The Wag-Aero Sport Trainer - Differences from the real PA-11

[DENNY]

Just some questions to think about when deciding what to build. What is the mission? First is to build a plane together so that part is easy most any plane will work. Once it is built then what? Is this plane only going to be a trainer or short range same day flyer with one or two light people? What type of useful load do you want/need to have? Do you plan on taking the plane any distance with adventure gear? Things to consider basic safety gear/tools/tie downs/survival gear that always is in the plane =30 lbs. Passengers 150-200 lbs each. 4 hr fuel for a 150 hp 0320 basic cub load = 216 lbs. We have not even got to bringing along a lunch or chairs for a fly in. Figure out how much weight you need for a two person 3 day camping/fishing trip, food/tent/stove/camp site gear/clothing/camp chairs/cooler = min 80 lbs. Building a plane that has a useful load of 800-1000 LBS expands the capability greatly! The big issue will be the need for a capable engine (150 hp). Every body is getting into the STOL stuff and although weight does matter most every STOL bush class event in Alaska is won by 160 hp cubs weighting 1200 lbs give or take a few lbs. Building a pa 18 vs pa 11 with flaps is a wash. Look hard at a PA 18 let form follow function and avoid carbon fiber you get it done at a reasonable price if you can find a decent engine in todays world. No right or wrong just stuff to ponder.
DENNY

 

[supercrow]

Agreed Denny. Everyone has different ideas of what they should settle for. My last major mod to the super crow was a new fuselage I built a couple years ago. I did extended baggage top and bottom with three external doors and full lightweight alum interior with flat floors. (elev. cables under the fuselage) Obviously I was trying to stay as light as possible while ending up with the mods I wanted. With the original long wings and long flaps, VG's etc.. and a bumped up 160 I came in at 1203 lbs. Heavier than I wanted, but you can't tell by flying it. It is very light on the controls (bearings) and performs as well as it ever did. It is all about compromise but by using a light battery and the Sensenich ground adjustable I ended up 30 lbs heavier that it was for the first 25 years and am very happy with the end result. As a recreational machine it does what I need to do.

 

[RAVC1]

I think the Wag-Aero plans are useful regardless of the outcome. They are inexpensive and more importantly, a form of media you can pick up to read and study rather than being required to turn on a computer. There is a useful education in this activity alone.

I cannot predict what my son will want; he is currently a teenager and temporary interests occur each year. I'll support him as best I can but he needs to take the initiative for this type of activity...I cannot and should not be the helicopter. The help that each of you have given me is greatly appreciated.

 

[RVBottomly]

I’ll second Marty’s mention of the Wag 2+2. It has wing attachments that match the PA 18. If you want, you can build in the increased angle of incidence to match the PA 18. The design says 2200 gross weight. Make it a tandem and it is close to a wide body super cub.

It is supposed to handle 180 + horsepower too, if you are looking for a horse instead of a fun pony.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

 

[Colorado-Cub]

This is how I feel stuffing myself into my Cubby:

 

[Sarpy]

I finished a Sport Trainer in 1986. PA-18 overhead, wood wings, balanced elevators, jack screw, 0-320, standard SC flaps and ailerons. Cruise 104 mph. I am now replacing the wood wings with aluminum spars and ribs, 90-inch flaps and ailerons, and a number of upgrades discussed at length on this site. Thanks to all of you! If you have read this so far, here is some good news: I will give away a couple of boxes of steel wing hardware to a good home. (Made from the Wag-Aero plans.) Also four 16-gallon wing tanks which proved to be much more range than I really needed. (Back to two 18-gallon tanks which a friend gave to me!)

Hank: I’m working on my second Experimental Cub down east of BIL. Would be interested in your cast offs. With friends in the FCA area, I think I could handle the freight deal. Please PM me at sarpykid@yahoo.com.

Thank you,

Lee Howard

 

[jnorris]

Lots of good info in this thread. The main point being, when building an amateur-built aircraft, you can really customize it to be the airplane YOU want, not what someone else thought you wanted.

Many have chosen to build the CUBy (not "Cubby", that's a small bear) with a trim tab because it's much easier to build. I have flown both, and I highly recommend that you put in the extra effort to install the jack screw. MUCH more effective trim, and more aerodynamic to boot. The trim tab is just "ok" but the jack screw is the sh*t!! You'll be glad you did the jack screw!

