the others. You can't bolt their wings on ANY other fuselage. They won't fit. Same for the fuselage. It is all different and integrated. Thus, you are probably going to buy their engine and firewall forward package too and maybe their instrument panel. That is all good as they are very complete and they all fit together into a wonderful package but they don't allow for much customization either.
So the total build cost for a Cub Crafters Kit is probably going to be in the 120 to 130k price range.

Next most expensive will probably be the Dakota Cub. Like the CC kit it is pretty fixed, not a lot of room for customization, but you also have a very known product. Say 70K for the kit and another 40K to 50K to finish is about 110 to 120K total.

Next seems to be the Backcountry kits. I have not spoken much about these. This is what I did last time. It is a known company with a good reputation and they have done a lot of innovative things, ie the SQ2. Wayne and Sharon Axelson were building wings for Nick Smith and they produced beautiful and well made wings. Cover them and bolt them on. They were straight and true. Wayne has gone from building wings to managing the entire kit, and he now has the help of Wayne and Sharon Mackey. If you guys don't know Wayne Mackey, you should. He is one of the Gurus of the Supercub world. Their standard kit comes with all sorts of mods, square wings, dual door, extended glass etc. You can get it back closer to stock but it will cost extra. Their cub is pretty highly modified. They have an excellent build manual and website to help you through the build. If there is any downside to this kit at all it would be that the cost and weight have crept up, at least with the Supercub kit. I am not that familiar with the SQ2. I know Wayne Mackey is very weight conscious and that he has been getting the weight down on their kits.
The basic cost of their kit is about 49K. To build what I want, ie customize the kit to my specs, would push it to close to 55K, if I understand their website and order form correctly. So 55K plus 40 to 50K to finish and you are right around 100K

Javron is currently listing his kit at 41K, plus what ever mods you want. add 40 to 50 K to finish and you are in the 80 to 90K range.

I do not have all the cost data for some of the other options and I am running out of steam posting all this stuff.

The Legend Kits are very nice but they are more light sport ie not 2300 pound GW Cubs so that does not fit my needs. It may be perfect for you however.

More later

Hope this helps and remember...... a LOT of this stuff is just my opinion and may not be perfectly accurate.


Bill

 

[tempdoug]

Bill, to me a very big item to building is Phone, Freight, Gas, UPS, parcel post, etc, etc. I dont want to know but i think im in the 5-9 grand area by the time it was all said and done. So the more of all the little things you can get the more 12 1/2 dollar bills you will save getting that one piece you forgot. doug

 

[Marty57]

Bill,
I think you are right on target on the different issues regarding building a Cub. There is one other thing to consider regarding scratch building a Super Cub that you haven't touched on yet. You are right about the completion rate for scratch built being low overall but I think that might be different for Cubs. My reasoning is Supercub.org. My project did not come with a builders manual and that has been a very big stumbling block many times. However, this site has become my "builders manual". The talent and generosity offered here is likely very unique and has sustained my efforts during times when it would have been easy to pack it up. Christian's site inspired me to put my build on line, D.A. is doing the same. You are offering the initial inquire in to the entire process; a great resource. Any questions a builder has can usually be answered with a search; if not than a post gets answers for sure. There sure are a lot more exp. Cubs being finished now than when I first started 5 years ago and I suspect that will continue because of these resources. The beauty of the Cub as an option for the experimental builder seems to to be you can simply pick the price you want to spend and realistically come pretty close to that mark. The range is build it all your self (my project) or assemble and fabricate as little as you like. Range is from around $30K to over $100K; 5+ years or one year to build. I don't think there are many other "kits" or plans out there that allow that kind of versility. Most of the planes out there today do not offer plans as an option; fewer yet allow you to build a part or buy that part un-certified or buy it for a certified aircraft and use it. I think the value of the Cub to any prospective builders are these options. I think it's great that you are taking the time to outline all these options; it is a lot of work on your part but exactly the example of what this site can mean to a builder. I bet there are going to be a lot more Exp. Cubs flying in the next few years. Great job putting together your perspective on all this!
Marty57

 

[Bill Rusk]

I need to catch up a little on my responses.

