I am in the midst of ordering wings from Dakota for a supercub ground up rebuild. The planes primary mission will be to fly in and out of small ponds at gross weight. Powerplant will be the 180hp conversion. The available selection is std cub wing or the square tip wing. The square tip can be ordered with leading edge slots and/or extended flaps. Performance off the water is the goal. Will the performance of the extra wing area of the square tip offset the weight gain? How about those slots and extended flaps?
Wings For The Ultimate Cub Float Plane
- Thread starter tdh
- Start date
behindpropellers
Registered User
NE Ohio
tdh said:
What is your gross weight?
Are you talking certified or exp?
What is the weight difference between a slotted wing and a standard round tip?
How far are you going, how much fuel do you need to haul?
Are you just flying it or loading junk in it?
behindpropellers
Registered User
NE Ohio
tdh said:
So now your only float choice is the wipline floats.
You will need to check with the combination of the slotted wing and the 2000lb. GW kit.
Just helping you cover the bases.
One additional note... I have flown two kinds of floats on the PA-18. EDO 2000 and wipline amphibs. The EDO's will give you a much better AOA to get out of the water short. Maybe sombody can give this comparison between the straight wipline floats and the straight EDO's (not sure if it is different from the amphib).
Tim
KenyaCub
Registered User
Kenya, Africa
The wing combination I like is not readily made by Dakota, but their parts could be used.
If you're going to extend the wings, you want to extend the ailerons. There is a huge gain in roll control with the long ailerons. Extend the flaps inboard but not outoard. Then add a droppy aileron system. With full flaps you still should get about the same roll response as a stock wing without the droop, and with lower flap settings you will get more.
A lot of people don't like the droopy ailerons, but if used properly they really help a lot. When you need more aileron you just put two notches of flaps. You'll still be flying as slow as three notches with no droop but will have more roll control (with the long ailerons).
The problem with the slot is it won't work unless you're at high angle of attack. On takeoff on floats, you'll never be able to use it.
The flaps and droopy ailerons will help you both on landing and takeoff and will work at lower angle of attack, so you'll be coming in with a flatter deck angle = more visibility.
This is the route I have taken.
If you're going to extend the wings, you want to extend the ailerons. There is a huge gain in roll control with the long ailerons. Extend the flaps inboard but not outoard. Then add a droppy aileron system. With full flaps you still should get about the same roll response as a stock wing without the droop, and with lower flap settings you will get more.
A lot of people don't like the droopy ailerons, but if used properly they really help a lot. When you need more aileron you just put two notches of flaps. You'll still be flying as slow as three notches with no droop but will have more roll control (with the long ailerons).
The problem with the slot is it won't work unless you're at high angle of attack. On takeoff on floats, you'll never be able to use it.
The flaps and droopy ailerons will help you both on landing and takeoff and will work at lower angle of attack, so you'll be coming in with a flatter deck angle = more visibility.
This is the route I have taken.
Tim, If memory serves me correctly, the cub raffled at the Alaska Trade Show had slots and the 2000lb gross. Presumably its legal on paper, but will verify depending on whether I consider the slots. Frankly, I think the slot's weight will defeat any benefits, but I have no experience with them and one reason for the post. Square tips with vgs seem to be the best selection at this point based on what little I know now. Once Dakota provides weights, I may change my mind.
Wipaires float limitation on there gw stc. does lock me in on buying their floats, but I certainly will consider buying a different brand of floats in the search of performance and at the expence of limiting gross weight. If that becomes the case, the gw kit will only serve as peace of mind and resale value.
Great point re: AOA each respective float provides. Crash addressed problems with Baumans he put on his 14 a while back and an appropriate fix. Will cross that bridge at a later date, and if necessary, under a different post. Similarly, when I receive my airframe, I intend on verifying ultimate AOI so Mark with Thrustline will feel good about selling me a kit and getting paid for it. Are you reading this Mark :lol:
Thanks for the post Tim
Wipaires float limitation on there gw stc. does lock me in on buying their floats, but I certainly will consider buying a different brand of floats in the search of performance and at the expence of limiting gross weight. If that becomes the case, the gw kit will only serve as peace of mind and resale value.
