Seaplanes?

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 09:59:30 -0800, "Bob Gardner"
wrote in ::

Rachel, you will have a heck of a time trying to find a rental.

Of course, one can always purchase one:
http://www.cubcrafters.com/cci/airpl...PartID=174 96

Don't forget Legend Aircraft for the Legend Cub.



"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
| On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 09:59:30 -0800, "Bob Gardner"

| wrote in ::
|
| Rachel, you will have a heck of a time trying to find a
rental.
|
| Of course, one can always purchase one:
|
http://www.cubcrafters.com/cci/airpl...PartID=174 96

On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 23:58:05 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
wrote in
tKQkf.11646$QW2.11307@dukeread08::

Don't forget Legend Aircraft for the Legend Cub.

http://www.legend.aero/index.cfm
Base price configuration of $74,000,

The American Legend Cub is a LSA, so a pilot won't need a medical to
fly it, but it's only 100 HP, and lacks the performance of the
Cubcrafters 180 HP product (base price about double the Legend).
There's a good Legend Cub article he
http://www.flyingmag.com/article.asp...age_numb er=1

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 23:58:05 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
wrote in
tKQkf.11646$QW2.11307@dukeread08::

Don't forget Legend Aircraft for the Legend Cub.

http://www.legend.aero/index.cfm
Base price configuration of $74,000,

The American Legend Cub is a LSA, so a pilot won't need a medical to
fly it, but it's only 100 HP, and lacks the performance of the
Cubcrafters 180 HP product (base price about double the Legend).
There's a good Legend Cub article he
http://www.flyingmag.com/article.asp...age_numb er=1


The only one worth considering
http://www.seawind.biz/

On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 18:05:19 GMT, "Steph"
wrote in zj%kf.47416$ki.307@pd7tw2no::


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 23:58:05 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
wrote in
tKQkf.11646$QW2.11307@dukeread08::

Don't forget Legend Aircraft for the Legend Cub.

http://www.legend.aero/index.cfm
Base price configuration of $74,000,

The American Legend Cub is a LSA, so a pilot won't need a medical to
fly it, but it's only 100 HP, and lacks the performance of the
Cubcrafters 180 HP product (base price about double the Legend).
There's a good Legend Cub article he
http://www.flyingmag.com/article.asp...age_numb er=1


The only one worth considering
http://www.seawind.biz/


I always thought a high-wing would permit landing in rougher water,
because of the added height of the wing above the waves. Perhaps
someone with some seaplane experience can comment on that aspect.

Larry Dighera wrote:

I always thought a high-wing would permit landing in rougher water,
because of the added height of the wing above the waves. Perhaps
someone with some seaplane experience can comment on that aspect.

Getting your prop into the water is considered bad thing...

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
The only one worth considering
http://www.seawind.biz/


I always thought a high-wing would permit landing in rougher water,
because of the added height of the wing above the waves. Perhaps
someone with some seaplane experience can comment on that aspect.

The position of the wing doesn't affect the water conditions limiting the
airplane so much, as does the hull design, whether it's the entire fuselage
as the hull or attached floats (a "steeper" hull generally gives better
rough-water performance).

Note the the new Russian seaplane that has a low-wing design (not even
mid-wing, like the Seawind or similar airplanes). It appears to be able to
handle waves of roughly the same height as any similarly sized airplane,
from the pilot reports I've read.

As far as protecting the prop goes...

Engine on top may protect the prop in some situations. However, because
top-mounted engines are generally pusher engines, they actually are more
susceptible in other situations, because spray comes off the hull and heads
backwards over the wing and into the prop. At the high angles of attack
when the spray is at its greatest, a front-mounted prop may be reasonably
away from the spray. In the end, neither design is necessarily better than
the other; prop erosion is a fact of life for any seaplane.

IMHO, two genuinely important questions with respect to wing position are
where and how you interface with land, and stability during turns on the
water. A low wing position allows for a lower center of gravity and better
stability (though mitigated somewhat by having the engine up high). A high
wing position gives the airplane more clearance around solid objects, like
docks, rocks, and the like.

Finally, you can always be assured, practically anytime someone precedes a
statement with a phrase like "the only one worth considering", they are
either intentionally engaging in hyperbole, or they are an idiot. It is
exceedingly rare for a single airplane to be THE ONLY viable choice for a
given application, even when the application is defined narrowly (like "you
need to be able to transport a 747 fuselage in one piece"). When the
application is defined as broadly as "seaplane", there's no such thing as
"the only".

Pete

The ability to land in rough water is limited by the hull strength.
Pontoon type floats have struts and the struts can break. Hull type
aircraft such as a Lake use the hull itself to land on, no struts.
Although you CAN break anything, usually hull type aircraft can land on
the incoming wave's backside (the worst spot), hit and not breakup
HARDER than can pontoon aircraft. Of course it depends on the plane.
Larger planes tend to do better. But even the Beavers and such can
break a strut. Usually when the waves start whitecapping, 15knot winds
or so, small GA planes can no longer land safely on whitecapping waves.
But there are waves and there are other waves, it all depends.

Like Pete said, high wings tend to be able to get into docks better
because their wings clear the docks. Low wing planes usually wont
clear, so you can't get the fuselage up next to the dock.

("Larry Dighera" wrote)
The American Legend Cub is a LSA, so a pilot won't need a medical to
fly it, ...


Question: Is it a LSA or an LSA?

I can see "a" ...for a Light Sport Aircraft

But here, is it "an" ...for an (L)SA as in elephant?

Curious. My eyes see it one way, my ears hear it another.


Montblack
Never met a comma I didn't like.

"Montblack" wrote in message
...
("Larry Dighera" wrote)
The American Legend Cub is a LSA, so a pilot won't need a medical to
fly it, ...


Question: Is it a LSA or an LSA?

I can see "a" ...for a Light Sport Aircraft

But here, is it "an" ...for an (L)SA as in elephant?

Curious. My eyes see it one way, my ears hear it another.


Montblack
Never met a comma I didn't like.

I believe it would be an "a" because of how the first word that is
abbreviated is actually pronounced.

A Light ... and not An Light ...

Jay Beckman
I Are An College Graduate