[7 / 6 / ?]
Quoted By:
Let's have a thread about aircraft which land on the water.
I've wondered for some time now, what the most efficient design would have been to this day. For example: If you strap floats to a Cub, it has to come with the bigger engine, 150, 180 would be even nicer and will carry less than it's 125 cousin while maybe even being slower, lower, and more fuel hungry (...) on the way.
Something like a PA Searey on the other hand... I mean I don't have the numbers, but they seem nimble for what they are and I think their numbers compared to equal mass/size/construction, rotax powered land going equivalents... I mean I'm just guessing, but I think they hold up quiet well, don't they?
Now what would be the most efficient one of the bunch in terms of... anything really, weight, drag, space, handling... Bonus points for being economically made, sold & maintainable.
Also post pictures, discuss wellies and other seaplane related shit.
I've wondered for some time now, what the most efficient design would have been to this day. For example: If you strap floats to a Cub, it has to come with the bigger engine, 150, 180 would be even nicer and will carry less than it's 125 cousin while maybe even being slower, lower, and more fuel hungry (...) on the way.
Something like a PA Searey on the other hand... I mean I don't have the numbers, but they seem nimble for what they are and I think their numbers compared to equal mass/size/construction, rotax powered land going equivalents... I mean I'm just guessing, but I think they hold up quiet well, don't they?
Now what would be the most efficient one of the bunch in terms of... anything really, weight, drag, space, handling... Bonus points for being economically made, sold & maintainable.
Also post pictures, discuss wellies and other seaplane related shit.
