A question for any floatplane pilots...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SE Asia
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A question for any floatplane pilots...
I’m interested in setting up a floatplane operation in SE Asia. The vast majority of my customers would be European couples, occasionally with one child. Only local sightseeing flights, so minimal fuel required, and no need to carry baggage.
An aircraft like the Caravan is simply unjustified (with only 2 pax) so I am considering a 180 hp Cessna 172, or a 206.
I’ve flown 206 landplanes and would prefer to operate 172’s because of the lower operating costs, and the smaller noise footprint, especially on Take-off.
(Also the 206 has a complicated cargo-door opening procedure, in an emergency, if flaps are down)
I know pilots always want more power, but would the performance of a 180hp 172 floatplane be satisfactory, with 3 adults on board? (Typical OAT is about 30* C)
Any ideas or opinions welcome…
Thanks,
Duck Dodger.
I fly a C185 on floats with a 300hp Continental engine. Personaly I think a C172 especialy in those temperatures will just not have enough power to get up on the step without using about 5km of water.
Perfect aircraft would either be a Cessna 180 or 182. Both have a 230hp engine with a CSU and that is what can really help getting out of the water and a 182 that has a turbocharger could be perfect for those high density altitude days.
Hope this helps.
Perfect aircraft would either be a Cessna 180 or 182. Both have a 230hp engine with a CSU and that is what can really help getting out of the water and a 182 that has a turbocharger could be perfect for those high density altitude days.
Hope this helps.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Kerikeri, New Zealand or Noosa Queensland. Depending on the time of year!
Age: 84
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have to agree with OldPilotGuy, 30 degrees and European pax a C180/182/185 would all be an ideal choice, and give you more flexability in your operation. Remember there are not too many 170lbs pax around these days - even the kids are grossly overweight...
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Darwin, Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
Duck Dodger,
The first question is what sort of water are you planning to operate in - is it protected water or open water. Protected water means inland water, or water contained in a reef. Open water is generally associated with salt water, but large lakes and waterways frequented by boats can have similar charactaristics.
In rough water nothing beats mass - float length comes second, followed by power, stol performance and structural strength. What they do with Twin Otters (5700kg MTOW) in the Maldives demonstrates this well. The Caravan (3800kg MTOW/675HP) copes with rough water well if kept within its limits, but they have a high stall speed and a firewall is very unforgiving to mistreatment (ie $$$$$$$). The Dehavilland Beaver (2500kg MTOW/450HP) copes with rough water very well considering that its MTOW is only about 2/3rds that of a Caravan - its STOL performance and strength help overcome its lower mass, shorter float length and limited power. In the Whitsundays 206s (1600kg MTOW/285HP) fell out of favour because they couldn't cope with the water - it was too rough for them too regularly.
The second question is if you need an amphibian or will a straight floated aircraft do the job. The undercarriage system on an amphibian is significantly heavy - some models of amphibious floats can be around twice the weight of straight floats. Additionally the openings in the floats for the main wheels also detract from the takeoff performance. From a performance perspective (not rough water perspective) for the same load you will be able to use a smaller aircraft that is on straight floats.
Generally tail wheel aircraft make better floatplanes than nose wheel aircraft - the loads imparted by the floats onto the airframe is in a similar position to the main gear on a tail dragger.
The first question is what sort of water are you planning to operate in - is it protected water or open water. Protected water means inland water, or water contained in a reef. Open water is generally associated with salt water, but large lakes and waterways frequented by boats can have similar charactaristics.
In rough water nothing beats mass - float length comes second, followed by power, stol performance and structural strength. What they do with Twin Otters (5700kg MTOW) in the Maldives demonstrates this well. The Caravan (3800kg MTOW/675HP) copes with rough water well if kept within its limits, but they have a high stall speed and a firewall is very unforgiving to mistreatment (ie $$$$$$$). The Dehavilland Beaver (2500kg MTOW/450HP) copes with rough water very well considering that its MTOW is only about 2/3rds that of a Caravan - its STOL performance and strength help overcome its lower mass, shorter float length and limited power. In the Whitsundays 206s (1600kg MTOW/285HP) fell out of favour because they couldn't cope with the water - it was too rough for them too regularly.
The second question is if you need an amphibian or will a straight floated aircraft do the job. The undercarriage system on an amphibian is significantly heavy - some models of amphibious floats can be around twice the weight of straight floats. Additionally the openings in the floats for the main wheels also detract from the takeoff performance. From a performance perspective (not rough water perspective) for the same load you will be able to use a smaller aircraft that is on straight floats.
Generally tail wheel aircraft make better floatplanes than nose wheel aircraft - the loads imparted by the floats onto the airframe is in a similar position to the main gear on a tail dragger.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C206
I have flown all sorts on floats and the most disapointing would be the 206.
You need to be a master to wiggle them off the water on hot days with near on full loads and I state NEAR on full loads. Awesome land A/C.
A shame they dont make new beavers these days. Have heard on turbine conversions on the beaver.
Maules are good but better be good at salt water management in particular on these guys and 180 series are pretty good as well.
I love floats and having a moment to my self now with a brewsky coz I reminising
You need to be a master to wiggle them off the water on hot days with near on full loads and I state NEAR on full loads. Awesome land A/C.
A shame they dont make new beavers these days. Have heard on turbine conversions on the beaver.
Maules are good but better be good at salt water management in particular on these guys and 180 series are pretty good as well.
I love floats and having a moment to my self now with a brewsky coz I reminising
