Pierre,

Thank you very much for such a informative post. You sure know the area and conditions of Tahoe and Fallen Leaf. I read and bookmarked Harbor Sport Aviation's website, knowledgeable folks.

I think you have spun me 180 degrees. My degree (wasn't intended as a segway) is Marine Transportation, and after reading Harbor Sport Aviation's website I realized I wasn't approaching this from a informative viewpoint. Heavy amphib floats are a Catch 22, get them large enough for the buoyancy needed, and now your dealing with a lot of weight, not a good thing on LSA. Now I'm back to considering the Searey, plenty on the used market with the 914, and a hull/fuselage designed for planing and lower power needed for getting on the step. If going this route I'll have to practice greased landings on land so that maybe I can still join the BCP group on some of their outings. That is why I started this thread was to determine what might work for the dual mission of backcountry and seaplane ops. I just wish I hadn't heard so many comments on the fragility of Searey's landing gear.

BTW, Harbor Sport has posted on their site......

"We are also currently working on a "new" engine coversion, that is to deliver 140 HP with a weight less than that of a 912S, and looks promising?? More to come!!​"

Got my interest, wonder which conversion it is?

Continued research has me returning to the CH 701. The wing used, even though the coefficient of drag is high, so is the coefficient of lift at slow speeds and high AOA. I've scoured YouTube and watched many take off videos of the 701 and read Chris Heintz reasoning for the wing design and have concluded that this wing design is the best for working high DA. It simply has more lifting power at slow speeds than the Searey wing, or any others under consideration. Here is a good article by Chris Heintz.... http://www.zenithair.com/stolch801/design/design.html

He cleaned up the wing a bit for the newer CH 750 giving a higher cruise speed, but here are his published take off rolls for the 701, 750 and 750 Cruzer at full gross.

CH 750 Cruzer 350' with 130 hp UL 350is
CH 750 100' with 100 hp 0-200
CH 701 90' with 100 hp Rotax 912S

deckofficer wrote:Pierre,

Thank you very much for such a informative post. You sure know the area and conditions of Tahoe and Fallen Leaf. I read and bookmarked Harbor Sport Aviation's website, knowledgeable folks.

I think you have spun me 180 degrees. My degree (wasn't intended as a segway) is Marine Transportation, and after reading Harbor Sport Aviation's website I realized I wasn't approaching this from a informative viewpoint. Heavy amphib floats are a Catch 22, get them large enough for the buoyancy needed, and now your dealing with a lot of weight, not a good thing on LSA. Now I'm back to considering the Searey, plenty on the used market with the 914, and a hull/fuselage designed for planing and lower power needed for getting on the step. If going this route I'll have to practice greased landings on land so that maybe I can still join the BCP group on some of their outings. That is why I started this thread was to determine what might work for the dual mission of backcountry and seaplane ops. I just wish I hadn't heard so many comments on the fragility of Searey's landing gear.

BTW, Harbor Sport has posted on their site......

"We are also currently working on a "new" engine coversion, that is to deliver 140 HP with a weight less than that of a 912S, and looks promising?? More to come!!​"

Got my interest, wonder which conversion it is?

FWIW, there's a pretty good article in the Sept/Oct 2014 issue of WaterFlying, the Seaplane Pilots Association mag, about the Searey, which is now available both as a kit and as a certificated finished airplane, with a choice of a 100hp Rotax or a 115hp turbo Rotax. (That's the issue in which our own MTV wrote regarding amphibs--great article, also.) One of the emphasized points in the Searey article is the difficulty with insurance in any amphibian, but apparently Searey is following suit with what Lake did and getting a training program going to ameliorate that to some extent.

I did not see anything describing how sturdy (or weak) the main gear is on the Searey, so whether it is rougher strip friendly, I don't know.

FWIW, the last few years at the OSH seaplane base, there's been a fellow there with a Searey giving rides. When he takes a break, he noses it toward the shore, drops the gear, and taxis out onto land, then spins it around pointing at the water. When he's ready to go out again, he cranks it up and drives it into the water and pulls the gear up. It does look like a fun little airplane.

You might give some thought to joining SPA. I was a member for a couple of years before getting my SES, mostly for the magazine.

Cary

The Searey is indeed a very nice little airplane. I've flown a couple and have been impresses with their performance and with the hull's handling in some fairly significant waves. I don't know how tough that gear is either, but like any gear, abuse it and it could fail. I suspect that gear could handle most any decent airstrip, absent big rocks.

MTV

I do like the Searey, on the used market there are plenty to choose from with the 914. Here is one just over the hill from me in Reno, so it is already a veteran of high density Lake Tahoe operations.







While trying to decide if I want a boat that flies or a plane that swims, (a hull vs floats) I looked at what Searey has for competition. There is quite a few, but all of them combined doesn't approach the number of Seareys in the States. The Brazil built Super Petrel seems on paper to be a much better overall performer than the Searey. Thanks to composite build it is over 200 lbs lighter than the Searey and that alone will enhance performance. Even the turbo 914 Searey Elite is hard pressed to match the 100 hp Super Petrel specs and now the 914 is offered in the SP.

