Flying Seaplanes
I love seaplanes but they seem quite touchy on take off and landing.
Can anyone explain these two videos, why this happen? I have an interesting seaplane landing from Sweden which I will post a little later. |
In the first video it looks law a yaw problem of some sort. Could it have been the rudders on the floats deployed too soon?
|
Seaplane Operations
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3736/9...5bdc6b1d_b.jpg
Subic Seaplane, Inc. operate a non-scheduled charter seaplane service from the Subic Bay Freeport Zone in the Philippines |
Are there many/any seaplane operators around the UK?
|
I remember these guys starting up a few years ago.
http://www.lochlomondseaplanes.com/ Looks like they're still at it. |
..and an iconic operator from my home area:
Kenmore Air ? Scheduled Air Service ? Charter Service ? Scenic Flight Tours - Seaplanes - Kenmore Air |
Can anyone with seaplane experience provide a description of some of the procedures used for take off and landing on water and also the difference between landing a plane with a hull and one which has floats.
Thanks. |
Second video:
Goose Crash Story Contributed by a viewer: Here is the story of the fouled landing of the Grumman Goose you have on your site as: "Wild Landing!". Please note that contrary to the comments of the reporter, the pilot of the Goose, Hoot Gibson, is a well-known stunt and airshow aviator who enjoyed many years of flying after the incident. WILD GOOSE Back in the "olden days", when Tamarindo was a small village and everyone knew everyone else, filmmaker Bruce Brown chose the town to shoot a segment for his new movie "Endless Summer II". The sequel to the famous surfing movie "Endless Summer" came a generation later than the original, and, of course, featured new stars: Wingnut and Pat O'Connor, together with one of the originals, Robert August. Living in Flamingo at that time was a pilot, "Hoot" Gibson, who had spent several years obtaining his commercial license in Costa Rica. Hoot owned a vintage Grumman Goose seaplane, relic of World War II, and intended to charter it for tours. Given the state of the roads then - and not much improved since - a seaplane seemed the way to go to explore a country surrounded by sea. Robert August had a fine idea: To charter the Goose to fly the film crew and its surfers around the coasts of Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Panama, looking for unknown or little-known surf spots to shoot their sequences. Apart from being much faster to cover more area, the aircraft was highly superior to a boat, which could only examine the waves from the "back", or ocean, side whereas a 'plane could approach from the landward side, too. "Endless Summer II" was Hoot's first charter in Costa Rica, and was to last two weeks. On the first day, the Goose took off from the airport. The plan was to fly out to Cabo Velas, return along Playa Grande and land in the bay near Tamarindo estuary, where the crew would board, then to take off on their adventures. The camera crew set up on Tamarindo Beach, ready to shoot the approach and landing for the movie. But instead of flying from Cabo Velas, approaching Tamarindo from the west along the Playa Grande coastline, the big Grumman twin came roaring down the river from the north, putting on a show for the camera. On board were the pilot, "Hoot" Gibson, and local resident and California board shaper, the late Mike "Doc" Diffenderfer. Approaching Tamarindo, the pilot started a right turn to follow the estuary, but his height was insufficient. Presumably he suddenly became aware of the power lines which cross the river at that point, and was forced to fly below them. The right pontoon caught the water, and jerked the aircraft to the right. Overcorrecting, the pilot put the left float into the water, and the aircraft swerved to that side. Gibson applied full take-off power to get the aircraft back into the air, but it careered from the river onto the beach, where it ground-looped and came to a stop. The whole incident was filmed, and eventually became part of the movie. "At this point," said August, "we saw fuel spraying from the aircraft onto the sand, and there was a distinct danger of a fire or explosion. As we approached the 'plane, the doors opened and Hoot and Doc jumped out, fortunately both unhurt. From a nearby beach house, a resident came running, carrying a big club and shouting at the pilot that he was in a national park, and polluting the beach. We managed to calm him down, and the incident ended at that point." Eyewitness Dean Butterfield adds: "I was up the hill looking over the estuary, watching Hoot Gibson fly the plane through it. He was doing touch and go's in the estuary, I was wondering why he felt he had to do that in there. As he came out to the mouth I think he saw the cable stretched across at the last minute and tried to duck under it. He caught the wing tip and stuffed it into the sand. By the time I got down to it, there were a lot of people