Fat cub? Build quality? What are some of the highlights for those that have owned/flown them?

Halfway tempted to unload the Wagon and try something different.

Thanks for the insight.

Will it fit in your hangar?

asa wrote:Will it fit in your hangar?

Nope... LOL

When I looked at them insurance was surprisingly steep.

I fly an A1-C for a customer of mine.
All I can say is it’s nice, but it ain’t no C180....

Hammer wrote:When I looked at them insurance was surprisingly steep.

My insurance is surprisingly cheap. Avemco, same for my brother and friends all with Husky’s.

Kurt

Had a very nicely equipped Super Cub as well as many other airplanes over the years and am on my second Husky. I like both the Super Cub and Husky but prefer the Husky. Build quality is excellent. Heavier than a SC but there is more “beef” around you. Performance is excellent, my miles per gallon and speed is much better than my SC was. I need to carry less fuel in the Husky to accomplish the mission. My range is much better than my SC even with the combi pod, I have never had to carry cans in the Husky. It’s a very nice airplane, I have the MT Ultra prop on mine and really like it. If you are used to a SC and hop in it and try to fly it like a SC you will be disappointed. It takes a a little bit of time to get used to it but after a few hours you will really appreciate its strong points. Anyway, more pluses than mentioned as well as some negatives but nothing that I would consider a deal killer.

PM me with your phone number if you would like to talk, too much to type.

Kurt

I’ve had a 180 HP super cub. Now have a 2006 A-1B new wing Husky. What’s the mission? While there are similarities, the differences can be deal breakers depending on the mission.

Check out flyhusky.com. It’s a user forum for Husky owners.

I just bought an A1-C and I love it so far. Lots of nice refinements. Really light on the roll and very stable. Very few are ratty and old.

I laugh every time I do a full flap takeoff. It’s ludicrous.

My useful load (C model) is 907 pounds. Pretty good for a two place airplane. Gross weight is 2250.

Kent

We owned a 180 for a bit and have an 03 B model Husky now. Very different airplanes. If you fly by yourself most often the Husky is more fun to fly imo. I enjoy the view afforded by the tandem seating arrangement. Flying with the windows open and the door down in the summer time is hard to beat. The C model has a lot of improvements over the B, one of the nicest imo is the larger door opening over the B. Much easier to get in and out of.

As to the SC vs Husky, there are a lot of views on that as well. I recommend going to the SC forum and reading up on the threads asking this exact question. MTV has a LOT of time in Husky's and gives some great bullet points in threads on the subject. Worth taking the time to search and read.

Aviat has never been known for cheap parts..... More sources for SC parts.


They are a great airplane and I love ours. One thing though. I don't think it will ever appreciate in value. 180/185's seem to keep going up and up and......

Squash wrote:I’ve had a 180 HP super cub. Now have a 2006 A-1B new wing Husky. What’s the mission? While there are similarities, the differences can be deal breakers depending on the mission.

Probably 80% of the time solo just out screwing around. I fly a half dozen trips or so from Albuquerque to my farm strip NW of Houston where deer often ride back with me. A Cub is too slow and doesn’t have the useful I need but the Wagon isn’t being used to it’s full potential and isn’t as much fun to fly although 150mph on those trips is hella convenient.

One other thing. Not sure about Carbon Cubs but the ability to open up the sides of a Husky after removing 1865 screws in the side panels is a nice option to have.

TxAgfisher wrote:

Squash wrote:I’ve had a 180 HP super cub. Now have a 2006 A-1B new wing Husky. What’s the mission? While there are similarities, the differences can be deal breakers depending on the mission.

Probably 80% of the time solo just out screwing around. I fly a half dozen trips or so from Albuquerque to my farm strip NW of Houston where deer often ride back with me. A Cub is too slow and doesn’t have the useful I need but the Wagon isn’t being used to it’s full potential and isn’t as much fun to fly although 150mph on those trips is hella convenient.

Then a Husky is for you, that sounds like a perfect fit for a Husky. The Husky will do that trip non stop if you wish. You can also get an Airglass belly pod for more cargo volume. Carries 169 pounds, weighs 27 pounds. Husky is very versatile.

Kurt

G44 wrote:

TxAgfisher wrote:

Squash wrote:I’ve had a 180 HP super cub. Now have a 2006 A-1B new wing Husky. What’s the mission? While there are similarities, the differences can be deal breakers depending on the mission.

