Thanks for the kind words. I'll have Paul tell Paul that you appreciated the graphic point outs.

@@AVweb Oh it is Paul who did the editing also! :-) For a moment my brain got fried reading the reply but then I realized and the bulb came on haha! Thank you Paul for your fantastic videos please keep them coming thick and fast. My favorite aviation presenter on YT!

Yes, have Paul tell Paul that he is an excellent presenter as well as editor 🙂

I like your sarcasm too. I've been known for a bit of that too.

Yup. “I’d hire a guy to do it for me so I don’t break a nail”. Love it. Basically that sums it up…it’s for super rich dudes that can’t bother mastering the skills necessary for a tail dragged.

I loved that outro

Agreed! He's funny but you have to pay attention. Maybe that's the point.

@@davidoickle1778 trust me, I hang on his every word!

You mean opinionated sarcastic jerk.... ha ha. Yep he is something.

@YaBoiRyan Well of course, and if you read that forbes article I posted, its a great overview of the situation in GA. The bad news is new sales prices. The good news is my (well maintained) aircraft has tripled in value. There are a lot of good airplanes out there to be had. It means you are better off getting an older aircraft and improving it. Judging by my large city airfield, there are a lot of aircraft riding down to eventual death by lack of proper maintenance. Their not hard to spot: the aircraft sit on flat tires, which screams "nobody flies me". Sure it is expensive to fix up aircraft. I probably invested $50k in my 1977 172 bought for $55k, but the aircraft values out at $150k on AOPA site and has every capability that the $432k brand new 172 has (save fuel injection). I am happy, but it does indicate GA is a slowly shrinking pool, which is sad. But then, aviation has changed. I used to walk to school through the airport and look at the planes. Try that now: its fenced off with spikes and security guards.

@@scottfranco1962 you have no issue flying the older stuff from a safety perspective?

@@robdc4829 Its a good question, but the maintenence standards for aircraft seem to be sufficient for the job. My engine got overhauled at 2,000 hours, and I have personally been over every inch of the aircraft.There are aircraft still flying much older than mine, including WWII with bullet holes. Much farther back than that, probably termites are the major failure mode. That airplane will last longer than I will.

@@scottfranco1962 Thanks Scott. I have a '50's Cessna 150. I do worry about it....but my mechanic says the same thing you do - the airplane will outlast me. My AME likes the fact it's old but certified - he says he knows everything that can go wrong because it that would have happened 25 years ago. He went over it for corrosion a while ago and said it's fine...and that he thought it was unsafe, he'd tell me. He's had customers try and push him to sign stuff he's not comfortable with - he chooses to not have these folks as customers.

@@robdc4829 Amen... hold on to that guy.

As my father used to say, boy that could be out of your league, but if you set your goals to achieve it someday you could reach it. He forgot to mention what my wife would say. 😂 $454,740 for a toy for you, I don’t think so hubby! 😂 but I agree with you Paul I’d go for the nose wheel option too! Gotta love a Cub rag wing!

Yep, its a bit sad to see. The LSA and experimental markets were to help lower the bar of entry. It's simply out of hand...

I got to start testing hardware store materials and hope to someday struggle upon a good combination for an inexpensive build. wasn't low cost the whole idea behind the cub in the first place?

Yep. Couple years till retirement, then the proverbial duct tapes, million year old C150. Probably still have to find a hangar with a shitty apartment upstairs since they aren't cheap either. (taped) And no, flew quite a bit of duct tape years ago at the bargain rent-a-cessna.

Ch701

Going to be using that one the next time I'm doing a lecture

Apparently I'm not gravitationally consequential, yet 🙂

Or you can simply lift the tail at a dead stop…..

@@akomara1 and risk banging the prop on the dirt....

@@fantabuloussnuffaluffagus Maybe there is a fix for this, Beechcraft Starship used a huge and thin inverted "fin" to avoid this. Maybe a better shock absorber on the rear wheel for other typical problems.

@@akomara1 "Simply" That's actually not a very smart thing to do. At all. Don't do that. Unless you don't value your engine and prop. Tail-up taxi is all fun and games until you have to stop for the airport tug that started driving out in front of you without a call to ground.

@@philconey11 not many tugs screaming by on the gravel bars, or any off airport landing have done. Over 2k hours of tailweel time and I’ve never had a propstrike, or ground loop. Simply, yes…. For everyone, no. Especially those flying l4’s to Oshkosh in flight suits. Gravel and many other surfaces are hard on landing gear. The tailwheel is often a weaker link and lifting the tail to turn around safely eliminates stress to the tire, spring, and mount, during a turn on rough terrain where the tire does not have as much flotation as a larger tire. (Mainly on rocks) there is no need to do this on grass pavement, or gravel/dirt runways. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/kMuDaZd6ptmwpH0.html

I agree with you on all of this. The only thing to watch out for, on rough ground, is the taxiing. It has a tendency to flip over if you use it at taildraggers speeds.

@@QBziZ - Rolling them sideways and smacking a wingtip into the ground is always a risk on high-wing airplanes like the Cub, the Zlin Shock Ultra, or the Cessna 152/172 - the landing gear "stance" isn't nearly as wide as it can be on a low-wing plane like the Beechcrafts, Citation, or TBM. You have to pay more attention to not let taxi speed get too high or make turns that are too sharp. Something I didn't realize about the NXCub until I saw this video, is that the nose gear is just a caster that swivels wherever it wants to, and isn't connected to the rudder pedals for ground steering! No wonder the steering while taxiing felt so sloppy!

