Wag Aero Wagabond vs Sportsman 2+2

[fish2keel]

I would not call the Kitfox a backcountry airplane. It is an airplane adapted to the back country by a market demand. Yes, you can go fly with Trent Palmer but doesn't meet my mission for backcountry. I want to be able to carry two people and a weeks worth of camping supplies 1,000 miles plus. Having flown Pacers and Super Cubs on gravel bars I like the centerline visibility. It was always hard to see what was on my right side in the Pacer, not so in the Cub. Pacer was a lot faster and carried a lot more stuff easier. It is all acompromise.

I was not fully aware that the kitfox was not designed around backcountry flying. For someone that wants something light weight, side by side, a few bags or fishing gear, would a wagabond with supercub style wings work better than a sportsman 2+2, or can the sportsman have weight savings to compete with the wagabong (pending longer wings).

[Stephen]

I believe the key difference between a stock Pacer and SC when flying in the Backcountry is the advantage of the slower approach and landing speeds of the SC.

I don't think I would put SC length wings on a short Pacer type fuselage. The plane will likely lack stability in Yaw and Pitch axis. It will also have a shorter lever arm to the tail with and increased center of lift force which may effect stalls and landings. A shorter fuselage is not significant as far as weight increases. My Bushmaster added two feet to the fuselage length and 8 feet to the wing span and only 80 lbs to the GW. There are better ways to cut weight.

[fish2keel]

I believe the key difference between a stock Pacer and SC when flying in the Backcountry is the advantage of the slower approach and landing speeds of the SC.

I have never flown in a pacer but have in many SC. I would prefer the SC slow landings and approach over the faster cruise speeds of a pacer. Although I would prefer the side by side, which is why I was thinking wagabond would fit the bill. Im not so sure the 2+2 can do those super cub speeds.

Stephen,

Can you have some insight on the performance of your bushmaster build? That's a 2+2 turned backcountry, correct?

[Stephen]

There were no Kitfoxes in the STOL drag finals. Highlander makes a good Backcountry airplane. Although, it does not out perform the SC in STOL flying. The PA 14 with a 180 is a good compromise.

[fish2keel]

There were no Kitfoxes in the STOL drag finals. Highlander makes a good Backcountry airplane. Although, it does not out perform the SC in STOL flying. The PA 14 with a 180 is a good compromise.

I did not realize the kitfox did not make the STOL drag finals.

The PA 14 is very nice

[Stephen]

The 2+2, PA 14, Double wide SC, Bushmaster, Stretched Pacer, and Super Pacer are all very similar. They all have the SC wing and the same fuselage lengths. They can all have the same tail. The empty weights can all be similar depending on the builder. The 2+2 and the double wide SC have sticks. SC and Double wide SC will have a couple of degrees AOI, while the PA 14 and modified Pacers have zero AOI. Zero AOI will have faster cruise speed but a longer take off roll. My Bushmaster with zero AOI, uses 150 feet for takeoff. Modified Cubs can beat that. But, I cruise faster even with my 82 44 prop and 29 inch tires. I can use 50 mph approach speeds easily and stall sub 30 mph. BTW, when building any of these planes, you can change the AOI to match the SC or even more. Wing modifications such as tips, VG's, leading edge mods and flap type and size are choices the builder has. I've owned a J3, stock Pacer and now Bushmaster. The BM meets my needs best. Backcountry flying, off airport landing, camping and XC flying.

I've also got time in SC's and a PA14. The 14 is a bit tight for me. I'm 6'4" and 200 lbs. The J3 was not so good for camping or XC.

[Stephen]

I did not realize the kitfox did not make the STOL drag finals.

The PA 14 is very nice

I should have said the final two. It was Steve Henry's highly modified Highlander and I believe a modified Carbon Cub.

[fish2keel]

The 2+2, PA 14, Double wide SC, Bushmaster, Stretched Pacer, and Super Pacer are all very similar. They all have the SC wing and the same fuselage lengths. They can all have the same tail. The empty weights can all be similar depending on the builder. The 2+2 and the double wide SC have sticks. SC and Double wide SC will have a couple of degrees AOI, while the PA 14 and modified Pacers have zero AOI. Zero AOI will have faster cruise speed but a longer take off roll. My Bushmaster with zero AOI, uses 150 feet for takeoff. Modified Cubs can beat that. But, I cruise faster even with my 82 44 prop and 29 inch tires. I can use 50 mph approach speeds easily and stall sub 30 mph. BTW, when building any of these planes, you can change the AOI to match the SC or even more. Wing modifications such as tips, VG's, leading edge mods and flap type and size are choices the builder has. I've owned a J3, stock Pacer and now Bushmaster. The BM meets my needs best. Backcountry flying, off airport landing, camping and XC flying.

I've also got time in SC's and a PA14. The 14 is a bit tight for me. I'm 6'4" and 200 lbs. The J3 was not so good for camping or XC.

Stephen, this is great information! If it's not to much trouble, where does a wagabond fit in here? Or a modified one?

[Stephen]

Stephen, this is great information! If it's not to much trouble, where does a wagabond fit in here? Or a modified one?

Wagabon is short winged and will be a lighter version of a Pacer. It will be a responsive plane and light weight. Depending on the engine it should have a decent take off and climb. It is not a SC when it comes to Backcountry flying. More wing and hp will give better BC performance. For BC and off airport landing SC is the standard, then comes the PA12, 14, and stretched Pacer mods. Maule and 180,s are also good for BC but, got necessarily for off airport stuff. A stretched and wing lengthened Wagabon would be a great option.

Since a Wagabon is light, maybe an 18 inch stretch with SC wings and tail and 120 to 180 hp engine could be a cool airplane. With extended gear and few wing mods it might perform as good as a SC.

[fish2keel]

Wagabon is short winged and will be a lighter version of a Pacer. It will be a responsive plane and light weight. Depending on the engine it should have a decent take off and climb. It is not a SC when it comes to Backcountry flying. More wing and hp will give better BC performance. For BC and off airport landing SC is the standard, then comes the PA12, 14, and stretched Pacer mods. Maule and 180,s are also good for BC but, got necessarily for off airport stuff. A stretched and wing lengthened Wagabon would be a great option.

Stephen,

Would you stretch both the fuse and wing wagabon to SC dimensions, or is there a combination of things that make a great BC aircraft.

Thanks for all your help btw!