Great point re: AOA each respective float provides. Crash addressed problems with Baumans he put on his 14 a while back and an appropriate fix. Will cross that bridge at a later date, and if necessary, under a different post. Similarly, when I receive my airframe, I intend on verifying ultimate AOI so Mark with Thrustline will feel good about selling me a kit and getting paid for it. Are you reading this Mark :lol:
Thanks for the post Tim
Gunny
Registered User
WA
tdh - If you are going to be flying floats I would consider the square Dakota wings with the slots. I am not a float pilot nor have I flown a slotted winged cub on floats - although mine is plumbed for amphibs. The square wing is going to give you more lifting area complemented by the larger flaps. Give Mike Butterfield at Yakima Aerosport 509-969-3701 or 509-453-3412 a call and talk with him - he has flown slots on both wheels and floats. If you'd like to test drive a slotted wing on wheels shoot me a pm - you are welcome to try mine although I am down here in WA state. Please fly the slot before you make your decision - you will not regret it even if you decide against the slot for your mission. Also - shoot "mtsprayer" a pm - he just put a set of slots on his Cub and is very pleased and to the best of my knowledge he is working that airplane in an ag operation.
Kenya Cub - you are flat wrong about the slot not working unless you are at a high angle of attack - they are doing their job at all angles of attack and they keep doing it all the way up into ridiculously high angles of attack and are doing the job long after vgs have quit on you. If you had flown that wing you would know that. Sorry its a sticking point with me - I have close to 300 hours flying my slotted wing and I know what I'm talking about. No - I'm not a professional pilot but why don't you talk to "mtsprayer" and ask him what he thinks about the slotted wing.
Kenya Cub - you are flat wrong about the slot not working unless you are at a high angle of attack - they are doing their job at all angles of attack and they keep doing it all the way up into ridiculously high angles of attack and are doing the job long after vgs have quit on you. If you had flown that wing you would know that. Sorry its a sticking point with me - I have close to 300 hours flying my slotted wing and I know what I'm talking about. No - I'm not a professional pilot but why don't you talk to "mtsprayer" and ask him what he thinks about the slotted wing.
KenyaCub
Registered User
Kenya, Africa
Hi Gunny,
You're right, the only experience I have with the slot was in your cub. But it is something that I've looked into before and spoke to a few people about. If what you say is the case then I still don't understand how a slot works.
I was under the impression that the slot only enabled you to fly slower because of the higher angle of attack you can achieve.
Imagine two planes the same everything (weight, wing ...) except the slot. Both at the same angle of attack (not necessarily ridiculously high).
Are you saying that the plane with the slot will fly slower (produce more lift and more drag) for the same angle of attack? and why?
You're right, the only experience I have with the slot was in your cub. But it is something that I've looked into before and spoke to a few people about. If what you say is the case then I still don't understand how a slot works.
I was under the impression that the slot only enabled you to fly slower because of the higher angle of attack you can achieve.
Imagine two planes the same everything (weight, wing ...) except the slot. Both at the same angle of attack (not necessarily ridiculously high).
Are you saying that the plane with the slot will fly slower (produce more lift and more drag) for the same angle of attack? and why?
AkPA/18
MEMBER
Big Lake Ak
Hah---yep---I'm reading this Ted. I really doubt you will have any problems regarding the Airframes inc fuselage and AOI. I have been measuring for customers and they have been right on. Put one in a jig that we know has the proper AOI(the mech was welding mods as it was ordered un-powdered). It was just a touch off from pinning--like 1/3 bolt hole left to right on the rear attch fitting ---but AOI was right on. That does not mean Lees hole was off as it could have been the jig that was off. I was surprised at such a small difference(totally a non-issue). It was not a problem at all so we did not look further. The important stuff was great. The best part was the reprts I got from the folks that flew that fuselage was that it flew like one of those good cubs you would like to own(lands sloow). The story I have on that jig was that it was Dan's jig years ago--Lanny Merritt has owned it for quite a while--- at his hangar in Wasilla now. I know I am doing a little rambling but just thought I'd pass on a little that we have seen lately. So--- on the subject of jigs---for you guys outside--Wayne Mackey's jig there in Miles City is also turning out cubs with good flight characteristics--if anyone is looking. Did not mean to hijack your thread Ted--but you got me started 
Mark
Mark
StalledOut
MEMBER
Anchorage
Best way to get out of the water, no wide body, stock wings with hoop tips, 160hp, constant speed prop (moves tons of air) and Edo 2000's.
