Let's make a Carbon Cub for AFS2 - 2019

  • Kinda like the new mobile version of AFS2 is now call the 2019 version, maybe we can start a new thread for the "pickup and run with the Carbon Cub for AFS2 -2019". Jay and Jan's preliminary work stopped last March. Jay has graciously agreed to transfer his model in progress" work including his extensive (tons) documentation to anyone willing to agree to build a "high quality Carbon Cub" for AFS2. The single condition is that the developer must agree to pay real attention to detail in the cockpit area. AFAIK Jan also remains keenly interested in seeing this one completed, but his contribution will be in the TMD development and other back office support - not 3d modeling.


    Our intent was to use one of the existing panel designs from Cubcrafters and we spent a lot of give and take to settle on a panel design that Jan thought feasible. This one has a Garmin 696 GPS that can be programed for both the IPACS Extra and the new Carbon Cub. I still want at autopilot, but, let's see if we can just get the design moving forward for now.


    My contribution will be in the research and permission side and as chief cheerleader. Here are the last few progress images posted in the "Let's Make an Aircraft" thread dated March 18-19, 2018. We have only lost slightly less than a year, so any takers?


    Best Regards,
    Ray





  • A little bird told me that our newest 3rd party payware developer that is actively working on a Supermarine Spitfire Mk IX for AFS2 is also interested in seeing a working GPS for Aerofly FS2. So, maybe the "to be built" GPS can become a de facto standard for the first AFS2 GPS. Just a thought.


    Regards,

    Ray

    I'm a little fuzzy on the exact model CarbonCub we settled on but I was recommending the FX3 mainly for the higher performance, higher cruise speed, and longer range. All the models look very similar. Two are carbureted, two are fuel injected, two have fixed pitch props, two have constant speed props. All 4 of them are true STOL designs that can take off on a dime and land in less than 200 feet.


    Seeing as how this is all on paper, or maybe all in CAD, we are not saving any money by going cheap. My view is to go for the dual function of backcountry and cross-country and that would come down to a choice of the FX-3 or Xcub. Either one of these would be an outstanding addition for AFS2.



  • I thought we decided for the simple Carbon Cub SS back then but I guess if we now also have a Piper Cub Special the Carbon Cub SS would be too similar maybe. I still like the idea of having the SS since it is the lightest of them all with the slowest stall speed and shortest landing and takeoff rolls, but the FX3 or XCub are much faster in cruise. Hey research guy, what are the external differences between these aircraft, since Jay already spend a lot of time on the externals.

  • For those that are not familiar with the Carbon Cub family. You can spent hours, maybe days, clicking around this site. There are also some excellent videos online in 4k with great sound of all models.


    http://cubcrafters.com/


    I guess it goes without saying any of the 4 models have optional floats and skis and all come more or less standard with big backcountry tires.





    I thought we decided for the simple Carbon Cub SS back then but I guess if we now also have a Piper Cub Special the Carbon Cub SS would be too similar maybe. I still like the idea of having the SS since it is the lightest of them all with the slowest stall speed and shortest landing and takeoff rolls, but the FX3 or XCub are much faster in cruise. Hey research guy, what are the external differences between these aircraft, since Jay already spend a lot of time on the externals.

    I think the most obvious external differences are going to be in the lower cowling air scoops. I think the 3d model was the SS which is an excellent choice for sure. These are still considered experimental home builts (LSA) so any reasonable choice of engine/propeller can be installed to hone in on the best STOL performance.


    The landing gear might be another of the visual differences in the SS and the Xcub. The SS gear looks very similar to a Plain Jane J-3 cub and the Xcub looks a lot like a Cessna 170 except for the big tires. Nice and clean. I would think the simpler one would be a good choice.


    Wings are the same. Ailerons and Slotted flaps are different but might not be that noticeable.


    Here is the SS below. Xcub photo in previous post.



    I thought we decided for the simple Carbon Cub SS back then but I guess if we now also have a Piper Cub Special the Carbon Cub SS would be too similar maybe. I still like the idea of having the SS since it is the lightest of them all with the slowest stall speed and shortest landing and takeoff rolls, but the FX3 or XCub are much faster in cruise. Hey research guy, what are the external differences between these aircraft, since Jay already spend a lot of time on the externals.

    Should the incoming new developer wish to revisit the model choice, keeping in mind that all models are STOL designs and after all it is a flight simulation model that can be tweaked for specific performance it will probably be his choice of model. When looking at the basic SS vs the FX-3 there are pros and cons for each, of course, but like you say, if we have a flying model of the PA-11 Cub Special, that might be sufficient for the low end model - SS.


    This would then leave the developer to choose between the FX-3 and Xcub. There are no bad choices here, just fast and faster, with either still having outstanding STOL capabilities, long range, decent cruise speeds and endurance, etc. All models have two tandem seats and choice of panels.


    I think there are some technical differences in the airfoils for the SS, FX, and Xcub. I'm not sure if the flight sim could or would know the difference, but, it might. I can research this and make a comparison chart so someone to use.


    Regards,

    Ray

  • Reseach guy sounds good 8o


    It's all about reference material, when you want to have a good and detailed visual model. To be honest, a 3-view with a few cross-sections and pictures found in the internet are usually not enough.

    As a developer you come pretty fast to areas where you have to guess, what takes time and is frustrating. Even with 1000 pictures of the Bücker I had still those spots.

    I was in fact going with the camera once more around the plane and took pictures of those areas, partly with a ruler for reference. Because, how it looks is one thing, the dimensions is the other..


    I suppose, it's under the line a bit easier with the Carbon Cub, as the Cockpit is covered with all those panels. But what I was finding on a quick search is not enough. At least for my idea of a visual model.


    Just my two cents..


    Kai

  • Fantastic project ! For me the fx3 or X Carbon Cub would be my dreamhorse, with retractable ski/wheels option to enjoy to land on Swiss Glacier ( our friend Drassaud is currently working on the 40 official moutain and glacier landing strips (all between 6000 and 12000 ft), so it is necessary to have some power in the engine ;-).


    Unfortunatelly, I’m unable to help for the 3d design or the .tmd settings.... but if it would be appreciated from talented comrades here spending time to make for us a high quality Carbon Cub, I’m ready to give some gift (paypal or let me know), or bucks.... because work deserves salary... but I don’t want to offend anyone here, hope that all can understand me (and my poor english).


    And I want to salute and pay hommage here to the very very positive spirit and new dynamic that is coming since some months in our community, particulary with all the gentlemen here that have make us fantastic sceneries, repaints, utilities and new freeware planes, like the dornier, the f-104g, the dhc-1 or the jpcoming Bestmann... to all: a big up, a big thank you !!


    Let me know if i can help !


    Friendly from Switzerland, Herve:)

  • Would this Google search help? All the images have resolution of 4 MP or better:


    Hi-res Carbon Cub Images

    No, I mean detail pictures. Here is one example:



    I think, you can imagine that the pic makes it pretty easy to model the trim tap. But now, for example, check all the pictures for details of the tailwheel of the Carbon Cub. So, there would already be the first problem.


    Guys, don't understand me wrong. Just saying that we should try to get a photo set from somewhere.


    Kai

  • Guys, when posting photos that you captured from the internet please make absolute certain that they are not copyrighted and that you can freely copy and distribute them in other places on the web.

    IPACS Development Team Member

    I'm just a cook, I don't own the restaurant.
    On behalf of Torsten, Marc, and the rest of the IPACS team, we would all like to thank you for your continued support.


    Regards,


    Jeff

  • I think, you can imagine that the pic makes it pretty easy to model the trim tap. But now, for example, check all the pictures for details of the tailwheel of the Carbon Cub. So, there would already be the first problem.


    Guys, don't understand me wrong. Just saying that we should try to get a photo set from somewhere.

    I wonder if the parts and technical manuals used by A&P mechanics would be helpful?

  • kai503 don't worry about the thing!


    We've managed to obtain loads of documentation (even some official drawings);) where every single detail is clear.

    That sounds perfect. :)


    How far have you been modeling it? The external parts look pretty complete. Have you done any mapping yet?


    Kai

    I wonder if the parts and technical manuals used by A&P mechanics would be helpful?

    Absolutly! But it looks like Jay has everything together already. I think, he posted in the same moment as you.


    Kai

  • All the wings for all the Carbon Cubs are USA 35B (sometimes it says modified) which is the same as the J-3 cub and many Piper models including the twin-engine Aztec. The difference in the low end SS standard flight controls and the higher end FX and Xcub have G-series ailerons and slotted flaps. I will see if I can find a comparison between the standard and G-series.


    Ray

  • Sounds like there might be some real possibilities brewing here. I feel good about this. 8o


    Ray

    I went back through all the posts last year and compared all our drafts and discussions for panel arrangements. Mostly because Jan is the resident expert for autopilots, tmd files, animations, displays, electrics and fuel systems and leans towards using round gauges, I recommend the team seriously considers Jan's #6 panel layout. See below.


    This choice will enable some global gains for all IPACS aircraft with the development of the 696 GPS and possibly use the autopilot development for both the Carbon Cub and the Cessna 172.


    Assuming the team is successful with this initial Carbon Cub, we could possible use this as a stepping stone and develop a follow-on higher end model with a full buffet of options like floats and skis various sized tires, choice of panels, etc.


    Regards,

    Ray



  • For those that may not be familiar with the Carbon Cub SS here are some photos of one for sale. The panel is a little overcooked with dual Garmin 696s but otherwise it is the SS with the optional paint.


    http://warrenaircraft.com/index.php?id=n89db#!prettyPhoto[gallery]/0/