If you don't mind doing the work, building a CUBy/Sport Trainer can be a very cost-effective way to get a really nice Cub!!

 

[behindpropellers]

Many have chosen to build the CUBy (not "Cubby", that's a small bear) with a trim tab because it's much easier to build. I have flown both, and I highly recommend that you put in the extra effort to install the jack screw. MUCH more effective trim, and more aerodynamic to boot. The trim tab is just "ok" but the jack screw is the sh*t!! You'll be glad you did the jack screw!

I saw the results of a failed elevator trim tab that made the elevator flutter. Whatever system you choose, make sure it doesn't have a single point of failure for the adjustment mechanism.

Tim

 

[RVBottomly]

I saw the results of a failed elevator trim tab that made the elevator flutter. Whatever system you choose, make sure it doesn't have a single point of failure for the adjustment mechanism.

Tim

I’ve heard of three failures of that push-pull cable set up. All induced flutter. Everyone got down ok by slowing down and landing immediately. I’m with you, that method is weak.

Pull-pull or servos sound like the way to go. I’m building the jack screw.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app

 

[Colorado-Cub]

Many have chosen to build the CUBy (not "Cubby", that's a small bear)

Didn't Wag get sued for calling their clone a "CUBy"?

 

[RVBottomly]

Didn't Wag get sued for calling their clone a "CUBy"?

Yup. In the 80s. Here is the appellate court opinion if you feel like reading it:

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/741/925/90826/

 

[Colorado-Cub]

Wow, that is quite a read and shows exactly why mine is called "Cubby" rather than "CUBy".

You are working on a Sport Trainer now? Build thread?? I love seeing everyones ingenuity!

 

[RVBottomly]

You are working on a Sport Trainer now? Build thread?? I love seeing everyones ingenuity!

I'm working on a Wag 2+2. https://www.supercub.org/forum/showthread.php?53240-Therapy-Project

Started a little more than 4 years ago. Still at it with the typical fits and starts. Fuselage mostly done, one wing built, I'm expecting a replacement spruce spar to arrive tomorrow.

Just today I've come close to convincing myself it will be a tandem. I went back and looked at Brandon Jewitt's build and thought, "why not?"

 

[Cub Builder]

I’ve heard of three failures of that push-pull cable set up. All induced flutter. Everyone got down ok by slowing down and landing immediately. I’m with you, that method is weak.

Pull-pull or servos sound like the way to go. I’m building the jack screw.

FWIW, slowing down and throttling back didn't really affect the flutter when my trim cable broke. Pulling in flaps significantly moderated the flutter. I replaced that setup with a Ray Allen trim servo, which I love. No need to re-open the trim tab vs adjustable stab discussion, but I've never observed any advantage to the adjustable stab. My tab is aligned with the elevator in cruise, so isn't making any additional drag until I trim nose up to pull in flaps. Additional drag at that point in time is just fine with me. Of course maybe my skills aren't fine tuned enough to tell the difference. But if I was building my Cub again, I'd still go with a trim tab. I'd just skip the step of installing the bowden cable and go straight to the Ray Allen trim servo. Just offering a differing opinion. 8)

-Cub Builder

 

[rsrguy3]

Haha serrated Gourney flaps . .... because I don't gouge my bald nugget enough on everything else!

 

[rsrguy3]

Yup. In the 80s. Here is the appellate court opinion if you feel like reading it:

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/741/925/90826/

Kinda funny... now that we have carbon, Javron and Dakota

 

[Dan Gervae]

One nice thing about the Wag Aero plans for a PA11/J3 replica is the allowable 1400lb gross weight listed on the plans. Unless you want or need to go light sport, then you set your gross at 1320 when you apply for your airworthiness.

 

[pilotski]

My son has been a SC fan for several months. I intend to purchase him a set of the Sport Trainer plans and we will build it together as a family project. I read here that it is known to differ from the true PA-18 but the distinctions were not listed and I do not follow the SC. Can someone hep me with understanding the differences? We'll want to build it light and set him up with flaps and 29" or 31" so I appreciate any direction you can offer.

Rick

I have a set of homebuilt j-3 or PA11 wings