Tomahawk/ Skipper

[W P Dixon]

These planes look like clones of each other. I like the looks but does
anyone have experience in both to compare the two?

--
Patrick Dixon
student SP
aircraft structural mech

[Jim Macklin]

Beech Skipper Model 77 is a well constructed airplane with
Beech quality systems. It spins are well behaved and
predictable. There was some industrial espionage that got
the general layout to Piper and they got on the market
first. Had a lot of problems with the first 1,000 planes or
so, construction was often sloppy, things like the control
wheel breaking off in the pilots' hands (both) and they had
to do a lot of spin fixes, which involved stall strips. The
location of the stall strips varies from plane to plane
because the wings are different.
Both airplanes have good visibility and hot cockpits as a
result. Both could use about 25 more HP. When I win the
lottery I would buy a Skipper and put an IO-320 or 360
engine on the front with a CS prop. The Skipper is a lot of
fun to fly and it is a stick and rudder airplane.

Taught quit a few CFIs how to fly in a Skipper, little time
in a Tomahawk.

My opinion, Beech did it right, Piper did it quick.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"W P Dixon" > wrote in
message ...
| These planes look like clones of each other. I like the
looks but does
| anyone have experience in both to compare the two?
|
| --
| Patrick Dixon
| student SP
| aircraft structural mech
|

[Ron Natalie]

W P Dixon wrote:
> These planes look like clones of each other. I like the looks but does
> anyone have experience in both to compare the two?
>
They're not real clones, just the product of the marketing design
ideas of the seventies when they were developed. Wanted to
distinguish themselves from the 150/152 which really looked no
different than the rest of the post-war Cessna line.

T-tails of the seventies were the swept tails of the sixties.
Biggest problem with the the skipper, was the price. Hard
to compete against cheaper stuff in the training market
especially as the late 70's were also are last great "Fuel
Price is going to kill aviation" era. The skipper is pretty
much typical Beech.

There were more Tomahawks built (about 2500 compared to 300 for
the skipper). Tomahawks have had their series of problems
over the years between a whole slew of AD's for manufacturing
quality issues and a few issues with the spin recovery.

They both fly well...tomahawk performance is slightly better.
The skipper was pretty much a orphan child in our FBO...most
opted to train in the 172's even for a few bucks more an hour.
Both of these birds are getting a bit long in the tooth these
days.

[Larry Dighera]

On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 08:28:24 -0600, "Jim Macklin"
> wrote in
<kb1ef.1110$QW2.1065@dukeread08>::

>Beech Skipper Model 77 is a well constructed airplane with
>Beech quality systems.

That probably means that maintenance costs are higher than the
Tomahawk.

>Both could use about 25 more HP. When I win the
>lottery I would buy a Skipper and put an IO-320 or 360
>engine on the front with a CS prop.

Is this truly something that could be done safely? Would the wing
structure and airframe withstand the increased stresses of higher
speeds and increased weight? Is it possible to shoehorn an IO-360
into the original cowl? Could the W&B changes be overcome?

>My opinion, Beech did it right, Piper did it quick.

Additionally, there is finite fatigue life limit specification of
11,000 hours on the Tomahawk wing. Those near the limit are sold at
bargain prices.

More here:
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.aviation.piloting/browse_thread/thread/d03392ba8546272c/4ed64d319b06a81d?lnk=st&q=tomahawk+life+wing+group:rec.aviation.piloting&rnum=1&hl=en#4ed64d319b06a81d
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.aviation.piloting/browse_thread/thread/7115d20b23a4d6cb/58959e893f29db9c?lnk=st&q=tomahawk+life+wing+group:rec.aviation.piloting&rnum=2&hl=en#58959e893f29db9c
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.aviation.owning/browse_thread/thread/1cacf1dcc98f192/768a3c06289b4459?lnk=st&q=tomahawk+life+wing+group:rec.aviation.piloting&rnum=3&hl=en#768a3c06289b4459
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.aviation.piloting/browse_thread/thread/c7529c8481352458/870959a0709830aa?lnk=st&q=tomahawk+life+wing+group:rec.aviation.piloting&rnum=4&hl=en#870959a0709830aa
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.aviation.piloting/browse_thread/thread/7dd6c43a2574ee97/99a22e0740dcfc44?lnk=st&q=tomahawk+life+wing+group:rec.aviation.piloting&rnum=5&hl=en#99a22e0740dcfc44
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.aviation.aerobatics/browse_thread/thread/d0cce9ee287e145b/abbeed6a96abec0d?lnk=st&q=tomahawk+life+wing+group:rec.aviation.piloting&rnum=6&hl=en#abbeed6a96abec0d

[[email protected]]

>>>>When I win the lottery I would buy a Skipper and put an IO-320 or 360 engine on the front with a CS prop.<<<<

You need to raise your sights a bit, Jim - MY "lottery plane" is a
TBM700C2, but then again, to each his own... : )

Having learned in a Traumahawk 10 years ago, I can personally attest to
the low power and VERY study undercarraige, as there were quite a few
carrier landings those planes survived courtesy of yours truly. It
wasn't until after I finished the PPL that I started reading about the
stall/spin accidents in the PA-38. Yikes.

