XCub - Overview 

Me!

Quickly became my favorite

Me too, my new favorite!

Yep! my new default fave ........until those bad boys from A2A send their fleet over

Not the only one

Sounds like a killer life man

hope is a beggar. get on it!

The smiling face reminds me of the Dodge Neon's front end.

Хах, удачи приятель

I hope you made it buddy

It is in Infinte flight!!!!!!!!!!!

KnirpsApollo 213 yes 👍

Blake Grey and soon xplane11! So, us poor broke slobs can lov3 flying too!🚁🛸🤷🏻‍♂️

Rick Jones 9

Infinite flight sucks

First thing I noticed about it in MSFS2020. Now, it's my favorite plane!

Удачи парень

Carbon Cub have had amphibious floats for years and years, this only expands the extra payload

If you put amphibian floats on a cub (1750 gross) the useful goes down 322 lbs to 444 lbs fron 766. and with 36 gallons (old cub) that makes 228 lbs, which is not even a single place plane for a fat guy (250+lbs). It would appear that cubcrafters do like Cessna does, namely, increase the wing loading with the same wing size. Going from 1750 (old super cub) to 2300 lbs is a 31% increase in wing loading. For example, an old Cessna 172 (1974) is 2300 gross (same as xcub) and an old 182 (1972) is 2950, which is a 28% increase in wing loading. What does not make sense to me is why not increase the wing area and maintain the wing loading if the original design has traits that are desirable? Wing loading dominates the feel of the airplane and anybody who has flown a 172 vs a 182 knows the difference in feel and landing speeds. The stall for a C-182 (2950lbs) is 57 mph and a 1974 C-172 (2300 lbs) is 49 mph. That is 8 mph difference. Either they are saying the new loading for the xcub is correct, or the old loading (all the other cubs) was too little. Which is it?

Nope

The carbon cub is LSA. This airplane would not meet the requirements for LSA.

The Carbon Cub is about 200K new.

Yes it can be. With a fully glass cockpit.

Only if you don't have the bucks.

I don't know....it looks pretty happy to me.