PA-15/17 replica versus PA-18

[drew]

My wife and I are currently "project-less" and are considering what to take on next.

We're torn between a light super cub w/O-200 or a Wagabond.

We like the slow flight characteristics of the cub, but sometimes we'd like a bit more speed, and the side-by-side seating (it's tough to play "kneesies" in a cub :) )

The great majority of our flying is airport to airport, though we'd still like the option to land in a cow pasture.

My wife is a 200+ hour pilot, with about 10 hours in a J3 Cub. I don't fly due to medical reasons, but I'm an A&P and love to build. I'm thinking a Wagabond (I already own the plans) with an O-200 or near equivalent would be kind of neat.

I would like to hear what you all think about the light PA-18 versus Wagabond.

[pistoncan]

Drew,
Just my 2 cents ( I am sure Hillbilly will tell you that's all my opinion is worth :D ) I think you have a third option. The Wagabond Sportsman 2+2 is basicly a PA14 Family Cruiser. I had the plans here for a while to look them over, (there is a set for sale on ebay right now for 85.00) You have side by side seating, the long wing of the cub (if you wish, of coarse it could be built as a shortwing also.) You have the long tail for gently gound handling and you can always leave off the back seats if you want. As a two seater it would fly well on a 0200. IMHO I would think it would fill all your criteria. The plans are very nice, They have the option of spoilers or flaps also. Gary

[drew]

Well, I have the plans for those, also.

But I hadn't looked over them as thoroughly as the Wagabond. And the Wagabond plans are nice.

I hadn't thought about actually building one.

Drew

[Hillbilly]

Drew,
Just my 2 cents ( I am sure Hillbilly will tell you that's all my opinion is worth :D ) I think you have a third option. The Wagabond Sportsman 2+2 is basicly a PA14 Family Cruiser. I had the plans here for a while to look them over, (there is a set for sale on ebay right now for 85.00) You have side by side seating, the long wing of the cub (if you wish, of coarse it could be built as a shortwing also.) You have the long tail for gently gound handling and you can always leave off the back seats if you want. As a two seater it would fly well on a 0200. IMHO I would think it would fill all your criteria. The plans are very nice, They have the option of spoilers or flaps also. Gary


No way Gary, There have been a couple ham headed Frankensteins (heh) pass through here, whose opinions were worthless (to me at least) but not you! -Hillbilly

[pistoncan]

Well, I have the plans for those, also.

But I hadn't looked over them as thoroughly as the Wagabond. And the Wagabond plans are nice.

I hadn't thought about actually building one.

Drew
There is a fellow on wagbuilders website who has an excellent website of his own showing the construction of his Sportsman http://www.xanga.com/martyfeehan Marty Feehan is an industrial Arts teacher and did a beautiful job documenting his work Gary
PS thanks A.H.

[drew]

I'm familiar with Marty. He's a great guy, who sent me some airplane stuff for a class project in 2006.

I was under the assumption that the 2+2 was a much bigger project than a Wagabond, but I'm getting the sinking feeling that the ass-u-me is incorrect, here... :D

[pistoncan]

I'm familiar with Marty. He's a great guy, who sent me some airplane stuff for a class project in 2006.

I was under the assumption that the 2+2 was a much bigger project than a Wagabond, but I'm getting the sinking feeling that the ass-u-me is incorrect, here... :D
Nope, No reason why it couldn;t be a LSA so long as it was placarded for 1320 lbs gross. Just as the Wagabond/colt are the two place version of PA20/22. The sportsman 2+2 (PA14) could be done as a two place as well. Ya just have a real nice baggage area. They all use the same wing (either 2 or 3 bay).
Apparently, Mr Piper didn;t like to change things If he already had something that would work. As you probably noticed, the Fuselage of a sprotsman/PA14 is built more like the eariler designed cub. That is the biggest difference I can see. Sorta like a extra extra wide supercub.

[drew]

I was thinking about this while I was eating lunch. Frankly, I like the fuselage of the PA-15/17/20/22 better than that of a Cub. My sense of practicality and esthetics is offended by all the "decorative" iron work in the back of the Cubs. Plus, I've welded up a couple of Cub fuselages and they seem overcomplicated, compared to the shortwings.

