• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Float insurance

Anchorage, AK
I am thinking about putting my 12 on straight floats. Anyone have an idea what insurance would cost? Do people typically just buy liability and self insure hull? I don’t have a float rating but can get it easily enough since I am only 1/2 hour from Kenmore.
 
Wheels to floats my Cessna annual rate was close to double. The -12 was closer to triple. The only saving grace was that float season is fairly short and I could change the insurance back to wheels or to not in motion when hunting season ended.
 
Many years ago when I got my float rating I had full coverage on my cub with about 2000 hours in type. The insurance company said that to avoid any huge rise in premiums I would need to get the float rating plus get 28 hours of dual. I thought that was ridiculous but as it turned out it may have been the best training I have ever received.
I went through 4 instructors to complete the hours and learned something special from each. River work, short lakes, tight lakes and crosswinds etc. Each instructor seamed to have had their "specialty".
When done I was very comfortable in taking the wife and kids. Wasn't all that confident just after the check ride. The insurance guys knew what they were talking about.
 
What Cubpilot2 said....yes, really. I insured my 170 and Super Cub on floats through Avemco for years--liability only, and they were quite reasonable. Hull coverage in Alaska was outrageous. I've always made the assumption that if I can't afford to lose the airplane, I can't afford to own it, but liability.....there's no way I'd fly without liability coverage.

Then I wanted to start instructing in my airplane..... Avemco said "Nope". I went with Falcon, who at the time had an agreement with the Seaplane Pilot's Association. Still didn't buy hull, but liability was only about half again what it would be without the instruction.

But, trust me, when you get the SES added to your certificate, it REALLY is a license to learn. I was fortunate to get training and regular checkrides from folks who really knew floats. I've trained a number of folks to the SES, and I always felt very good about their abilities when I handed them off to the examiner. They all got exposed to rivers, both fast and slow, beaching (as in more than once), big water, confined areas, site evaluation, etc, as well as the basics required by the PTS.

Don't hesitate to get some good instruction, and once rated, keep learning, fly with folks who have more experience, etc.

I currently use Avemco, though I'm not on floats. It's a great company.

MTV
 
I have insurance through Falcon. Taylorcraft F21 on Baumann amphib, wheels and skis. Liability and non moving hull. $930 per year and I have lots on time.

Jim
 
PK 1900? Maybe 1800 or 2050? Or Aqua 1900's? If PK 1800's they don't take kindly to aft CG and can submarine in certain circumstances. But they make a great Taylorcraft setup.

Gary
 
My buddy Ed had Phil Zincks PK 1900 on his 150 SC and even with the stock 7656 prop it got off better then any edo 2000 cub I've ever seen

Glenn

Had to be empty. Put a load on and EDO is the second best. Still an Aerocet fan first, but $.

First class only will cost 90% more
 
2000s work great on a -12. You'll see the tails submerged and water running over the aft inspection covers when you're slow taxiing with a passenger or cargo. Not a big deal. No different from other round top EDOs on other planes. They get on step quickly and are good in step turns. Enjoy yourself. Cubs on floats are the ultimate toy!
 
worth a call to Avemco, I have my 12 on wheels with them and pay about $1200/yr for full coverage @ about $65K value, called for an estimate in December, same coverage for me on floats (for my first 50 hours of SES) right at $6200/yr (from my memory give or take a couple hundred bucks). goes down to about 1/2 that at 100 hours
 
worth a call to Avemco, I have my 12 on wheels with them and pay about $1200/yr for full coverage @ about $65K value, called for an estimate in December, same coverage for me on floats (for my first 50 hours of SES) right at $6200/yr (from my memory give or take a couple hundred bucks). goes down to about 1/2 that at 100 hours

Thats for 12 months? Guys i know do 3 months on floats then cancel the policy getting 3/4 of their money back every year. And Avemco has a payment plan

Glenn
 
Some add Eddie's chine angles in front of the step...doesn't increase displacement but can help get on up and go away.

I had EDO 2000's on a 180 PA-12. Off light in 2-300' at most. Maybe 5-600' at GW. Great floatplane but had the centering springs instead of the ventral fin and wandered about some.

Gary
 
Some add Eddie's chine angles in front of the step...doesn't increase displacement but can help get on up and go away.

I had EDO 2000's on a 180 PA-12. Off light in 2-300' at most. Maybe 5-600' at GW. Great floatplane but had the centering springs instead of the ventral fin and wandered about some.

Gary

Is there a drawing for the ventral fin?
 
Is there a drawing for the ventral fin?

Others would know about the fin as I've never flown with one on a PA-12. My only experience was with M. R. Borer's STC SA289AL rudder centering springs. They go forward from the rudder arm on both sides with a cable and spring to the rear lift handles or thereabouts. Holds the rudder centered and reduces yaw in flight.

I'd prefer dual fins on the outboard horizontal stabilizers over a ventral fin that hits the ground and your head.

Gary
 
Last edited:
They were 1800, both seats full and still off shorter then 2000 solo.

Glenn

If both seats were full of the husband and wife we are talking 250 lbs, maybe? Please load the airplane to gross + and take it for a ride. The free market has set the worth of these floats. A beat up set of 2000's is $10K all day long. 1800 PK's might get you a $5K offer. A couple of sets here in the east that seem to come up for sale every spring with no takers.
 
Is there a drawing for the ventral fin?
From the TC:
204. Edo 89-2000 floats with water rudder and seaplane fin (Dwg. No. 11030) +183 lbs. (+14.5)in accordance with Piper Dwg. 11031 (without spreader bars) orEdo Dwg. 89-180A (with spreader bars). Airplane Serial Nos. 12-1 through 12-3011,and 12-3901 through 12-3966, except 12-3943, 12-3945, 12-3947, 12-3949 and 12-3965, must haveadditional fuselage brace tubes (Parts Nos. 11026 and 11027 in accordance with Piper Dwg. 11031).