around. I took pictures and made a T-shirt from one." Officials of Minae also attended the site very shortly after the accident, and charged the pilot with flying in a protected zone (Parque Marina las Baulas). As a result, Gibson's license, obtained over several years, was withdrawn after one brief flight. "As it happened, the club-bearing resident did quite well out of the crash." August continues. "The plane suffered damage to a wing and one of the propellers, and parts for a vintage seaplane are not procured at your local NAPA store, so the aircraft had to sit for a year or so while repairs were made. During this time the aircraft was parked in the resident's back garden, he and his family being paid for caretaker duty against theft or vandalism. I believe someone of the family slept in their garden ornament every night." The day after the accident, filming continued with a scene where supposed crash passengers August, Wingnut and Pat O'Connor climb cheerfully from the Goose, carrying their boards, and run off to the surf. Seriously concerned that accident investigators or other officials might confiscate the film shot up to that point, Director Bruce Brown hired a friend to hop a Sansa flight to San José, thence to Los Angeles for processing. Fortunately, the film escaped customs examination but, arriving in Los Angeles, it was delayed a couple of days en route for the processing studio by the Rodney King riots, which occurred in the vicinity of the studio. The Goose was eventually repaired and flown out of Tamarindo. |
Thank you zondaracer. :ok:
Do you think that landing seaplanes with floats, like the Cessna 206, is more difficult that landing one with a hull, like the Grumman Goose? |
The Beaver crash was also the result of filming it, the owner of the plane wanted to do the scene, the director insisted on a "hotshot stunt pilot" he nosed in the floats and well you can see the results
|
Is this the "HOOT" the article is talking about?
I met the man himself in Reno, he handled his racer Sea Fury engine failure like nothing had happened, I can't believe a former Shuttle commander would had left himself out for such a tw@t-moment... DK :\ |
Here is a good source for seaplane and skiplane procedures.
Seaplane, Skiplane, and Float/Ski Equipped Helicopter Operations Handbook |
HEMS driver thank you for the link, shall take some time to read through this. :ok:
|
For the first video, I think Hell Man had it. A small float plane has three rudders, one for the air and two for the water.
The two water rudders are at the end of each float, and they are supposed to be lowered only for Idle Taxi. A set of rudders that can steer you at a couple of knots are going to steer you really, really fast at 70 knots. It looks like he just forgot to raise the water rudders. |
I don't agree, if you look at the last few seconds of the video you can see that the water rudders are up.
I think that he was too fast and not stabilised at all, touched down with assymetry and the instant drag caused it. f |
Originally Posted by rigpiggy
(Post 7988016)
The Beaver crash .. he nosed in the floats and well you can see the results
Are seaplanes more dangerous to fly than wheeled aircraft? |
This boat-hulled amphibian available to buy new in Russia:
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2850/9...2a062714_b.jpg AeroVolga LA-8 RA-0778G in Gelendzhik |
The Beaver was landing on what is called glassy water. This is where there is no wind, and the surface of the water is like a mirror. Under these conditions there is no depth perception and it is preferable to set up an approach using power and reduced flap and 'drag' the airplane in in a slight nose up attitude until it touches down. I forget the whole story behind the Beaver accident but rigpiggy is essentially correct. The company decided to use one of their own hot shots - who I seem to remember had a brand new float endorsement - instead of an experienced pilot, with the results you see there.
The correct procedure for a glassy water approach with the Beaver is to use climb flap and enough power to maintain 70 - 75 mph in a slight nose-up attitude with about a 300 fpm rate of descent. (I seem to recall about 20 -22 inches of manifold pressure and 1800 RPM.) The airplane will actually begin to round itself out as you enter ground effect. The touchdown should be just forward of the float step, with the heels of the floats about parallel to the surface of the water. In the video the pilot touches down in too level an attitude and the airplane goes squirrely on him. He appears to try and correct the yaw at which point he ceases to be a pilot and is now along for the ride. I won't comment on the second video. I've never flown a Goose, but if the guy is as good a pilot as it is said, I guess he had a bad day As an old friend once told me, "Sometimes you bite the bear and sometimes the bear bites you." :D |
pigboat - Only trouble is it has made me a bit concerned about trying seaplane flying, it seems dangerous?
