Flying the Super 18

[Cubus Maximus]

I like the position of the flap handle in the Smith Cub. Craig modified it a bit from stock and it sits out of the way, yet is easy to reach and pull.

I like this set up in left crosswinds - no more flap handle blocking your leg and not allowing full left stick travel. I wish Piper had always kept it the way they positioned the handle for the toe brake model with flaps. It seems much more natural there and it's out of the way. During the rebuild of a generic PA-18 can you reposition the flap handle to conform with this position, citing Piper drawings?

 

[mvivion]

What I can't figure out, and what isn't changed in the Super 18, is why not put the flap handle overhead, a la the CC Sport Cub with flaps?

Seems to me that is a serious shortcoming of all the Cubs and Huskys.

It also seems to me that you could develop a much simpler system by doing so.

If you are going to certify a new airplane, why copy the mistakes the original designers made?

Is anyone aware of any good reasons you couldn't put the flap lever overhead?

MTV

 

[Flapman]

The Dakota 'extended' wing should probably be referred to as a 'square' wing. The length of the square wing from the inboard end of the butt hinge to the outboard tip of the fiberglass wingtip is within 3/4 inch of the length of the stock wing from the same inboard point to the outboard margin of the tip bow. (This 3/4 inch will vary slightly depending on who put the tip bows on the stock wing.)
The square wing allows the stock length aileron (102 1/8 inches)to be moved outboard, and the it is distance moved is filled with larger flaps (62 1/2 inches stock to 90 1/4 inches).
The photos referred to by Cubus Maximus are great, this is the first time I've seen them. This Cub is the test bed aircraft, and the configuration shown is how it was when the FAA flight tests for the slotted wing were flown in South Dakota. These wings were replaced with square wings and FAA flight tests for this configuration were flown near Palmer. The square wings were replaced with square slotted wings, this is the current configuration.
The round tip slot wings have the larger flaps with a stock length wing, therefore the ailerons are reduced in length.
The currently available slotted wing is the square wing with slots, the best combination (IMHO) of wing area, slots, full length ailerons, and large flaps.
Regards,
Flapman

 

[SuperCub MD]

Is anyone aware of any good reasons you couldn't put the flap lever overhead?

MTV

Where are you going to mount it over head in a Cub so you don't thump your noodle on it in turbulence or a crash? Many old Super Cub flap levers have mysteriously shrank and bent to the left over the years....

Back to the Super 18, I had the privilege of flying it this summer. I'd describe the slot wing as "solid". The airplane is very comfortable to fly slow. It is very forgiving to crossed up, uncoordinated flight. The big advantage I see is safety. Pilots of this plane may not need thousands of hours of Super Cub time to feel comfortable pushing this plane to the edge. Are you going to see this airplane wiping a stripped out stock 160 Super Cub on a short field, and see all the working pilots giving away their old work horses to buy one of these?..No, that just isn't realistic, and isn't a fair comparison. What it is is a very solid, safe, easy to fly and capable airplane build with completely new top shelf components from Dakota and Airframes. I'd also think that the "kit" version should be very popular with home builders because the PMA'ed components will always hold their value, and would not carry as much liability for the owner if ever resold. For us owners of battered old Super Cubs, the good news is that most, if not all the Super 18 components will be PMA'ed for our old airplanes. I just completed a article on the new jackscrew which will be in the next Cub Clues, and will be doing a article on the complete Super 18, probably in the next issue. There are things I like, some I don't like being that I am sort of a purist in the way of the Super Cub, but overall this is a good airplane, and should be a very strong competitor in the new airplane market.

 

[Widebody]

Hello Everyone,

I'm new here in the discussions but have been around Supercub.org as a guest for quite a while. Had to get in on this topic. No more watching.
I was one of the lucky ones and was invited to test fly the Super18.
One member asked how it would compare to an equal Cub without the Slotted Wing. Another asked about takeoff and landing distance. Well I just happen to own that equal Cub your looking for.
I finished a restoration of my 1955 A model in April, and it's now 4"s wider with 180hp. The only differences are the slotted wing on the Super18 and Micro VG's on mine. I have 61 gal gas, Mark has 48 gal.
Super18 has 26" Bushwheels, mine are 26"Goodyear. My Cub weighs in at 1240 lbs. I believe the Super18 was 1260. I don't think you are going to find a better comparison than this. So here's my take on the Super18.
As a working pilot, when I flew the Super18 I wanted to know how it acted in slow flight doing observation turns and at 40 IAS it was rock solid,
at 30 to 35 IAS with 1 notch flaps still solid, never felt mushy. Even when increasing bank angle at these speeds it never felt like it was going to fall out, it just felt good. I then honked around a little with it, doing some steep turns at normal airspeeds and it was pretty uneventful, it was like flying any other Cub. As for the takeoff, until you get used to it it's ready to fly before you are. On landing I trimmed nose up went full flaps set the tail wheel in the grass held the mains off at 0 IAS and it just flew down the runway hanging there, added full power in this attitude and it shot into the air never changing pitch, this was mainly do to 180hp but the wing still has to fly.
Now my Cub. I put 125 hrs on mine before adding the VG's so I would have a good feel for just how much it changed it. I could tell the difference right away, definitely more stable especially in slow flight.
When putting mine through the same turns and paces, in the same configuration as the Super18, it just didn't feel as solid at those airspeeds.
My cub on landing, putting the tailwheel in the grass and holding the mains off it would quit flying at about 26 IAS but when adding full power
it went into the air the same as the Super18, again it's 180hp more than anything. Do I think the Super18 will takeoff and land shorter than mine.
YES. By how much I'm not sure. It helps to be slow when landing short but good brakes are a must and Mark's are great. I'll be getting a set for mine soon. Maybe I'll take a little X-C and get the Cubs together to find out more on takeoffs and landings. The Super18 is a great Cub and it's the wing that sets it apart. Cert. at 2300# it will be a great work Cub, load it and go legal. I just can't think of any draw backs to this Cub, my next set of wings will be from Dakota Cub. Hope this helps a little. Have a good day. Just thought of something mine has standard flaps extended only to the fuselage and I don't have extended ailerons

 

[StewartB]

Thanks for your report, it's a good one. Thanks to MD and Flapman for their comments as well.

