Smith Cub Questions...

[marlboro]

Hi,

I'm very interested in the kits made by Smith Aviation, but I'm new to the Super Cub type in general. I currently own a Bellanca Decathlon and I love that little bird. So, now I want a cub, and I trying to basically decide between Smith's the PA-18-95 Cub Special or PA-18 Super Cub. I have some questions that might help me decided...

1. Do I want to build an airplane with flaps? I know their utility in general, but I am quite fond of a rudder-to-the-floor slip in my Decathlon and it has served me well. I like the classic no-flap look of the PA-18-95, but I don't want to take away some of the Cub's utility without getting the opinion of experienced cub fliers.

2. Speaking of flaps, I notice some cubs have the "corrugated" metal flaps and ailerons. I think these looks neat and I would like to have them on my cub. So, what are the advantages and disadvantages or metal flaps and ailerons? Also, was this done on particular Piper models or just an option on all Cubs or STC?

3. It seems to me, and it may just be my imagination, but some PA-18's (particularly those with round tips) seem to have shorter wings. I wouldn't call them clipped, but they seem to extend less beyond the struts. I would very much like these shorter/round tipped wings and I am wondering what it's called in Piper terms?

4. Finally, I know bigger is supposed to be better, but what is the sweet spot HP wise when choosing an engine for my Super Cub? Looking at Piper's data, the 135 seems quite good indeed. What are you guys using in your projects and why?

Thank you in advance,

Wayne Norris, Jr.
Seneca, SC

 

[irishfield]

The guys/gals are sure to chime in and answer your questions but I just thought I'd ask if you have taken the time to type "Smith Cub" in the search window to read thru the dozens of theads already archived here on the subject.
Cheers

 

[marlboro]

Yes, many times.

 

[Alaskan-18]

Smith cub

Go with the pa-18 150. If you like slips so much don't use the flaps all the time. If you ever get into a position where you need them they are the only way to go. I live in Alaska and have a 150hp cub and I love it. By myself or carrying a big load. 7.5 gals an hour isn't bad for the utility or just the fun you'll have. My Grandfather has lived here his whole life and has been flying the bush here since he was 14. He rants a raves about the 135hp cub because of the power to weight ratio. Although make sure if you go that route you don't buy the pa-18 super cub kit because of the extra tubes and ribs it will be a little doggy. My airplane knowledge is fairly limited but its not the #1 airplane up here for nothing. I almost ordered a Smith kit this year and from my research every person I've talked to loves the kit. Hope you'll be able to get one!

 

[Steve Pierce]

If you just want to fly around for the fun of it get a PA18-95. If you want to go camping and back country flying get a PA18-150. If you like building things look at this photo gallery.

http://sparky.supercub.org/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=559&ppuser=44

That ought to help you figure out if you want to build one or not.

 

[CptKelly]

Too much, or too little?

In my humble opinion, one cannot have too much power in any airplane. I also think one cannot have too much of a short field plane. That being said, a 180+ hp cub is simply a blast to take off. Leaving terra firma at a very steep angle, climbing like a homesick angle, and being envied by everyone... is really fun. On the reverse side, landing very slow, with large full flaps, touching down oh so lightly, and stopping almost immediately, is also very rewarding and fun. Why choose a cub that won't do what cubs do best?
My 2c worth.

Mike

 

[behindpropellers]

Make sure you account for your time and cost for all of the extra parts for the smith cub. It is probably cheaper just to buy a cert. cub that you can fly.

 

[Bill Rusk]

Wayne

I would like to offer my opinions.

1 Don't do a homebuilt unless you are really into the building part. If you go that route just to save money, or just to get the end product, you may be disappointed. Even with a kit it is a BIG project consuming much time. If you are into learning lots of new skills and enjoy the satisfaction of creating with your hands it is very rewarding. Just do a hard personal assessment prior to jumping in as to why you are really doing this.

2 The utility of the PA-11, J-3 is limited. They are a ball to fly in the pattern but they are limited in their ability to carry you and all your gear X/C. Some have done great things in them but that is the exception rather than the rule. If you hang around on this site awhile you will want to go to the fly-ins to meet up with the Brotherhood (or maybe just the "hood") of Cub drivers and it will be a pain in the PA-11 whereas it will be great fun in the PA-18.

3 I don't think the Smith Cub PA-11 would be the lightest one out there. If you are going to go with a smaller engine than a 150 then weight will be absolutely critical for you to get that fun, gee whiz, performance. Look for a J-3 and upgrade the engine and then you will have the lightest possible airframe with more Hp. The Smith product is well built but may be a little stout if you are looking for a feather weight airframe. Strength cost. It is all one big compromise. But again, remember that a bigger engine J-3 will still not have the utility of a PA-18. I am building my Smith Cub to be as light as possible so I am using an 0-320 rather than an 0-360 and watching every ounce. I may sacrifice some utility but I hope it will be a compromise that satisfies my personal desires and needs.

4 The flaps on a SC are not as effective as say the 170 or 180 series slotted fowlers but they make a big difference getting a heavy airplane in short. You can slip a light J-3 in as short as a SC but when you load that J-3 up with your friend and your camping gear it just will not hold a candle to a SC. Getting in or going out.

5 It really depends on your mission. What are you going to use the airplane for MOST of the time? If you are just going to play around the local area, then nothing is as much fun as a light PA-11 or J-3. They will put a grin on your face that will last all week. But if you load up that PA-11/J-3 with a starter, battery etc it will be a dog. If you are going to go light then go light, don't start adding weight. If you want starters, radios etc then NOTHING will beat a light SC. If you are going to haul big loads out of high mountain lakes on amphibs then a 180 hp cub will be your ticket.

