Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23

Thread: Aviat Husky Question

  1. #1
    New member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6

    Default Aviat Husky Question

    Hey Guys,

    I'm not a bush pilot, but am shopping for a Husky right now. We are wanting an airplane on floats for some fun and I want to know everybody's opinion on the 180 vs 200 hp versions. I have heard a few say that the 180 is preferred and I kind of find that hard to believe since the 200 is injected. Just wanting some education and any other helpful tips are greatly appreciated. Thanks for the help.

    KHSGT

  2. #2
    Member kahahawai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    How experienced are you? Huskies are are EXPENSIVE! they are the best IMO, but for starters I would go with a supercub.

  3. #3
    New member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6

    Default

    I'm a high time corporate pilot but no bush or seaplane time. The company I work for is considering a float plane purchase and the Aviat sales guy I spoke with said that most people prefer the 180hp on floats to the 200. This doesn't make any sense to me and I am just wanting some further education. We currently operate 2 business jets and a Cirrus

    And another question for anybody, if you had $400,000 to spend, what kind of floatplane would you buy and why that particular one?

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by khsgt View Post
    I'm a high time corporate pilot but no bush or seaplane time. The company I work for is considering a float plane purchase and the Aviat sales guy I spoke with said that most people prefer the 180hp on floats to the 200. This doesn't make any sense to me and I am just wanting some further education. We currently operate 2 business jets and a Cirrus

    And another question for anybody, if you had $400,000 to spend, what kind of floatplane would you buy and why that particular one?
    Do you really want a two place? What about a Found Bushhawk?

  5. #5
    New member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alaskaflyer331 View Post
    Do you really want a two place? What about a Found Bushhawk?
    A 2 place is all that is required, but more is always good. Any experience with the Found?

  6. #6

    Default

    Only on wheels. We have one in service at work. I think it is generally trumpeted as a "replacement" for the Cessna 185 - but it flies differently. Some ways better, some ways worse. It is a utility aircraft made for utility use, and is well-built. It easily reconfigured, with attachment points galore for nets, seats that come in and out very easily, lots of head and cargo room, a no-nonsense panel, great visibility both out the sides and over the glare shield (for a big-motored plane.) If I were looking for something new I would buy it long before a Cessna 206 for float use. Check out the pics and performance specs on the link above.

    All depends on your mission. Need to get in tight or want lower fuel burn? Get a Husky. Need to carry four guys and cargo - or two and a giant (and I mean giant) pile of stuff - on one trip? You really couldn't go wrong with a Found.

  7. #7
    New member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6

    Default

    Thanks for the info. We will have a serious look at those because I think being able to haul a decent load would make it substantially more useful even as a "toy"

  8. #8

    Default

    Another vote for the Bushhawk. It is a very solidly built performance bush plane. There is a used one for sale on Amphibs that could be bought for under $400 I think. The guy I share a hangar with has one on wheels and skis and really likes it. Give Paul at Mountain Flying Service in Haines a call. 766-3007.

  9. #9
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,214

    Default

    With float flying the primary way to get into trouble is on the water. The plane is not a plane right then and it is also not a very good boat.

    So you have three types of taxi, 1. displacement or idle, 2. plow taxi and 3. Step Taxi.

    You also have another method of manuevering on the water called SAILING, Both power-off sailing where you are going backwards and to some degree sideways with the wind and Power-on sailing where you can go sideways or at an angle forward.

    For sailing purposes it is nice to have an engine that will turn over at low RPM and have a flat prop to reduce thrust. It is also a good idea to have an engine that will restart when hot. And I mean restart right flippin now....!

    There is nothing worse than drifting torwards a $800,000 turbine Otter while you are trying to get you darn engine to restart.
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,293

    Default

    The 200hp Husky option is fuel injected, right? I think that's what Float Pilot was alluding to. Lots of guys are reluctant to use fuel injection because of the "hot start" issue. In my flying experience that issue is a myth. Fuel injected airplanes have been easy to start in all conditions once I got to know the airplane, but all my FI experience is with TCM engines, not Lycoming.

    $400K? I'd seek out the finest 185 I could find and fly it pants off it. If a small plane is better for the purpose I'd have a Supercub built to my specs. New doesn't impress me as much as performance does.

  11. #11
    Member BeaverDriver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by khsgt View Post
    Hey Guys,

    I'm not a bush pilot, but am shopping for a Husky right now. We are wanting an airplane on floats for some fun and I want to know everybody's opinion on the 180 vs 200 hp versions. I have heard a few say that the 180 is preferred and I kind of find that hard to believe since the 200 is injected. Just wanting some education and any other helpful tips are greatly appreciated. Thanks for the help.

    KHSGT
    Depends on what you are going to be doing with it. If it really is strictly for fun then the 180HP is easier to start (sometimes), easier and cheaper to maintain, probably burns a tad less fuel, but of course with 20 less ponies that may make the difference in a tight lake or a no wind situation etc. The only times I have had problems with a 200HP starting have been hot hot days - and it probably had more to do with my unfamiliarity with the engine in those conditions or possibly my impatience.