Cruise speed 100 hp Searey 90 mph, 100 hp SP 109 mph
Useful load Searey 450 lbs, SP 616 lbs
Take off run water 100 hp Searey 472', 100 hp SP 390'. 115 hp Searey 350', 115 hp SP 289'.
Range Searey 100 hp 363 miles, 100 hp SP 545 miles.

Too bad as of this post there is only one used Super Petrel for sale in the States and it doesn't have the Turbo 914.

This one is for sale in Colorado.


Just a few random pics of the SP.




Since I'm not in a hurry to purchase, I'll just keep looking for a plane that comes closest to my mission requirements. It is hard to ignore a 19 mph faster cruise, 200 lbs lighter, and landing gear that has good travel and truly retracts out of the slipstream. 180 mile greater range is also appealing. The new price of the SP is much less than a new Searey, so if a 914 powered SP never appears on the used market I might bite the bullet and buy new.

When you join SPA does that allow you to view archived articles of the magazine? I would like to read both the Searey review and MTV's article.

deckofficer wrote:I do like the Searey, on the used market there are plenty to choose from with the 914. Here is one just over the hill from me in Reno, so it is already a veteran of high density Lake Tahoe operations.







While trying to decide if I want a boat that flies or a plane that swims, (a hull vs floats) I looked at what Searey has for competition. There is quite a few, but all of them combined doesn't approach the number of Seareys in the States. The Brazil built Super Petrel seems on paper to be a much better overall performer than the Searey. Thanks to composite build it is over 200 lbs lighter than the Searey and that alone will enhance performance. Even the turbo 914 Searey Elite is hard pressed to match the 100 hp Super Petrel specs and now the 914 is offered in the SP.

Cruise speed 100 hp Searey 90 mph, 100 hp SP 109 mph
Useful load Searey 450 lbs, SP 616 lbs
Take off run water 100 hp Searey 472', 100 hp SP 390'. 115 hp Searey 350', 115 hp SP 289'.
Range Searey 100 hp 363 miles, 100 hp SP 545 miles.

Too bad as of this post there is only one used Super Petrel for sale in the States and it doesn't have the Turbo 914.

This one is for sale in Colorado.


Just a few random pics of the SP.




Since I'm not in a hurry to purchase, I'll just keep looking for a plane that comes closest to my mission requirements. It is hard to ignore a 19 mph faster cruise, 200 lbs lighter, and landing gear that has good travel and truly retracts out of the slipstream. 180 mile greater range is also appealing. The new price of the SP is much less than a new Searey, so if a 914 powered SP never appears on the used market I might bite the bullet and buy new.

When you join SPA does that allow you to view archived articles of the magazine? I would like to read both the Searey review and MTV's article.

I just did some searching on the SPA's website and some archived issues are available. I can't find these particular ones.

Cary

Thanks for looking Cary.

I've never flown (or even seen) a Petrel. Those numbers sound pretty interesting, but I'd be real suspect till I saw one that'd been weighed. Airplane manufacturers are infamous for advertising very light weights, when in fact their production examples are much heavier.

It's hard for me to imagine getting a similar size airplane much lighter than a Searey, especially one with another set of wings....... And, the newer Seareys have been available with a carbon fiber hull, which is lighter than the fiberglass. I seriously doubt that a composite wing is going to be lighter than the Searey's fabric covered wing as well....and again, the Petrel has two sets of wings.

But, who knows, maybe it's a great little airplane. I'd just want to see an actual weight on one.

MTV

mtv wrote:I've never flown (or even seen) a Petrel. Those numbers sound pretty interesting, but I'd be real suspect till I saw one that'd been weighed. Airplane manufacturers are infamous for advertising very light weights, when in fact their production examples are much heavier.

It's hard for me to imagine getting a similar size airplane much lighter than a Searey, especially one with another set of wings....... And, the newer Seareys have been available with a carbon fiber hull, which is lighter than the fiberglass. I seriously doubt that a composite wing is going to be lighter than the Searey's fabric covered wing as well....and again, the Petrel has two sets of wings.

But, who knows, maybe it's a great little airplane. I'd just want to see an actual weight on one.

MTV

Me too. For LSA amphib they don't even use the max allowable weight of 1430 lbs, but instead 1320. If they didn't build it as light as claimed, having a 1320 MTOW would sure be shooting themselves in the foot.

Headed to work on a rental. I'm early for my apartment. So.......

A more traditional setup. In the first part of the video, you can see how the Aerocets / Carbon Cub configuration is on grass.Note the nose wheels are the same size as a tail wheel on most light GA conventional gear aircraft, and the mains are a 'real' aircraft tire, not a skinny little hard surface only setup. I've never had any problem on grass or gravel runways, or even some light off-airport duty like gravel roads etc... I wouldn't go anywhere particularly soft on the wheels (like mud or sand), but otherwise they perform well on land or water.

Brad Damm
CubCrafters Direct Sales Manager
Yakima, WA

Delete