About float planes....

[Fred Choate]

Hey folks......

Being a low time pilot (65 TT), I have a question about float operations,
and I suppose it may carry over to land planes as well.

Anyway, yesterday I took a fellow up on a scenic flight around Seattle.
What a perfect day for it too.....I never realized how pretty urban areas
are from the air. They seem so peaceful from altitude...LOL. Anyway, as I
flew from west to east north of Seattle, I was monitoring 122.9, and made a
few blind calls as to my altitude and location as Kenmore air has a lot of
float traffic coming in and out of Seattle. My plan was to fly east to Lake
Sammamish, and then turn south and head on back down to Puyallup. As I
neared Lake Sammamish, I heard a call that an aircraft was departing
Sammamish........I looked at my chart, and saw no airport, or anything there
indicating any airfield at the Lake, and thought that maybe I didn't hear
the call correctly. A few moments later, I heard the call that "float plane
XXXX is leaving the water eastbound, Sammamish". I looked down at the lake,
and sure enough, there was a floater climbing out. I was at 2000 ft, so no
issue, and I had made a blind call about 3 minutes earlier announcing my
position, altitude, and direction of flight, but I guess I didn't think that
there would be traffic landing or departing the lake.

I guess my point is, is that I learned something yesterday. It didn't occur
to me that there could be float traffic over or around many of the lakes in
our area, and to listen a bit closer to the radio. After seeing the plane
below me, it occurred to me that the aircraft had called his intentions, and
asked for any traffic any the vicinity to let him know, but when he called
out "Sammamish" and I looked at the chart and didn't see any airport or
seaport identification at Sammamish, I guessed I was hearing communication
from a more distant airport, and it didn't click.

It is important to know the names of lakes you are flying over or around, as
well as small towns that may have fields that pilots may use for landing
strips, even if they are not shown on the chart. I kind of felt that maybe
the pilot of the float plane should have said a bit more to clarify what he
was doing. That maybe something that they do there all the time, but not
flying that area very often, I wasn't aware of the "local calls" that might
be made for it, so it confused me slightly.

Anybody else ever had a similar experience?

Fred C.

[RomeoMike]

Fred Choate wrote:

I kind of felt that maybe
> the pilot of the float plane should have said a bit more to clarify what he
> was doing.


I am familiar with the Seattle area, though I've never flown any kind of
plane there. Having at one time been a seaplane pilot, I find myself
looking up when one goes over, and that is a frequent occurence in
Seattle and environs. So I think any pilot there would be alert to
seaplane activity and be paying attention to the water as well as to
airstrips on sectionals (and the usual scan, etc.).

[Fred Choate]

Right....which is something that I didn't really think about until
yesterday, and it is something that should be touched on my local
instructors.

Thanks...

Fred


"RomeoMike" > wrote in message
...
> Fred Choate wrote:
>
> I kind of felt that maybe
>> the pilot of the float plane should have said a bit more to clarify what
>> he was doing.
>
>
> I am familiar with the Seattle area, though I've never flown any kind of
> plane there. Having at one time been a seaplane pilot, I find myself
> looking up when one goes over, and that is a frequent occurence in Seattle
> and environs. So I think any pilot there would be alert to seaplane
> activity and be paying attention to the water as well as to airstrips on
> sectionals (and the usual scan, etc.).

[[email protected]]

"Fred Choate" > wrote:
> Right....which is something that I didn't really think about until
> yesterday, and it is something that should be touched on my local
> instructors.

Isn't that "Situational Awareness"?
Some bodies of water may = seaplanes.

But I agree, never hurts to be reminded. Even though symbols appear on
sectionals for gliderports, I've been surprised to learn that many CFIs
don't realize that some glider operations do not use radios, so while
visual scanning anywhere is always a given, you can't always count on
them announcing their presence/positions.

[Fred Choate]

Yes it is.......which is why it sort of bothered me. It is a "situation"
that I didn't consider, therefore wasn't really being "aware" of it.... ;)

Fred


> wrote in message
...
> "Fred Choate" > wrote:
>> Right....which is something that I didn't really think about until
>> yesterday, and it is something that should be touched on my local
>> instructors.
>
> Isn't that "Situational Awareness"?
> Some bodies of water may = seaplanes.
>
> But I agree, never hurts to be reminded. Even though symbols appear on
> sectionals for gliderports, I've been surprised to learn that many CFIs
> don't realize that some glider operations do not use radios, so while
> visual scanning anywhere is always a given, you can't always count on
> them announcing their presence/positions.

[Peter Duniho]

"Fred Choate" > wrote in message
...
> [...]
> Anybody else ever had a similar experience?

Sure. I operate my seaplane from Lake Sammamish regularly. Every now and
then, there's another seaplane there at the same time I am. IMHO, you miss
the point when you write "I kind of felt that maybe the pilot of the float
plane should have said a bit more to clarify what he was doing". That there
was a radio call at all was unusual, and so was the coincidence that you
happened to be listening on that frequency. Worrying about WHAT was said on
the radio call is pointless.

I don't even bother with the radio. I didn't even realize that the Kenmore
traffic was in the habit of using their frequency for Lake Sammamish
operations, but a) it's not an authorized frequency for Lake Sammamish, and
b) the majority of traffic in the area won't be listening on that frequency
(assuming they are listening to any frequency at all).

As with every other area away from an airport, it's important to be aware of
the possibility for air traffic. Yes, over waterways you have the
additional possibility of seaplane traffic, but frankly I don't see this is
a significant difference from the usual "see and avoid" each pilot needs to
be using in the first place. If you are flying in a particular area, then
anyone else could be too. Lake Sammamish in particular is a reasonably
popular place for any airplane to be; the transient landplane traffic flying
over the lake far outnumbers the seaplane traffic, so one ought to be
looking out the window in any case.

Pete

[Fred Choate]

Lesson learned for sure. I am more upset with myself for not thinking about
it than anything. You make a good point about the radios and that point is
taken....thank you. I expect that there will likely be little things
learned on many of my flights in the near and distant future....

Fred


"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Fred Choate" > wrote in message
> ...
>> [...]
>> Anybody else ever had a similar experience?
>
> Sure. I operate my seaplane from Lake Sammamish regularly. Every now and
> then, there's another seaplane there at the same time I am. IMHO, you
> miss the point when you write "I kind of felt that maybe the pilot of the
> float plane should have said a bit more to clarify what he was doing".
> That there was a radio call at all was unusual, and so was the coincidence
> that you happened to be listening on that frequency. Worrying about WHAT
> was said on the radio call is pointless.
>
> I don't even bother with the radio. I didn't even realize that the
> Kenmore traffic was in the habit of using their frequency for Lake
> Sammamish operations, but a) it's not an authorized frequency for Lake
> Sammamish, and b) the majority of traffic in the area won't be listening
> on that frequency (assuming they are listening to any frequency at all).
>
> As with every other area away from an airport, it's important to be aware
> of the possibility for air traffic. Yes, over waterways you have the
> additional possibility of seaplane traffic, but frankly I don't see this
> is a significant difference from the usual "see and avoid" each pilot
> needs to be using in the first place. If you are flying in a particular
> area, then anyone else could be too. Lake Sammamish in particular is a
> reasonably popular place for any airplane to be; the transient landplane
> traffic flying over the lake far outnumbers the seaplane traffic, so one
> ought to be looking out the window in any case.
>
> Pete
>

[john smith]

Don't even get me started on pilots busting an active aerobatic box
because they didn't look at the charts or get current NOTAMs before they
went flying!

[Blueskies]

"Fred Choate" > wrote in message ...
> Lesson learned for sure. ... I expect that there will likely be little things learned on many of my flights in the
> near and distant future....
>
> Fred

Like they say...this is ticket to learn...

[Seth Masia]

I got my float rating on Lake Washington, and we used Sammamish as the prime
training area. I should think you'll see a ton of floatplane traffic
popping back and forth between the two big lakes and Union. Most of this
traffic is at lower altitudes, and it's all VFR. It also moves slowly and
is easy to spot -- probably more easily seen than the average helicopter.

Almost all floatplanes are high-wingers, either Cessnas or Cubs or Beavers.
If you see one descending toward a lake, be sure that the pilot is staring
at the water surface and not looking for you: he or she is looking at boats,
at wave patterns, and for logs, waterfowl and especially for jet skis.

On Lake Washington, be alert for plenty of floatplanes near Kenmore at the
north end and near Wiley Post at the south end. These guys have their own
patterns that depend entirely on wind direction and on their oddball taxi
routes across the water surface, but there are some standard arrival routes.
If you fly into neighboring airports, especially Renton, ask a local about
them.

Union is where most of the scheduled and air taxi floatplane traffic lives,
mostly Twin Otters and Beavers.

