Aviation Forum / General / Homebuilt / January 2007

I don't know Ed.  Haven't you ever flown a J-3 with the door open and the
window down?  That's got to be pretty close to a parasol.

Rich

The change from a Parasol of the A-2/E-2 to the "razorback" J-2 was
merely cosmetic.  You can very easily build a parasol from the Wag Aero
plans by omitting the upper fairingof the aft fuselage WITH NO
STRUCTURAL CONSEQUENCES.

http://www.goldenageair.org/collection/1932taylore2.htm  I say that is
a parasol.  A Super Cub has, for all intents and purposes, the same
structure, but with a non-structural cosmetic fairing on the fuselage.

Bob's point was the quality of the plans.  Other points I'll add are
wide availability of pre-made parts.

Another design the original poster might think about: Stewart Headwind.
And the steel tube fuselage version of the Piet, the Grega Gn-1 (well,
there is a wood version too, you chose) is set up to use A-65 engines,
and wings from whatever air-knocker is hanging around the hanger.  The
GN-1 is also set up to use a lot of pre-made parts from Piper Cubs,
allowing you to trade money for build time, if you've got more of the
former than the later.

http://www.stewartaircraft.com/main.html
http://www.gregagn-1.com/index.php

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

Dear Mike,

Don't give up so easily :-)

If you go to Wag-Aero's 'on-line' catalog, look for Sport Trainer (or
whatever) you'll get a list of 44 items, one of which is the DRAWINGS.
Their catalog number is Q-001-000, price is $125.  And yes, you really
CAN build your very own Super Cub, should you wish to do so.  :-)

However, since a lot of people already hold drawings for the Cuby,
Sport Trainer, et al, you can probably find a set to study within your
local EAA chapter.   Making up a couple of test-ribs is always fun and
even if you elect not to build, they look good on the wall of the
hangar.  The real key is the engine.  Find a suitable engine and you're
half-way home.

I should mention here that yes, the Cub has flown behind a BIG VW
conversion... but not very well.  A big-bore stroker such as an 84 x 94
(142cid) is a close match to the Lycoming O-145 (which many people will
literally GIVE you to get rid of them) but simply does not have the
low-rpm torque needed for this type of airframe.  Ditto for the little
1834cc conversions, which are a close match for the A-40a (ie, 112cid).
Basically, you'll end up with a single-place Cub having a minuscule
ROC that needs its valves topped every 200 hours.  Cheap, but you can't
fly it off floats, haul a heavy, etc.

The best part of the joke is that unless you are up to your elbows in
old Volkswagens,  rebuilding a run-out O-200 will usually cost LESS
than building up a RELIABLE good big-bore stroker :-)

Either way, you've got some fun ahead of you.  Good luck with it.

-R.S.Hoover

Me!  I think a Cessna 180 would be 3 times the airplane for about the
same or 1.5 times the cost of a "Super" Cub  :)  Personal preference I
suppose ;)

Scott