Floatplane Training.

[North Shore]

There's a recent post in the bush forum by a German? guy wanting to come here to get his CPL and become a bush pilot. I was doing a little research on my reply to that thread, and it seems to me that there is a glaring gap in the floatplane training available, and I can't figure out why?
Everyone seems to be offering training on a 172XP or 180, but nothing smaller. I can see the argument to use a 180 (train on the a/c that the pros use) but surely 10 hours on a $150/hr a/c is better than 5 on a $300/hr 180? To my mind, the important things to get sorted are reading the water, and your landing attitude, therefore the cheapest option is going to get you the most time doing just that. Plus, a relatively underpowered plane is going to require a little more finesse than a lightly-loaded 180.
So, why is there no training (that I can seem to find) on a Champ/Cub/Citabria etc on floats? Are those a/c too delicate to be used as trainers?

Any comments from the collective wisdom?

[Bushav8er]

http://www.elmhirst.com/air_adventures.html Scroll down - "Floatplane training is offered in the Piper PA12 aircraft. Advanced seaplane training is offered in the Cessna 185. "

There are others, you have to look harder. I got my rating on a Fleet Canuck (and C180).

(I'm not affiliated with above)

[iflyforpie]

So, why is there no training (that I can seem to find) on a Champ/Cub/Citabria etc on floats? Are those a/c too delicate to be used as trainers?

Any comments from the collective wisdom?

Wisdom from someone who has 14 seaplane hours..

Lack of doors on both sides. Fabric + outdoors + insurance = $$$$. Tandem seating. No C/S prop. Anything with the words 'cub' and 'floats' in it is nearly as expensive as a 180 or 172XP anyways.

My $0.02...

[SuperchargedRS]

It is FAR easier to fly a cub (or similar) on floats then a 172ish plane. One benefit of a CS floatplane (at least down here) is you can do your commercial in it. Secondly by adjusting your MP by 3/4" you can simulate 1000' density alt, a good precursor for actually landing in mountain lakes.

[Big Pistons Forever]

There seems to be an increasing tendancy for insurance companies to want 50 hrs on type. Since your first commercial float job will almost certainly be on the C180/185 it seems you will be most empoyable after a 50 hr float course on a C180 taught by an instructor with industry name recognition. I am not commenting as to whether this is a good or bad thing just giving my .02 cents on what I percieve is the reality of the business today.

BTW I learned on a flapless 85 hp Luscombe. It was great training as the airplane was underpowered and rather unforgiving on floats. IMO the perfect float trainer would be a stock 100 hp C150 with the factory float kit. Simple, all metal, factory corrosion proofed, and very cheap to operate and maintain.....and best of all, it is possibly the worst float plane ever made (except for maybe the PA 28 on floats allthough I have never flown one) . If you can fly one of those well, anything you will see as a commercial pilot will be easier.

[mr.jinks]

I find the 172 with 150hp to be a great trainer, it has doors on both sides, all aluminum and is a glutton for punishment. It's not the easiest floatplane to fly, nor is the hardest. having 6 gallons of fuel per side or full tanks with two people on board is the difference between nice'n easy and having to work her a bit.

The COPA website used to have a fairly comprehensive list of seaplane schools on its website with aircraft types and prices, but that seems to have changed. There is the seaplane pilots association website, but it seems outdated and leaves out a lot of schools.

[Blue Side Down]

Everyone seems to be offering training on a 172XP or 180, but nothing smaller.

Because the profit margins are larger on these types? Just a guess...

Then again, right after the bottom line I hear that there is a quality control check box for 'Did the student receive an honest, well rounded, avcanada approved float training experience?' ...for tax purposes

[Slats]

by adjusting your MP by 3/4" you can simulate 1000' density alt, a good precursor for actually landing in mountain lakes.

Or just about anywhere in north-central Canada shield country. I've always found the altitude to be more of a consideration on take off from mountain lakes as opposed to landing in them.