"That thing sure is interesting. I'd love to build one of them one of these days!"

I've started mine. Just Aircraft calls it the Super STOL and that it does. Troy can land it dropping at about 750~850 fpm. Check out the videos on youtube listed below. The STOL gear wasn't finished when I bought my kit so I added it on over the Christmas holidays including the shock absorbing tail wheel set-up. Still waiting on the factory to get the wing production going. Attached are some pictures of the new STOL gear after I got all done welding it up and attaching to the plane.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbZ27wXiQjY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJ5uudaAPPY

Take Care,
John Cooley
Super STOL #265

How about a close up shot of that tail wheel suspension?

That big round shock tube looks like it would be easy to fair the backside of.....pretty draggy as is. Plain old lumberyard door casing, 2 pieces glued together, work real well for smaller dia tubing. Spaced out a bit it'd work for there, and the resulting blunt trailing edge is supposedly less drag then a sharp TE. Drag below the thrust line really hurts as you have to add more trim drag to counter it, that would be super easy to clean up and well worth the effort. Try hanging that strut out the car window at 80 (poor mans wind tunnel) mph and it will rip your arm off, then fair it and try it! Then imagine that reduction in arm ripping off force NOT holding your plane back in cruise, even at 60MPH well worth it. Looks pretty cool otherwise. Good job on the lightening holes in baggage area.

As requested here a couple of quick ones I uploaded on the tail wheel set-up. I do plan on adding some streamlining to the shocks and maybe the gear legs later. Everything is just attached for the pics as there are still some bushings etc that I don't have for the tail wheel swing arm.

John Cooley
Super STOL #265

I love my Bearhawk, but have always been envious of the Highlander. Especially now!

Any idea what engine and mods Troy is running? Steve Henry has a sweet modified rotax in his current ship, and I assume he'll do the same on his next one.

Cal

I think the current SuperSTOL demo plane has a stock 914 in it. I'm not sure what kind of prop, Airmaster maybe?.

Hi Folks,
The plane Troy is flying in the video has a stock 914. The props I know they have used on the plane with the new wing and landing gear are the 3 blade Ivo medium inflight adjustable and Troy has told me just very recently he has flown it with a Aerolux and likes it better than the Ivo. The plane used to have a Kiev on it prior to the new wing and I don't know if they have used it with new wing or not.
The motor Steve Henry has and is selling like hot cakes right now is a modified 912S that Ronnie Smith of South Ms. Light Aircraft is building and selling. The motor has a some extensive mods such as modified pistons to lower compression, some work to heads for better flow, welded crank journals to protect crank from over boost, ceramic coating of piston heads and exhaust system for heat dissipation and of course the 914 turbo kit primarily from Bullyhawk and in short supply. The motor is said to produce about 135 hp. I will also have this motor in my plane. Ronnie is my neighbor and has ordered my turbo kit and started work on my motor.
Steve is at the factory building a set of new wings now and picking up several kits. He said the factory plan flies just like Troy told him and he likes it. He also has Ronnie working on several of the 912S Super engines for the kits he's picking up.

Take Care,
John Cooley

Troy can land it dropping at about 750~850 fpm.

Educate a backcountry newbie. Why is it desirable to plunk down at 850 fpm? All my life I've tried the opposite- touch down at low rate of descent. Seems it would be hard on the gear and airframe, wing struts, etc, not to mention a prop strike waiting to happen - looking at the gear splay in the video.

I'm sure it absorbs a lot of the forward momentum, resulting in a shorter landing. It's probably not necessary to land like that all the time, but good to know the gear can handle it.

Karmutzen wrote: Why is it desirable to plunk down at 850 fpm?

Not desirable from any common sense perspective... but it does work when everything is right. Many many airplanes have little or no reserve elevator/pitch/flare authority on super slow steep approaches. You can do a steep power-on approach, way behind the drag curve, high power, coming down steep over trees into a short strip... and then have nothing left to flare the airplane when you get within 10 feet of the ground. This puts the "firma" in terra firma.

But if you have a landing gear that will allow the airplane to survive that kind of impact, then perhaps you can actually take off again without being helicoptered out in rescue baskets.

This is why current US Navy carrier based aircraft have complex trailing-arm gears, why the WW2 Corsair had a bent wing, why the Storch, Porter, and other extreme STOL airplanes have long-stroke gears, etc. etc. On aircraft designed for extreme STOL and back country ops, the advantages of this kind of landing gear (Highlander STOL, Porter, Fieseler) are well worth the extra drag and complexiousness.

Well, I just got off the phone with Troy Woodland at Just Aircraft, so let me now answer my own questions.

I am very interested in the Highlander and especially the SuperSTOL both as a project for me personally and as a potential light observation platform for law enforcement. I just sent off an e-mail to the company, but in the meantime I have couple of questions:

--In the video clips it almost seems a little TOO STOL in that in the flare the fuselage angle is so high that the tailwheel is hitting first. I does seem, though, that you could fly it on in three-point attitude with no flare and just let the long-travel gear absorb the descent. That way you'd have better visibility and be nowhere near the stall if a wayward gust messed things up. Am I missing something?

Those demo clips are a bit "show off" and are often with substantial power added to maintain those high angles of attack. The planes was designed for power off, no flare landings without bounce and will do that just fine.

--Is there any reason you'd have go with the big donut tires vs. something less extreme, say 8.50 x 6? The kinds of applications I envision would be more short field than rough field.

With the original tires and gear, the plane was actually slightly faster in cruise than the stock Highlander. There is more than enough prop clearance and travel in the shock struts to adapt to smaller wheels and tires and, except for extreme rough field work, the big tires aren't really necessary.

--Does anyone know if the automatic slats on the SuperSTOL are independent or interconnected to retract and deploy together? I have read that for some aircraft with automatic slats that there are conditions when one slat will retract or deploy before the other one and cause handling quirks.

The slats are automatic and independet. Troy has flown a Helio Courier with the same system and the Highlander SuperSTOL behaves the same way--yes, often one slat deploys or retracts slightly before the other, but there it's a non-event.

Troy was great to talk to, knowledgable and generous with his time, and I would be very interested in tackling a kit like this if I didn't live a gypsy life and change continents every couple years. But I can still dream, and in this case, drool with envy.

Cheers,

Matthew

John, Bart - how's the build coming along?

How would you describe the kitset and plans to work with?

You must have missed the post almost 3 years ago now where Bart said he sold he project!

I thought I remembered that, but wasn't sure, so I directed the question at both people building