plane purchase question

[StewartB]

I have built a hybrid SQ2, PA-18 like fuselage with SQ2 wings, 0-375 engine, large tail feathers and a few other goodies. Starting another SQ2 project soon. I do my own flight testing so I have some time in them.
In the process of building I have been talking to and looking at all of the Exp's out there that are doing the same stuff and learning as much as I can pertaining to building the best performing cub like aircraft that I can.
So far the SQ2 wing is my favorite.
Where is Stewart? Those old codgers go to bed to early

Walking the dogs. Old dudes don't sleep much.

I have no criticism of trick wings. I just don't need or desire them. Basic
stock-type wings provide good all-around performance and seem to get me
where I want to be in all types of weather and wind that I'm willing to fly
in. Contest performance isn't my priority. The thread was started by a new Cub guy looking for advice. Some here act like stock Cubs are obsolete and less worthy than juiced-up variants. I disagree, at least for my needs. No big deal. Besides, it's no secret I'd rather fly my Cessna. Hey, I've got a very new, very nice PA-12 that may suit the original poster's needs.

Stewart

 

[bearsnack]

Morning Stewart,
I think a lot of the part 135 cub guys do not look close at this stuff because they know they can not use it. They are busy enough building and flying their own refined, part 135 or guide certified cubs.
Your observation has been the same as mine, in fact my cub is exactly like you say..round stock wing with VGs. Thats because I need it to be certifiable for part 135.
Take away the regulations though, and the advent of technology has free reign.
We have to operate under the belief that there are new and better ideas for these airplanes coming out every day.
Many times the first place it shows is in the experimental class.

 

[bearsnack]

Morning Stewart,
I think a lot of the part 135 cub guys do not look close at this stuff because they know they can not use it. They are busy enough building and flying their own refined, part 135 or guide certified cubs.
Your observation has been the same as mine, in fact my cub is exactly like you say..round stock wing with VGs. Thats because I need it to be certifiable for part 135.
Take away the regulations though, and the advent of technology has free reign.
We have to operate under the belief that there are new and better ideas for these airplanes coming out every day.
Many times the first place it shows is in the experimental class.

 

[dawgdriver]

If you consider a Carbon Cub and are going to take a passenger, you need to sit in the back. With the front seat all the way back ( where most would fly it) your knees get a bruising from the sides of the front seat. I know I could not tolerate it for long.

 

[Taledrger]

Taildrger, good advise. Some thing rebuilt and restored back to like new would be OK. A couple year old scout would be OK but their a little heavy around 1500lb dry after normal equip. I have always loved the look of a super cub. Do you have contact info on the warren bros. thanks

Here's a link to Warren. Scot is here somewhere. He is also a CC dealer I believe. Has a very nice rebuild listed now.
If you want any Husky info PM me, I'll be happy to give an unbiased opinion.
This is no the place to discuss them

http://www.warrenaircraft.com/home.html

 

[WhiskeyMike]

buying bush plane

I have both a Cub and a Husky. the Cub is a sweeter flying plane, and lets you feel what you are doing. It will get in and out from shorter fields. It is relatively slow. The Husky is perhaps more rugged, and flies much faster. If I had bucks I'd be very tempted by a CC Carbon Cub for fun use. They say the Husky is stronger in case of an incident, but Cub crafters offers air bag shoulder harnesses. There is nothing at all wrong with a used Cub as long as you have an experienced Cub guy look at it for a thorough pre buy. For me, I don't care what year it was built. A 90's airplane can be worn and corroded but my 57 Cub is spotless in and out. Any Cub is as new as the date of a proper rebuild.
I urge you to go sit in the front seat of a Cub, Husky and a Scout; and to fly all 3 before you decide. You'll know pretty much right off which you feel good in, and which you don't. No sense to buy a new Ferrari only to discover the seat's not comfortable. Lucky dog, you! 8)

 

[aktango58]

Welcome to the land of difinitive ideas!

Frankly, let me be the first one to suggest that you start with a crawl, then learn to walk and run...

buy a champ, or a J-3 to start with.

And get one with 100 hp or less.

