Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:46 AM - Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats (jam-n)
2. 05:46 AM - Re: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats (Paul Seehafer)
3. 05:53 AM - Re: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats (Paul Seehafer)
4. 06:14 AM - Re: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats (Paul Seehafer)
5. 06:41 AM - Re: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats (Noel Loveys)
6. 07:08 AM - Re: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats (Dj Merrill)
7. 07:22 AM - Re: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats (shorty)
8. 07:24 AM - Re: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats (shorty)
9. 07:34 AM - Re: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats (Noel Loveys)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats |
--> Seaplane-List message posted by: jam-n <jghunter@nol.net>
I'd love to have a 4-seat aircraft to haul the family around in, but I'm
a little scared how much insurance is going to be on a 4-seater with
enough capacity that can live on floats as well (thinking Murphy Moose
on the big side; Tundra, Yukon, or Bush Caddy L-164 the next size down).
I reckon I've still got some time to think about it, though.
*prob 4-6K depending on hull value and ur exp... etc. perhaps a bit more
Is a Seaplane Pilots Association membership worth the investment? Is that
a good place to get more background information on the subject?
* YES! nice publication, too. WATER magazine. i have had some stuff
published in it before... i wrote. if u r looking for some swell
floatplane exp... try turner's seaplane port in ME. if u r rated, have
some time, the ses rating, pass their scrutiny... etc... they will rent
172's solo. hardly anyone else in usa will... i went up there and got
siigned off in about 3.5 hrs... i got the ses at over at kenmore in
seattle. that training was great and it made a dif with the folks in
turner. :) i did a 50 hr block of time there sev yrs back... was a
supper holiday. lots of lakes. mtn flying, too. plenty of challenges. hi
speed water taxi for miles on end.... amazing stuff. gosh, and if they
knew about the fun factor... they'd try to tax it!! the folk at turner's
are quite helpful. the area scenery is to die for. and did i mention...
NO shortage of lakes to fly to land on, fish or what ever... and take
off again. guess i logged about 6-8 hrs a day on floats... one day i did
over 100 water take offs and landings... :))
oh, did i mention... TONS a' fun!
hope this helps...
feel free to email me offline if u have any specific questions...
regards
jam'n
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats |
Chris;
Researching what kind of plane is best is always the fun part, and getting a
good education in the process about the differences of tube and fabric,
aluminum, or composite is certainly worthwhile knowing if you are going to
one day bite the bullet and purchase your own seaplane. Aviation is filled
with knowledgable people to help guide you. Al Barger would be a good
example of that. And you're right, I doubt Al would mind talking seaplanes
with anyone as he too plans on his own seaplane one day. And his wife Lori
is one of our finest at the seaplane base! She's a doll. Works her butt
off for all of us seaplane types. They make a pretty neat couple, and I'm
proud to say they are friends.
Ironically, Lori and Al are posed with the same dilema you are; wanting a
good 4 seat seaplane. And I'd guess that is somewhat of a universal
problem. Unfortunately, a good four seat seaplane is big money because
everybody wants one. If you could live with just having straight floats on
it, the price will be somewhat lower. But "good" amphibs capable of hauling
four people and gear are premium priced, as there really aren't many
airplanes that can do that. Or should I say do it well (or legally for that
part). It's not uncommon to see a 185 Cessna amphib with a 7 to 9 hundred
pound useful load. So load it up with fuel and your payload is not enough
to haul two large adults and their gear. And a 185 is a premium airplane!
Pretty much everything under that price range is only going to be worse.
Now, put it on straight floats and you will have a good 3-4 seat airplane
with fuel. Everything changes when one wants amphibs. Unfortunately,
unless you have a good place to keep a seaplane on water, you need amphibs.
Plus after having flown both straight floats and amphibs for years, I don't
think I could ever go back. I'd give up the hauling and performance for the
benefits of all the added utililty an amphib provides. I remember my
straight float days flying around on fumes trying to find fuel. That tends
to take the fun out of it. I admire the guys that fly straight floats and
cope well with the shortcomings of being limited to water only. But I don't
have a lot of desire to rejoin their ranks. Been there, done that.
Personally, I still believe the best seaplane value is a lake amphibian when
you need to haul more than two seats. They are inexpensive to purchase
because they are greatly misunderstood, and sometimes difficult to learn to
fly. But overcome that and you will have one of the most efficient 4 seat
amphibs in existence. Granted, the airplane is in a whole different league
than an Avid, Kitfox, or Highlander as overall costs are much higher to own
and operate. But, the airplane in the right hands will do what they say it
will. My old 180 hp LA-4 Lake will haul three 200 lb people and four plus
hours of fuel legally. And yes, it flies well at that weight as well And
the old 180 lakes have a gross weight that is 290 pounds less than the 200
hp versions. So the 200's are truly four seat amphibs. Of course, the
250-270 hp Lake Renegades are even better load haulers, but now we are
talking some pretty serious change. I'm not trying to sell you on a flying
boat vs a float plane, as I truly enjoy both. But if shopping airplanes,
don't shortchange yourself by not including them. They not only can be very
efficient, but also a real blast to fly. Water maneuvering ability makes
them a lot more exhilarating than a float plane, and if you like attention
be ready for it. On a beach most onlookers will hardly notice the
floatplanes parked next to it. It is rather exotic and unusual looking
compared to a float plane. I would say after years of flying both floats
and boats, that if comparing them against automobiles a Lake would be a
ferrari, and a float plane a pick up truck. And while the ferrari is fun,
most people find a pick up truck more versatile for their needs. Therefore
you see a lot more float planes than you do Lake amphibians. Ok, Ok, got
myself going on this subject....so I'll move onto the next.
Seaplane pilots Association; Ditto what jam'n said in the latest post. The
magazine alone is worth the money, and there is currently no other place to
find more information about seaplanes when you are trying to learn more.
And their attempts at keeping waterways open is an added benefit in my
opinion. I say that because I believe it is up to all of us to work hard to
keep waterways open by being "good neighbors" to the waterway communities.
I've always said that one arrogant seaplane pilot can close waterways faster
than a team of 100 lawyers can work to keep them open. So ultimately,
advocacy is up to us. We are our own worst enemy in my opinion. So one day
when you start flying seaplanes, remember to be a good neighbor, and remind
your other seaplane pilots to do the same. That is the best thing we can do
if we want to continue to enjoy the thrill of landing on public waters.
I'll close this on a final note; If thinking about what kind of seaplane
you want vs what you might be able to afford, consider renting the four seat
airplane at the airport when you want to travel, and enjoying the heck out
of a more affordable two seat seaplane the rest of the time. Take the kids
flying with you one at a time. Give them a one on one quality experience
with dad. And the same goes for the wife. I think you will find it very
enjoyable, and rewarding. After all, we all have the same problem. Being
around seaplanes for a long time I've heard it a hundred times. But the
reality is if you want to haul the wife and kids and their gear all over the
country in a seaplane, you better just set your sights on a Beaver right
away. Anything less will still be a compromise you will find difficult to
accomplish your mission. I'm not trying to discourage you from pursuing the
dream, in fact just the opposite. I'd rather you understand the limitations
of seaplanes right up front so you don't get frustrated and give up when you
discover the reasonable to purchase and reasonable to own 4 seat seaplane
really doesn't exist. That's why I've been enjoying the heck out of my
little cost efficient Kitfox. In fact, I'm going flying right now...
