C 172 Amphibian conversion -Diesel plus Group ownership Scotland -any interest?

[CLOUD999]

I am interested in gauging the viability of group ownership of a C172 amphib based in scotland ( thinking Cumbernauld or Oban).
Just doing some research and looking at aircraft on the market which might be suitable for conversion.
Does anybody know if a Diesel engined C172 would be suitable? Power to weight ratio good enough? Etc
I notice a few lower powered C172 floatplanes in US and the wiplane website suggests all C172 can be converted.
Another option might be to buy already converted aircraft from overseas.
Any thoughts or opinions on the matter would be appreciated.
Secondly any Seaplane rated pilots out there interested in group ownership as mentioned above?
At present rental is very difficult, group ownership could give a practical way of real seaplane P1 flying on a regular basis and being amphib not confined to water ops.
Very early days - but any interest let me know.

[irish seaplane]

There is not a chance, not even a remote one that a diesel 172 would work on straight floats, let alone Amphib floats. Floats are heavy and Amphib ones heavier again with big cavities that suck them onto the water - that ll be the wheelwells. If you look at the the seaplanes that perform, they have lots of power or are very clever designs. Normally both are an advantage. You should go do some more seaplane flying with Hamish and Neil as there is a good bit to learn up there, and if you think about it the wind and big lakes there mean you need to be crafty. Say 15 knots and you'll have a handful. Say 25 knots and lots of things become impossible on the water.

The best bang for the buck in the Amphib world is a Lake. They are half the price of most other float type amphibs. I'd buy a cheap N reg lake 180/200 in the US and put the hydro boosters and VGs on her and keep it light. Drop the heater, rear seats and old radios. Get the droop tips and wing and tail fairings. Then get an ultrasonic leak detector and get the hull real tight. You'd have a ball. I had a working class 200, and a cream puff 200 and loved them both. I have a Piper Cub seaplane and its great fun but the Amphib flexibility is awesome. The lake handles big wind and grass strips at her ease. If I could afford a big amphib I would buy a Maule on Wip 3000's but that's big money. Pulling up in front of a crowd at a lakeside hotel dropping the wheels and driving up on the shore is one of the most ear to ear smiley things you ll ever do. :ok:

Irish

[Pilot DAR]

I totally support everything that Irish Seaplane has said. A 172 on straight floats works, but is a low performing two place plane. We were trying to go the diesel route in a 182 amphib, but gave up before we started for many reasons. It will fly with a 550 next month instead.

I have lots of experience on Lakes, and own a Teal. Lakes are a super plane, providing you care for them well, and keep ahead on the maintenance. They do have some quirks in operation, but they are an excellent plane, if operated properly. In terms of simple handling as a plane, they are one of the better of all planes I have flown. On the water, they will outperform a comparable floatplane, and are much safer. Lake type training is a must though.

If you would like the 172 float flying experience, I highly recommend this company:

Lake Country Airways: floatplane training, endorsements, float charters and rentals (http://lakecountryairways.ca/)

It'll give you a sense of what to expect - and NOT expect on the water, and you'll get a float rating while you're at it. It's worth the trip to Canada, if you're really interested in float flying....

[M-ONGO]

Why go to Canada when he can do it in Scotland?

[CLOUD999]

Thanks for the replies.
I suspected the diesel was a non starter but was putting it out there anyway, liked the idea of using Jet A1 :).Irish - I am indeed planning some more flying with Hamish and Neil and I agree that there is lots more to learn, isnt there always with aviation! However my aim is to get some practicle use from the rating and not just little jaunts here and there. Group ownership seems to work with land planes im not sure why its not so popular with seaplanes here, provided it involves a group of sensible, capable and trustworthy pilots who know their limits.
I have the advantage of being far closer to suitable lochs than airfields. After learning the basics the best wayto learn is to get asmuch time as P1 from my experience.
The lake amphibian has certainly caught my eye but then theres the issue of paying for yet more training before flying it safely. Which brings me back to the Cessna. Thanks for the info about Cessna float training in Canada Pilot DAR, I should have mentioned I already have a float rating and am planning some Cessna amphib flying here in Scotland. However I might do some flying in Canada or US in the future if I can tie it in with a trip so the info is useful.
I am still looking for any folk interested in shared ownership here on west coast of Scotland btw, I know 2 pilots locally who might be persuaded to come on board if I could get some interest going.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

<===== that's what I'd like to see ... couldn't afford a share though

[CLOUD999]

Looks like there is no interest in shared seaplane ownership :rolleyes:

[irish seaplane]

If you bought one you could easily convince people to buy shares. Once it's real and they can see the merchandise, it's easy. Getting a group together to buy a plane is much much harder. You ll have to put your cock on the block I'm
afraid.

Been there.....

[CLOUD999]

Point well made Irish. :ugh:
As you have been there... What are the monthly running costs? I know that will vary with type, location and hours flown but any example costings?
Eg Lake 200 EP ? Any idea?

