Seems like a high time engine but low time AF. Anyone flown one of these? Have only heard good things. Maybe a good deal for for someone?

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/listing?id=1375285

AKT

Here's another one:
http://anchorage.craigslist.org/rvs/2619916285.html
The prices do seem pretty good.
My understanding is that the main downside of the Arctic Terns is the parts availability.

By the look of the wingtips anyway, it looks like a semi elliptical airfoil. 23012? Nice looking airplane.

If I remember right the Tern is based on the Interstate Cadet. Heard good things, but have never flown one.

Gump

And remember the performance that Kent Piech used to get out of the Interstate Cadet at the Reno Air Races! What did it have - 65-85 hp? After an incredible show, he shut it down at 10,000 ft and dead stick landed it on a spot in front of the stands. Hope those days return there.
-------------
Chance

That's exactly what I thought, looking at the first picture Emory Bored. Unmistakable airfoil, the NACA 23012. That's certainly not a bad thing. Many great flying machines use that one.

The Tern was a good airplane. It was unfortunate that Bill Diehl could never really get production up to the point where it was a profitable and sustainable company. They were built in Anchorage, and as noted, it was a follow on to the Interstate Cadet, which itself was a good airplane.

We had two Terns for some time, and they worked well. Some very innovative concepts, like a HUGE aft baggage compartment, with a bottom that was a plastic tub with a drain, to wash out blood, etc. from the moose hunt. Wings were interchangeable, simplified production and parts supply.

I only flew one of the airplanes a little bit, but I liked it.

The company was sold to a fellow on the east coast, who intended to bring the airplane back into production, and came very close to doing so before he was killed in a freak accident. Unfortunately, it appears that the airplane may never see production again.

Parts availability might be a problem, but this is a stove bolt simple airplane, and I suspect most of the parts could be "owner produced" if necessary. Not convenient, of course.

Good performance, good visibility and an honest solid airplane.

MTV

Present ownership status and contacts here.

http://www.interstateaircraft.com/Contact.html.

It sure looks like it has potential to be a good backcountry two place with lots of shoulder room for the big guys and room for equipment. How did that happen in an older design? Maybe its an affordable Super Chub.

I had looked at a couple of them before I bought the Champ. I was impressed with them and thought they would be a great plane. I may be wrong here but if I remember correctly in my research, isn't the Arctic Tern light on the tail or to put it another way, heavy on the nose. I could be confusing it with something else I had looked at at the time, but something about having to be easy on the brakes to avoid a nose over is in my thoughts. MTV, did you sense this when flying one?

I remember I had contacted the guy that was trying to get them back into production before his accident, I had hoped he was going to succeed.

keith

I have owned an Arctic Tern, Super Cub and Husky. Although the Tern is a great airplane (wish there were more of em) the comments the fellow makes who now owns the Arctic Tern type certificate comparing the Tern to the Husky are not what I have experienced. I much prefer the Husky to the Tern. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have a Tern, great airplane at a great price but it is not a "better" airplane than a Husky in my opinion.

G44

G44 wrote:I have owned an Arctic Tern, Super Cub and Husky. Although the Tern is a great airplane (wish there were more of em) the comments the fellow makes who now owns the Arctic Tern type certificate comparing the Tern to the Husky are not what I have experienced. I much prefer the Husky to the Tern. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have a Tern, great airplane at a great price but it is not a "better" airplane than a Husky in my opinion.

G44

A Husky, A Supercub, a Tern, AND a Widgeon?! What took you so long to join the forum?

Welcome. I bet we know some of the same folks in NH aviation.

-Denalipilot

G44 wrote:I have owned an Arctic Tern, Super Cub and Husky. Although the Tern is a great airplane (wish there were more of em) the comments the fellow makes who now owns the Arctic Tern type certificate comparing the Tern to the Husky are not what I have experienced. I much prefer the Husky to the Tern. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have a Tern, great airplane at a great price but it is not a "better" airplane than a Husky in my opinion.

G44

Hey G44, can you elaborate a bit about the pro/cons of the Tern/SC/Husky? I get that a lack of parts and support is a negative for the Tern, but as far as flying qualities and utility go your perspective would be helpful. Thanks.

You bet, I will be more than happy to...

I find the Husky to be incredibly efficient, never thought I would have believed it could be so until I actually owned one. I remember what got me to thinking seriously about a Husky was Mike V's article in Water Flying magazine about the Husky, he posted some pretty impressive fuel burn/cruise speed numbers at various power settings. I was skeptical at first then realizing who wrote the article and that he had no incentive to embellish I took notice.

I have never experienced such good MPG numbers in a Super Cub, Tern, Scout, 185 or any other airplane for that matter. When I bought my Husky and experienced such great numbers I was thrilled. Remember, you can go further out in a more fuel efficient airplane or play around the area longer after you get there in a more fuel efficient airplane, you may not have a gas station in the back country and hauling cans is a pain in the behind as well as dangerous at times!

I started reading and trying what others posted on various online forums concerning the Husky and soon came to the realization it was a fantastic airplane. Before this I was convinced the Super Cub was the better airplane for me but now I know the Husky is the better airplane for me after owning and flying both. They are all good but I like the Husky best.

I do not own an airplane now but when I get another airplane in the future it will be a Husky.

The Husky has some flying characteristics that are different than the Tern and SC namely it requires more precise speed control on approach and landing, a bit too fast will increase landing distance quite a bit. The Husky cruises faster than both at the same power setting/fuel burn. The Husky may take a bit longer to get of the ground than the SC but it will climb out of ground effect right from lift off, probably better than a SC at clearing the FAA prescribed 50 foot obstacle however I am not sure, it would be close. The Husky will beat the Tern off the ground in my experience and climb better too. All these comparisons are at legal Gross Weight. My dad has a Scout that I fly and I have not been able to get the Scout to perform in T/O, climb or cruise better than the Husky. I would love to see a gross weight take off contest at Valdez, I bet the Husky would be very competitive against the Super Cubs and other airplanes.

Now comes safety... I have watched some pretty gruesome crashes unfortunately, definitely something I wish no one should ever have to see. Having said that, I watched a Husky crash on take off. The airplane clipped a telephone pole while taking off from a farm strip, it actually knocked the pole over! I was sitting in my airplane (not a Husky at the time) waiting to take off when this happened. The reason of the crash or cause is not really important to what I am trying to convey so I wont go into why it happened except to say I don't think it was the airplanes fault. Well after the airplane came to a stop all crumpled up I was convinced the 2 people inside were seriously hurt if not dead, as I was running over to the wreckage preparing myself mentally for what I was about to see, I was amazed to see both guys getting out without a single scratch or bump! The airplane did an amazing job absorbing the impact, also there was no fuel leaking. I was impressed.

The lack of parts for a Tern do not concern me much, it is such a simple airplane just about anything could be easily made. The Tern has a super easy to remove cowling and a HUGE baggage area you can easily sleep in, just be careful with the loading. Empty the Tern is nose heavy but that is good for when you have a load in the rear. The feel in flight is very good, it is a very nice airplane to fly, great visibility. The landing gear can be a weakness on the Tern. The gear legs themselves are very strong, the weakness is where the upper part of the gear legs attach to the big spring under the seat, there is a little oval shaped tab that attaches all of this together and this tab has failed on one airplane that I know of, MINE, although it happened to the guy I sold it to and not me. If I were to have another Tern, I would try to double this tab up or strengthen it somehow.

The door on the Tern is pretty nice, it swings up, its one piece, however I find it is easier to get into and out of a Husky and Super Cub than a Tern, Scout or PA-12 due to the "put your butt on the rear part of the door opening, swing your legs into airplane" technique. I like the low points in the Tern fuel tanks, easy to sump out the water and also lets you use all the fuel.

The wing on a Tern has the rib shape more like a Taylor Craft instead of a flatter bottom like a SC or Husky. The Tern has a very good flap but I think the SC and Husky wing is a better hi lift wing. The wood spars of the Tern don't bother me so long as they have not touched the ground in a ground loop or if they have, been properly inspected for cracks. Wood spars are very strong.

These are just some of my thoughts, I am not the best writer and I know some of this seems a bit scattered but I was writing things as they came to me. I am sure there is more I could add but that is all I could think of at the time. I would be more than happy to answer any specific questions you may have. Im sure Mike V would have plenty to add.

I want to make it perfectly clear that I like all the airplanes mentioned above and would own any one of them again, I do not mean to slam or trash anyone's favorite airplanes I just wanted to point out my observations and opinions. Hope this helps!

G44

PS, I must say, the Widgeon is my all time favorite, yes even more than a P-51 but since I probably won't own another Widgeon again it's gonna be another Husky for me.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hey G44, can you elaborate a bit about the pro/cons of the Tern/SC/Husky? I get that a lack of parts and support is a negative for the Tern, but as far as flying qualities and utility go your perspective would be helpful. Thanks.[/quote]

I would bet we do! I bet we know some of the same folks in Alaska too!

Those were great fun airplanes but in these economic times something has to give, oh well, fun while it lasted!

Im not a big typist or writer so that is probably what took me so long to join, I have been lurking and enjoying everyones posts for years!

G44

denalipilot wrote:

G44 wrote:I have owned an Arctic Tern, Super Cub and Husky. Although the Tern is a great airplane (wish there were more of em) the comments the fellow makes who now owns the Arctic Tern type certificate comparing the Tern to the Husky are not what I have experienced. I much prefer the Husky to the Tern. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have a Tern, great airplane at a great price but it is not a "better" airplane than a Husky in my opinion.

G44

A Husky, A Supercub, a Tern, AND a Widgeon?! What took you so long to join the forum?

Welcome. I bet we know some of the same folks in NH aviation.

-Denalipilot

Sitting on the ramp tonight...

I am VERY familiar with this airplane!

BRD wrote:Sitting on the ramp tonight...

G44 wrote:Im not a big typist or writer so that is probably what took me so long to join, I have been lurking and enjoying everyones posts for years!

Well, typist or not, that was a ton of great info in your post above. Thanks for your input! I find the Tern very intriguing, wish there was an experimental quick build version available!

FLIGHT OF THE ARCTIC TERN, a great read (1952, Alaska homesteaders), it would be a must read for anyone considering buying one. Amazon has a couple available.

Hey G44 - This Tern has been parked on the ramp in front of the Airmotive maintenance hangar here at Brainerd (KBRD) for the last week. Good looking bird!

Brad