Hope this helps and welcome to Supercub.org.

Bill

 

[Bill Rusk]

More

Metal flaps and ailerons tend to be more rigid and as a result may very very very slightly improve performance (they do on Hatz biplanes anyway) but they would be more difficult to build and probably add weight. There is one report on this site that roll performance was a little better with metal Vs fabric. More difficult to repair also.

The short wing you are referring to may be something from the shortwing Piper group rather than a short wing PA-18. All of the clipwings I have ever heard of clip from the inboard side so I am not sure of what might cause a short wing on a PA-18 on the outside part. ??????


Bill

 

[Alaskan-18]

smith cub

I agree with behindpropellers, if you just want to fly it would be cheaper to buy a cert. cub than build a brand new one. I bought a pa-18-150 w/flaps all Alaska Mods and 250 hrs smoh for 42,500. It took me almost a year of looking every day to find it but I eventually did. The only reason that I want to build a Smith cub is because they are brand new. Strong, smooth and I can work on it. The absolute cheapest I have ever heard of a 150hp Smith being built for is 50,000. Mine would have cost 60,000. Good luck.

 

[Bugs66]

Hey Guys, the Navy L-4 on last month's Sport Aviation was built for $10K. Cert isn't cheaper, it's just faster (way way faster) and for those who don't like to build.

 

[behindpropellers]

Hey Guys, the Navy L-4 on last month's Sport Aviation was built for $10K. Cert isn't cheaper, it's just faster (way way faster) and for those who don't like to build.

I like to build. But it sure would be nice to have somthing to fly!


I would be scared to fly somthing that was built for 10K in 200X dollars. It bothers me how EAA always writes these stories about people building el-cheapo used and junk parts airplanes. If you are going to build a plane and trust your life to it why not use the best parts you can?

 

[Bugs66]

Hey Guys, the Navy L-4 on last month's Sport Aviation was built for $10K. Cert isn't cheaper, it's just faster (way way faster) and for those who don't like to build.

I like to build. But it sure would be nice to have somthing to fly!


I would be scared to fly somthing that was built for 10K in 200X dollars. It bothers me how EAA always writes these stories about people building el-cheapo used and junk parts airplanes. If you are going to build a plane and trust your life to it why not use the best parts you can?

I am not aware of any junk in that beautiful L-4. They took their time, scrounged around. As good or better than factory. As many scratchbuilders do, they trade a whole lot of time for less pre-fab parts and save a ton of money. The kits fall somewhere in the middle.

 

[Steve Pierce]

Not everybody has a knack for scrounging.

 

[marlboro]

Folks,

Thank you for the well thought out responses. It goes a long way in helping me decide what I really want to build. First, I enjoy working on airplanes probably as much or more than flying them. I know how much work it takes and I'm looking forward to it. Second, I agree about the power situation and I'm leaning towards the 150 HP version. I've been quite pleased with the performance and economy of the AEIO-320 in my Decathlon and it would be a pleasure to own another. Third, I like the thought of having flaps weather I decide to use them or not. I'll just have to get used to having them again! :lol:

Finally, I have learned something else since my first post on this fine forum. I thought the Smith kit was an exact replica of a factory SC. Am I correct in assuming that an Airframes, Inc. kit would be closer to a factor cub, particularlly in regard to the wing? I now understand that the internal bracing and flap/aileron attach points are different on a Smith wing.

I know Airframes, Inc. will cost more, but I can stomach that if necessary to get what I want.

Thanks again,

Wayne Norris, Jr.
Seneca, SC

 

[Alaskan-18]

Smith wing

Whats different about the Smith wing?

 

[Cubus Maximus]

Smith internal drag bracing is with square tubes instead of wires. It also has two extra attach points per wing. 4 on the ailerons and 3 on the flaps.

 

[Bugs66]

The wings use different style compression members and cross members instead of drag wires. Longer top LE skin. Alternate style ribs. Three hangers per control surface. I always thought they were a work of fine craftsmanship.

Hey Cubus, this is your photo!

 

[Cubus Maximus]

Cool Bugs - but you should be out in the shop working on yours instead of messing with the 'puter... 8)

(last parts went on the airplane today so the Cub is now just waiting for paperwork and inspection - how's that for motivation?

 

[Alaskan-18]

Wing info

Thanks for the reply I think I know what that means.

 

[Bugs66]

Cool Bugs - but you should be out in the shop working on yours instead of messing with the 'puter... 8)

(last parts went on the airplane today so the Cub is now just waiting for paperwork and inspection - how's that for motivation?

Oh man. All you guys need to tell me that everytime so I get my A** back in the shop working on my project. That's motivation too!

 

[JayH]

Just a note: The extra hangers are on the EXTENDED flaps and ailerons - Standard set up on the traditional round wing tip.

 

[marlboro]

bugs66,

Thanks for posting those pictures! The workmanship does look nice indeed!

JayH, can you clarify what you just said a little bit. I can't figure out what you're saying is the standard setup on the round wing tip model?

TIA!

 

[JayH]

marlboro,
I have the traditional round tip Cub style Smith wing. My flaps have the traditional 2 hangers and my ailerons have the traditional 3 hangers. The additional hangers were added to the square tip wing which has the extended (longer) flaps and ailerons. Hope this helps.
J

 

[marlboro]

Thanks JayH... I'm crystal clear now.