Backcountry replacements

M

Mtns2Skies

Final Approach
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
5,631
Display Name
Display name:
Mtns2Skies
Well with the huge explosion of pilots into the Backcountry/bush flying realm, the planes capable of doing that type of flying, or at least the ones we think of, have pretty much dried up. If they haven't dried up, they're priced so much higher than they used to be just a year or two ago that it probably prices some wannabe Backcountry pilots out of that flying.

The planes I'm talking about are 170/180/182/185/206s, maules, Cubs, huskies and scouts.

What are some of the more capable unassuming bush planes people can buy at a slightly more reasonable price point?

Stinsons? Cherokees? What's out there?
 
Piper Pacer, Piper PA12. Stinson 108, Piper Tripacer.
 
Stinsons
Citabrias
Zenith
Tri pacer / pacer
Old AG planes like a Callair
Old tailwheel concerted 150/150


But there are also people who have made Bos work in the quasi backcountry, ofcourse how backcountry they can get is a little different.
 
Zenith 701 or 750. It’s what they were designed for. The 701s are pretty darn cheap as well. ~25k for a decent one from what I remember.

I assume a kit fox or avid may work as well.

Edit: I forgot to add the Bearhawk as another option
 
How does a typical owner utilize the capabilities of these types of airplanes? Do the people who own these generally live near national parks or in Alaska where there are places to fish/camp? I don't feel like there is anywhere near me that I could make use of this type of plane, but I bet part of that is my ignorance related to this type of flying. Also Louisiana just seems like a horrible place for camping with 90% humidity and all the bugs you want and lakes/rivers filled with dark brown water.
 
Challenged said:
How does a typical owner utilize the capabilities of these types of airplanes? Do the people who own these generally live near national parks or in Alaska where there are places to fish/camp? I don't feel like there is anywhere near me that I could make use of this type of plane, but I bet part of that is my ignorance related to this type of flying. Also Louisiana just seems like a horrible place for camping with 90% humidity and all the bugs you want and lakes/rivers filled with dark brown water.
Click to expand...

Let’s be realistic. The typical owner probably thinks they’re more of a bush pilot than they really are. At least that has been my observation. But, it is all in what you make of it. I don’t consider myself much of a “bush pilot” in the general sense despite having a fair amount of off airport experience and having some experience flying in some very remote parts of Canada. All this flying was done with very average airplanes rather than the kind of stuff people perceive as “proper” bush planes.

As far as the original question goes, there are still plenty of airplanes left. I type this as I sit in a hangar full of proper bush planes. Once the endless stream of fabric cub based Pipers dries up there will still be an endless stream of the experimental clones.
 
C-172 / C175 / C-182.
 
You can still find good Cubs for $100K and good Skywagons for not too much more. Those prices have been stable for many years.

State of the art Cubs? Better bring $300K. There are lots out there north of that price. A friend sold his '76 185 last year. Low time, immaculately kept, IO550 and C401-86 for $167K. That was a sweet deal for somebody.
 
wasn't there some dude on here who claimed his lance had big tundra tires on them? turn ur average RV into a bush plane with a coupl'a those.
 
DFH65 said:
Bush planes are a lot like 4 wheel drive trucks about 1% of people use them to their capabilities.
Click to expand...
Rhetoric. Often repeated by guys who don't live in the realm they're commenting about.
 
WagAero Cubby (exp obviously) or a Champ, T-cart, etc. With a decent pilot these things will get in/out of some pretty short stuff.
 
Stewartb said:
Rhetoric. Often repeated by guys who don't live in the realm they're commenting about.
Click to expand...
I am sure you are right although no doubt somewhat dependent on where you live . Most of the bush style planes I see around here are babied and the guys that fly them consider a 1500 foot grass strip an accomplishment.

I do have a 4 wheel drive pick up and while not in the 1% I am probably in the 25%. My truck has seen more than it's share of fields, logging roads and such.
 
mondtster said:
Let’s be realistic. The typical owner probably thinks they’re more of a bush pilot than they really are. At least that has been my observation. But, it is all in what you make of it. I don’t consider myself much of a “bush pilot” in the general sense despite having a fair amount of off airport experience and having some experience flying in some very remote parts of Canada. All this flying was done with very average airplanes rather than the kind of stuff people perceive as “proper” bush planes.

As far as the original question goes, there are still plenty of airplanes left. I type this as I sit in a hangar full of proper bush planes. Once the endless stream of fabric cub based Pipers dries up there will still be an endless stream of the experimental clones.
Click to expand...

Depends, not too hard to find a clearing or a sand bar, just depends on what you want to do and how far you want to take it.