Then don't load it up with too much other unneccessary junk.
If it's a really short pond, stash fuel on a bigger lake a few miles away and go in light.
With 10 gallons, 2 average Alaskan guys (200lbs each) you don't really experience much of a slide step, you just fly off. With the C/S once you're in the air you accelerate right away and climb out.
Then don't load it up with too much other unneccessary junk.
If it's a really short pond, stash fuel on a bigger lake a few miles away and go in light.
With 10 gallons, 2 average Alaskan guys (200lbs each) you don't really experience much of a slide step, you just fly off. With the C/S once you're in the air you accelerate right away and climb out.
behindpropellers
Registered User
NE Ohio
sharp said:Seems a lot of numbers for wheel ops but haven't seen much on float operations and typical limits.
Float ditch is 1800' here. Cub gets off of the water in about 6-800'.
150 hp, 82/41, No VGs, edo 2000's.
First time I solo'd on floats was out of here....... this=pucker factor.
Tim
RaisedByWolves
FRIEND
Tx
pzinck said:
would you like to enlighten us?
i know with the skyhawk it's a longggg time to get off the water...
tom ford
Gunny
Registered User
WA
Kenya Cub – my heartburn here is with the assertion that the “slots only work at a high angle of attack”. In my opinion they work quite nicely in the more common angles of attack although the benefits are more subtle. Sure it’s obvious that they can keep an airplane flying at ridiculously high angles of attack (and that’s where everyone ends up focusing) but they also are doing their job in routine flight – bear with me while I address your questions.
This is a bit of a trick question and I think you know the answer. If by “fly slower” you mean to keep a stall from occurring until a lower airspeed is achieved than the airspeed at which the wing without the slot stalled then the answer is yes. Remember, we are talking about two identical airplanes – the only difference is the slot. This phenomena has been widely demonstrated with vgs and is evidenced by the lower stall speeds of the wings with vgs. The slot does a better job than the vgs because it is providing a laminar (correct term?) flow instead of a turbulent flow (vortices). The slot is also providing that airflow over a much larger surface area than the vgs. The vgs create vortices in bands down the wing while the slot is providing its flow over a contiguous area of the whole wing from the outboard edge of the wing tank to second to last outboard wing rib - I'm guessing that's in the neighborhood of 65-70% or more of the total wing surface area.
The often overlooked benefits of the slot are dramatically improved aileron responsiveness (responsiveness not roll rate) in slow flight because the attached flow is catching more of the aileron with slots than with vgs; and finally, the biggie in my book, no, zero, none, nix tendency to drop a wing or try to go over on your back when the stall occurs. To focus simply on relative airspeed (fly slow) at which the stall (stop flying) occurs ignores these more important (in my opinion) benefits of the slot; namely, enhanced control response in slow flight and stall spin resistance – and they are there even without a ridiculously high angle of attack. Vgs provide the same benefits as the slot (but to a lesser degree) over a stock wing i.e. enhanced control response and improved stall spin resistance. The slot just does a better job and gives you a huge margin of safety compared to the stock wing or wing with vgs.
Again you are focusing only on the high angle of attack. The benefits I described above; enhanced control response and stall spin resistance are still there even at commonly used (for lack of a better term) angles of attack. Here’s an example.