I thought this was interesting - |
YBB seaplane flying is inherently no more dangerous than landplane flying, the big difference of course being the condition of the alighting surface. Glassy water I've mentioned, the other condition that can cause you grief is the sea state, if you're landing on a large open water area. You learn to judge the sea state by checking the wave action along the shoreline, and the wind velocity. If you want to try float flying I say go for it, and I wish you the best of luck. Any good float flying school can give you instruction. A few things I would emphasize would be the afore mentioned glassy water landings, sailing an airplane backwards when it is too windy to turn around on the water and how to judge the swell conditions and wind velocity by wave action. You may never have to use any of those tricks if you just want to putter around on a fine afternoon, but they are something you should have up your sleeve if you find yourself in a situation where they may be called for. In Canada you would need a minimum of five hours instruction on a seaplane, with a minimum of five landings and takeoffs to obtain a bare seaplane rating. That isn't much time and should be looked upon as a license to learn. :p
That's an interesting video. I've taken off off the dolly with the Beaver and the C185. We used to employ the truck to tow the airplane out to the end of the runway and retrieve the dolly after the airplane had departed. Personally I would refuse a towed takeoff like that. A dolly takeoff is not without a certain amount of inherent risk but in my opinion that truck out front of the airplane simply doubles it. You can't hit a truck that isn't there. There are some airports who refuse to allow a take off without the truck on the grounds that the dolly will possibly take out some runway lights after the airplane has flown off it, but to me that argument is specious. Not to say it hasn't happened, but if the dolly doesn't remain on the runway after the airplane has departed it simply means it wasn't lined up properly at the start. The technique we always used was to have the run up completed, shut the engine down, position the airplane on the runway center line and disconnect the dolly tow bar. Have all your pre takeoff checks done, because now once you start the engine you no longer have brakes and the airplane will begin to roll as soon as you add anything more than idle power. The trick is to add the power smoothly while holding full right rudder to counteract P effect. The rudder becomes effective at low airspeed, with the Beaver and Cessna I seem to remember around 20 kt, so you have full rudder control very early. At that point you're simply driving a landplane with no brakes. When you reached takeoff speed simply allow the airplane to fly off the dolly - there is no need to horse it off - but lift off should be positive, you don't want to settle back down. Our dolly was equipped with brakes that were actuated by a lever that popped up when the airplane lifted off, so after a few hundred feet it rolled to a stop. If you were unfortunate enough to have the dolly run off the runway, you bought were required to buy the maintenance guys a case of beer, the same as landing with the water rudders extended. :O |
I can't comment on the 2nd flick but with the beaver, there is a few issues that in my point of view that contributed to the accident.
Unstable approach, a definite no-no when landing on glassy water. Secondly, not straight ....too much left yaw. Finally in my opinion, the main problem was that he was too nose low for what appears to be Whipline floats. Touching down further back on the heels will can in most cases correct the first 2 issues. Wether you have the water rudders up or down is irrelevant. They are spring loaded and will bounce up on touchdown if indeed they have not been retracted. However, you can expect some damage to the brackets! FJ 01 |
Dear pigboat & floatjockey01, thank you for your comments which are very interesting.
I have been considering doing a fixed-wing PPL in order to fly float planes (I currently fly helicopters) but float plane landings and take-offs seem to have so many dangers but thank you for explaining about these. I am going to continue researching the matter before approaching one or two float plane pilots and then hopefully make a decision. In my first post I wrote: I have an interesting seaplane landing from Sweden which I will post a little later. My question is this, the construction of the floats for the Cessna 206, when the aircraft is sitting in the water the weight is carried not just by the very bottom of the float, the köl (I suppose you call it keel) but by as much of the float as is submerged, is this correct? How then can the full weight of the aircraft be taken: a) just only on the keel as in this video b) instead of a "soft" material like water the float is now making contact with something much harder? I suppose my overall question is whether using the floats on other surfaces can damage them - and yet this operator lands like this at the end of each season so I suppose it must be okay. The same kind of question then, can you use floats to land on ice which is also very hard and only contacting the keel? |
