BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Aug 2019, 21:07

Not that it means anything, but I’ve handled more tailwheel insurance claims in the backcountry than nosewheel claims. A lot more.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 01:05

Username Protected wrote:

Not that it means anything, but I’ve handled more tailwheel insurance claims in the backcountry than nosewheel claims. A lot more.

And I bet almost no Cirrus are in those back country claims. Clearly, people should switch to Cirrus airplanes by your logic since they aren't crashing out there.

In other words, until you normalize for exposure, planes doing the same job at the same rate, your evidence doesn't inform.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 09:41

Username Protected wrote:

Not that it means anything, but I’ve handled more tailwheel insurance claims in the backcountry than nosewheel claims. A lot more.

And I bet almost no Cirrus are in those back country claims. Clearly, people should switch to Cirrus airplanes by your logic since they aren't crashing out there.

In other words, until you normalize for exposure, planes doing the same job at the same rate, your evidence doesn't inform.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 09:43

Username Protected wrote:

Not that it means anything, but I’ve handled more tailwheel insurance claims in the backcountry than nosewheel claims. A lot more.

And I bet almost no Cirrus are in those back country claims. Clearly, people should switch to Cirrus airplanes by your logic since they aren't crashing out there.

In other words, until you normalize for exposure, planes doing the same job at the same rate, your evidence doesn't inform.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 09:43

Username Protected wrote:

Cracks me up how much certain groups in aviation HATE anything new or different. I swear you could design a plane that costs fourteen dollars and outperforms a TBM930 and these guys would say it’s the dumbest thing ever.

I for one am vehemently against tribalism to self-promote. Taildragger vs. trike, Cirrus vs. Beech, Piper vs. Cessna ect. I may not always have been that way but that is how I feel now. General aviation is too small to bash new planes that come to market. Each one has its own merit. Each airplane is different. All of them deserve respect or they will bite. That is something that has never changed.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 10:57

Username Protected wrote:

Geesh Mike, he's sharing an observation, not publishing a comprehensive safety study for the NTSB.

Mike is a dog with a bone, and he'll never let it go. He's made a point that he thinks is infallible, and he will smite down any other comments, whether or not they oppose his view. There's no point in engaging.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 10:59

Username Protected wrote:

Geesh Mike, he's sharing an observation, not publishing a comprehensive safety study for the NTSB.

Mike is a dog with a bone, and he'll never let it go. He's made a point that he thinks is infallible, and he will smite down any other comments, whether or not they oppose his view. There's no point in engaging.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 11:27

If you owned an NXCub you would have the abilitly to do both! Most have missed that the NXCub is convertible from nosewheel to tailwheel configuration so therefore its a win win for both camps.

Let's face it most guys buying a 400K plus XCub or NXCub have a vision of Johnson Creek being extreme backcountry and this aircraft takes them there all day long quickly, efficiently and safely with very little danger of bent metal.

Username Protected wrote:

Of all the places one can land an airplane there are a minuscule percentage that the NXCub wouldn’t be a safer fit for.

About 99% of the Earth's surface will be safer in the tailwheel airplane.

I await a video of a nosewheel airplane doing a hydroplanning landing to a small shore to prove me wrong. I literally could not find such a thing on youtube and there are numerous examples for tailwheels.

If I owned an NXCub, I simply wouldn't fly it to places I'd take a XCub, the two planes are just not mission equivalent.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 11:42

Username Protected wrote:

Geesh Mike, he's sharing an observation, not publishing a comprehensive safety study for the NTSB.

Mike is a dog with a bone, and he'll never let it go. He's made a point that he thinks is infallible, and he will smite down any other comments, whether or not they oppose his view. There's no point in engaging.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 11:44

I’ve heard there are lots of ground looped CC at the factory waiting to get repaired. Cub Crafters might have noticed, and made a plane to help prevent this. Yes, I owned a CC, yes I live in WA very close to the factory, and yes I’ve flown w Larry..he’s a very safe pilot!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 11:50

Username Protected wrote:

If you owned an NXCub you would have the abilitly to do both! Most have missed that the NXCub is convertible from nosewheel to tailwheel configuration so therefore its a win win for both camps.

Brilliant!
Might want to make that super obvious in the marketing.

Otoh, Darn. Through more innovative enginnering you’ve forced us all to find some other aviation related item to argue about...... or um.....discuss.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 11:54

Username Protected wrote:

A water assisted takeoff is going to be a rodeo....

I thought the early 747s regularly performed water assisted takeoffs!

:peace:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 12:06

Some years ago I was in discussions with Jim R to sell his planes in AK, this was soon after the Sport Cub was introduced. Jim wanted be to switch out our training fleet of nose-draggers for new Cubs, after all, we are talking about Alaska. I didn’t agree.

In short we didn’t come to an agreement and Jim chose a more “Alaska minded” fellow to show his products. A few months later we were planning an air show at the Palmer airport and I told Jim he should bring his plane for at least a static display, he agreed. As the date grew close I called Jim telling him I had still not heard from his guy and show day was coming up fast. After some uncomfortable deflection on his end Jim finally admitted his plane would be a no-show because his true Alaskan aviator had wrecked it. Something about letting it drift off a bit to much and catching the wing in the trees...

I suggested we take off the damaged side and put it against the wall. Jim didn’t seem to appreciate my sense of humor.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 12:48

Username Protected wrote:

The Peterson kits on 182's and planes like the 206 with beefed up nose gear elements certainly can get into more challenging spots than the normal tricycle gear planes. But when there are large rocks, small logs, tall sticks, deep sand, untracked powder snow etc. etc. the tricycle gear planes are at risk for their props and especially their nose gear. I do a lot of backcountry flying in and around Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado and Utah. I've never seen a King Katmai away from an airport. I spent 4 days up in Idaho recently and while there were plenty of tricycle gear planes at places like Johnson Creek, there were none at Mile Hi, Vines etc. I've taken a T210 into the Flying B, but I would never trust it's nose gear in rougher stuff. I spent a week in the Wrangell Range for backcountry skiing via ski-plane access. The professional operator at the lodge had 3 Cubs (with no electrical systems to keep them light), two 185's and a Turbine conversion Otter...all on skis, all conventional gear. I didn't see a tricycle gear plane all week. Again, it just depends on the mission.

That must be your MU2 I see landing in McCall, I've always had a soft spot for MU2's ever since Polaris owned one in the 70's. I fly the SEAT out of McCall.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Aug 2019, 13:16

Tricycle gear has won. 172’s way outsold 170’s. Tri-pacers outsold Pacers. Cubs are among the last accessible holdouts in the tailwheel game. From a sales and marketing perspective, Cubcrafters made a good call with the nose wheel. However, I think the universe is out of kilter with a nose wheel Cub.

I just landed after spending 2.5 hours tooling around in the hills west of Fort Worth in my Legend Cub. I am happy to report that my feet still work and I feel great. Great therapy for the soul.

CubCrafters New NXCub Oshkosh Unveiling