SuperCub vs. Husky

[Taildraggaah]

I have flown the SuperCub but never the Husky. How do they compare? It seems that people that I speak with that fly the SuperCub first, seem to dislike the Husky, just my observation. But the same can't be said when someone flies the Husky first. Any objective comparisons out there?

 

[AKAAB]

I towed banners with a Husky many years ago and found the plane to handle quite well. Everyone always told me it was like a SuperCub on steroids.

 

[svcta]

I've got around 600 hours in Super Cubs and a little in Huskies. I think that the Husky is a dead knock off of the Cub, but with every possible improvement. The handles for ground handling, improved door, etc. I will say that the one that I flew I don't think performed as well off the ground as a 180 Super Cub(which Piper never actually made, so I guess that's worth something). My favorite addition was the spades. That did improve the feel of the airplane, especially when you were really throwing it around; I always felt like the Cub was just a little heavy handed on the ailerons.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Well, I definitely like the fact that the fuel selector in the Husky is "on" or "off"...I had a student turn the fuel off on a Super Cub twice while trying to switch tanks. We were pretty close to the ground before I noticed it the second time

Otherwise, you can take the position that the Husky is a Super Cub on steriods. Or you can take the position that they're both high-wing, tandem-two-seat taildraggers, and the comparison ends there. Either way, you'd be right

My guess is that the "Super Cub first" group that doesn't like the Husky are probably steeped in traidition, and looking at it as a Super Cub that had a lot of changes made to it, some of which they don't understand, others of which they don't like. The "Husky first" group is probably looking at it more along the lines of two different airplanes.

Fly safe!

David

 

[svcta]

Funny, I had a student in a super cub turn the fuel off while trying to blindly trim the airplane just after lift off(there's no way we were above 500 feet). The thing went silent with me in the back seat(having access to nothing). The lady in the front said "you've got it" and gave up. I said, "Okay, there are a few things that I need you to do." and walked her through the standard suspects: mags, fuel, etc, all the while setting up to land in a field just next to our airport. She verified for me that the fuel was on a good tank as I turned base for said field, but something just wasn't sitting right with me, so I leaned as far forward as I could and barely got a hold of the fuel selector. Grabbed it, gave it a whirl and away we went. The thing lit right back up and we were on our way.

I briefed the trim and fuel selectors a little more thoroughly after that.

 

[Swass]

I've owned the Husky and have alot of hours in them and have flown the Cub a handfull of times. I like the feel of the Husky better, lighter on the controls and more powerful feeling.

 

[LJDRVR]

I've flown both and the CA-1 is a better airplane in all respects but one:

The stupid spring-loaded pitch trim. Hate it.

For that reason alone I'd take the PA-18 first. Especially when you take looks into account.

 

[LearLove]

the cub still has more useful load - thats what count when hauling stuff pays the bills. You cant put full fuel and 2 big guys in a husky like you can in a pa18, atleast not on paper.

A PA-18-150 is one of the most useful/versital aircraft for moving stuff and other light aircraft type jobs. Me and a friend are thinking about getting one to do tailwheel checkouts.

 

[svcta]

That's an expensive airplane just for the sake of giving dual. Especially when Champs, Citabrias, T-craft, C-120, etc. can all be had so reasonably. Cubs, both super and regular type, are worth way more than the sum of their parts just because of the name they bear and the fact that they're so darn useful.

 

[LearLove]

That's an expensive airplane just for the sake of giving dual. Especially when Champs, Citabrias, T-craft, C-120, etc. can all be had so reasonably.

yeah but like I said, you cant put 2 big guys in any of thoes above.

we figure 65 to 80k will get us a nice pa28-150. just kicking around the idea. I would like to do tailwheel checkouts but really don't want to run a bizz. plus my friend wants to get on with Alaska and I'm (hope) gonna stay in phl with US Air.

I may just keep saving and get a Varga (35 to 40k). I've got enough stashed away for a C-150 but may hold out for the Varga.

Shortly I should be able to have access to a T-34 for 60/hr so if that happens I'll just keep saving until I don't have access to the t34 anymore.

 

[svcta]

I used to do tailwheel endorsements, and while I used Super Cubs to do it, I never leaned on the capabilities of the airplane to get flying done. Of course, you know what you need best, but if you wanted something for fun/giving a bit of dual, you could save half of your money, I'd guess.

Watch out for insurance, too. When you say "giving instruction" in a conventional gear a/c they begin to ask for big bucks. I worked for a company that used its airplanes for commercial purposes only and we paid 10K a year for insurance...with a specific limitation: No instruction.

Not that you'll pay anywhere near that, but even as we were giving our souls to them they didn't cover us for giving dual.

 

[LearLove]

Doesn't matter anymore - as of today I've got access to a T-34 for basically gas money. I'll fly it about 3 to 5 times a month and save the rest of my cash for a rainy day. Sometimes you just get luckey.

 

[svcta]

I've got some time in T-34s, all B models. Very fun, and getting cheaper by the day. Flying club airplane? Which powerplant?

 

[LearLove]

yes, navy club - we used to have 4 but one had a bird strike and won't be repaired (on the wing to the spar). All others have had the wing mod done so they are good to go. Down to 2 right now as one is awaiting an engine change. they are all stock navy with the O-470. alittle doggy when its hot out but besides that a great plane for just flying around.

 

[J3 Driver]

I have roughly 500 hrs in each and believe the Husky is hands down a better airplane but as LJDRVR said, the pitch trim system is a stupid setup. That seems to be the only complaint with the airplane that I have heard from other owners. My Super Cub was a good airplane as well but it seemed that airplane was closer to the J-3 then a modern airplane. I primarily used the Husky to get into short dirt strips where it seemed right at home mainly because of the responsive controls and great forward visibility. Although both are great airplanes I ended up selling them and buying a Super Decathlon; which is more fun then the both of them combined.

 

[svcta]

yes, navy club - we used to have 4 but one had a bird strike and won't be repaired (on the wing to the spar). All others have had the wing mod done so they are good to go. Down to 2 right now as one is awaiting an engine change. they are all stock navy with the O-470. alittle doggy when its hot out but besides that a great plane for just flying around.

Quickly, so as not to drift any further, I only flew one with the 470, mostly all of my T-34 time is behind the IO-550. It really gives it a kick in the pants. I've been all over the US in one; it is a simple, fun airplane. Enjoy.

 

[ATCT]

I guess im old and traditional, but Im a Super Cub guy hands down. A good 160HP / Leading edge exhaust Super cub with a navcom and hand help GPS will take ya in and out of holes and gravel bars than a husky dreams of. If you get someone who knows what their doing to fix up your super-cub, it'll fly as "smooth" as any Husky, with a greater payload and half the price.

Husky's are good planes, the only problem is that most bush pilots cant exactly fork out $200,000 for a Husky when some good Super Cubs can be had for $80,000.