What do you think about building a "stretch" Wagabond, instead of a PA-14?

I'm not concerned about building an LSA: I'm more interested in building a light aircraft for its flying characteristics and economy of operation.

[Steve Pierce]

Have you seen the Cub Crafters Sport Cub fuselage? It is a top longeron fuselage like a Short Wing. I love flying my Dad's 65 hp Vagabond and my friends 90 hp Super Cub. Just keep it light.

[drew]

That is soooo sweet!

Frankly, I'm surprised it hasn't been done earlier.

And you could make a PA-14 the same way, huh.

[Steve Pierce]

Stretched Pacer like Steve Bryant does. The PA14 and Sportsman 2+2 is a little narrow. Look at Airwrench's photos in the gallery.

[d.grimm]

I like the idea of a PA15/17 replica. ( I wonder why?) The 150 hp Super Cub with a 2000 lb gross weight kit that I am helping to rebuild has a power loading of 13.3 lbs per horsepower at gross weight, the Vagabond with a 85 hp engine has a power loading of 13.5 lbs per horsepower.
Wing loading for the Vagabond at gross is 7.8 lbs per sq. ft. vs 11.5 lbs per sq ft for the Super Cub.
I have the feeling that my performance should be comparable to a 150 Super Cub.
Not that I wouldn't have a Super Cub if I could afford it, the Vagabond fills the bill for me.
Dave
P.S. A 100 hp Experimental Vagabond at 1320 lbs would have a 13.2 lb per hp power loading and a wing loading of 8.9 lbs per sq. ft. Again, slightly better than a Super Cub.(Power loading for a stock Super Cub would be 11.7 lbs per hp.)

[drew]

That's kind of what I was thinking, before you all went and distracted me with crazy talk about PA-14s and such.

I have a bunch of Piper Cub parts left over from a couple projects, and just enough tubing to "almost" make a PA-15. Isn't that how the PA-15 was born, to begin with? Piper was in financial trouble, and turned a bunch of Cub parts into PA-15s???

[d.grimm]

Drew,
That's the story. I find there are at least three different sources of Vagabond/J-3 parts for everything I need. And the 5 gal per hour fuel burn is a winner also. I have welded a complete Vagabond fuselage and thought it went pretty well for my first try.
Dave

[drew]

I'm assuming from your avatar, that you are currently flying a PA-15/17 type? If so, how does it fly?

I figure if your CG is far enough forward and the wheels are on straight, it should taxi reasonably well. (While I've heard horror stories about both original PA-20s and bad PA-22 conversions, I haven't heard much similar about the PA-15/17.

I guess I'm looking for "simple". We are a daytime, VFR kind of couple. We're thinking wing tanks for the safety aspect, but otherwise want a minimalist airplane. I'm even kind of kicking around carbon fiber ribs as an idea. But will probably stick to the plans and build wood.

[Steve Pierce]

The Vagabonds I have flown were pussy cats as are the Clippers. My Pacer has a little quirk but it just takes attention. The Short wings all take a little more attention than a Cub or Super Cub but they are not hard to handle at all in my opinion. Note: I learned to fly in a Clipper so I might be biased. :D

[d.grimm]

Drew,
Yes that is my Vagabond. C-85 and two twelve gallon wing tanks. I am rebuilding the wings so I have not flown it yet.
Can't wait to fly it as I only hear how nice they do fly. I wish I could get the gross weight to the 1325 that Piper did with their Experimental Vagabond with a C90. I read the difference was PA16 wings, I've seen both and don't see any changes.
I heard Wag-Aero's gross weight (1300?) was checked by an engineer.
Dave

[Claudio]

Stretched Pacer like Steve Bryant does. The PA14 and Sportsman 2+2 is a little narrow. Look at Airwrench's photos in the gallery.

[Wheelie Wayne]

Drew, I also like the side by side seating. I have a "Wagabond Traveller" that was a 1952 PA22 converted to a taildragger back in the early 80's and the FAA actually licenced it as a Wagabond. The FAA was much more lenient back then I guess. But the Traveller is a two place plane, so my back seat sits in the hanger and I have a bunch of baggage capacity. I really like the plane as a two place. Not being an A&P, I also really enjoy being able to do all the work myself.