Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Comparable Aircraft To DHC-2 Beaver  
User currently offlineLionel From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 391 posts, RR: 2
Posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8503 times:

The DHC-2 Beaver is flying since more than 60 years and still is the backbone of Canadian Bush Aviation.

Is there any newer aircraft which could take over it's role?

Specification would be:
Max. payload around 1t
Passenger seats 4-6
STOL
Floats
Comparable or lower costs
Capable to fly short legs with short warm up time (means no turbine aircraft?)

Any idea?

33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineZKNCL From New Zealand, joined exactly 4 years ago today! , 292 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8497 times:

Do any of these Qualify? didn't have much time to reaserch
Helio Courier
Murphy Moose
Noorduyn Norseman


User currently offlinebj87 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 8470 times:

There aren't that many non turbine powered planes out there that can replace a beaver. The only one I can think of it the GA8 Airvan. It comes with a piston engine and you can turbocharge it if you want. I am not sure if you can get one with floats though. But it shouldn't be too big of a problem to have them retrofitted.

http://www.gippsaero.com/ZoneID=145.htm


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Brett Pulford



Some specs from the above website.


GA8 (Normally Aspirated) & GA8-TC320 (Turbocharged)

SPECIFICATIONS

DIMENSIONS
Length 29 ft 4.3 in (8949 mm)
Wingspan 40 ft 8.68 in (12412 mm)
Height 12 ft 9 in (3885 mm)
Wing Area 208 sq ft (18.75 m2)
Wing Loading 19.2 lb/sq ft (96.75 kg/m2)
Cabin
Height 44.9 in (1140 mm)
Length (Firewall to Aft of Cabin Baggage shelf) 182.6 in (4013 mm)
Width 50 in (1270 mm)
Main Cabin Area Floor 54 sq ft (5 m2)
Main Cabin Area Internal Volume 164 cu ft (4.43 m3)
Cabin Door 41.5 in x 41.5 in (1054 mm x 1054 mm)
Baggage Capacity
Cabin Shelf 18 cu ft (0.53 m3)
Aft Locker 13 cu ft (0.35 m3)
Cargo Pod 18 cu ft (0.53 m3)
Seats 8

DESIGN WEIGHTS AND CAPACITIES
GA8
Maximum Take Off Weight 4000 lb (1814 kg)
Maximum Landing Weight 4000 lb (1814 kg)
Typical Empty IFR Equipped Weight 2235 lb (1014 kg)
Maximum Useful Load - GA8 1764 lb (800 kg)

GA8-TC 320
Maximum Take Off Weight 4000 lb (1814 kg)
Maximum Landing Weight 4000 lb (1814 kg)
Typical Empty IFR Equipped Weight 2324 lb (1054 kg)
Maximum Useful Load - GA8-TC 320 1675 lb (760 kg)

Optional Cargo Pod – Capacity 440 lb (200 kg)

Fuel Capacity:
Total 92.2 US Gal (350 ltr) Useable 87.7 US Gal (332 ltr)

POWER PLANT & PROPELLER

GA8 - Normally Aspirated Airvan

* Textron Lycoming IO-540-K1A5 - 6 cylinder Direct Drive Fuel Injected Engine - 300 HP @ 2700 RPM
* Hartzell 2 blade Constant Speed Propeller - Diameter 84 in (2134 mm)

GA8-TC 320 - Turbocharged Airvan

* Textron Lycoming TIO-540-AH1A, 6 Cylinder Direct Drive Turbocharged Fuel Injected Engine
o 320 HP @ 2500 RPM @ 40“ MP to 5000 ft, and
o 300 HP @ 2500 RPM @ 38“ MP above 5000 ft
* Hartzell 3-blade Constant Speed Propeller - Diameter 82 in (2083 mm)


User currently offlineLionel From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 391 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 8437 times:

Quoting ZKNCL (Reply 1):

Do any of these Qualify? didn't have much time to reaserch
Helio Courier
Murphy Moose
Noorduyn Norseman

Helio Courier --> Can only take 600kg
Murphy Moose --> Could be an alternative although it hasn't 3 abreast seating like the Beaver
Noorduyn Norseman --> Compares rather to the Otter than to the Beaver

Quoting bj87 (Reply 2):
There aren't that many non turbine powered planes out there that can replace a beaver.

