• 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!

Has anyone here ever flown a RANS S-7 on floats or amphibs?

Alex Clark

Registered User
Life Long Alaskan
Has anyone here ever flown a RANS S-7 on floats or amphibs? I was wondering how they have enough usable load?
 
Not on floats, but on wheel skis. It performs very well, but I also don't take a big passenger AND lot's of gear. Just me and lot's of gear, or me and a passenger, with emergency gear, still very good performance. Check out this takeoff at 8,000', right at 9:30, nothing marginal about it at all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycv2GDm2DOo&t=520s So, it'd depend on your mission. I've done three different op's at 10K, in the summer, but again just me, but with full camping gear.

There have been several of them put on floats, that I know, though I never paid that close of attention, the design has been around for 30 years now. I can't see why it wouldn't be a good float performer.
 
Has anyone here ever flown a RANS S-7 on floats or amphibs? I was wondering how they have enough usable load?
Flown RANS S7S on aluminum 1500 straight floats about 100 hours. Performance is excellent with 1/2 fuel and one person. Full fuel and two average people you’re over gross but the thing will still perform well. Floats less then 1500s are a little too small IMO. No experience with amphibs.
 
What type of fuel burn do you RANS 7 folks see on average?
I take it that your max gross is around 1320 pounds, so what are you running for empty weights?
I have only flown two long tail S7s and I was impressed with both. Although while instructing in the back seat my head was touching something above me..
 
You need to fly it hard to burn 5 gph. In the pattern you’d be around 3 gph and at cruise around 4.
Empty wt on 2004 RANS S-7S with Roberts Gear and Aero Classic 850s plus T3 tailwheel is 762 lbs.
Courierguy has more specific fuel burn numbers.
 
Today, a 140 mile (one way) breakfast flight to Leadore, 29 gallons on board (mogas) 3.4 GPH at 75 MPH ASI, at 8 K', 3.7 GPH at 85 MPH. 29" Airstreaks, Roberts gear (though faired and covered), a HacMan leaner, a low comp BigBore Zipper mod, and a 78" Prince prop. 780 pounds, after 12 years, they always gain weight, but I have it set up exactly how I want it. Almost identical fuel burns to what I got in my T-Craft with the A-65, but a lot more thrust.
 
I really loved the 2 I have flown on wheels. They behaved like my old lightweight non-electric PA-11, but with a little bit more width and a door on both sides.
BUT,,, I am not sure I could get a LODA ( Letter of Devine Acceptance) from the Holy order of the FAA to use one for any sort of instruction.
 
Not a float guy.

We burn closer to 5gal with ours on 29” Airstreaks. Sea level and cooler is much different than the guys getting by on 3.5 at higher altitudes. Of course I’ve always had the slowest plane and dumbest dog. We have big bore cylinders on a 912 and run it at 5200rpm or higher cruise. With the monster gear and big tires that yields a little less than 90mph average.

I cannot imagine it would be a good float plane for instruction. We really like ours, it’s a ton of fun, but it suffers greatly with a load compared to empty. Ingress/egress is not all that convenient for those a bit less mobile and useful load will be an issue with the size people are today.

I also had a PA-11 with a ton of PA18 mods. It was probably 200# heavier than the Rans. There is very, very little performance difference getting off the ground and also getting on the ground. The climb performance on the Rans is better. The extra wing on the -11 is a huge boost.
 
GBFlyer:
My PA-11 was non electric, C-90-8, only one tank, fixed seats, bare bones interior, and lightweight fabric. so she was only 776 pounds on wheel gear. ( weighed) She jumped off the ground here at sea level.

But I will say that my buddy's Long tail S-7 with a starter gets off the ground at about the same place.
 

Attachments

  • Cub at mountain base.JPG
    Cub at mountain base.JPG
    145.2 KB · Views: 264
  • 2012-12-31 003 (1280x882).jpg
    2012-12-31 003 (1280x882).jpg
    463.5 KB · Views: 1,718
Not a float guy.

We burn closer to 5gal with ours on 29” Airstreaks. Sea level and cooler is much different than the guys getting by on 3.5 at higher altitudes. Of course I’ve always had the slowest plane and dumbest dog. We have big bore cylinders on a 912 and run it at 5200rpm or higher cruise. With the monster gear and big tires that yields a little less than 90mph average.

I cannot imagine it would be a good float plane for instruction. We really like ours, it’s a ton of fun, but it suffers greatly with a load compared to empty. Ingress/egress is not all that convenient for those a bit less mobile and useful load will be an issue with the size people are today.

I also had a PA-11 with a ton of PA18 mods. It was probably 200# heavier than the Rans. There is very, very little performance difference getting off the ground and also getting on the ground. The climb performance on the Rans is better. The extra wing on the -11 is a huge boost.