Probably 80% of the time solo just out screwing around. I fly a half dozen trips or so from Albuquerque to my farm strip NW of Houston where deer often ride back with me. A Cub is too slow and doesn’t have the useful I need but the Wagon isn’t being used to it’s full potential and isn’t as much fun to fly although 150mph on those trips is hella convenient.

Then a Husky is for you, that sounds like a perfect fit for a Husky. The Husky will do that trip non stop if you wish. You can also get an Airglass belly pod for more cargo volume. Carries 169 pounds, weighs 27 pounds. Husky is very versatile.

Kurt

Belly pod would be on the list of must haves for sure.

G44 wrote:

Hammer wrote:When I looked at them insurance was surprisingly steep.

My insurance is surprisingly cheap. Avemco, same for my brother and friends all with Husky’s.

Kurt

Maybe rates have changed. It was over a decade ago, but Husky rates quoted to me were three-times the rates for a 170 with the same hull value and 500 hrs tailwheel time. I was very surprised by the discrepancy.

I was a working Wildlife Biologist/Pilot in central Alaska when I concluded that the Husky would do the task I needed to do. I had the use of a couple of Super Cubs, but the Cubs wouldn't do the job I needed done.

The mission: Depart Fairbanks northbound, to ~ 100 to 150 miles north, work in slow flight and low level for 2 to 5 hours, and return home without re-fueling. In pretty much all months except December and January. That means short days, where traveling another hundred plus miles while up north to refuel wasn't practical. I also needed to work on wheels, skis and floats in various seasons.

I talked our aircraft folks into buying a Husky, a 1989 A-1. Airplane was equipped with EDO 2000 floats, Aero 3000 straight skis and various tires, depending. Due to limited gross weight, on some missions, we'd run it on 6.00 x 6 tires to extract maximum speed and useful load.

At the time, we operated as "Public Aircraft" and our Cubs were all operated at weights well above the "legal" gross weight of 1750 (1760 on floats). We hadn't done any research/engineering on the subject, we just did it, cause we could.....as public aircraft. I can tell you honestly and from experience that a stock super cub at 2200 pounds is a dog. And, due to the type of work I was doing, I refused to fly them that heavy.
Anyway, I wrote to the head of our aircraft program, stating that I wanted authorization to operate that A-1 Husky at 2000 pounds, vs it's "legal" GW of 1800 lbs. That letter went unanswered for a couple months, and when the response came, it instructed me to bring the A-1 to Anchorage and exchange it for the first production A-1B Husky. That airplane was certified to 2000 pounds and 2200 on floats.

Turns out that first B model weighed 1260 empty on big tires....the lightest Husky I've ever flown. We procured a set of Rosti Fernandez retractable wheel skis from Thomas Deitrich in Germany for it, and at 76 pounds total additional weight, what a machine that airplane was.

With 50 gallons useable (and in fact, most Huskys have a little more) and minimal equipment, that airplane on skis, tires and Baumann 2100 floats was a horse. One of our very experienced pilots flew it on moose surveys one winter and noted to me that you couldn't run it out of gas in a day. And, getting to and from the work was fast and comfortable. That constant speed prop is a magic way to control thrust and fuel flows, and I learned to work both.

Eventually, our outfit bought seven Huskys, all B's. That first B that I flew for ~ 1600 hours or so was replaced with a later B that weighed almost a hundred pounds more.....groan. They transferred my favorite to another agency, who promptly wrecked it.

Anyway, one of my projects each year was to conduct Dall's Sheep surveys in the White Mountains north of Fairbanks. That flight was a Seven hour flying day, which typically started at around 4 AM. With the Super Cub, I had to do it in a borrowed airplane on wheels, and had to cache fuel either on one of the ridges or a gravel bar on Beaver Creek. Lots of fuel, because the Cub (ours were all 160 hp) really wasn't happy doing sheep surveys very heavy. So, at least two refuelings in a day needed.

When I started operating the Husky, it was assigned to me, and was generally on floats at the time of year when sheep surveys were done. PITA to take it off floats, then put it back on them after sheep surveys to do LE work in hunting seasons. So, I did some practice work in the canyons and decided I could use the Husky on floats for sheep surveys. And, it did that job beautifully. That constant speed prop allows you to actually USE all that horsepower, compared to a Cub, even one with 180 hp. And, I could get to the mountain, and back fast. I cached gas on a small lake close to the survey area.

