Greetings, everyone. Colleagues, may I ask for your opinion? Please tell me—would there be demand today for a twin-engine, six-seat amphibious aircraft designed so that, after landing on water, you can conveniently lower a two-seat jet ski or quad bike into the water and then lift it back aboard? It would be powered by two 180 hp Lycoming engines, and if the aircraft carries the jet ski of course only two people would be on board . Setting aside the price of a new amphibian of this kind—around one million dollars—I’m interested purely in whether such a capability would be in demand. Thank you in advance for your response.
a twin-engine, six-seat amphibious aircraft
- Thread starter AKLAVIA13
- Start date
mvivion
FOUNDER
Bozeman,MT
For perspective, there is an STC to suspend two jet skis into pods (with winches) on the wings of the Grumman Albatross.
Jet skis are not light. The asymmetric weight and drag on a small aircraft would likely be a non starter, and as ry6ator pointed out, 180 hp engines would be massively underpowered, even without the external load.
Jet skis are not light. The asymmetric weight and drag on a small aircraft would likely be a non starter, and as ry6ator pointed out, 180 hp engines would be massively underpowered, even without the external load.
RedOwlAirfield
FRIEND
Nevada
Not to be a negative Nelly or to pile on... But I have to agree with both of the other posters regarding feasibility of the project. Beyond that though - and to answer your actual question - I really don't think the demand is there for such a thing. If the whole "personal watercraft" deal is a thing to someone I can't imagine anyone to whom that task would be primary. If an aircraft met another (more commonly utilized) task set - and it just so happened that hauling watercraft could also be done - then maybe you've got an avenue in. It's my considered opinion ( and worth every penny you paid for it) that the multi engine amphib market is at full float. We don't lose a lot of them every year and the current fleet seems under utilized. I do however encourage you to build an experimental version for your own satisfaction. Of course since you appear to be considering a commercial enterprise I will remind you of the aviation truism... "The only way to make a small fortune in aviation is to start with a large one."
Best of luck whichever direction you take. Let us know if you start through the process to do this.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
The Twin Bee is a 5 seat twin-engine amphibious airplane with Lycoming IO-360 180 hp engines. If you reshaped the cabin area you could accommodate the jet ski and two people. This could be done by reshaping the aft section with a rear facing cargo door. During flight testing, an FAA aerodynamicist suggested a method of reducing drag by reshaping the aft portion of the cabin. It's excellent performance is credited to it's high aspect ratio wing and flaps along with the two engines blowing air over the wings and flaps. Single engine performance is marginal. In it's day, there was a lot of interest which the factory was unable to meet. Therefor only 23 were built with not many remaining today. I was the company pilot.
https://seabee.info/twinbee_history.htm
It's doable, whether you could produce enough of them to make it financially viable is another question.
Hint: Use a left hand rotating engine on the right side and cant them both outboard a bit for better single engine handling.
Another hint: counter rotating engines on a flying boat improves the take off performance by eliminating the tendency of the left wing float digging in the water when you apply power.
https://seabee.info/twinbee_history.htm
It's doable, whether you could produce enough of them to make it financially viable is another question.
Hint: Use a left hand rotating engine on the right side and cant them both outboard a bit for better single engine handling.
Another hint: counter rotating engines on a flying boat improves the take off performance by eliminating the tendency of the left wing float digging in the water when you apply power.
Last edited:
Farmboy
SPONSOR
Fort Edward, NY - Fairview, OK
SeaBear Aircraft
www.seabearaircraft.com
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
Look at the wing span 48', high aspect ratio. Interesting plane, I'll bet you didn't realize Russia has general aviation community.SeaBear Aircraft
Farmboy
SPONSOR
Fort Edward, NY - Fairview, OK
I’ve been keeping an eye on that one for awhile Pete. Michael Smith, that flew around in the Searey, bought one as his replacement seaplane.
In other news, it’s amazing to me how much misguided money is poured into things electric.
In other news, it’s amazing to me how much misguided money is poured into things electric.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
I can think of a few places I've been getting gasoline where I would not have been able to fill my batteries. Is there a Seabear in the US? That does look to be a fun airplane.
hotrod180
FRIEND
Port Townsend, WA
I looked over a McKinnon turbine Goose that used to fly into my airport occasionally.
It had outboard-canted engines, which wasn't very obvious unless you were looking at it from behind,
but then it was hard to miss.
These are the specs from Wiki for the Grumman Widgeon, a 5 seater. These are 'Seneca I' weights and power, so barely a 6 seater.
- Empty weight: 3,240 lb (1,470 kg)
- Gross weight: 4,525 lb (2,053 kg)
- Powerplant: 2 × Ranger L-440-5 air-cooled inverted six-cylinder inline engine, 200 hp
john schwamm
SPONSOR
Anchorage, Alaska Carefree, AZ
Original with Rangers was only 5 seats. STC for other engines allowed 6 seats.
skywagon8a - does the name Gordon Newell ring a bell? 4B2, Riverside airport, was working on getting a Widgeon right with the FAA, 1992 or thereabouts…
Yes, Gordon installed Continental IO-520s with a Dean Franklin conversion on his Widgeon. Ned Rice who was a retired engineer from Pratt & Whitney helped him getting it certified as a one only STC. Ned told me that was a great performer. Ned did the engineering for the TIO-520-J2BD STC also. The FAA in Seattle designated him as a DER for the project.
I've wondered how a Continental IO-550 would do with the Dean Franklin conversion? .
NX1PA
hotrod180
FRIEND
Port Townsend, WA
hotrod180
FRIEND
Port Townsend, WA
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
If you do pursue this idea, consider using the IO-360-M1A. This engine has the fuel servo mounted in the front of the oil sump thereby reducing the height of the engine. Don't even consider using a carburetor or an engine with the fuel injector servo mounted under the sump because the height of the engine will produce too much cross sectional area, thus too much drag which will make meeting the single engine control requirements likely impossible to meet. We tried using the carburetor version first on the Twin Bee and had to change to fuel injection with a forward mounted fuel servo for this reason.
john schwamm
SPONSOR
Anchorage, Alaska Carefree, AZ
Widgeon does not perform as well on takeoff with straight drive motors, geared motors give it amazing thrust. When light off the water in about 8 seconds.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
Granted the larger engines in Widgeons do perform better than a Ranger powered Widgeon. I have flown a Ranger Widgeon with Hartzell controllable props, it performed very well. With the fixed pitch props, not so well. I understand why George Pappas liked that version.
john schwamm
SPONSOR
Anchorage, Alaska Carefree, AZ
For sure lightest Widgeon, but Ranger top ends(really bottom) did not last very long, always piston/valve issues.
George Pappas made them better with constant speed prop, and I think Dodge truck pistons.
Paul Heinrich
SPONSOR
Illinois & Wisconsin
If you're planning to spend big bucks on a flying boat anyway, buy or restore a PBY. Travel in style and comfort while preserving their awesome History.
By the way, flying boats aren't designed for small waterbodies or steep approaches. A float plane like an Otter might better fulfill your mission objectives. Perhaps you could design a drop down rear ramp to load personal watercraft.
By the way, flying boats aren't designed for small waterbodies or steep approaches. A float plane like an Otter might better fulfill your mission objectives. Perhaps you could design a drop down rear ramp to load personal watercraft.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
You need to go for a ride in a Twin Bee, your point of view will change.
Paul Heinrich
SPONSOR
Illinois & Wisconsin
Yep, I thought of those the moment I hit "post reply", but it would be hard to fit a jet ski in or on one.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
That's true, but aklavia13 is talking about building a new design. A similar design with a modified cabin section may do the trick.
Similar threads
