Flight instructed in Tomahawks for nearly eight years; never had a problem. We had a fleet of four Tomahawks and I taught spins in each of them. Yes, they will wind up tight in a spin, but I never had a problem with recoveries. In fact, I owned a Tomahawk for nearly fifteen years. I wish I still owned it.
The mighty Tomahawk! - I still call them "Trauma-Hawks" as a term of endearment! I love them as they're sturdy, cope very well with student punishment on the landing gear springs, and have superb visibility. From the teaching and learning point of view, you have to keep positively flying them, just like a helicopter! They won't stay in a groove through the sky like a C172, which teaches you good hand and feet control with the view out the front window. I always enjoyed the tail shake when my pre PPL instructor showed me during a full stall way back in 1989, but I never felt unsafe! And they do a mighty good wing drop stall if you let it fully develop, which I always enjoyed doing. - Unlike the Cherokee-40s which just wallow like a leaf in a stall when I was doing all my CPL flying. I can't recall getting the 140s to wing-drop without full rudder. Yes, the elevator is powerful, as I carved a short groove once in the sealed taxiway when I got a little too much back pressure dialled in! I flew 3 different Tommies during all my pre PPL flying including piles of cross country flights all around and over the mountains and plains of the South Island of New Zealand. They'll also handle at least a 26kt pure steady "nor-wester" crosswind too, as I spent an hour in the right seat with my instructor one day "teaching" her crosswind circuits with takeoffs and touch-n-go landings with big ground rolls onto the big wide sealed runway, with the nose-wheel authority near the end of its limits in the ground roll with slow left drift. That was great fun, and I'll never forget that great experience! Cheers, David from down under!
I've got about 20 hours in the Tomahawk, they are wonderful airplanes. I wish Piper would redesign the PA28s with features that are on the Tomahawk, specifically: two doors and a fuel selector that is easy to reach. Phoenix, AZ
I don't know of another plane that is as polarizing as the ol' Tommy! I did most of my training in one of these and then later finished off in a C-152. People either love them or hate them--there are very few people in the middle, it seems. I personally LOVE this airplane. I love the low wing, the visibility and the awesome T-Tail. I felt like I was flying a jet-fighter every time I flew these birds and they just "felt" faster and more sporty than the good old 150/152s. Piper mitigated their furious spin capabilities with some little triangular strips on the leading edge and that helped quite a bit. I would agree with others that the Tomahawk is not as "easy" to fly as a Cessna, but I would suggest that it makes you remember to always "fly" the plane and when you treat it right, it treats you right as well. Of course, that's my opinion. 😉
As a pilot who did my full PPL in the Tomahawk and then kept flying it for 120 more hours, I totally agree. The plane is more dangerous than a 152, especially in a stall where a wing may drop out pf nowhere and an unintended spin may develop if not reacted correctly, spin which is more difficult to recover too than in the 152. But do you know what is more dangerous? Learn to fly in a very forgiving plane, acquire habits that are in line with that forgiveness (70, 60, it's the same. Stall warning? Ok, not that urgent, etc), and then transition with a real plane with real plane's characteristic. Learning to fly in a more challenging plane makes better pilots. I a friend did the PPL together in the same school. I flew the Tomahawk, he flew the 152. We got our license within 1 week of each other. After that, we worked to get endorsement for the other plane. He found it a challenge to transition to the Tomahawk. For me, to transition to the 152 was boring (not to mention uncomfortable, especially being 6'4", and the visibility). We both ended up flying the Tomahawk.
Yes they were designed as a trainer. After working on them at a flight school I learned them inside and out. We had damaged planes fly out of the desert after repairs and I have repaired abused Tomahawks. I would take one over a C152 any day. However, the older straight up tail C-150s with 40 degree flaps are a favorite of mine.
Yes we called it the Tomacoffin. I loved the quality compared to a 152, but the ailerons were remarkable ineffective for some reason, in addition to the other issues.
I learned to fly in the Tomahawk and did nots of cross country flying for my commercial. It was a great airplane and incredibly cost effective to rent, I recall paying $25 per hour back in the mid 1980’s.
During my PPL trading at a military club spins and aerobics where required for 7:15 at least one hour. I flew on of these a few times didn’t like it because of that high tail. 😊
Btw Mike the rear camera position with the 4 dial heads up display for us was pretty nice n the quality of the video was amazing, HD or its my phone but very clean n clear vision. 👍
Hi John! Don the Camera Guy here. We just bought a new camera, so the videos should all be much crisper now than before. Then, we were able to use the GPS data from the GoPro to create the dials. So glad you liked it and happy the quality upgrade was noticed!
I did my primary flight training out of Burbank flying Tomahawk's and I can truly say that I Love that Airplane! Yes, it would bite if you showed poor technique but, it also let you know when you were doing it right. The Chief Pilot at the school demonstrated spins with me during my stage 1 check ride with the admonition that I would be Skinned Alive if I tried it on my own. Many happy memories in that little airplane....most of them priceless!
This was a very exciting video to watch. Like go out and find one to rent and fly regularly. The owner is very happy with his airplane, and Mark's energy and love for airplanes just makes this a great video.
Not to bee too ~critical, but maybe it's your Engrish Accent, but the correct pronunciation is: "Trau-ma-hawk" Traumahawk! A Piper Traumahawk. The 1st time I've heard that...that's all it's ever been and will be. As my brother has a ScareCoupe (Alon) 🤪
Pilots who know always qualify their remarks with "if flown right". Which trainer would not do the same? Why do they feel a need to apologize for the plane?
I've owned my T'Hawk for 3 years now. It's a great flying aircraft that's a " stick & rudder " a/c. and as far as spins goes, it's very easy to recover from if you get the nose pointed exactly perpendicular to terra -firma so that you get wind flowing over the elevator t gain authority / control.
Ive got a 1980 Arrow IV I can bring down for you to look at. I went through the whole Wing Spar AD and got them replaced I think that would be interesting to discuss.
While in high school I worked part time for a FBO out of ILG and rented the Tomahawks wet for $45/hour. Loved that little plane and flew the heck out of them.
Awesome piper aircraft , and yours is absolutely gorgeous ✈️❤️ , I’ve had like 600 hours in those and love it , the trauma thing is invented by the cessna guys ,
the devil is in the details: that altimeter rendering the Vfe and Vno are not for the pa38, the white arc goes from kts to kts. Green arc from 48kts to 110kts. Yellow arc 110kts to 138kts and Nve 138kts. At first I thought he was setting the flaps at a prohibited speed.
Those gyros are generic for the Go-pro. Not a single one is to be trusted. They are for entertainment only. They are generated by the telemetry of the GPS in the Go-Pro.
Disappointed in both of you! #1: for missing on calling out that 172s prior to the 1973 "M" model had Singer sewing machine-like Continental O-300s and #2: the Hawk XP had a *195hp* Continental IO-360... It was also certificated on a different type certificate than the 172 (same as 175; but everyone knows that). The IO-360 isn't nearly as sewing machine-like as the O-300 but it's still lovely. 🤓
The XP is a 210 HP engine de-rated to 195 HP so that it is not High Performance so the flight schools would still buy them. (under 200 HP) If you get the STC to turn up the RPM from 2600 to 2800 for take off (which is what the Continental IO-360 six cylinder is designed to do), it gets it back from 195 HP to 210 HP. This RPM increase is called the Isham conversion.
I learnt in one and it was great, fantastic view not that the instructor let me see it as every time I looked to be enjoying looking outside he made me fly on instruments and the aeroplane had a faulty AI so I learnt partial panel flying. When I got it back for my final flight tests instrument flying was so easy.
This particular Tomahawk looks lovely. My very limited experience with them was attempting to administer private check rides in them as a DE, when they were new. Field elevation: 6150. To use your words, “Patton” altitude was seldom achieved! Looks like an enjoyable bird near sea level.
Over 40 years ago, I was working on a PP Certificate. I "upgraded" from a C150 to the Tramahawk way back when. It was a bit quirky but OK., Did a few spins in one - with an Instructor, Took my FAA checkride in a C150. Ahhhh memories.
Ahhh the mighty Thomas hawk! My first solo was in ZK-WAD at Ardmore NZ 1982! Perfect airplane for training and low wing so you could see where you were going in turns. Never had a problem although never spun one as not in the training manual here.
A fellow Kiwi ! I also did my training in Tomahawks during the late 80s (in ZK-ESI and ZK-ESH) out of Christchurch (Drake Aviation). I included spins in the syllabus - with a top rated Ag pilot. Jeez - that was exciting!
Nice video, and I talk from experience, as I owned a Tomahawk for many years, and used it daily as a short commuter to get to work. Only spun it once, with an instructor during conversion to type. The Tomahawk is a little unstable in yaw during cruise, a bit like the V tail Bonanza, but otherwise an honest, safe aircraft, easy to fly, just stay within it’s limitations.
I remember a flight instructor in 1981telling me of a Tomahawk flat spin where she had to leave her seat to move under the panel enabling the nose to finally drop for a recovery. This instructor had thousands of hours under her belt with 30 years of flying. She never instructed in another one after that occurrence and stuck to Cessna products.
She must have been a tiny pixie to have been able to go under the panel in a spinning Tomahawk. All she had to do was reduce power, centralize the ailerons, opposite rudder and pull out of the dive.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 Not all of them Mark. There is a lot more to the Tomahawk spinning recovery difficulties than this gentleman knows, or led some to believe. Considerably more! You might be surprised!
We've learned that there were some variations of the aircraft build at the factory, resulting in some very different handling characteristics for the production run. That could explain why people have such different experiences with this particular model. We don't doubt that some experiences involved terror and screaming while others were boring to the extreme.
Done many spins teaching but the last one i did was reluctant to recover. I went back to pro spin, tried again and it popped out. It might be if the control briskly forward is done too soon. Rudder needs to bite then half second later control wheel forward. It ended in a very low nose attitude, i gave it 3-4 seconds, no sign of coming out. By that stage i reckoned the rudder had very little leverage. Going back to pro spin flattened the rotation, so rudder could bite.