Paul
(here's a pic of my Lake amphib - one of the few inexpensive choices for
hauling 3 people. Old La-4's like this traditionally can be had for 50-70
grand. Cheap in comparison to other choices)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris In Madison" <cowens@cnw.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:18 PM
Subject: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats
> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Chris In Madison" <cowens@cnw.com>
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> Thanks for the follow up. I'm happy to hear a good description of tube
> and fabric aircraft and how they compare to metal craft. I can't say that
> I've spent a lot of time researching the
> differences/advantages/disadvantages between them, but now I've got some
> incentive to do some more :-)
>
> Al Barger is the president of our EAA chapter (and a friend of yours, I
> believe) and he had a lot of really great things to say about the
> Highlander. I'll have to see if I can find some more info on it beyond
> what's on Just's web site. It's a very attractive plane, and your article
> definitely touts its positive aspects. I'm sure Al doesn't mind talking
> about seaplanes since his wife works at the seaplane base :-)
>
> I'd love to have a 4-seat aircraft to haul the family around in, but I'm a
> little scared how much insurance is going to be on a 4-seater with enough
> capacity that can live on floats as well (thinking Murphy Moose on the big
> side; Tundra, Yukon, or Bush Caddy L-164 the next size down). I reckon
> I've still got some time to think about it, though.
>
> Is a Seaplane Pilots Association membership worth the investment? Is that
> a good place to get more background information on the subject?
>
> Thanks again for taking the time to write. I find myself reading your
> article over and over. Feel free to write more of them!
>
> Best regards,
> Chris
>
> --------
> Chris Owens
> Waunakee, WI
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=61633#61633
>
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats |
--> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
Shorty;
Yeah, my money would be on the fox for short takeoff. But it would be much
more fair to compare straight floats to straight floats. Not an amphib fox
against a straight float Supercub. I'm convinced the S/cub wouldn't stand a
chance then. And if it were a lightweight two stroke in the Fox, it would
be even more disheartening for the S/cub pilot.
Yeah, you are 100 lbs lighter than my lead sled 4 stroke
everything-on-it-but-the-kitchen-sink Kitfox. So I don't plan on
challenging you to any takeoff contests anytime in the future? <GRIN>
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "shorty" <shortnaked@golden.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:53 PM
Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats
> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "shorty" <shortnaked@golden.net>
>
> I will vote for the Kitfox off the water quicker than a Super cub with 160
> hp
>
> Paul's Kitfox off the water in 8 seconds ?
>
> Mine is 100 lbs lighter ..............
>
>
> Muahahahhwwaaaaa
>
> you did see the under 4 second take off s on ski right Noel ?
>
> :)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:08 PM
> Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats
>
>
>> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>>
>> Paul this cub was on straight 200 floats...around half tanks and beside
>> myself and the instructor for the float endorsement there wasn't much
>> else
>> on board. I saw a few of the places that plane had been into and to say
>> it
>> must have been tight would be an understatement.
>>
>> The Super cub was a great diversion. Just having the horsepower under
>> your
>> thumb! It took a bit of getting used to flying with the wrong hand ( I'm
>> a
>> south paw) I don't think I'm going to try to get into one of the "bog
>> holes" in my fox any time soon.
>>
>> Noel
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf
>>> Of Paul Seehafer
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:30 PM
>>> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
>>> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>>> LSAs on floats
>>>
>>>
>>> Noel,
>>>
>>> I'm surprised you'd find the Supercub that much better
>>> performer off water
>>> compared to a Kitfox. Not that a Supercub with 160 hp is any
>>> slouch, as it
>>> is a marvelous seaplane. But my little 80 hp amphib kitfox
>>> will break water
>>> in 8 seconds with 2 hours of fuel on board and me, whereas a
>>> 180 hp amphib
>>> Supercub can't come close to that (amphib vs. amphib
>>> comparison) I know
>>> this factually as one of my friends has one of the nicest
>>> amphib Supercubs
>>> on the planet. A Husky would be a better comparison to the Fox in my
>>> opinion, but takeoff I'm confident the Kitfox would still win if the
>>> aircraft are flown light. Now, if you load both airplanes up
>>> with weight,
>>> horsepower and large wings will win, thereby giving the Husky
>>> the advantage.
>>> But give me a 100 hp 912, or a 115 hp 914 in my Fox, and I'm
>>> confident I
>>> would turn the tables.
>>>
>>> I have some videos I need to get posted for you guys on the
>>> kitfox/lazair
>>> site. I have a Avid on floats doing a takeoff contest
>>> against a Challenger,
>>> and a Kitfox against an extremely light 90 hp Cub. Both are pretty
>>> convincing of the Light Sport Aircrafts potential as
>>> performers. Fwiw -
>>> still the record holder for off the water takeoff is an Avid Flyer on
>>> straight floats.....2.7 seconds from standing still to lift
>>> off. You won't
>>> find many airplanes that can do that on pavement. I guess
>>> you can all tell
>>> I am biased towards the Avid/Kitfox/ and Highlander, as they are all
>>> derivatives of the original Dean Wilson Avid Flyer. And man do they
>>> perform. After 1300 hours of float time in Avids and Foxes,
>>> I can tell you
>>> that you can't find a better performing, more versatile, capable, and
>>> economical seaplane. And the best part is thats they are
>>> just a hoooooot to
>>> fly! When was the last time you watched someone do a
>>> circular takeoff with
>>> a float plane...on one float? With the Avid and Kitfox they
>>> are so nimble
>>> on controls that doing so is not difficult, assuming you are
>>> familiar with
>>> your airplane. And talk about versatile; my little Model IV
>>> Kitfox on
>>> Amphibs with a 80 hp 912 rotax can fly alongside of any
>>> Supercub. In fact,
>>> I have to slow down so they can keep up when at cruise. My
>>> Kitfox is much
>>> more compatible in cruise flight to an Aviat Husky seaplane,
>>> even though
>>> they have 180 hp and a constant speed prop (and cost about 6
>>> times the money
>>> of the fox).
>>>
>>> Ok, ok, probably a little hard to believe. So if my picture
>>> goes through,
>>> here is a panel shot from in my 80 hp Kitfox amphib that says
>>> it all. Just
>>> check out my gps mph reading in the middle of the panel, my indicated
>>> airspeed, my altitude, and my rpm on the right side of the
>>> panel. You will
>>> notice this little seaplane is VERY capable for cross country
>>> work, as well
>>> as for small lakes and airports. (incidentally, 5800 rpm is
>>> max power on a
>>> 912. Also, I more typically fly around at 4900-5000 rpm
>>> giving me right
>>> around 100 mph tas while burning all of 3.5 gph of regular
>>> unleaded auto
>>> fuel)
>>>
>>> I'm not trying to knock anyone elses seaplane here. As
>>> personally, I've
>>> never met an airplane I didn't like. But my preference is an
>>> Avid and
>>> Kitfox. Not because I'm biased and close minded toward other
>>> aircraft, but
>>> because I know how well the Avid and Kitfox work, both as
>>> land planes and
>>> seaplanes. So for those of you looking for an economical
>>> alternative, the
>>> Avid and Kitfox choice is a very good one in my opinion. And
>>> there are a
>>> lot of good used airplanes around, as well as kits from the
>>> manufacturers
>>> Kitfox, Just Aircraft co. (Highlander), and Airdale (for the Avid).
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>>> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 5:43 PM
>>> Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>>> LSAs on floats
>>>
>>>
>>> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys"
>>> <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>>> >
>>> > Shorty:
>>> >
>>> > I did some time in a PA 18 Super Cub last
>>> week.......finally got most of
>>> > the
>>> > time for the endorsement. Wow what a ride... 160 Hp gets
>>> the lead off the
>>> > water real fast. Having the instructor in the rear seat
>>> was perfect.
>>> > Most
>>> > of the time I was hardly aware he was there. There wasn't the same
>>> > pressure
>>> > as having an instructor sitting beside you. The plane
>>> itself behaved like
>>> > a
>>> > 'fox on a mega dose of steroids. Landing speed was a bit
>>> higher but it
>>> > seemed to drop off step very fast..... As for getting up on
>>> step 160 Hp
>>> > says
>>> > it all! One notch of flaps was like throwing the hook
>>> (anchor) overboard.
