vintage powered glider

[Chip Starr]

Can anyone out there give me an idea of what a vintage powered sailplane is
worth? It is a Hawk model 3 1963 powered sailplane. In great condition,
with all log books, missing gauges.
Thanks,
Chip

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Aug 13, 11:10*am, Chip Starr > wrote:
> ...It is a Hawk model 3 *1963 powered sailplane...

Never heard of it. Is it a production unit, or a one-off homebuilt? Do
you have a photo of it? Also, the N-number might give us a clue.

One thing to watch for is that aircraft homebuilders will sometimes
construct an aircraft from a kit or from plans, and then register it
as having a type completely unrelated to original design. For example,
I've seen RVs and HPs show up as type "QS-1" and stuff like that.
There is absolutely no rule that says that a homebuilder has to
register the aircraft they built from their RV-6 kit as an "RV-6." The
homebuilder is the manufacturer of record, and they can call it
anything they want.

As for value, that could be anywhere on the map depending on
condition, performance, utility, and historical value. If you're the
owner, the most practical way of determining the value is to offer it
for sale and see what people offer for it. And for that, you might
find that eBay is your best bet.

Thanks, Bob K.

[vontresc]

On Aug 13, 2:25*pm, Bob Kuykendall > wrote:
> On Aug 13, 11:10*am, Chip Starr > wrote:
>
> > ...It is a Hawk model 3 *1963 powered sailplane...
>
> Never heard of it. Is it a production unit, or a one-off homebuilt? Do
> you have a photo of it? Also, the N-number might give us a clue.
>
> One thing to watch for is that aircraft homebuilders will sometimes
> construct an aircraft from a kit or from plans, and then register it
> as having a type completely unrelated to original design. For example,
> I've seen RVs and HPs show up as type "QS-1" and stuff like that.
> There is absolutely no rule that says that a homebuilder has to
> register the aircraft they built from their RV-6 kit as an "RV-6." The
> homebuilder is the manufacturer of record, and they can call it
> anything they want.
>
> As for value, that could be anywhere on the map depending on
> condition, performance, utility, and historical value. If you're the
> owner, the most practical way of determining the value is to offer it
> for sale and see what people offer for it. And for that, you might
> find that eBay is your best bet.
>
> Thanks, Bob K.

Wow that is one ugly airplane.....

http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/GauthierDavidJ/7500.htm

Pete

[Vaughn Simon]

"vontresc" > wrote in message
...

>Wow that is one ugly airplane.....

> http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/GauthierDavidJ/7500.htm


Ugly yes! But it has an amazingly unique propeller stowing scheme.


--
Vaughn

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nothing personal, but if you are posting through Google Groups I may not receive
your message. Google refuses to control the flood of spam messages originating
in their system, so on any given day I may or may not have Google blocked. Try
a real NNTP server & news reader program and you will never go back. All you
need is access to an NNTP server (AKA "news server") and a news reader program.
You probably already have a news reader program in your computer (Hint: Outlook
Express). Assuming that your Usenet needs are modest, use
http://news.aioe.org/ for free and/or http://www.teranews.com/ for a one-time
$3.95 setup fee.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Will poofread for food.

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Aug 13, 1:15*pm, vontresc > wrote:
>
> Wow that is one ugly airplane.....
>
> http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/GauthierDavidJ/7500.htm
>

Good catch! I did a few searches before giving up.

Does anybody else think that the fuselage and vertical fin (what we
can see of them) looks a lot like LK-10A/TG-4 truncated at the front
cockpit? The wing is obviously in the wrong location for an LK
fuselage, but that could easily be a modification.

Say what you want about the aesthetics, but the retractable cowl
cheeks and pivoting engine are a pretty nifty solution to the problems
of engine-off cooling drag and prop drag.

Thanks, Bob K.

[JJ Sinclair]

>
> Does anybody else think that the fuselage and vertical fin (what we
> can see of them) looks a lot like LK-10A

Yep, it looks like the illegitimate offspring of an LK-10 with a put-
put.
JJ

[raulb]

On Aug 13, 11:10*am, Chip Starr > wrote:
> Can anyone out there give me an idea of what a vintage powered sailplane is
> worth? *It is a Hawk model 3 *1963 powered sailplane. *In great condition,
> with all log books, missing gauges.
> Thanks,
> Chip
>

Haufe Dale Hawk Model 3, motor glider, 1 built, 469.6 lbs (213
kg), 40' span (12.34 m)

Since it is a one-off, it is worth what someone is willing to pay for
it.

[Glenn Davis]

Is this what you mean

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Aircraft-T21t-X-RAF-self-sustaining-Glider-No-reserve_W0QQitemZ280255595912QQcmdZViewItem?hash=i tem280255595912&_trkparms=72%3A984|39%3A1|66%3A2|65%3A12&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14.l1318




At 04:25 14 August 2008, raulb wrote:
>On Aug 13, 11:10=A0am, Chip Starr wrote:
>> Can anyone out there give me an idea of what a vintage powered
sailplane
>=
>is
>> worth? =A0It is a Hawk model 3 =A01963 powered sailplane. =A0In great
>con=
>dition,
>> with all log books, missing gauges.
>> Thanks,
>> Chip
>>
>
> Haufe Dale Hawk Model 3, motor glider, 1 built, 469.6 lbs (213
>kg), 40' span (12.34 m)
>
>Since it is a one-off, it is worth what someone is willing to pay for
>it.
>

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Aug 14, 2:55*am, Glenn Davis > wrote:
> Is this what you mean...

I think that's more in the way of a powered vintage sailplane, as
opposed to a vintage powered sailplane...

Thanks, Bob K.