OOH-RAAH,
I'll admit Maules are rather odd looking. They are kind of short, fat and the tails too big. I can say that because I have one. That's OK to me, I'm used to it. I was at Tinker Air Force base years ago for an airshow with an Apache. Had an Air Force fighter jock walk up out of the blue and say now he understands why we did all our flying at night. I had to ask why and he told me the Damn thing (Apache) was too ugly to be allowed out during the day time.
The 120 / 140 have some of the best looking "lines" to me. Maybe include the 170 in that, but the 185 just looks "chunky". Beavers aren't really good looking either, but those are two of the best back country airplanes. Sometimes beauty is in the utility of the aircraft and not in the eye of the beholder.
The insurance, well that's just what it is. I'm thinking that if it doesn't come down this year, not renewing it and just carrying liability. It's the one cost of ownership that I haven't been able to affect.
The best aircraft is of course mine, be it a Maule or a Luscombe or 120 whatever. But even thought I'm one of the faithful Maule drivers, I was getting tired of every time somebody wanted to ask anything about anything else somehow it would turn into a Maule sales pitch. I like the things, but enough is enough.

well mine doesn't have a big tail. It's so old it looks like the Pacer. BD modeled it after the piper or so i'm told. The later models got the big tails and such.

Jr.CubBuilder wrote: Frankly I don't care what anybody flies, and I certainly don't have any allusion of my plane being perfect, I'm just glad I can own one.

Well said, Jr. I think 50% of hangar flying is talking about the different kinds of planes themselves, so it's inevitable that the discussions in this forum are gonna be about which plane is better and this or that. Rarely do we admit to just being irrationally drawn to aesthetics, which it perfectly okay. I think a big round tail is a beautiful thing. Same goes for my women (although currently I own an ultralight in that department...)

I'm sure glad I have that crappy 170 in my dad's hangar. Who knows if I could have gotten the loan nowadays. There's nothing quite like loading up your own bird and not asking anyone's permission to land it on grass or dirt or keep it for X number of days. The hours and hours of wrenching on it with my old man are priceless.

Damn, sure is nice weather this week...

I made a comment on another post basically saying that I think Maules are ugly.............I do.

Hey, I don't take offense to that remark!

Like you, I like reading about other people's planes, any kind, and their experiences. I had a 1946 Luscombe 8A for a couple of years. Loved the looks and fixing it up. Sold it to Jim Tucker down in 'Bama. Jim was the FedX Captain that back in 1994 was flying a cargo jet and fought off a disgruntled employee that tried and hijack the plane with a hammer and a spear gun (Yup - a spear gun!) so he could crash it into FedX headquarters. In the process Jim received a blow to the head with a hammer. The damaged prevented him from ever flying solo again commercially or as a private pilot. Then the Sport Pilot license came out. Jim came up, looked over my Luscombe and bought it on the spot. When he flew away it was the first time in 12 years he had flown alone. Man, the guy had a grin from ear to ear!

Brand new Luscombe's are now back in production under the Light Sport rule. Saw a shiny one at OshKosh. Pretty cool!

Here is the link to the Luscombe web site.

http://www.luscombe-silvaire.com/

Real pretty in polished metal!

I too think this is the coolest site ever!!! For the most part everyone is very supportive and does a great job sharing their expertise without making others feel inferior...thanks Zane.

While I do have to admit that the Luscombe is the best looking plane ever made I don't think I would ever buy one of the new ones. Of course this is based upon what I have heard and know about the type. Because of the way they are configured, engine, electrical, metal wings...etc, you couldn't fly it legally with full fuel and a passenger because you would be way over gross. It is really great that someone is trying to revive a classic but I think it will be though with that engine/airframe combination in the LSA class.

In my opinion the ultimate Luscombe would be 150hp no electrical and full length flaps like this one, except this is a T-8F, which is the same basic airframe except you sit tandem and it has the cool bubble window for the rear passenger.

whee wrote:I too think this is the coolest site ever!!! For the most part everyone is very supportive and does a great job sharing their expertise without making others feel inferior...thanks Zane.

While I do have to admit that the Luscombe is the best looking plane ever made I don't think I would ever buy one of the new ones. Of course this is based upon what I have heard and know about the type. Because of the way they are configured, engine, electrical, metal wings...etc, you couldn't fly it legally with full fuel and a passenger because you would be way over gross. It is really great that someone is trying to revive a classic but I think it will be though with that engine/airframe combination in the LSA class.

In my opinion the ultimate Luscombe would be 150hp no electrical and full length flaps like this one, except this is a T-8F, which is the same basic airframe except you sit tandem and it has the cool bubble window for the rear passenger.