[Neil Gould]

Recently, > posted:

>>>>> When I win the lottery I would buy a Skipper and put an IO-320 or
>>>>> 360 engine on the front with a CS prop.<<<<
>
> You need to raise your sights a bit, Jim - MY "lottery plane" is a
> TBM700C2, but then again, to each his own... : )
>
> Having learned in a Traumahawk 10 years ago, I can personally attest
> to the low power and VERY study undercarraige, as there were quite a
> few carrier landings those planes survived courtesy of yours truly. It
> wasn't until after I finished the PPL that I started reading about the
> stall/spin accidents in the PA-38. Yikes.
>
I also trained in a Tomahawk, and read the various reports on stall/spin
accidents. However, I concluded that many of those reports were of
questionable veracity due to a lack of how the lost planes were loaded
(W&B information) and some bizarre conclusions. I can't imagine how one
could flat spin a Tomahawk, something repeated frequently in the reports,
without putting a significant amount of weight in the storage area. The
worst thing I can say about a Tomahawk is that you have to fly the thing
100% of the time. For that reason, it makes a great trainer. ;-)

The Skipper seemed like an upscale comfy version of the Tomahawk to me.

Neil

[Robert M. Gary]

I've given Private Pilot training to a couple students in Tomahawks. My
understanding is that they had some strange stall behavior at one time
but since the FAA's mandated stall strips were added they have had no
problems. I found it to be a very nice plane to stall. It does spin
easier by design. CFIs were complaining that it was too hard to give
spin training in the Cessna 150 so better spin training became a
requrement of the Tomahawk. Nowadays people don't tend to do spin
training for privates so no one cares. If you read the Tomahawk web
pages you'll see that there appear to be more reasonable answers to the
few spin accidents that have hurt the Tomahawk reputation. The main
benefit of the T over the Skipper is better support from a larger fleet.

[Jose]

> The
> worst thing I can say about a Tomahawk is that you have to fly the thing
> 100% of the time. For that reason, it makes a great trainer. ;-)

When I fly, I always hand fly. I've played with the autopilot a few
times, for a few minutes, but I feel like a passenger if my hand is not
on the yoke. Maybe it's because I trained in a Tomahawk. I liked the
plane - peppy, good viz; when I transitioned to a 152 it was a dog by
comparison.

It always rattled the tail in stalls, and my instructor would cast a
worried look back there. What did I know about tails - I was just a
student.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jim Macklin]

If I had won the big lottery a few weeks ago, my personal
flight department would be these airplanes...
A Beechjet 400A (now called a Hawker 400) since I am already
typed in it.
A Beech 1900 to carry my Harleys around to Sturgis(typed in
that too.)
A Helio Courier on floats
A Legacy Cub
A G36 Bonanza
A Pitts S2
A Skipper with a big engine
A Duchess with two bigger engines and floats

And I'd build a 50% scale A10 with a 7.63 minigun in the
nose.

BTW, the TBM700 was the Mooney 301, I was there for the
first public flight at Kerrville. Nice airplane.

I liked the report about the student who had the control
wheel break in his hand and then the CFI took control and
his wheel broke too. Many CFIs took to carrying ViseGrip
pliers to use as an emergency handle. The PA38 was an
adventure.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



> wrote in message
oups.com...
| >>>>When I win the lottery I would buy a Skipper and put
an IO-320 or 360 engine on the front with a CS prop.<<<<
|
| You need to raise your sights a bit, Jim - MY "lottery
plane" is a
| TBM700C2, but then again, to each his own... : )
|
| Having learned in a Traumahawk 10 years ago, I can
personally attest to
| the low power and VERY study undercarraige, as there were
quite a few
| carrier landings those planes survived courtesy of yours
truly. It
| wasn't until after I finished the PPL that I started
reading about the
| stall/spin accidents in the PA-38. Yikes.
|

[W P Dixon]

Fellow on ebay was auctioning off some flight time in a Tomahawk. I like the
way the Tomahawks and Skippers look . Thought it might be fun to fly one
before I get my SP cert. Use it to get some controlled airspace time in.
Thanks to everyone for all the info. Most definitely gets your attention if
your control falls apart in your hand! WOW talk about a bad feeling!

Patrick
student SP
aircraft structural mech

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:MS7ef.1147$QW2.4@dukeread08...
> If I had won the big lottery a few weeks ago, my personal
> flight department would be these airplanes...
> A Beechjet 400A (now called a Hawker 400) since I am already
> typed in it.
> A Beech 1900 to carry my Harleys around to Sturgis(typed in
> that too.)
> A Helio Courier on floats
> A Legacy Cub
> A G36 Bonanza
> A Pitts S2
> A Skipper with a big engine
> A Duchess with two bigger engines and floats
>
> And I'd build a 50% scale A10 with a 7.63 minigun in the
> nose.
>
> BTW, the TBM700 was the Mooney 301, I was there for the
> first public flight at Kerrville. Nice airplane.
>
> I liked the report about the student who had the control
> wheel break in his hand and then the CFI took control and
> his wheel broke too. Many CFIs took to carrying ViseGrip
> pliers to use as an emergency handle. The PA38 was an
> adventure.
>
>
> --
> James H. Macklin
> ATP,CFI,A&P
>
> --
> The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
> some support
> http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
>
>
>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> | >>>>When I win the lottery I would buy a Skipper and put
> an IO-320 or 360 engine on the front with a CS prop.<<<<
> |
> | You need to raise your sights a bit, Jim - MY "lottery
> plane" is a
> | TBM700C2, but then again, to each his own... : )
> |
> | Having learned in a Traumahawk 10 years ago, I can
> personally attest to
> | the low power and VERY study undercarraige, as there were
> quite a few
> | carrier landings those planes survived courtesy of yours
> truly. It
> | wasn't until after I finished the PPL that I started
> reading about the
> | stall/spin accidents in the PA-38. Yikes.
> |
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

