Hey, if you need a helicopter... buy one... :}

Seriously though, I watched the Aviat Husky video and I understand now... :D:D:D

I SEEEEEEEN de light!!!!!! Hallelujah!!!!

...and name me any trike that's even a half decent aerobat??

Ummm F15,16,18,22 :}:E

The Cub's cub
 

Even more fun at the time..
J3 Kitten single seater with VW engine -
http://i784.photobucket.com/albums/y...s/scan0009.jpg

Ummm Shorts Tucano, BAe Hawk, and what about them Harvards and Yaks and stuff?

The only reason those little carbon fibre thingies are taildraggers is that it is the only way to keep those big props away from the ground!

A PA-22 does 7 knots better with a tailwheel than the nose gear. Imagine the drag of a bloody great nosewheel on a DC3 for example.

But of more importance a taildragger is a "CONVENTIONAL AIRCRAFT" a tricycle is not!:rolleyes:

Just a small point, I thought a Harvard was a tailwheel?

And remoak, if you convert any cub to a tricycle, I will hunt you down and convert you into a tricycle...:}

j3

Cheap PA-18. Note date.
 

The year this photo was taken you could have hired her for about 3 pounds six shillings
All over grass airfield NORAD but lights from the tower .


http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y15...on/ZK-BKUb.jpg

Young blokes today will never have it as good, even with all their "wizbangery". When I was short of money and couldn't afford the outrageous rates of 1970 on the Canterbury Cub, I'd go to Wigwram and fly gliders. In Sydney, 1968, I flew lots of hours in VH-MUG, a C172 from the Aviation Centre, for $10 per hour solo.

And, on an average wage, I could afford it. What's happened since???

One has to agree that there is nothing like flying a SuperCub for the sheer pleasure of basic flying, particularly on a nice day with no turbulence and your landing strip is some virgin snow on the top of Mount Whistler in BC Canada.

http://i954.photobucket.com/albums/a...g?t=1275723034:ok:

Tinny,

That Cub is still on the register. If I'm not mistaken about the airfield, that hanger is still there and the houses in the background as well, but the nearby control tower has been replaced.

They're not "aerobats"!! I'd like to see any of them perform any significant -ve G manouevres let alone gyroscopic manouevres, (how the hell do you spell that "m" word?).

I will concede the Yak 52 is "half decent", but it's one of the only ones.

And yes they do need the prop clearance, but if a trike was the "preferred" method then the Extra 300 would be 10 feet tall with a nose wheel...how bad would that look!!!:eek::mad:

Anyway, back to the thread. Whilst I've flown a couple of SuperCubs, I'd really like to try a J3, no radios, no electrics, door/window open....there's something to be said for going "back to basics"!!

27/09 Correctamento! A few years earlier this would have been parked beside it
Slackie would have liked the old tower, nothin to do all day but smoke cigarettes and drink tea and fire lights at Fletchers .

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y15...-08-08-467.jpg

Sorry my bad, was thinking T-28 Trojan but typed Harvard (looks like a Harvard except it has the wheel in the correct place)...

You're a bad bad person. :=

yeah I get that a lot... :}

Never seen an F22 up close doin its thing Slackie? trust me, talking to the driver last year at Farnborough during the trade day...he pulls plenty of -ve.
Interestingly, he flys an edge 540 in his spare time..:ok: