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

Travis Beach wrote:

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

Beach

Much has been said and of good quality so I feel I can add my $.02 FWIW.

I have been a glider pilot with one primary commercial operation for around
20years and been at the end (trailing end) of a variety of tugs.
My perspective has been one where I watched a succesful gliderport operator
try a variety of towplanes and eventually pare the fleet down to Pawnees
exclusively.

In the process I saw Cubs, SuperCubs, a C182, Scout, and a Husky make their
way thru the fleet but all thats left are the Pawnees.

At my end of the rope, I love 'em.

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

I concur with Cloudy. Eventually, almost all high volume tow
operations in the USA have ended up with Pawnees. Rugged, inexpensive
to buy and operate, easy to fly, good viz, good crash protection -
what more do you want?

Husky's are good for a lot of things but towing is not one of ithem,
IMO. They are incredibly expensive to buy (4X+ a Pawnee), parts are
very expensive and the Internet is full of people complaining about
customer service. There is essentially only 1 place to buy Husky
parts and probably hundreds where you can get Pawnee spares.

In my 25+ years of towing with and behind Cub, Pawnee Bird Dog, Scout,
Citabria, C-182 and others, nothing is a better all-around tug than an
0-540 Pawnee.

If you need versatility, a C-182 is probably the best, albeit far
inferior to the Pawnee as a pure tug.

On Oct 18, 3:49 am, " wrote:
I concur with Cloudy. Eventually, almost all high volume tow
operations in the USA have ended up with Pawnees. Rugged, inexpensive
to buy and operate

Reason I mentioned "other efficient 180hp tugs" is because at least at
sea-level sites, the likes of SuperCubs and Robin DR400s (guess you
don't have them in the US) tow to height just as fast as a Pawnee, but
use only something like two-thirds of the fuel by virtue of a much
more efficient aerodynamic design. The Robin saves even more on aero-
tow retrieve (it's fast), and is a very popular tug in the UK (moreso
than the Pawnee). In fact we even tried towing with a Rotax Falke -
only 100hp or so, but very efficient. Within its tow limit (600kg)
what it loses in climb to a Pawnee 250 it more than makes up on
descent as it's water-cooled.

The only place a Pawnee shines (at sea-level) is for acceleration on
the ground roll. If you have the room, that's not an issue.


Dan

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

On Oct 22, 5:07 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,

Well, imagine that. If the students (and/or instructors...and/or
private ship owners) really **** of the tow pilot, he can shut the
"money making motor" off and soar for himself! I like that idea.

Having been stuck as the only "tow slave" on many booming days when I
wanted to soar (but was too chicken to shut off the motor in the
Pawnee or CallAir). Yeah, I know pilots that have taken Pawnee
"gliders" to 20,000+ feet in wave -- I guess I never got THAT
desperate.

-Pete

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?

Speak to the people at Lake Kepit Soaring Club in New
South Wales. they had a Husky (new) for a while. Basically
the thing was not up to the rigors of towing and essentially
fell apart.
They now use a Pawnee. Go figure

At 23:18 15 October 2007, 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

On Oct 15, 5:16 pm, 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

Received an e-mail from LAVIASA, Argentina today

Prices for NEW Pawnees

PA-25-235 (PROP FIX PITCH)
US$ 156,634

PA-25-260 (PROP FIX PITCH)
US$ 160,115

PA-25-260 (PROP CONSTANT SPEED)
US$ 169,397

On Oct 20, 12:20 am, Frank Whiteley wrote:
Received an e-mail from LAVIASA, Argentina today

Prices for NEW Pawnees

PA-25-235 (PROP FIX PITCH)
US$ 156,634

PA-25-260 (PROP FIX PITCH)
US$ 160,115

PA-25-260 (PROP CONSTANT SPEED)
US$ 169,397

Hmm, nobody mentioned "upgrading" to new Pawnees (and I didn't know
you could get then NEW).

Nobody's discussed getting an Air Tractor, or Thrush, or other modern
Turbine powered AgPlane.
http://www.airtractor.com/Default.aspx?p=4530
With a useful load of 9,495 lbs (isn't that approximately FIVE fully
loaded Duo Discus -- or is it Disci?), it would seem to me that the
Air Tractor 802 would pay for itself in less than a season, with tows
to 5,000 feet taking approximately 2 minutes and 34 seconds.

Hmm, turbine -- that means NO shock cooling.
Air Conditioning -- that means NO tow pilot whining.
254 gal fuel capacity -- that means gas it up once a week(end).
Double or triple tows -- that means maximum 15 minute wait for a
tow...

Is Jet fuel still less expensive than 100 LL?

-Pete
#309

On Oct 20, 9:35 am, 309 wrote:
On Oct 20, 12:20 am, Frank Whiteley wrote:

Received an e-mail from LAVIASA, Argentina today

Prices for NEW Pawnees

PA-25-235 (PROP FIX PITCH)
US$ 156,634

PA-25-260 (PROP FIX PITCH)
US$ 160,115

PA-25-260 (PROP CONSTANT SPEED)
US$ 169,397

Hmm, nobody mentioned "upgrading" to new Pawnees (and I didn't know
you could get then NEW).

Nobody's discussed getting an Air Tractor, or Thrush, or other modern
Turbine powered AgPlane.http://www.airtractor.com/Default.aspx?p=4530
With a useful load of 9,495 lbs (isn't that approximately FIVE fully
loaded Duo Discus -- or is it Disci?), it would seem to me that the
Air Tractor 802 would pay for itself in less than a season, with tows
to 5,000 feet taking approximately 2 minutes and 34 seconds.

Hmm, turbine -- that means NO shock cooling.
Air Conditioning -- that means NO tow pilot whining.
254 gal fuel capacity -- that means gas it up once a week(end).
Double or triple tows -- that means maximum 15 minute wait for a
tow...

Is Jet fuel still less expensive than 100 LL?

-Pete
#309

Not positive, but I don't think multiple glider tows are allowed under
the SSA insurance plan.

Turbines consume a lot of fuel while on the ground also, according to
a friend of mine.

I believe there is a SIAI-Marchetti SM.1019 in Uvalde, 400hp. It's
been used as a tow plane but I don't believe it's in regular use.
Rate of climb on tow is said to be 2100fpm and 9000fpm descent.
2000ft tow cycle was reportedly three minutes. Similar to winching;^)

http://www.warbirds-eaa.org/articles/04_02_featue.pdf
http://www.shanaberger.com/sm1019.htm

Frank Whiteley