08 May 2025, 17:55 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cub vs Air Cam on Floats Posted: 22 Apr 2020, 22:22 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/18/13 Posts: 710 Post Likes: +566 Location: Tampa, FL
Aircraft: 2020 Gamebird GB1
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Cub on floats in not going to be much faster than your aircam. Is that 70 mph or 70 knots? I though the aircam was a bit faster than that (85mph) 70 mph, the yellow arc on the airspeed indicator starts at 85 mph IAS. You could fly at 80-85 mph, but you really have to keep the nose down to maintain level flight and you can feel the airframe start to vibrate above this speed. The Vne is 110 mph, yes, mph. Butch
_________________ The only way to make more time is to go faster. 2020 Gamebird GB1 2015 Lockwood AirCam KTPF/KVDF
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cub vs Air Cam on Floats Posted: 23 Apr 2020, 11:22 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/06/13 Posts: 421 Post Likes: +260 Location: KFTW-Fort Worth Meacham
Aircraft: C208B, AL18-115
|
|
On 8.50 x 6 tires my Legend Cub (180 hp) indicates 105-110 mph at cruise (2450 rpm) or 91 kts. Big bush wheels would slow it down, but according to what I hear floats are not as negative on speed (seems counter-intuitive).
Both the Air-Cam and Cub are slow by any definition, but there is a big difference between 100 mph and 70 mph. On a 200 mile trip, there is almost an hour difference.
The difference really manifests itself in a head wind. 20 mph on the nose and the cub does the same 200 mile trip in 2.5 hours, the Air-Cam takes 4 hours.
Apology for using statute miles and mph, just easier for the example.
Both are fun, just different strengths. Air-Cam was designed as a camera platform to fly over very unforgiving terrain. The cub....well everyone knows the Piper Cub story.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cub vs Air Cam on Floats Posted: 24 Apr 2020, 08:45 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 09/05/09 Posts: 4326 Post Likes: +3112 Location: Raleigh, NC
Aircraft: L-39
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I just did a 4 hour trip in my Husky. Maybe mine is just slow, but I doubt a Husky on amphibs will do 120. what kind of gear do you have, and what are you seeing for airspeed?
_________________ "Find worthy causes in your life."
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cub vs Air Cam on Floats Posted: 24 Apr 2020, 11:51 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 06/29/15 Posts: 16 Post Likes: +4 Location: PDK- Atlanta, GA
Aircraft: RV-8, 206H
|
|
VNE for a husky on wiplines is 115kias. Cruise is going to be about 100knots, though slowing down a bit will help on the fuel economy. If you plan on doing much docking, you may want to look at the 180hp husky to have the carbureted engine. Science has proven an injected engine in a seaplane never wants to hot start when your drifting towards a hazard 
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cub vs Air Cam on Floats Posted: 25 Apr 2020, 06:40 |
|
 |

|

|
Joined: 12/09/07 Posts: 17117 Post Likes: +13053 Location: Cascade, ID (U70)
Aircraft: C182
|
|
Username Protected wrote: 150 with 150HP engine on floats. Biggest issue is entry and exit.
On subject- the AirCam was designed to fly at gross on one engine but needs a ME and it is not a forty year old overpriced aircraft Why are these two aircraft your short list? Something is overpriced only if no one is buying it. If it's selling at that price, it's not overpriced. It's priced to the market.
_________________ "Great photo! You must have a really good camera."
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cub vs Air Cam on Floats Posted: 25 Apr 2020, 12:10 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 09/05/09 Posts: 4326 Post Likes: +3112 Location: Raleigh, NC
Aircraft: L-39
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Why are these two aircraft your short list? no particular reason. I always thought the aircam looked cool- and I have the ME so that's not an issue. but I'd like to have the ability to make a cross country. 150/180 would be a cool option; husky, or supercub (probably a bit slower tho). i also looked at a Maule- hard for me to love the shape; but I like the company.
_________________ "Find worthy causes in your life."
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cub vs Air Cam on Floats Posted: 26 Apr 2020, 10:44 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/20/15 Posts: 209 Post Likes: +108 Location: AZ
Aircraft: C501
|
|
How bout a PA-12 Super Cruiser with the 150hp STC? They are cheaper to buy and have 95% of the performance? There is a little more room in the cabin and it is a little faster because of the wing angle of incidence and gear that is less bulky when not on floats.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cub vs Air Cam on Floats Posted: 28 Apr 2020, 17:28 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/10/17 Posts: 2130 Post Likes: +1549 Company: Skyhaven Airport Inc
Aircraft: various mid century
|
|
trouble is the useful load of a PA-12 on floats especially with 150hp if amphibs it could be single place.
There is a gross increase kit but will need to be welded in. more weight. Adding flaps would be nice to help getting off. The 160hp is noticeably better than 150 but higher octane fuel needed.
If you ever change the bungees on the stock PA-12 gear you will run out and buy a cub gear to replace them It’s a wild time being in the cockpit with the stretched bungees and the tool plus a long pipe all aimed to cause significant bodily injury if something slips. To do that every time changing from floats to wheels I’d switch over to the PA-18 gear quickly.
12 cabin width would be much nicer. Add the cathedral ceiling baggage mod and there is a good bit of room. It would need to be a custom rebuild with floats in mind and mods made at that time. A new fuselage frame with mods already setup might be cheaper option.
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|