Sparrowhawk Ultralight

Perhaps I should have provided a little more information about what I
know, and what I want.
I have read the Sparrowhawk web site. From what I see the sailplane
looks good. Easy to assemble, cores thermals well, good climb
performance. Nice performance all around, about the same as a Ka 6E or
Libelle 201. One thing still has me wondering. Flying in windy
conditions, especially in the landing phase. With a low gross weight
(half the above ships) won't you get blown around like a leaf ? Is
there enough penetration to be an effective cross country plane in the
hands of an average pilot.

Now what I want...... Fun to fly !!! Easy to assemble / disassemble
(hate having to ask two or three folks for help). Easy to repair. Easy
to get parts / upgrades. The annual is not an issue, nor is
registartion or licensing. Low maintenance finish. And last good resale
value ( same as good performance).

wrote:
Perhaps I should have provided a little more information about what I
know, and what I want.
I have read the Sparrowhawk web site. From what I see the sailplane
looks good. Easy to assemble, cores thermals well, good climb
performance. Nice performance all around, about the same as a Ka 6E or
Libelle 201. One thing still has me wondering. Flying in windy
conditions, especially in the landing phase. With a low gross weight
(half the above ships) won't you get blown around like a leaf ? Is
there enough penetration to be an effective cross country plane in the
hands of an average pilot.

Now what I want...... Fun to fly !!! Easy to assemble / disassemble
(hate having to ask two or three folks for help). Easy to repair. Easy
to get parts / upgrades. The annual is not an issue, nor is
registartion or licensing. Low maintenance finish. And last good resale
value ( same as good performance).

Well, while the weight is low, the wing is small, so the wing loading
is probably similar to a 1-26.

As to resale price, that's a tougher one, because I have not seen one
offered on the used market. I find that interesting, because I seem to
remember that nearly as soon as the Russias and PW5s became available
new, they became available used.

Tim Ward

Tim.Ward wrote:

Well, while the weight is low, the wing is small, so the wing loading
is probably similar to a 1-26.

It's actually much higher than a 1-26. The 1-26 is rated at 3.6
pounds/sq ft; the SparrowHawk is typically 5 to 6 pounds/sq ft. This
makes a big difference! This wing loading is about the same as Russia
AC-4, which is similar in performance.

As to resale price, that's a tougher one, because I have not seen one
offered on the used market. I find that interesting, because I seem to
remember that nearly as soon as the Russias and PW5s became available
new, they became available used.

Tim Ward



--
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

Eric Greenwell
Washington State
USA

"With a low gross weight (half the above ships) won't you get blown around
like a leaf ?"

Weight alone has nothing to do with getting blown around like a leaf. A
hawk is very light but does not get blown around. Wing loading is a major
factor. Piper Cubs get blown around, because they have light wing loading.

It is good to take a test flight if you are considering one. Perhaps the
key word you are looking for is balance. Few ships do everything well in a
conveneint package.

The information Eric presented shows that the aircraft can do serious cross
country - which is the question asked. Whether it is adequate to meet your
demands is a personal question. Knowing the weight is irrelevant to the
question asked of whether it gets blown around like a leaf. A bolwing ball
weighs only 10 pounds ( or so, just a wild guess), but does not blow around
like a leaf.

Colin