>>> >
>>> > Noel
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>> >> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
>>> >> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On
>>> Behalf Of shorty
>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 5:15 PM
>>> >> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
>>> >> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>>> >> LSAs on floats
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "shorty"
>>> <shortnaked@golden.net>
>>> >>
>>> >> Good site here on Challengers. http://challenger.ca/
>>> >>
>>> >> I am not a Challenger owner , but I will say that they have a
>>> >> great group of
>>> >> owners that help each other out.
>>> >>
>>> >> That Site has a few videos that compare the 503 and 582
>>> Challenger on
>>> >> Floats. really shows you why a 582 is so popular although the
>>> >> 503 isa great
>>> >> engine.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Kitfox or Avid on floats is hard to Beat. Cruise in a side
>>> >> by side cabin
>>> >> on Amphibs from 80 to 110 mph with ease depending on the
>>> >> engine a 582 or
>>> >> 912 is my comparison.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Shorty
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>>> >> From: "Chris In Madison" <cowens@cnw.com>
>>> >> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 3:30 PM
>>> >> Subject: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>>> LSAs on floats
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Chris In Madison"
>>> >> <cowens@cnw.com>
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Hi John,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > You're the second person who's mentioned the Challenger
>>> >> aircraft to me.
>>> >> > Our kids' sitter's husband's father (yeah, I know...) is a
>>> >> Challenger
>>> >> > dealer out here in Waunakee (or is it Madison). He tells
>>> >> me it's loads of
>>> >> > fun to fly them as well. If two people say so, it must
>>> be true :-)
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I briefly looked at a couple of web sites that sell the
>>> >> Challenger, but
>>> >> > they were so horrible that I couldn't get a decent look at
>>> >> one. Perhaps
>>> >> > I'll try to get a closer look at one from the
>>> father-in-law, who's
>>> >> > apparently been selling them for a long time out here.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I might have to drop by the next time I'm up in your neck
>>> >> of the woods, so
>>> >> > to speak. Thanks for the info :-)
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Best regards,
>>> >> > Chris
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --------
>>> >> > Chris Owens
>>> >> > Waunakee, WI
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Read this topic online here:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=59678#59678
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats |
--> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
Noel,
That's a very interesting story supporting tube and fabric. And anyone that
has seen how some of the bush planes north of us get used, it is certainly
believable. I guess I won't be hiring any ferry pilots anytime soon
(snicker).
Neat to hear you experienced a Lake with your Dad. They are fun airplanes.
But I do agree with you that you have to be careful with those nose gear
doors. Traditionally they get all messed up when driving up onto a beach
and then when driving back into the water later, the pilot tries to retract
the gear when the nosewheel isn't straight. So whenever I do that, once I
enter the water and the plane is floating, I shut down and crawl out onto
the nose and reach down to verify the nosewheel has centered. If it isn't I
find shallow water and then just swivel it back into a neutral position,
then crawl back in the cockpit and retract it. Never had a problem by doing
so. But it is easy to see when you drive into the water with the gear down
how the nosewheel can not swivel itself back straight, as it is rare to have
enough beach to go straight back into the water. Interesting aside; one of
my lake instructors told me it is extremely important to maintain a correct
hull angle to keep the nosewheel doors from catching a wave. So he spent a
lot of time showing me correct hull angle. After I didn't do it right
numerous times he got a little frustrated and said 'Ok, put it this way.
Just pretend your family jewels are out there between those two nose wheel
doors. Now, do you really want to be dragging them in the water at 50 miles
an hour?" Worked for me. Never since have I let those nose wheel doors
drag too nose low...
Regarding your previous comment about landing a Supercub in a short
place/bog; Once I landed my Avid Flyer on straight floats in a 14 acre lake
(pond) that was in the shape of a circle, with a large circular island in
the middle of it (offering very little landing area width, and none in a
straight line), and power lines running across one end (of course the end
you had to take off over). I know a Supercub wouldn't fare well in that
small body of water, because there is no way he could ever get back out.
The Avid had no trouble. Climbed out right over the highlines with room to
spare. Once again, the Supercub is a phenomenal airplane. But when you do
the horsepower to weight, and wing loading comparisons of the early Avids
and Kitfoxes against it, the Avid and Kitfox will have the distinct
advantage for takeoff, climb, and landing. Remember, early Avids had a 22
mph stall speed. But out of fairness to those reading this, I will admit
that my newer laminar flow wing, four stroke Kitfox would probably require
the same landing area as a Supercub, possible more, as my current Kitfox is
a little hard to slow down. But it will cruise faster than the cub.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:54 PM
Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats
> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>
> BTW I'm with you on the tube planes. A couple of years ago I had to do
> some
> work on a Super Cub that flew in from BC (British Columbia) with the tail
> bent to a ridiculous angle. We had to resection longerons and replace a
> fair bit of the welds in the tail of the plane. My point is if it had
> been
> a Cessna it would never have made the first ten feet of the trans
> continental flight. Monocoque construction doesn't like dents let alone
> bends.
>
> The ferry pilot said he didn't notice the defect in the tail at all.
> Another reason to be very careful when having your plane ferried. I have
> it
> on good authority when the plane left BC it was in perfect condition.
>
> Re: your Lake. For quite a few years I beat all over this island in my
> fathers Lake LA-4. Quite the lovely plane but..... Darn there always has
> to be a but... But.... With that plane you have to be very careful that
> the front gear doors are closing completely before going for a swim. To
> do
> this hold the main gear locked with Vise grips and tie the tail down while
> doing a retract. The gear must be able to fully retract and still close
> the
> doors fully.
>
> I remember on time hitting a wake and having water short out our com radio
> for several days.
>
> Noel
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf
>> Of Paul Seehafer
>> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:49 PM
>> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>> LSAs on floats
>>
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> Glad you enjoyed the article. I'll be doing more in the future.
>>
>> I'm also glad you enjoyed EAA's seaplane base. It is in my
>> opinion EAA's
>> crown jewel. Not big, but very high quality and extra
>> special. It has
>> introduced most of us to the wonderful world of seaplanes.
>> Keep dreaming
>> and one day you will find yourself owning one.
>>
>> Metal airplanes vs tube and fabric....hmmmmm. Well, here's
>> my two cents on
>> that. If you look at race cars hitting walls at 150 mph,
>> notice what they
>> are in. Chromoly steel tube frames. Thats because they are
>> light and can
>> handle loads better pound for pound. So a tube and fabric
>> airplane is much
>> the same. Look at some of our most famous airplanes (cub,
>> taylorcraft,
>> stinson, waco, stearman, etc, etc) that have been around the
>> longest. They
>> have held up very well over the decades. Not that modern day
>> Cessnas and
>> Pipers haven't, but aluminum is more subject to metal fatigue
>> than would be
>> the steel tube frame. I fly a lake amphibian as well as my
>> Kitfox. The
>> lake is built like a tank compared to a Cessna. Yet it has
>> had a lot of
>> fatigue cracks that had to be patched due to water operations causing
>> excessive metal fatigue. And the airplane only has a little
>> more than 2000
>> hours on it. Imagine what it will look like when it hits
>> 20,000 hours like
>> a lot of old J-3's have probably endured? Don't get me
>> wrong, I love my old
>> aluminum lake amphib. But if I had to crash in one or the
>> other, I'd prefer
>> to be in my tube and fabric airplane. Aluminum just doesn't
>> have it when it
>> comes to hitting the wall...
>>
>> Keep your dream alive to one day own a seaplane. It's really not as
>> expensive as you may think.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> ps - here's a pic of a few airplanes doing a stop on one of
>> the lakes we
>> used for our poker run at the Eagle River Wisconsin Seaplane
>> Fly In this
>> last weekend. The photo represents about 1/2 of the
>> airplanes in the poker
>> run. The Highlander amphib is in the foreground with my
>> Kitfox amphib next
>> to it. This ought to get your heart pumping!
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Chris In Madison" <cowens@cnw.com>
>> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 8:40 AM
>> Subject: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats
>>
>>
>> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Chris In Madison"
>> <cowens@cnw.com>
>> >
>> > Hi Paul,
>> >
>> > Thanks for the great article. I had never given
>> floatplanes any thought
>> > until recently. I don't remember what made me think more
>> seriously about
>> > them, but it may have been the video for the Murphy Moose
>> that I received
>> > with a product information kit earlier this year. I went
>> to Oshkosh for
>> > the first time this year and saw a Beaver on amphibious
>> floats, then took
>> > a trip over to the seaplane base. After that, I was
>> completely hooked. I
>> > now realize that I want to be on floats when I grow up.
>> Now I just need
>> > to see if I'll ever be able to afford to fly in that capacity!
>> >
>> > I've never really taken a serious look at a fabric-covered
>> aircraft. I
>> > always assumed that an all-metal plane was a better option.
>> Perhaps I
>> > need to take another look at them, especially for all the
>> reasons you
>> > described in your article.
>> >
>> > Thanks again for the great read :-)
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> > Chris
>> >
>> > --------
>> > Chris Owens
>> > Waunakee, WI
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Read this topic online here:
>> >
>> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=59591#59591
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats |
--> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
True but skis a bit lighter than amphib floats. You also have the "C" box
with the GSC/Warp prop.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of shorty
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 11:23 PM
> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
> LSAs on floats
>
>
> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "shorty" <shortnaked@golden.net>
>
> I will vote for the Kitfox off the water quicker than a Super
> cub with 160
> hp
>
> Paul's Kitfox off the water in 8 seconds ?
>
> Mine is 100 lbs lighter ..............
>
>
> Muahahahhwwaaaaa
>
> you did see the under 4 second take off s on ski right Noel ?
>
> :)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:08 PM
> Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
> LSAs on floats
>
>
> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys"
> <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> >
> > Paul this cub was on straight 200 floats...around half
> tanks and beside
> > myself and the instructor for the float endorsement there
> wasn't much else
> > on board. I saw a few of the places that plane had been
> into and to say
> > it
> > must have been tight would be an understatement.
> >
> > The Super cub was a great diversion. Just having the
> horsepower under
> > your
> > thumb! It took a bit of getting used to flying with the
> wrong hand ( I'm
> > a
> > south paw) I don't think I'm going to try to get into one
> of the "bog
> > holes" in my fox any time soon.
> >
> > Noel
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
> >> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf
> >> Of Paul Seehafer
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:30 PM
> >> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
> >> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
> >> LSAs on floats
> >>
> >>
> >> Noel,
> >>
> >> I'm surprised you'd find the Supercub that much better
> >> performer off water
> >> compared to a Kitfox. Not that a Supercub with 160 hp is any
> >> slouch, as it
> >> is a marvelous seaplane. But my little 80 hp amphib kitfox
> >> will break water
> >> in 8 seconds with 2 hours of fuel on board and me, whereas a
> >> 180 hp amphib
> >> Supercub can't come close to that (amphib vs. amphib
> >> comparison) I know
> >> this factually as one of my friends has one of the nicest
> >> amphib Supercubs
> >> on the planet. A Husky would be a better comparison to
> the Fox in my
> >> opinion, but takeoff I'm confident the Kitfox would still
> win if the
> >> aircraft are flown light. Now, if you load both airplanes up
> >> with weight,
> >> horsepower and large wings will win, thereby giving the Husky
> >> the advantage.
> >> But give me a 100 hp 912, or a 115 hp 914 in my Fox, and I'm
> >> confident I
> >> would turn the tables.
> >>
> >> I have some videos I need to get posted for you guys on the
> >> kitfox/lazair
> >> site. I have a Avid on floats doing a takeoff contest
> >> against a Challenger,
> >> and a Kitfox against an extremely light 90 hp Cub. Both are pretty
> >> convincing of the Light Sport Aircrafts potential as
> >> performers. Fwiw -
> >> still the record holder for off the water takeoff is an
> Avid Flyer on
> >> straight floats.....2.7 seconds from standing still to lift
> >> off. You won't
> >> find many airplanes that can do that on pavement. I guess
> >> you can all tell
> >> I am biased towards the Avid/Kitfox/ and Highlander, as
> they are all
> >> derivatives of the original Dean Wilson Avid Flyer. And
> man do they
> >> perform. After 1300 hours of float time in Avids and Foxes,
> >> I can tell you
> >> that you can't find a better performing, more versatile,
> capable, and
> >> economical seaplane. And the best part is thats they are
> >> just a hoooooot to
> >> fly! When was the last time you watched someone do a
> >> circular takeoff with
> >> a float plane...on one float? With the Avid and Kitfox they
> >> are so nimble
> >> on controls that doing so is not difficult, assuming you are
> >> familiar with
> >> your airplane. And talk about versatile; my little Model IV
> >> Kitfox on
> >> Amphibs with a 80 hp 912 rotax can fly alongside of any
> >> Supercub. In fact,
> >> I have to slow down so they can keep up when at cruise. My
> >> Kitfox is much
> >> more compatible in cruise flight to an Aviat Husky seaplane,
> >> even though
> >> they have 180 hp and a constant speed prop (and cost about 6
> >> times the money
> >> of the fox).
> >>
> >> Ok, ok, probably a little hard to believe. So if my picture
> >> goes through,
> >> here is a panel shot from in my 80 hp Kitfox amphib that says
> >> it all. Just
> >> check out my gps mph reading in the middle of the panel,
> my indicated
> >> airspeed, my altitude, and my rpm on the right side of the
> >> panel. You will
> >> notice this little seaplane is VERY capable for cross country
> >> work, as well
> >> as for small lakes and airports. (incidentally, 5800 rpm is
> >> max power on a
> >> 912. Also, I more typically fly around at 4900-5000 rpm
> >> giving me right
> >> around 100 mph tas while burning all of 3.5 gph of regular
> >> unleaded auto
> >> fuel)
> >>
> >> I'm not trying to knock anyone elses seaplane here. As
> >> personally, I've
> >> never met an airplane I didn't like. But my preference is an
> >> Avid and
> >> Kitfox. Not because I'm biased and close minded toward other
> >> aircraft, but
> >> because I know how well the Avid and Kitfox work, both as
> >> land planes and
> >> seaplanes. So for those of you looking for an economical
> >> alternative, the
> >> Avid and Kitfox choice is a very good one in my opinion. And
> >> there are a
> >> lot of good used airplanes around, as well as kits from the
> >> manufacturers
> >> Kitfox, Just Aircraft co. (Highlander), and Airdale (for the Avid).
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> >> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 5:43 PM
> >> Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
> >> LSAs on floats
> >>
> >>
> >> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys"
> >> <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> >> >
> >> > Shorty:
> >> >
> >> > I did some time in a PA 18 Super Cub last
> >> week.......finally got most of
> >> > the
> >> > time for the endorsement. Wow what a ride... 160 Hp gets
> >> the lead off the
> >> > water real fast. Having the instructor in the rear seat
> >> was perfect.
> >> > Most
> >> > of the time I was hardly aware he was there. There
> wasn't the same
> >> > pressure
> >> > as having an instructor sitting beside you. The plane
> >> itself behaved like
> >> > a
> >> > 'fox on a mega dose of steroids. Landing speed was a bit
> >> higher but it
> >> > seemed to drop off step very fast..... As for getting up on
> >> step 160 Hp
> >> > says
> >> > it all! One notch of flaps was like throwing the hook
> >> (anchor) overboard.
> >> >
> >> > Noel
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> >> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
> >> >> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On
> >> Behalf Of shorty
> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 5:15 PM
> >> >> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
> >> >> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
> >> >> LSAs on floats
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "shorty"
> >> <shortnaked@golden.net>
> >> >>
> >> >> Good site here on Challengers. http://challenger.ca/
> >> >>
> >> >> I am not a Challenger owner , but I will say that they have a
> >> >> great group of
> >> >> owners that help each other out.
> >> >>
> >> >> That Site has a few videos that compare the 503 and 582
> >> Challenger on
> >> >> Floats. really shows you why a 582 is so popular although the
> >> >> 503 isa great
> >> >> engine.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Kitfox or Avid on floats is hard to Beat. Cruise in a side
> >> >> by side cabin
> >> >> on Amphibs from 80 to 110 mph with ease depending on the
> >> >> engine a 582 or
> >> >> 912 is my comparison.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Shorty
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> >> From: "Chris In Madison" <cowens@cnw.com>
> >> >> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 3:30 PM
> >> >> Subject: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
> >> LSAs on floats
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Chris In Madison"
> >> >> <cowens@cnw.com>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hi John,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You're the second person who's mentioned the Challenger
> >> >> aircraft to me.
> >> >> > Our kids' sitter's husband's father (yeah, I know...) is a
> >> >> Challenger
> >> >> > dealer out here in Waunakee (or is it Madison). He tells
> >> >> me it's loads of
> >> >> > fun to fly them as well. If two people say so, it must
> >> be true :-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I briefly looked at a couple of web sites that sell the
> >> >> Challenger, but
> >> >> > they were so horrible that I couldn't get a decent look at
> >> >> one. Perhaps
> >> >> > I'll try to get a closer look at one from the
> >> father-in-law, who's
> >> >> > apparently been selling them for a long time out here.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I might have to drop by the next time I'm up in your neck
> >> >> of the woods, so
> >> >> > to speak. Thanks for the info :-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Best regards,
> >> >> > Chris
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --------
> >> >> > Chris Owens
> >> >> > Waunakee, WI
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Read this topic online here:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=59678#59678
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats |
--> Seaplane-List message posted by: Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net>
jam-n wrote:
> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: jam-n <jghunter@nol.net>
>
>
> I'd love to have a 4-seat aircraft to haul the family around in, but I'm
> a little scared how much insurance is going to be on a 4-seater with
> enough capacity that can live on floats as well (thinking Murphy Moose
> on the big side; Tundra, Yukon, or Bush Caddy L-164 the next size down).
> I reckon I've still got some time to think about it, though.
>
I don't know about floatplanes specifically, but I asked my
insurance agent the following:
I'm building an experimental airplane, a Glastar Sportsman. I
have the option of building this airplane with 2, 3, or 4 seats. Is there any
significant difference
in the cost of insurance based on the number of seats installed, 2, 3,
or 4? I would be looking for a "full coverage" policy when it gets time
to obtain the insurance.
and her reply:
When you look at a breakdown on premium, the quote is probably 85% hull
premium and 15% liability premium. The number of seats is not going to
make a huge difference. You will be surcharged for 2 to 4 seats, but
not enough that should stop you from putting in 4 seats.
Her contact info is:
Melissa Perkins
mperkins@nationair.com
(800) 356-7075
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118
http://econ.duke.edu/~deej/sportsman/
"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats |
--> Seaplane-List message posted by: "shorty" <shortnaked@golden.net>
where is snaps video to show how to get off the water in 2 seconds?
LOL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 8:52 AM
Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats
> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer" <av8rps@tznet.com>
>
> Shorty;
>
> Yeah, my money would be on the fox for short takeoff. But it would be
> much more fair to compare straight floats to straight floats. Not an
> amphib fox against a straight float Supercub. I'm convinced the S/cub
> wouldn't stand a chance then. And if it were a lightweight two stroke in
> the Fox, it would be even more disheartening for the S/cub pilot.
>
> Yeah, you are 100 lbs lighter than my lead sled 4 stroke
> everything-on-it-but-the-kitchen-sink Kitfox. So I don't plan on
> challenging you to any takeoff contests anytime in the future? <GRIN>
>
> Paul
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "shorty" <shortnaked@golden.net>
> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:53 PM
> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats
>
>
>> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "shorty" <shortnaked@golden.net>
>>
>> I will vote for the Kitfox off the water quicker than a Super cub with
>> 160 hp
>>
>> Paul's Kitfox off the water in 8 seconds ?
>>
>> Mine is 100 lbs lighter ..............
>>
>>
>> Muahahahhwwaaaaa
>>
>> you did see the under 4 second take off s on ski right Noel ?
>>
>> :)
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:08 PM
>> Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats
>>
>>
>>> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>>>
>>> Paul this cub was on straight 200 floats...around half tanks and beside
>>> myself and the instructor for the float endorsement there wasn't much
>>> else
>>> on board. I saw a few of the places that plane had been into and to say
>>> it
>>> must have been tight would be an understatement.
>>>
>>> The Super cub was a great diversion. Just having the horsepower under
>>> your
>>> thumb! It took a bit of getting used to flying with the wrong hand (
>>> I'm a
>>> south paw) I don't think I'm going to try to get into one of the "bog
>>> holes" in my fox any time soon.
>>>
>>> Noel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf
>>>> Of Paul Seehafer
>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:30 PM
>>>> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>>>> LSAs on floats
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Noel,
>>>>
>>>> I'm surprised you'd find the Supercub that much better
>>>> performer off water
>>>> compared to a Kitfox. Not that a Supercub with 160 hp is any
>>>> slouch, as it
>>>> is a marvelous seaplane. But my little 80 hp amphib kitfox
>>>> will break water
>>>> in 8 seconds with 2 hours of fuel on board and me, whereas a
>>>> 180 hp amphib
>>>> Supercub can't come close to that (amphib vs. amphib
>>>> comparison) I know
>>>> this factually as one of my friends has one of the nicest
>>>> amphib Supercubs
>>>> on the planet. A Husky would be a better comparison to the Fox in my
>>>> opinion, but takeoff I'm confident the Kitfox would still win if the
>>>> aircraft are flown light. Now, if you load both airplanes up
>>>> with weight,
>>>> horsepower and large wings will win, thereby giving the Husky
>>>> the advantage.
>>>> But give me a 100 hp 912, or a 115 hp 914 in my Fox, and I'm
>>>> confident I
>>>> would turn the tables.
>>>>
>>>> I have some videos I need to get posted for you guys on the
>>>> kitfox/lazair
>>>> site. I have a Avid on floats doing a takeoff contest
>>>> against a Challenger,
>>>> and a Kitfox against an extremely light 90 hp Cub. Both are pretty
>>>> convincing of the Light Sport Aircrafts potential as
>>>> performers. Fwiw -
>>>> still the record holder for off the water takeoff is an Avid Flyer on
>>>> straight floats.....2.7 seconds from standing still to lift
>>>> off. You won't
>>>> find many airplanes that can do that on pavement. I guess
>>>> you can all tell
>>>> I am biased towards the Avid/Kitfox/ and Highlander, as they are all
>>>> derivatives of the original Dean Wilson Avid Flyer. And man do they
>>>> perform. After 1300 hours of float time in Avids and Foxes,
>>>> I can tell you
>>>> that you can't find a better performing, more versatile, capable, and
>>>> economical seaplane. And the best part is thats they are
>>>> just a hoooooot to
>>>> fly! When was the last time you watched someone do a
>>>> circular takeoff with
>>>> a float plane...on one float? With the Avid and Kitfox they
>>>> are so nimble
>>>> on controls that doing so is not difficult, assuming you are
>>>> familiar with
>>>> your airplane. And talk about versatile; my little Model IV
>>>> Kitfox on
>>>> Amphibs with a 80 hp 912 rotax can fly alongside of any
>>>> Supercub. In fact,
>>>> I have to slow down so they can keep up when at cruise. My
>>>> Kitfox is much
>>>> more compatible in cruise flight to an Aviat Husky seaplane,
>>>> even though
>>>> they have 180 hp and a constant speed prop (and cost about 6
>>>> times the money
>>>> of the fox).
