Hi All

This is my first post but I have been hovering around for ages without registering, and I appologise for the long first post.

I need a bit of direction as we dont have access to the community and knowledge down here in South Africa like you guys do.

I have decided to build a “cub” style aircraft and have sent out multiple email to Javron, Dakota, Backcountry , Cubcrafters , Bearhawk and Airframes Alaska with only the last two replying after weeks of multiple emails. Firstly excuse the lack of building knowledge as I will be paying someone to built the machine but what I originally had in my mind was a tandem seating edge performance turbo charged aircraft similar to the Zlin Norden however Zlin will only sell a kit with a 600kg MAUW aircraft which will not suit my mission.

My parameters for the aircraft choice are
1. Tandem High wing bush plane
2. Minimum of 400 - 450nm range ( for regional flying the ports of exit and entry are pretty far apart )
3. Originally my mind was set on the Edge Performance or Rotax 915 for the turbo and very high density altitudes .
4. 400lbs of people with fuel for a 400 - 450nm leg
5. I love the look and want the bush flying ability however in reality none of the strips will be less than 1500ft ( but would like to fit ACME type landing gear )
6. I know I’m going to get forum slapped for this one but I would like an aircraft that can comfortably cruise at 100knot plus TAS as a good portion of my flying will be long distances relatively speaking , so I guess a CS prop is a necessity .

And lastly to make it even more difficult I really don’t have a big budget probably 90-120k with a little flexibility if it makes sense .

I wanted to look at the Javron kit and see if it would be possible to Fit a Rotax based engine to it but I am not getting any replies to my emails, so to be honest I am open to any suggestions and or direction on what is the right plane for my mission.

Thanks to everyone in advance
RGB

Define bush airplane?

If you want speed and range I don’t think a PA18 clone is going to be it

Turbo wise, as I remember most all the commercial operators in Namibia were rocking NON turbo C210s for the piston fleet

If you don’t need major backcountry abilities and can do a side by side maybe a tailwind?

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/ ... ittail.php


*I miss the braai boerewors and savanna

Hi NineThreeKilo

Thanks for the reply, I forgot to add that it would need to be "experimental" the certified planes in SA cost a fortune to maintain.

To be honest I can't define it .It is a bit of a "want " requirement of tandem aircraft bush wheel (26 tyres, not the big boys) aircraft that is just for me .

I have never flown a Cub clone but flew a 160hp Decathlon and she was a 120-125 knot machine and again not first hand but I have read a cub clone type aircraft is capable of 100kts TAS with a CS prop

Again a side by side does make sense but iv just always wanted a tandem Bush plane.

Regards

Welcome. There have been a few experimental Piper Pawnee Fledgling tandem low wings built. Piper only manufactured two Fledglings, a 150 hp and 235 hp Lycoming powered for Ag training. I flew both at Slaton Flying Service Ag School in 79. They were great trainers but Ag was going turboprop, so not continued. Low wing does not hamper backcountry operations much and certainly makes low altitude work much safer. It is really good to see where you are going when horizontal space is limited. Kingsley's Plane Cents Aviation at MO9 have a Pawnee fuselage jig if you get interested and they put a lot of certified and experimental stuff out.

Sounds like you are describing a Rans S7.

https://www.rans.com/s-7-courier-specsperformance

Agree, the RANS S-7 would be a contender, but might be a little short on the 100KT cruise speed. 100MPH maybe but on bushwheels you'll be hard pressed to cruise at 100kts.

I understand the desire for a tandem aircraft, but is there a reason to not look at side by side seating planes? They generally have a bit more internal space. I own both types (RANS S7 and a Murphy Rebel) and while I truly enjoy the tandem (when solo) the side by side does have advantages when you're hauling a passenger. If I am doing any kind of traveling the Rebel is the perfect choice for me. The S-7 is not as enjoyable on longer trips due to light wing loading and in rough air gets tossed around a lot more. JM2C

Note: I am biased

Sounds like you are describing a Bearhawk. Depending on the engine/prop combo you can expect 125-150 TAS with GY 26’s.

My wife who is my primary passenger is not a backseat person so I am building a Companion which is a 2 seat side by side. With 55 gal fuel and an option to install aux tanks the range is double your stated needs.

I am very familiar with Jo’Burg (will be in SA the whole month of November) I think you might need to look at NA engines. My home field is 5,637’ and as I type this at 10:30am the DA is 8,154 and will get up to or near 9,500’ in the early afternoon. Just go with a 200hp or higher legacy engine and you are good to go. Best option would be a 390 or 375 and you gain simplicity and don’t have to reinvent the wheel.

Edited to add: I think you will be hard pressed to stay below $120K especially with a 375 or 390 engine. I chose a 200hp O-360 angle valve with a vetterman exhaust to boost it a bit. I sourced a lot of things well in advance at prices lower than today’s prices, I did seriously splurge on my panel, but am pushing $150K

Good luck with your choice

Thanks to everyone for the replies , much appreciated.

I do like the sound of the Patrol, but it is over a years waiting period on the kit .

Would the Javron cub with a 180hp CS prop not fit the bill ? I am asking out of pure ignorance as we have zero exposure to experimental cubs in SA .

Thanks again to everyone for the help.