The first plane I trained in was a Tomahawk. 1982.. I thot it was a great aircraft, and roomy enuf for myself (6'3" 245 and my instructor 6' 180).. we never quite had full tanks of fuel, but we could sit comfortably. I really liked the visibility.. after transitioning to a 172 (6 cyl conti btw) i felt blind for abit, but it was smooth. Great presentation Mark. Thanks
First ride in a plane was in a Tomahawk in ~1980. Have always liked the lines! Who knows - when the time comes - maybe I'll get one for the last chapter...
My first plane was a Beech Skipper and it seemed more solid built than the piper and I remember my instructor commenting that the tail did not wiggle as much in a power on stall! Great plane the beech with the rudder pedals off the king air!! If it only had 125 or 150 ponies I would of kept it!! Handled like a sports car!
It behaves like a light low wing trainer! but with a vice, it will always drop a wing in a stall and unless your on it, it will spin in a moment on you, other than that a pleasure to fly, has decent power and actually climbs well with two, a different story for the 150s which made you really work to climb it with two, fab visibility, spacious cockpit and two doors , what's not to like!
What you mean to say you need to fly more like a high performance aircraft, got to keep the speed up on short final and fly it on. Not this just chopping the power as you might on C150/152/172 or Warriors. Roundout out too high it doesn't drop like on a parachute. Reason way a lot of Hawks have had nose wheels taken off.
Mark as always I enjoy and learn a lot. Thank you. Curious with all the planes you've had the opportunity to fly if you own a personal plane/planes? What is it?
I wish i could get £1200 annual in my school aircraft (last annual hour was 2500). Now a 900 quid starter. I always teach takeoff one stage flap, requires less rotation. 55 lift nosewheel off, then takes off 60 kts. Climb at 70. This in UK weather. Great trainer, very steady in calm conditions, but lively with a bit of turbulence, student has to work. Could have done with a shimmy damper as standard. I'm seeing 20 litres/hour on a one hour training flight. And our engine one of the smoothest i have know, seen it running covers off it was rock solid, no lateral shaking.
Wrote too soon, few months later, engine spun a bearing, was going to cost £25k to rebuild. Plus a 3k annual, so aircraft sort of scrapped, airframe value.
Can be a Scary bird….some Tomahawks recover from spinning more easily than others..Aviation Consumer magazine did a report indicating variations in construction practices at the factory may have contributed to different aircraft responses from spin recovery….not my favorite low speed bird.
The Tomahawk appears to stand tall on its gear? Would be a capable aircraft on unimproved runways, would it not? I wonder if anyone has put larger tires on for even more capabilities? I love the two doors having trained on Cherokee 140s, I always felt a bit claustrophobic in the left seat. Especially if you had an emergency landing. lol And the almost bubble canopy is great too. You can buy these Venetian Blinds to give some shade on especially hot, bright conditions. Love your videos🤣🍀👍🏻
Really like these videos. I'm from Auburn but live in Georgia now. I remember the 49er Fire, saw it from my backyard before it was even on the news. I have my PPL checkride scheduled for tomorrow but will probably have to postpone for weather.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 the instrument overlay is dead wrong, the VNE is actually 138 knots for a tomohawk. the instrument overlay was not related or a mirror to the tomohawks instrument readings in this video. The VA speed 103 knots. @FrançoisDion they just put these on up to make flashier and more entertaining but those are not accurate.
@braydon N - Thank you for pointing out my oversight with such vigor. None of us are perfect, as evidenced by your incorrect spelling and capitalization of Tomahawk ... not tomohawk. Don the Camera Guy.
This is the airplane I used to earn my pilot's license on my 14th birthday. It was called the trauma Hawk the flying brick but I dubbed that the doctor killer.
I used to work on Pipers at a flight school. We mechanics used to Kindly call them Hatcthets and really liked flying and working on them. We even had one we named "Turbo Hatchet", we had two decals left over from another job so we put them on the engine cowl. After that we noticed that aircraft was getting more hours on it at the flights school. We did remind all the students there was no "Turbo Hatchet" but I think everyone just liked it. The Lease-back owner sure didn't mind it. Anyway, for some reason we really loved the little planes.
We had a 172 at my flight school N157ME. I flew "Mike Echo" a few times and I guess it came up in conversation with my girlfriend. One day she mentioned how cute it was that we gave our airplanes pet names. I asked what she meant by that, and she replied, Well you are always talking about flying "My Geko"....
No, no no!!!! The Trauma part comes from the fact that after you push the yolk forward and neutralize the ailerons and put in opposite rudder the li'l darlin' will continue for two, two and a half or even three more spins before she'll come out of it. All the time she's rockin' and shudderin'. Man, I loved that plane. I owned 2517B back in the '80's. Oh, what fun we had! S
I did last spin in 90's in these after doing dozens. Normal entry at 5000 feet, normal recovery technique, but didn't come out, kept spinning. After several turns i went back to pro spin, then back to recovery and came out, 1500 feet.