When I’m on short final I have the airplane setup in a three point attitude (nose up about 10 degrees), typically with full flaps and am descending at about 200-300 fpm – I trim to be able to maintain this attitude hands off. My airspeed will be indicating about 35-40 mph. Now, if I come back gently on the stick, the nose will not pitch up noticeably (marginal change in AOA if any) but my descent rate will jump to 700 maybe even 1,000 fpm. At this point I believe (I can’t prove it I’ve never tufted the wing and filmed it) I’m in a stall but I am descending, wings level, three point attitude, at the 700+ fpm mentioned. If I release the back pressure on the stick the descent rate will slow to the 200-300 fpm I am trimmed for. This dynamic is the direct product of the slot and throughout it I have a “solid” stick feel – no mush – like I felt when I was flying my Cub with stock wings and vgs slow. No high angle of attack here but the benefits of the slot are crystal clear to me – you can feel them when you fly the wing.
I’d be curious to know how many, if any, guys with vgs are flying this edge, descending in a three point attitude on short final. I wouldn’t want to be stalled 100 feet over the runway in a Cub with vgs but it sure feels like that is where I am with the slots and all I have to do to recover is release back pressure and/or add power. No unpleasant and dangerous nose drop or wing dip. Also, I don’t think I’ve seen any other Cubs descending, power back, on the glideslope in a three point attitude on short final – usually they are pitched down about 10 degrees, power back descending on the glideslope and then flare to the three point to land or are pitched up dragging it in tail low with power to land.
Lastly, I’d like to address your assertion that when taking off on floats you will not reap any benefits from the slotted wing. I said it before and I will say it again here now – I am not a float pilot and I have not flown a slot equipped Cub on floats. I will, however, say this – on floats the airplane will benefit from vgs or slots in the same way – you will have enhanced control response and you will have it sooner than with a stock wing. As soon as the air starts flowing over vgs or over a slotted wing they will begin to work. As for the AOA issue – float planes I’ve seen start their takeoff runs sure looked nose high, tail low, to me when they firewalled the throttle on their take off run – isn’t that creating some AOA that admittedly decreases when they get on the step – but AOA none the less. I think Mike B mentioned to me that when he flew a float plane with slots they were getting out of the water without getting on the step. But I will let him confirm or deny that.
Slots and/or vgs aside – lets not overlook the obvious lift benefits of a 44.4% (90.25 inches versus 62.5 inches) larger flap on the Dakota square wing as well as the squared off wing tip that is also generating lift where the bow tip wasn’t. Both the larger flaps and the squared wing have got to be of benefit in trying to get a float plane off the water – more lift. Any float pilots care to comment? Anybody flying a slotted cub on floats?
In summary, I hope that helps – and I hope it helps redirect focus regarding the slotted wing away from the high AOA and towards the more subtle – but way more useful – benefits of enhanced control response when slow and massive stall spin resistance. These will really count when you are maneuvering low and slow and are where the focus should be when it comes to the slotted wing. Sorry about the long post.
Come on U7 and mtsprayer - you guys have been flying the slotted wings for awhile now - let's hear what you think about it.
KenyaCub said:
This is a bit of a trick question and I think you know the answer. If by “fly slower” you mean to keep a stall from occurring until a lower airspeed is achieved than the airspeed at which the wing without the slot stalled then the answer is yes. Remember, we are talking about two identical airplanes – the only difference is the slot. This phenomena has been widely demonstrated with vgs and is evidenced by the lower stall speeds of the wings with vgs. The slot does a better job than the vgs because it is providing a laminar (correct term?) flow instead of a turbulent flow (vortices). The slot is also providing that airflow over a much larger surface area than the vgs. The vgs create vortices in bands down the wing while the slot is providing its flow over a contiguous area of the whole wing from the outboard edge of the wing tank to second to last outboard wing rib - I'm guessing that's in the neighborhood of 65-70% or more of the total wing surface area.