D.A. asked about the left door. Here is just one thought on that......

That left door might be nice when it is on floats (probably 30% of the time for me) and when I really need to dock on that side,(10% of 30%), so not very often, but the throttle will be in a uncomfortable position ALL of the time with dual doors. So it is not worth it to me to have poor ergonomics for the throttle for that one time a year event. One of the things I love about cubs is the way the controls just seem to fit and be in just the right place. It is a wonderfully comfortable plane to fly.
The door/throttle is just one example of many, and others may have other opinions but I do think whatever your opinion....build for what you will be doing MOST of the time.

Dalec - As Marty 57 says, one of the great things about cubs is the possibility to mix and match. Start building a set of wings. Not too difficult, not too expensive. Then if you want (and can afford it) you could just buy ailerons and flaps from one of several sources, Univair, Dakota, Backcountry, Javron, Wag Aero etc.
Plus you do have this great website and tons of support.

ronmac - welcome to SC.org. Great to have input from places other than middle USA. The trick is to cut the weight where you can. In a perfect world the entire airplane would fail at say 7G's. It does no good to have a spar attach fitting that will fail at 30G's if the bolt holding it on fails at 7G's. Cut that fitting down to where it weighs less and fails at 7G's. That is the whole issue with the weight on some of the cubs. We are beefing up areas that are already over built. If I can save 3 pounds from a part by getting it closer to the ultimate load criteria then that is good. If you know the bolt will fail at 7G's would you be comfortable with a attach fitting that fails at 10G's. Sure you would. Well I just saved a pound. Lets multiply that many times and you get a light airplane that flys better, hauls more and is just as strong as the original. Win Win situation. There are places where history has proven it is good to reinforce,..... tails, birdcages, gear, seatbelt attach, firewalls, etc. I am all for that, and my cub will have all those mods.

But a question for the masses.....How many pure structural failures have we seen from Supercubs? IE wings folded, tail fell off, firewall separated from fuselage? I don't know of many.

Andrew - I don't dislike the widebody but I am not so sure that I personally need it. It is nice in a lot of respects. I am actually still considering it. I think the perfect cub might be a 2" wider fuselage. Unfortunately no one makes one and it would add to the complexity. IE it would require a special cabane vee for the gear, custom windshield, custom panel, etc. Not all that bad if you are going to scratch build but if you are looking for a kit to speed up the building process it does make things a bit more difficult. The Northstar and the CC (as you mentioned) are wider but it is difficult to compare because the layout of the cockpit can have a big affect on the feel of the cockpit.

Marty57 - Excellent post. I agree this site and the folks here are a BIG asset. Furthermore, there is a lot more building going on now that a few years ago. In fact I would speculate that other than the RV guys the Supercub may be the second largest group of homebuilders. There is a lot of activity in this group.

Bill

 

[skywagon8a]

Widebody fuselage
I chose the wide body because of the increased space in the cockpit. It will fit me better. My question is: Does the widebody do anything else? Has anyone noticed any different flight characteristics that could be attributed to the extra width? I used to think that the reason that an Aeronca 7AC was faster than a J-3 was the width of the fuselage having a little less drag. Also that a PA-12 was faster than a PA-18 for the same reason. After all a blimp is supposed to have the most efficient shape. Wider in the middle. The 7AC has a different airfoil and the PA-12 has the wing mounted at a different angle. Perhaps those are the reasons? Is a PA-18, with the only change being a wide fuselage, any faster than a stock PA-18? Is there anything else that is effected?

Builders manual
I think that any kit should have a good printed manual. My Backcountry/TCOW kit only had a very poor manual which I had to download over the internet. To me it was almost useless. I do not like to have a computer running in my shop for two reasons. It goes to sleep while I am performing a task and it will get very dirty or broken. Just look at how dirty ones hands get while performing in the shop.
In my case it was not too important to have the manual as I have been working on these planes for over fifty years. For someone else, who does not have this advantage, a good printed manual would be a must.