@@flybobbie1449 Yep! That's my T'Hawk! Okay, now recover ... recovering ... uhhh ... re - cov -er? ... uhhh .............. whew! I later instructed in a 150/152. Gawd, that was boring ... so awfully, dreadfully BORING! S
We used a software package called "Telemetry Overlay." It extracts the GPS data from the camera and converts it to approximate the flight instruments. - Don the Camera Guy.
Back in the late 70s I was training for my Commercial and CFI and had to fly the Tomahawk to do spins in. Spins were straight forward and very easy to recover from, no drama. After that I would often rent the Tomahawk for cross countries and loveed the visibility and the roomy cabin. It felt more "sporty" to fly than a Cessna or a Cherokee. The only thing I didn't like was that it tended to feel a bit busy in yaw in bumpy air. But overall it was one of my favorite planes that I've flown.
I strongly disagree, my 1979 Tomahawk was a great plane! It flew honest and had superb comfort but the 5 inch wheels and low prop clearance operating off grass strips were not ideal.
@@NStraveler Of course that's how rumor and exaggeration and drama are spread. I trained at a flt school with a fleet of these and we only had about 1/4 of the students killed, not all of them. Plenty of planes with worse AD's.
Flight instructed in Tomahawks for nearly eight years; never had a problem. We had a fleet of four Tomahawks and I taught spins in each of them. Yes, they will wind up tight in a spin, but I never had a problem with recoveries. In fact, I owned a Tomahawk for nearly fifteen years.
I wish I still owned it.
Every plane has it's idiosyncrasies. Everyone has an opinion but not everyone has experienced them Thank you.
The mighty Tomahawk! - I still call them "Trauma-Hawks" as a term of endearment! I love them as they're sturdy, cope very well with student punishment on the landing gear springs, and have superb visibility. From the teaching and learning point of view, you have to keep positively flying them, just like a helicopter! They won't stay in a groove through the sky like a C172, which teaches you good hand and feet control with the view out the front window. I always enjoyed the tail shake when my pre PPL instructor showed me during a full stall way back in 1989, but I never felt unsafe! And they do a mighty good wing drop stall if you let it fully develop, which I always enjoyed doing. - Unlike the Cherokee-40s which just wallow like a leaf in a stall when I was doing all my CPL flying. I can't recall getting the 140s to wing-drop without full rudder.
Yes, the elevator is powerful, as I carved a short groove once in the sealed taxiway when I got a little too much back pressure dialled in! I flew 3 different Tommies during all my pre PPL flying including piles of cross country flights all around and over the mountains and plains of the South Island of New Zealand. They'll also handle at least a 26kt pure steady "nor-wester" crosswind too, as I spent an hour in the right seat with my instructor one day "teaching" her crosswind circuits with takeoffs and touch-n-go landings with big ground rolls onto the big wide sealed runway, with the nose-wheel authority near the end of its limits in the ground roll with slow left drift. That was great fun, and I'll never forget that great experience!
Cheers, David from down under!
I love flying the Tomahawk. It is so much fun to fly.
I've got about 20 hours in the Tomahawk, they are wonderful airplanes. I wish Piper would redesign the PA28s with features that are on the Tomahawk, specifically: two doors and a fuel selector that is easy to reach.
Phoenix, AZ
I solo'd in a Piper Tomahawk. Beautiful aircraft!
This is the exact plane I’m training on now. It’s excellent!
I like his style of safety.
Love the instruments on the fly around. Nice touch!
Glad you like them!
I don't know of another plane that is as polarizing as the ol' Tommy! I did most of my training in one of these and then later finished off in a C-152. People either love them or hate them--there are very few people in the middle, it seems. I personally LOVE this airplane. I love the low wing, the visibility and the awesome T-Tail. I felt like I was flying a jet-fighter every time I flew these birds and they just "felt" faster and more sporty than the good old 150/152s. Piper mitigated their furious spin capabilities with some little triangular strips on the leading edge and that helped quite a bit. I would agree with others that the Tomahawk is not as "easy" to fly as a Cessna, but I would suggest that it makes you remember to always "fly" the plane and when you treat it right, it treats you right as well. Of course, that's my opinion. 😉
As a pilot who did my full PPL in the Tomahawk and then kept flying it for 120 more hours, I totally agree. The plane is more dangerous than a 152, especially in a stall where a wing may drop out pf nowhere and an unintended spin may develop if not reacted correctly, spin which is more difficult to recover too than in the 152. But do you know what is more dangerous? Learn to fly in a very forgiving plane, acquire habits that are in line with that forgiveness (70, 60, it's the same. Stall warning? Ok, not that urgent, etc), and then transition with a real plane with real plane's characteristic. Learning to fly in a more challenging plane makes better pilots. I a friend did the PPL together in the same school. I flew the Tomahawk, he flew the 152. We got our license within 1 week of each other. After that, we worked to get endorsement for the other plane. He found it a challenge to transition to the Tomahawk. For me, to transition to the 152 was boring (not to mention uncomfortable, especially being 6'4", and the visibility). We both ended up flying the Tomahawk.
