No. Not me in the video. That bird belonged to John Knapp. He has moved on years ago, though. He's got some little biplane on floats now...

Re: Two Seaters

I can just imagine canoeing along the shore of a lake, and coming up to a young kid sitting on a stump in the middle of nowhere holding a snubbie .454.

"Hi. Whatcha doin?"

"Waiting for my dad, he'll be right back."

Maule on floats in Alaska on E-Bay right now
For $48,000.
Dave

powderburner wrote:I don't have a very broad spectrum of experience but lets here from guys out there who've flown stuff off the water. What are some of the best light aircraft float performers, i don't want a 180/185 but i want to be able to take me and my kids (2) out fishing and don't want to be into the set up for more than 60g's....so without fuel figure 500lbs.

A couple of questions:

1) How old are your kids? IE: How big?

2) How long do you want this (carrying yourself and two kids) to be an option? Two years, three, five, ten???? They are going to grow.

3) What do you want to do with the plane, ie: How far from home base will you plan to fly? You cannot discount gas weight in these deals.

Frankly, I doubt you're going to find anything in decent condition that will meet your criteria at that price point. Note my verbiage "decent condition". A "cheap" airplane will almost certainly become a much more expensive airplane right about the first annual inspection.

Pricing an airplane, as most are doing here, ignores the cost of floats and installation. Even the most inexpensive floats are going to cost upwards of $8 to $10 K for that size airplane, again, in decent condition. Now you're talking a $50 K airplane....in decent condition.

I've flown Pacers on floats. Great training airplane. Good basic two seater, assuming a fairly long stretch of water, a healthy engine and the right propeller (82 X 42 or 43 Borer). Even with wing extensions and tips, they are NOT sparkling performers on floats. And, they are VERY marginal three seaters, assuming at least one of those three is REALLY small.

Same goes for many in this category.

An Aeronca Sedan comes to mind as a great seaplane, but hard to find. A Sedan with a 180 (even harder to find, and bring $$) is a barn burner of a seaplane, even without flaps.

A stock Cessna 170 MIGHT do the job, but not for long as those kids grow, and/or if you want to carry much fuel.

A good Super Cub or a 12 that's modified is going to be waaaaay over that budget. The Super Cub with the third seat conversion, unless it is REALLLY light AND has the 2000 pound gross weight kit, is NOT going to be legal on floats with three, even if two of them are LIGHT. The 2000 pound kit is not cheap, by the way....

A Maule M-4 or early M-5 would do the job, if you can find one on floats, or find a cheap one and a set of floats for it (good luck there). I've seen floated Maules in that price range....not pretty, and would warrant a LOT of careful inspection and probably some fix up, but....

I think to be realistic, you may need to plan a little more $$, but there are sometimes deals out there.

Good luck.

MTV

172 w/O-360? I spent some time in one flying around with three adults - that only allowed for enough gas for local lakes but that ought to allow for kids + gear. There's one on barnstormers for $69k, not far off your target.

For the criteria that you have established, I would go with a Maule. With a bit of patience, you should be able to find an acceptable Maule that would accommodate floats for the price range that you desire. It is a great float plane, has plenty of power and has lots of room for the kids and extra equipment -- even a wife.

Nizina

The maule or the Stinson with either a Franklin 220 or O-470 would work. If the Stinson is a 108-3 with the bigger motor you will have no problems hauling that load with fuel legally and safely. A big motored Stinson makes a great float plane, a 165 hp Stinson float plane is a 2 seater. You should be able to find either the maule or stinson in your price range with some patience.

this is a great forum, i gotta be honest i've been in others and you don't get the honest non condecending imput like you do here!
i think we'd all love a light little rocket off the ground plane for all those hard to reach places, but i guess my reality is my flying is more going to be off water and ski's...i've never looked much into the stinsons, i've rode in a maule on floats alot, it hink we had a 750lb legal limit we could carry if i recal right. i think it was an m-7?

mountainmatt wrote:

robw56 wrote:PA-12?

A PA-12 with flaps and the upgross kit perhaps. But it would be hard to stay under 60k.

C170B or Stinson? (I had a ride in a 108-3 with the Franklin 220 and it handled nice from what I could tell).

I did alot of hauling this fall with a straight wing 12 on EDO 2000's With the 82X41 prop I was off the water and climbing out at 800 FPM in under 500' with half fuel and 2 adults in the back seat. Granted we are in AK and the TO / Landings were from SL to 300 ASL.

I have lots of time in a 12 with flaps and I was shocked that I could get the old straight wing off the water just as fast if not faster than the moded out 12 with flaps. I think it is all in the float rigging. I would roll a float at 35 indicated and fly off the water at 40-45.

Deals can be found on an unmolested straight wing 12 (150 hp) and they will do very well once you get a little time in it and get a few techniques down.

powderburner wrote:this is a great forum, i gotta be honest i've been in others and you don't get the honest non condecending imput like you do here!