That problem was fixed rather quickly. But it really should
never have happened. The FAA has Part 39 rules for
Airworthiness Directives, laws that require fixes. You can
find ADs for any airplane at the FAA web site
here
http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/MainFrame?OpenFrameSet


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"W P Dixon" > wrote in
message ...
| Fellow on ebay was auctioning off some flight time in a
Tomahawk. I like the
| way the Tomahawks and Skippers look . Thought it might be
fun to fly one
| before I get my SP cert. Use it to get some controlled
airspace time in.
| Thanks to everyone for all the info. Most definitely gets
your attention if
| your control falls apart in your hand! WOW talk about a
bad feeling!
|
| Patrick
| student SP
| aircraft structural mech
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:MS7ef.1147$QW2.4@dukeread08...
| > If I had won the big lottery a few weeks ago, my
personal
| > flight department would be these airplanes...
| > A Beechjet 400A (now called a Hawker 400) since I am
already
| > typed in it.
| > A Beech 1900 to carry my Harleys around to Sturgis(typed
in
| > that too.)
| > A Helio Courier on floats
| > A Legacy Cub
| > A G36 Bonanza
| > A Pitts S2
| > A Skipper with a big engine
| > A Duchess with two bigger engines and floats
| >
| > And I'd build a 50% scale A10 with a 7.63 minigun in the
| > nose.
| >
| > BTW, the TBM700 was the Mooney 301, I was there for the
| > first public flight at Kerrville. Nice airplane.
| >
| > I liked the report about the student who had the control
| > wheel break in his hand and then the CFI took control
and
| > his wheel broke too. Many CFIs took to carrying
ViseGrip
| > pliers to use as an emergency handle. The PA38 was an
| > adventure.
| >
| >
| > --
| > James H. Macklin
| > ATP,CFI,A&P
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| > some support
| > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
| >
| >
| >
| > > wrote in message
| >
oups.com...
| > | >>>>When I win the lottery I would buy a Skipper and
put
| > an IO-320 or 360 engine on the front with a CS prop.<<<<
| > |
| > | You need to raise your sights a bit, Jim - MY "lottery
| > plane" is a
| > | TBM700C2, but then again, to each his own... : )
| > |
| > | Having learned in a Traumahawk 10 years ago, I can
| > personally attest to
| > | the low power and VERY study undercarraige, as there
were
| > quite a few
| > | carrier landings those planes survived courtesy of
yours
| > truly. It
| > | wasn't until after I finished the PPL that I started
| > reading about the
| > | stall/spin accidents in the PA-38. Yikes.
| > |
| >
| >
|

[[email protected]]

Never flew the Skipper, but had some time in the Traumahawk. Two things
that I remember besides being horribly underpowered was my instructor
repeatedly warning me about secondary stalls in one and accelerated
stalls at high bank angles. From what I can remember from his warnings
is that the Trauma when it enters the secondary stall, becomes overly
sensitive to having a wing down and when the stall breaks, it
definately wanted to go on it's back and spin. At that point and when
you had an accelerated stall at at large bank angle, the tail would
start to waggle pretty hard and if you were looking at the correct
time, you would catch seeing the fin twist a considerable amount of
distance off of the centerline of the aircraft.

I will say that it had pretty robust gear for a light trainer. We got a
new one in from the east coast for our school and discovered after it
was there and in the shop for an inspection that the a/c had been
landed so hard that the tires left skidmarks on the bottoms of the
wings. Wasn't until after that that you could visually notice that it
had suffered a severely hard landing and bent the gear.

After flying one for about 10 hours I moved on up to a Warrior since it
had air conditioning and was only 10$ an hour more at that time.

Craig C.

[Skywise]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in news:MS7ef.1147
$QW2.4@dukeread08:

> If I had won the big lottery a few weeks ago, my personal
> flight department would be these airplanes...
> A Beechjet 400A (now called a Hawker 400) since I am already
> typed in it.
> A Beech 1900 to carry my Harleys around to Sturgis(typed in
<Snipola>

What? Don't have a leather butt? :)

BTW, whatchya got? I have an '86 Sporster 883. Admitedly
not the bike for a long haul ride.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
Supernews sucks - blocking google, usenet.com & newsfeeds.com posts

[Kyle Boatright]

"W P Dixon" > wrote in message
...
> These planes look like clones of each other. I like the looks but does
> anyone have experience in both to compare the two?
>
> --
> Patrick Dixon
> student SP
> aircraft structural mech

A flight school in my area had one of each for a while. Later, they sold the
Skipper and bought a second Tomahawk.

