Project Stinson STOL - Learning STOL Techniques in a Stinson 108 - Stalls

[@wallacemacquarrie4800]

Remove the factory wing tips,outboard of the aluminum spar extrusions, extend both spars by 16", add fabricated ribs identical to inboard ribs, extend ailerons to match the new wing extensions, add Madras wing tips, add two extra knotches on the flap detente, stall speed drops 7mph. No change in cruise speed on a float plane 108-1

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

Show me the AI who can get that 337'd and I'm in!

[@jimsparks981]

I have a -2 with a Franklin 180hp and constant speed prop. My stall numbers are about the same, 50ish when using gps. I use 1.2 vso or 60mph on final. have to be on the ball though as it is real easy to drop it in. makes for short roll outs. Definitely have to use power to arrest sink rate at those lower approach speeds. You might want to check into the EZ flap stc. I installed one last year as I found it impossible to reach the flap handle without loosening my shoulder harness. also do not have to look down or lose site of the runway when grabbing flaps.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

My goal is 45MPH IAS on final. I think this spedd would get me below 150' landing distance. I have been using a 50MPH IAS on final and am getting ~200' with the VG's the 50MPH is rock solid all the way down. I'm doing the math and using my numbers full flaps power off Stall at 40 IAS would genetrate a 48 IAS 1.2 Vso airspeed. That's why my goal is the ~1.1Vso (45 IAS) final speed. *****I am not a flight instructor and am not recommending anyone fly final at anything other than POH airspeeds*****

[@jimsparks981]

I will be watching what you come up with, I'm doing something similar flying in/out of a tundra strip near my gold mine. I just cleared the brush/trees off of the strip in September, has not been used since 1980. I ended up with about 600 usable with very soft tundra that is questionable for another 300, so maybe 900 feet if I'm lucky. I routinely fly out of a gravel 900' at 2500 elev with my GCBC, 108-2. Flying is pretty much over till next spring, too cold/snowy to be messing around. I'm planning on putting 29 or 31 ABW next year, not sure yet, hoping to talk to others that have used them. I have a set of 29's I am putting on my GCBC next spring and will use that aircraft first before I try with the heavier Stinson.

[@jimsparks981]

what size engine and prop are you using?

[@jimsparks981]

also, since you have owned a -3, do you think the larger rudder helped or hindered in a crosswind. I have noticed in mine, I pretty much run out of rudder to correct a left turning tendency when taking off on asphalt. Not nearly as bad when on gravel. Reminds me of trying to turn my old D8 2u caterpiller dozer, having to use all of my leg strength to get it to turn!

[@lindsaylittle6535]

Great video. I owned a straight 108 for 20 years and those numbers, if I can remember correctly were pretty much what I came up with. Nice looking Stinson you have! Looks like it has found a great home. Greetings from NE MN.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

Thank you! This plane will one day find it's way up to NE MN. The area around Duluth sounds like a great place to fly an old tail wheel.

[@lindsaylittle6535]

great place with a lot of beauty is right up along the lake 100 miles north to the border. (CKC) Dinner on us.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

@@lindsaylittle6535 That looks like a beautiful place to fly on right on the Lake Superior circle route I hope to do in the next year or two.

[@lindsaylittle6535]

@@GreatMichiganBushCo I will watch for your video and meet up. My wife and I will show you around.

[@cooper5164]

great video. i really appreciate you taking time to do them. i have a 108-3 and it does not stall like your video. i have a hard time getting it to break over. it just wants to mush and lose altitude. i have double checked my cg and all is good. i can drop the nose and it is flying again. my stall horn never goes off.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

I got this to break with no flaps by getting fairly slow with power and the bringing it back to idle. It doesn't want to stall without flaps. I'm not sure without input the nose would get below the horizon, though it would still be descending. The 108's are a very docile aircraft.

[@whaledriver5457]

Did you see how much your cowling moved at 1:48? I have had my Stinson 108 for 30 years and it has never moved like that. You can see the lower cowling move quite a bit at the aft attach points. You need to tighten that up.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

This one came that way. My other one didn't have the movement.

[@ajaypalmann]

Hi, I am looking at a Stinson 108-2, with a lycoming O360 in it. Stock airframe. Do you know what difference it makes with various engine types?

[@LaRobertos]

do all stinsons have brakes a rudders pedals both sides?

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

No, only the 108-3 came stock with brakes on both sides.

[@gris3tle]

Are you using your ASI for airspeed during your stalls? If so, the angle at which the pitot tube is at a stall is going to show a far lower airspeed than actual. When I did this I used GPS ground speed and found my straight 108 would stall at around 48 to 50 mph with power and flaps.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

Of course there is airspeed error at that high an angle of attack. The error will be consistent at the weight, flaps, and power settings. I am not as concerned with how fast I am going but at what indicated airspeed the plane will fall out of the sky in it's current configuration so I can fly the approach near stall without stalling. The GPS speed on an approach will not help since the ground speed changes with headwind component. I would guess my TAS is in the 50ish MPH when it stalls.

[@sierraromeo]

I'm looking at the 108 series for my farm strip. Was the move to a smaller tail the main reason for changing aircraft? Does your 108-2 have the 165 engine? Are major new Franklin parts available now? Thanks for sharing the videos.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

I moved to the -2 for a few reasons. One was the smaller tail. The big tail adds weight and hurts the ground handling. The big tail also helps handling int he air and stability. The -3 flies more stable. Most -2's have the Franklin 165. I have not found to many problems finding Franklin parts I don't think many have been new though. The current manufacturer is in Poland and not producing much but with the internet a large community has formed around Franklin engine making parts easier to find.

[@RumblestripDotNet]

So planning your trip for 2020 High Sierra then?

