Not the usual comparison I'm sure but what I have is a 1959 Cessna 180B on CAP 3000 floats and what I'm looking at is a 1967 Cessna U206B with a float kit (no floats yet)
I love my 180, it's a great plane, but I have a wife and three kids and I find myself regularly bumping against max gross and max passenger capacity. I love taking my kids on trips in our province and a lot of places we go are 3 or 4 hours each way so ferrying multiple loads is a bit of a stretch. I love taking my Dad and all my kids fishing with me, but right now it's my Dad and 1 or 2 kids. My 180 has a useful load of almost 1000 lbs.
This brings me to the 206 and what I'm wondering about is performance on floats, taking off and climbing. Both my 180 and this 206 have WingX and Sportsman Stol, the 206 also has VGs. Both have stock engines, 230 hp O-470 in the 180, 300 hp i0-520 in the 206. If I load the same 1000 lbs into the 206 will it use the same amount of water to take off as my 180? (assuming the right prop and floats are selected). Will it take more distance to take off? Less? What about if I load 1200 or 1300lbs in the 206, so both planes at max gross, then what will takeoffs look like? Excluding Aerocets, because the budget won't allow for them at this time, what would be the straight float to get for the 206? What's the hardest pulling prop?
Thanks for your insights.
Matt

Hey Matt. Make sure the 206 you are looking at has the hinged FWD cargo door from Coast Dog Aviation. Without it it is a bit of a pain as you can only have 1 seat in rye center row if you have any in the rear row. Even if yoy only fly I as a 4 seater, you still have to comply with the new AD. Cessna doesn't have the parts past I checked, and had no time frame on when the parrs would be available. Just something to keep in mind.
As for the performance question, I dinr have float experience, bu on wheels a 206 is a beast. I absolutely love mine. Granted it is light, but my 180 didn't touch it for performance. The 3 blade black Mac just keeps pulling.
Hopefully MTV will chime in. Hes got lots of float time in both models and I'm sure would have some good insight.

First, I have zero experience with WingX on a 180 or a 206, though I have flown a 206 with Flint tanks, which extend the wings about the same amount as the WingX.

Frankly, I seriously doubt that, with the comparison you've offered, the 206 is going to perform close to what that 180 does. Especially if you exclude the Aerocet Floats, which would be my first, second, and third choice for that plane.

Of the other choices for floats for the 206, the EDO 3430 floats would be my next choice. Next in line, but probably irrelevant if you're excluding Aerocets, would be Wipline 3450 straight floats (scarce as hen's teeth and $$$$). A distance down the list would be PeeKay 3500 straight floats. I'd stay waaay away from the big Aquas.

The 206 performs reasonably well on EDO 3430 floats, but I just don't think you're going to get the same takeoff performance as that 180.

As to propellers, I'm not sure what's approved these days on the 206, but either the big three blade Hartzell or McCauley props perform well on the airplane. It may well be that a composite prop like the MT three bladed prop would be the best choice, for weight savings and performance.

Now, I realize this is an order of magnitude more in $$$ but, an IO-550 engine is what the 206 on floats always really, really wanted. I switched from running good, strong 185s one running PeeKay 3500s and the other EDO 3430s, to a U-206 with IO-550 on Wipline 4000 straight floats, and when I got the hang of the floats, that 206 was coming out of the water EXACTLY where either 185 did, every time. And, that was running that 206 at 3800 pounds GW, compared to the 185s at 3350. The 550 is a horse.

But, frankly, it sounds like your mission has already made the decision for you. Those kids aren't going to get smaller, ya know...... So, my recommendation is go with the 206, assuming it's a good one, and adjust the kinds of places you go to the aircraft's performance. The differences, with some practice and on a good set of floats, aren't going to be huge. And, if you can run fairly light on some trips, the 206 will do a great job as well.

It seems to me you only really have one good choice of floats as well, which is 3430s. The good news is that EDO built a lot of them, and a lot of them have been replaced in service by Aerocets.

