what the heck was the "J3 cantilever" ? It's hard to tell in the picture but it almost does appear strut-less. I've never heard of it

When I was airplane shopping a little over a year ago the airplane I really wanted was a 90 hp pa-18....

Tough to find one that is reasonably priced.

We looked at Pa-11s, pa-12s and j-3s of various types. One day I will have a clipped wing Cub.

We almost pulled the trigger on a really nice pa-12 listed here by Tom Gresham. It had the 150hp 320 and PA-18 tailfeathers. I bet it is a ton of fun to fly.

I settled however on a Wag Aero Sport Trainer/ Cuby... The reasons all came down to the build and the desire to go experimental so I could avoid the hostage situation certain IAs can put you in. My A&P charged me a lunch and an airplane ride for my conditional inspection this year..

Built by Trevor Rafferty with a super cub fuselage, oversized elevator and rudder and float fittings... putting the deposit down was one of the happiest days of my life.

All in all, I was on the hunt for about 8 weeks before pulling the trigger. Could not be happier. A ton of fun to fly, and not breaking the bank.

Ben, that's awesome! How long did it take you to build?

He Bought it Chris...................Ask him how the trip getting it Home from Florida was

Probably ask him in a PM

We had a PA-12. Super Cruiser. 150 HP. No Flaps.

Wish it had flaps. Many folks added flaps to them later.

If you want a max envelope performer, don’t settle on something that is missing a fairly important part of its edge of envelope performance capability.

If it’s just for cruising around the countryside, it doesn’t matter.

There are so many with flaps………..why get one without them?

He Bought it Chris...................Ask him how the trip getting it Home from Florida was

Probably ask him in a PM

Good question, in my case I am not looking for maximum performance bush flying. Even without the big tires, this cub is right at home on grass.

If I had a STOL super cub for sure I would want them.

For flying purposes, I can accomplish steepening a descent and maintaining airspeed with a slip. They are super fun too.

There is definitely something to be said about just simple stick and rudder flying. As I have been told, easy to fly these planes, hard to fly them well. Seems to be the case so far.

Someone asked about build time, it was built by Trevor Rafferty. He is a pretty well known aerobatic pilot from Canada. It is my understanding he builds in the winter months and flies in the airshows in the warmer summer months. I think this was his 14th cub, he set it up to keep for himself and kept it for 3 years. The owner I bought it from hardly flew the thing. I have put about 75 hours on it in the last year and only had some minor work.

I went with the push rod tube conversion kit from Real Gasket. This is super important in my opinion for small continentals, makes accessing the lifters and replacing/repairing cylinders a lot easier job.
Second thing I learned is these low compression engines, 6.3:1 do not like 100LL gas.

Run ethanol free 87, test each batch for ethanol, and add just a few gallons of av gas for the biocides.

Had a stuck exhaust valve on my #3 and ended up having to remove the cylinder, clean and lap both intake and exhaust valves. Have not had any issues since.
Also, was able to do this all on my own, inspect and repair/replace anything, take my time and make sure it was done right, legally.

Even without flaps the limiting STOL factor normally will be the pilot

That said, if you’re dropping big bucks, yeah get all the toys

There is a great article in Sport Av about Trevor R and his phenomenal custom Pitts Model 12. I bet that Cuby is a great example and joy to fly.

Even without flaps the limiting STOL factor normally will be the pilot

That said, if you’re dropping big bucks, yeah get all the toys

The limitations of the pilot applies to nearly every airplane when it comes to wringing out performance. As ones skills develop, it’s nice to already have all the “toys” (flaps in this case) ) to further push the capabilities of the airplane. It’s a lot cheaper to buy the toys already on the plane than to buy them later……. Been there, done that with the PA 12.
I’d really like a true SuperCub just for fun but our pponk 182 does 10x the mission a supercub would do for us……….hauling boatloads of crap into elk camp.[/quote]


This is true

It’s also easier to bail yourself out with em, I remember that when I got my wagon

…there’s a pretty nice PA-18-95 for sale on here at the moment;)…haha… And, I could t agree more with the various comments. The 90hp cubs fly wonderfully! And are rare to come by!

Mike,

You are around a lot more STOL airplanes in Idaho than I am in the flatlands of Mississippi. I'm curious just how much difference the flaps make "in the real world", meaning hard numbers. I've never flown a Cub with flaps, but I would like to and do repeated take offs and landings with and without to see the difference.

Atlee Dodge got some STC's many years ago to convert J-3's to essentially PA-11's. He was generous with letting others use the STC's without any charge and a handful of J-3's were converted in that manner. Atlee's purpose, I talked to him personally, was to make a better J-3 on floats, and according to him, it made a world of difference.

Other builders did the same, some with flaps and some without. The biggest limitation is that gross weight was not increased. After 60 plus years of flying tailwheel and STOL airplanes, my stick and rudder skills are well honed. It is hard to imagine that the performance of my Cub would be much affected by flaps, BUT I COULD CERTAINLY BE WRONG.

In ground effect, my Cub will fly at 40 mph and land/takeoff in 400'. Getting a performance differential in that tiny performance corner takes a lot, but I would love to fly a similar Cub with flaps just to satisfy my curiosity.

If you have a buddy that has done takeoffs/landings with and without and has a firm number on difference, I'm all ears. It would even be interesting on a later model Super Cub. That being said, I wouldn't consider going to the expense of adding flaps. I've never gone to a place I wanted to land in and had to turn away.

Jg

“ real world” difference for 95% of landings? Negligible. Especially if the vast majority of your mission is to simply fly around the patch and land on the common suburban runway.

When the majority of your mission and fun changes to landing at shorter strips where normal length or wide patterns dont exist, ill take a little extra available drag when its sitting right there ready and available. We see those patterns frequently on the 100+ landings Andrea and I make every year in the “Frank”. I love the 40 degrees of flaps on our 182 for that very reason. In fact, we are headed there today.

But to your point, I would not have added them to my PA12 though. The benefit would not justify the expense. If i flew it into truly unimproved, unmarked spots like so many folks do here all the time. ( owyhees), that equation would change.

Ray Arnold is a backcountry legend out here. Hes in his late 80s now. Ray flew countless hunting parties into the woods and delivered mail to the few ranches in the wilderness….. on skis in the winter.
Sadly, he cant fly anymore but before he lost his medical, he was rebuilding his PA12 in the hangar……..with added flaps.

Rebuilt a j3 20 years ago, presently with a 85 stroker and tundra tires and a climb prop, goes anywhere i want to go but it's usually just me. I had a pa12 i kept in ak for a year, 150hp with all the mods including flaps. Flaps did not help take-off roll at all since they only added drag and not lift like fowler flaps do. THey did allow a steeper approach but not much more than a full slip will perform with no flaps. I shorter landing if you were willing to fly in behind the power curve due to the added drag.