Stewart

 

[coder]

trying to help

Trying to answer some more questions.

The Super 18 KIT comes without an engine so you can put what ever you want on it (150, 160, 180). The assembled airplane has a 180. The assembly facilities set their own prices so that's the reason for the $185,000 tag (radios, instruments, every single part is off the shelf brand new). On top of that, the $155,000 price tag was a show and introductory price. A certified cub sells for a lot more than an experimental one so it is already more valuable.

GW on the airplane is being tested to 2400+ #s and is currently good for 2300#.

The tail feathers on the Super 18 are the same size as stock 18 feathers just beefed up a little. Since the wings are squared (same length as standard), there is talk of developing squared tail feathers, which would increase surface area as well as effectiveness.

Slotted wings are certified (according to the Piper L-14 which had larger flap and smaller aileron) for both round and squared wing (there were less than a dozen sold with the round tip configuration). They no longer offer the slot on a round tip wing due to the shorter aileron having inadequate control in a crosswind situation.

The slotted wings weren't made to get off short as much as they were made to climb at a 45-50 degree aoa immediately upon leaving the ground. That way you can climb over that 50' tree 500' away without having to worry about gaining airspeed before altitude and then doing a 50 degree bank to follow the river canyon you just landed in all at the sam time. Safer and more stable is the purpose of the slot. The enhanced STOL performance just adds to the appeal.

There is no place to put an over head flap handle that wouldn't interfere with something (fuel lines, butt hinges, aileron cables, etc.) and no where structurally strong enough to support it. They are also talking about trying to develope a better flap handle, but they need more to focus on getting a TC first.

If there are any questions just ask, I'm sure someone will be happy to try and help.

Coder

 

[mvivion]

Thanks for the additional history and information. An interesting airplane, and I wish them well.

It is a small market, though, and CC is already there. Hence my comment about changing a few of the little things, like the flap handle.

CC already has an overhead flap handle on the Sport Cub, I believe. I doubt it would be an issue with heads since those go forward and DOWN in a crash, generally. In turbulence, if it was forward it shouldn't be a problem. Just thinking out loud.

The problem with suggesting that they'll do this sort of stuff after certification is that that means it'll never get done. It would mean a change in the type design, which is a big deal, and not worth doing, whereas if its done prior to certification it becomes part of the process.

I think the plane would benefit from the larger control surfaces, or at least a strake or VG's on the tail. I flew it very light, and of course it was far forward in CG. I think the bigger tail would really help there.

If the airplane ever goes on amphibious floats, the bigger tail will REALLY be nice, since those airplanes are always forward.

All in all, I thought it was nice airplane, and it handled well. The question, I suppose, is whether there's a market.

MTV

 

[coder]

I agree, the time to make modifications is now before the TC is issued.

Everyone has good ideas about the little things such as the flap handle location. Offering suggestions to improve the Super 18 would not be taken lightly at this point, and I know the Dakota boys would take any helpful information they can get.

As far as a market goes, I think the only thing we can say for sure is time will tell.

Good posts everyone.

Coder

 

[kase]

I dont really care for the flap handle hanging from the roof. Flew a exp cub set up that way and its awkward and unnatural. If it hits your leg bend it over.

 

[ground loop]

I think I would like a simple bend also, as long as it didn't interfere with the float rudder retractor access. It already seems to get occasionally caught up in the wires.

Coder,
What do you mean, when you say it already has a GW of 2300+?

 

[SuperCub MD]

I dont really care for the flap handle hanging from the roof. Flew a exp cub set up that way and its awkward and unnatural. If it hits your leg bend it over.

Ditto....My experience with overhead flaps also. Pulling them on wasn't bad, but dumping them at touchdown was tough, I suppose you get used to it but... If I ever see one of those CC Cubs I'll have to try to remember to look at how they set it up.

I've wacked my head on the skylight in turbulence hard enough to break the bird cage, and been repeatedly slammed against the side of the cabin. In a bad crash the top of a Cub tends to twist up. I just don't like extra stuff hanging around my head.

If bending the flap lever isn't enough, chopping about 3" off it and bending it over some more will cure the whole problem. If more time and money is to be spend on engineering the Super 18, I'd rather see it spent on maybe tweaking the thrustline and making the elevators more effective than redesigning the flap system.

 

[Cubus Maximus]

Bend flap handle over next time - duh... I should have done that LONG ago... :-?

I remember Mark you have an aversion to headset gut hooks on the V and X brace. And here I thought it was just the extra weight...

 

[coder]

Coder,
What do you mean, when you say it already has a GW of 2300+?

They are still in the testing phase to get the 2400+ GW, it is currently good for 2300

Coder