It seems as the two critical issues are:
Engine --> Is there no "new" piston with more than 360HP? For STOL on floats this is unsatisfying.
Seating --> Very few 3 seating abreast. This is a huge advantage as this allows 4 pax plus cargo.

What do you think of the Found Bush Hawk?


User currently offlinepmk From United States of America, joined May 1999, 664 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 8427 times:

Having researched bush planes extensively there really is nothing that can take the place of the DeHavilland Canada aircraft. The Beaver, Twin Otter, and to a lesser extent the Buffalo and Caribou were the best at what they do. Others may debate or challenge that, the Cessna Caravan, 172, 182, and to a lesser extent the offerings of Britten, Citabria, Maule, Beach and Piper have filled the roles of the older DeHavillands.

The reasons for discontinuation of the DHC fleet are more political and related to the sale of DHC to Boeing and subsequent sale to Bombardier and the actions of Air Canada. Fast forward twenty odd years and Bombardier no longer cares about the small toys DHC used to make, the former Prime Minister and the then president of Airbus Industrie are called to testify, a special commission determines that the PM took funds for which he did no work from the then president of Airbus Industrie, but it stopped short of conviction saving that for the courts.

Ultimately Bombardier sold the type certificates to Viking Air of Victoria, British Columbia, a company that made and continues to make spares and offer support of the DHC fleet. Viking has recently begun production of a modernized Twin Otter and is making preparations to build new Beaver aircraft as soon as they have sufficient orders and production capacity.

The willingness of a manufacturer to commit to building a fleet of aircraft conceived and originally built before the birth of most of the people who are now building them is a testament to the solid design concept of the DHC fleet.

The king is dead, long live the king!

PMK


User currently offlineyenne09 From Canada, joined Jun 2010, 197 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 8345 times:

Viking Air is actually rebuilding the Beaver with turbo-prop conversion. They were talking while ago about the relaunching
of the production line of the Beaver and the Otter. Up to now nothing has been realized and we know nothing about their plans. So, I think that the only aircraft that can challenge the Beaver is the Quest Kodiak.


User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 8305 times:

Quoting Lionel (Reply 3):
Do any of these Qualify? didn't have much time to reaserch
Helio Courier
Murphy Moose
Noorduyn Norseman

Helio Courier --> Can only take 600kg
Murphy Moose --> Could be an alternative although it hasn't 3 abreast seating like the Beaver
Noorduyn Norseman --> Compares rather to the Otter than to the Beaver

Couple of points:
- The Norseman was the first really practical bush plane, and had a very succesful career in the USAAF during WW2. Dad actually worked at the Noorduyn plant for a while.
- The Beaver, although it only had room for about 6 pax vs 9 or 10 for the Norseman, could lift more load (about 2,100 lb vs about 1,800). The Turbo-Beaver conversion I believe can handle 10 pax.
- The Otter sort of combined the best points of the above, with a much bigger payload than the Beaver. The thing I never really liked about it was its' 800 ft/min climb rate. Took forever to get up there. There is a Turbine Otter option out there now as well. Both the Turbo-Beaver & Otter are currently available from Viking Air in Victoria, BC.

As a worthy competitor I'd nominate the Pilatus PC-6 Turbo-Porter.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlinemetjetceo From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 412 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 8287 times:

The one that comes to mind for me is the Grand Caravan.

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25653 posts, RR: 22
Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8129 times:

Quoting ZKNCL (Reply 1):
Noorduyn Norseman

The Norseman is much older than the Beaver.


User currently offlineB777LRF From Luxembourg, joined Nov 2008, 1389 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8117 times:

Cessna Caravan. Suspect it too well reach more than 60 years of service.