My question is this, the construction of the floats for the Cessna 206, when the aircraft is sitting in the water the weight is carried not just by the very bottom of the float, the köl (I suppose you call it keel) but by as much of the float as is submerged, is this correct? (a)...Each main float must have... (1)...A buoyancy of 80% in excess of the buoyancy required by that float to support its portion of the maximum weight of the seaplane or amphibian in fresh water; and (2)...Enough watertight compartments to provide reasonable assurance that the seaplane or amphibian will stay afloat without capsizing if any two compartments of any main float are flooded. (b)...Each main float must contain at least four watertight compartments approximately equal in volume. That 185 in your video is equipped with Edo 2960 floats, and its MTOW if I recall correctly is 3100 lbs, thus it is very well floated with nearly a 100% buoyancy reserve. Other aircraft aren't so well off, the 8000 lb MTOW Otter is underfloated on the standard Edo 7170's. My opinion, of course. ;) Float keels are made from aluminum, but usually have a steel shoe. Landing on wet grass like the video will not damage the keel, maybe rub a bit off the screw heads. Water is a pretty hard medium at the touchdown speed of the average seaplane. The risky thing about grass landing with a seaplane is if you do it often enough the genie of bad luck will pee on your careful planning and you could end up inverted. The guy in the video deserves an attaboy. He does everything exactly right, particularly the attitude during the approach and touchdown. Any flatter and he'd be touching down too far forward of the step inviting a nose over, any more nose up and the heels of the floats will touch first, forcing the airplane forward. Nose over time! You can land on ice on floats but with a caveat. The ice should be thick enough to support the weight of the airplane. If you break through, ice can hole a float very easily and you lose the airplane. A company I used to work for did exactly that with a Beaver many years ago. Personally I wouldn't land on ice on floats unless it was an emergency situation. Here's a vid of a float takeoff with a loaded Norseman under no-wind, glassy water conditions. Check the length of the takeoff run, it's over a minute and a half. You'll see he doesn't try to force it onto the step, simply allows the airplane to rise, then when the spray from the float is about even with the wing struts he begins to ease on forward elevator to bring the airplane up onto the step. Then at the end he raised the right wing, lifting the right float out of the water to minimize drag, and at last he's away. Classic Norseman takeoff. |
Thanks Mr. Pigboat, you sound like you know your stuff!
Why are floats so darn expensive? A new set of wip 8750's installed costs more than every plane I've ever owned put together! - and I've owned a gaggle of them! FR |
I think some of pigboat's seaplane landing techniques might even apply to performing a ditching.
This video shows a ditching test carried-out by NASA in 1944 using a B-24 Liberator and which I found most interesting: |
Mr. Ghost, that is one interesting video. Those guys had big ones, made of brass, gives a whole new meaning to 'test pilot'. No doubt they'd figured out all the tricks beforehand, but it still took nerve to ditch that thing. I seem to recall the B-24 was notorious for killing the cockpit crew in a wheels-up landing, the airplane would break apart at the leading edge of the wings, as that one did and the cockpit would be mangled. It would also break at the trailing edge, apparently the bomb bay created a weak spot. Have you seen pictures of Lady Be Good?
Frank those are hefty floats, what are they installed on, a 'van? We had the very first set of Edo 2960's - msn 001 - installed on a brand new 1966 C-185. The whole airplane including a set of Flui Dyne A3000 skis came to less than 35 grand. |
Pigboat, I feel lucky to meet you on PPRuNe! :ok: Thank you for the good explanations.
I must say that I still feel that to land and take-off a seaplane is probably more risky than for normal wheel plane. The condition of the water rough/smooth, the waves, the position of the floats on landing etc. I think with wheels on tarmac it will be easier but I suppose with practice you can learn to make it safe. The Norseman take off was very very long indeed but nice to watch. |
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-y...4-no/goose.jpg
Grumman Turbo Mallard https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-E...+seaplanes.jpg Key West Seaplanes Cessna 172 Amphibian |
No, that ain't no Turbo Mallard....:sad:
|
Nice pics Photoburst. :ok:
That's a Turbo Goose, not a Mallard. I know a guy who has thousands of hours on seaplanes and amphibs, mostly the PBY. He says the Turbo Goose is the most difficult to fly of any seaplane he has ever flown, because of the placement of the engines. There's a guy who's just started a seaplane service in Key West using turbo Otters. He's on his way down from Alaska with one at the moment. https://www.facebook.com/groups/173069206140238/ |
Have you seen pictures of Lady Be Good? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._Discovery.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...os_1960_-3.jpg Lady Be Good Regarding the courage of the test pilots in the Liberator ditching, I agree. In fact I think that the rate of deceleration could easily have knocked you out if you weren't prepared for it! |
Taken just a few days ago:
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5523/1...8ec8cfef_b.jpg De Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver Mk1 N4957W Lake Hood October 2013 Photo by Danny Fritsche |
Photoburst send that pic to Neil Aird at CURRENT COVER PAGE
That's one beautiful picture. You should also post it on this site on the book of faces. |
Yeah, this picture is really beautyful!
|
Thanks for sharing Photoburst, that pic made my day yesterday.
|
One of the things I notice about seaplane flying is that a lot of it seems to take place in very beautiful locations.
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:41. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.