To Pawnee or not to Pawnee...that is the question...

A couple of links about towing with Rotax power. First the microlight
in SA:

http://www.glidingmagazine.com/FeatureArticle.asp?id=91

And also on using Rotax Falkes:

http://www.glidingmagazine.com/Featu...cle.asp?id=117

I bet a fair few Falkes are being used as tugs in Germany - any of our
members from over there know?


Dan

I bet a fair few Falkes are being used as tugs in Germany - any of our
members from over there know?

Bleurgh, it would help if I RTFA I linked to. At least 20 are used for
towing over there, and that was in 2001. A good point made in the
article is also that, of course, a motorglider tug still gets used for
circuit training, field landing exercises etc., and all that ups
utilisation and lowers costs. And it is damned quiet - ours is *much*
quieter than our Pawnee.


Dan

About as many as Scheibe elected to build...

Scheibe has recently gone through ownership change, and hopefully will get more
focussed on building gliders.

Frank Whiteley wrote:
On Oct 22, 6:07 am, Dan G wrote:
On Oct 22, 9:27 am, Dan G wrote:

In fact we even tried towing with a Rotax Falke -
only 100hp or so, but very efficient.
"As a tug, the SF25C Rotax Falke seems to perform very well, climbing
with heavy two-seaters at 400ft/min. This is marginally slower than,
say, a Robin DR400, but this Falke uses only half as much fuel and the
noise pollution is much less. In Germany, official analysis of
comparative tug noise estimates a single tow in a Robin DR400 type tug
equates to 4.8 tows in a SF25C Rotax Falke. Glider-tug speed
compatibility, similar wing loadings and aspect ratios, and reduced
wake turbulence, mean the motorglider aerotowing option offers
significant safety features.

The manufacturer's fuel consumption figures are 16-18 litres (c 3.5
gallons) an hour, hardly thirsty for tugs. Taking into account all the
costs of operating the Falke, including an engine rebuild every 2,000
hours, insurance, fuel and maintenance costs, a Falke is estimated by
its makers to tow at about 60 per cent of the cost of today's
conventional tugs."

http://www.fffoundation.co.uk/SGart.html

That article was published in 2000. How many are currently in use as
tugs?

Dan G wrote:
I bet a fair few Falkes are being used as tugs in Germany - any of our
members from over there know?

Bleurgh, it would help if I RTFA I linked to. At least 20 are used for
towing over there, and that was in 2001. A good point made in the
article is also that, of course, a motorglider tug still gets used for
circuit training, field landing exercises etc., and all that ups
utilisation and lowers costs. And it is damned quiet - ours is *much*
quieter than our Pawnee.

I think you'll also find that a number of German operations are using
modern glass ultralights as tugs. IIRC the Wasserkuppe uses a Virus or
similar - a nose gear gear high-wing anyway - for towing single seaters
and a GR400 for their ASK-21s.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Monday, October 15, 2007 7:16:11 PM UTC-4, Travis Beach wrote:
Our club has a Piper Pawnee 235hp in excellent condition.
We just spent $35000 five years ago to completely overhaul
her...new fabric, new engine, anything that needed
to be replaced was...

Heres the rub...we are in the middle of a new two place
acquisition with the club making a decision about getting
a new two place intermediate performance. We were about
to drop the hammer when a very vocal minority raised
the issue of PAWNEE needing to be replaced citing extreme
maintenance cost (???) and inability to get parts.
He/She cited the local aero repair facility as his/her
source of information...Many of us just dont see this
as a problem. The replacement that was cited was a
Husky 180HP...I just dont see the reasoning of such
a switch...I surely would rather two a heavier two
place with a proven performer with 235 hp vs a 180...

What say you? Discuss...should we scrap the Pawnee
in favor of a Husky?

Beach

must be single place glass your towing with the scout and husky, no comparison between the 2 and a 235-260 pawnee, not safe hauling our ask21 loaded with anything but the pawnee, my old club had pawnees and a scout and the scout was seldom used, not enough HP, and we only towed the light gliders with it, you just can't replace horse power.

All this talk of horsepower ... I've never towed with anything other than a 150hp Super Cub and a 150hp Citabria and they got the job done from 1500' altitude fields off 2500' grass strips, even with two place glass. I've enjoyed being towed by Pawnees but as others have noted, the only real difference from the quiet end of the rope was the initial ground roll. More horses are nice but not really necessary at low altitude ... in fact they used to tow at one of my clubs with a Tiger Moth!

On Sunday, March 23, 2014 2:31:52 AM UTC-7, wrote:
All this talk of horsepower ... I've never towed with anything other than a 150hp Super Cub and a 150hp Citabria and they got the job done from 1500' altitude fields off 2500' grass strips, even with two place glass. I've enjoyed being towed by Pawnees but as others have noted, the only real difference from the quiet end of the rope was the initial ground roll. More horses are nice but not really necessary at low altitude ... in fact they used to tow at one of my clubs with a Tiger Moth!


This thread is from 2007, so I suspect they made a decision . . . unless they're really slow.

Up high, Minden is at 4730' and high desert, there's no comparison. I own a 180 HP Husky with PowerFlow exhaust and cooling improvements. I've towed heavy two place glass and it's doable, just barely. And not at all kind to the Husky with CHTs over 400 F and climb sub 200 fpm. Pawnee, no problem.

Haven't towed near sea level, but of course have taken my Husky there - - totally different animal! The roughly 3% change in horsepower per thousand feet makes a remarkable difference when you're used to mostly flying mountains.

bumper