My experience is in the Tomahawk. I owned one and have about 300 hours in
it. I thought it was a great little airplane. Certainly, the performance
was limited, but any two seat trainer has limited performance. If I was
looking for an inexpensive aircraft for ~$20k, it would be my fist choice.

Someone brought up the wing's lifespan limit. Oh the joys of being certified
in the modern era where all aircraft have life limits. There is an STC to
extend the life of the T-hawk's wing, by the way..

I found the aircraft a delight to fly. No unpredictable behavior, but if you
do stall it, it will drop a wing, unlike a C-15X, which usually stalls
straight ahead as long as the ball is more or less centered.

One of the real advantages of the T-hawk is that it has the biggest cabin in
the class. Several inches wider and taller than the Cessnas, and bigger than
a Skipper or AA-1 as well. It makes a difference if you're going X/C...

KB

[W P Dixon]

Well I guess that explains the nickname Traumahawk! Shame to, it is a good
looking little bird IMO. Probably won't ever see a T-hawk II ..improved
version ;)

Patrick
student SP
aircraft structural mech

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Never flew the Skipper, but had some time in the Traumahawk. Two things
> that I remember besides being horribly underpowered was my instructor
> repeatedly warning me about secondary stalls in one and accelerated
> stalls at high bank angles. From what I can remember from his warnings
> is that the Trauma when it enters the secondary stall, becomes overly
> sensitive to having a wing down and when the stall breaks, it
> definately wanted to go on it's back and spin. At that point and when
> you had an accelerated stall at at large bank angle, the tail would
> start to waggle pretty hard and if you were looking at the correct
> time, you would catch seeing the fin twist a considerable amount of
> distance off of the centerline of the aircraft.
>
> I will say that it had pretty robust gear for a light trainer. We got a
> new one in from the east coast for our school and discovered after it
> was there and in the shop for an inspection that the a/c had been
> landed so hard that the tires left skidmarks on the bottoms of the
> wings. Wasn't until after that that you could visually notice that it
> had suffered a severely hard landing and bent the gear.
>
> After flying one for about 10 hours I moved on up to a Warrior since it
> had air conditioning and was only 10$ an hour more at that time.
>
> Craig C.
>

[Jim Macklin]

Right now I'm walking, but when the lottery comes through,
I'll get an XL1200R and maybe a V-Rod with mid-mount
controls. Hey, I think arriving with the bike in an
airplane would be cool. Maybe land in town and taxi down
main street.

No roids, just old.


"Skywise" > wrote in message
...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in news:MS7ef.1147
| $QW2.4@dukeread08:
|
| > If I had won the big lottery a few weeks ago, my
personal
| > flight department would be these airplanes...
| > A Beechjet 400A (now called a Hawker 400) since I am
already
| > typed in it.
| > A Beech 1900 to carry my Harleys around to Sturgis(typed
in
| <Snipola>
|
| What? Don't have a leather butt? :)
|
| BTW, whatchya got? I have an '86 Sporster 883. Admitedly
| not the bike for a long haul ride.
|
| Brian
| --
| http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy,
Skepticism
| Seismic FAQ:
http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
| Quake "predictions":
http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
| Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
| Supernews sucks - blocking google, usenet.com &
newsfeeds.com posts

[W P Dixon]

I've never flown one but I will say I have noticed their cost. Seem to be
easily obtainable from 16-20G . I may have to do alittle checking into the
wing problem. Can the wing be rebuilt, or does it have to be red tagged
after those hours? Rebuilding a wing is alot of fun, for me anyhow, if that
was allowable?

Patrick
student SP
aircraft structural mech

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
...
>
> "W P Dixon" > wrote in message
> ...
>> These planes look like clones of each other. I like the looks but does
>> anyone have experience in both to compare the two?
>>
>> --
>> Patrick Dixon
>> student SP
>> aircraft structural mech
>
> A flight school in my area had one of each for a while. Later, they sold
> the Skipper and bought a second Tomahawk.
>
> My experience is in the Tomahawk. I owned one and have about 300 hours in
> it. I thought it was a great little airplane. Certainly, the performance
> was limited, but any two seat trainer has limited performance. If I was
> looking for an inexpensive aircraft for ~$20k, it would be my fist choice.
>
> Someone brought up the wing's lifespan limit. Oh the joys of being
> certified in the modern era where all aircraft have life limits. There is
> an STC to extend the life of the T-hawk's wing, by the way..
>
> I found the aircraft a delight to fly. No unpredictable behavior, but if
> you do stall it, it will drop a wing, unlike a C-15X, which usually stalls
> straight ahead as long as the ball is more or less centered.
>
> One of the real advantages of the T-hawk is that it has the biggest cabin
> in the class. Several inches wider and taller than the Cessnas, and bigger
> than a Skipper or AA-1 as well. It makes a difference if you're going
> X/C...
>
> KB
>

[G Farris]

In article >,
says...
>
>
>These planes look like clones of each other. I like the looks but does
>anyone have experience in both to compare the two?
>


The Beech Skipper, in an unpretentious way, is a fine little airplane. It
has an excellent reputation. They seem to have gotten everything "just
right". The Tomahawk, sadly, is not a fine little airplane. It's crappy.
I'm sorry, but everything is wrong with this plane. The wing structure
has a definite design limitation - after the plane has flown a certain
number of hours, you just trash it like a beer can. I'm sorry to be
denigrating - I know there are people who have them and love them, and
even more who trained in them and have fond memories - but IMO it's not a
successful design, and not really very safe.

