Tomahawk/ Skipper

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

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
|

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.

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 he
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.av...4d319b06a8 1d
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.av...9e893f29db 9c
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.av...3c06289b44 59
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.av...59a0709830 aa
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.av...2e0740dcfc 44
http://groups.google.dk/group/rec.av...ed6a96abec 0d

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.

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

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.

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.

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.
|

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.
|