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've got a Citabria. My favorite woman thought the back seat was "okay" but her first input was that she liked side by side seating.

After flying with her and a few other people I started feeling guilty about having such an amazing view from up front.

Now I put most passengers in front and I get the second best seat. Zero complaints about tandem seating now.

flyingzebra wrote: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!

I have two of these bikes and not one has ever made it into the Husky. I am looking at the space through the door and into the baggage area and don’t see an “easy” way. I have not attempted to take the rear wheel off and stuff just the fuselage in the back, but even if I could, I think I would risk damaging part of the plane making it go back there. The volume probably exists, but the implantation and extraction seems complicated. For the bikes, the skywagon is the better plane and both fit easily in the back.

Oh man, what a setup!

While it may be possible, it would not be easy or convenient, similar to how a Montague fits (doesn't) in a Super Cub. Meanwhile, my setup in the Rans S-7S, fits so good, I can have it out and be riding off in less the 3 minutes after touchdown, that includes the needed time to unsecure it from it's inflight status. The two huge doors in the S-7S make this possible. Sure, if I had to choose a design to crash in, especially nose first, a Husky or a SC would seem to offer more protection, there is simply more structure and only one small door, but if they can't haul a bike, what good are they

Obviously, you can tell I get a kick out of how airplanes costing much more then mine, can't as effectively and practically carry a Montague, but that's how I see it. If it takes even 10 minutes to get the bike out and ready to ride, while still better then no bike at all, it's usefulness is lessened quite a bit, as compared to less then 3 minutes. I land, eyeball the distance I need to go, and if it's longer then a 3 or 4 minute walk, I get the bike out. Walking kind of sucks, as compared to riding, it's slow and boring, riding rocks. I can see more and explore the area, it adds immeasurably to the XC flying experience. Now a Maule on the other hand....

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 can second that. My wife prefers the back seat of our Husky over the right seat of our Skywagon. She says the Husky provides a fantastic view. Also, the sliding left window allows for great photos from the rear seat. Good luck with your new direction!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I just asked my wife if she prefers the back seat of the Husky or the front seat of the Skywagon. She says she prefers the front seat of the Skywagon. She is a pilot though and prefers the front seat of the Husky of any option.

Squash wrote:I just asked my wife if she prefers the back seat of the Husky or the front seat of the Skywagon. She says she prefers the front seat of the Skywagon. She is a pilot though and prefers the front seat of the Husky of any option.

I had purposely omitted that alternative altogether, for obvious reasons [emoji30]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I might be chickening out...! I posted the Wagon for a few days, had all kinds of calls and emails and one guy wanted to buy it before getting cold feet and wanting to think about it. I was in the hangar last night putting kids Christmas presents together and I just don’t know that I can part with it yet - not because it checks all my boxes but because it’s such a good airplane it would be dang near impossible to replace.

Anyway, supposed to fly a Husky tomorrow so we’ll see how that changes things...

If you can afford the 180 and it serves you well for 90% of what YOU like to do in the plane don't sell. I started with a Super Cub, it was great but not quite enough. Stepped up to a '54 180 and owned it for about 7 years. Family came along, bills to pay, not flying enough so I sold it. 20 years later I'm fortunate enough to own a 185.

Is the 185 perfect? Not 100%. Would a Husky be more economical? 100% yes! Do I enjoy time in the hangar with the 185? 100% Yes!

It appears to me you have answered your own question. There are few 180/185 owners out there who I dare say look forward to selling their Wagon. If you do sell it will be bittersweet. Unless you have an immediate need to sell the 180 I'd hit the pause button for a few months to make sure.

185MW

My 180 is now gone and I have a Husky. Everything is a compromise and the art of a good life is finding the compromise that works best for you. The Husky seems to fit my 90% mission very well and it’s a TON of fun to fly! The jury is out on the bike but after eyeballing it, I’m calling it unlikely without back tire removal. That will work too and if not, I still like hiking.
I wasn’t excited about seeing the 180 go and was relieved it was at least going to a super cool new owner. Give me a year and I’ll decide if it was the right choice.

Cannondale 29ER in the back. Pulled the front wheel and the seat.

Flew the Husky, what a cool machine. Put an hour + in the Wagon on the way there, jumped in the Husky and piddled around for 30 mins or so and back in the Wagon home.

Super responsive to control inputs, very sensitive on the rudder and this is coming from a guy who owned a short coupled Pacer for a while. Stable as can be though and a blast to get down low and slow.

It’s not as smooth as the Continental power or Cessna wing but two dissimilar airplanes, obviously.

Also, this is turning into a long post anyway so might as well add the wife got in the 180 this morning and tolerated it. She enjoyed the flying around and seeing some local sights but absolutely hated when we slowed down to land out of fear of “falling out of the sky”. I’ll let her mull it over for a few days and see from there I guess...

My wife used to get nervous during certain aspects of flying. I cajoled her into taking flight lessons with no expectation of licensing. She finally stopped at instrument-private with TW and HP endorsements, and now I have auto-pilot on demand.

flyingzebra wrote:My 180 is now gone ….I wasn’t excited about seeing the 180 go and was relieved it was at least going to a super cool new owner. Give me a year and I’ll decide if it was the right choice.

When did you sell the 180, Chris?
And where did it go?
Glad you've got a replacement already,
hope the Husky works out for you.

Serious thread drift. I apologize.
So, weather has kept me out of my new-to-me A1 and it’s been sitting, wet and waiting (way not as good as that description could be under other circumstances). Went to fly today and all the pitot static instruments were not functioning unless I opened the alternate air and I can’t find the static air port. Can any of you Husky drivers point me at it? Couldn’t find it in the POH or other experience related suggestions? Thanks!
Chris

flyingzebra wrote:Serious thread drift. I apologize.
So, weather has kept me out of my new-to-me A1 and it’s been sitting, wet and waiting (way not as good as that description could be under other circumstances). Went to fly today and all the pitot static instruments were not functioning unless I opened the alternate air and I can’t find the static air port. Can any of you Husky drivers point me at it? Couldn’t find it in the POH or other experience related suggestions? Thanks!
Chris

Take a look at the pitot mast. There's a collar just aft of the tapered part. Just behind that collar are the static ports....small holes around the perimeter of the tube.

In my experience, you need to cover the pitot/static tube when parked, as much as possible. Otherwise, you WILL get some moisture in the system, and when it gets cold.....it freezes.

Thaw it out, disconnect the pitot and static lines behind the instruments, and blow them out GENTLY from that end.

Then, make sure you cover the pitot tube when parked. For a number of years, I flew Huskys on floats, where it's really tough to cover the pitot mast, so before first frost, we'd blow out the lines, then go to wheels or skis.

MTV

MTV, thank you for that info! I had bought a cover but it only covers the pitot opening, not the small holes behind that. If you know of a specific cover to recommend, please do. I can also hunt one down. Thanks a ton.
Chris

Condom

Rubber chicken...

flyingzebra wrote:MTV, thank you for that info! I had bought a cover but it only covers the pitot opening, not the small holes behind that. If you know of a specific cover to recommend, please do. I can also hunt one down. Thanks a ton.
Chris

Sorry, all the Huskys I flew much came with a pitot cover. I’m sure Aviat sells them, but they may cost. I’d bet Spruce has them.

MTV

The whole pitot static system was totally full of water. New cover ordered. Thanks.