Old, yup. under powered for a load, yup.

limited in ability... depends on the pilot

First rule of off airport, you WILL have a situation that can be very costly. You might just land in the nicest place, fish for the evening and come back to find a 10 mph tail wind on takeoff

Time to spend the night...

By starting in a low powered taildragger, you will learn to fly the plane by feel. The do not have enough power to horse them like we do cubs. It will teach you patients, and strip assesment.

For a new back country pilot, you will not be able to fly any of the planes listed so far to the edge without tearing them up for a while. There is a steep learning curve, and trying to put all the factors together off airport can be tough and expensive.

What ever plane you buy, spend 100 hours in it before you go off into the bush. Fly it hard for thoes 100 hours. NOT just to sunday burgers, but shoot landings at grass strips until the wing bottoms are green.

If as a weekend camping pilot you need the 'rugged' airplane, you are doing something wrong :-?

Much of the discussion above can be broken down to it does not matter until you make a mistake, miscalculation or error in judgement. Start with an inexpensive trainer type and learn the tailwheel basics, move to some back country strips with it, (empty you can fly with other supercub guys that are loaded on 60 degree days), then you may have a much better idea of what you really want from the bird. Trying to rush into taking folks with you is a good way to cause yourself lots of stress.

I do agree with Stearman, a 1952 plane with a fairly new rebuid with new fuse is better than a 1990 plane that has original fabric and been thrashed.

 

[littlecub]

tango has it RIGHT!

Mr. 'RICH', staring in his 'Beaver on floats-crash' video (that most of us have seen) showed why learning to crawl first is better than starting out 'running'.
(As in running into trouble!)

LC

 

[gbflyer]

Turbine otter is the best camping plane if you've only got 2 people for the way I pack. Any more than that, better have an 18 - wheeler.

gb

 

[WhiskeyMike]

buying plane

Tango has it right.

"Start with an inexpensive trainer type and learn the tailwheel basics,"

You can even rent at places like Hampton NH. Save you a lot of money, get some great training, and meet new friends. If I had my way, we'd all start with gliders and then move to a J-3. Then where ever you like. While you're at it get spin training. 8)

 

[genze]

How does something under powered like a J3 work out of high alt. Our field
in Idaho is at almost 6,000 ft. and most of the small strips in our mountains are higher than that. In the summer it can get up in the 90s. I'm not flying in the Mid west. Plus you need to climb high to get over those mountains. I know in the summer and flying in these mountains in the bonanza there were allot of times i wished I had more power.

 

[mvivion]

I don't think tango got it right, for what its worth.

It's the PILOT, folks, not the airplane. Sure, starting in a low powered airplane is a fine way to transition to tailwheel airplanes, but with good training, AND a conciensious pilot, there's no reason whatsoever that someone can't do just fine in almost any of these planes.

And, by the way, he's not a new pilot, as he said, he has quite a few years of flying. So really he's talking about transitioning into a different type of airplane and a different type of flying. That ain't rocket science, folks.

BUT, it does require a fair bit of a introduction, by a QUALIFIED instructor, and then a good bit of practice BEFORE going into the tule-bushes with that airplane.

Living at 6,000 feet in Idaho, I would NOT suggest a Champ, J-3, stock PA-12, etc. Sure, those airplanes can operate in that country, but they are pretty limited.

I'd start off with a good basic airplane, Cub, Husky, Scout--whatever winds your watch, get a fair amount of dual instruction as an introduction to THAT airplane, with an instructor qualified in THAT airplane and the country.

Once you're pretty comfortable working that airplane on nice big airports, with consistency and precision (that means you hit the spot you intended to hit, AT the intended speed, EVERY TIME), then and only then you might start taking on some slightly challenging strips, and gradually work your way into more challenging areas.

Remember, a huge percentage of back country flying is precision landings. You can practice those at your local international airport. Only once you have that plane mastered in this regard should you even THINK about taking it into more challenging places.

It's the pilot, folks. And, I've worked with some folks who put a LOT of money into an airplane or five, but still sought out and worked hard on getting qualified in the airplane.

Attitude is everything, both in learning and in avoiding a stall/spin.