There are “Bush pilots” in Africa who fly to dirt strips that are super wide and long, there are “Bush pilots” in the north east who land on gravel bar islands that are maybe 400’ long, folks in AK who land on very rocky areas or on major slopes, also guys in AK who land on dirt strips that are normal airports aside from not being a hard surfaces, and everything in between
 
Similar note, the old owner of my plane spent a TON of money on its /G IFR panel, he was a VFR pilot
 
Challenged said:
How does a typical owner utilize the capabilities of these types of airplanes? Do the people who own these generally live near national parks or in Alaska where there are places to fish/camp? I don't feel like there is anywhere near me that I could make use of this type of plane, but I bet part of that is my ignorance related to this type of flying. Also Louisiana just seems like a horrible place for camping with 90% humidity and all the bugs you want and lakes/rivers filled with dark brown water.
Click to expand...

LOTS of it going on here in the Rockies and Pacific NW. There's some seasonality to it because in winter a lot of the backcountry strips up here are snowbound. I'm thinking next winter learning to fly on skis.

Like many pursuits, where you live has something to do with it. For example, you can fly floats practically anywhere on amphibs, but if you really want to do it seriously you need to be in lake country.
 
ircphoenix said:
So so so many 4 wheel drive heavily modded $80,000 grocery getters...
Click to expand...

Yes, but then some of the rest of us don't need to go 100 miles to get off the pavement either. ;)
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Well with the huge explosion of pilots into the Backcountry/bush flying realm, the planes capable of doing that type of flying, or at least the ones we think of, have pretty much dried up. If they haven't dried up, they're priced so much higher than they used to be just a year or two ago that it probably prices some wannabe Backcountry pilots out of that flying.

The planes I'm talking about are 170/180/182/185/206s, maules, Cubs, huskies and scouts.

What are some of the more capable unassuming bush planes people can buy at a slightly more reasonable price point?

Stinsons? Cherokees? What's out there?
Click to expand...

Don’t you have a skywagon?
 
James331 said:
Don’t you have a skywagon?
Click to expand...
Yeah, the question wasn't for me, it was just in general.

There is one 180 for sale online and maybe 6 185s.... waaay down from a year ago. People are snatching them up like crazy and my plane is worth double from when I bought it just under a year ago. I was thinking what would a person do if they wanted a plane in this day and age.
 
If I look at STOL competitions the popular models are Supercubs, Skywagons, and Carbon Cubs. PA-12s, Just Super STOLs, stretched Pacers (Producers), Maules, and 170s fill in the rest. There's always a 182 or Helio in there, too. Out in the field? Supercubs, modified PA-12s, and Skywagons dominate. 206s are better haulers but need better LZs. I know a few wheel Beavers but most of them stay on floats. I don't see many 172s or 182s but both are good off-airport airplanes. Private guys aren't much different than the commercial guys. Buy the plane that fills the need. And then there are guys like me. I don't "need" my 180 anymore, being an empty nester. But I like it and I don't "need" to sell it. I don't "need" my Cub, but I wanted a bad-ass Cub so I built one. Airplanes are fun.
 
I'm looking at a '57 Supercub now. Don't really NEED one but always wanted one and my 90 hp Champ is stretched a bit getting over the mountains. Used to have a 235 hp Maule and would go to backcountry flyi-ns up in Idaho and Montana where everyone would show up with their 35 inch Bushwheels and then some punk kid in a clapped out Cessna 150 would show up and deflate a lot of egos - or worse yet some old dude in a Ercoupe, those things show up everywhere.

As for prices, you can probably get a Maule cheaper than a Cub.
 
GRG55 said:
LOTS of it going on here in the Rockies and Pacific NW. There's some seasonality to it because in winter a lot of the backcountry strips up here are snowbound. I'm thinking next winter learning to fly on skis.

Like many pursuits, where you live has something to do with it. For example, you can fly floats practically anywhere on amphibs, but if you really want to do it seriously you need to be in lake country.
Click to expand...

How's the float flying coming along in Colorado? :) Last I knew it was not allowed on public waterways.
 
Stewartb said:
If I look at STOL competitions the popular models are Supercubs, Skywagons, and Carbon Cubs. PA-12s, Just Super STOLs, stretched Pacers (Producers), Maules, and 170s fill in the rest. There's always a 182 or Helio in there, too. Out in the field? Supercubs, modified PA-12s, and Skywagons dominate. 206s are better haulers but need better LZs. I know a few wheel Beavers but most of them stay on floats. I don't see many 172s or 182s but both are good off-airport airplanes. Private guys aren't much different than the commercial guys. Buy the plane that fills the need. And then there are guys like me. I don't "need" my 180 anymore, being an empty nester. But I like it and I don't "need" to sell it. I don't "need" my Cub, but I wanted a bad-ass Cub so I built one. Airplanes are fun.
Click to expand...

