Template talk:Piper Cub aircraft
Latest comment: 18 years ago by Ericg in topic Defining A Piper Cub
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Defining A Piper Cub
editCubdriver has a page on his pipercubforum.com website titled What's a Piper Cub?. His argument is that there were enough significant changes in the Vagabond as to make it separate from the Piper Cub.
If not the Vagabond, then where should the line be drawn? Is anything pre-WWII considered a Cub, eliminating the PA-11, 12 and 14? Should Cubs from other manufacturers be considered Cubs, or as separate developments?
Just looking for more guidance and consensus on this. McNeight 22:18, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
- Fair enough on the Vagabond and successors. I suppose we should at least limit it to aircraft tandem seating rather than side-by-side that use the basic cub fuselage and/or wing. ericg ✈ 01:04, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- I wish it were that simple. The J-4 is a side-by-side Cub (named the Cub Coupe by Piper), while the J-5 is a 3 seat Cub called the Cub Cruiser. Personally, I don't mind leaving them out, as they aren't what most pilots would consider a Piper Cub. This would also eliminate the PA-12 and PA-14, as they were follow-ons to the J-5.
- The list could be knocked down to just the most relevant variants that are considered "true" Cubs: E-2, J-2, J-3, PA-11, PA-18. However, I don't want to make the call on where to draw the line without a little more input. McNeight 01:29, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'd forgotten about the coupe. I'm copying the previous discussion to WT:Air where the wikiproject can weigh in. ericg ✈ 01:32, 7 December 2005 (UTC)