Beaver / Otter - how long will their era last?

[floatplane]

Hi guys,

the Beaver / Single Otter are nearly 40-50+ years in service.
Mostly they have accumulated (ten)thousands of hours on frame.

Are these planes flying forever or are times near,
where a suitable successor is required?

Could the Kodiac be the right one or which plane could fill the gap?

I am courious about your comments!

[185_guy]

They will last until the supply of parts drys up and that will take quite some time with Viking making and others making new parts.
Who can afford to buy a million dollar or so airplane to replace the beaver they have thats bought and paid for and only worth about 400G's?
The Beavers/Otters and a few Norseman will be flying for a while yet.

[iflyforpie]

What I found amazing about the Beavers and Otters was how amazingly simple they are to work on. No fancy plastic parts, all standard AN hardware, and simple airframe systems. Anybody with half a brain and a rivet gun (or hammer and bar on some god forsaken lake) can patch the airframe.

It will be interesting to see how the Kodiak does but a Beaver is still a bargain compared to it.

The Caravan has been a good plane too but not designed for extreme STOL performance like the Otter and much more expensive.

Ultimately it will come down to product support and airframe availability. I've worked on planes in daily commercial service far older than either of these planes and some with four times the hours of the highest time Beaver still flying.

[sdogg0]

Anytime somebody wants to sell there "used" up beaver, let me know ill buy it.....cheap.
Great planes will always outlast shiny planes

[sky Rookie]

what would guys do without beavers

[Beaver Driver]

what would guys do without beavers

Walk!

[iflyforpie]

what would guys do without beavers

[Moose47]

G'day floatplane

You can tack on a few more years for each type.

The prototype Beaver flew just over 61 years ago and went into production shortly after.

The prototype Otter (proposed name King Beaver) first flew on the 12th of December 1951.
After some mods, primarly the small tail enlarged and wing fence installation, it was type certified on the 5th of November 1952.

Cheers...Chris

[Old Dog Flying]

I watched CF-PCG, Beaver 1000...depart Downsview on a dolly off Rnwy 15. The float equipped bird got airborne but the dolly took out Phil Garret's new Studebacker Gold Hawk.

And the grand old bird is still plugging along out of YVR...which is a wonder seeing as Garret played submarine with it a couple of times.

[1000 HP]

Hi guys,

the Beaver / Single Otter are nearly 40-50+ years in service.
Mostly they have accumulated (ten)thousands of hours on frame.

Are these planes flying forever or are times near,
where a suitable successor is required?

Could the Kodiac be the right one or which plane could fill the gap?

I am courious about your comments!

They won't last forever, but I'll be dead before they are. I've flown a 1949 Beaver, and presently fly a minty like new 1956 Otter. It's all about the maintenance...

[boozy]

Jeez, I read about that dolly hitting a car at downsview in a book on the beaver. Are some of these "old" guys that designed the beaver/otter still kicking around.

[Old Dog Flying]

Boozy: I was a 21 year old kid working in the RCAF Tower at YZD and got to see an awful lot of Beavers and Otters on their production test flights...along with some of DeHav's other projects. Great time believe me.

Barney

[beaverman]

I currently fly a 1958 Beaver with 17,000 hrs on her frame. Great bird . Have abiut 3500 hrs flying them and enjoyed every minute. I read an article somewhere saying that the US was thinking about putting an age limit on older aircraft, if this comes to Canada it will destroy alot of bush operations hopefully we never see this. Cheers.

[Irishgypsy1962]

How about the Bush Hawk? I know it will not come close in most aspects to the Beaver but is it not in the running?

[sarg]

I currently fly a 1958 Beaver with 17,000 hrs on her frame. Great bird . Have abiut 3500 hrs flying them and enjoyed every minute. I read an article somewhere saying that the US was thinking about putting an age limit on older aircraft, if this comes to Canada it will destroy alot of bush operations hopefully we never see this. Cheers.

If it happened it might wipe out the value of the older machines, but would probably make it feasible for Viking to start the production line for Beavers like they're doing for the Twin Otter.

[Rubberbiscuit]

If the Twotter is going back into production, what is stopping someone from doing the same with the Beaver or Otter? Modernized with Turbine engines and some lighter weight materials here and there (without turning them into disposable plastic airplanes).... would think it could make for some nice machines. I guess it is a matter of the demand being there.

