Stern to the front would seem counter-intuitive, but the pilot is correct. One of the most efficient wheel fairings ever made (Thorp T18) merely faired the rear of the tyre. In Australia we have no such problems because even considering hauling the boat externally would see one in prison and never allowed near an aircraft again.
This from gov Canada Flying safely with floats: Carry only approved external loads and keep wake turbulence in mind to avoid blanking your tail feathers. In Canada, bush planes with canoes and boats is all day everyday.
@@amilton2128 In the 80's, a boat just like that one hung by the stern under a chopper. No sweat,...but no speed either. 20 MPH max ! About as heavy as a black bear in a net...
This is because people ironically understand supersonic aerodynamics better than subsonic aerodynamics. Like boat tail bullets only offer lower drag once subsonic.
These guys know what they are doing. In the Yukon I flew a Lund stapped to the side of a Beaver once, just me and minimum fuel. It was a bear getting off the water and then I had to circle the lake multiple times to get altitude. Gain 100 ft on one leg and lose 50ft in the turn. Once was enough for me. Updated Transport Canada have restricted many external loads from “back in the day”.
Amazing.I had a bad experience just by extending a windshield by a foot on an ultra-lite . Made the aircraft almost unflyable. Says a lot for these trusty aircraft !!
Curious... Can the Beaver take off with a boat on each side, or is that just too much drag? Also... To all the comments saying the boat should be bow first, maybe the guy who does this for a living might know which way is best... Just because something seems like it should be a certain way doesn't mean it should be. Look at how they transported the space shuttle on the 747. Pointed fairing on the back of the shuttle for less drag and less effect on the tail of the 747.
Flew my fair share of external loads. As a young lad before I was licensed in the early 80’s, I was onboard a Beaver as a helper, Northern Ontario, we flew into a remote lake and picked up two 16 foot aluminum canoes, strapped them to the port and starboard, was a short 10 minute flight back to base. Only two of us onboard with minimal fuel etc, pretty tight lake, maybe 3000 feet long, 1,000’ above sea level, calm winds, standard-ish temperatures, no hills on the departure to speak of, just spruces, birches etc. Went pretty good overall. The climb rate was super sluggish though, as expected. Flew back to the base with a touch of flap deployed. Engine oil temps were slightly elevated, but again, it was a very short flight. One thing I’ll add, the pilot was a lifelong friend who flew floats extensively until age 85, never wrecked a plane. But I never saw him strap two canoes on again. And yes, the pointy end always goes to the rear so as to help smoother air pass by the stabilizer/elevators to minimize the buffeting, and also, partly blocking out the airstream through the tail area. Excessive buffeting can be felt through the controls, and when you look back you can also see the extent of any tail buffeting. It’s good to be mindful of excessive buffeting, not good long term on the tail structures in terms of metal fatigue. Add a bit of flap, or slightly change your airspeed to try calm the tail, sometimes it helps.
Yes, correct. My experience as well flying in Yukon for 10 years. Two canoes is a lot, we tried to nestle them together which worked quite well. Climb rate is very poor. I had to work the updrafts to gain altitude. No I didn’t repeat the exercise again. People often are not thinking of air flow over the tail. This is critical. I have lost friends to that oversight.
No, not. Surprisingly they weren’t even designed for floats. The Beaver flies like a real airplane on wheels. Comparably they are a dog on floats. Great take off run but poor on climb and cruise speed.
For anyone wanting to see the updated air regulations in Canada …CAR 703.25 addresses external loads on float equipped aircraft. That was updated in the 2000’s. It mentioned the requirement to mount bow to aft as well. Air flow over tail is critical. DHC-3 was way better with canoe and boats. In the 90’s when I flew in Yukon the interpretation of allowable external loads was pretty liberal. What is truly amazing about the Beaver and Otter is they are still in service and still do the best to address the job they were designed for. With over 16,000 hr on floats, 6,000 hrs on Beaver and I had one engine failure. An amazing aircraft.
@@Gremlin-lc9ne not buying it, but if it does produce a little less turbulence I’m sure it also produces a few less knots... I’d rather have the knots.
@@Gremlin-lc9ne damn!!! I seem to have forgotten that one. If you could go ahead and inform the rest of the aviation and auto communities we could all start reaping the benefits by flying and driving backwards!!!