MTV

 

[Fencer]

I would really recommend going to JC or some place similar and trying the different models in similar conditions. As for the lsa's being lighter, they are 8) But since you want your plane to fly being light is not a bad thing. The carbon cub will noticeably out preform your typical cub in: take off roll, climb rate, and cruise speed. But its not cheap. More important than the stats is the "feel" in flight and for that you really need to fly them in similar conditions. Good luck, hope you find the right plane for you.

 

[littlecub]

I agree, Mike, spot landings can be practiced at your local large rwy.
FWIW, I see there being more to it than that.

Getting used to flying in valleys, then smaller valleys, and finally canyons. Grasping the relationships of size of trees and closeness of walls and being comfortable (reasonably) and sizing up and using all the information your peripheral vision is feeding your brain. Using all these visual cues AND responding appropriately with flight controls is not a weekend project, even if you are used to cruising on autopilot at 8 grand AGL for 2 or 3 careers.

Then add wind and/or weather to that valley. Gusts, thermals off of bare canyon walls that are basking in the sun on a 'calm' day. Dust devils that can happen in some surprisingly narrow valleys. Down drafts on final landing on a bench where you have a 'one way' strip that you have to be down on early...... Even as basic as crossing ridges at a 45 degree angle to maintain your options. How about barometric pressure differences pushing the air down low in the opposite direction as the winds aloft? It doesn't happen often, but it can put you in the weeds/trees if you don't consider the possibility....

I have just scratched the surface of things to learn about Idaho strips, and I know probably 10% of what the real savvy experienced back country pilots know, for I am just a hobby pilot.

But I am on familiar ground with you disagreeing with me, Mike. Thank you, it keeps me thinking.

LC

 

[mvivion]

Littlecub,

Actually, I don't see any disagreement between us on this subject. There is a great lot to learn about back country flying, just as there is about instrument flight. But, you have to start somewhere, correct? My point was pick an airplane that you like, then learn to fly it, with precision. You have NO business in the back country anywhere if you can't fly your airplane with precision.

THEN you can start to learn something about the country, the winds the canyons, etc.

I suggested seeking out qualified instructors in getting checked out in the airplane, and the same goes for getting checked out in the country and the back country airstrips.

I see a lot of folks who make this all out to be some sort of impossible process for a pilot who's never done it.

I don't know how you got started in back country flying, but I was very fortunate to have some highly experienced mentors. I am only suggesting that flying in the backcountry, even in Idaho, is not an impossible process, IF you learn to fly the airplane well, and then get some training in the country and its characteristics.

Then, you have to ease into it. It seemed to me that many on this site offer nothing but negatives to someone trying to learn about this type of flying. I agree that it can't be learned on the internet.

I would respectfully suggest, however, that flying the Idaho backcountry or Alaska isn't rocket science. There are lots of opportunities to screw up there, but again, with experience and good training it can be done safely.

So, how would YOU suggest the guy get started? Or would you just suggest that he never even consider flying in the back country?

MTV

 

[Gordon Misch]

Cub Crafters had two Carbon Cubs at Snohomish today, giving demo flights. I had the opportunity to fly one, and it is SWEET. Great performance, with very nice, light-on-the-controls handling. The empty weight in the low 900's is just grand. I thought I might not like the overhead flap handle, but that turned out to be very comfortable to use - I liked it.

Thanks to Randy Lervold of CubCrafters, and George (CouleeOne on this site) for offering this opportunity. The Experimental Amateur Built kit version of this plane is very interesting to me. I learned that it can be certified (experimental) at 1320 lb gross for LSA, or at 1865 lb, its design gross. The 180 HP 340 cu in engine was real smooth and relatively quiet.

Nice plane! If I were on the market for a new cub-type plane, this is one I would seriously consider.

 

[don d]

I wonder and dream of what it would be like to afford a new or nearly new airplane.

If you are flying Idaho, trade the beechcraft for a Cessna Turbo 206.. Then be real patient in learning to fly it in the back country... The 206 will take you everywhere most have any business going.

 

[littlecub]

Mike, I go with the 'Crawl, Walk, and then Run' analogy. I just want to emphasize there is more to 'it' than spot landings, to reduce the odds that someone thinks they have the bases covered when they master that skill set.

