Hello Backcountry Pilots,
If I was a millionaire, I'd have one of these. This is parked outside my office window this morning.

James

Makes my poor ol' turd bird look like crap

That bird belongs to one of our members here, Cameron Stallings. I am forgetting his avatar...

Beautiful aircraft!

AKT

I'm wondering what they did to the tail??? The original was beautiful.

aktahoe1 wrote:That bird belongs to one of our members here, Cameron Stallings. I am forgetting his avatar...

Beautiful aircraft!

AKT

That plane has about every modification available it looks like. Just wonder how slow or fast it can fly with the turbine?

James

That was parked at Seldovia most of the summer last year, it also has a matching set of anphibs too.

Here she is parked next to my bird in Homer last fall. It's even sexier in person!

That is pretty, but if it were me, I'd keep the Pratt and the sexy tail.

I'm still saving up for mine...

Super-Maule wrote:Hello Backcountry Pilots,
If I was a millionaire, I'd have one of these. This is parked outside my office window this morning.

James

Being a millonaire wouldn't buy the fuel.

Zzz wrote:I'm wondering what they did to the tail??? The original was beautiful.

That is the stock Mk3 Turbo-Beaver vert fin and rudder, done by Mother deHavilland in '63 or so. She really needs the added directional control BTW, 680 HP is a lot more than the 450 of the Mk1.

On floats I've had to offset the initial takeoff heading by 30 degrees or more to get her lined up once there's enough airspeed to steer.

Sam

Rich mans RV......... Last time I was in Gumps neck of the woods saw a few of these sitting on the ramp with the round motors.

A Millionaire could go broke real fast in that thing.

Oregon180 wrote:That is pretty, but if it were me, I'd keep the Pratt and the sexy tail.

I'm still saving up for mine...

I'm with you. On both points.

Halestorm wrote:

Zzz wrote:I'm wondering what they did to the tail??? The original was beautiful.

That is the stock Mk3 Turbo-Beaver vert fin and rudder, done by Mother deHavilland in '63 or so. She really needs the added directional control BTW, 680 HP is a lot more than the 450 of the Mk1.

Ahhh, I didn't realize de Havilland made a turbo beaver, I thought they were all conversions by an aftermarket shop.

Yep...DHC built the Turbo Beaver on request of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. They also built one "King Beaver"...a slightly larger Beaver with an Alvis Leonides engine...not to be confused with the "king Beaver" name used for the prototype Otter.

The ugliest Turbo Beaver is the "Stovepipe Conversion" that puts a TPE 331 (Garret) engine up front. UGLY! Although the Walter Turbine conversion with the "Advanced Technology Wing" is no looker either...

A Million$ won't buy ya much of a Turbo Beaver these days...and the fuel burn makes them not that economical for commercial flying...Might as well get a Turbine Otter...better bang for the buck but...

There ain't a sexier bush plane than a Turbo Beaver!

Naw... If'n I was gonna burn kerosene I'd be going elsewhere.

For a Beaver, give me round front and rear.

Gump

northernguy wrote:Yep...DHC built the Turbo Beaver on request of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. They also built one "King Beaver"...a slightly larger Beaver with an Alvis Leonides engine...not to be confused with the "king Beaver" name used for the prototype Otter.

The ugliest Turbo Beaver is the "Stovepipe Conversion" that puts a TPE 331 (Garret) engine up front. UGLY! Although the Walter Turbine conversion with the "Advanced Technology Wing" is no looker either...

A Million$ won't buy ya much of a Turbo Beaver these days...and the fuel burn makes them not that economical for commercial flying...Might as well get a Turbine Otter...better bang for the buck but...

There ain't a sexier bush plane than a Turbo Beaver!

I don't know...that turbo Pilatus flying in Indo is pretty damn sexy!

Akt

I retract my previous post from "if I was a millionaire" to "if I was a multimillionaire". I can't see where this incredible airplane would be cost feasible for any 135 Operation or Lodge. However it is still too cool, would be a blast to fly and would carry everything including the kitchen sink. That Beaver sure would look good parked at Clear Creek International. It actually made 35 inch Bushwheels look relatively small.

This morning I visited with the pilot and he was on his way to Alaska. He was concerned about making the crossing times for CANPASS and EAPIS. They sure have sucked the fun out of flying into Canada.

Just one man's opinion,

PS, I'll take that turbine over a round engine any day of the week!
Dependability and horsepower are good things.


James
Clear Creek, Idaho

GumpAir wrote:Naw... If'n I was gonna burn kerosene I'd be going elsewhere.

For a Beaver, give me round front and rear.

Gump

Trouble is that you wouldn't be a millionaire for long with one of those and you'd always be worried about other people wanting to fly it when you're not around.

I'd be happy with any of the planes mentioned!

I'd also love to take a Turbine Sherpa for a spin...