Yes they were designed as a trainer. After working on them at a flight school I learned them inside and out. We had damaged planes fly out of the desert after repairs and I have repaired abused Tomahawks. I would take one over a C152 any day. However, the older straight up tail C-150s with 40 degree flaps are a favorite of mine.
Yes we called it the Tomacoffin. I loved the quality compared to a 152, but the ailerons were remarkable ineffective for some reason, in addition to the other issues.
Loved this video, love the Tomahawk. Very informative presentation!
I learned to fly in the Tomahawk and did nots of cross country flying for my commercial. It was a great airplane and incredibly cost effective to rent, I recall paying $25 per hour back in the mid 1980’s.
Wonder how many times he's had to notify ATC that he was unable 500 fpm while on IFR. Pretty routine for me in the 150 I frequently commuted IFR in
The owner should know better. This aircraft is was actually built in 1979. not 1978 as the owner stated. c/n is 38-79A0211
It appears he does know better. A quick check of the FAA registration reveals this aircraft was manufactured in 1978.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 The FAA is wrong. the "79" in the C/n proves 1979 manufactured.
It is the 211th 1979 Tomahawk built.
What do you use to create the instrument overlay
Erm...... Don, you better answer this.
I've put a link in the description for you. Don the Camera Guy.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 thanks!
You used to have to spin for a private license. Not just CFI. You still need to do it for CFI. The tomahawk spins wonderfully and easily recovers.
During my PPL trading at a military club spins and aerobics where required for 7:15 at least one hour. I flew on of these a few times didn’t like it because of that high tail. 😊
story doesn't agree with your facts.
Btw Mike the rear camera position with the 4 dial heads up display for us was pretty nice n the quality of the video was amazing, HD or its my phone but very clean n clear vision. 👍
Hi John! Don the Camera Guy here. We just bought a new camera, so the videos should all be much crisper now than before. Then, we were able to use the GPS data from the GoPro to create the dials. So glad you liked it and happy the quality upgrade was noticed!
@@skywagonuniversity5023 yup no doubt its of a higher quality. 👍🙂
Call me shallow but line up a 150/152 and a Tomahawk, I know what I'm flyin'. Thx Mark.
I did my primary flight training out of Burbank flying Tomahawk's and I can truly say that I Love that Airplane!
Yes, it would bite if you showed poor technique but, it also let you know when you were doing it right.
The Chief Pilot at the school demonstrated spins with me during my stage 1 check ride with the admonition that I would be Skinned Alive if I tried it on my own.
Many happy memories in that little airplane....most of them priceless!
This was a very exciting video to watch. Like go out and find one to rent and fly regularly. The owner is very happy with his airplane, and Mark's energy and love for airplanes just makes this a great video.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Not to bee too ~critical, but maybe it's your Engrish Accent, but the correct pronunciation is:
"Trau-ma-hawk"
Traumahawk!
A Piper Traumahawk.
The 1st time I've heard that...that's all it's ever been and will be. As my brother has a ScareCoupe (Alon) 🤪
Pilots who know always qualify their remarks with "if flown right". Which trainer would not do the same? Why do they feel a need to apologize for the plane?
I've owned my T'Hawk for 3 years now. It's a great flying aircraft that's a " stick & rudder " a/c. and as far as spins goes, it's very easy to recover from if you get the nose pointed exactly perpendicular to terra -firma so that you get wind flowing over the elevator t gain authority / control.
Thanks for the info!
Tomahawks are just sexy compared to 150’s/152’s
Ive got a 1980 Arrow IV I can bring down for you to look at. I went through the whole Wing Spar AD and got them replaced I think that would be interesting to discuss.
Keep in touch and we can do a video about it and the Piper Spar AD.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 Whats the best way to contact you?
Years ago did quite a few spins, until the last one it struggled to recover. That was last time i spun the Tomy.
Good idea.
Imagine a 150-HP TurbAero turbo prop or TP-100/125-HP turbo prop in a Tomahawk with 3-blade prop!
(May have to look into an STC for it)!😁
Damn?! yes.
While in high school I worked part time for a FBO out of ILG and rented the Tomahawks wet for $45/hour. Loved that little plane and flew the heck out of them.
Awesome piper aircraft , and yours is absolutely gorgeous ✈️❤️ , I’ve had like 600 hours in those and love it , the trauma thing is invented by the cessna guys ,
Nice simple, clean easy to read panel. Nothing more, nothing less, perfect
the devil is in the details: that altimeter rendering the Vfe and Vno are not for the pa38, the white arc goes from kts to kts. Green arc from 48kts to 110kts. Yellow arc 110kts to 138kts and Nve 138kts. At first I thought he was setting the flaps at a prohibited speed.