>>>>
>>>> Ok, ok, probably a little hard to believe. So if my picture
>>>> goes through,
>>>> here is a panel shot from in my 80 hp Kitfox amphib that says
>>>> it all. Just
>>>> check out my gps mph reading in the middle of the panel, my indicated
>>>> airspeed, my altitude, and my rpm on the right side of the
>>>> panel. You will
>>>> notice this little seaplane is VERY capable for cross country
>>>> work, as well
>>>> as for small lakes and airports. (incidentally, 5800 rpm is
>>>> max power on a
>>>> 912. Also, I more typically fly around at 4900-5000 rpm
>>>> giving me right
>>>> around 100 mph tas while burning all of 3.5 gph of regular
>>>> unleaded auto
>>>> fuel)
>>>>
>>>> I'm not trying to knock anyone elses seaplane here. As
>>>> personally, I've
>>>> never met an airplane I didn't like. But my preference is an
>>>> Avid and
>>>> Kitfox. Not because I'm biased and close minded toward other
>>>> aircraft, but
>>>> because I know how well the Avid and Kitfox work, both as
>>>> land planes and
>>>> seaplanes. So for those of you looking for an economical
>>>> alternative, the
>>>> Avid and Kitfox choice is a very good one in my opinion. And
>>>> there are a
>>>> lot of good used airplanes around, as well as kits from the
>>>> manufacturers
>>>> Kitfox, Just Aircraft co. (Highlander), and Airdale (for the Avid).
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>>>> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 5:43 PM
>>>> Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>>>> LSAs on floats
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys"
>>>> <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>>>> >
>>>> > Shorty:
>>>> >
>>>> > I did some time in a PA 18 Super Cub last
>>>> week.......finally got most of
>>>> > the
>>>> > time for the endorsement. Wow what a ride... 160 Hp gets
>>>> the lead off the
>>>> > water real fast. Having the instructor in the rear seat
>>>> was perfect.
>>>> > Most
>>>> > of the time I was hardly aware he was there. There wasn't the same
>>>> > pressure
>>>> > as having an instructor sitting beside you. The plane
>>>> itself behaved like
>>>> > a
>>>> > 'fox on a mega dose of steroids. Landing speed was a bit
>>>> higher but it
>>>> > seemed to drop off step very fast..... As for getting up on
>>>> step 160 Hp
>>>> > says
>>>> > it all! One notch of flaps was like throwing the hook
>>>> (anchor) overboard.
>>>> >
>>>> > Noel
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>>> >> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> >> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On
>>>> Behalf Of shorty
>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 5:15 PM
>>>> >> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
>>>> >> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>>>> >> LSAs on floats
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "shorty"
>>>> <shortnaked@golden.net>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Good site here on Challengers. http://challenger.ca/
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I am not a Challenger owner , but I will say that they have a
>>>> >> great group of
>>>> >> owners that help each other out.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> That Site has a few videos that compare the 503 and 582
>>>> Challenger on
>>>> >> Floats. really shows you why a 582 is so popular although the
>>>> >> 503 isa great
>>>> >> engine.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Kitfox or Avid on floats is hard to Beat. Cruise in a side
>>>> >> by side cabin
>>>> >> on Amphibs from 80 to 110 mph with ease depending on the
>>>> >> engine a 582 or
>>>> >> 912 is my comparison.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Shorty
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> >> From: "Chris In Madison" <cowens@cnw.com>
>>>> >> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 3:30 PM
>>>> >> Subject: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>>>> LSAs on floats
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Chris In Madison"
>>>> >> <cowens@cnw.com>
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Hi John,
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > You're the second person who's mentioned the Challenger
>>>> >> aircraft to me.
>>>> >> > Our kids' sitter's husband's father (yeah, I know...) is a
>>>> >> Challenger
>>>> >> > dealer out here in Waunakee (or is it Madison). He tells
>>>> >> me it's loads of
>>>> >> > fun to fly them as well. If two people say so, it must
>>>> be true :-)
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > I briefly looked at a couple of web sites that sell the
>>>> >> Challenger, but
>>>> >> > they were so horrible that I couldn't get a decent look at
>>>> >> one. Perhaps
>>>> >> > I'll try to get a closer look at one from the
>>>> father-in-law, who's
>>>> >> > apparently been selling them for a long time out here.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > I might have to drop by the next time I'm up in your neck
>>>> >> of the woods, so
>>>> >> > to speak. Thanks for the info :-)
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Best regards,
>>>> >> > Chris
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > --------
>>>> >> > Chris Owens
>>>> >> > Waunakee, WI
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > Read this topic online here:
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=59678#59678
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats |
--> Seaplane-List message posted by: "shorty" <shortnaked@golden.net>
add 2 seconds then Noel.
582 Kitfox on ampibs off the water in 6 seconds LOL
show me a super cub off in 6 seconds on straights will yah !!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 9:41 AM
Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats
> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>
> True but skis a bit lighter than amphib floats. You also have the "C" box
> with the GSC/Warp prop.
>
> Noel
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of shorty
>> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 11:23 PM
>> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>> LSAs on floats
>>
>>
>> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "shorty" <shortnaked@golden.net>
>>
>> I will vote for the Kitfox off the water quicker than a Super
>> cub with 160
>> hp
>>
>> Paul's Kitfox off the water in 8 seconds ?
>>
>> Mine is 100 lbs lighter ..............
>>
>>
>> Muahahahhwwaaaaa
>>
>> you did see the under 4 second take off s on ski right Noel ?
>>
>> :)
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:08 PM
>> Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>> LSAs on floats
>>
>>
>> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys"
>> <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>> >
>> > Paul this cub was on straight 200 floats...around half
>> tanks and beside
>> > myself and the instructor for the float endorsement there
>> wasn't much else
>> > on board. I saw a few of the places that plane had been
>> into and to say
>> > it
>> > must have been tight would be an understatement.
>> >
>> > The Super cub was a great diversion. Just having the
>> horsepower under
>> > your
>> > thumb! It took a bit of getting used to flying with the
>> wrong hand ( I'm
>> > a
>> > south paw) I don't think I'm going to try to get into one
>> of the "bog
>> > holes" in my fox any time soon.
>> >
>> > Noel
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
>> >> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf
>> >> Of Paul Seehafer
>> >> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:30 PM
>> >> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
>> >> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>> >> LSAs on floats
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Noel,
>> >>
>> >> I'm surprised you'd find the Supercub that much better
>> >> performer off water
>> >> compared to a Kitfox. Not that a Supercub with 160 hp is any
>> >> slouch, as it
>> >> is a marvelous seaplane. But my little 80 hp amphib kitfox
>> >> will break water
>> >> in 8 seconds with 2 hours of fuel on board and me, whereas a
>> >> 180 hp amphib
>> >> Supercub can't come close to that (amphib vs. amphib
>> >> comparison) I know
>> >> this factually as one of my friends has one of the nicest
>> >> amphib Supercubs
>> >> on the planet. A Husky would be a better comparison to
>> the Fox in my
>> >> opinion, but takeoff I'm confident the Kitfox would still
>> win if the
>> >> aircraft are flown light. Now, if you load both airplanes up
>> >> with weight,
>> >> horsepower and large wings will win, thereby giving the Husky
>> >> the advantage.
>> >> But give me a 100 hp 912, or a 115 hp 914 in my Fox, and I'm
>> >> confident I
>> >> would turn the tables.