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

🤫

[@leeadams5941]

so is one of your mods going to larger tires?

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

I have 8.50 aeroclassic's on it now. This increased the deck angle sitting on the ground. This allows for a higher angle of attack when it sits on the tail during the takeoff run, I am sure you are aware of how this works. It looks like the 29 or 31" tires still keep the angle of attack under a stall angle of attack at 40-50mph. Yet there is a huge increase in weight (30 pounds) if I put these tires on. The Aeroclassic's are 10 pounds each. On a side note this plane wpould look wicked cool with 29" tires.

[@leeadams5941]

@@GreatMichiganBushCo I cant find it right now but was looking at a Maule a while ago and one of the options was a 20+ Goodyear tire I think it had treads though....I remember reading it was a pretty good tire I think 6/8 ply...the thing i liked is we both know most tundra tires wear quickly on asphalt and supposedly this one did not. The negative was with treads it was suppose to sling gravel up on the tail section ...my flying was about 50/50 grass or dirt and concrete/asphalt so with plastic/rubber protectors on the horizontal stab it might be a good thing....you might be able to find it or maybe know what tire Im talking about....

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

@@leeadams5941 those are the old Goodyear blimp tires. 26". I have a 337 written to put those on my airplane. The problem is they're only about an inch taller than what I have right now.

[@leeadams5941]

@@GreatMichiganBushCo got it, sure would look killer though

[@gernblanston99]

How much lighter is your empty weight compared to your -3?

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

That's a funny story. They are nearly identical. I always felt the stated weight on the -3 was low my guess was it weighed about 30 pounds more than the paperwork but finding the scales to prove my hunch proved difficult. I don't believe the weight on this plane either. I think it's stated higher than it really is as I can't see why it would weight 30 pounds more than other 108-2's. Another advantage of the -2 over the -3 is the tail weight, that big tail is heavy and gives it not great flight characteristics when slow. So anyway my guess is this plane is around 50 or so pounds less, I'll need to dig some scales up and re-weigh it. Shedding weight is one of the projects I am going to work on. If my calculations are correct I can loose somewhere around 50-60 pounds on this by the time I am through.

[@davidspeyers]

Have installed VG's on a 108-3 but never did a numbers comparison like you did, will be interested to see what difference you have after that? Also what other mods are out there? The AOA will help with the consistent landings regardless of weight. Does the one you talked about come with a probe that gets mounted out on the wing? Of course bigger tires will help give you a higher angle of attack for takeoff and landing, are baby bushwheels in your future? Looks like you got that hair cut a 1:40 but grew it out for the rest of the video. =)

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

David you have a sharp eye! The AOA uses accelerators, gyroscopes, and pitot information for AOA, it meets FAA standards but does have some limitation when in up/down drafts. I'll compare the VG numbers at some point... soon. I had a set of 8.5" and will probably end up with those on this plane. The other I have looked at is the Good Year 26"

[@southjerseysound7340]

@@GreatMichiganBushCo I loved the 26's on my 108-3 and I've got the Goodyear 29's on my Maule M4 and I never had a a problem hanging with guys running ABW's when I was living in AK. There's some really hardcore people putting the softies to work, but for the most part I've seen them limit guys flying more than open they opened up new places to go. I do have to say that they look great on the hanger queens 😁 😁

[@airstation2030]

The John Hoyt books suggest you make a power on approach and full flaps at the weight you are at for the film can come in at 1.25 vso indicated power on which equals 41 mph ias with power on and full flap...allowing a chop n drop in stop.....or dump the flaps to make a point.....yet crossing the trees and taking into view the micrometeorolgy of a slight drop in wind about the treeline or gusts....could create a rolling motion which in turn will need arrested that in turn with a deflected aileron changes the camber of the individual wings and localized dynamic flow that in turn will not be sufficient to arrest the roll in a timely fashion...with the ensuing limited control response and difficulty accelerating to a more controllable situation. If the motor conks out you will pancake. In short....better be smooth as glass so ya don’t end up on yer.... If it is...ya got this

[@justinharrison9463]

Search Copenhaver Stinson.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

I've seen your video before! It's an inspiration. Proves to me the Stinson is a capable machine. The O-470 has to make the plane a real beast to fly!

[@bigbeartr57]

Do a video about how you have you recording equipment set up. I'm thinking about starting a Stinson vlog as well, and would love some pointers.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

I could show you what I did. The art of making these videos is something I have struggled with. So I've went to route of put cameras everywhere and something good will get captured

[@MrRepoman25]

I have the same plane, 165hp frank with a climb prop super bad ass, almost have my solo in her

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

The first time alone in the 108 is a great feeling. Keep flying her! The climb prop is in this ones future. Thanks for watching and let us know how your solo goes.

[@timsaxer6442]

Any landing distance 1 foot shorter than your best takeoff distance is wasted effort, other than non-useful bragging rights.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

I'd disagree. I've landed on a beach that was full of debris. I needed to land 220' to get in but once on the ground cleared the additional ground I needed for the takeoff roll.

[@timsaxer6442]

@@GreatMichiganBushCo Was your plane on fire? Were you physically incapacitated? If not, I suspect you didn't "need" to land on a beach in 220 feet. What purpose did it serve, other than bragging rights and a lark. A conservative pilot would rethink your reasoning. I stand by my first comment.

[@GreatMichiganBushCo]

@@timsaxer6442 We went in to provide some clean up after a flood. There was a lot of garbage in the area and access to the area was limited. I guess we didn't need to land there but it did provide a service to the community.

[@thonatim5321]

@@GreatMichiganBushCo Great point. This is a great example that a pilot can improve his take off distance after he/she is on the ground. This could apply to basically any back woods strip.