Those gyros are generic for the Go-pro. Not a single one is to be trusted. They are for entertainment only. They are generated by the telemetry of the GPS in the Go-Pro.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 thanks for the clarification
Disappointed in both of you! #1: for missing on calling out that 172s prior to the 1973 "M" model had Singer sewing machine-like Continental O-300s and #2: the Hawk XP had a *195hp* Continental IO-360... It was also certificated on a different type certificate than the 172 (same as 175; but everyone knows that). The IO-360 isn't nearly as sewing machine-like as the O-300 but it's still lovely. 🤓
The XP is a 210 HP engine de-rated to 195 HP so that it is not High Performance so the flight schools would still buy them. (under 200 HP) If you get the STC to turn up the RPM from 2600 to 2800 for take off (which is what the Continental IO-360 six cylinder is designed to do), it gets it back from 195 HP to 210 HP. This RPM increase is called the Isham conversion.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 Totally! I used to teach an owner of a 210hp one on straight floats. It was a fantastic two person seaplane.
I'm having my first flying lesson in the Tomahawk soon. Can't wait.
They are great trainers despite what people say.
An excellent aircraft of instruction very economical and easy to operate. congratulations.
Glad you liked it!
I learnt in one and it was great, fantastic view not that the instructor let me see it as every time I looked to be enjoying looking outside he made me fly on instruments and the aeroplane had a faulty AI so I learnt partial panel flying. When I got it back for my final flight tests instrument flying was so easy.
Glad you enjoyed it
This particular Tomahawk looks lovely. My very limited experience with them was attempting to administer private check rides in them as a DE, when they were new. Field elevation: 6150.
To use your words, “Patton” altitude was seldom achieved! Looks like an enjoyable bird near sea level.
Over 40 years ago, I was working on a PP Certificate. I "upgraded" from a C150 to the Tramahawk way back when. It was a bit quirky but OK., Did a few spins in one - with an Instructor, Took my FAA checkride in a C150. Ahhhh memories.
Ahhh the mighty Thomas hawk! My first solo was in ZK-WAD at Ardmore NZ 1982! Perfect airplane for training and low wing so you could see where you were going
in turns. Never had a problem although never spun one as not in the training manual here.
A fellow Kiwi ! I also did my training in Tomahawks during the late 80s (in ZK-ESI and ZK-ESH) out of Christchurch (Drake Aviation). I included spins in the syllabus - with a top rated Ag pilot. Jeez - that was exciting!
Nice review. Would be very interested in Beech Skipper, Mooney M10 and Ercoupe.
If we can get any of those in, we'll do the videos.
@@skywagonuniversity5023James Good, Juanes mate out of Nevada County has one. Try and get him on 👍
🤦
Nice video, and I talk from experience, as I owned a Tomahawk for many years, and used it daily as a short commuter to get to work. Only spun it once, with an instructor during conversion to type. The Tomahawk is a little unstable in yaw during cruise, a bit like the V tail Bonanza, but otherwise an honest, safe aircraft, easy to fly, just stay within it’s limitations.
Nice flying airplanes! Enjoyed the gauges in the video.
Glad you enjoyed it
I really want to go for a ride in a Tomahawk
Recently found what appears to be a pretty good deal on a well maintained, low-time/2200-TT Tomahawk, with original paint and interior.
(TBC)
flew 202HD out of terre haute. loved that plane. Tim Lazar... not so much
Tomahawk I flew in the 90's seemed to fishtail in cruise, enough to become unsettling. Nowadays a desirable airplane. That one's a beauty.
Every one I ever flew does the same thing!
I remember a flight instructor in 1981telling me of a Tomahawk flat spin where she had to leave her seat to move under the panel enabling the nose to finally drop for a recovery. This instructor had thousands of hours under her belt with 30 years of flying. She never instructed in another one after that occurrence and stuck to Cessna products.
She must have been a tiny pixie to have been able to go under the panel in a spinning Tomahawk. All she had to do was reduce power, centralize the ailerons, opposite rudder and pull out of the dive.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 Not all of them Mark. There is a lot more to the Tomahawk spinning recovery difficulties than this gentleman knows, or led some to believe. Considerably more! You might be surprised!
@@scotabot7826 yes I was
nearly killed by one spin recovery was dangerous.
We've learned that there were some variations of the aircraft build at the factory, resulting in some very different handling characteristics for the production run. That could explain why people have such different experiences with this particular model. We don't doubt that some experiences involved terror and screaming while others were boring to the extreme.
Done many spins teaching but the last one i did was reluctant to recover. I went back to pro spin, tried again and it popped out. It might be if the control briskly forward is done too soon. Rudder needs to bite then half second later control wheel forward.
It ended in a very low nose attitude, i gave it 3-4 seconds, no sign of coming out. By that stage i reckoned the rudder had very little leverage. Going back to pro spin flattened the rotation, so rudder could bite.
The first plane I trained in was a Tomahawk. 1982.. I thot it was a great aircraft, and roomy enuf for myself (6'3" 245 and my instructor 6' 180).. we never quite had full tanks of fuel, but we could sit comfortably. I really liked the visibility.. after transitioning to a 172 (6 cyl conti btw) i felt blind for abit, but it was smooth. Great presentation Mark. Thanks
Thanks.