Seth


"Fred Choate" > wrote in message
...
> Hey folks......
>
> Being a low time pilot (65 TT), I have a question about float operations,
> and I suppose it may carry over to land planes as well.
>
> Anyway, yesterday I took a fellow up on a scenic flight around Seattle.
> What a perfect day for it too.....I never realized how pretty urban areas
> are from the air. They seem so peaceful from altitude...LOL. Anyway, as
> I flew from west to east north of Seattle, I was monitoring 122.9, and
> made a few blind calls as to my altitude and location as Kenmore air has a
> lot of float traffic coming in and out of Seattle. My plan was to fly
> east to Lake Sammamish, and then turn south and head on back down to
> Puyallup. As I neared Lake Sammamish, I heard a call that an aircraft was
> departing Sammamish........I looked at my chart, and saw no airport, or
> anything there indicating any airfield at the Lake, and thought that maybe
> I didn't hear the call correctly. A few moments later, I heard the call
> that "float plane XXXX is leaving the water eastbound, Sammamish". I
> looked down at the lake, and sure enough, there was a floater climbing
> out. I was at 2000 ft, so no issue, and I had made a blind call about 3
> minutes earlier announcing my position, altitude, and direction of flight,
> but I guess I didn't think that there would be traffic landing or
> departing the lake.
>
> I guess my point is, is that I learned something yesterday. It didn't
> occur to me that there could be float traffic over or around many of the
> lakes in our area, and to listen a bit closer to the radio. After seeing
> the plane below me, it occurred to me that the aircraft had called his
> intentions, and asked for any traffic any the vicinity to let him know,
> but when he called out "Sammamish" and I looked at the chart and didn't
> see any airport or seaport identification at Sammamish, I guessed I was
> hearing communication from a more distant airport, and it didn't click.
>
> It is important to know the names of lakes you are flying over or around,
> as well as small towns that may have fields that pilots may use for
> landing strips, even if they are not shown on the chart. I kind of felt
> that maybe the pilot of the float plane should have said a bit more to
> clarify what he was doing. That maybe something that they do there all
> the time, but not flying that area very often, I wasn't aware of the
> "local calls" that might be made for it, so it confused me slightly.
>
> Anybody else ever had a similar experience?
>
> Fred C.
>
>

[RomeoMike]

wrote:

>
>
> Isn't that "Situational Awareness"?
> Some bodies of water may = seaplanes.
>
> But I agree, never hurts to be reminded. Even though symbols appear on
> sectionals for gliderports, I've been surprised to learn that many CFIs
> don't realize that some glider operations do not use radios, so while
> visual scanning anywhere is always a given, you can't always count on
> them announcing their presence/positions.

Very good other example. And to ?complete the reason for the scan and
awareness consider that some seaplanes, like other planes, don't have
radios...and then there are the skydivers...and...

[Eric Bartsch]

As several people have pointed out, Lake Sammamish is used for seaplane
training quite a bit, since it is very near to places like Kenmore Air.
Since you live in the Seattle area, I'd highly recommend taking a dual
instruction lesson at Kenmore. I was visiting Seattle a couple of weeks
ago and arranged for some dual instruction in a DHC-2 Beaver. The folks
at Kenmore were great, and the experience of flying a Beaver on floats
was outstanding.

Kenmore also has a couple of super cubs on floats that are normally
used for training, and they are probably a more appropriate first
seaplane to fly than a Beaver. Still I'd recommend the Beaver to anyone
willing to pay the hourly rate. In 1.1 hours we did 6 water takeoffs &
landings and I'd say about 3 1/2 were unassisted. Coming from flying
various Cessnas & Pipers, its really fun to fly a plane with a big
round Pratt & Whitney engine on the front that takes 6 gallons of oil.
No matter which plane you choose, flying a seaplane is definitely an
experience to add to your flying background.

Eric B

[Fred Choate]

I would LOVE to do this, and plan on it, but probably not until I get a bit
more experience. Currently, I have only flown a 172. I did fly a 182 once,
but that was an intro flight, and so I didn't really know what was going on.

Thanks for the heads up though. I didn't realize that Kenmore did that sort
of thing....