>> >>
>> >> I have some videos I need to get posted for you guys on the
>> >> kitfox/lazair
>> >> site. I have a Avid on floats doing a takeoff contest
>> >> against a Challenger,
>> >> and a Kitfox against an extremely light 90 hp Cub. Both are pretty
>> >> convincing of the Light Sport Aircrafts potential as
>> >> performers. Fwiw -
>> >> still the record holder for off the water takeoff is an
>> Avid Flyer on
>> >> straight floats.....2.7 seconds from standing still to lift
>> >> off. You won't
>> >> find many airplanes that can do that on pavement. I guess
>> >> you can all tell
>> >> I am biased towards the Avid/Kitfox/ and Highlander, as
>> they are all
>> >> derivatives of the original Dean Wilson Avid Flyer. And
>> man do they
>> >> perform. After 1300 hours of float time in Avids and Foxes,
>> >> I can tell you
>> >> that you can't find a better performing, more versatile,
>> capable, and
>> >> economical seaplane. And the best part is thats they are
>> >> just a hoooooot to
>> >> fly! When was the last time you watched someone do a
>> >> circular takeoff with
>> >> a float plane...on one float? With the Avid and Kitfox they
>> >> are so nimble
>> >> on controls that doing so is not difficult, assuming you are
>> >> familiar with
>> >> your airplane. And talk about versatile; my little Model IV
>> >> Kitfox on
>> >> Amphibs with a 80 hp 912 rotax can fly alongside of any
>> >> Supercub. In fact,
>> >> I have to slow down so they can keep up when at cruise. My
>> >> Kitfox is much
>> >> more compatible in cruise flight to an Aviat Husky seaplane,
>> >> even though
>> >> they have 180 hp and a constant speed prop (and cost about 6
>> >> times the money
>> >> of the fox).
>> >>
>> >> Ok, ok, probably a little hard to believe. So if my picture
>> >> goes through,
>> >> here is a panel shot from in my 80 hp Kitfox amphib that says
>> >> it all. Just
>> >> check out my gps mph reading in the middle of the panel,
>> my indicated
>> >> airspeed, my altitude, and my rpm on the right side of the
>> >> panel. You will
>> >> notice this little seaplane is VERY capable for cross country
>> >> work, as well
>> >> as for small lakes and airports. (incidentally, 5800 rpm is
>> >> max power on a
>> >> 912. Also, I more typically fly around at 4900-5000 rpm
>> >> giving me right
>> >> around 100 mph tas while burning all of 3.5 gph of regular
>> >> unleaded auto
>> >> fuel)
>> >>
>> >> I'm not trying to knock anyone elses seaplane here. As
>> >> personally, I've
>> >> never met an airplane I didn't like. But my preference is an
>> >> Avid and
>> >> Kitfox. Not because I'm biased and close minded toward other
>> >> aircraft, but
>> >> because I know how well the Avid and Kitfox work, both as
>> >> land planes and
>> >> seaplanes. So for those of you looking for an economical
>> >> alternative, the
>> >> Avid and Kitfox choice is a very good one in my opinion. And
>> >> there are a
>> >> lot of good used airplanes around, as well as kits from the
>> >> manufacturers
>> >> Kitfox, Just Aircraft co. (Highlander), and Airdale (for the Avid).
>> >>
>> >> Paul
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>> >> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 5:43 PM
>> >> Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>> >> LSAs on floats
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys"
>> >> <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
>> >> >
>> >> > Shorty:
>> >> >
>> >> > I did some time in a PA 18 Super Cub last
>> >> week.......finally got most of
>> >> > the
>> >> > time for the endorsement. Wow what a ride... 160 Hp gets
>> >> the lead off the
>> >> > water real fast. Having the instructor in the rear seat
>> >> was perfect.
>> >> > Most
>> >> > of the time I was hardly aware he was there. There
>> wasn't the same
>> >> > pressure
>> >> > as having an instructor sitting beside you. The plane
>> >> itself behaved like
>> >> > a
>> >> > 'fox on a mega dose of steroids. Landing speed was a bit
>> >> higher but it
>> >> > seemed to drop off step very fast..... As for getting up on
>> >> step 160 Hp
>> >> > says
>> >> > it all! One notch of flaps was like throwing the hook
>> >> (anchor) overboard.
>> >> >
>> >> > Noel
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> >> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
>> >> >> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On
>> >> Behalf Of shorty
>> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 5:15 PM
>> >> >> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
>> >> >> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>> >> >> LSAs on floats
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "shorty"
>> >> <shortnaked@golden.net>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Good site here on Challengers. http://challenger.ca/
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I am not a Challenger owner , but I will say that they have a
>> >> >> great group of
>> >> >> owners that help each other out.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That Site has a few videos that compare the 503 and 582
>> >> Challenger on
>> >> >> Floats. really shows you why a 582 is so popular although the
>> >> >> 503 isa great
>> >> >> engine.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Kitfox or Avid on floats is hard to Beat. Cruise in a side
>> >> >> by side cabin
>> >> >> on Amphibs from 80 to 110 mph with ease depending on the
>> >> >> engine a 582 or
>> >> >> 912 is my comparison.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Shorty
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> >> From: "Chris In Madison" <cowens@cnw.com>
>> >> >> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
>> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 3:30 PM
>> >> >> Subject: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
>> >> LSAs on floats
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Chris In Madison"
>> >> >> <cowens@cnw.com>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Hi John,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > You're the second person who's mentioned the Challenger
>> >> >> aircraft to me.
>> >> >> > Our kids' sitter's husband's father (yeah, I know...) is a
>> >> >> Challenger
>> >> >> > dealer out here in Waunakee (or is it Madison). He tells
>> >> >> me it's loads of
>> >> >> > fun to fly them as well. If two people say so, it must
>> >> be true :-)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I briefly looked at a couple of web sites that sell the
>> >> >> Challenger, but
>> >> >> > they were so horrible that I couldn't get a decent look at
>> >> >> one. Perhaps
>> >> >> > I'll try to get a closer look at one from the
>> >> father-in-law, who's
>> >> >> > apparently been selling them for a long time out here.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I might have to drop by the next time I'm up in your neck
>> >> >> of the woods, so
>> >> >> > to speak. Thanks for the info :-)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Best regards,
>> >> >> > Chris
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --------
>> >> >> > Chris Owens
>> >> >> > Waunakee, WI
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Read this topic online here:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=59678#59678
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on LSAs on floats |
--> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
A day or so after flying the Cub I did get the Beothuck Explorer's (A.K.A.
Kitfox III-A) floats wet. I agree that it's a lot more fun... make the FUN
than the Cub. I liken it to the difference between The Honda Silver Wing
GL-500 Interstate motorcycle I used to ride and the Honda Gold Wing. I
really liked the little wing. The engine was buttetproof and the bike was
big enough to haul my considerable rump from Newfoundland to places like
Montreal and Washington DC. The first time I was on a Gold Wing 1200 It was
an enjoyable change from the Caf racers and Silver Wing I had been riding
but there is no way I could ever want to own one.
I guess I'm a bit of a minimalist. I have one of the first 224 Miatas to
hit this continent. When it arrived here they didn't even know it was going
to be called a Miata. It is a bit underpowered, has no air conditioning
(wow) and no power steering (power steering on a sports car?) I've driven a
few later models and with their bigger engines, Air, Power Steering, Power
Windows and other additional gizmos not one of them comes close to providing
the fun my little 17y.o. beastie can. I'd trade it in a flash.....for
something like a Healey 3000 or an early four wheel Morgie or even a good
MG-A. I think that makes me a member in a rather large club and I don't
expect to see a long line of Healeys outside my door any time soon.
Noel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf
> Of Paul Seehafer
> Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 10:44 AM
> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
> LSAs on floats
>
>
> --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Paul Seehafer"
> <av8rps@tznet.com>
>
> Noel,
>
> That's a very interesting story supporting tube and fabric.
> And anyone that
> has seen how some of the bush planes north of us get used, it
> is certainly
> believable. I guess I won't be hiring any ferry pilots anytime soon
> (snicker).