Using this approved Beaver rack, the boat is placed within the prop arc. If the stern is at the back, airflow burbles off the stern and affects the tail. In another example, on the Norseman the boat is outside the prop arc and is better placed bow first as you suggest.
Drag of a boat is always best with bow aft - even on a roof rack car. The flow of air is forced to separate further out front leaving a dead air pocket up front for the air to maneuver around. The aft tapered end then allows the air to smoothly rejoin. Old trick my old man taught me. BTW, if you have a friend in the boat on the water have them sit in the front if you are rowing as the aft end transom lifted just slightly above the waterline drastically reduces the water drag - less stable for direction but much less effort on the oars. ;).
Wow, very informative discussion gents, as I was actually wondering about the stern being positioned that way as well, thanks and great vid btw. I love to see these grand old birds still up and flying
Flew hundreds of boats on the beaver and otter, and all of them were stern first. The only thing I would add to the discussion is that I never tied a rope from any part of the boat to the aircraft. If the rear rope, or strap, was past the point where the boat begins to taper, the boat never moved on me. I would rather buy the customer another boat if it fell off than have one flailing around attached by a stout rope. ... Just my two cents, great video!
I once flew a piano strapped to my Beaver in Northern Quebec.
Stern to the front would seem counter-intuitive, but the pilot is correct. One of the most efficient wheel fairings ever made (Thorp T18) merely faired the rear of the tyre.
In Australia we have no such problems because even considering hauling the boat externally would see one in prison and never allowed near an aircraft again.
This from gov Canada Flying safely with floats: Carry only approved external loads and keep wake turbulence in mind to avoid blanking your tail feathers.
In Canada, bush planes with canoes and boats is all day everyday.
@@amilton2128 In the 80's, a boat just like that one hung by the stern under a chopper. No sweat,...but no speed either. 20 MPH max ! About as heavy as a black bear in a net...
This is because people ironically understand supersonic aerodynamics better than subsonic aerodynamics.
Like boat tail bullets only offer lower drag once subsonic.
These guys know what they are doing. In the Yukon I flew a Lund stapped to the side of a Beaver once, just me and minimum fuel. It was a bear getting off the water and then I had to circle the lake multiple times to get altitude. Gain 100 ft on one leg and lose 50ft in the turn. Once was enough for me.
Updated Transport Canada have restricted many external loads from “back in the day”.
Nice Beaver!!!
Thanks. I just had it stuffed.
Amazing.I had a bad experience just by extending a windshield by a foot on an ultra-lite . Made the aircraft almost unflyable. Says a lot for these trusty aircraft !!
Just watch the video and listen ! He explained very well why he fixed it with the stern to the front.
Love it looks perfectly natural.
Hell yeah. You could hang an ATV from the other side as a counter-weight and that plane would not much care. Like a flying tow truck.
This plane would be a loud and expensive boat with an ATV on the float.
Curious... Can the Beaver take off with a boat on each side, or is that just too much drag? Also... To all the comments saying the boat should be bow first, maybe the guy who does this for a living might know which way is best... Just because something seems like it should be a certain way doesn't mean it should be. Look at how they transported the space shuttle on the 747. Pointed fairing on the back of the shuttle for less drag and less effect on the tail of the 747.
Thank you for your comments. I believe a boat on each side would be too much.
Flew my fair share of external loads. As a young lad before I was licensed in the early 80’s, I was onboard a Beaver as a helper, Northern Ontario, we flew into a remote lake and picked up two 16 foot aluminum canoes, strapped them to the port and starboard, was a short 10 minute flight back to base. Only two of us onboard with minimal fuel etc, pretty tight lake, maybe 3000 feet long, 1,000’ above sea level, calm winds, standard-ish temperatures, no hills on the departure to speak of, just spruces, birches etc. Went pretty good overall. The climb rate was super sluggish though, as expected. Flew back to the base with a touch of flap deployed. Engine oil temps were slightly elevated, but again, it was a very short flight. One thing I’ll add, the pilot was a lifelong friend who flew floats extensively until age 85, never wrecked a plane. But I never saw him strap two canoes on again.
And yes, the pointy end always goes to the rear so as to help smoother air pass by the stabilizer/elevators to minimize the buffeting, and also, partly blocking out the airstream through the tail area. Excessive buffeting can be felt through the controls, and when you look back you can also see the extent of any tail buffeting. It’s good to be mindful of excessive buffeting, not good long term on the tail structures in terms of metal fatigue. Add a bit of flap, or slightly change your airspeed to try calm the tail, sometimes it helps.
