So after my last post I see there is some confusion. The bow stakes are vertical and called spray rails. After reviewing all Edo IPC's only 2 show spray rails, the 3500 ampigs and the Cessna 172 tubular gear. I am not sure of other manufacturers IPC's but assume most did not test with spray rails due to their destabilization.

Even though floats and hulls are considered major alterations, the FAA in their complete, ignorance or incompetence has disregarded them for the 61 years they have been in existence, since 1958.

Their mission statement is :
Our continuing mission is to provide the safest, most efficient aerospace system in the world.

Floats continue to be the redheaded unwanted stepchild of the aviation industry. The FAA needs to step up to the plate and correct this situation.

Runswithscissors wrote:So after my last post I see there is some confusion. The bow stakes are vertical and called spray rails. After reviewing all Edo IPC's only 2 show spray rails, the 3500 ampigs and the Cessna 172 tubular gear. I am not sure of other manufacturers IPC's but assume most did not test with spray rails due to their destabilization.

Even though floats and hulls are considered major alterations, the FAA in their complete, ignorance or incompetence has disregarded them for the 61 years they have been in existence, since 1958.

Their mission statement is :
Our continuing mission is to provide the safest, most efficient aerospace system in the world.

Floats continue to be the redheaded unwanted stepchild of the aviation industry. The FAA needs to step up to the plate and correct this situation.

Just be careful what you wish for..... .

I totally agree that FAA ignores floats. Easy way to operate on “somewhat modified” floats? Have your annual inspection done on wheels. The odds of a fed looking at your floats is near zero. The odds of him/her knowing ANYthing about them: Far less.

MTV

There should maybe be a separate log book for the floats, and/or skis. It’s troubling that the history of an appliance is left behind when they are moved to a new airplane.

There are separate spray rail drawings available now for both EDO 4930 and 2000, EDO sells them.

I can remember several times being asked to install spray rails on beavers by simply copying an existing installation out in the yard. It’s amazing how many variations there are in spray rail installations betwixt various beavers.

I’ve never heard anyone comment on there being any particular performance differences between horizontal or vertically mounted spray rails in flight or step taxi operations. Usually only done vertically around Seattle because of the prevalence of float trucks and not wanting to interfere with that operation.

New wipline amphibs are delivered with a logbook, at least the couple brand new sets I’ve been involved with in the last decade or so.

Usually repairs and maintenance to floats are noted in the airframe logbook but that gets convoluted quickly as a set of floats gets moved around from aircraft to aircraft.

Yes there are drawings and even spray rails Edo will sell you. Problem is no paperwork for approval. It is up to the installer to get them field approved or, as is the norm, no paperwork or approval.

Edo did not get the rails approved on their floats. What a quandary

I understand some of the concern here, but its up to the installer to make sure that the "appliance" is airworthy when they install them. And that the installation is done IAW something approved.

Are we asking to have logbooks for skis? how about gear legs? Tires? magnetos? avionics? where does it end??????

You start asking for something you "think" is a good idea, its going to roll downhill pretty quick.

I really do appreciate your test flight work? I never had a clue. My floats have spray rails as you describe. full length and 3 inches deep. And when I get a chance, I will be trying out these tests, see how it reacts,But, then again, I've never, in the years of flying floats, and the thousands of water landings, have I thought I needed slip an already draggy, falls-out-of-the-sky float plane. Or have I thought I should be doing pedal turns like when I was cropdusting in a field with trees. I'm thinking most float pilots feel the same, which is why non of us have heard of any "UFIW", at least not as you describe.

The way to make this, and other issues better, is by education. I applaud you, and gratefully thank you for your work, and passing on the information along. This is preciously what we need. Dragging a government agency in, and making more regulations, only hurts things.

Even our "Kinder, Friendlier" FAA has started to agree that education is a much more effective means of "compliance"

Older ag planes are certified under CAR 8, which is pretty open ended in aircraft modifications. Somewhere I have an old Ag Cat manual that essentially says, “CAR 8 is the best thing the feds have done for ag operators, don’t screw it up!”

I have no experience with floats, but if you can self police through trial and error, I’d sure keep that going before getting more feds involved.

The two tests I was talking about are required for any aircraft to be certified. The 3 cases of UFIW I know of were very experienced high time pilots in Alaska. Sometimes conditions dictate using a slip. The aircraft were certified for slips with the flaps extended. As I said they had done it many times before. It was rare they had that happen.

Anytime an aircraft is modified per STC and flight testing is involved it has to meet the standards required. In this case it is CAR 3. Further modification can modify flight characteristics as we discovered.

Modifying floats has always been a major alteration. I really doubt the FAA will step in. The best way is to use minimal spray rail to achieve the most desirable outcome. The great American way of “if a little is good, more is better” does not apply to a lot of things and for sure spray rails/bow strakes are one of those things