GF

[Kyle Boatright]

"G Farris" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> says...
>>
>>
>>These planes look like clones of each other. I like the looks but does
>>anyone have experience in both to compare the two?
>>
>
>
> The Beech Skipper, in an unpretentious way, is a fine little airplane. It
> has an excellent reputation. They seem to have gotten everything "just
> right". The Tomahawk, sadly, is not a fine little airplane. It's crappy.
> I'm sorry, but everything is wrong with this plane. The wing structure
> has a definite design limitation - after the plane has flown a certain
> number of hours, you just trash it like a beer can. I'm sorry to be
> denigrating - I know there are people who have them and love them, and
> even more who trained in them and have fond memories - but IMO it's not a
> successful design, and not really very safe.
>
> GF

My understanding is that all aircraft certified under the current rules have
life limits. IIRC, the new certification rules began around 1973, but that's
a pretty fuzzy recollection. Notice that the Cirrus has a life limit?

Most GA designs predate the new certification requirements.

KB

[Kyle Boatright]

"W P Dixon" > wrote in message
...
> I've never flown one but I will say I have noticed their cost. Seem to be
> easily obtainable from 16-20G . I may have to do alittle checking into the
> wing problem. Can the wing be rebuilt, or does it have to be red tagged
> after those hours? Rebuilding a wing is alot of fun, for me anyhow, if
> that was allowable?
>
> Patrick
> student SP
> aircraft structural mech

Of course you could remanufacture a wing. However, IIRC the life limit is
well over 10k hours, and there are plenty of 3,000 to 4,000 hour Tomahawks
out there. It might not be worth the time and expense right now...

KB

[Jay Honeck]

> It always rattled the tail in stalls, and my instructor would cast a
> worried look back there. What did I know about tails - I was just a
> student.

Ha! I'd forgotten about that.

The old Cherokee 140 I trained in also made all sorts of weird noises in the
stall, seemingly coming from the aft fuselage section.

Only later did I realize it was probably *always* making that noise (or
worse), and we just couldn't hear it until the power was off.

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Right now I'm walking, but when the lottery comes through,
> I'll get an XL1200R and maybe a V-Rod with mid-mount
> controls. Hey, I think arriving with the bike in an
> airplane would be cool. Maybe land in town and taxi down
> main street.
>
> No roids, just old.

Bah. I'd rather die than be seen trailering my motorcycle to a rally.

Of course, that's prolly why I don't go to rallies anymore...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Neil Gould]

Recently, > posted:

> Never flew the Skipper, but had some time in the Traumahawk. Two
> things that I remember besides being horribly underpowered was my
> instructor repeatedly warning me about secondary stalls in one and
> accelerated stalls at high bank angles. From what I can remember from
> his warnings is that the Trauma when it enters the secondary stall,
> becomes overly sensitive to having a wing down and when the stall
> breaks, it definately wanted to go on it's back and spin. At that
> point and when you had an accelerated stall at at large bank angle,
> the tail would start to waggle pretty hard and if you were looking at
> the correct time, you would catch seeing the fin twist a considerable
> amount of distance off of the centerline of the aircraft.
>
Hmm. Never experienced that kind of thing in the Tomahawk, even in a spin.
Perhaps it was because the one I flew was a later model? I think there's a
lot more myth than truth about these planes.

Neil

[W P Dixon]

Hmmm,
Maybe find one cheap enough..and for me that takes some doing! HAHA The
wing rebuild would be a blast. To bad they don't meet the sport category :
( . But one day if I have the room , it'd be nice to tinker on one, or a
Skipper as well. My basement shop is getting alittle full now with Luscombe
parts and Volksplane parts! Ahhhh the dilemma of another plane. ;) I need
some land and my own hangar...just have to keep dreaming for awhile.

Patrick
student SP
aircraft structural mech

"Kyle Boatright" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "W P Dixon" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I've never flown one but I will say I have noticed their cost. Seem to be
>> easily obtainable from 16-20G . I may have to do alittle checking into
>> the wing problem. Can the wing be rebuilt, or does it have to be red
>> tagged after those hours? Rebuilding a wing is alot of fun, for me
>> anyhow, if that was allowable?
>>
>> Patrick
>> student SP
>> aircraft structural mech
>
> Of course you could remanufacture a wing. However, IIRC the life limit is
> well over 10k hours, and there are plenty of 3,000 to 4,000 hour Tomahawks
> out there. It might not be worth the time and expense right now...
>
> KB
>
>
>
>

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Patrick, if there was ever a human being that should be building a homebuilt
it is you. You should really think about a Zenith 601XL.

