The French guy commented on the photo. He thinks it’s a Sikorsky S-38 amphibian. After checking several photos of the type, the tails and rudders (and booms) look identical.
The wing looks higher in other photos than it does in the frame. This might be caused by the camera angle and/or the lens used for the film. The man half-off the frame seems to be position just right to obscure the hull, and the lower wing may not be visible even if he weren’t there. Another thing I missed is that there appears to be a strut attached to one of the booms. The S-38 had boom struts. An eight-seater, as opposed to the six-seat Skymaster, the S-38 is a larger airplane than I imagined.
All things considered, I think he is correct.
EDIT: Here’s his site, BTW. 
.
I agree on the Sikorsky S-38 or S-41.
(And I was silly enough to think that I might get back with the ID first.)
the rudders aren’t the same. Look at the top front which pivots over the stabilizer. having said that, the one you linked to is a reproduction built from scratch. Can’t remember if they had the plans to work off of or not. I agree that you’ve got the right plane or a derivative of it. I’m trying to find the single engine version of it.
update: Not the [airfield.“”]single engine version](“There are so many relief agencies funneling through the airport that it has kind of created a bottleneck,” U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Leon Strickland told CNN en route to the drop point. "We’re going to put things directly out of the air onto the ground and open up another distribution point north of the [Port-au-Prince), it has a single tail.
correct version of single engine.. It is a twin boom. more research to follow.
can you tell in the video if it has a second wing?
Oh curses. I was going to suggest the Sikorsky S-38 from the beggining but I was in doubt since Johnny LA didn’t mention it was a biplane, well, sesquiplane.
Next Mystery Plane thread I’ll be more proactive. 
Ratio of the part above the vertical stabilizer is the wrong and it has no brace wires on the upper section of same. Still could be though, just one being modified maybe. To the right you can see the tip of the lower wing maybe… I think lens used and perspective have it all out of whack…
YMMV
the wires may or may not be there. Johnny L. A. used a web cam to take a picture of a TV image on pause. The general shape is WAY to close to be any other aircraft and looking over Sikorsky’s other versions it appears that they couldn’t go 5 minutes without a modification. I can’t believe I missed this because I have about a hundred pictures of the plane from Oshkosh. I thought it might have been another plane from Oshkosh but I didn’t bother to identify it when photographed (and it wasn’t the plane anyway). They were parked a couple of rows away from each other.
Geez, they get enough struts on that baby? :rolleyes: Talk about parasite drag…
Note the Civil Air Patrol emblem on the tail.
One of its wings is now on NC50V (N50V), an S-39C registered to a trustee in New Hampshire.