I owned a 48 8A and I can tell you that flying that thing was the most fun I've ever had in a plane. That A65 would sip fuel at 105 mph, it would loop like a dream, spin with a little encouragement and do slow, lumbering aileron rolls. I had to sell 1933B because no matter how hard I tried I couldn't squeeze my wife and 2 kids in there...not even after greasing them up with vaseline. I sold the plane for double what I paid for it and within a year, the owners flight instructor (who was alone in the plane) had the thing laying on it's back in the middle of FIA. The owner offered the plane back to me for $3000...which I almost bit on but, after some research, it appears that I'd need some high-tech jig to get the fueslage straight after the kind of damage it suffered...and a repair was just out of my league.
I loved that Luscombe and would own another any day-any time...I hated to see mine go.

Though I'm pretty new here (thank you Capt Kirk) I'm loving this site!

I've never had the opportunity to fly a Luscombe but have always loved their looks and they sound like a blast.

I flew ultralight trikes for a couple years before I got my license in a Citabria 7GCBC on 8.50 tires. Then rented a Cherokee 140/160 for a year. Now I own a 1963 Cessna 150C, a classic straight back/straight tail model. It's about 100lbs lighter than the later style 150's so preforms a bit better. My avatar photo is me and my 150 at the old Goldking air strip about 40 miles south of Fairbanks this spring. Though not a fantastic performer in any catagory I'm loving the little 150. Nice light controls and just a joy to cruise around in the mountains.

I currently living the backcountry pilot's dream. My house is a hangar with an attic apartment on top, located on a 4,000ft grass and gravel private runway. Right now I'm finishing up a Challenger II LSP for a friend, who unfortunately may never get to fly it due to health problems. When that's finished I've got a set of Bearhawk Patrol plans (the 2 place) sitting there ready to start.

Great site here!

Phil

P.S. as you might have guessed by my user name, I get very tired of people asking why I don't "upgrade" to a Super Cub, and Cub pilots who think any plane that can't take-off under 100ft isn't worth having. I always tell them that if I ever get the urge to crash a $100k airplane on a tiny gravel bar in the middle of nowhere, I'll get a Cub.

Dude ^^^^ You ARE living the life!

I come from the ultralight world too...nothing else is quite like it. I did all my Part 61 training in a 152 and will agree that it is a fun flying 1-person aircraft.

Welcome to the site.

So, Zane, since this site is so cool wouldn't it be nice to have shirts and hats to go with it?

PS - I got connections if you need some help.

Jr.CubBuilder wrote:Bottom line is I read this rag to hear about flying, and I like seeing pics of places other people go. Frankly I don't care what anybody flies, and I certainly don't have any allusion of my plane being perfect, I'm just glad I can own one.

Well put Jr.CubBuilder. I second your thoughts.

I do feel some here are over sensitive though.

If you don’t fly a Maule, but say you fly a Cessna, or what ever, well that’s ok. At my work I have been required to attend PC, diversity, and sensitivity, classes. I think I am starting to understand that we are all different in what we like, and that’s ok. I have learned that men having sex with men is really ok! Transvestite ok, Transgender ok, Lesbian ok, Bestiality ok, Multiculturalism ok. Don’t fly a Maule ok! DIVERSITY is wonderful! These classes are working, I’m a changed man.

Honestly folks, if you read something and you don’t like the way it is going stop reading.

There is enough stuff in life to get fired up about.

If you don’t like hearing about Maules, I understand. The classes I just talked about. I was forced to sit there for over 15 hours. Talk about pissed. At least here you’re not forced to read about Maules, just go to the next post.

One of the first things we were taught in training, at the Fire Dept, was don't tell the other guys what bugs you or your asking for it. Same here.

This was an attempt at humor. If you are offended, I learned in the PC class to say sorry. So I'm SORRY! Boy those classes are working. See before the classes I would have told you to go "F" yourself. I like the new me.

Hugs and Kisses

RobBurson wrote:I do feel some here are over sensitive though.

That's it. You're banned. Your Maule is banned too.

I can relate to the sensitivity training. I have endured it in its various forms for the last 15 years in the Navy. Ugh. I think we are raising a generation of PANSIES!!!! We all just need to have thicker skin. 'nuf said.

As for which airplane is best, I think that one that gets me off the ground and which I can land safely at a planned destination is mine. My favorite is the H-46 that is in my album. I tried to post the pic here but I have a mac and don't have a right button to click!


I love the 737, but my heart belongs to the Phrogg. She was and will always remain my first love (with aircraft).

And to all the Maule drivers, I gotta poke at ya: A 30 degree glideslope to a zero-zero landing in a meadow that is a 100' wide disc surrounded by 200' trees....now THAT is short-field performance!!!