Yes, correct. My experience as well flying in Yukon for 10 years. Two canoes is a lot, we tried to nestle them together which worked quite well. Climb rate is very poor. I had to work the updrafts to gain altitude. No I didn’t repeat the exercise again.
People often are not thinking of air flow over the tail. This is critical. I have lost friends to that oversight.
I saw Sarahs Beaver, trout fishing on the Bingham.
Nice plane. Sounds like a big block l.
ah come on dude; everyone knows that there's a little man in a boat on EVERY beaver!
It must require a lot of rudder input?
... crabbing all the way to the destination.
On the car is very hard with high speed, but in the air with 100 mph, ....you are men! :)
Watching this you get the impression this is the kind of thing the Beaver was designed for😁
No, not. Surprisingly they weren’t even designed for floats. The Beaver flies like a real airplane on wheels. Comparably they are a dog on floats. Great take off run but poor on climb and cruise speed.
For anyone wanting to see the updated air regulations in Canada …CAR 703.25 addresses external loads on float equipped aircraft. That was updated in the 2000’s. It mentioned the requirement to mount bow to aft as well. Air flow over tail is critical.
DHC-3 was way better with canoe and boats. In the 90’s when I flew in Yukon the interpretation of allowable external loads was pretty liberal.
What is truly amazing about the Beaver and Otter is they are still in service and still do the best to address the job they were designed for. With over 16,000 hr on floats, 6,000 hrs on Beaver and I had one engine failure. An amazing aircraft.
How Canadian is that eh?
Should have put between the floats, upside down. St.Paul.Minnesota.
Yeah. Right after you cut all of the flying wires.
Takeoff might be ok. Landing definitely won’t be.
aahh i wanted to see more air action than that with a boat attached! !!! lol
Great!
I would have put the boat on with the bow forward! Less drag on the plane.
And if you survived you would know better next time lol.
Wow what can’t a Beaver do?
we put a goat in the float compartment on a 206
what?
Your life depends on that front strap.
Like Buddy pointed out it would be considerably more aerodynamic to turn the boat around.
That’s not true. When the pointed end is at the back it reduces turbulence by smoothly letting the airfoil roll off the boat
@@Gremlin-lc9ne not buying it, but if it does produce a little less turbulence I’m sure it also produces a few less knots... I’d rather have the knots.
@@bleustalder8717 u don‘t have to buy it😂 that’s general aviation knowledge buddy
@@Gremlin-lc9ne damn!!! I seem to have forgotten that one. If you could go ahead and inform the rest of the aviation and auto communities we could all start reaping the benefits by flying and driving backwards!!!
@@bleustalder8717 😂what’s up your butt
risky business
Why on earth would he point the boat the wrong way? I'm mean like that was stupid.
If you watch the video he explains why ....
If the boat was fixed bow first it would be more streamline
Using this approved Beaver rack, the boat is placed within the prop arc. If the stern is at the back, airflow burbles off the stern and affects the tail. In another example, on the Norseman the boat is outside the prop arc and is better placed bow first as you suggest.
Drag of a boat is always best with bow aft - even on a roof rack car. The flow of air is forced to separate further out front leaving a dead air pocket up front for the air to maneuver around. The aft tapered end then allows the air to smoothly rejoin. Old trick my old man taught me. BTW, if you have a friend in the boat on the water have them sit in the front if you are rowing as the aft end transom lifted just slightly above the waterline drastically reduces the water drag - less stable for direction but much less effort on the oars. ;).
Have you flown an external load within the prop arc of a DeHavilland Beaver? It is how the tail is affected which needs to be considered.
Wow, very informative discussion gents, as I was actually wondering about the stern being positioned that way as well, thanks and great vid btw. I love to see these grand old birds still up and flying
Flew hundreds of boats on the beaver and otter, and all of them were stern first. The only thing I would add to the discussion is that I never tied a rope from any part of the boat to the aircraft. If the rear rope, or strap, was past the point where the boat begins to taper, the boat never moved on me. I would rather buy the customer another boat if it fell off than have one flailing around attached by a stout rope. ... Just my two cents, great video!
He should have put the boat pointing toward the front.