From receips and radials over straight pipes to big fans - been there, done that, got the hearing defects to prove
User currently offlineUTAH744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 202 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 8057 times:

How about:

Noorduyn Norseman

Antonov n-2r



You are never too old to learn something stupid
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6728 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 8033 times:

It looks like the Cape Air topic again.

There is no real replacement for the plane, and for the engine it's worse.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 5057 posts, RR: 43
Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7987 times:

Quoting pmk (Reply 4):
The reasons for discontinuation of the DHC fleet are more political and related to the sale of DHC to Boeing and subsequent sale to Bombardier and the actions of Air Canada.


I am curious how you feel that the "actions" of Air Canada had something to do with the future of de Havilland Canada?

Quoting Lionel (Thread starter):
Capable to fly short legs with short warm up time (means no turbine aircraft?)


I think you will find that turbine engines are less likely to need a warm up time than large piston radial engines.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7956 times:

Quoting longhauler (Reply 12):
Quoting pmk (Reply 4):
The reasons for discontinuation of the DHC fleet are more political and related to the sale of DHC to Boeing and subsequent sale to Bombardier and the actions of Air Canada.


I am curious how you feel that the "actions" of Air Canada had something to do with the future of de Havilland Canada?

Quoting Lionel (Thread starter):
Capable to fly short legs with short warm up time (means no turbine aircraft?)


I think you will find that turbine engines are less likely to need a warm up time than large piston radial engines.

Longhauler, I too was mystified by this post. I always thought the reasons for stopping production of the DHC-2/3/4/5 in the 60s was NO ONE WAS BUYING THEM ANYMORE (sorry for shouting). Pretty basic commercial decision.

Another factor working against the older Beaver & Otters, esp. in the High Arctic, is the increasing unavailability of AvGas.

As to the "politics" of the decision, that's bewildering to me.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineLionel From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 391 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7882 times:

Does anybody know the difference in running costs between the original beaver radial and the turbine version? What about the fuel consumption?

User currently offlinebj87 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7837 times:

Quoting Lionel (Reply 14):
Does anybody know the difference in running costs between the original beaver radial and the turbine version? What about the fuel consumption?

I don't know for sure but I would think a turbine burns more fuel. That said jet-A that the turbine uses is heck of a lot cheaper to buy than avgas. So I would say that fuel wise the difference isn't that big when it comes to cost. The turbine might be cheaper to run because it needs less maintenance than a radial. The turbine also doesn't burn expensive oil so that is a money saver.


User currently offlinepmk From United States of America, joined May 1999, 664 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7785 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 13):
Longhauler, I too was mystified by this post. I always thought the reasons for stopping production of the DHC-2/3/4/5 in the 60s was NO ONE WAS BUYING THEM ANYMORE (sorry for shouting). Pretty basic commercial decision.

Another factor working against the older Beaver & Otters, esp. in the High Arctic, is the increasing unavailability of AvGas.

As to the "politics" of the decision, that's bewildering to me.

The production of the DHC2,3,4,and 5 were stopped due to sales, however the decision to restart production, when operators were SCREAMING for new airframes was political. You as an indicated Canadian should be well aware of Air Canada's actions during the "Airbus Affair". DHC became a political football, bought by Boeing as a political move to prove to Air Canada they were dedicated to Canada, then Airbus paid off the prime minister, as well as others, to shift the order to Airbus. Boeing then sold DHC to the highest bidder who at the time was Bombardier. While I'm not a believer in Wikipedia do check out the listing and read through the linked articles, they are quite illuminating. It was quite the scandal and it's still not resolved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_affair

PMK


User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 17, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7718 times:

Quoting pmk (Reply 16):
You as an indicated Canadian should be well aware of Air Canada's actions during the "Airbus Affair"

Air Canada's actions during the so-called "Airbus Affair" was to select the right aircraft for the mission profile: The Airbus A320-211. The competition was the Boeing 737-400. Not even a fair fight. The B734 didn't have the range, couldn't reach the desired cruise altitudes, didn't have as generous cabin dimensions, burnt more fuel, didn't have the BITE (note bite me) equipment that the A320 does. It was and is an inferior airplane. The 737NG was not available at that time.