[S-Works]

I would love to be involved in a seaplane in the UK. However the practicality is that it would struggle to be utilised and the capital and fixed costs would be very high even in a max group of twenty. The cost of travelling up to use it and then no guarantee of actually being able to fly due to weather would be very restrictive. I also bet there are very few of us current on seaplanes in the UK,most people do it for the novelty and never bother again.

I do around a dozen hours a year at Jack Browns in Florida and some in Canada and it still works out cheaper by a very long margin than trying to be in a group in the UK.

I do wish you good luck with it as it would be great to see a group running one. A maul or something like that would be nice or go for something really simple like a cub.

[irish seaplane]

N Reg Lake 200 VFR with no FAR 411 & 413's which are another £200 plus a flight to a repair station like IAE. Ok here goes

Trust Fee £450
Paul Furnee Annual £2500
2 x 50hr checks done locally £600
Lake Amphib Flyers Club Membership £70
Hangarage £2000
3rd Party Insurance £1000

So you'll if looking at £6620 plus fuel at 45 litres per hour to run it. They do run fine on Mogas, but each to their own. Obviously the big area to save on is hangarage, if you can base on a loch somewhere. You need to be on the sheltered side of the loch, and ideally a smaller one will be more useful as it will be calmer. You might be able to save on the trust too if were, or had a US citizen group member. Thats all pretty solid advice.

Irish

[CLOUD999]

Thanks for the info Irish, that actually sounds afordable within a group, not so affordable as an individual!
The insurance sounds cheaper than I was expecting.
Thanks again- food for thought.

[UV]

The insurance sounds cheaper than I was expecting.

It'a third party only quote. Effectively uninsured.

[irish seaplane]

Eh try getting hull cover for an Amphib and let us know how you get on.....:hmm:

Water flying isn't dangerous, it's just incredibly easy to make an expensive embarrassing mistake. Even the insurance companies know this. I think it's in around 4k if you have the necessary water flying experience to even get a quote.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

it's just incredibly easy to make an expensive embarrassing mistake
You've got to get your attitude a whole fraction of a degree wrong to dig in the fronts of the floats ...

[Pilot DAR]

I think it's in around 4kMy Teal amphibian is insured for everything, for $2050 per year. Insured hull value $45,000. I have no idea how that relates to UK prices, but just for reference. Bear in mind, for any floating airplane, it is vital that you have coverage to recover the plane out of lake. If you don't have the insurance for that, some very authoritative entity is going to tell you that your uninsured wreck is littering, and if you don't take it out, they will, and you'll get the bill anyway.

The insurance IS expensive on amphibians because of the very real risk of a wheels down on water landing, which is not possible on floatplanes. .

Annual £2500Possible, but optimistic....

You've got to get your attitude a whole fraction of a degree wrong to dig in the fronts of the floatsOn many floatplanes, yes. However, this is one of the characteristics which makes a Lake (and the Teal, which is about the same) a delight to fly - they ARE a boat, when on the water. If, shortly after touchdown, I want to prolong my water run (like step taxi, but with no power applied) I can move the stick full forward, and the hull just happily planes along, When I want to stop, I pull all the way stick back, and it settles in nicely. The Lake, does not like full stall landings though, you fly it onto the water, as though the rails of the approach transition nicely onto the water, and you're just following them.

This is me.... (same video twice - I don't know why....)

180 hp Thurston Teal amphib Doing Touch and Go 2!! - YouTube

[CLOUD999]

Again thanks for some interesting replies.i tend to agree that the fixed costs are going to outweigh the utilisation for many, as Bose has suggested.
I couldn't sleep at night with so much money invested with only 3rd party insurance so that has to be factored in for me.
The Teals and Lakes do really capture my interest, great video Pilot DAH btw. I am intrigued by your comments about handling. In everything I have read so far Lakes seem to have a fairly high accident rate and from the advice I have seen 20+ hours of Lake instruction required even for float rated pilots to become safe.The comments here seem to suggest that Lakes/ Teals are if anything more forgiving than floatplanes. I am sure everyone will have their own views on that.:hmm:

[irish seaplane]

Insurance in an amphib is a real chicken and egg situation. No hours means scant chance of getting cover without huge excess and big premiums. You have the hours then and get familiar with the machine, know its limits, keep it in a hangar and begin to wonder about how valuable hull cover will be. Recovery of a seaplane can be dealt with as per the excellent Dale DeRaemer "Seaplane Operations" and its not an impossible task. I know a team who've done a 206 before. Its easy to sleep at night if your airplane is in a hangar, and if something in an operational context makes you uneasy then don't do it. Easy thing to break as I said, and it'll always happen with a crowd looking .....IMHO

As for the paul furnee annual, well he charged us €250 a day plus we covered his expenses, so he's not hard to look after. A week should do an annual on a well bought airplane.

Happy seaplane hunting!

