Plans for De Havilland Beaver, Nooduyn Norseman or similar

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

cheeka

Active Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2016
Messages
40
Location
City of Angels, CA
Howdy folks,

Has anyone scratch built a Beaver or any other aircraft of a similar size and importantly role? I looked into the Murphy Moose but it's only available as a kit. I came across the St-Just Cyclone which is a replica of the Cessna 180 / 185 and was wondering if someone has done a similar job to the Beaver or Norseman. I also looked into the Bearhawk 5 place but it's quite than smaller than what I'm looking for.
 

Angusnofangus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2015
Messages
607
Location
Victoria, Canada
The drawings for the DHC-2 Beaver are owned by Viking Air of Victoria, BC. They hold the type certificate and I can guarantee that they won't sell you a set of drawings. They can supply lots of parts, but that's about it. You could find a basket case Beaver and rebuild it, but be prepared to shell out a LOT of money. not to mention time. A lot of stuff for a rebuild can be fabricated from the original examples, but you would need someone to sign it off in the end as it IS a TCed A/C.
 

Dan Thomas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,315
The drawings for the DHC-2 Beaver are owned by Viking Air of Victoria, BC. They hold the type certificate and I can guarantee that they won't sell you a set of drawings. They can supply lots of parts, but that's about it. You could find a basket case Beaver and rebuild it, but be prepared to shell out a LOT of money. not to mention time. A lot of stuff for a rebuild can be fabricated from the original examples, but you would need someone to sign it off in the end as it IS a TCed A/C.
A homebuilt Beaver or Norseman could qualify as a homebuilt, as the St. Just Cyclone does. You'd have to fabricate at least 51% of it.

But the amount of work would be phenomenal. These are BIG airplanes and they need big power. One could easily spend ten years or more, and a quarter-million dollars or much more, building one. And that's if you have the plans. If you have to design and engineer it? Many more years.

It's real easy to bite off way more than one can chew. It's done all the time. One of the sadder things is seeing an ad for some ambitious homebuilt project, for sale by the executors of the estate of some old guy that spent his last 30 years on it.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
11,063
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
Cheeka, what part of LA are you in? What is the mission you are trying to achieve with whatever you build? How old are you and how many 'active years' do you have left in life... do you have the time left on this planet to spend ten thousand hours building whatever it is?
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
17,566
Location
Memphis, TN
You can’t build one cheaper as a homebuilt. It would easily cost half a million dollars in time and materials to build a homebuilt Beaver. Cheaper to buy one flying. For one person, twenty year project. Cool planes. There have been large homebuilts made, but they really were not home projects. They had a workforce and a goal in hopes someone would buy the idea from them. You would be better off finding a Howard that needs to be restored or a Wilga. Piper Aztec is a hauler and somewhat bush. A twin Commander. No matter what, something that big is $200,000 or more flying that’s not falling apart.
 

cheeka

Active Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2016
Messages
40
Location
City of Angels, CA
Cheeka, what part of LA are you in? What is the mission you are trying to achieve with whatever you build? How old are you and how many 'active years' do you have left in life... do you have the time left on this planet to spend ten thousand hours building whatever it is?

I'm in West LA, pretty close to Santa Monica airport. As for the reason why I'm looking for plans, it's for a stress and deformation study of the wing structure. I'm interested in the design of bush planes, and trying to gain a deeper insight of how the original designers went about their design process given the constraints they had "back in the day".
 

WonderousMountain

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
2,760
Location
Bellingham, Wa
Neat aim, a quick search turned up Noorduyn worked at Fokker & Bellanca : N. NorseMan wing looks as Pacemaker with Fokker wingtips. D.H. Beaver the result of Punch Dicken's pilot survey. Happy hunting.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
11,063
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
I'm in West LA, pretty close to Santa Monica airport.

That makes you a denizen of Tito's Tacos and Killer Shrimp, eh?