Quoting pmk (Reply 16):
then Airbus paid off the prime minister, as well as others,

Show me the evidence that A directly paid off the (thankfully) former PM. There is none. Maybe they did pay off Karl-Heinz. And for sure KHS employed Mulroney as some sort of consultant/advisor who wound up doing absolutely nothing for the dough. So was that an indirect payoff ? Maybe. No doubt Mulroney has dirty hands. As for the scnadal not being resolved, I would suggest otherwise, and, in any event, it's old news, not many people give two cents about it anymore.

Bottom line, the superior a/c was purchased for the right reasons.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineFighterPilot From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 1410 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7639 times:

The Quest Kodiak has been marketed as a DHC-2 "replacement" slightly larger and turbine only. It's fairly new and I don't know any operators that run them up here. It would be my first choice as a "replacement."

Quoting Lionel (Reply 3):
What do you think of the Found Bush Hawk?

It's only a beefed up Cessna 180 with more bells and whistles. Not enough useful load. The Found tried to sell the company I was working for at the time one, but it had too much extra gear like HSI, VOR and NDB radios.

The Norseman like others have said, is more in a class with the Otter, it has the same PW R-1340 engine after all. As well like others have stated was more of a grandfather to the beaver

The Cessna Van is more of an Otter sized plane as well.

All in all I don't think you can just replace the DHC-2, the only thing that can replace an old Beaver is a new beaver.

Cal   



*Insert Sound Of GE90 Spooling Up Here*
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25653 posts, RR: 22
Reply 19, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7634 times:

Quoting FighterPilot (Reply 18):
All in all I don't think you can just replace the DHC-2, the only thing that can replace an old Beaver is a new beaver.

True, just like the Twin Otter. Another type in that situation is the 737-200C combi equipped for gravel runway operations. The several Canadian operators using the 732C have to keep those aircraft flying as long as possible (many now in service well over 30 years) as there's no current aircraft that can do the same job.


User currently offlineLarshjort From Denmark, joined Dec 2007, 1486 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7616 times:

Quoting Lionel (Reply 3):

It seems as the two critical issues are:
Engine --> Is there no "new" piston with more than 360HP? For STOL on floats this is unsatisfying.
Seating --> Very few 3 seating abreast. This is a huge advantage as this allows 4 pax plus cargo.

There's the OE600A, a 600 hp turbocharged V-8
http://www.traceengines.com/specs.html

/Lars



139, 306, 319, 320, 321, 332, 34A, AN2, AT4, AT5, AT7, 733, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 146, AR1, BH2, CN1, CR2, DH1, DH3, DH4,
User currently offlinerikkus67 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1661 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 7616 times:

Quoting yenne09 (Reply 5):
Up to now nothing has been realized and we know nothing about their plans.

As a small manufacturer of aircraft, Viking more than likely have their hands full with production of the Twin Otter 400.

Until they are completely comfortable with the new and continued production of that aircraft, I doubt they have the time necessary to work on a new Beaver. Will it happen...that's yet to be seen, but as far as anyone who would be infinitely knowledgable on the Beaver, it will be Viking.



AC.WA.CP.DL.RW.CO.WG.WJ.WN.KI.FL.SK.ACL.UA.US.F9
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7570 times:

I suggest:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Erick Stamm


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © AirSpeed


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jerome Zbinden



User currently offlineYVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2495 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7550 times:

Quoting Lionel (Reply 3):
Helio Courier --> Can only take 600kg

And not much younger either if you are wanting to replace old airframes.

Quoting Lionel (Reply 3):
What do you think of the Found Bush Hawk?

Pretty plane, but not popular with operators. One of the reasons I think is the lack of wings struts means theres nothing to grab onto on the dock.