Got a HacMan leaner GB? They pay for themselves quickly, but at sea level, or near to it, conditions I don't know......I rarely cruise at 5200, but when I do it's 3.7 or 3.9 GPH. I'm clueless on how the thicker air helps or hinders relative to fuel consumption. Thinner air helps I guess. I have no real idea if the 1" induction cross over tubes I have help my fuel burn, but something is. I do realize my fuel burn seems to be lower then most any Rotax other drivers, so much so that I have taken pains to accurately determine it, and I can't quite believe it myself! A gallon an hour less then my first 7, with the Subaru conversion FWIW. I flight plan for 4 GPH, and always err on the plus side, in round numbers.
 
Not a float guy.

We burn closer to 5gal with ours on 29” Airstreaks. Sea level and cooler is much different than the guys getting by on 3.5 at higher altitudes. Of course I’ve always had the slowest plane and dumbest dog. We have big bore cylinders on a 912 and run it at 5200rpm or higher cruise. With the monster gear and big tires that yields a little less than 90mph average.

I cannot imagine it would be a good float plane for instruction. We really like ours, it’s a ton of fun, but it suffers greatly with a load compared to empty. Ingress/egress is not all that convenient for those a bit less mobile and useful load will be an issue with the size people are today.

I also had a PA-11 with a ton of PA18 mods. It was probably 200# heavier than the Rans. There is very, very little performance difference getting off the ground and also getting on the ground. The climb performance on the Rans is better. The extra wing on the -11 is a huge boost.

Got a HacMan leaner GB? They pay for themselves quickly, but at sea level, or near to it, conditions I don't know......I rarely cruise at 5200, but when I do it's 3.7 or 3.9 GPH. I'm clueless on how the thicker air helps or hinders relative to fuel consumption. Thinner air helps I guess. I have no real idea if the 1" induction cross over tubes I have help my fuel burn, but something is. I do realize my fuel burn seems to be lower then most any Rotax other drivers, so much so that I have taken pains to accurately determine it, and I can't quite believe it myself! A gallon an hour less then my first 7, with the Subaru conversion FWIW. I flight plan for 4 GPH, and always err on the plus side, in round numbers.

Seems like my dad talked with Hal about a Hackman leaner and I believe the consensus was it would be of very little use at our usual altitudes. We got a set of the exchange intakes with the 1” crossover tube plumbing. All I can say is that the quality of workmanship is such that I would not put them on an air boat much less an airplane. Must have been a bad day.
 
GBFlyer:
My PA-11 was non electric, C-90-8, only one tank, fixed seats, bare bones interior, and lightweight fabric. so she was only 776 pounds on wheel gear. ( weighed) She jumped off the ground here at sea level.

But I will say that my buddy's Long tail S-7 with a starter gets off the ground at about the same place.

My -11 was C90-12 but no electric at the time. I believe someone has put a starter in it since. It has flaps, -18 seat, 2 tanks,no headers. It is #900 plus. It’s been passed around quite a bit since it left Canada years ago, I got it from Stan Franz at CC. It might be back in Alaska, last time I saw if for sale it was. Fun solo airplane and performed well considering the weight.

I’m of the opinion that the Rans S7S is just a touch short of wing....but I guess the speed penalty was too much? I dunno. If I was scratch building one it would get more.
 
Not a float guy.

We burn closer to 5gal with ours on 29” Airstreaks. Sea level and cooler is much different than the guys getting by on 3.5 at higher altitudes. Of course I’ve always had the slowest plane and dumbest dog. We have big bore cylinders on a 912 and run it at 5200rpm or higher cruise. With the monster gear and big tires that yields a little less than 90mph average.

I cannot imagine it would be a good float plane for instruction. We really like ours, it’s a ton of fun, but it suffers greatly with a load compared to empty. Ingress/egress is not all that convenient for those a bit less mobile and useful load will be an issue with the size people are today.

I also had a PA-11 with a ton of PA18 mods. It was probably 200# heavier than the Rans. There is very, very little performance difference getting off the ground and also getting on the ground. The climb performance on the Rans is better. The extra wing on the -11 is a huge boost.
I don’t have to imagine. RANS S-7S is a great float plane, especially on straight floats. Two average people and 1/2 fuel makes it a fine training aircraft. (Many pilots were trained in Nova Scotia exactly like this). Double doors are a bonus on floats. Easier to get into and out of, more room then a cub.
 
I don’t have to imagine. RANS S-7S is a great float plane, especially on straight floats. Two average people and 1/2 fuel makes it a fine training aircraft. (Many pilots were trained in Nova Scotia exactly like this). Double doors are a bonus on floats. Easier to get into and out of, more room then a cub.

If you say so. With floats there’s somewhere around a 450# payload left maybe. Pretty thin but could theoretically work I suppose for some folks but fewer than you might think. It isn’t gonna take much in the way of seas with those little bitty floats. I don’t fly them but where I live I’ve rode in lots of float planes. I strongly disagree that it’s easier to get in and out of than a cub. The strut is in the way just like a Maule. Double doors are cool until you get hung up on the throttle handle.