Bottom line: Huskys are heavier than SC. Why? look at one without fabric sometime. There are UPPER longerons! So, you've got THREE sets of longerons back aft, and lots more structure all over. A sister agency pilot wrecked one of ours in a stall/spin. Pilot wound up with the engine in his lap and perished. Back seater was alive and suffered strap rash and a concussion from the deceleration when they impacted the ground, almost pure vertical. I've never seen anyone survive that sort of accident in a Cub. Part of that was the restraint system in the Husky as well....five point harness is a life saver.

Weights: Huskys are heavy, compared to Cubs. That said, more structure, and frankly, many SC empty weights are fairy tales. Yes, there are light Cubs out there. At the University where I worked, we had a brand new Top Cub, from Cub Crafters. It had one radio, no transponder, no gyro system at all. VERY basic. Honest empty weight: 1307 lbs. CC claimed those airplanes all weighed less than 1200 lbs. I've flown three of them, and all were over 1300.

Bottom line: Husky is 20 mph faster than a comparable Cub on same undercarriage. At that speed, it'll burn less gas. The late Bs and Cs are certificated to 2250. Highest Cub weight (legal) is 2000. Top Cub was 2200. The constant speed prop on the Husky makes it the workhorse it is. The quality of workmanship is superb, period! Look at the welds in the frame of a Husky, and the fabric work, etc. Cubs may have that kind of workmanship, or not.....

Husky is much more robust airframe. Lots of mods are covered on the TC....tires for example.

I tell people if your mission is to take off, fly less than fifty miles or so, land on fairly challenging sites on wheels, the SC is your machine. If you need to go farther, and on wheels, floats and skis, the Husky is the winner hands down.

Parts are $$, and Huskys are heavy. We had to mod them to get more cabin heat, but I often operated at -30 down to -40 (and, by the way, get in an empty Husky at -40 and shove the throttle to the stop if you want performance.). So, if you're operating at "normal" temps, the heat in the planes is probably fine.


FWIW. Send me a PM and we'll talk on the phone if you'd like.

MTV

Had a SC for 14 yrs and always had a Cessna for Travel (mostly 210s). Husky isn't as intuitive as SC but to me is much more stable at slow speeds (heavier), faster (20+ mph) equipped the same. We bought our Husky in August and still get a smile every time I fly. Landed at friends 10,200' elevation pasture at 60 temp with 80' rise. In/out no issues; nice to have big tires with 4"+ rock hiding in the grass. Slow flight sightseeing with tandem seating is a pure joy as Husky is so stable. In/out heavy into 8,300' strip in summer here in CO no issues. Joining other Huskys this winter in AZ landing dry sandy creeks with larger rocks as well as desert flying. After 35 yrs it's still pure fun sightseeing- slow down and fuel burn easily as low as 6 gph.
Jack

On my near monthly breakfast flight flights to Afton, I park about 100' away from the dog kennel parking ramp. I always seem to have to wander over and eyeball them, and it always occurred to me if I had a Husky I would already be home by then. with their much greater speed, but I'm not so sure I'd land one on the off airport sites I hit on the flight back. The factory is always a beehive of activity, with about a dozen or so planes tied up outside, good to see!

Interesting fuel comparison —

Aviat TCDS does not allow MoGas 91 octane: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/8d3a87c0823d1ff0862581c6006cca2c/$FILE/A22NM_Rev_30.pdf

There is a Mogas STC from Peterson: https://www.autofuelstc.com/approved_engines_airfames.phtml

Husky
A-1, A-1A, A-1B, A-1C-180

8GCBC wrote:Interesting fuel comparison —

Aviat TCDS does not allow MoGas 91 octane: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/8d3a87c0823d1ff0862581c6006cca2c/$FILE/A22NM_Rev_30.pdf

There is a Mogas STC from Peterson: https://www.autofuelstc.com/approved_engines_airfames.phtml

Husky
A-1, A-1A, A-1B, A-1C-180

Just because it’s not approved (as opposed to specifically prohibited) doesn’t imply it can’t be approved. Lycoming doesn’t “approve” Mogas in their O 360 engines either.

MTV