Quoting yenne09 (Reply 5):
Viking Air is actually rebuilding the Beaver with turbo-prop conversion. They were talking while ago about the relaunching
of the production line of the Beaver and the Otter. Up to now nothing has been realized and we know nothing about their plans. So, I think that the only aircraft that can challenge the Beaver is the Quest Kodiak.

   And like the Cape 402 / Navajo discussion, the majority of the bush operators can not afford to buy a new airplane. Telus here in YVR replaced their Turbo Beav with a Kodiak. Have to say it is one fugly machine, but reports are its a solid performer.

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 9):
Cessna Caravan

Too big, Otter size. And plenty of them here for that purpose.



Follow me on twitter for YVR movements @vernonYVR
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 24, posted (3 years 9 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7528 times:

Glad this is going back to topic and apologies for helping to drag it off...

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 23):
Quoting Lionel (Reply 3):
What do you think of the Found Bush Hawk?

Pretty plane, but not popular with operators. One of the reasons I think is the lack of wings struts means theres nothing to grab onto on the dock.

Yah, struts are a very over-looked practical asset in bush planes. They also provide a mount on which, in a pinch, you can strap something. I display my ignorance of statics & dynamics, but I wonder if struts are actually lighter than an unstrutted wing. ??



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
25 Post contains links YVRLTN : I dont know that its done on a daily basis exactly, but there are certainly external loads carried this way such as a canoe, bicycle or ltimber. http
26 Post contains links and images FighterPilot : Not as much as an issue, they help but it can be done without them. May not be a daily occurrence, but it was defiantly weekly in North Western Ontar
27 Lionel : Is there any new plane with that engine? Any conversions available? You can attach cords to the wing of the Found Bush Hawk to grab it at the dock. N
28 connies4ever : Having the PT6 as an engine hasn't stopped the Twotter from being a commercial success. I think the stopper is the conversion cost because it's simpl
29 bravo1six : Some facts: The last DHC 2 came off the production line in 1968. The last DHC 3 - 1967 The last DHC 4 - 1973 The last DHC 5 - 1986 In 1986, when Boei
30 Post contains images FighterPilot : I agree, a rope will work in a pinch, but it's not rigid. All you can use the rope for is pulling the plane towards you, it limits your ability to st
31 Post contains links and images 2H4 : I wonder if a North American manufacturer could acquire or partner with Technoavia to produce the Finist over here...it seems pretty comparable to the
32 YVRLTN : Wow, it does - I remember this aircraft when new in the 90's but had forgotten about it - very striking resemblance to a Beaver with a Turbo tail. Im
33 connies4ever : All very good points, and backed up by the fact that the original Turbo-Beavers mods back in (I think) the late 70s and now Vikings, are selling slow
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
New Aircraft To Hawaii - How? posted Fri Nov 20 2009 17:54:09 by Rgreenftm
Wizzair Adds 4th Aircraft To WAW, Opens EIN, BCN posted Thu Oct 22 2009 06:40:13 by Joost
NW Tailstrike At DEN, Aircraft To Be W/O? posted Fri May 8 2009 13:38:26 by GARUDAROD
Jet Airways Leases Aircraft To Oman Air posted Tue Feb 17 2009 03:43:22 by QatarA340
Aircraft To Aircraft Close Call posted Mon Jan 5 2009 15:46:56 by B707forever
Returning Aircraft To Lessors posted Wed Dec 3 2008 17:59:03 by Brenintw
What Would Happen To A Diverted Aircraft To CA? posted Mon Nov 10 2008 19:50:55 by Rgreenftm
Allegiant Increasing PIE From 2 Aircraft To 4 posted Wed Oct 15 2008 13:39:43 by FATFlyer
Air Canada Aircraft To Japan, 2007-2008 posted Tue Oct 7 2008 09:53:00 by UnitedFirst
Winter X UK Aircraft To Canada? posted Fri Jul 18 2008 13:05:56 by Rdwootty