Had one....great plane
Great trainers.
First ride in a plane was in a Tomahawk in ~1980. Have always liked the lines! Who knows - when the time comes - maybe I'll get one for the last chapter...
I learned to fly in a Tomahawk. Did the spin training and had no problems at all.
Oh my, this brings back memories. As a student pilot solo in 152 landed on the roller coaster. Always fantastic aircraft.
The Trauma Hawk
That's her.
My first plane was a Beech Skipper and it seemed more solid built than the piper and I remember my instructor commenting that the tail did not wiggle as much in a power on stall! Great plane the beech with the rudder pedals off the king air!! If it only had 125 or 150 ponies I would of kept it!! Handled like a sports car!
Thanks for sharing!
Exactly my comment. All it needed was an O320 and I would still own it.
The Skipper is two Times the airplane the PA-38 is. I would buy a Skipper in a heartbeat, but they go very fast as their were only 312 ever built.
I learned on the Tomahawk. Great airplane for training. It behaves like a larger plane with the low wing.
It behaves like a light low wing trainer! but with a vice, it will always drop a wing in a stall and unless your on it, it will spin in a moment on you, other than that a pleasure to fly, has decent power and actually climbs well with two, a different story for the 150s which made you really work to climb it with two, fab visibility, spacious cockpit and two doors , what's not to like!
What you mean to say you need to fly more like a high performance aircraft, got to keep the speed up on short final and fly it on. Not this just chopping the power as you might on C150/152/172 or Warriors.
Roundout out too high it doesn't drop like on a parachute. Reason way a lot of Hawks have had nose wheels taken off.
I flew a Cirrus first time last week, same technique, landed it no problem. Fly the speeds. Horrible notchy side stick though.
Mark as always I enjoy and learn a lot. Thank you. Curious with all the planes you've had the opportunity to fly if you own a personal plane/planes? What is it?
I fly a 1965 Mooney M20E, which is excellent.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 awesome!
I did my first solo, first solo cross country and my private checkride on a Tomahawk ! Great airplane, great memories.
They have a bad reputation with all those that have never flown one.
I got my private pilot in Tomahawk. A fun airplane though a bit more challenging than a C-150. Love the visibility.
Funny to see that short fat square wing out there.
I wish i could get £1200 annual in my school aircraft (last annual hour was 2500). Now a 900 quid starter. I always teach takeoff one stage flap, requires less rotation. 55 lift nosewheel off, then takes off 60 kts. Climb at 70. This in UK weather.
Great trainer, very steady in calm conditions, but lively with a bit of turbulence, student has to work.
Could have done with a shimmy damper as standard. I'm seeing 20 litres/hour on a one hour training flight.
And our engine one of the smoothest i have know, seen it running covers off it was rock solid, no lateral shaking.
Wrote too soon, few months later, engine spun a bearing, was going to cost £25k to rebuild. Plus a 3k annual, so aircraft sort of scrapped, airframe value.
Loved this video, love the Tomahawk. Very informative presentation!. Love the instruments on the fly around. Nice touch!.
Thanks for watching
I solo it a Tommy...you taught me a lot I'd love to talk to you.....Rolls
i flew one years ago and it was different, but I remember I liked it
Can be a Scary bird….some Tomahawks recover from spinning more easily than others..Aviation Consumer magazine did a report indicating variations in construction practices at the factory may have contributed to different aircraft responses from spin recovery….not my favorite low speed bird.
Best is, then don’t spin it.
The Tomahawk appears to stand tall on its gear? Would be a capable aircraft on unimproved runways, would it not? I wonder if anyone has put larger tires on for even more capabilities? I love the two doors having trained on Cherokee 140s, I always felt a bit claustrophobic in the left seat. Especially if you had an emergency landing. lol
And the almost bubble canopy is great too. You can buy these Venetian Blinds to give some shade on especially hot, bright conditions. Love your videos🤣🍀👍🏻
Despite what many people think, they are great trainers.
Congrats for the video, i´m flight instructor in Brasil and we have the only one Tomahak in the all country. Is a amazing plane!!
Thanks a lot!
Did my PPL entirely in a PA38; which at the time included spins. When I got checked on a 150 I could not believe how tame it was in the spin.
You never know it until you try it. You have flown both. That is good. A lot of people have an opinion about Tomahawks and have never been in one.
Lol...I always called the "Hatchets".
Great info…..was always Leary of those little birds….
Glad you enjoyed it
Mark, perhaps you can do a comparison video on the Tomahawk vs Skipper.
We'd have to have both aircraft at the same time. If it happens, we'll do the comparison.
Does that rectangular wing have washout or a varying aspect ratio along its length?
It is literally a plank from one end to the other.
No drops a wing nicely.
Really like these videos. I'm from Auburn but live in Georgia now. I remember the 49er Fire, saw it from my backyard before it was even on the news.
I have my PPL checkride scheduled for tomorrow but will probably have to postpone for weather.