Fred


"Eric Bartsch" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> As several people have pointed out, Lake Sammamish is used for seaplane
> training quite a bit, since it is very near to places like Kenmore Air.
> Since you live in the Seattle area, I'd highly recommend taking a dual
> instruction lesson at Kenmore. I was visiting Seattle a couple of weeks
> ago and arranged for some dual instruction in a DHC-2 Beaver. The folks
> at Kenmore were great, and the experience of flying a Beaver on floats
> was outstanding.
>
> Kenmore also has a couple of super cubs on floats that are normally
> used for training, and they are probably a more appropriate first
> seaplane to fly than a Beaver. Still I'd recommend the Beaver to anyone
> willing to pay the hourly rate. In 1.1 hours we did 6 water takeoffs &
> landings and I'd say about 3 1/2 were unassisted. Coming from flying
> various Cessnas & Pipers, its really fun to fly a plane with a big
> round Pratt & Whitney engine on the front that takes 6 gallons of oil.
> No matter which plane you choose, flying a seaplane is definitely an
> experience to add to your flying background.
>
> Eric B
>

[[email protected]]

Fred Choate wrote:
> I would LOVE to do this, and plan on it, but probably not until I get a bit
> more experience. Currently, I have only flown a 172. I did fly a 182 once,
> but that was an intro flight, and so I didn't really know what was going on.
>
> Thanks for the heads up though. I didn't realize that Kenmore did that sort
> of thing....
>

I did my floatplane rating in Alaska literally right after taking my
private checkride near Boston, which was a pretty stark but enjoyable
change. I didn't plan it that way, but that's how it happened. Now is a
great time to learn things because you have fewer ingrained habits and
are more inclined to learn without ego. I believe the military has guys
landing jets on carriers within a few hundred hours, just to give you
some idea of what's possible given the right kind of attitude and
training.

At 65 hours you will be getting surprised frequently, just the nature
of the beast. If you're not being surprised it's because you're not
spreading your wings and that means you're not learning. I think this
is the biggest challenge new pilots face because it's the first time
you're on your own completely and if you're a responsible adult it's
sometimes more than a little scary.

I think a lot more people quit aviation at this point out of simple
fear than is openly discussed, not least because it's the last thing a
lot of us would want to admit to, least of all to other pilots who were
"man enough" to make it through. Of course this is a caricature, but I
think it's more common than is given credit because it's invisible.

Anyway, my only advice, having the sum of 250TT under my belt, is to
keep on chugging. Don't go more than a few weeks without flying, even
just around the pattern, and find ways to challenge yourself.
Crosswinds were my first big bugbear, so I found a CFI who would take
me out in the gnarliest stuff we could find and really wring me dry.
I'd be glad 18 months later when I was sneaking back home ahead of the
thunderstorms just as the tower began calling winds 360@20 with the
active 29 and some T-storms starting to roll 25 miles north.

Best,
-cwk.

[Seth Masia]

Float flying was the most fun I've ever had in an airplane.

You'll enjoy it best if you have a background in sailing. On the water the
floatplane is a big, clumsy, topheavy sailboat; it weathercocks unless you
have some power in, and if there's any current going you have to allow for
that, too. Before you tie down, you have to dock the thing -- with power
off the last few yards, because there's no brakes.

So it's a challenge. My instructor pointed out that most floatplane
accidents are really boating accidents.

Coming back from my checkride, in a 172, the examiner said "If you can put
me on the dock with dry shoes, you pass."

I've never really believed the old saw that any landing you walk away from
is a good landing. But then it struck me: The guy who said it was a
floatplane pilot.

Because any landing you swim away from really was a bad landing.

Seth

[zatatime]

On 17 Jul 2005 17:26:39 -0700, "Eric Bartsch" >
wrote:

>Since you live in the Seattle area, I'd highly recommend taking a dual
>instruction lesson at Kenmore.


I don't know if he's still around, but I'd recommend Jim at Seattle
Seaplanes on the other side of the lake. He uses a Stinson 108 and
Cessna 206s. Of the 10,000+ hours he had when I learned from him 10
years ago, only 20 were in land planes. The day I got my ticket he
offered the airplane to me to go where ever I wanted! I'd bet Kenmore
would never do that. The instruction I got was to make me a self
sufficient sea plane pilot, not just give me a rating. It took a
couple extra hours, but was worth every minute of it.

HTH.
z

(If anyone knows if Seattle Seaplanes is still around I'd love a
response. It'd be good to look him up again.)

[Rob McDonald]

zatatime > wrote in news:fvepi15ee5no4bbvf5m7evli5aq5ikjfpb@
4ax.com:

> ....
> (If anyone knows if Seattle Seaplanes is still around I'd love a
> response. It'd be good to look him up again.)


http://www.seattleseaplanes.com/