WilliamF wrote:
I would really love to see someone docking an Icon A5 at a jetty in those winds that the midwest is famous for.
I had a look at the Icon at one of the airplane shows here and what struck me as an oversight was that there is no way to maneuver the plane without the prop running. I asked if they had an option for a little (electric) outboard engine and they blankly stared at me. It also doesn’t have any water rudder. I suspect that docking that thing might be somewhat challenging.
Noe wrote:
I was actually surprised to see how many jetties there were on small lakes, and wondered what they were used for – but it was the Midwest and people probably get bored easily there.
I would really love to see someone docking an Icon A5 at a jetty in those winds that the midwest is famous for. I bet it would make for interesting viewing in anything over 12kts. Not every lakeside property is a natural environment for a seaplane. I live right beside the lake and survey almost everywhere I can, to see where I could have an aircraft securely parked. Those smooth gradual lawns on the brochures/fbook pics that transition into the water are rare as hens teeth over here.
Icon announced today they are laying off 40% of their workforce.
It’s kind of amusing to re-read this thread from the beginning, as I just did 
I think it goes something like this – the US Federal Government regulates aviation, not the states or local governments, but FAA does not regulate land use or trespassing. Obviously, for most flying in the US that is not an issue because Federal grant money goes to the airports (typically owned by local governments) with strings attached – meaning airports have to be open and unrestricted. In the case of operating from a sizable body of water (also typically owned by local governments) there is no FAA money and therefore no strings to prevent the landowner from restricting aircraft operations. Also, in the case of a privately owned body of water, there may be local government imposed restrictions in place for ‘environmental’ reasons (e.g. ostensibly to protect the water supply), but if that is not the case there is nothing to prevent aircraft operations. FAA doesn’t care where you land as long as its safe in accordance with the FARs.
This link provides more specific information. Obviously if you travel to the right places there are plenty of sea planes – Lake Hood in Anchorage AK has 750 resident aircraft.
Airborne_Again wrote:
I thought that in the US the states have no power to legislate aviation?
AFAIK it’s not the aviation part, it’s once you are on the ground, or rather, water. @Pilot_DAR might know more about that.
Silvaire wrote:
I’m told the issue in the US is more legal than physical: jurisdiction is not with FAA, making legality of aircraft operation subject to obtuse state and local law.
I thought that in the US the states have no power to legislate aviation?
Silvaire wrote:
I’m told the issue in the US is more legal than physical: jurisdiction is not with FAA, making legality of aircraft operation subject to obtuse state and local law.
Yes, that’s what I also heard. I don’t fly seaplanes, but the rules seem to be very local.
172driver wrote:
Tons of it here in the US. Many, many reservoirs and lakes.
I’m told the issue in the US is more legal than physical: jurisdiction is not with FAA, making legality of aircraft operation subject to obtuse state and local law. Every operation needs investigation to determine legality, although FAA couldn’t care less as long as the FARs aren’t violated.
Peter wrote:
fairly smooth water, of which there is obviously little in the whole world. It is basically just bits of lakes or rivers, on calm days.
Tons of it here in the US. Many, many reservoirs and lakes. Obviously you wouldn’t want to land the Icon in the Pacific, though – I guess that might well ruin your day.