MTV

A1Skinner wrote:Hey Matt. Make sure the 206 you are looking at has the hinged FWD cargo door from Coast Dog Aviation. Without it it is a bit of a pain as you can only have 1 seat in rye center row if you have any in the rear row. Even if yoy only fly I as a 4 seater, you still have to comply with the new AD. Cessna doesn't have the parts past I checked, and had no time frame on when the parrs would be available. Just something to keep in mind.
As for the performance question, I dinr have float experience, bu on wheels a 206 is a beast. I absolutely love mine. Granted it is light, but my 180 didn't touch it for performance. The 3 blade black Mac just keeps pulling.
Hopefully MTV will chime in. Hes got lots of float time in both models and I'm sure would have some good insight.

Thanks for the info. You're saying on wheels your 206 bests your 180?
Coast Dog Aviation is where I get my plane serviced, I was actually at the shop as Dale and the other fella were combining ideas to make that door mod, it would absolutely be going on the plane prior to any float ops.
Thanks,
Matt

mtv wrote:First, I have zero experience with WingX on a 180 or a 206, though I have flown a 206 with Flint tanks, which extend the wings about the same amount as the WingX.

Frankly, I seriously doubt that, with the comparison you've offered, the 206 is going to perform close to what that 180 does. Especially if you exclude the Aerocet Floats, which would be my first, second, and third choice for that plane.

Of the other choices for floats for the 206, the EDO 3430 floats would be my next choice. Next in line, but probably irrelevant if you're excluding Aerocets, would be Wipline 3450 straight floats (scarce as hen's teeth and $$$$). A distance down the list would be PeeKay 3500 straight floats. I'd stay waaay away from the big Aquas.

The 206 performs reasonably well on EDO 3430 floats, but I just don't think you're going to get the same takeoff performance as that 180.

As to propellers, I'm not sure what's approved these days on the 206, but either the big three blade Hartzell or McCauley props perform well on the airplane. It may well be that a composite prop like the MT three bladed prop would be the best choice, for weight savings and performance.

Now, I realize this is an order of magnitude more in $$$ but, an IO-550 engine is what the 206 on floats always really, really wanted. I switched from running good, strong 185s one running PeeKay 3500s and the other EDO 3430s, to a U-206 with IO-550 on Wipline 4000 straight floats, and when I got the hang of the floats, that 206 was coming out of the water EXACTLY where either 185 did, every time. And, that was running that 206 at 3800 pounds GW, compared to the 185s at 3350. The 550 is a horse.

But, frankly, it sounds like your mission has already made the decision for you. Those kids aren't going to get smaller, ya know...... So, my recommendation is go with the 206, assuming it's a good one, and adjust the kinds of places you go to the aircraft's performance. The differences, with some practice and on a good set of floats, aren't going to be huge. And, if you can run fairly light on some trips, the 206 will do a great job as well.

It seems to me you only really have one good choice of floats as well, which is 3430s. The good news is that EDO built a lot of them, and a lot of them have been replaced in service by Aerocets.

MTV

Thanks for this wealth of information Mike. It's a blessing to be able to draw upon your experiences. This performance is what I was worried about, that the 206 would be a let down compared to my current plane. But at least it doesn't have to always be that way. The engine is half way used up as it sits, I can save some pesos and put in the i0-550 next overhaul. I can save up for some Aerocet floats and there will be a buyer for the EDOs when the time comes. I can trade up the prop any time.
When you say you don't think the 206 will match the 180 do you mean with both at max? If I'm running the 206 with the same 1000lbs as the 180 do you think it might match it at that point? Sorry to be splitting hairs here, there's a few hunting spots on small lakes where the 1000lbs gets the job done just fine and I'd still like to hunt up there. I'm sure it all depends on a lot of factors though.
Can you recall what cruise speeds were like with the 3430s? One of the concerns I have is gaining the extra useful load only to use it up carrying fuel for a thirstier engine, we have some long legs between float plane fuel stops here. I've heard from 185 guys that if they throttle back the i0-520 to the same cruise speed I'm doing with my 180 they actually use about the same fuel, have you found that to be the case? Would the same hold true with a 206?

Fraser Farmer wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:Hey Matt. Make sure the 206 you are looking at has the hinged FWD cargo door from Coast Dog Aviation. Without it it is a bit of a pain as you can only have 1 seat in rye center row if you have any in the rear row. Even if yoy only fly I as a 4 seater, you still have to comply with the new AD. Cessna doesn't have the parts past I checked, and had no time frame on when the parrs would be available. Just something to keep in mind.
As for the performance question, I dinr have float experience, bu on wheels a 206 is a beast. I absolutely love mine. Granted it is light, but my 180 didn't touch it for performance. The 3 blade black Mac just keeps pulling.
Hopefully MTV will chime in. Hes got lots of float time in both models and I'm sure would have some good insight.

Thanks for the info. You're saying on wheels your 206 bests your 180?
Coast Dog Aviation is where I get my plane serviced, I was actually at the shop as Dale and the other fella were combining ideas to make that door mod, it would absolutely be going on the plane prior to any float ops.
Thanks,
Matt

Right on. Glad that you are right there working with them.
Yep, on 8.50s my 206 out performs my old 180. With 80 gallons fuel, myself, and 80lbs of fishing gear I'm off in 180 feet. This is with a completely stock wing. Down and stopped in 250. Maybe I'm not good enough, but I couldn't get my 180 off rhat short. And even if I did, it was lumbering along in groynd effect to build some speed up. My 206 is off and at 80mph before I know it. It is purple built for its mission though, and it does very well at it. Keeping it light is key, as wih any aircraft.
Mike has the float experience though, so I would heed his advice there.
One of tyese days I need to get over to the coast and meet some of you guys.

David

A1Skinner wrote:

Fraser Farmer wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:Hey Matt. Make sure the 206 you are looking at has the hinged FWD cargo door from Coast Dog Aviation. Without it it is a bit of a pain as you can only have 1 seat in rye center row if you have any in the rear row. Even if yoy only fly I as a 4 seater, you still have to comply with the new AD. Cessna doesn't have the parts past I checked, and had no time frame on when the parrs would be available. Just something to keep in mind.
As for the performance question, I dinr have float experience, bu on wheels a 206 is a beast. I absolutely love mine. Granted it is light, but my 180 didn't touch it for performance. The 3 blade black Mac just keeps pulling.
Hopefully MTV will chime in. Hes got lots of float time in both models and I'm sure would have some good insight.

Thanks for the info. You're saying on wheels your 206 bests your 180?
Coast Dog Aviation is where I get my plane serviced, I was actually at the shop as Dale and the other fella were combining ideas to make that door mod, it would absolutely be going on the plane prior to any float ops.
Thanks,
Matt

Right on. Glad that you are right there working with them.
Yep, on 8.50s my 206 out performs my old 180. With 80 gallons fuel, myself, and 80lbs of fishing gear I'm off in 180 feet. This is with a completely stock wing. Down and stopped in 250. Maybe I'm not good enough, but I couldn't get my 180 off rhat short. And even if I did, it was lumbering along in groynd effect to build some speed up. My 206 is off and at 80mph before I know it. It is purple built for its mission though, and it does very well at it. Keeping it light is key, as wih any aircraft.
Mike has the float experience though, so I would heed his advice there.
One of tyese days I need to get over to the coast and meet some of you guys.

David

Neat. When I ran my 180 off the farm this spring I only mowed 500 feet for the strip. I'd use almost all of it landing but getting off probably a little over 300. 250 is impressive. This 206 would be kept as light as possible, stripped interior, no ancient Apollo GPS or Loran riding around, just the essentials.
If you do make it out here, drop by for sure. If I'm running on floats, and I usually am, there won't be a strip mowed at the farm but we could go flying.

A1Skinner wrote:

Fraser Farmer wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:Hey Matt. Make sure the 206 you are looking at has the hinged FWD cargo door from Coast Dog Aviation. Without it it is a bit of a pain as you can only have 1 seat in rye center row if you have any in the rear row. Even if yoy only fly I as a 4 seater, you still have to comply with the new AD. Cessna doesn't have the parts past I checked, and had no time frame on when the parrs would be available. Just something to keep in mind.
As for the performance question, I dinr have float experience, bu on wheels a 206 is a beast. I absolutely love mine. Granted it is light, but my 180 didn't touch it for performance. The 3 blade black Mac just keeps pulling.
Hopefully MTV will chime in. Hes got lots of float time in both models and I'm sure would have some good insight.