RB

[flyingsafely]

The DHC-2 and-3 will be with us for a while yet.
Here's a link to a musical tribute:
http://www.sealandaviation.com/beaver_song.php

[all_ramped_up]

If the Twotter is going back into production, what is stopping someone from doing the same with the Beaver or Otter?

I believe what's stopping someone from doing it is the fact that Viking owns the rights to the designs for the DeHavilland airframes.

[Rowdy]

How about the lack of new R985's to hang off the front of those beavers? That and the PT6 is a bit too pricey for most bush ops, both in fuel burn and initial cost!

[dhc-t2]

Add the word Turbine & add the price of a small house to the final price tag. R-985's ? I wonder if we still have the technology to make more?
Many very capable shops like Aero Engines, Tulsa, Aero Recip.

[viccoastdog]

rubberbiscuit wrote:
"If the Twotter is going back into production, what is stopping someone from doing the same with the Beaver or Otter?"

Probably 2008 labour costs, liability insurance costs in 2008, coupled with tooling costs (even though Viking has quite a bit from DeHavilland/Bombardier) that will have to amortized over a small production run. All because the total demand is still going to be quite small, and the learning curve for a production run commensurately steep.

dhc-t2 write:
"Add the word Turbine & add the price of a small house to the final price tag. R-985's ? I wonder if we still have the technology to make more?
Many very capable shops like Aero Engines, Tulsa, Aero Recip."

Sounds like you should know the answer to this one! But isn't there a big difference between rebuilding engines and making them from scratch with casting cases and forging cranks etc etc?

I reckon Beavers and Otters will be going as long as there are companies to supply parts; so pretty much forever.

[Northern Skies]

From my perspective, there seems to be quite a bit of demand for turbo otters these days. It is possible that a production run could be feasible given the right conditions in industry ie. inaccessible resource exploration. The Otter fleet is working quite hard, and holding a lot of value.

I don't foresee any new beavers coming off the line, though. The market is saturated and will continue to do so if the tourist operators continue to hurt like they have been. I saw a few parked beavers this summer and I think next summer may be worse. There are enough beavers being found somewhere and brought home for rebuild to make up for attrition. If there's a data plate left, just building a new one around it is a lot less hassle than a whole new run.

I flew a Beaver this summer, a '51 with over 26000 hours on the airframe. It is in excellent condition and evey effort is made, successfully, to keep it that way. It works hard and earns its place on the dock. I never had any troubles or real snags with it all season. My experience with it this year is nothing but a blink in the life this aircraft has had and will continue to have if it's treated right.

[Castorero]

The Twin Otter is off the production line and will be in the hands of lucky operators very soon.

Ultimately, economics will dictate how long these beauties will keep flying.

Rising operating costs have relegated privately owned Beavers, and Turbo Beavers especially, to a rarified clientele.

Insurance costs have driven many commercial Beavers onto the market in the last 7-10 years., so I dont see a very bright future for the Beaver beyond the existing numbers of today. Not with today's price tag of $1.5M for a TB.
I am sure that Viking thought long and hard about which aircraft to put back in production.
The Twin Otter won out most likely because of end user preference for two engines, otherwise I would have thought that the single otter would have been a better choice for many obvious reasons.

Most Single Otters now sport a Turbine on their nose, but the number of unconverted Otters must be drying up soon.

Viking's Single Otter Turbine conversion is probably the best all round reworked Otter in terms of systems and airframe, but I think that it would have been an even better machine with more horse power, 1000 at least, even 1200 HP at best.

With its incomparable aerodynamics and STOL virtues the Single Turbine Otter, I predict, will be next in line for reproduction when the market is ready.

I certainly will not see the end of these wonderful machines before My last flight...

[iflyforpie]

Viking's Single Otter Turbine conversion is probably the best all round reworked Otter in terms of systems and airframe, but I think that it would have been an even better machine with more horse power, 1000 at least, even 1200 HP at best.

With its incomparable aerodynamics and STOL virtues the Single Turbine Otter, I predict, will be next in line for reproduction when the market is ready.

Here it is...



The only thing is, they want 1.6 million dollars for it. More power will reduce the economics even more. If you don't need the space of an Otter, but more than a Beaver, the Quest Kodiak isn't much more money and every bit the STOL aircraft the Otter is.

[Airtids]

The difficulty in finding Avgas will be a bigger detriment to the continued operation of the DHC-2 and -3 aircraft than the lifespan of the airframe, IMHO.