Good luck in the PPL Checkride.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 I passed!
I like the idea of the instrument overlay. One thing: Does the Tomahawk really have a VNE of 90 knots? Seems rather low.
Don the Camera Guy here ... *sigh* ... I overlooked that detail. Good eye!
@@skywagonuniversity5023 Just out of curiosity, how did you manage to do that (overlaying that is)?
@@skywagonuniversity5023 the instrument overlay is dead wrong, the VNE is actually 138 knots for a tomohawk. the instrument overlay was not related or a mirror to the tomohawks instrument readings in this video. The VA speed 103 knots. @FrançoisDion they just put these on up to make flashier and more entertaining but those are not accurate.
@braydon N - Thank you for pointing out my oversight with such vigor. None of us are perfect, as evidenced by your incorrect spelling and capitalization of Tomahawk ... not tomohawk. Don the Camera Guy.
@ François Dion - I put a link in the description for you.
This is the airplane I used to earn my pilot's license on my 14th birthday. It was called the trauma Hawk the flying brick but I dubbed that the doctor killer.
I used to work on Pipers at a flight school. We mechanics used to Kindly call them Hatcthets and really liked flying and working on them. We even had one we named "Turbo Hatchet", we had two decals left over from another job so we put them on the engine cowl. After that we noticed that aircraft was getting more hours on it at the flights school. We did remind all the students there was no "Turbo Hatchet" but I think everyone just liked it. The Lease-back owner sure didn't mind it. Anyway, for some reason we really loved the little planes.
All about appearances.
We had a 172 at my flight school N157ME. I flew "Mike Echo" a few times and I guess it came up in conversation with my girlfriend. One day she mentioned how cute it was that we gave our airplanes pet names. I asked what she meant by that, and she replied, Well you are always talking about flying "My Geko"....
No, no no!!!! The Trauma part comes from the fact that after you push the yolk forward and neutralize the ailerons and put in opposite rudder the li'l darlin' will continue for two, two and a half or even three more spins before she'll come out of it. All the time she's rockin' and shudderin'. Man, I loved that plane. I owned 2517B back in the '80's. Oh, what fun we had!
S
Sounds like fun.
I did last spin in 90's in these after doing dozens. Normal entry at 5000 feet, normal recovery technique, but didn't come out, kept spinning. After several turns i went back to pro spin, then back to recovery and came out, 1500 feet.
@@flybobbie1449 Yep! That's my T'Hawk!
Okay, now recover ... recovering ... uhhh ... re - cov -er? ... uhhh .............. whew!
I later instructed in a 150/152.
Gawd, that was boring ... so awfully, dreadfully BORING!
S
Nice video! Im curious what camera you used that animates the 4 basic flight instruments. Thanks.
We used a software package called "Telemetry Overlay." It extracts the GPS data from the camera and converts it to approximate the flight instruments. - Don the Camera Guy.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 Just downloaded their software. They need to give you a commission. Thanks.
Back in the late 70s I was training for my Commercial and CFI and had to fly the Tomahawk to do spins in. Spins were straight forward and very easy to recover from, no drama. After that I would often rent the Tomahawk for cross countries and loveed the visibility and the roomy cabin. It felt more "sporty" to fly than a Cessna or a Cherokee. The only thing I didn't like was that it tended to feel a bit busy in yaw in bumpy air. But overall it was one of my favorite planes that I've flown.
👍👍👍👍👍
6.5 GPH on a O235? Wow that's high!! Is this the 125hp version?
Super job, as usual. Thanks!
Thanks again!
“Trauma-Hawk!” 😅
Only when flown poorly.
I have over a 100 hours in the tomahawk, back in the day.
how long take rol at wvi .....my air port....
Sea level, 500 feet maybe.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 the book said fully loaded 823 I don't know that sounds kind of high thank you
Been waiting for a new one. 👍🙂
Hope you enjoyed it!
@@skywagonuniversity5023 Always Mike, love each n every one of yr videos....specially the technical and maintenance ones.
@@JohnDoe-we9yk It's Mark.
Deadly trainer .! If you survive the first 50 hrs it will still bite you in the bum ! No thank you !
They are perfectly safe if you operate them just like any other plane.
Thanks for another great vid about a neat little plane . Loving the content, the information value of each vid is incalculable.
Glad you like them!
One of the worst dangerous airplanes that Piper ever made. It had terrible TAIL WAGGLE.
Yes AD on that, I remember turning around during stalls and wild flat spins and seeing it shake. Really a good 2 seater trainer.
Hasn't come off in 44 years. Can't be that bad.
I strongly disagree, my 1979 Tomahawk was a great plane! It flew honest and had superb comfort but the 5 inch wheels and low prop clearance operating off grass strips were not ideal.
@@NStraveler Of course that's how rumor and exaggeration and drama are spread. I trained at a flt school with a fleet of these and we only had about 1/4 of the students killed, not all of them. Plenty of planes with worse AD's.
Everyone I know calls it the "Traumahawk"!
YEAH>........n9623t....just got one.....Rolls