Thanks for the info. You're saying on wheels your 206 bests your 180?
Coast Dog Aviation is where I get my plane serviced, I was actually at the shop as Dale and the other fella were combining ideas to make that door mod, it would absolutely be going on the plane prior to any float ops.
Thanks,
Matt

Right on. Glad that you are right there working with them.
Yep, on 8.50s my 206 out performs my old 180. With 80 gallons fuel, myself, and 80lbs of fishing gear I'm off in 180 feet. This is with a completely stock wing. Down and stopped in 250. Maybe I'm not good enough, but I couldn't get my 180 off rhat short. And even if I did, it was lumbering along in groynd effect to build some speed up. My 206 is off and at 80mph before I know it. It is purple built for its mission though, and it does very well at it. Keeping it light is key, as wih any aircraft.
Mike has the float experience though, so I would heed his advice there.
One of tyese days I need to get over to the coast and meet some of you guys.

David

Hey David, is your plane a P206? If it is, what do you think of the access for the rear passengers in that configuration? What does the rear door look like or is it just a baggage door?
Thanks,
Matt

Fraser Farmer wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:

Fraser Farmer wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:Hey Matt. Make sure the 206 you are looking at has the hinged FWD cargo door from Coast Dog Aviation. Without it it is a bit of a pain as you can only have 1 seat in rye center row if you have any in the rear row. Even if yoy only fly I as a 4 seater, you still have to comply with the new AD. Cessna doesn't have the parts past I checked, and had no time frame on when the parrs would be available. Just something to keep in mind.
As for the performance question, I dinr have float experience, bu on wheels a 206 is a beast. I absolutely love mine. Granted it is light, but my 180 didn't touch it for performance. The 3 blade black Mac just keeps pulling.
Hopefully MTV will chime in. Hes got lots of float time in both models and I'm sure would have some good insight.

Thanks for the info. You're saying on wheels your 206 bests your 180?
Coast Dog Aviation is where I get my plane serviced, I was actually at the shop as Dale and the other fella were combining ideas to make that door mod, it would absolutely be going on the plane prior to any float ops.
Thanks,
Matt

Right on. Glad that you are right there working with them.
Yep, on 8.50s my 206 out performs my old 180. With 80 gallons fuel, myself, and 80lbs of fishing gear I'm off in 180 feet. This is with a completely stock wing. Down and stopped in 250. Maybe I'm not good enough, but I couldn't get my 180 off rhat short. And even if I did, it was lumbering along in groynd effect to build some speed up. My 206 is off and at 80mph before I know it. It is purple built for its mission though, and it does very well at it. Keeping it light is key, as wih any aircraft.
Mike has the float experience though, so I would heed his advice there.
One of tyese days I need to get over to the coast and meet some of you guys.

David

Hey David, is your plane a P206? If it is, what do you think of the access for the rear passengers in that configuration? What does the rear door look like or is it just a baggage door?
Thanks,
Matt

Hey Matt. Yes its a P206. I pike the acces for the rear row. Its a high step, but quite doable. I can still get big baggage in, and if I'm hauling really big stuff I can put it in through one of the main doors. I really like having a co pilot door, as does my wife. She would not be comfortable in a U206 knowing that she doesn't have easy egress. And since most of my flying hinges on having a happy wife, it aas an easy decision. IMO, if you are more hauling passengers and family the P is better then the U. If hauling a lot of freight, the U is probably better.

Maybe I ought to be looking for a P model with a float kit.

mtv wrote:......Frankly, I seriously doubt that, with the comparison you've offered, the 206 is going to perform close to what that 180 does. Especially if you exclude the Aerocet Floats, which would be my first, second, and third choice for that plane. ..........
The 206 performs reasonably well on EDO 3430 floats, but I just don't think you're going to get the same takeoff performance as that 180. .........

I've been wondering about this Mike.
The two airplanes have close to if not the same wing area,
and the 206 has 300hp (for takeoff) vs 230 for the 180.
So the takeoff performance difference all about the floats?
PS I dunno shit about flying on floats, it probably shows.

P model with a float kit was never built, as far as I know. I wouldn’t chance my kids in the back row of a P206 on floats anyway. Egress wouldn’t be any easier than a U206 without the door mod. Probably even harder for self rescue or rescue by others who had already escaped. I’d feel the same about a third row in a 185.

If you want to compare performance, power to weight ratios on each airplane is the easiest to quantify. The wings are different, but the big teller is power to weight. Any other mods will only be marginal.

206 at the same power to weight is going to be similar to the 180.

I’d go with a U206, passenger door, and cargo door mod on Aerocets if you can write the cheque.

