EAA493 Mailing List: Re: New bush plane, Super Cub replacement?

[Edward Earwood (cubpilot222]

My internet connection is super slow and I've not been able to watch this video that seems to be right up my alley! However, I will say that there have been many designs trying to out do the super cub and in my opinion, none are as efficient, effective, and as safe and economical to fly than the original design.

Joe we will sure miss you and Judy! We all respect and cherish your input and posts. I sure hope you will continue to be a 493 member and keep your Texas friends "in the know"! I realize I don't often comment or post, but I sure enjoy reading your posts as well as those of other members that have tremendous knowledge in aviation!

Thanks!

Edward

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Joe Christian <k5hmd [at] uppercanyon.us> wrote:

I hadn’t thought of the “asymmetrical thrust” problem.  Maybe he leads with the rear engine when adding power?

 

He had a motorcycle strapped to the bottom in one shot so guess it has a good useful load.  Maybe he straps on an external tank for longer flights, and uses a pump to transfer fuel to the main tank.

 

Good to hear from you.  Supposed to close on the ranch sale in February, then off to the races to buy property in Oklahoma.

 

Later,

Joe

 

From: EAA493 [mailto:eaa493-bounces+k5hmd=uppercanyon.us [at] fly-web.us] On Behalf Of Dale Elliott
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 1:09 PM
To: Joe Christian
Subject: Re: [EAA493] New bush plane, Super Cub replacement?

 

You know me.  Always asking questions.

1. Curious about the "pitch-over” tendency during initial part of takeoff roll and during a refused landing (go around, aborted attempt, etc).  Engines are definitely above the pitch axis pivot point (moment arm?).  It has got to be a consideration.  Suspect that’s why the rear engine looks like it’s pointed straight at the horizontal elevator surfaces.

2. Fuel?  I think cubs are gravity fed?  But doubling the fuel load doesn’t seem realistic in that design.  Wouldn’t think it has much range.  Can it get to the “bush?"

3. Doesn’t look that “cubby”.  Landing gear, wing (?), vertical tail.  Cub guys would know what else.  Flaps don’t seem too cubby.  Lots more moving parts than your run of the mill Cub.

Interesting!

Al

On Jan 29, 2016, at 9:53 AM, Joe Christian <k5hmd [at] uppercanyon.us> wrote:

 

Neat plane; great pilot!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHR6bpupwJk

_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.fly-web.us/mailman/options/eaa493/chippiepig%40gmail.com

 

_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.fly-web.us/mailman/options/eaa493/cubpilot222%40gmail.com