Glad you like it here, I knew you would.

lol you was right, this place is much better.
the Pa-12, i looked at that before but not much. never spent much time around them. but i've seen a few for sale in the 40-50g range and a few pimped out/moded out ones over 100g's...
hows the PA -12 for a ski plane? i'm sure i'll end up with some BW underneath in in the spring and fall when the ice and lack of snow force me onto them...good hunting both those times of year.
Is a 150hp -12 with 500lbs a 300 foot plane on wheels?

While I agree some 12's with 150HP can be very good performers on floats, I'm thinking you'll have a real hard time staying in legal GW on floats with you kids fuel and stuff - if that matters to you. You'll have a lot more room for stuff and legal weight in the Maule or Stinson. As a former Stinson -3 F220 owner, I can testify they are great float performers with a large legal load. Only Maule experience I have is M7 which I don't think you'll find in your price range, but if you did it would easily fit your mission profile.

i think one of the other factors that'll jump in here is just flat out operating/insurance costs as well.
i know the more the HP the more gas i'm gonna be pumpin' thru this things. part of all the fun of researching is the point where you have to say, thats to much, but it'll do what i want, or thats in the range we can afford and we'll just to have learn how to operate with what we can afford...do enough research and i think we can find ways to maximize the bang for the buck! you guys are being a great help with that.

powderburner wrote:lol you was right, this place is much better.
the Pa-12, i looked at that before but not much. never spent much time around them. but i've seen a few for sale in the 40-50g range and a few pimped out/moded out ones over 100g's...
hows the PA -12 for a ski plane? i'm sure i'll end up with some BW underneath in in the spring and fall when the ice and lack of snow force me onto them...good hunting both those times of year.
Is a 150hp -12 with 500lbs a 300 foot plane on wheels?

I would say that depends ALOT on the pilot! Yes if you know your plane!

so in the right hands, the plane could do it....in the words of jim carey..."soooo your saying theres a chance!!!"
the PA-12 is becoming pretty attractive....i just need to get the idea of a stripped down PA-18 180hp on 35"s outa my head and be realistic....

Remember that any PA 12 in your price range is going to have a 65 plus year old, mild steel tubing airframe. Ever wonder how these outfits that build new airframes for these things stay in business?

The Maule M 4 or 5 will do the job you describe and I doubt that weight will be an issue, whereas it MAY be with a 12 (1935 max weight).

But whatever winds your watch.

MTV

powderburner wrote:i think one of the other factors that'll jump in here is just flat out operating/insurance costs as well.
i know the more the HP the more gas i'm gonna be pumpin' thru this things. part of all the fun of researching is the point where you have to say, thats to much, but it'll do what i want, or thats in the range we can afford and we'll just to have learn how to operate with what we can afford...do enough research and i think we can find ways to maximize the bang for the buck! you guys are being a great help with that.

With any of the birds that are in the 210-235 hp range, your going to be in the 10-12 gph fuel burn range, depending on how fast you want to fly.

Hey Powder,

FYI, there is a 172 with a Franklin 220 600-700 smoh on 2440 edos sitting on a trailer in alpha parking at Lake Hood asking $60K. Overall looks to be in good condition. A friend of my Dad owned the plane 5+ plus years ago before upgrading to a 206. He said it was great little performer. It has been for sale since summer, might be some wiggle room on the price.

Akavidflyer is right on with his post. A PA-12 never needed flaps. They just weakened the wing. If you can side slip a bit and know how to use your trim a straight wing will do better. The PA-12 wing is one of the best ever. All PA-12's are getting old. If the lower tubing hasn't been changed it needs to be. Keep that in mind if you buy. It's almost impossible to stay under legal gross weight with any Cub/champ etc. But they fly just fine a few lbs heavy.(tongue in cheek) I've seen quite a few Stinsons with the 0470 upgrade. Bad idea in my opinion, Now you're burning 14 gal+ an hour but the prop is so short you not getting the result. Lots of engine conversions. Stay away from the 190 hp Continental.The Stinson tubing is rock solid and it has a great wing. Lots of dihedral and those wing slots make handling a dream. Also once you get in it you are pretty comfortable, not the best door for a seaplane if you're over forty. You need the 108-3 with the big tail and the rudder trim for a larger engine which can be trouble in windy situations. A C172 0n floats has four seats but without a power upgrade its a two person airplane. A Maul is a fairly good bird but some are horrendousely over priced. Be sure to test fly your purchase well for what you want it to do or this can be a real learning (and expensive) experience. Good luck. PS. Sometimes paying a little more at the start can save a fortune later on.

Scouter wrote:AV8or3400

Was that you in the Avid video?

No that is John Knapp. That Avid is really cool. He's rebuilt it 3 different times doing different stuff each time. He flies a full circle in the float pond at Oshkosh with one float still in the water and the wingtip just inches off the water.