I have the nosewheel Maule MT7 and love it. Like a 4 seat cubcrafters, and my insurance is half what the tailwheel guys pay.

My favorite plane in the sim, so far. 🖖😀

And I only fly helicopters, so none of this is relevant, but ditto!

It helps that the conventional gear is not unduley far forward. Many aircraft have it located far forward for reduced chance of nose-over and prop strikes from hard braking. But having the main gear far forward of the CoG causes much more severe ground looping tendencies, and take more discipline to keep straight on rollout. The Pitts Special with it's original bungee gear is a good example of gear that's a little too far forward, they are not know for prop strikes, in spite of being stubby little planes, but many countless hundreds of ground loops even by experienced pilots. The Citabria is a good example for well placed main gear. They almost track on their own if you touch down going straight there is little need for rudder on rollout. But, I've known several cases of prop strikes that are borderline freak accidents. One was two large guys, and a very far aft CG, back taxied on a paved runway with a moderate breeze, the pilot held back-stick instead of "diving away from" the wind. The breeze might have been 10-12 knots. Propwash usually cancels the light tailwind, and with the elevator near the ground the earths boundary layer usually reduces the wind speed at the surface to near zero. But, this plane went over on it's nose in a slowmo nose over that took like a full two seconds. He was pulling hard back, but as the tail came up the tailwind really got under it and sent it over. Only full throttle could have saved him, but it's not natural to do that when your nose is pointing at the ground and the prop about to strike... Citabria gear is in the ideal placement, but you gotta manage the fore-aft stick placement as much as the side-side, when taxiing in wind. Most conventional gear is located at a 15° angle forward and down from the CG location. Any more than that becomes squirrelly and ground loop prone, and much less that that noses over. Because it's nearly under the CG for conventional gear, you only have to move it aft a foot, foot and a half or so to be behind the CG at all loading scenarios. Because the CG range is usually only 20-30% of the wings mean chord, and light airplanes have a mean chord of aproximatly 4'-5' giving a CG range of anywhere from 9.6" - 18".

@@jj4791 very interesting, thank you!

It looks so happy with that upturned air scoop under the prop shaft and the two big googly eyes for the side intakes.

Baby boomers who want to keep their insurance costs down. Taildraggers are getting very expensive to insure, especially for low time pilots.

Same thoughts. Crazy price.

TRUE for sure BUT it was the accident chasing attorneys long ago that drove the costs into space.... my '78 172 cost $39,500. OTD,.. a handful at the time but thats the name of the game now..... It's CYA with lots of cash to cover the law suits.

@@robertlafnear4865 I think experimental bush planes are a fraction of the price, but you have to assemble them, it triggers the big government, ...

I am feeling really good now my Tri-Pacer 160 hp weighs 1057 lbs and can carry 1000 Lb with big volume and under $40,000. I do not want to land on big rocks, grass and dirt is what it was designed for.

Add a demi-brigade of engineers and lawyers to get it certified.

Say...you could be on to something. (:

as long as the FAA is not involved ... yes.

It's been done...

Mount the mains in the middle and use both nose and tail wheels. You could then titter totter your way down the runway. Heck you could pretend you're riding a galloping dragon as it's about to take off.

Yes you can! It’s called an R22!

Between the XCUB, Zenith and Freedom Fox, the NXCUB feels like a plane you would feel comfortable to fly in real life.

@@QBziZ Definitely!

9 months late, but yeah that's definitely from Publix.

Ya, same!

There’s a light on the panel when the nose gear pin is out.

@@blainelv1 Yay! I Know that I would have forgotten to reinsert that Pin unless I were reminded.

@@blainelv1 not good enough, never take it out.

@@blainelv1 correction. There's a light on the panel that lets you know you just had a prop strike.

I just made a comment about that and immediately replied to myself: that’s where the force goes when the plane’s flying anyways. Now my question is if that’s specific engineering. If I swap a car engine into a plane, will it rip itself apart since the crankshaft isn’t designed to be pulled like that? Is that where the forces end up in a car (ultimately pushed through motor mounts)?

@@andrewahern3730 Just have to hope the electronic mag does not kick the engine over.

Buena? I know the CubCrafters guys like to use Buena for a bit of back-country feel in demos. I think much of this may have been filmed there... I was watching this video trying to figure out where most of the pictures and videos were taken. I live in Richland.

@@driftertank Yes the Buena AP.....where they were flying does not look like the Yakima...I thought they said Florida in the Vid....not sure

@@yuvegotmale Yeah you're right. I saw the carport-hanger thing and thought it might be Buena...but rewatching, the trees aren't right, there's no fence like that, car traffic's wrong...

@@driftertank Do you have a cub crafter plane? Iam not a pilot but have had a interest in aviation most of my life. In the 60s my dad had a Taylorcraft bc12d and I flew with him a lot as a kid....he kept it at the Prosser AP. As a teenager I pretty much knew I was not pilot material. He also had a J3 cub and Taylor L2 ww2 observation plane...it never got finished. Dad passed in 74...the tcraft is in Alaska, cub in Seattle , and L2 in renton...still not done.

@@yuvegotmale No, I don't yet own a plane. I rent out of RLD. Wish I had the kind of money for a CC cub.