Tomahawk/ Skipper

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

"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

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

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

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 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.

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

"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