I'll stress again, I am a pilot/poster with questions and NOT an expert with any final answers. I appreciate your wealth of knowledge, and your willingness to share with those of US who have a LOT to learn. Hopefully I can contribute by drawing additional information out of the Senior (knowledge/experience) contributors on this site.

I would encourage other people wanting to join the ranks of the back country pilots to do so-with care, instruction, reading, planning, studying, listening, caution, and probably most important, THINKING. And I see this list as being in addition to excellent flying knowledge and stick/rudder skills.

I am not trying to discourage or dissuade others. I love it and I just wish 'life' didn't interfere with my chances to live it more often.

LC

 

[cafi19]

Many of these companies are in the advertisers gallery on this site. Check them out there.

Also in the gallery is a link for David Foster, Fox Aviation. He has a couple of VERY nice planes for sale including the winning plane from the AK Airmen's show a few years ago.

I think Seaworthy had an excellent point. If you are not already trained in the tail wheel, that is a great place to start. If you fly with different people and in different planes you will find out for yourself what features are important to you.

I'm all for the "Dont overlook a quality rebuild" idea too. There ARE some good shops....do your homework and read lots here.

Remember....the search function is your friend! :lol:

cafi

 

[aktango58]

Mike,

I hope I did not sound negative.

My reasoning for a smaller engine plane is that we, (I do anyway), compensate for many things with power in our cubs. It takes just a few seconds on the runway, and I am climbing. I do not need to have my feet as in tune, because she lifts off so soon.

a little tail breeze, add a smidgen of power...

forgot and had full tanks, ok, it is a super cub, just go.


By starting out with a smaller engined plane, every detail, nuance and wind will be felt, noticed and make a differance when trying to land on that spot you talk about.

No chance in the champ to lift flaps when six inches off and floating to put her down, yet still have six miles and hour to much speed. Go around and come back with the correct speed.

As far as altitude/heat... rule one is patients. Pilots learn quickly to do the high altitude flying early before convective activity. I have been places that you literly had to work early or late due to the hazards of convective activity.

NO, it may not be rocket science. But it is not like flying IFR either. IFR your guages tell you you are drifting off, deal with it. Off airport the sympton may be groundspeed slightly high at touchdown and a long landing; but the cause is the more important- oat, tailwind, runway slope, weight in the plane, airspeed control.

Off airport, you must be able to KNOW what caused the deviation, not just know how to correct AFTER.

Small, Light planes make you pay more attention. that is my reasoning.

And fyi: this is from a guy that had a few thousand hours and went from a cub to 180 to champ... the champ taught me lots about being patient, and got my tecnique tuned up quickly 8)

 

[mvivion]

Littlecub,

I couldn't agree with you more. Crawl, walk, run, and stumble occasionally.... :lol: :lol:

An old friend and one of my mentors told me "If you don't learn something every time you fly, you weren't paying attention". I try to ascribe to that philosophy every time I fly. There's ALWAYS something more to learn, and I've got a LOT left to learn as well.

To the poster's original question: Lots of great airplanes out there. New airplanes of this type are going to be expensive. They are also going to be expensive to insure until you've got some experience.

In large part, the choice of airplane will depend largely on the bank balance and what else you want to do with the airplane. Want to do back country AND be able to fly IFR? Cub wouldn't be my choice. Husky--maybe, TU-206--would work fiine.

I agree with those who've said find a deal, and get some stick time in each of the candidates. Find someone who will instruct in one, and fly it more than just a half hour.

MTV

 

[behindpropellers]

1994 posted today....

Good learning machine and fully "upgradeable"....

 

[genze]

Thanks foe all the good advice. I will take my time and start flying some of the planes mentioned. I'm going to get my tailwheel in my friends scout, so I will have a feel for that plane. And then I will try the others.
I like the crawl, walk, run idea. Idaho has some very good mountain flying schools that I will attend. Learning is the fun part. Its all about the journey not the destination. Thanks Again

 

[aktango58]

again, don't allow yourself to get caught up in the off airport tecniques before you have a bunch of time in the tailwheel.

Either tailwheel or off airport flying can use all your skill. get one down before adding the other.