"W P Dixon" > wrote in message
...
> Hmmm,
> Maybe find one cheap enough..and for me that takes some doing! HAHA The
> wing rebuild would be a blast. To bad they don't meet the sport category :
> ( . But one day if I have the room , it'd be nice to tinker on one, or a
> Skipper as well. My basement shop is getting alittle full now with
> Luscombe parts and Volksplane parts! Ahhhh the dilemma of another plane.
> ;) I need some land and my own hangar...just have to keep dreaming for
> awhile.
>
> Patrick
> student SP
> aircraft structural mech
>

[Jim Macklin]

If you built a whole new wing and it met the 51% rule, you
would have a new airplane and you could set the GW at 1320 .


"W P Dixon" > wrote in
message ...
| Hmmm,
| Maybe find one cheap enough..and for me that takes some
doing! HAHA The
| wing rebuild would be a blast. To bad they don't meet the
sport category :
| ( . But one day if I have the room , it'd be nice to
tinker on one, or a
| Skipper as well. My basement shop is getting alittle full
now with Luscombe
| parts and Volksplane parts! Ahhhh the dilemma of another
plane. ;) I need
| some land and my own hangar...just have to keep dreaming
for awhile.
|
| Patrick
| student SP
| aircraft structural mech
|
| "Kyle Boatright" > wrote in
message
| . ..
| >
| > "W P Dixon" > wrote in
message
| > ...
| >> I've never flown one but I will say I have noticed
their cost. Seem to be
| >> easily obtainable from 16-20G . I may have to do
alittle checking into
| >> the wing problem. Can the wing be rebuilt, or does it
have to be red
| >> tagged after those hours? Rebuilding a wing is alot of
fun, for me
| >> anyhow, if that was allowable?
| >>
| >> Patrick
| >> student SP
| >> aircraft structural mech
| >
| > Of course you could remanufacture a wing. However, IIRC
the life limit is
| > well over 10k hours, and there are plenty of 3,000 to
4,000 hour Tomahawks
| > out there. It might not be worth the time and expense
right now...
| >
| > KB
| >
| >
| >
| >
|

[Lakeview Bill]

And it would make a nice 1128 lbs (empty weight) lawn ornament...



"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:CJqef.3403$QW2.467@dukeread08...
> If you built a whole new wing and it met the 51% rule, you
> would have a new airplane and you could set the GW at 1320 .
>
>
> "W P Dixon" > wrote in
> message ...
> | Hmmm,
> | Maybe find one cheap enough..and for me that takes some
> doing! HAHA The
> | wing rebuild would be a blast. To bad they don't meet the
> sport category :
> | ( . But one day if I have the room , it'd be nice to
> tinker on one, or a
> | Skipper as well. My basement shop is getting alittle full
> now with Luscombe
> | parts and Volksplane parts! Ahhhh the dilemma of another
> plane. ;) I need
> | some land and my own hangar...just have to keep dreaming
> for awhile.
> |
> | Patrick
> | student SP
> | aircraft structural mech
> |
> | "Kyle Boatright" > wrote in
> message
> | . ..
> | >
> | > "W P Dixon" > wrote in
> message
> | > ...
> | >> I've never flown one but I will say I have noticed
> their cost. Seem to be
> | >> easily obtainable from 16-20G . I may have to do
> alittle checking into
> | >> the wing problem. Can the wing be rebuilt, or does it
> have to be red
> | >> tagged after those hours? Rebuilding a wing is alot of
> fun, for me
> | >> anyhow, if that was allowable?
> | >>
> | >> Patrick
> | >> student SP
> | >> aircraft structural mech
> | >
> | > Of course you could remanufacture a wing. However, IIRC
> the life limit is
> | > well over 10k hours, and there are plenty of 3,000 to
> 4,000 hour Tomahawks
> | > out there. It might not be worth the time and expense
> right now...
> | >
> | > KB
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | >
> |
>
>

[W P Dixon]

I hear you!
I do like the 601, fellow in our EAA group built one and is having a ball
flying her. He bought the quick kit, and he put it together very quick I
might ad, and he'd never built a plane before. Myself I like the here are
the blueprints now have at it option. But I love doing the metal work and
that, like aircraft painting just isn't for everyone. Though the 701 is not
as fast I like that plane as well...just an excellant take it hunting or
fishing airplane. The VP may make some very serious progress very shortly,
I'll let ya know what happens on it.
My drawback on the 701 is from what I have heard it really needs that
high priced Rotax to get the best performance, the 601 I am still waiting to
see how peoples powerplant choices are working for them. Hear good things
with an 0-200. But there are alot of certified airplanes that would be fun
restoration projects..if I could get lucky to find one under a King's ransom
; )

Patrick
student SP
aircraft structural mech

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
> Patrick, if there was ever a human being that should be building a
> homebuilt it is you. You should really think about a Zenith 601XL.
>
> "W P Dixon" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Hmmm,
>> Maybe find one cheap enough..and for me that takes some doing! HAHA The
>> wing rebuild would be a blast. To bad they don't meet the sport category
>> : ( . But one day if I have the room , it'd be nice to tinker on one, or
>> a Skipper as well. My basement shop is getting alittle full now with
>> Luscombe parts and Volksplane parts! Ahhhh the dilemma of another plane.
>> ;) I need some land and my own hangar...just have to keep dreaming for
>> awhile.
>>
>> Patrick
>> student SP
>> aircraft structural mech
>>
>
>