There’s a very sobering accident review told by a father who’s young son died in his U206 amphib. You can search it on AOPA. I don’t think you have to be a member to access it. It will haunt you forever, but that is it’s purpose. Get as many doors as money can buy, and run your whole family through the Dunker Guy egress training.

Pinecone is correct, I don't think any P models left the factory with a float kit. But float kits have been added. I also agree that the rear seats still aren't great for float egress. It is pretty simple to open that rear door from the inside however. Just pull the handle and it opens. Still sucky for kids. But even if operated as a 4 place aircraft, the co-pilot door is super handy vs the U model. Unless you get the copilot door mod, which is big $$ and a smaller door. Its only money though, can't take it with you anyways! Haha. How else can we help you spend it?

I was also thinking the P-206 was never available with a float kit. So, I looked at the TC, which shows seaplane information for the P-206. Can't say that I've ever seen one.

I THOUGHT I recalled one of the folks at Wipair trying to get a field approval for an early 206, but now that I think about it, his airplane was actually a 205, which is actually a version of the 210, and not covered by the 206 TC.

In any case, I'd bet that P-206s with float kits are scarce as hen's teeth. And converting one could probably be done, but bring $$$. The biggest single part is the vertical tail, which is entirely different on the seaplane models. So, you'd have to replace the vertical tail. Last I heard, that was well over $20 K plus paint.
'
The other issue with the P-206 is that I believe they were all built with the small fuel tanks. So, if you're doing any distance, especially on floats, that can be an issue. I may be wrong on this one....not sure.

As noted above, weight is a huge factor when comparing performance, no doubt. But, it is definitely NOT the only significant factor. Put a U-206 next to a 185, both on the same floats, both with the same engine/prop and load them to the same weight, and the 206 will lag some behind the 185 in takeoff performance. I've never quite understood that, but the wings are a bit different on the two airplanes. The difference isn't huge, but it's there.

The two airplanes will land in about the same distance, though someone who's handy with a 206 might land shorter by raising the flaps just prior to touchdown......if you want to play those games.

Different floats can make a HUGE difference in takeoff performance, but very little in landing performance. That said, sometimes it just takes some practice and experience with the floats to make them perform. Frankly, on floats, the single biggest difference in performance is going to nearly always be the pilot.

Example: I really disliked the big Wipaire 4000 straight floats on a 206 I flew. Lots of floatation, but huge floats, and seemed to be water lovers. Till I discovered the "aquatic slip", that is. With those floats, I could get the plane up on step fairly fast, but the bottoms were so huge, there was a lot of hydrodynamic drag there. The plane would accelerate up to its hull speed, then just stay there. One day I was right there, trying to get the thing to launch when I kind of scruntched around in my seat, which had the effect of pushing on the left rudder, followed by pushing on the right rudder....yawing the plane. As soon as that happened, the thing launched beautifully. I worked on that technique, added a roll and pull component, and after that, I'd get that plane out of the water at 3800 pounds exactly where my previous two 185s got out of the water, at 3350. Totally weird technique, but that's float ops for you. I'd still prefer the Wip 3450 floats mind you, but.....

But, in answer to the question regarding takeoff distances: I regularly worked several small water bodies for 20 years. Much of that time was working them with 185s. Switched to a 206 with an IO-550 and folks told me I'd have to rethink landing those lakes. Not at all, actually. Understand that I never came out of those lakes at gross weight in either type.

So, yes, the 206 will operate pretty short, if you keep it light. When I operated out of those small water bodies, I often shuttled out of them....two trips to a larger water body, reload with a full load and head out. Same goes for fuel.....sometimes you need to stage some fuel. In bear country, that can be a pain if you use plastic jugs. I bought five gallon steel cans of 100 LL to spot out in caches. Just have to be careful handling them while fueling.

As to a comparison of the two aircraft side by side on wheels, I agree with the earlier assessment that the 206 is an ass kicking mobile on wheels. Not only that, it's a huge load carrier, especially compared to the 180.

Fuel burn: Yes, you can run the power down on the 206 to NEAR 180 fuel burn, but the plane's not going to be real happy there on floats.....lots of drag. That said, with an engine monitor and balanced injectors, I ran both the IO-520 and 550 lean of peak, at around 12 to 13 gph. Slows you down, of course, but... The 550 LOVES LOP ops in my experience. Also, remember that the 520 is actually a 285 hp engine, that's approved for takeoff power of 300.