Learned to fly 150's and152's at Gunnell Aviation at SMO, had to wait three whole days after 16th B-day to solo because of that mother-!(#&*$& marine layer. This was 1000 years ago, back in the day when Gunnell was on the south side of the airport, the Donald Douglas museum was a small building down the street, and the FAA had the FSDO office at the airport. The instructors used to take us walking down to the end of the runway to see the two big old Douglas buildings where the DC-3 was built, before the buildings were torn down. How many people remember the old original "twin hi-rise" as the final reporting point, before the "twin towers" in Century City were built?

Holy crap I'm old...
 

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
9,612
Location
World traveler
Not quite the same league, but the late Chris Heintz wrote quite a bit about his design philosophy and methodology over the years, so perhaps you could look at the CH801 as a smaller and more recent example with a similar mission?

1649409297372.png
 

cheeka

Active Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2016
Messages
40
Location
City of Angels, CA
That makes you a denizen of Tito's Tacos and Killer Shrimp, eh?

Learned to fly 150's and152's at Gunnell Aviation at SMO, had to wait three whole days after 16th B-day to solo because of that mother-!(#&*$& marine layer. This was 1000 years ago, back in the day when Gunnell was on the south side of the airport, the Donald Douglas museum was a small building down the street, and the FAA had the FSDO office at the airport. The instructors used to take us walking down to the end of the runway to see the two big old Douglas buildings where the DC-3 was built, before the buildings were torn down. How many people remember the old original "twin hi-rise" as the final reporting point, before the "twin towers" in Century City were built?

Holy crap I'm old...

Hahaha! I was Santa Monica airport last week and found it very hard to believe that they were actually manufacturing aircrafts there and not some small GA aircraft but DC 3's! Hahahahaha, I completely understand by the "marine layer". It looks like someone pulled a blanket over Santa Monica. I have to say the layer here isn't as bad as it is in Norcal esp Pacifica.
 

cheeka

Active Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2016
Messages
40
Location
City of Angels, CA
You can ask what the engine will cost.


Pretty sure a mortgage and then some! I am a little baffled that radial engine manufacturers are pretty much extinct at this point which is a tragedy. A turbine can never achieve the fuel efficiency and ease of maintenance that a radial does, assuming one is familiar with their very picky start-up procedure. With current engineering, metallurgical and FEA advancements, I'm pretty sure radials can serve a niche role that a turbine or a piston engine can't.
 

WonderousMountain

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
2,760
Location
Bellingham, Wa
Last year I was south of Pacifica bird watching upon the ridge.
Eagles, Ravens & Turkey Gyps all dynamic soaring the same gusts. Striding straight through the mists. Not much rain, not much warmth either.
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
17,566
Location
Memphis, TN
Turbines are much easier to maintain and more reliable. The manufacturing is just more complex. More reliable in the money world means no one has to touch them for hundreds of hours. That means fewer mechanics. Hour per mechanic touching it is more efficient. Not many moving parts in a jet; they just move fast. They know how to make a radial work great. I think TBOs over the years have gone from 500 in the thirties to 4000+ now. You get 7000 for a jet. At least in big jets. A new issue is fuel, especially from your state. Gasoline outlawed, doesn’t matter how good an engine is.
 

blane.c

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
6,162
Location
capital district NY
Pretty sure a mortgage and then some! I am a little baffled that radial engine manufacturers are pretty much extinct at this point which is a tragedy. A turbine can never achieve the fuel efficiency and ease of maintenance that a radial does, assuming one is familiar with their very picky start-up procedure. With current engineering, metallurgical and FEA advancements, I'm pretty sure radials can serve a niche role that a turbine or a piston engine can't.

Radials easy to start, look at engine temperature's, if engine cold flood it, you'll know if you have given it enough fuel when you can hear it pissing on the ramp, if engine is hot, do not touch fuel, it already has enough, it isn't long you'll know how much to "tickle" fuel in the middle temps.
 

Dan Thomas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
7,315
Radials are big and draggy. One has to watch for hydraulic lock before startup. Bottom plugs foul easily. TBOs weren't so good. What's to love besides the vintage sound and appearance?
 
Top