I believe the wait for a Javron will be at least a year as well.

There is a Bearhawk Patrol wing kit for sale on Bstormers to get you started.

The tailwind is a experimental, cruise speed it rocks and will blow the doors off my much more expensive certified 185, if I had your mission profile, based off the strips I saw in Namibia, would be a good contender

If a cub clone is what you want, why not build just that?

Today's exp cubs, are not your grandather's PA-18.... There is nothing on your list of desires unattainable in a decent clone build, 100 Kts? pfff... that's easy peasy, and constant speed would be nice, but ground adjustable WW or Sen can get it done, while keeping weight, cost, and complexity down.

Want speed and load hauling capability? Aspect ratio is your friend. Long wings will get you there, and that does not describe a short winged craft that relies on a high strung engine for airborne motivation. Since Valdez style STOL was not on your wish list, keep the wings relatively clean (no slats, slots, or radical cuffs) and you won't ding the speed. Need a little more short field capability than a relatively simple cub wing offers? push the flaps out in all three directions (inboard, outboard, and chord). Fuselage wise, they run the gamut with some being as close to Piper as it gets and pretty quick and painless to acquire, while others only resembling a cub from 100 yards. The single biggest choice there is will a 'clone' suffice? or do you need a stretched fuselage with top longhorns pushed up to the top stringer line (ala BCSC) for cavernous baggage and load hauling?

Speaking of complexity, Turbo and Rotax have their following. But when I conjure up thoughts of really being in the bushes, complexity and high strung are the last things I want. Although everybody's 'mind's eye' forms a different picture of 'backcountry'.

You did not define what your idea of high DA's is, so turbo may in fact be a thing, but natural aspirated engines are getting it done world wide in some pretty tall DA's.

Endurance is a function of fuel burn over fuel capacity. You are building this thing from scratch. Why are we overthinking endurance? Make the fuel burn fit your wallet, then make the fuel capacity fit the mission. Real loose numbers for a typical clone = (2) x 24 gal tanks = 48 gals. / 8 gph = 6 hrs x 100 kts = farther than I can carry my bladder. How about you? And you can do better than these without trying too hard at all.

Unless you're hauling thousands of pounds, the 1500' strip isn't a factor. If it is, dual is the answer not a fancy set of shocks.

Lastly, your budget will be impossible hiring the build out, unless exchange rates are amazing and labor is next to free... Sorry, but this stuff costs money. Just be glad your wishlist did not include turbine, because that would require a pretty serious meeting with the boss.

Good luck on the build!

Take care, Rob

Rob …. Thank you for that reply

It was like having a conversation in the mirror except with the right answers coming back at me.

I have tried to contact Javron again via email hopefully I will get a response this time around.

As always the direction is much appreciated

Your best bet to get ahold of Javron is by calling them. From my experience Jay doesn't always check emails, so I always just call his shop and ask for him if I need to talk to him. Sometimes it takes a day or two to catch him if he's busy running to the powdercoaters or other errands.

I will also say the workmanship done by Jay and his team is top notch, and you won't be disappointed if you go to Javron, especially since they will customize it however you want.

Your clearly focused on a Javron, if it ticks all the boxes for you go with it all others need not apply.

I talked at length with Jay at Osh Kosh. If I was going that route I would definitely be buying from him. Very professional and knowledgeable. I have this adage of "ask the right guy and listen to what they say". I would recommend him as the right guy.

There's an ACA Scout for sale in your neighborhood right now. It's on Controller.com and has been there for some time.

I doubt you could build an equivalent experimental for the money. Might not be everything you are looking for but it would be close.

I fly a lot of visitors around every summer. I usually have a friend with a very nice Cessna 170 come along and we switch passengers 1/2 way through the trip. By the end of the tour almost all prefer a Supercub backseat because of the excellent view. I prefer it over my 180 for most flying for the same reason so for a fun of flying aspect I think a tandem aircraft is best. A few points to think about. If you are going fixed runways/grass strips without major ruts, holes, I would consider spring gear. It is not that hard to fit on a cub and will give you 15 MPH gain over stock gear. Spring gear aircraft fly all over Alaska and do fine, Cub gear is usually only really needed when exploring new or rough areas. Your gross load of fuel and 400 lbs of people leaves out a lot. Survival gear/tiedown equipment/tools should be a bout 20-30 lbs. Unless you plan on flying back home every night you are going to need camping gear/food/chairs/clothing/tent/ect. Even a trip to wine country for the weekend is going to take some baggage and you may want to bring a case home. So a minimum of another 200 lbs will get you and partner out for nice fly out. Four hours of fuel sounds like a lot but it is really not that much. When your trips start getting interrupted by wind and weather it is nice to have some extra fuel for the change in plans. I have stopped at a lot of places to pee that did not have fuel or it was locked up for the night. So 6 hours of fuel total is easy to add to a cub wing and you don't have to fill the tanks if you don't need it. Javron is a very nice cub ( I am building one) But you are going to have to call and get Jay on the phone to talk to him. I know he has a lot of builds in line. You could see if he could supply the wings/all other small parts/motor mount/tail feathers and get the fesulage from airframe from Alaska Airframes. My buddy did that because Airframes is just down the road it worked out well. No right or wrong just stuff the think about
DENNY