[W P Dixon]

Ahhhhh,
But what would be the actual gross with the cockpit full of potted
flowers? ; )

Patrick
student SP
aircraft structural mech

"Lakeview Bill" > wrote in message
. ..
> And it would make a nice 1128 lbs (empty weight) lawn ornament...
>
>
>
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> news:CJqef.3403$QW2.467@dukeread08...
>> If you built a whole new wing and it met the 51% rule, you
>> would have a new airplane and you could set the GW at 1320 .
>>
>>
>> "W P Dixon" > wrote in
>> message ...
>> | Hmmm,
>> | Maybe find one cheap enough..and for me that takes some
>> doing! HAHA The
>> | wing rebuild would be a blast. To bad they don't meet the
>> sport category :
>> | ( . But one day if I have the room , it'd be nice to
>> tinker on one, or a
>> | Skipper as well. My basement shop is getting alittle full
>> now with Luscombe
>> | parts and Volksplane parts! Ahhhh the dilemma of another
>> plane. ;) I need
>> | some land and my own hangar...just have to keep dreaming
>> for awhile.
>> |
>> | Patrick
>> | student SP
>> | aircraft structural mech
>> |
>> | "Kyle Boatright" > wrote in
>> message
>> | . ..
>> | >
>> | > "W P Dixon" > wrote in
>> message
>> | > ...
>> | >> I've never flown one but I will say I have noticed
>> their cost. Seem to be
>> | >> easily obtainable from 16-20G . I may have to do
>> alittle checking into
>> | >> the wing problem. Can the wing be rebuilt, or does it
>> have to be red
>> | >> tagged after those hours? Rebuilding a wing is alot of
>> fun, for me
>> | >> anyhow, if that was allowable?
>> | >>
>> | >> Patrick
>> | >> student SP
>> | >> aircraft structural mech
>> | >
>> | > Of course you could remanufacture a wing. However, IIRC
>> the life limit is
>> | > well over 10k hours, and there are plenty of 3,000 to
>> 4,000 hour Tomahawks
>> | > out there. It might not be worth the time and expense
>> right now...
>> | >
>> | > KB
>> | >
>> | >
>> | >
>> | >
>> |
>>
>>
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

depends on how you did the rebuild, the size of the wing and
how much crap was removed from the rest of the structure.


"Lakeview Bill" > wrote in message
. ..
| And it would make a nice 1128 lbs (empty weight) lawn
ornament...
|
|
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:CJqef.3403$QW2.467@dukeread08...
| > If you built a whole new wing and it met the 51% rule,
you
| > would have a new airplane and you could set the GW at
1320 .
| >
| >
| > "W P Dixon" > wrote in
| > message ...
| > | Hmmm,
| > | Maybe find one cheap enough..and for me that takes
some
| > doing! HAHA The
| > | wing rebuild would be a blast. To bad they don't meet
the
| > sport category :
| > | ( . But one day if I have the room , it'd be nice to
| > tinker on one, or a
| > | Skipper as well. My basement shop is getting alittle
full
| > now with Luscombe
| > | parts and Volksplane parts! Ahhhh the dilemma of
another
| > plane. ;) I need
| > | some land and my own hangar...just have to keep
dreaming
| > for awhile.
| > |
| > | Patrick
| > | student SP
| > | aircraft structural mech
| > |
| > | "Kyle Boatright" > wrote in
| > message
| > | . ..
| > | >
| > | > "W P Dixon" > wrote
in
| > message
| > | > ...
| > | >> I've never flown one but I will say I have noticed
| > their cost. Seem to be
| > | >> easily obtainable from 16-20G . I may have to do
| > alittle checking into
| > | >> the wing problem. Can the wing be rebuilt, or does
it
| > have to be red
| > | >> tagged after those hours? Rebuilding a wing is alot
of
| > fun, for me
| > | >> anyhow, if that was allowable?
| > | >>
| > | >> Patrick
| > | >> student SP
| > | >> aircraft structural mech
| > | >
| > | > Of course you could remanufacture a wing. However,
IIRC
| > the life limit is
| > | > well over 10k hours, and there are plenty of 3,000
to
| > 4,000 hour Tomahawks
| > | > out there. It might not be worth the time and
expense
| > right now...
| > | >
| > | > KB
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

[[email protected]]

>>>>>If I had won the big lottery a few weeks ago, my personal
flight department would be these airplanes...
A Beechjet 400A (now called a Hawker 400) since I am already
typed in it.
A Beech 1900 to carry my Harleys around to Sturgis(typed in
that too.)
A Helio Courier on floats
A Legacy Cub
A G36 Bonanza
A Pitts S2
A Skipper with a big engine
A Duchess with two bigger engines and floats <<<<<<

Aha. No round engines in the list, I see...