The fin is required in accordance with the TC unless the rudder centering springs are installed in accordance with the STC.

The centering springs do nothing more than to center the rudder while providing opposing force to the pilot's foot input in making control inputs. They will be satisfactory when the plane is loaded at a forward CG.

When the plane is loaded at or near the rear CG limit it will tend to fishtail more. In this condition more vertical tail area is required for stability. The springs will not provide stability in this condition. Even though you will be legal.

Where have all the fins gone? Some have been removed and left in the barn because they do get in the way during some ground handling conditions. Some having been removed while the plane is on wheels get lost when the plane is sold separately from the floats. Now 70 years later they are few and far between.

My long wing -18 clone on EDO 2000 performs best when loaded with a rearward CG. In this condition it will fishtail in turbulence requiring lot's of pilot inputs which becomes very tiresome. I installed a ventral fin from a Husky which was on Wipline floats when the Husky was converted to stabilizer fins. With the ventral fin my Cub flies beautifully, without it is uncomfortable.

Since you are in the Seattle area you might be able to install a set of stabilizer fins from a Citabria. The Seattle region of the FAA is very understanding in these matters. At least they used to be.

However you approach this you will be happier with more vertical tail area.

If you have altered your wing tips from the original Piper shape, the instability will be more noticeable.
 
My buddy Ed had Phil Zincks PK 1800 on his 150 SC and even with the stock 7656 prop it got off better then any edo 2000 cub I've ever seen

Glenn

If both seats were full of the husband and wife we are talking 250 lbs, maybe? Please load the airplane to gross + and take it for a ride. The free market has set the worth of these floats. A beat up set of 2000's is $10K all day long. 1800 PK's might get you a $5K offer. A couple of sets here in the east that seem to come up for sale every spring with no takers.
I installed a set of PK 1800s on a 7GCBC and have done several 7GCBCs on EDO 2000. There was no comparison, the 2000s were clearly a better float. The 1800s were lacking in forward flotation with the corresponding tendency towards plowing before the bows came up.
 
I have flown PA-12s both with and without ventral fins, and there’s no question in my mind that the fin makes a very positive difference in stability, as Pete noted. He is exactly right on fins being left off on many installations over the years. I’ve gone to pick up planes with recently installed floats, only to find the (required) fin absent. Oops! Mechanics forgot.

Airplane manufacturers design in the bare minimum of vertical fin and rudder when they design an aircraft, for reasons of drag and weight. Then someone decides to put that airframe on floats, and, dang! Not enough yaw stability. No problem.....we’ll add a fin. Which works till someone leaves the fin in the Hangar one spring......

Ever see a Beaver without a fin, or ”finlets” or enlarged vertical? Ever see a Cessna 206 on floats with the standard “non seaplane “ tail? When Cessna put the U-206 H into production, the airplane came with the “non seaplane” vertical tail and rudder. Cessna no longer offered the seaplane tail as an option. Duh! So, now, if you buy a brand new U206 you’ll have to shell out a LOT of extra bucks for a different vertical tail if you want to put it on floats. And, even with the bigger vertical tail, all 206s on floats are equipped with a very large fin. Those fins are a mild inconvenience at worst, in my opinion, but they sure improve an airplanes handling.

Pete’s point about wing extensions is also right on. I once flew a Super Cub with wing extensions on floats. I flew that plane for several years, and learned to fly it with constant and large application of rudder. It was the most unstable airplane I’ve ever flown when loaded.....and I flew it loaded most days.

When that plane went in for a complete rebuild of the airframe, the wings were converted back to stock confuguration. The airplane was much nicer to fly after. That airplane would have benefitted from a fin, in retrospect.

I also flew a Husky with a fin a good bit, and never really found the fin to be a major pain. The next Husky was on Baumann floats, which don’t require a fin. That airplane was noticeably less stable, but not ugly in any case.

If I were putting a 12 on floats, it would have a fin. Much nicer to fly, frankly. And EDO 2000 floats would be my first choice.

MTV
 
Last edited:
All you guys worry about in max buoyancy, and that most likely is the safest? But from what I've seen a under floated smaller float performs better getting off then a larger float. I want the performance over the floatation. Yup you need to be extra careful on down wind turns while on the water and taxiing around. I've done the monkey climb up my lift struts to pull a submerged tip back up a few times that I should have stayed home on 30 mph wind days. And I've had 1400 edos but I still would stay with the smaller 1320s for how much faster they get off. Cruiser, I've been loaded right up to 1500+lbs and they work fine but you need to be careful. I hope Ed put those 1800 back on this year so we can put you 2 side by side and you can watch him and Lo thru the sunroof while your still on the water. ;-)

Glenn
 
Glenn,
The difference between the EDO 1400 and 1320 which you notice is more the shape of the bottoms than the difference in buoyancy. With equal shaped floats, the only difference being the size, the larger float will get out sooner because it has to push less water out of the way while it is climbing on the step. More water to push means more drag and more power required to overcome the drag thus more time to get on the step. Once on the step there should be little noticeable difference, all else being equal.
 
Glenn,
The difference between the EDO 1400 and 1320 which you notice is more the shape of the bottoms than the difference in buoyancy. With equal shaped floats, the only difference being the size, the larger float will get out sooner because it has to push less water out of the way while it is climbing on the step. More water to push means more drag and more power required to overcome the drag thus more time to get on the step. Once on the step there should be little noticeable difference, all else being equal.

OK, but I have a little Aqua 1500 time and the 1320s do better.


Glenn
 
Back
Top