 

[mike mcs repair]

edit: moved to own thread
http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?38506-Left-Door-Throttles

..... but the throttle will be in a uncomfortable position ALL of the time with dual doors. So it is not worth it to me to have poor ergonomics for the throttle for that one time a year event. One of the things I love about cubs is the way the controls just seem to fit and be in just the right place. It is a wonderfully comfortable plane to fly......
Bill

I still need to mock up the left door throttle idea that keeps it all in same basic location and movement...

mentioned in another thread, you would also need one more in front of door for that one time when door is open.

and you could do normal style handles.. I just thought the rod between knobs was simpler

discussed down in these threads
http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?37340-Our-Cub-Project&highlight=left+door+throttle

http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?38506-Left-Door-Throttles&highlight=left+door+throttle

 

[qsmx440]

Mike why not a good quality cable for experimental? It's good enough for the engine compartment, why not all the way? To much bending?

 

[qsmx440]

Rethinking that, A small back up handle on the floor between the seats for door open and emergency if cable breaks in the door. Allows both doors to be open and still function and backup. Still lighter than a lot of hard linkage? I'm thinking the door part closes over the handle. Door part breaks, open the door to disconnect.

 

[Greg Campbell]

Bill Bilt

Bill, I agree with StewartB. Flying that Bill Bilt Supercub from the front seat will always be a life memory for me. I would put it right back the way it was. It was perfect. I know you might get bored with the same new same new. Bill, Tornado got the J3. Be ready to give me my check out when our Supercub Upgrade Arrives. Greg

 

[mike mcs repair]

edit: moved to own thread
http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?38506-Left-Door-Throttles

Mike why not a good quality cable for experimental? It's good enough for the engine compartment, why not all the way? To much bending?

that was one thought I mocked up on -12 before i settled on this style... was a long cable going along hinge line(almost ordered the cable to do that!)...

but I like this better.... good old 1920's tech.... when levers were high tech!!

 

[Marty57]

The issue of a builders manual is an interesting point to look at. If a manufacturer is selling something that they call a "kit" than it should come with a very detailed builders manual. if the aircraft is advertised as "plans built" than it is just that; a series of drawings providing all the necessary information to fabricate the aircraft but little or no step-by-step info. If I were in the market for a "kit" aircraft and found out the manufacturer did not have a builders manual I would think long and hard about committing to that project. Where do you start? What is the sequence necessary to complete a given task? My 2+2 is a "plans built" aircraft and there is no builders manual and requires a lot of head scratching. Unless you are comfortable forging ahead without the directions in a manual you should stay away from "kits" that don't have a detailed manual. Just my experience and opinion.
Marty57

 

[Bob Breeden]

Bill,

Just got home and it was good to get back on SuperCub.org and find this thread. Looks like I found it at an opportune time...... Thanks for this thread!

Bob Breeden

 

[cgoldy]

Builders manual
I think that any kit should have a good printed manual. My Backcountry/TCOW kit only had a very poor manual which I had to download over the internet. To me it was almost useless. I do not like to have a computer running in my shop for two reasons. It goes to sleep while I am performing a task and it will get very dirty or broken. Just look at how dirty ones hands get while performing in the shop.
In my case it was not too important to have the manual as I have been working on these planes for over fifty years. For someone else, who does not have this advantage, a good printed manual would be a must.[/QUOTE]



I built my BC Cub from a lap top in the shed and was so frustrated. I was too tight (stingy) to print out the entire manual. With hindsight, I should have bitten the bullet and printed it out. Couple this with the very long and over done Stewart's System DVD I reckon I wasted weeks in front of a screen. Not to say that the Stewart's DVD wasn't complete but a bit long winded for some one on a mission.

But I now have a great Cub and all is almost forgotten!!!

 

[ronmac]

Bill, If it helps at all, Wayne Mackey put my wings on a diet 2 years ago. We shaved out almost 10 lbs from each wing. It's still heavier than a stock Piper wing, but it will handle 2,400 lbs.

Thanks Wayne,what did he do to lighten them?Regards,Ron.

 

[cgoldy]

For some reason, Skywagons's quote above looks like my comments. See [/QUOTE] One day I will work out this posting thing!