[Pilot DAR]

In everything I have read so far Lakes seem to have a fairly high accident rate and from the advice I have seen 20+ hours of Lake instruction required even for float rated pilots to become safe

Yes, 20+ hours of flying boat training is vital to fly a Lake safely. It's not that they are any more difficult or dangerous, but they are different than a floatplane. Different safer, once you figure it out - with training. With 250 hours of floatplane time, I was checked out in the Lake and the Teal in about 2 hours of intensive water work. Both my check pilots are extremely competent trainers on those types.

The most significant differences flying boat to floatplane, is that you cannot allow the flying boat to intensify a porpoise. Other than a full stall landing (which is to be avoided), a porpoise is an element of every takeoff and landing, but to a very slight degree. It is very easy to get caught up in a PIO, and it gets worse fast. You'll get airborne with too little flying speed, and your return to the water will be brutal. It is a mind over matter skill, in realizing that you must control pitch, and that you can.

Landings are flown on at speed, there's not much of a flare. I can fly an approach at 70 MPH with power, and touch down at 70 MPH with less power. Slower is better, but not to the point of a stall, or even the warning. Where a floatplane can be hung on the stall horn onto the water. Obviously, with rough water, slowing down is better, but if you're slowing down to the point of a stall because of conditions, to land a Lake, you're probably trying to land in conditions you should not. I would happily land a Lake of the TEal into water more rough than I would ever want to land a floatplane on, though obviously, it is wise to aim for the more calm water when possible.

I do not have type specific statistics for accidents in these aircraft. Any floating aircraft has a higher risk of accident than a landplane, because in addition to all the factors that affect flight, the landing surface is much more dynamic for a floatplane. That can be a very large factor in risk. On top of that add wheels of an amphibian which can be selected to the wrong position, and it gets worse. My 9 year old daughter used to laugh, now she repeats with me for every landing - twice - "wheels are up for landing on water" or "wheels are down for landing on land". You can buy expensive systems that say it for you, but I would rather save the money, and just say it myself. I look at the wheels while I say it.

As Irish says, it's a tough nut to crack, getting insured to get the experience it takes to be insured. That's why the 20+ hours of training, because it's the only way for you to actually fly, while an insured pilot (not you) is assuring safety of the flight. I was lucky to have Lake flying covered under the fleet policy I test fly on.

http://i381.photobucket.com/albums/oo252/PilotDAR/Jims%20DAR%20Testing/LA4boom.jpg

Magnetic survey boom installation

I did get the evil eye from the boss once, when he saw me return from a Lake ferry wearing a life jacket, and asked if I'd been in the water. I honoured up that I had. He took me for another intense hour to test my mettle, and after about 40 touch and goes of every condition and configuration, declared me competent, and that was that. But, without that highly qualified mentoring, getting insured would be really difficult.

Happily, multiple practice touch and goes on the water are easy, if the lake is the right size, and oriented into the wind nicely - you can do two per minute!

[Aim Far]

You can get insurance for a Lake in the UK for not much more than an equivalent retractable. The excess is the same as a retractable for land work but considerably higher for water work. The only question they asked me was around the number of water landings I'd done which was a bit silly as, even as a low time seaplane pilot, I've done plenty of landings since any training trip is going to involve numerous touch and go's.

What you do need to get is training from a Lake specialist. A Jack Brown's floatplane rating simply will not cut it. Furnee's crew are as good as any for that training.

Also water-currency is everything; I'd be concerned about being in a group where other owners have to travel to fly and therefore have longish gaps between their Lake outings. You'd need an instructor involved and there aren't that many in the UK.

The benefit of the Lake over a float plane is that you can use it as a land plane. It is not that much slower than my previous aircraft. My personal accounting system therefore only counts the marginal cost above "normal" aircraft ownership and that makes the Lake much more justifiable!

[CLOUD999]

Thanks guys I really need to fly a Lake sometime to see for myself :D
Sounds like glassy water landings (almost) every time, being predominantly a jet pilot fully stalled landings are not something I do naturally anyway :)
Anyway its good to get so many views from people with real experience owning and flying floats / boats.
The old adage " if it floats, flies or f##ks its cheaper to rent" seems to hold true :rolleyes:
If it flies and floats .........!!!! :=

[PH-UKU]

Just to update .... Shares ARE available for amphib flying in the west of Scotland.

See this link (http://www.scotlandonfloats.com), and this little video - Fiddler's DRAM - Flying a seaplane around Scotland. - YouTube to put you in the mood.

PM for more details

[Big Pistons Forever]

There is a good reason the aircraft is named "Lake" and not "Ocean" or even "Estuary". Operating this airplane in salt water is going to very substantially increase your maintenance costs.......

[Sam Rutherford]

Why not start with an LSA floatplane?

I had a flight in one in the Congo about 2 months back - amazing machine.

Super Petrel LS (http://www.superpetrelaustralia.net/)

Only 2 places, but full glass cockpit, autopilot - incredible...

And it runs on petrol (perfect for a Scot!). ;)

Cheers, Sam.