amphibious and float planes?

dont really see them that much here
or been spoken about alot

how come we dont have large comercial Boat planes anymore?
it must be a good way to make them larger as you cant run out of sea.

or is there and i just missed the topics?

[edit on 13-12-2007 by bodrul]

There are a few modern one, but they are mainly used for fire fighting. They can land on a lake, fill their tanks and then release.

The is also a project called the Beriev-2500 so called because it will be able to take off with 2500 metric tonnes.

Jensy

Originally posted by bodrul
dont really see them that much here
or been spoken about alot

how come we dont have large comercial Boat planes anymore?
it must be a good way to make them larger as you cant run out of sea.

or is there and i just missed the topics?

They went out of fashion after WW2 because the primary benefit of a flying boat, the lack of a need for a long runway, became defunct as the war left thousands of long paved runways all over the world.

And so the world went with land based aircraft, as flying boats hauled around a significant amount of extra weight, and couldn't be made as aerodynamically economic as a land based aircraft.

should this thread of been titled as amphibious and float planes?

Personally I really like the unusal shape of the CL-415 waterbomber. What to make a model of it someday when I actually get free time. provided a pic so that we have something to look at on the thread lol.

Here Bodrul, have a read of this. You might like it.

giant flying boat project

reply to post by waynos


sweet going to have a read now

Canada_EH true, changed title name
i like the designs of the planes and the way they made

Float planes are used a lot in Canada, and growing up in British Columbia it was the only way to get from A to B sometimes. I couldn't even guess the number of times I've flown on Twin Otters to get over to Vancouver or go into a town to get supplies. The Twin Otter is very versatile because I've been on planes with floats, wheels, and skies for snow. It's a go anywhere type of plane that carries a fair bit of weight for it's size.

I've always found take off and landing on water a lot more exciting than doing it on a runway, and in Canada most people refer to them as seaplanes even if they never see salt water.

I believe Harbour Air has the largest fleet and number of flights of any water based aircraft in the world, but I may just be bragging on Canada because I live here.

reply to post by anxietydisorder


i would love to fly in one, you lucky b****ted
only planes i have been on are the Normal boring ones

I've always been a huge fan of seaplanes!

My dream is to one day have enough money to get my pilots license, learn to fly seaplanes, and eventually purchase and rebuild/outfit a Grumman Albatross-type plane. It's actually the kind of plane that Jimmy Buffett owns and flies, and I actually saw him land it before his concert when I was in Miami.

I also saw a show about a retired couple that own an Albatross and pretty much live out of it. They just fly around the country to different lakes and camp out and everything. There's just something fascinating to me about being able to land in relatively-calm waters anywhere in the world, where you're not confined to landing at airports. Not to mention the fact that if you choose to you can also land an Albatross on a runway.

I also read there is a large event every year for the Grumman Albatross owners (it may not be exclusive to just Grumman, but I forget) out west. I believe it's in Colorado or Idaho somewhere. Anyway, in addition to a bunch of events, they will teach and certify you how to fly a seaplane. And you'll actually get hours in the cockpit of a real seaplane, which is something rare considering how few in numbers they are these days.

Anyway... if you're into seaplanes, you have to check out the ones that the Soviet Union made during the height of the Cold War. I forget what they're called, but they are gigantic and were going to be used for troop transport and landings. They were JET POWERED and also able to fire cruise missiles! A few of them still exist to this day, but they are somewhere rotting away. The funding just wasn't there after a while and they were forced to abandon the project.

I also recall reading about Iran producing a fighter-type seaplane. It basically looked like a fighter jet on water skis, from what I remember.

I apologize for blabbing all of this info strictly from memory and without providing any links, but I just don't have any! But if you're interested in any of these topis, I'm certain a Google search will lead you in the right direction as that is where I read about most of what I've discussed. Although I learned about the Soviet seaplanes on a History Channel program about secret Soviet weapons, I believe.

Anyway.... I was really glad to see this topic! Let's keep it going, guys!

Here's something that might pique your interest. It's the Caspian Sea Monster, better known as the Ekranoplan. It's a Russian craft that operates on the ground effect. It's not technically an airplane, although it is a very interesting read.

Wiki: Ekranoplan

Originally posted by bodrul

i would love to fly in one, you lucky b****ted
only planes i have been on are the Normal boring ones

Normal and boring is a good thing most of the time when it comes to planes.
Landing in Nanaimo harbour when the sea is choppy can be down right scary.

The plane starts hitting the tops of the waves and it feels like you're slamming down over and over. The whole plane goes bang, bang, bang, about 25 times and then you pitch and roll as you taxi to the dock. They fly the Otters in any weather pretty much and I've seen some very frightened people if they're not accustomed to that type of flying.

Landing on snow in a ski plane is another experience because the surface isn't very smooth. You'd swear the plane was being shaken apart as it bounces and shudders just after touch down.

"Air West" is no longer in business, but when I traveled with them a lot all the passengers would call it "Scare West", and with good reason.
It was often a very frightening trip in bad weather, and I think some of the pilots took pleasure in making a very steep approach and sudden bank just for the fun of it. :shk:

You Otter try it

Originally posted by anxietydisorder
The Twin Otter is very versatile because I've been on planes with floats, wheels, and skies for snow. It's a go anywhere type of plane that carries a fair bit of weight for it's size.

Great plane. I've flown on them in Indonesia (jungle airstrips), Nepal (places where the plane has to climb on final approach and you see the wrecks of the ones that didn't make it littering the inaccessible ravines below) and Maldives (the floatplanes of Maldivian Air Taxi, the famous 'barefoot pilots' airline). You feel confident inside a Twin Otter.

They fly the Otters in any weather pretty much and I've seen some very frightened people if they're not accustomed to that type of flying.

As one of those 'barefoot pilots' once said to me, 'you know the monsoon's really hit when the rain gets horizontal'. That was about five minutes before we took off - into that horizontal rain.

Me, I like that sort of thing. Not really sure why.

reply to post by bodrul

how come we dont have large comercial Boat planes anymore?

Hi Bod,

I have about 500 hours as PIC (pilot) in floatplanes. They will never be used in large commercial operations because you never can be sure of the condition of the water where you intend to land. You could have 6 to 10 ft swells that make a safe landing nearly impossible. The bigger the plane the longer the waterway required, the longer the waterway the bigger the wave or swell potential.

Floatplanes are very useful in local situations where water landings and great hauling capacity are required. They are also a more stable and enjoyable flying platform. Passengers generally love them

And land pilots will always be envious!

just to add a few more negatives to why they are less common

cost - the airframe / hull cost per passenger / ton of payload is higer than a conventional airframe

payload - the payload / passengers per engine HP and fuel consuption are lower - due to construction / aerodynamics

passenger comfort - take offs / landings are ` exciting ` to say the least - some poeple like that sort of thing - most do not

maintainence - the seaplane / ploat plane has a much higher down time / hour in the air - and higher maintainence costs , esp if operated from salt water

edit to add :

the above drawbacks are the main reasons why unless flying to locations where hard landing simply does not exist [ like tracts of canada / alaska ] then a conventional plane is generaly perefarable and more ecconomic to operate

[edit on 14-12-2007 by ignorant_ape]

You amphibious fans might enjoy "Night over Water" by Ken Follett. It's about a large amphib the Yankee Clipper" Set at the start of WWII about a final exciting flight from England back to America before the evil Natzis attacked Merry England.