>
> Neat to hear you experienced a Lake with your Dad. They are
> fun airplanes.
> But I do agree with you that you have to be careful with
> those nose gear
> doors. Traditionally they get all messed up when driving up
> onto a beach
> and then when driving back into the water later, the pilot
> tries to retract
> the gear when the nosewheel isn't straight. So whenever I do
> that, once I
> enter the water and the plane is floating, I shut down and
> crawl out onto
> the nose and reach down to verify the nosewheel has centered.
> If it isn't I
> find shallow water and then just swivel it back into a
> neutral position,
> then crawl back in the cockpit and retract it. Never had a
> problem by doing
> so. But it is easy to see when you drive into the water with
> the gear down
> how the nosewheel can not swivel itself back straight, as it
> is rare to have
> enough beach to go straight back into the water. Interesting
> aside; one of
> my lake instructors told me it is extremely important to
> maintain a correct
> hull angle to keep the nosewheel doors from catching a wave.
> So he spent a
> lot of time showing me correct hull angle. After I didn't do
> it right
> numerous times he got a little frustrated and said 'Ok, put
> it this way.
> Just pretend your family jewels are out there between those
> two nose wheel
> doors. Now, do you really want to be dragging them in the
> water at 50 miles
> an hour?" Worked for me. Never since have I let those nose
> wheel doors
> drag too nose low...
>
> Regarding your previous comment about landing a Supercub in a short
> place/bog; Once I landed my Avid Flyer on straight floats in
> a 14 acre lake
> (pond) that was in the shape of a circle, with a large
> circular island in
> the middle of it (offering very little landing area width,
> and none in a
> straight line), and power lines running across one end (of
> course the end
> you had to take off over). I know a Supercub wouldn't fare
> well in that
> small body of water, because there is no way he could ever
> get back out.
> The Avid had no trouble. Climbed out right over the
> highlines with room to
> spare. Once again, the Supercub is a phenomenal airplane.
> But when you do
> the horsepower to weight, and wing loading comparisons of the
> early Avids
> and Kitfoxes against it, the Avid and Kitfox will have the distinct
> advantage for takeoff, climb, and landing. Remember, early
> Avids had a 22
> mph stall speed. But out of fairness to those reading this,
> I will admit
> that my newer laminar flow wing, four stroke Kitfox would
> probably require
> the same landing area as a Supercub, possible more, as my
> current Kitfox is
> a little hard to slow down. But it will cruise faster than the cub.
>
> Paul
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:54 PM
> Subject: RE: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
> LSAs on floats
>
>
> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys"
> <noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
> >
> > BTW I'm with you on the tube planes. A couple of years ago
> I had to do
> > some
> > work on a Super Cub that flew in from BC (British Columbia)
> with the tail
> > bent to a ridiculous angle. We had to resection longerons
> and replace a
> > fair bit of the welds in the tail of the plane. My point
> is if it had
> > been
> > a Cessna it would never have made the first ten feet of the trans
> > continental flight. Monocoque construction doesn't like
> dents let alone
> > bends.
> >
> > The ferry pilot said he didn't notice the defect in the tail at all.
> > Another reason to be very careful when having your plane
> ferried. I have
> > it
> > on good authority when the plane left BC it was in perfect
> condition.
> >
> > Re: your Lake. For quite a few years I beat all over this
> island in my
> > fathers Lake LA-4. Quite the lovely plane but..... Darn
> there always has
> > to be a but... But.... With that plane you have to be
> very careful that
> > the front gear doors are closing completely before going
> for a swim. To
> > do
> > this hold the main gear locked with Vise grips and tie the
> tail down while
> > doing a retract. The gear must be able to fully retract
> and still close
> > the
> > doors fully.
> >
> > I remember on time hitting a wake and having water short
> out our com radio
> > for several days.
> >
> > Noel
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com
> >> [mailto:owner-seaplane-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf
> >> Of Paul Seehafer
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:49 PM
> >> To: seaplane-list@matronics.com
> >> Subject: Re: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
> >> LSAs on floats
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Chris,
> >>
> >> Glad you enjoyed the article. I'll be doing more in the future.
> >>
> >> I'm also glad you enjoyed EAA's seaplane base. It is in my
> >> opinion EAA's
> >> crown jewel. Not big, but very high quality and extra
> >> special. It has
> >> introduced most of us to the wonderful world of seaplanes.
> >> Keep dreaming
> >> and one day you will find yourself owning one.
> >>
> >> Metal airplanes vs tube and fabric....hmmmmm. Well, here's
> >> my two cents on
> >> that. If you look at race cars hitting walls at 150 mph,
> >> notice what they
> >> are in. Chromoly steel tube frames. Thats because they are
> >> light and can
> >> handle loads better pound for pound. So a tube and fabric
> >> airplane is much
> >> the same. Look at some of our most famous airplanes (cub,
> >> taylorcraft,
> >> stinson, waco, stearman, etc, etc) that have been around the
> >> longest. They
> >> have held up very well over the decades. Not that modern day
> >> Cessnas and
> >> Pipers haven't, but aluminum is more subject to metal fatigue
> >> than would be
> >> the steel tube frame. I fly a lake amphibian as well as my
> >> Kitfox. The
> >> lake is built like a tank compared to a Cessna. Yet it has
> >> had a lot of
> >> fatigue cracks that had to be patched due to water
> operations causing
> >> excessive metal fatigue. And the airplane only has a little
> >> more than 2000
> >> hours on it. Imagine what it will look like when it hits
> >> 20,000 hours like
> >> a lot of old J-3's have probably endured? Don't get me
> >> wrong, I love my old
> >> aluminum lake amphib. But if I had to crash in one or the
> >> other, I'd prefer
> >> to be in my tube and fabric airplane. Aluminum just doesn't
> >> have it when it
> >> comes to hitting the wall...
> >>
> >> Keep your dream alive to one day own a seaplane. It's
> really not as
> >> expensive as you may think.
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> ps - here's a pic of a few airplanes doing a stop on one of
> >> the lakes we
> >> used for our poker run at the Eagle River Wisconsin Seaplane
> >> Fly In this
> >> last weekend. The photo represents about 1/2 of the
> >> airplanes in the poker
> >> run. The Highlander amphib is in the foreground with my
> >> Kitfox amphib next
> >> to it. This ought to get your heart pumping!
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Chris In Madison" <cowens@cnw.com>
> >> To: <seaplane-list@matronics.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 8:40 AM
> >> Subject: Seaplane-List: Re: EAA Sport Pilot article on
> LSAs on floats
> >>
> >>
> >> > --> Seaplane-List message posted by: "Chris In Madison"
> >> <cowens@cnw.com>
> >> >
> >> > Hi Paul,
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for the great article. I had never given
> >> floatplanes any thought
> >> > until recently. I don't remember what made me think more
> >> seriously about
> >> > them, but it may have been the video for the Murphy Moose
> >> that I received
> >> > with a product information kit earlier this year. I went
> >> to Oshkosh for
> >> > the first time this year and saw a Beaver on amphibious
> >> floats, then took
> >> > a trip over to the seaplane base. After that, I was
> >> completely hooked. I
> >> > now realize that I want to be on floats when I grow up.
> >> Now I just need
> >> > to see if I'll ever be able to afford to fly in that capacity!
> >> >
> >> > I've never really taken a serious look at a fabric-covered
> >> aircraft. I
> >> > always assumed that an all-metal plane was a better option.
> >> Perhaps I
> >> > need to take another look at them, especially for all the
> >> reasons you
> >> > described in your article.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks again for the great read :-)
> >> >
> >> > Best regards,
> >> > Chris
> >> >
> >> > --------
> >> > Chris Owens
> >> > Waunakee, WI
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Read this topic online here:
> >> >
> >> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=59591#59591
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|