I think it would be a ton of fun on a little frog water pond by myself. Love to try it sometime but surrounded by ocean. One thing for sure, a student would certainly have to learn how to fly the floats. There isn’t enough power to make up for poor technique.
 
Jack Brown seaplane base- they’re training aircraft are J3s on Aqua 1500s. Those aircraft are heavier then the S-7, lack flaps, and, have heavier 100 hp 0-200s which don’t crank up like a 100 hp 912. They’ve trained more floatplane pilots then anyone else. What are we talkin about anyway? Lol. Passing an opinion on the RANS on floats and ya ain’t never flew one on floats. Great info.
 
Jack Brown seaplane base- they’re training aircraft are J3s on Aqua 1500s. Those aircraft are heavier then the S-7, lack flaps, and, have heavier 100 hp 0-200s which don’t crank up like a 100 hp 912. They’ve trained more floatplane pilots then anyone else. What are we talkin about anyway? Lol. Passing an opinion on the RANS on floats and ya ain’t never flew one on floats. Great info.

True.
 
Well, one of these days maybe I'll get back to the original poster and answer the question. I have a set of Full Lotus floats that are already rigged for an S-7. I've just never had the time to mount them up to my S-7. When I do fly end up flying the plane, it's mostly just locat area flights and several T/O and landings at my own strip.Absolutely love flying floats, but the guys I used to fly around with have mostly moved on the other endeavours. Still want to do more float flying though.... Maybe next year.
 
I called the RANS folks.
The factory built S7s are certified as Special Light Sport category ( not experimental ) and it is legal to do instruction with them or rent them out.
 
Saw this one near Siren, WI a few years ago. I don't know anything about it though.

Howard_Fly-in_1_365.JPG


Howard_Fly-in_1_366.JPG


Howard_Fly-in_1_367.JPG


Howard_Fly-in_1_369.JPG


Lowrance!
Howard_Fly-in_1_370.JPG
 
I called the RANS folks.
The factory built S7s are certified as Special Light Sport category ( not experimental ) and it is legal to do instruction with them or rent them out.
Alex, Before you get too wound up with this you should make certain with the FAA that you can use this for regular seaplane rating instruction without being limited to Light Sport.
 
I'm not sure how sea level (or close to it) ops at standard temps compare to 14 degree temps at 6,000' density altitude wise, but I do know that my short local flight yesterday showed some pretty good overall performance. With my runway slope, (9 to 12%) I take off, downslope of course,at partial power, as I am too impatient to wait for the motor to fully warm up usually. Yesterday's cold air meant a 1640 RPM, at the prop, takeoff was no sweat (being punny there) and then more then level flight, a slight climb, was possible. Once the engine got warmed up, 1800 fpm climb at WOT. Point being, set up right, there would seem to be enough excess performance to make it a decent float plane. I know nothing about the allowable regs that address the instruction issue. 5 degrees right now......but snowing heavily and 100 yard viz.
 
Sky wagon: Apparently I could use one as long as it is a factory built version. The Rams 7 factory built are certified under the special light sport category. Just a thought towards the future where affordability and light weight will be an issue.
 
Don’t want to offend Roddy any further so I’ll keep my lack of water rudder time opinions to myself as building one of these things and flying it a couple hundred hours doesn’t count. [emoji1]

Jamie in Palmer had a factory S7 for awhile. I think it’s been passed around a bit too. His number is 240-1764 and he’s at RAVN. He’s a good resource for all things S7S and a super nice fellow. He’s also built a bunch of them, and Highlanders and a SQ.
 
Sik, you have yet to reply or email me in regards to a float build CD for Murphy' 1800's.. do you want one or not? #1 son is hard to tack down and for now I'm only bothering him once to do a run for those that want same. You asked.. others have paid and given me all their details, but still nothing from you! Thanks, Wayne
 
Sik, you have yet to reply or email me in regards to a float build CD for Murphy' 1800's.. do you want one or not? #1 son is hard to tack down and for now I'm only bothering him once to do a run for those that want same. You asked.. others have paid and given me all their details, but still nothing from you! Thanks, Wayne

I have chosen to take a different route regarding the Murphy floats and no longer need information for construction. Simply put, I didn't want to waste your time, thus no contact.

Sik
 
Okay... it actually works the other way as I strive to take care of my customers, and have for the past 26+ years. You've wasted my time, and others, by asking about the CD (while trying to coax others to loan/sell you their encrypted copy) and then not following through when I stated they are indeed available from me, while I hold up others waiting for a build CD... as I wait for the original requester to order one, being you! A simple reply on the Murphy builders forum that you were "out" would have expedited other folks orders ...

Sorry for the hijack Alex !
 
You've wasted my time, and others, by asking about the CD !

Inappropriate location for this exchange. No apology to you Irishfield, but I do apologize to the rest of supercub.org for the previous three posts.

I am curious however (back on topic), who made the floats in posting # 21.

Sik
 
Back
Top