As I said before, it sounds to me as if your mission is strongly favoring the larger airplane. And, the mission is and should be HUGE in determining what plane you're going to use.

Emergency egress: I agree that the U-206 offers limitations on emergency egress. If you're always flying with the same group of people, as it sounds like you are, you can deal with that easier by really emphasizing and practicing egress with your regular passengers.

But, stuff happens. The good news is, this stuff rarely happens with straight float airplanes. It's largely an amphibian thing. But, I know a fellow who got a straight float 180 upside down in the water. He and his wife got out, but he came to our water egress training program we put on in Fairbanks, and went right home and got his wife. She hated it, but she told me he'd informed her after having gone through it that if she didn't go through the training, he wouldn't carry her as a passenger any longer..... That tells you what a fellow who'd done the egress thing for real felt about the training. It can and has saved lives.

As to amphibs, install a set of mirrors on the wings that allow you to visualize the landing gear position, then inspect the gear and THINK about the position of the gear prior to every landing.

One other question: Do you ever operate on skis? That can also be an issue, but I'll tell you, the 206 can also be a fantastic ski plane. Approvals may be scarce, and gross weight is often limited, but....

MTV

Great info Mike. I sure appreciate you sharing your knowledge.
The P 206 has LR fuel. My '65 has 80 gallons. Even the 205 had it optional.

Lots of great info guys. Thanks to all.
I know on the 185 I wouldn't be willing to put my kids in the third row for float ops but I thought on the P206 there was a full size door into the third row on the pilot side? So you'd have the two front doors for egress with the middle row exiting through those doors, just as in a Skywagon, but the third row would exit through the back door. I haven't been able to find much info though on the back door of the P206 so I must be mistaken. Certainly I realize it's not like the big double door on the U206. I like the U206 with the Coast Dog door kit, great big double doors to exit through for the back two rows but a little trickier for the copilot.
Interestingly it does end up being very similar power to weight between the 180 and 206 at max gross but clearly that's not the whole story to getting off the water.
I appreciate the advice on the underwater egress training, the kids are pretty young for that although they're all very good swimmers. I think we will do that in the fairly near future. We are running straight floats and I'm flying cautiously.

The P-206 rear door is smaller than the U-206 door, but operation is much simpler, and I believe it can be opened with flaps deployed. As you noted, though the P-206 also has a copilot door, which in my opinion is a HUGE safety feature.

I always figured if I screwed up in a U-206, I’d have tracks all over me from passengers exiting.......our U- 206s all had the Wipline Co pilot door, which is smaller than a standard door, but better than nothing.

MTV

I don’t think you have to change the vertical stab on a 206 to go on floats, just the rudder. But 20K probably doesn’t even buy a rudder these days. I’m told used ones are unobtainable. And that’s not the only mod that would be needed. A1Skinner probably knows or could cipher it quickly.

Probably cheaper to go for the Wipline passenger door than convert a P206, and it will be more resaleable. Also, airplanes are available on floats often with this conversion complete. You’ll pay less this way than assembling one and paying as you go for the mods.

I doubt the kids are too young for egress training. They’ll surprise you. Ask Bryan, AKA Bry the Dunker Guy. He’ll know how young he’s seen in his course. You're familiar? He’s in your region.

I have a young grandson. I’m debating whether I’ll even take him on a water landing ride until he can complete the course. Probably I don’t have to decide. Completing the course might be the only way to obtain permission from my daughter!

The H model 206 has never been available with a float kit. So, from day one, if you bought one of these “next gen 206s” and you want to put it on floats, you were instantly in the market for at the very least, a used rudder.......seriously? I spoke to the Cessna folks at the AOPA conference when they first announced the 206 was going back in production, and asked them that question. They had blank looks. If you’re only going to produce one rudder, why not choose the one that’ll work on any platform?

Duh. As a consequence, I’m not sure you can find a 206 float rudder these days.

MTV

Yes, it's very very hard to find a float plane rudder these days. I bid on an insurance wreck 206 a couple years back that had a good seaplane tail. I didn't get it, and after talking to wipaire one day I realized why. I didn't realize how much the rudder alone was worth...