That’s the beauty of the skywagon, STOL but also a good cruise speed, range, IFR and payload
 
Lachlan said:
How's the float flying coming along in Colorado? :) Last I knew it was not allowed on public waterways.
Click to expand...

I'm too far north to spend much flying time in Colorado. The lee side of the Rockies, where I live, is one of those examples where pure floats are pretty useless. You have to be on amphibs, and you'll spend a lot of time flying off the pavement. The better float flying is between the west side of the Divide and the coast, or east side of the Plains into the lake country, e.g. Minnesota, etc. Or north into Ontario and Quebec. There's also some real decent float flying on the coast and in the interior of B.C. as well as northern Alberta and Saskatchewan, in Canada, but many of those "lakes" in the latter two are shallow and more slough than real lakes.

One of the big issues with pure floats where I am is no fueling services on the water anywhere. Another reason for the amphibs.
 
I spend more time talking to backcountry pilots now than before, for obvious reasons.
I wonder if one of the attractions is it's just a simpler, less-hassle form of enjoying an airplane. For example, quite a number of the folks I know with tailwheels are organizing their flying and where they keep their planes to eliminate the need to do the ADS-B upgrade. Come Jan 2020 they are just going to stay right out of controlled airspace, and they can do it.
 
I have been toying with the idea of buying a stol weight shift trike. I have found a few that will fold up and fit in my toy hauler. I think it would be great fun to haul out the toy hauler, side by side and a trike out camping for the weekend! Trying to decide if I want to go for the 2 seat or just a single seat

https://evolutiontrikes.com/revolt/
https://evolutiontrikes.com/rev/
 
Marky_24 said:
I have been toying with the idea of buying a stol weight shift trike. I have found a few that will fold up and fit in my toy hauler. I think it would be great fun to haul out the toy hauler, side by side and a trike out camping for the weekend! Trying to decide if I want to go for the 2 seat or just a single seat

https://evolutiontrikes.com/revolt/
https://evolutiontrikes.com/rev/
Click to expand...
I've never seen those Revolt's before. Looks like a lot of fun! (if you can start out close to something fun to fly around)
 
DFH65 said:
Most of the bush style planes I see around here are babied and the guys that fly them consider a 1500 foot grass strip an accomplishment.
Click to expand...
That’s totally me, but I’m getting better. And with all of the sliding sideways on the tires, I wouldn’t say my 185 is babied!

I used to have a BMW R1200GS. I’ve been a bush poseur for a long time.

To the OP, a 150/150 would make a great bush plane. As the author FE Potts wrote, a Bonanza makes a good bush plane as long as you have enough width at your LZ. A properly-shod C140 would be tough to beat.

Lately, there’s a lot of Pacer love afoot at Backcountry Pilots, so expect their values to rise in the coming months.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
...Lately, there’s a lot of Pacer love afoot at Backcountry Pilots, so expect their values to rise in the coming months.
Click to expand...

Agree.

I think they are being "rediscovered". I missed out on a converted Pacer early this year. Called on the first day it was for sale and it was already gone. A converted 150 hp with mogas STC, VGs and droop wingtip extensions should be quite an economical and fun backcountry plane, while also capable of some cross-country utility.

As for "bush pilot" or "bush plane", I have no aspirations to ever try to claim to be one or to own one, respectively. I think there's a distinction between bush pilots and those of us who just want to improve our skills and mix in a little or a lot of backcountry experience and fun in our flying.

I did a 1600 nm round trip just before the winter set in. Unlike the Aztec, where I just get up high and go straight line, in the Husky I was down low, following the valleys and dropping into practically every little airport along the way (nothing exciting, just gaining experience with the airplane).
 
Last edited:
DFH65 said:
A c47/DC3 is a great bush plane.
Click to expand...

Plenty of Caravans, Kodiaks and Twin Otters operating out of "the bush" worldwide too.
 
When I was in Alaska I noticed a lot of the "bush" planes were 206's and 207's. Not taildraggers but as they taxied past fully loaded with big tires and a pumped up nose strut the tail tie down looked like it was only about six inches off the gravel.

As for the Pacer, That's pretty much what a Maule is. In fact Bedford Maule started out at Piper.

The PA-18 I'm looking at has a lot of hours and has had at least five different engines on it. From the logs it doesn't appear to have spent much idle time over the past 61 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top