FLOATS on a Cessna 337 ?
Raymond Russell
centerline twin C-337.
C. Marin Faure
(Raymond Russell) wrote:
> Does anyone know if floats can be put on a Cessna Skymaster. This is the
> centerline twin C-337.
According to the official listing of all the airplanes that can be fitted
with EDO floats, the 337 has never been approved for floats. It's
possible that another make of float has been approved for the 337. I've
never seen or heard of a 337 on floats, but that doesn't mean it ain't so.
I don't think it would be a very good floatplane anyway, as the rear
propeller would be subject to a tremendous amount of spray during every
takeoff which would make short work of the blades.
C. Marin Faure
author, Flying A Floatplane
Kenneth M. Gianino
I read somewhere that it was tried and abandoned due to excessive
rear prop erosion.
-Ken
Kim Hackett
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.91.6
>In article <4k1m89$13...@usenetw1.news.prodigy.com>, HMQ...@prodigy.com
>(Raymond Russell) wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know if floats can be put on a Cessna Skymaster. This is the
>> centerline twin C-337.
>
>According to the official listing of all the airplanes that can be fitted
>with EDO floats, the 337 has never been approved for floats. It's
>possible that another make of float has been approved for the 337. I've
>never seen or heard of a 337 on floats, but that doesn't mean it ain't so.
>
I have never heard of the 337 using floats. I will ask around at work
and see if anyone else has heard of it.
Kim Hackett
Cessna Aircraft Company
Wichita, Kansas
Craig Spence
>
>In article <4k1m89$13...@usenetw1.news.prodigy.com>, HMQ...@prodigy.com
>(Raymond Russell) wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know if floats can be put on a Cessna Skymaster. This is the
>> centerline twin C-337.
>
>According to the official listing of all the airplanes that can be fitted
>with EDO floats, the 337 has never been approved for floats. It's
>possible that another make of float has been approved for the 337. I've
>never seen or heard of a 337 on floats, but that doesn't mean it ain't so.
>
>I don't think it would be a very good floatplane anyway, as the rear
>propeller would be subject to a tremendous amount of spray during every
>takeoff which would make short work of the blades.
>
>C. Marin Faure
>author, Flying A Floatplane
Gil Devores has fixed PeeKay floats to C-336 & C-337. Aircraft
had Robertson STOL gear fitted to provide better water performance. Most twin
engined float aircraft are difficult to handle with an engine out, due to the
additional drag of the floats.
I have flown centre line thrust (CLT) aircraft in the USA, Australia and
New Zealand since 1966.
Joseph L. Todd
>>(Raymond Russell) wrote:
>>
>>According to the official listing of all the airplanes that can be fitted
>>with EDO floats, the 337 has never been approved for floats. It's
>>
>>C. Marin Faure
>>author, Flying A Floatplane
Where can I find the official listing? I'm curious if some aircraft that
I'm interested in are approved for floats.
Thanks in advance,
Joe Todd
===========================================================================
--
Anyone who thinks money can't buy happiness hasn't bought the right
airplane yet.
C. Marin Faure
L. Todd) wrote:
> >>Marin Faure wrote:
> >>According to the official listing of all the airplanes that can be fitted
> >>with EDO floats, the 337 has never been approved for floats. It's
> .
> >>
> >>C. Marin Faure
> >>author, Flying A Floatplane
>
> Where can I find the official listing? I'm curious if some aircraft that
> I'm interested in are approved for floats.
I have a little book (about 60 pages) written by Jay Frey called How To
Fly Floats. Jay is the EDO vice-president in charge of that company's
Float Division. At the end of the book is a listing of all the airplanes,
past and present, that have been licensed for use with EDO floats. The
list also calls out the float model for each airplane and the attachment
drawing reference number if known. I have two copies of Jay's book, one
from many years ago and a newer copy he gave me. Both contain the
listing. How To Fly Floats is available at many aviation bookstores, and
I'm sure you could order a copy directly from EDO. Their address is 1404
111 Street, College Point, New York 11356.
Keep in mind that EDO builds far fewer styles of floats than they used to,
and the fittings and attachment gear required for many airplane models is
no longer manufactured. You may be able to find used floats and
attachment gear for something like a Nooduyn Norseman, for example, but
not anything new. If EDO doesn't build floats for the plane you're
interested in, try Wipline, although their floats are designed more for
"newer" airplanes like the de Havilland Beaver and the Cessna lineup.
They weren't around when EDO was putting floats on Wacos and Ford
Trimotors and Rogojarskies.
WILLIAM BERLE
writes:
>I have never heard of the 337 using floats. I will ask around at work
>and see if anyone else has heard of it.
>
>Kim Hackett
>Cessna Aircraft Company
>Wichita, Kansas
I would think that floats and the extended nosegear leg would cause
some cooling and airflow problems for the rear engine. It is my
understanding that the Skymaster had some initial problems with cooling
the rear engine. The screwed up airflow off the back of the fuselage
was bad enough for getting clean air into the aft propeller already, an
inherent compromise of the configuration. Adding the screwed up airflow
from the floats and locked landing gear must make that situation only
worse. I may very well be wrong about this, but I think that those
airflow problems worsening the flow into the rear engine and prop would
account for a third of the reason it was not certified on floats. By
far the biggest problem would be the water spray off the floats going
right into the rear prop. Water can erode propellers fast and
dangerous, and it would certainly damage the Skymaster's rear prop in a
quick hurry. Perhaps someone at Cessna will have the real answer.
--
Bill Berle PP/ASEL/G
as-...@ix.netcom.com
Victor Bravo Promotions
Victor Bravo Air Racing
"If you can't judge a book by its cover,
why are hardcover books more expensive?"
Eric Rood
: >>According to the official listing of all the airplanes that can be fitted
: >>with EDO floats, the 337 has never been approved for floats. It's
: Where can I find the official listing? I'm curious if some aircraft that
: I'm interested in are approved for floats.
A Cessna 337 may not be approved for floats, but what about a Cessna 336?
Attach fittings for the floats would have to be fitted as well as a carry
through structure. The gear would have to be retracted and disabled.
Just a few quick thoughts. Eric.
--
Eric Rood
eric...@freenet.columbus.oh.us
C. Marin Faure
eric...@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Eric Rood) wrote:
If the 337 had been approved for floats, I suspect the landing gear would
simply have been removed rather than retracted and locked. The floats
would need to attach to the airframe in about the same place as the gear,
so why complicate things by leaving the gear in place, plus lug around all
that extra weight. The old Republic Seabee amphibians that were used only
on water by companies like Kenmore Air Harbor during the late '40s had the
gear removed to save weight.
The EDO float approval list does not contain either the 337 or the 336.
Serious propeller erosion and possible engine cooling problems as
mentioned by another poster would have been the same on either plane.
I did some video work in the early '80s for the developer of a pusher
turbine seaplane based on a Skymaster wing and tail assembly with a larger
flying boat hull in place of the Skymaster's fuselage. Part of the shoot
involved tracking the plane (called a Seamaster) from a helicopter as it
took off from Lake Washington. The prop was in about the same place as
the prop on the rear engine of the Skymaster. When it transtioned from
displacement through the hump phase and then to the planing phase, it
looked like half the lake went into that prop. I still have the original
tapes, and looking at them again, I doubt the propeller would have lasted
very long in the beating it took during every water takeoff. The
Seamaster was a failure for a lot of reasons, but it still exists, minus
its PT6A turbine, backed up against the south fence of Renton Airport.