The often overlooked benefits of the slot are dramatically improved aileron responsiveness (responsiveness not roll rate) in slow flight because the attached flow is catching more of the aileron with slots than with vgs; and finally, the biggie in my book, no, zero, none, nix tendency to drop a wing or try to go over on your back when the stall occurs. To focus simply on relative airspeed (fly slow) at which the stall (stop flying) occurs ignores these more important (in my opinion) benefits of the slot; namely, enhanced control response in slow flight and stall spin resistance – and they are there even without a ridiculously high angle of attack. Vgs provide the same benefits as the slot (but to a lesser degree) over a stock wing i.e. enhanced control response and improved stall spin resistance. The slot just does a better job and gives you a huge margin of safety compared to the stock wing or wing with vgs.
KenyaCub said:
Again you are focusing only on the high angle of attack. The benefits I described above; enhanced control response and stall spin resistance are still there even at commonly used (for lack of a better term) angles of attack. Here’s an example.
When I’m on short final I have the airplane setup in a three point attitude (nose up about 10 degrees), typically with full flaps and am descending at about 200-300 fpm – I trim to be able to maintain this attitude hands off. My airspeed will be indicating about 35-40 mph. Now, if I come back gently on the stick, the nose will not pitch up noticeably (marginal change in AOA if any) but my descent rate will jump to 700 maybe even 1,000 fpm. At this point I believe (I can’t prove it I’ve never tufted the wing and filmed it) I’m in a stall but I am descending, wings level, three point attitude, at the 700+ fpm mentioned. If I release the back pressure on the stick the descent rate will slow to the 200-300 fpm I am trimmed for. This dynamic is the direct product of the slot and throughout it I have a “solid” stick feel – no mush – like I felt when I was flying my Cub with stock wings and vgs slow. No high angle of attack here but the benefits of the slot are crystal clear to me – you can feel them when you fly the wing.
I’d be curious to know how many, if any, guys with vgs are flying this edge, descending in a three point attitude on short final. I wouldn’t want to be stalled 100 feet over the runway in a Cub with vgs but it sure feels like that is where I am with the slots and all I have to do to recover is release back pressure and/or add power. No unpleasant and dangerous nose drop or wing dip. Also, I don’t think I’ve seen any other Cubs descending, power back, on the glideslope in a three point attitude on short final – usually they are pitched down about 10 degrees, power back descending on the glideslope and then flare to the three point to land or are pitched up dragging it in tail low with power to land.
Lastly, I’d like to address your assertion that when taking off on floats you will not reap any benefits from the slotted wing. I said it before and I will say it again here now – I am not a float pilot and I have not flown a slot equipped Cub on floats. I will, however, say this – on floats the airplane will benefit from vgs or slots in the same way – you will have enhanced control response and you will have it sooner than with a stock wing. As soon as the air starts flowing over vgs or over a slotted wing they will begin to work. As for the AOA issue – float planes I’ve seen start their takeoff runs sure looked nose high, tail low, to me when they firewalled the throttle on their take off run – isn’t that creating some AOA that admittedly decreases when they get on the step – but AOA none the less. I think Mike B mentioned to me that when he flew a float plane with slots they were getting out of the water without getting on the step. But I will let him confirm or deny that.
Slots and/or vgs aside – lets not overlook the obvious lift benefits of a 44.4% (90.25 inches versus 62.5 inches) larger flap on the Dakota square wing as well as the squared off wing tip that is also generating lift where the bow tip wasn’t. Both the larger flaps and the squared wing have got to be of benefit in trying to get a float plane off the water – more lift. Any float pilots care to comment? Anybody flying a slotted cub on floats?
In summary, I hope that helps – and I hope it helps redirect focus regarding the slotted wing away from the high AOA and towards the more subtle – but way more useful – benefits of enhanced control response when slow and massive stall spin resistance. These will really count when you are maneuvering low and slow and are where the focus should be when it comes to the slotted wing. Sorry about the long post.
Come on U7 and mtsprayer - you guys have been flying the slotted wings for awhile now - let's hear what you think about it.