    But there are other airplanes out there that are within your budget that you may be happier with. A 185 or PPONK engined 180 would have larger cabins and be more comfortable for some corporate customers who are rather large or those who are unfamiliar with airplanes. And there are lots of mods for Cessna products that make them so much more useful. Atlee Dodge folding seats, Dodge Steps and Handles, Extended rear baggage, Sportsman STOL kits and a nice avionics package - such as a moving map display. That's where I would put my money instead of buying an expensive small Husky.

  12. #12
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,214

    Default

    The IO 360 engine in the 200 horse Husky has a mass balanced crankshaft. Plus different valves.

    As a result the LYCOMING IO360 200 horse engine weighs 23 pounds more than the 180 horse.

    Plus to be certified the 200 horse Husky has a second oil coooler added to the engine compartment and cowl flaps. More weight.

    Thus the opinion of some Husky drivers that the 180 horse is just fine. Although if you go to a MT composite prop the weight difference might be a wash. But then again water spray and composte props may not be a good mix.

    Some float pilots also have a thing about fuel injected engines for working in the bush with possible bad gas. Maybe they think that they can suck water into a carb and not through injectors. Who knows, but I have heard several old timers make that remark.

    I agree with Mr Pid that I have not really seen any fuel injection generated problems, other than the occasional hot start issue, but some people do...
    Injected engines start differently when hot in many cases and there is no problem if the pilot is used to that particular engine. I see it because I jump back and forth between different planes and many of the owners are new to that plane. So I can see it being a possible problem with a loaner or rental plane. Renters or occasional pilot would also be more prone to shuting down and restarting due to floatplane inexperience.

    Personally if I was going to spend $150,000 of a cramped two place Super Cub size aircraft, I would just have a real Supercub built to my specs using a tricked out 0-360. With the right exhuast system and some other tricks, a regular 0-360 will put out 200 horses.

    Plus a real Supercub has a much better trim system, adustable seats, and many other options which a Husky can never have.

    Then again you could buy a nice C-185 or Helio on Aerocets that will let two or three big guys get in and out without have to be a gymnist. Or four noraml size folks. Or put Atlee Dodge folding seats in back and use it as a two person plane with lots of easy to use cargo room. They are much more civilized.

    I would also recommend obtaining a float-rating from a bush type operator before shopping for a float plane. It will open your eyes and help you know what you need.
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  13. #13
    Member algonquin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seldovia, alaska
    Posts
    839

    Default late model C-185

    For that kinda money, the 185 is the ticket, with only two people you have a rocket, loaded to the gills you have three husky loads because of the bulk-out problem in the 2 place planes and you still have good performance.

  14. #14
    New member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2

    Default

    The 200 shines at high DA otherwise I don't think it performs that much better than the 180. Smoother? Yes but not worth the extra weight and especially not worth the extra $$$$. 180HP A1-B is a fine aircraft. BTW, the new SGS kit sure turns the Husky into a Puppy when it comes to landing on wheels and skis.

    My only gripe about the Husky is the door. If I had the money, I'd trade mine for a 2009 A1-C 180 HP with the bigger door and vernier mixture and just get a VFR panel w/ 496 or 696 installed in panel, 80" prop, 26 tundras and SGS kit. I got a good price on mine a couple of years ago but it is fully loaded IFR and it is just overkill for this type of plane, IMO.

  15. #15
    New member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2

    Default

    You still looking for a Husky?

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Semi-retired in Florida
    Posts
    483

    Default Grizzly 1

    Quote Originally Posted by khsgt View Post
    I'm a high time corporate pilot but no bush or seaplane time. The company I work for is considering a float plane purchase and the Aviat sales guy I spoke with said that most people prefer the 180hp on floats to the 200. This doesn't make any sense to me and I am just wanting some further education. We currently operate 2 business jets and a Cirrus

    And another question for anybody, if you had $400,000 to spend, what kind of floatplane would you buy and why that particular one?
    No question: A turbocharged Cessna 206 on Bill Wiplinger's Wipline amphibious floats. Why? First of all, the turbocharger. Second, the large double cargo doors. Third, land and sea operations. Fourth - - - the beast will carry about twice what the weight-and-balance math will tell you. After almost 20,000 hours of Alaska outback flying, that's my choice, anyway.

    If you really need something that will "leap off," better get a C-185, since the mechanical flaps will help you do that, but at the sacrifice of inside space and those handy loading doors.

    Good luck!

    Mort Mason

  17. #17
    New member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    1

    Default

    I'd go with the 180hp version which is lighter, and get the Powerflow tuned exhaust which should have an STC within a year at about $6000 installed. This should give you the same or better performance than the 200hp Husky for less cost. The 200hp is about a $30,000 upgrade on the new market. I might add the Husky is quite a bit faster than the supercub, both are great airplanes.

  18. #18
    Member mit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    702

    Default

    400K I would go get a Beaver and be done with it.
    Tim

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Semi-retired in Florida
    Posts
    483

    Default Grizzly 1

    Quote Originally Posted by mit View Post
    400K I would go get a Beaver and be done with it.
    Don't you find the maintenance costs of operating a Beaver to be just a touch above the maintenance costs for operating any of the Cessna line? At least they don't have that radial engine and all its push rod housing and other oil leaks . . . . .

  20. #20
    Member mit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    702

    Default

    If I was spending that much money the difference in maint cost probably wouldn't be as big a factor as if I only had 30 thousand to spend. I would want to cover the mission with the plane that fit.
    Tim

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •