New member - Patrol vs PA-18

[Flyincajun]

Hello everyone. I'm looking at beginning a scratch project and trying to decide on a direction. Desired plane will be experimental category, two seats, flaps and tundra tires for operations on and around local ag strips. I'm a 25 year A&P with no previous scratch projects, but have worked the various tube and fabric birds, including a J-3 (C-85) I owned for 10 years.
Any reason to NOT consider a Patrol? Thanks in advance.

[N3UW]

of course the only answer you will get here is go with the Patrol. I also was looking at the patrol vs pa-18. To me the patrol solved all the shortcomings I saw I the PA-18.

[jaredyates]

I would say a reason not to go with the Patrol, had you not already decided to go with an experimental, would be if you needed to stay out of the Experimental A/B category. This would matter if you were going to use the airplane for commercial operations, flight instruction, or other purpose other than education and recreation, etc.

[kestrel]

Cubs have options for slats and slotted flaps. If you're not going extreme then the patrol should be a better plane.

--
Bearhawk

[alaskabearhawk]

The higher airspeed at cruise would be enough for me to choose the Patrol. I never could understand why some Alaska cub drivers are so proud of their aircraft. They are cool, but who wants to take a road trip in car that is stuck in first gear?

[Flyincajun]

Thanks for the responses. I'm not all that concerned about cruise speed. If I want to go somewhere, I have access to a Cessna 182 and others. This bird will be just for personal use in getting in and out of unimproved areas where the ground is soft and low speed is key. We don't have rocks down here ! LOL!
I like the load carrying capability, but it won't be a deal breaker. Nice fuselage on the Patrol. Definitely like the wing on the SQ2.

[AKpatrol]

• Welcome to the forum. Cubs do have more options for off the shelf parts, though Bearhawk Aircraft has more than met all my needs. You would also be included in the Cub fraternity. I've been told (but not confirmed through personal experience) that the Cub's jack screw is a superior trim system for slow flight. I've found that Patrol, however, to be just as capable as all but the most heavily modified Cubs on the low speed end of the spectrum. Speed, control responsiveness, roominess, and climb performance all go to the Patrol. I also believe that the Patrol has a huge advantage in that that it was designed and engineered to be scratch built by folks like yourself.

[Zzz]

Climbing in and out of Cubs is a bit of a pain (my wife hates it), and they can be a little cramped for larger pilots. I've always enjoyed the roomy and easy-to-enter cockpit of the 8GCBC Scout (and Decathlon) for that reason. If I recall from sitting in Mark's demo plane, I imagine you'd enjoy the same cockpit roominess in a Patrol.

Plus, Cubs are a dime a dozen. Be unique and fly a Patrol.

[John Bickham]

Flyincajun!!!

Wher you bees?? You can't be fer from me???
Are you thinking of going 100% scratchbuilt?? I'm a hybrid builder. Wing kit from Avipro, scratch building the fuselage now with a few more parts thrown in from AviPro. Can't beat the service and the help I get from Mark G at AviPro.

[Flyincajun]

John, I'm in Kinder (40 miles NE of Lake Charles). I'm thinking hybrid also, but taking it all on is not out of the question. I'm a poor boy and can't slap down the cash for a Carbon Cub ! Might have to fly over and check out your project some day.
AKPatrol, I agree on the trim. Of course, I'm "Old School" and am not convinced on the electric actuators I've seen. Real world experience with Honeywell actuators on helicopters has been anything but impressive.
I like the all-metal wing. Thanks again for the responses.

[bcross2160]

Hi There

Just a minor comment on John's email. All trim systems on Bearhawks are cable actuated. On the Patrol, it is just a simple lever moving 2 anti-servo tabs, (1 on each elevator). Very sweet & simple. When flying solo, I leave it in one spot & never think of it again. Truth is, I only adjusted once in months - I accidentally bumped the lever while doing some clean up work in the cockpit. The Carbon Cub costs are in the clouds - way too much money. They are great to look at but the Patrol is really nice to fly. I agree that the SQ2 type of airplanes are the extreme types & can do things a Cub or Patrol cannot but that type of performance is not required for most folks. Also, their cruise speed is way down due to all the fancy things they do to the wings.

Brian

[jaredyates]

If you aren't concerned about cruise speed, you can fly at the same speed as a cub and burn much less fuel in the Patrol.

[Battson]

The problem with the SQ series is you can never realise all their performance in real-world situations.
The slats give them such a high AoA at stall, to get max performance, the pilot
(a) has to land on the tail wheel
(b) can't see where he's landing
(c) thrashes the airframe and scare passengers in the process

I haven't flown a patrol, but it's fair to say the Bearhawk would realise *slightly* more performance with fowler flaps, instead of straight hinged.

[Chewie]

I'm a poor boy and can't slap down the cash for a Carbon Cub !

The specs on their LSA cracks me up... 424 lbs available useful load and you have 2 seats. Oh, and you'll have to sell your house. Oh and you better throttle back after 5 minutes (wink wink).

[Mark Goldberg]

My Bearhawk LSA has a useful load remaining of 322 lbs - AFTER you fill it up with 30 gallons of fuel. Mark