StalledOut
MEMBER
Anchorage
In a light cub with a big prop, you will break out of the water, onto the step or sweet spot but you don't have to stay there. Vern Kingford talked about the two humps followed by the slide and accelerateration phase and ending at the lift off phase. Depending on the wind and water conditions, sometimes you just leap off with a quick application of flaps after the second "hump". What was his saying, let it rise, neutralize? After the second one, it's ready to fly sometimes. I'm not saying your average everday, out fishing kind of flight where it's you, buddy, lunch, tackle, extra cloths, fish in the float comparments and 30 gallons of fuel.
Short? I'll try to post a picture of a pond with the cub sitting on it years ago. I'd say 150 yards.
Short? I'll try to post a picture of a pond with the cub sitting on it years ago. I'd say 150 yards.
Jerry Burr
MEMBER
Sedro Woolley, Washington.
C/L
Hi Gunny. The stock and slotted wing produce an almost identical C/L up to the point that the stock wing stalls, then the slotted wing will continue to fly for several more degrees of AOA until it's Critical AOA is reached. The flying attributes of each wing are no doubt different however. Your high rate of descent I believe is due to your wing twist and that the inner sections of your wing are stalled while the outer sections are still giving you good control. Your comment on the V.G.'s is correct for the BLR's but not the Micros. The advantages of the slat of Waynes over the slot is the fact that they are full span. They also use the full chord of the existing wing where as the slot gives up around 4 inches of chord in the slot area for the slot airfoil. Also Waynes slats close up at cruise and do not produce as much drag in that configuration. I have the graphs but don't know how to post them. Perhaps we can have lunch and Ill give you a copy to post. Jerry. P.S. It would sure be interesting to tape a cuff onto the slotted wing for testing. Perhaps the slot airfoil could create lift on it's own at high AOA's.
Hi Gunny. The stock and slotted wing produce an almost identical C/L up to the point that the stock wing stalls, then the slotted wing will continue to fly for several more degrees of AOA until it's Critical AOA is reached. The flying attributes of each wing are no doubt different however. Your high rate of descent I believe is due to your wing twist and that the inner sections of your wing are stalled while the outer sections are still giving you good control. Your comment on the V.G.'s is correct for the BLR's but not the Micros. The advantages of the slat of Waynes over the slot is the fact that they are full span. They also use the full chord of the existing wing where as the slot gives up around 4 inches of chord in the slot area for the slot airfoil. Also Waynes slats close up at cruise and do not produce as much drag in that configuration. I have the graphs but don't know how to post them. Perhaps we can have lunch and Ill give you a copy to post. Jerry. P.S. It would sure be interesting to tape a cuff onto the slotted wing for testing. Perhaps the slot airfoil could create lift on it's own at high AOA's.
KenyaCub
Registered User
Kenya, Africa
Hi Gunny,
Wow, what an answer! You do highlight some interesting facts on the slot.
I'm not going to debate with you what the slot actually does, because you definetely have more experience with it.
But still from what I understand from your post, the only time a slotted wing flies slower than a non slotted wing is when at higher angles of attack. And even though you might see some subltle differences at lower angles, you're not flying much slower.
I think Jerry Burr just confirmed that too.
I guess for less experienced pilots who are not looking for the ultimate performance (at low angles), all the safety benefits you are talking about will be usefull.
I know my airplane very well, I've never stalled it or spinned it unintentionally and feel comfortable with my roll response/authority (even though it has droopy ailerons). If I can keep all that and fly slower without increasing the deck angle, that's what I'm interested in. I believe the long ailerons drooped will provide that. And I do believe it will fly slower at lower deck angles than your setup.
The way you fly your approaches would not work very well for my use. I like to be able to come over an obstacle and pitch the nose down, instead of up, to lose that altitude, all while not picking up too much speed.
It all depends what you want/need and how you fly.
But then again, you drink Scotch and I drink beer. And let's leave it at that.
Wow, what an answer! You do highlight some interesting facts on the slot.
I'm not going to debate with you what the slot actually does, because you definetely have more experience with it.