Until I can sell my house and get my own plane, this site helps fill the need to fly off to new adventures. Thanks for sharing your adventures with the rest of us. Cheers!
AwolArn
B737, BE-20, EP-3E, HH-46D, TH-57 Jet Ranger, T-34 TurboMentors, C1#2s and Cherokee 140/180s. What's next???? A taildragger!!!

A 30 degree glideslope to a zero-zero landing in a meadow that is a 100' wide disc surrounded by 200' trees....

Last time I did that in the Maule, I swore to the other 5 people onbard that I would not do it again until I got the VG's installed.

YB

AwolArn - One of our local guys here at BRD flew the 46 in 'Nam. (he never forgave the Marines for taking him out of F-4's and putting him in one)

He has some pretty awesome stories in a book he wrote for his family about his experiences. Some of the wildest were inserting/extracting SOF troops at night in the jungles, whacking trees you couldn't see with the rotor blades while being shot at it by NVA and Cong surrounding the extraction point. Then staggering home hoping the thing didn't fall apart from the vibration.

There was also a point when they lost the aft mast in several aircraft in a short period of time before Boeing came up with the fix.

The last time he flew one was heading out to the ship (generally they were land based Marine squadrons - but every now and then they got to stay shipboard) low on fuel and he got an emergency call to pick up wounded Marines pinned down under fire. They got the coordinates and came barrelling in asking the guys to pop smoke. Well whoever popped the smoke also threw it as far away from the group as he could (I suppose thinking it would draw more accurate fire) So when the 46 got there and landed by the smoke - immediately the enemy .50 cal the smoke landed next to opened up on him. Then the wounded guys started coming across the clearing towards the chopper - so they had to sit there with large holes getting punched into the aircraft and warning lights flashing on the panel till everyone got on board. As the last guy was dragged aboard they launched out of there. The copilot was yelling at him to go high and get out of the ground fire but Tom yelled back he wasn't going above 200 feet. He started gently moving the cyclic waiting for the inevitable and the moment it started to get stiff he dropped the collective and set them in a slightly nose high attitude. The cyclic then locked as the last hydraulic pressure ran out.
They hit a rice patty and flipped over on the left side about 2 miles from where they were first shot up (still taking pot shots and the right engine screaming away) but only 2.5 miles from a Firebase. Everybody survived the crash but Tom's back was wrecked enough that he never flew another 46.

He flies every now and then around here and when he does get in an acro bird or an old Stearman can wipe the floor with all comers.

Brad

Brad,
Hats off to your friend. Those Vietnam pilots were true heros of our nation. Those of us still in have the deepest respect for the jobs they did. If I ever have the pleasure of meeting him or others who served there, I'm buying, and it's top-shelf, call only.

The Navy has rid themselves of the Phrogg and replaced it with the "CH"60 but it is nothing like a Phrogg as far as vert-rep and logistics support. It is more reliable. I was lucky. Never had anything more than an electrical fire.

Cheers!
AwolArn

Yellowbelly wrote:

A 30 degree glideslope to a zero-zero landing in a meadow that is a 100' wide disc surrounded by 200' trees....

Last time I did that in the Maule, I swore to the other 5 people onbard that I would not do it again until I got the VG's installed.

YB

Once you got those 5 people out, the back seat out, and all them leaky fuel jugs out you'd probably have an easier time with it...VG's are still the way to go anyhow.

Testing my limited ability to attach a picture


Well, that didn't work so well...I give up.

Two things people will endlessly debate are airplanes and firearms, which is interesting because very few people can get full performance out of either, and within their respective categories, there really isn't that much difference between them.

What they both have in common is they are an endless compromise...for everything you choose to have, you must give up something else. There is something in this balancing of compromises which seems to tickle the mind of some...much in the same way that word puzzles or chess games tickle the mind of others.

I'm never sure if, after meeting someone who is positive that there is one best plane (or anything else for that matter), they know more than I do, or less. But a pretty good indication is whether they still debate the subject...after all, if you've figured it out, what's the fun in thinking about it?

I'll say this for the Maule crowd...they are loyal. I've met more than one Maule driver who felt like the search was over. Some of them had flown a whole lot of planes in their lifetime, too. I met one 86 year old chain smoking Maule driver who had spent his life ferrying aircraft, first in the military, then in civilian life. He had to go through his log books for insurance purposes, and he figured out he had been certified to fly over 200 different makes and models of aircraft in his lifetime. The afternoon I talked to him he was on his way to pick up the new Maule he had just bought... watching him absorb one cigarette after another I was amazed he was still alive, much less passing the FAA medical.

It's a good place, this Backcountry Pilot. Thanks to everyone who makes it exist.

Capt. Kirk wrote:Testing my limited ability to attach a picture


Well, that didn't work so well...I give up.

Capt. Kirk, Is this what you wanted? Cheers...Rob