Gweduck

Пікірлер

@assetstopurchase8432 2 ай бұрын

What wave height or sea state can this survive? Can this operate in an open ocean?

@Tay-ky3fi 2 ай бұрын

that silhouette is awesome

@Tay-ky3fi 2 ай бұрын

I wish you had sound.. I think I'll be buying one of these soon (within 15 years)... can it land in ocean water? Whats the highest wave it can handle?

@Tay-ky3fi 2 ай бұрын

Please keep it up. I got a call from you a few months ago (you returned my message) will touch base soon.

@dwaynesykes694 5 ай бұрын

That little mountain lake peeking out at 3:55... you know you want to. Sure, it's a no-go-around landing and there are almost certainly some unpredictable updrafts and/or downdrafts, but... look at that. That's the kind of place dreams are made of.

@Micksjourney 10 ай бұрын

What ever happened to this plane? Was it produced? Its just amazing👌👌

@Tay-ky3fi Жыл бұрын

1 year later.. I'm still interested! You haven't responded to my emails

@kevina8172 Жыл бұрын

I seen this plane in Anchorage around 2017? very nice but lots of money to build

@joeralston4387 Жыл бұрын

Can you post more videos?

@Tay-ky3fi 2 жыл бұрын

am very intersted in this idea! I know there are floating "panels" you can buy that allow you to "walk" on the water to get in/out of the aircraft... How do you stop it from slamming into the boat during rough seas though?

@Karuiko 2 жыл бұрын

Have you guys ever thought of advertising more on modern social media platforms/posting with more frequency? I feel like many people are wondering if the production of new Gweducks have stopped. Personally thinking, since it would be sad if there was only less than 3 in the next century...

@zacharymoore5271 2 жыл бұрын

Hey, how much are these kits?

@SeibertronAK 3 жыл бұрын

It’s been a long time! 🤘🏼

@MrBaasm 3 жыл бұрын

Woot! Glad to see you back

@assetstopurchase8432 3 жыл бұрын

Suits me.

@assetstopurchase8432 3 жыл бұрын

I- I, primarily, want an amphibious aircraft to access remote locales by using available bodies of water or short and rough airstrips requiring the least possible maintenance even in adverse weather and upkeep conditions. I’d also want it for commutes to and from my yacht. For this: 1- It would help if the ground clearance of the aircraft could be raised either with extensible hydraulic or pneumatic struts or else with larger diameter wheels. 2- The impact on rough strips to be absorbed either through right-triangular collapsible struts, like those on the Pilatus PC-24, or fat tyres, that could be deflated for broad width to absorb the impact forces and inflated to a narrow width for lower friction to run faster on paved strips (these features have also been implemented on the Pilatus PC-24: kzbin.info/www/bejne/sKmVk42ffM6tg9E ). 3- Some form of de-icing would help, regardless of whether that uses air bled from the engines or a separate heating system. 4- I would want sufficient electric power to operate a microwave, satellite and HF radios, weather and marine radars, AIS and ADS-B systems and cameras. 4- The aircraft should be able to take off in a very short distance in rough seas before the waves can damage the aircraft. i) Rough seas would imply strong winds, so all the that aircraft would need to do to take-off quickly would be to turn around quickly and face the wind(which should, by itself, reduce the take-off run). I don’t favor the Japanese US-2’s reliance on compressed air for turning the tail, supplementing the lift at the wing, and providing lift along the entire length of the aircraft, but would favor a rudder or a thruster, to use the water to turn the aircraft, or a retractable surface to channel the wind, to turn the tail of the aircraft, provided these can safely tucked in during the flight. ii) Also wonder if a very short, retractable, fin-keel would help against porpoising in rough seas. 5- I'm also afraid of being cut in a crash ina GRP aircraft, so I wonder if the cabin can be reinforced with something, so the passengers don't have fiberglass splinters going through them in the event of a crash. II) I’m, secondarily, looking for an amphibious aircraft, primarily, because of my fear of crashing over water. 1- In the event of an emergency over water, I want to be able to safely land and survive on water. For this: i) I need the aircraft to be able to survive and take-off after the necessary repairs in 3 to 6-ft waves. ii) The core of the aircraft to survive, as a life boat, in the worst possible sea condition, even if the wings and everything else are lost. This means, it should float and not sink and structurally survive smashing by waves and even minor impact with logs and containers. The windows also shouldn’t break or leak in frigid water (which can be deadly in minutes) or collapse for impact from the outside in, but should easily remove from the inside out, should the plane begin to sink, and the passengers need to swim out. iii) The aircraft should either have a ceiling high enough to fly over adverse weather or should be able to land in a shelter without any maintenance facilities, and then fly whenever the weather has cleared from the path: a) One option would be to have the petrol engine replaced with a larger version of the diesel engine, from the DA 62 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austro_Engine_E4), which would only be slightly heavier and free of all water-related ignition issues. Since diesel engines produce more torque, but less horsepower, and as a result have to rely on larger diameter propellers, which wouldn’t be very practical on a seaplane, I wonder if one could use smaller contra-rotating propellers or those with more numerous blades, but smaller diameters, to utilize the extra torque (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra-rotating#Marine_propulsion) b) The other option would be to replace the engines with turboprops, like the PT-6 (producing 500 SHP: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney_Canada_PT6), in the push-configuration, for the ability to fly over the weather with a higher ceiling and speed, but that would raise pressurization issues and the need for extra fuel, which might mean larger and stronger wings and a heavier cabin. Pressurization shouldn’t be a great deal because the Cirrus jet is an all-composite pressurized aircraft. One could do without pressurization and use oxygen cylinders or concentrators for short hops over adverse weather and then descend back to reasonable altitude.

@gregorybrown4062 4 жыл бұрын

Show the interior please

@gregorybrown4062 4 жыл бұрын

I'd like this better if I could hear the engines, com traffic and wind

@williamthurston5904 4 жыл бұрын

The guy ( outside of Leroy himself ) behind the goose and the rest of those early amphibs was aiming for a more sporty design...designed for a more civilian market and started a company called Thurston aircraft corp way back younder in the Indian nation ..Hoping to attract all the sport pilots he believed would be creating a new market after ww2..unfortunately that wasn't so much in the cards for dear Ol' Dave...but he made a few planes and did a lot of flying...the Chinese are rekindling some designs with that new 0600.?...because they got ideas on the south China seas..I think...and probably will find them useful in the near future ...who can tell.?.. but.. I really like what you've done guys..keep up the good work........I think you guys are heading in the Wright direction..!....Ha ha.!.

@1STGeneral 4 жыл бұрын

I'm glad I'm sober thank you Lord but when I lived on a boat I was a functioning alcoholic

@Taliyon 4 жыл бұрын

The hull on the Gweduck is substantially improved over a Widgeon. I'd prefer a bit less stability in my hull, but it's pretty hard to argue with how easily this ship handles. It's such an impressive piece!

$@balsumfractus$