aktahoe1 wrote:Love the Husky. Been flying with this fella for a bit and he's flying his Husky like a 10,000 hour pro. https://youtu.be/ljjQ9g8obiY


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice flying Weston! Husky will perform very good “in the weeds” as well as get up and go in the long leg cross country world too. Very versatile airplane.

Kurt

Still not much mention of mission other than:
Solo most of the time
Occasional long trip and appreciate 150 mph
Deer being hauled back

Depending on the size of your deer, the baggage area of the husky could be problematic. There is a bulkhead separating the cabin baggage area from the rear aft baggage. There was a mod being developed to reroute all the cables living in the bulkhead, but I don’t believe it ever got off the ground. If you need to haul longer objects or moose-like animals, the cub baggage is much more versatile than the Husky.

The rear seat can be folded down and the seat brace can be removed, but Aviat says the brace can only be removed for ease of loading and unloading baggage and is not approved for flight without the brace in it’s normal position.

Unless you just want something new to try or want centerline seating, I don’t perceive a compelling reason to sell a 180 to buy a two person Husky. You will no longer have the option of carrying four and you won’t see 150 mph. I fly a Husky and a 185. Between these two aircraft, given what I know of your mission thus far, I would keep my 185.

Here are the ways I generally use the two aircraft. The Husky is a better ski plane for me. My 185 on skis is a handful. The Husky is better on off camber beach landings. I go into some short and rough strips occasionally which the Husky can handle better. 185 is better for hauling a weeks worth of camping gear and two people to a camping spot 500 miles away. The wagon is a much more comfortable plane for distance trips because it’s smoother and way quieter with more room to stretch. Husky ingress and egress isn’t as easy as the wagon. It’s way easier to load a passenger into the wagon than the Husky. I can barely manage to figure out how to flop myself into the back seat of my Husky (newer C models have door that extends further aft into the passenger area). I take the husky on flights within 100 mile radius for low and slow messing around.

The super cub I previously owned was better than a Husky for a few things:
Repairs were cheaper and parts more readily available.
Easier to access engine through larger cowling doors.
Adjustable pilot seat in fore/aft.
Better extended baggage for long and bigger items.
The last 8 seconds of the flight were better than the Husky (slower, better stick forces in pitch, among others)
That’s about it. Otherwise, the Husky is stronger, faster, warmer, more efficient, while maintaining the essence of a cub-like experience.

Mission, mission, mission.

I hear what Squash is saying about mission...

...but I feel like dithering and optimizing is not as helpful as he might lead you to believe...

...so I am on the side of just buy an airplane you can afford to fly and fly it. A lot.

If you really do know the true mission, then sure. But most pilots imagine missions that aren't really what they will end up doing. If you own an airplane, the limitations that airplane imposes can be evaluated as to whether they are occasional or frequent issues. If they are frequent, go shopping again. If they are occasional, then you probably have the right airplane already.

FWIW

Squash wrote:Depending on the size of your deer, the baggage area of the husky could be problematic. There is a bulkhead separating the cabin baggage area from the rear aft baggage. There was a mod being developed to reroute all the cables living in the bulkhead, but I don’t believe it ever got off the ground. If you need to haul longer objects or moose-like animals, the cub baggage is much more versatile than the Husky.

The rear seat can be folded down and the seat brace can be removed, but Aviat says the brace can only be removed for ease of loading and unloading baggage and is not approved for flight without the brace in it’s normal position.

Here are the ways I generally use the two aircraft. The Husky is a better ski plane for me. My 185 on skis is a handful. The Husky is better on off camber beach landings. I go into some short and rough strips occasionally which the Husky can handle better. 185 is better for hauling a weeks worth of camping gear and two people to a camping spot 500 miles away. The wagon is a much more comfortable plane for distance trips because it’s smoother and way quieter with more room to stretch. Husky ingress and egress isn’t as easy as the wagon. It’s way easier to load a passenger into the wagon than the Husky. I can barely manage to figure out how to flop myself into the back seat of my Husky (newer C models have door that extends further aft into the passenger area). I take the husky on flights within 100 mile radius for low and slow messing around.

The super cub I previously owned was better than a Husky for a few things:
Repairs were cheaper and parts more readily available.
Easier to access engine through larger cowling doors.
Adjustable pilot seat in fore/aft.
Better extended baggage for long and bigger items.
The last 8 seconds of the flight were better than the Husky (slower, better stick forces in pitch, among others)
That’s about it. Otherwise, the Husky is stronger, faster, warmer, more efficient, while maintaining the essence of a cub-like experience.

Mission, mission, mission.

Greg,
I've heard this admonition regarding the seat back frame in the Husky. That said, I never found anything in writing (I am a slow reader though) stating that the seat back is required to be up and pinned for flight in the Husky. Right or wrong, i've flown a LOT of big loads with the rear seat back folded down in the Husky and never had a problem. In fact, I always considered that to be one advantage of the Husky over the Super Cub: Super Cub cross bar MUST be in place for flight. I never assumed the seat back in the Husky had to be upright to fly. Maybe wrong. In any case, the newest A-1C has a removable back seat, as in GONE, which can be removed for flight, so they've either addressed that issue, or it was never an issue.

Also, the extension of the door lower half is in the forward end of the door, so it doesn't help those of us who are challenged to get into and out of the back seat. That back seat is, by the way, one of the most comfortable seats in any airplane I've flown in. Getting in and especially out for an old, chubby dude like me is a challenge. But, said machinations provide all sorts of entertainment for the 25 year old gymnasts who haven't had two back surgeries......But, let me tell you, that FRONT extension of the door is simply magnificent! If you're climbing into the pilot's seat, that is.

And, of course, the current crop of Huskys are equipped with a VERY different elevator trim system, specifically, a trim tab on the elevator, as opposed to the "bungee trime" system previously used. Personally, the old trim system never really bothered me once I had flown it a bit.
But, that's the biggest bitch I hear from low time/new Husky pilots.

Personally, I don't care for the new "throttle quadrant" Aviat has installed for throttle, prop and mixture controls. Just doesn't feel right to me, but everybody wants to put EVERYthing in the panel, and control cables take up precious panel space, I guess.

Hey, they're all good. I'd be happy flying any of these airplanes, Cubs, Huskys, Scouts, etc. Pick one you like, go fly it, and if you still like it, buy it.

MTV

I like Huskys. They fly nice. I only have a couple complaints, like the pilot seat not being able to fold forward. Makes loading/unloading a PIA. The new ones fixed that issue, but the new style seat is not legal to put in an older model plane last I heard. I also really really wish they would put a swing out engine mount on them, similar to what the Cubs have. It's not fun changing mags or oil cooler hoses or anything on the back side of the engine. Also, be prepared to hit your head on the flap hangers. Only other gripe I have is that if you want to put Aeroski R2800s on it you have to buy new gear legs from Aviat to the tune of $$$. And they won't exchange for a core price on the old gear which is to bad.
Nice planes, I'd fly one if given the option. For now it's out of my price range.

mtv wrote:
Greg,
I've heard this admonition regarding the seat back frame in the Husky. That said, I never found anything in writing (I am a slow reader though) stating that the seat back is required to be up and pinned for flight in the Husky. Right or wrong, i've flown a LOT of big loads with the rear seat back folded down in the Husky and never had a problem. In fact, I always considered that to be one advantage of the Husky over the Super Cub: Super Cub cross bar MUST be in place for flight. I never assumed the seat back in the Husky had to be upright to fly. Maybe wrong. In any case, the newest A-1C has a removable back seat, as in GONE, which can be removed for flight, so they've either addressed that issue, or it was never an issue.

Also, the extension of the door lower half is in the forward end of the door, so it doesn't help those of us who are challenged to get into and out of the back seat. That back seat is, by the way, one of the most comfortable seats in any airplane I've flown in. Getting in and especially out for an old, chubby dude like me is a challenge. But, said machinations provide all sorts of entertainment for the 25 year old gymnasts who haven't had two back surgeries......But, let me tell you, that FRONT extension of the door is simply magnificent! If you're climbing into the pilot's seat, that is.

And, of course, the current crop of Huskys are equipped with a VERY different elevator trim system, specifically, a trim tab on the elevator, as opposed to the "bungee trime" system previously used. Personally, the old trim system never really bothered me once I had flown it a bit.
But, that's the biggest bitch I hear from low time/new Husky pilots.

Personally, I don't care for the new "throttle quadrant" Aviat has installed for throttle, prop and mixture controls. Just doesn't feel right to me, but everybody wants to put EVERYthing in the panel, and control cables take up precious panel space, I guess.

Hey, they're all good. I'd be happy flying any of these airplanes, Cubs, Huskys, Scouts, etc. Pick one you like, go fly it, and if you still like it, buy it.

MTV

Yes, I have flown with the back seat down. It’s the only way I can fit my skis inside the cabin. But I just thought it good to mention for those who need to do exactly what the manufacturer says, that Aviat claims the seat should be locked in the upright position for stability while in flight.

Bummer about the door. I thought it also extended further aft for the back seater.

The fixed horizontal (and bungee) do more than just make the plane feel different to the pilot, it changes the efficiency of the horizontal, especially at the low end of the envelope. I know that MTV knows all this, but I’m explaining it to those not familiar with the Husky. Their new aerodynamic trim tab system will relive the bungee pressure, but the fixed horizontal will always limit the effectiveness of the elevator at the stall. Aviat changed the incidence of the horizontal for the higher gross weight planes, and this is why they stall faster, even at the same weight and balance of earlier models. A cub is more efficient on the low end because of the jack screw system with adjustable horizontal incidence like the skywagon.

Troy Hamon wrote:I hear what Squash is saying about mission...

...but I feel like dithering and optimizing is not as helpful as he might lead you to believe...

...so I am on the side of just buy an airplane you can afford to fly and fly it. A lot.

If you really do know the true mission, then sure. But most pilots imagine missions that aren't really what they will end up doing. If you own an airplane, the limitations that airplane imposes can be evaluated as to whether they are occasional or frequent issues. If they are frequent, go shopping again. If they are occasional, then you probably have the right airplane already.

FWIW

I think we are sort of saying the same thing. The OP already owns a plane; and it happens to be one of the coveted planes routinely mentioned on this forum. One good reason to go through the hassle of selling a plane and then buying another is to hopefully move into something that better suits the kind of flying one wants to do, thus my focus on mission. Otherwise, it’s a lot of logistics just to get a different plane, or worse, a plane that isn’t as good as the previous one for the majority of flying that is done.

Troy Hamon wrote:. . . But most pilots imagine missions that aren't really what they will end up doing. . . .

Ouch! You stabbed this Skywagon owner right in the heart!!

For what it’s worth, I’m a 2001 A1B owner. I’m a very low time pilot who purchased the Husky to learn to fly in. No experience ever flying any other airplane. I can only share my minimal experience. I know it’s a very forgiving airplane and easily tolerated a ham fisted, slow footed student who managed to become a safe and competent tailwheel pilot. I’m a big boy (6-2 285) and it’s really not an issue for me flying the Husky. I have an IFR panel and don’t use heel panel cut outs. Power has never been issue. Flew to OSH 2017 in it with max gross weight and 10K plus density altitude in Rock Springs Wy and never had an issue. All I can say is it’s very forgiving, tons of power and is much more capable than I am. Best of luck.

Ahh...I see that now that you point it out. Lost track of the situation of the OP in wading through the thread.

As to that...I love airplanes in general and many of them specifically. I don't think I would trade a 180 off to get a Husky. But that is likely just me. FWIW.

StuBob wrote:

Troy Hamon wrote:. . . But most pilots imagine missions that aren't really what they will end up doing. . . .

Ouch! You stabbed this Skywagon owner right in the heart!!

I have seen a lot of people do this...wasn't aimed at you or anyone else specifically.

I bought a Tripacer to learn in and have still never upgraded. Flying lots of different airplanes at work, but still a milkstool driver at home. I do think about buying a cub or a 180 or a Maule...but then I just go fly my Tripacer.

StuBob wrote:

Troy Hamon wrote:. . . But most pilots imagine missions that aren't really what they will end up doing. . . .

Ouch! You stabbed this Skywagon owner right in the heart!!

Ouch! That’s the long and short of it though, got the Wagon because it’s a long way from where I am in NM to our place in Texas and figured the wife would fly instead of the 13hr drive but it’s not playing out that way. It may not be worth holding on it for that handful of XC trips a year.

I sold my pristine 185 and have a Husky now. Sure wish I had the 185 but would never (I know, never say never) sell my Husky. It would be great to have both.

Between my first and second Husky I owned this 185, it was a great airplane but many evenings my wife and I would just go out and fly, usually up the coast of Lake Michigan at sunset. We burned a lot of gas per hour doing this and could only see out one side or the other flying up the beach. My wife much prefers the Husky for these types of flights and so do I. Much cheaper and lots of fun.

The 185 was a great traveling machine but for the type of flying I do most down here in the lower 48 states the Husky suits me best and since I am down to being a 1 airplane guy its the Husky that fills most of the boxes for me.

Kurt

Listed the Wagon today... Lord help me. With my luck the wife will want to get in the airplane when we get back home next week and it will all be for naught.

TxAgfisher wrote:Listed the Wagon today... Lord help me. With my luck the wife will want to get in the airplane when we get back home next week and it will all be for naught.

She ever flown rear seat in a tandem?

My wife LOVES the rear seat of a tandem (Husky), seriously, she does. She says she can see so much more looking out both sides.

Good luck to ya!

Kurt

G44 wrote:My wife LOVES the rear seat of a tandem (Husky), seriously, she does. She says she can see so much more looking out both sides.

Good luck to ya!

Kurt

I have a good friend who has either owned or had access to many airplanes and his wife says the same thing. In the back of a tandem seat airplane she not only can see out both sides but, according to her, she "has her own space".

Probably not for everybody but some passengers love it.

G44 wrote:My wife LOVES the rear seat of a tandem (Husky), seriously, she does. She says she can see so much more looking out both sides.

Good luck to ya!

Kurt

Same here,

I was worried when I bought the Champ she wouldn't like it, but she loves it.

Pete

Does anybody know if a folding Montague mountain bike will fit in the back of an A1? I’m in discussion with a guy about trading off the C180 for an 87 A1. The Husky fits my mission better than the 180, as long as that bike fits. The folded bike is about 36” long x 14” wide x 30” tall. Any thoughts or experience would be helpful.
Thanks!

Zzz wrote:

TxAgfisher wrote:Listed the Wagon today... Lord help me. With my luck the wife will want to get in the airplane when we get back home next week and it will all be for naught.

She ever flown rear seat in a tandem?

She’s only been up once in my first Maule... claustrophobic and doesn’t like turbulence. Thought the 180 would solve those.