But still from what I understand from your post, the only time a slotted wing flies slower than a non slotted wing is when at higher angles of attack. And even though you might see some subltle differences at lower angles, you're not flying much slower.
I think Jerry Burr just confirmed that too.
I guess for less experienced pilots who are not looking for the ultimate performance (at low angles), all the safety benefits you are talking about will be usefull.
I know my airplane very well, I've never stalled it or spinned it unintentionally and feel comfortable with my roll response/authority (even though it has droopy ailerons). If I can keep all that and fly slower without increasing the deck angle, that's what I'm interested in. I believe the long ailerons drooped will provide that. And I do believe it will fly slower at lower deck angles than your setup.
The way you fly your approaches would not work very well for my use. I like to be able to come over an obstacle and pitch the nose down, instead of up, to lose that altitude, all while not picking up too much speed.
It all depends what you want/need and how you fly.
But then again, you drink Scotch and I drink beer. And let's leave it at that.
L
labdad32
Slot
Gunny has it figured-out. The only reason I have the slotted wing is for safety. I'm not good enough in a cub these days to eek-out every inch of performance from even a standard configuration, let alone some of the mods in use today. If you have never been in a spin, staring at the approaching trees at low level you may not appreciate what the slot has to offer.
Gunny has it figured-out. The only reason I have the slotted wing is for safety. I'm not good enough in a cub these days to eek-out every inch of performance from even a standard configuration, let alone some of the mods in use today. If you have never been in a spin, staring at the approaching trees at low level you may not appreciate what the slot has to offer.
Dave Calkins
Registered User
Anchorage, Alaska
Crash, were you at Valdez?
DAVE
DAVE
Dave Calkins
Registered User
Anchorage, Alaska
43A, did you make it down? DAVE
I guess no one has been around long enough to remember when Jerry Burr & Denny Martel use to attend these contest when they were held in Gulkana. I seem to remember the takeoff and landing numbers being half or less of the current competition. If my recollection is correct they had modified wings. If these gentlemen were at the 1600ft lower elevation in Valdez along with a cool ocean breeze their numbers would dazzle even the most skeptical of the modified Cub wing.
Dave Calkins
Registered User
Anchorage, Alaska
Bruce, thanks for responding.
I was wondering if you or Crash had made the show becuase it may be possible that not every good Cub and good Cub-driver in Alaska were at the show.
Having said this, it may be that some Cub with great mods wasn't there either.
The point is, when this show is your priority, you'll be there....competing....in whatever you like.
Lot's of guys like to "POO_POO" 6 inch extended gear. Paul Klaus won both the short take-off and the 'Bush Challenge' with 6" gear.
Also, lot's of guys like to poo-poo putting flaps on a PA-11, but Matt Piatt won the short landing comp. with a flapped -11.
If each hadn't done this, you might still be poo-pooing my idea that they are valid mods with a valid purpose. These guys proved it.
Also, like "piperpa-12" said, "...remember Jerry Burr and Denny Martel at Gulkana..." ???
I've said enuff. DAVE
I was wondering if you or Crash had made the show becuase it may be possible that not every good Cub and good Cub-driver in Alaska were at the show.
Having said this, it may be that some Cub with great mods wasn't there either.
The point is, when this show is your priority, you'll be there....competing....in whatever you like.
Lot's of guys like to "POO_POO" 6 inch extended gear. Paul Klaus won both the short take-off and the 'Bush Challenge' with 6" gear.
Also, lot's of guys like to poo-poo putting flaps on a PA-11, but Matt Piatt won the short landing comp. with a flapped -11.
If each hadn't done this, you might still be poo-pooing my idea that they are valid mods with a valid purpose. These guys proved it.
Also, like "piperpa-12" said, "...remember Jerry Burr and Denny Martel at Gulkana..." ???
I've said enuff. DAVE
StalledOut
MEMBER
Anchorage
If you go WAAAAAY back, before Gulkana, they were on the beach down below Kenai. If I remember, south of Clam Gulch and north of Ninilchik Anyone remember those?