[Jim Macklin]

Since it is an unlimited budget, a P47 and an F7F, a T6 and
a Stearman might fit in the hanger. And for the water
cooled engine, a P40 and a P51, but the odds are pretty
steep that the lottery will get that big, that I'll win it
and can find the airplanes for sale. But hey, I'd like a
date with Veronica Mars too.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



> wrote in message
oups.com...
| >>>>>If I had won the big lottery a few weeks ago, my
personal
| flight department would be these airplanes...
| A Beechjet 400A (now called a Hawker 400) since I am
already
| typed in it.
| A Beech 1900 to carry my Harleys around to Sturgis(typed
in
| that too.)
| A Helio Courier on floats
| A Legacy Cub
| A G36 Bonanza
| A Pitts S2
| A Skipper with a big engine
| A Duchess with two bigger engines and floats <<<<<<
|
| Aha. No round engines in the list, I see...
|

[Sylvain]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> But hey, I'd like a date with Veronica Mars too.

what kind of aircraft does she own?

:-)

--Sylvain

[Jim Macklin]

A pretty face, nice torso, but if we have to have a pilot
for a date, Angelina Jolie has an SR22



"Sylvain" > wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > But hey, I'd like a date with Veronica Mars too.
|
| what kind of aircraft does she own?
|
| :-)
|
| --Sylvain

[George Patterson]

W P Dixon wrote:

> Maybe find one cheap enough..and for me that takes some doing!

What's "cheap enough?" I saw a restored Champ the other day for about $25K.

George Patterson
If a tank is out of ammunition, what you have is a sixty ton portable
radio.

[Sylvain]

Jim Macklin wrote:

> for a date, Angelina Jolie has an SR22

now you are talking!

:-)

--Sylvain

[Jay Beckman]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:HHxef.3468$QW2.1533@dukeread08...
>A pretty face, nice torso, but if we have to have a pilot
> for a date, Angelina Jolie has an SR22

Similar amounts of composite materials used in the construction of both...

;O)

Jay B

[Jim Macklin]

But she needs to quit with the fat injections in her lips.


"Sylvain" > wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| > for a date, Angelina Jolie has an SR22
|
| now you are talking!
|
| :-)
|
| --Sylvain

[Jim Macklin]

Yes and both have nice fuselages.


"Jay Beckman" > wrote in message
news:ulyef.93$xu.30@fed1read01...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:HHxef.3468$QW2.1533@dukeread08...
| >A pretty face, nice torso, but if we have to have a pilot
| > for a date, Angelina Jolie has an SR22
|
| Similar amounts of composite materials used in the
construction of both...
|
| ;O)
|
| Jay B
|
|

[Montblack]

("Jim Macklin" wrote)
[snip]
But hey, I'd like a date with Veronica Mars too.


My hero? At this moment Bing Crosby :-)


Montblack

[Jay Beckman]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Beckman" > wrote
>>
>> Similar amounts of composite materials used in the construction of
> both...(torso and SR22)
>
> I don't know if that is a foregone conclusion, or not. I volunteer to do
> an
> up-close and personal inspection!
> --
> Jim in NC
>

Think of it more as a "Walk Around By Braile."

Jay B

[Morgans]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote
>
> Similar amounts of composite materials used in the construction of
both...(torso and SR22)

I don't know if that is a foregone conclusion, or not. I volunteer to do an
up-close and personal inspection!
--
Jim in NC

[Ron Natalie]

Jim Macklin wrote:

> A Skipper with a big engine

A big engine?

[Ron Natalie]

wrote:

> Aha. No round engines in the list, I see...
>
Maybe the big engine he was going to hang on the skipper
was a radial :-))

[Jim Macklin]

125-180 hp would be nice, so it could climb faster to
altitude for doing spins.



--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| > A Skipper with a big engine
|
| A big engine?

[Jim Macklin]

The best round engines are turbofans, but the 985 is nice on
a BE 18, too bad the wings are so old.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
| wrote:
|
| > Aha. No round engines in the list, I see...
| >
| Maybe the big engine he was going to hang on the skipper
| was a radial :-))

[[email protected]]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> > Right now I'm walking, but when the lottery comes through,
> > I'll get an XL1200R and maybe a V-Rod with mid-mount
> > controls. Hey, I think arriving with the bike in an
> > airplane would be cool. Maybe land in town and taxi down
> > main street.
> >
> > No roids, just old.
>
> Bah. I'd rather die than be seen trailering my motorcycle to a rally.

My one and only time to Sturgis, at the Glencoe campground, there was
some kind of country & western artist(s) entourage camped far across
the way from our tent with a couple big huge shiney custom painted
black and silver "greyhound" style tour buses. I don't know who they
were since I don't do C&W music, and there were no names painted on the
buses but one afternoon a big, very expensive-looking helicopter,
painted in the same exact black and silver color scheme as the tour
buses buzzed the campground and then landed next to where the buses
were parked. The occupants unloaded a minibike from the rear
seating/baggage area of the copter and one of them (presumably the main
artist or lead singer himself) started it up and rode around the buses
while the crowd that had gathered went abolutely nuts. That was in the
early 1990's a couple years before I ever got into aviation, but
looking back, there would've been enough room (with appropriate
planning of course) to have brought in and landed a Helio Courier with
a Harley strapped in the back! Now that would be a grand entrance to
the Sturgis event, and cool enough to be "socially acceptable" unlike
trailering your bike there.