Our new ( very old 1942 ) L4 Cub

[Gforce]

We recently bought a 1942 L4 Cub ( Grasshopper ) that is restored to a very high standard. We have just fitted a C90 to replace the C65 and have discreetly added electric starter and wing tanks to give it a bit of range ( as much as you can do at 60Kts )

 

Its a fantastic plane to fly with the doors wide open and its actually got some pretty amazing history and has been in active service in WW2 ! Now registered with the RAA its a keeper.

 

Really keen to take it to some flyins in NSW

 

Cheers

 

Garth

 

 

 

 

[facthunter]

You should increase your cruise speed a bit with the C-90. Is it a 16 F? The starter is the cable pull one I suppose. Pretty heavy but easier on the gears in the accessory case than some lightweight types. Pretty good aircraft (in my opinion)..Nev

 

 

[Gforce]

Increasing the cruse was never the goal - Payload or the ability to clear the trees two up was far more important !

 

2300 Rpm and just enjoy the scenery at 500 feet is what we bought it for.

 

 

[SDQDI]

I did my pilot certificate in a J3 Cub. An electric starter would have been nice but there is something enjoyable about swinging the prop and have it burst to life (except in the winter time of course, standing in the breeze isn't exactly nice when it is already frosty without it!)

 

They are certainly a very nice plane to poke around in

 

 

[facthunter]

I reckon the starter is too heavy. If you run the 2 bendix mags with impulse it will start easy hand swung. and the weight lost is useful for something else. Nev

 

 

[kaz3g]

Lovely little aeroplane that will give you lots of enjoyment. Congratu.ations.

 

Kaz

 

 

[Roundsounds]

Lovely aeroplane, I assisted with some info for electrics upgrade. What are you going to do with the C65?

 

 

[Riley]

I did my pilot certificate in a J3 Cub. An electric starter would have been nice but there is something enjoyable about swinging the prop and have it burst to life (except in the winter time of course, standing in the breeze isn't exactly nice when it is already frosty without it!)They are certainly a very nice plane to poke around in

Hand propping. I oft times get looked at sideways (and chided) when I hand bomb my Champ from behind. Back in the 1950's in Northern Canada, one stood on the starboard float when swinging a prop - come wintertime you still (thru habit) swung from behind. At Oshkosh a few years ago I attended a short 'hand propping' course/demo. The teacher lady couldn't agree that left hand on the fuel cap and right hand on the prop tip from behind was as safe as two hands on the prop and one leg in the air in a football kick out front. To each his own I guess but I get more smug satisfaction out of a hand bomb start on the Champ than I do with a 12V start on the Lightwing.

 

 

[Guernsey]

My L4 Cub had the 65hp engine and was very easy to handstart from behind. It didn't have a park brake so I had to chock the wheels with a rope joined to both chocks and back to the cockpit, I then climbed in and retrieved the chocks by pulling them inside. A very nice fun aeroplane and I wish I had kept it and been able to register it Raaus.

 

Alan Marriette.

 

Note the rego LFJ.....L4j.

 

 

 

[Guernsey]

Taxiing on a country road.

 

 

 

[ave8rr]

While we are visiting vintage aeroplanes, here is the latest addition to join my RV9A in our hangar.

 

A 1948 Piper PA-17 Vagabond. She lived most of her life since manufacture in South Africa as ZS-BZK now RAAus 24-4634.

 

Came to Perth back in 2006 and now to Bundaberg.

 

A65 Continental. No electrics except for battery to supply Becker Radio.

 

As we understand it , this is the only PA-15/17 in Australasia.

 

 

 

 

 

[old man emu]

I was lucky enought to have a look a Gforce's plane today while it was in its maintenance facility. It is a very, very tidy little ship and anyone would be proud to show it off at a fly-in. The engine conversion has been carried out to produce a quite neat result, given that the C90 is physically bigger than the C65.

 

I was told that this lovely little example is actually a true war veteran, having served in the European theatre of operations from D-Day.

 

(Have I praised it enough to be offered a circuit in the back seat?)

 

OME

 

 

[Gforce]

Haha ! Thanks OME - sure you can have a ride but it's s front seat for the co pilot as its flown from the rear seat for solo ops..

 

We found a guy over in the UK who sends a complete service history for 10 pounds sterling and this active history is pretty impressive to say the least !

 

Thanks for the comments all !

 

G

 

 

[facthunter]

A lot of that early stuff was flown from the rear seat. While you might wish to look over the front, instinctively, you get a much better idea of what is happening from the rear, once you get used to it. Nev

 

 

[Guernsey]

The early L4's were used as artillery spotter aircraft the pilot being in the front with an artillery spotter in the rear facing backwards with what we would regard as a rear parcel shelf, was his map table which he used to report back artillery or tank positions to their own artillery guns. Proved to be quite successful.

 

My Cub was facing forward and yes the pilot flew from the back seat. (A genuine back seat driver.)

 

Alan.

 

 

[facthunter]

The Super Cubs went to front seat pilot position. Nev

 

 

[ave8rr]

The Super Cubs went to front seat pilot position. Nev

Because the nose tank was removed and wing tanks installed. I believe there is an STC for J3 cubs to go this way.

Mike

 

 

[Guernsey]

My L4 was restored in the Phillipines and was supposed to be an 85 hp engine with wing tanks so I would have been able to fly front seat however I missed that one and finished up with the 65 hp and nose tank.

 

Alan.

 

 

[facthunter]

The front seat is very close to CofG so mass there doesn't change balance. Rear seat does, so having somone there (rear) all the time reduces the variation. Austers had the tank in the front on most models I think (Not sure about the J5G) and were flown from the front.

 

I think people generally find the idea of flying something from the rear seat a bit weird. With a biplane with normal stagger, you see more from the rear. Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...We found a guy over in the UK who sends a complete service history for 10 pounds sterling and this active history is pretty impressive to say the least !...

G

Be sure to share it when you get the info.

 

 

[Guernsey]

I agree with you Nev that rear seat flying in the L4 was weird, when taxiing, visibility forward was non existent so zigzaging was necessary, my rudder pedals were on both sides of the front seat, not good with a large passenger, I also had to ask the passenger to move their head to one side on landing so that I could read the instruments. Prop starting was no problem because my regular passengers were pilots so I climbed in the back whilst they prop started then jumped in.

 

I only ever flew the aircraft from the front seat on one occasion, with a rear passenger, and found it very cramped with my knees up against the dash panel.

 

I believe that when the aircraft was restored in Manilla the front seat may have been positioned more forward to give more room for the pilot in the rear.

 

Bearing in mind that the military L4 would have more leg room in the front (pilot) because the observer in the rear would be facing the rear so his legs would go under the 'parcel shelf'.

 

In spite of this, with the clear Perspex over the entire cabin area visibility was excellent when flying inverted.

 

Alan.