MTV,
Sorry to disagree, operators utilize certain aircraft because they meet their needs. They are proven and well trusted. Sure the SuperCub has had a long production life, then why is it that they don't change aircraft?
As far as the 777, it is just another bird. I still prefer flying my "fly by wire Cub", lots of wire!
By the way, I have the original invoice for my 1979 SuperCub, $26,000!
Today the same bird in pristine shape is worth $90,000 to $100,000 plus. A buddy purchased a factory new restored 1957 SuperCub with a 150horse for $96,000. He loves it! By the way he did test fly the Scout, not impressed. Does the Scout appreciate in value? Not! Lots of them for sale .
I think we have wrapped up this discussion, don't you?

Nice talking,


Idaho SuperCub

Welcome back to the BackcountryPilot.Org quarterly type debate! It appears that Idaho Supercub is fond of Super Cubs, but not Scouts. Owning neither, MTV tells it like it is and heralds the merits of both. Joecub owns a Scout and is reported to do some amazing backcountry feats in it. Mr Scout likes his enough to bear the model as his username. 777's are big.

And...we're BACK.

Idaho,

Well, consider this: You can buy a rusted out POS SUper Cub for ONLY $50 or 60 K. Then you can put another $50K in it, and you've still got less money in it than you'd have in a NEW Scout or Husky, course the airplane will be worth less than you have in it, just like a new airplane would.

As to people switching, some are. Note that there are VERY few Super Cubs operating under 135 certificates in Alaska these days. Can't make any money with them, or with Scouts, for that matter, but there are a few. Guides still use them(Cubs), cause they can trash em and buy another beater the next day. That said, I can show you Scouts being used in both roles, working hard, and keeping right up with the Cub guys, every day.

The Super Cub has a wealth of parts available from a number of vendors. There's no doubt that this is a big advantage to a commercial operator, and to a lesser degree to a private owner, both in cost of operation and in keeping it running. Can't argue that one.

As to me, I flew Cubs AT WORK for a number years and thousands of hours, and CHOSE to switch to a Husky. Three Husky's later, I'd do the same thing again. The Scout didn't fit my profile (though I'd have loved to have had that heater) for my work, and NEITHER did the Cub for the area that I had moved to and the work I was doing.

The Husky, with a PILOT, will go pretty much anywhere a Cub will on wheels, but on floats and skis, it will go places NO Cub can come out of. It's twenty miles per hour faster than most Cubs, burning over a gallon an hour less fuel than the Cub at the same time. It will work at high density altitudes better than the Cub as well. A friend frequently lands his at 15,000 feet.

So, my choice wouldn't (and more to the point WASN'T) the Scout, either, though I flew one (and a Maule M-7) while I was deciding what worked for my projects. The Husky did it for me best, and for several thousand more hours.

That doesn't mean the Scout is not as good an airplane as the others, just that it didn't fit MY work profile.

There is also the "Super Cub Aura" to consider. We hear this all the time. Frankly, I give a crap less what you fly, as long as YOU are happy with it.

I also been flying little airplanes at work long enough to know for a fact that 99% of making an airplane work is the pilot, NOT the airplane.

I've had very experienced Cub pilots (working pilots) tell me in amazement the places they've seen my Cessna 170, and that they wouldn't land there in a Cub. That was the guy who owned it before me. He was pretty much a superb pilot, I'm told, though I never flew with him. And, believe me, when these cub guys I'm talking about say stuff like that, they aren't trying to make me feel good about my airplane. Just shaking their heads in wonder..

In the end, whatever winds your watch is fine with me.

Just don't degrade someone else's airplane simply because it wouldn't be YOUR choice.

Adolph Galland, the fighter commander of the Luftwaffe during WW II was asked years later which of the many aircraft he'd flown during his long flying career was his favorite. His answer: "The one I was flying at the time".

That works for me..

MTV

You know MTV, the more I read your posts the more respect I have for you.

Arguments about equipment crosses all lines, Cubs -vs- Scouts, Ford -vs- Chevy, Nikon -vs- Canon. The people with experience come to the same conclusion every time. It's the person using the equipment that makes it do great things not the equipment itself.

The important thing is find a plane that fills your mission and make the most of it. Fly the hell out of it, and with the experience it will do great things!

Personally, I found a 4 place plane that has 900lb useful load for <$20k That is what I needed for my mission. Now I'm trying to maximize it's (read: my piloting skills) performance to get into shorter and shorter strips with still a full load. Getting very comfortable with the lower end of the flight envelope is the important and fun part for me.

Now let's talk about the best plane with trailing link gear and how smooth the gear make the ruttiest runway.

-Todd Giencke

Don't even get me started about Huskys. Flown them. I'm still trying to recover from banging my head on those wonderful flap hinges. I missed them the first fuel stop, the second got me . Oh well, nobodys perfect.

Idaho SuperCub

Oh, come on, Idaho, THAT WAS, after all, the point--to get you spooled up about Huskys.

Oh, well.

MTV

I was told that a Husky was a Super Cub, just Husky got to reverse engineer the Super Cub and fix the problems. You know what Piper would have done if they had stayed around long enough.

Thats pretty funny. Who ever designed it really scored well with that wonderful bungee elevator trim system. Not enough flaps either. No crossfeed available in the fuels sytem. Keep going?

Idaho SuperCub

Hi Zane!
Couldn't agree with you more -

Butttt ...you did screw the pooch on this one:

zane wrote: Joecub owns a Scout and is reported to do some amazing backcountry feats in it.
And...we're BACK.

He owns a cub (smith) and still thinks Scouts are groovy Myself, I like 'em all, and have had a few choice words for most that I've flown too!
Flew down to Eloy today to get some paint from the gal there that does exceptional fabric. She was working on a Stinson Gullwing. How cool would that be? The wing structure was built like a tank with a steel truss for a spar!

Idaho,

Not enough flaps??? Go measure the flaps on a Husky and then measure the flaps on TWO Super Cubs. The Husky will still have more flap. They only deflect to 30 degrees because they are FOWLER flaps, a bit different design than the simple flaps on many other airplanes, like the Cub. Uniquely enough, they not only create drag, they create a lot of lift. Novel concept, eh?

Fly one of the new wing airplanes which have even more flap sometime.

You might actually learn something about em if you weren't butting your head against them instead of flying them .

But you totally missed my points. But, who cares?

MTV

Well here goes. I have a total of .4 hrs tailwheel time so that makes me an expert. (Wink)

When I got my private a buddy of mine had the roachiest Beechcraft Musketeer with an IO346 I think. He let me use it all I wanted if I helped with expenses and I was in heaven. Did not mater to me if I pulled up to a brand new 172 on the ramp cus I was proud as punch.

I now own 1/2 of a 182B with fat tires and it really does a lot of stuff for me. I would like to get a tailwheel plane just because I have convinced myself I need one.

That said, I think that any plane that that I can get behind the controls of is a great plane.

I talked to a guy that was getting fuel one day in his 2 out of 10 172 and the guy behind him in line with a twin came up and started talking to him as to the greatness of a 172. The guy was really nice and helped him push the plane to a tie down after fueling and it turned out to be Chuck Yeager. I do not care how many hours you have or what you have flown. Just have a good time and fly safe. See you at Johnson Creek in my 1/2 182. Or is that a 91.

Tim

You obviously have little or no time in a flap equipped Cub. There is no comparison to the full flap slow flight tendencies of the Cub and the Husky.
All I know is I have flown the Husky, Scout, and the SuperCub. Everybody has there own opinions, and I have mine. Thanks for your opinions, and hope to meet you sometime in the backcountry.
Take Care,

Idaho SuperCub

Damn....

Why am I not feeling the love in the room?

I've seen guys (and gals) come and go in tricked out Cubs, Huskys, C185's, you name it, but... They were absolutely horrible pilots, and I wouldn't even think of climbing into an airplane with them in the Arctic.

On the other hand. I've flown with Eskimo kids, ink still wet on commercial certificates, flying ratted out Part 135 Cessna 172's, that had more air sense, and could make that little Cessna sing and dance, and kiss the ground with a tire within 6 inches of where they wanted to.

The airplane don't make the pilot.

Gump

Did Hawthorne blow up with that old ordinance all around?

Idaho SuperCub wrote:Did Hawthorne blow up with that old ordinance all around?

It's kinda hard to tell around here. Some of the citizens look shell shocked though.

Gump

Bad! , It kinda glows when you fly over

Idaho SuperCub wrote:Bad! , It kinda glows when you fly over

Makes it easier to find my way home at night.

Gump

What are you paying for gas there? I haven't checked today, but McCall Aviation is charging $4.50 - $4.60 per gal. Council $3.75

Idaho SuperCub wrote:What are you paying for gas there? I haven't checked today, but McCall Aviation is charging $4.50 - $4.60 per gal. Council $3.75

As of yesterday AVGAS was $4.08/gal here at KHTH. Damn car gas is $3.49 in town. Yerington is usually cheapest in the area, but I haven't been in there for a while so I don't know what they're charging now.

Gump

Bend over if heading north