Large Hawks: Skygate vs tomahawk vs fej
04-15-2013, 09:17 AM
#1
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (76)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 2,715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Large Hawks: Skygate vs tomahawk vs fej
I'm looking at getting a large hawk something that can handle a large 200+ size turbine.
So in the market it seems there are:
Skygate
Tomahawk
FEJ (will ask if they can build the plane using ONLY wood formers)
Skymaster?
So in the market it seems there are:
Skygate
Tomahawk
FEJ (will ask if they can build the plane using ONLY wood formers)
Skymaster?
04-15-2013, 11:48 AM
#3
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SevenoaksKent, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 5,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Large Hawks: Skygate vs tomahawk vs fej
Disco
Skygate is now C-ARF obviously and up to a 200 is perfect. Over 200 is not at all necessary. Same with the TomaHawk. Being bigger, the TH would probably be ok with something like a 220 but no need for anything bigger. Victor Calvo flies his with 2 x P160 and as great a pilot as he is, it still looks daft powering non stop vertically. Plus he spends most of his flight flying around on 1/3 power!
Larger turbines will also require more fuel, more weight, internal structure changes to cater for larger tanks etc etc
FlyEagle possibly comes in heavier than the two above but I don't know enough about the structure and proven strength of airframe to comment. I'd still be surprised if >200 is needed. It's a scale model after all, not an Ultra Bandit!
Rgds,
Mark
Skygate is now C-ARF obviously and up to a 200 is perfect. Over 200 is not at all necessary. Same with the TomaHawk. Being bigger, the TH would probably be ok with something like a 220 but no need for anything bigger. Victor Calvo flies his with 2 x P160 and as great a pilot as he is, it still looks daft powering non stop vertically. Plus he spends most of his flight flying around on 1/3 power!
Larger turbines will also require more fuel, more weight, internal structure changes to cater for larger tanks etc etc
FlyEagle possibly comes in heavier than the two above but I don't know enough about the structure and proven strength of airframe to comment. I'd still be surprised if >200 is needed. It's a scale model after all, not an Ultra Bandit!
Rgds,
Mark
04-15-2013, 03:58 PM
#4
RE: Large Hawks: Skygate vs tomahawk vs fej
Tomahawk all the way.
Skygate/Carf is great but no cockpits are available. A friend has been waiting a year already for delivery of a cockpit to complete it.
Skygate/Carf is great but no cockpits are available. A friend has been waiting a year already for delivery of a cockpit to complete it.
04-15-2013, 07:00 PM
#5
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (76)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 2,715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Large Hawks: Skygate vs tomahawk vs fej
has anyone been able to get in touch with someone at team aeroscale, does the tomahawk have a larger tank than a 160?
I have a 240 turbine so the airframe will need to be able to handle that I can always lower max power.
I have a 240 turbine so the airframe will need to be able to handle that I can always lower max power.
04-16-2013, 10:02 AM
#6
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: AucklandAuckland, NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
RE: Large Hawks: Skygate vs tomahawk vs fej
Just got my skygate/CARF hawk in white. To be honest the build quality is the best I've seen. Size is just right. For me the tomahawk just wouor have been too big. The skygate/carf is big but not inconvenient. If the build stage is important to you the go with CARF/skygate version as all structural work is done and everything fits perfect out of the box. Wouldn't touch FEJ personally.
02-15-2015, 03:58 PM
#7
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Manila Philippines
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a carf skygate with a 200sx carf is just perfect .quality number one, saw a fej snap on takeoff full bore on a 200sx on the 2nd flight. can anyone post a pic of the tomahawk beside a skygate bae hawk to see the size difference?
02-15-2015, 09:39 PM
#9
02-16-2015, 03:46 AM
#11
02-16-2015, 04:26 AM
#12
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: farnborough, , UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Agree with Scott, that looks very mediocre , why drill two holes right on the corner of a former? - might not be a structural one but if the thought process is maintained something is going to be drilled wrong elsewhere and fail big time .........
What glue is used? Seems they use different glue depending on what end you are working from - and why part-wood part foam looking stuff for formers, no continuity.
marcs
What glue is used? Seems they use different glue depending on what end you are working from - and why part-wood part foam looking stuff for formers, no continuity.
marcs
02-18-2015, 05:22 PM
#16
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: CORAL GABLES,
FL
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here are a couple pics of my Skygate and Tomahawk Hawks, both fly awesome. Skymaster which I had in the past also flew very well. One big must is a Bypass system the planes will fly a lot smoother ,gain speed and save fuel. Very noticeable, lots less drag.
02-19-2015, 05:05 AM
#19
I think if Skymaster puts the big Hawk together like they 1.45 size it will be the way to go if you want a great looking bird that is not hard to build. The biggest reason I went with the Skygate is that a lot more work was done on it compaired to the Airworld. I would love to build the Airworld Hawk 100 but I just don't have the time. I am hoping for Skymaster to offer the 100 in hawk.
You can't go wrong with any one of the 3. The Hawk in this size is an awesome plane to fly.
You can't go wrong with any one of the 3. The Hawk in this size is an awesome plane to fly.
02-19-2015, 07:07 AM
#20
My Feedback: (57)
Thanks Jeff, yeah Skymaster is what I wanted when I thought it was the same size as Skygate, but now that I see the SM-100 is the same length as the Skygate, I'm sure it will have a noticeably smaller presence on the ground. Especially when compared to Tomohawk! With that being said, I am extremely short on available building time as well, & the SM will probably be a bit less expensive.
Jay
Jay
02-20-2015, 11:09 AM
#24
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (76)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 2,715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Construction seems to be about what you have with skymaster if its plywood and airex; however that plane needs to have a wing tube not pegs.
Last edited by DiscoWings; 02-20-2015 at 11:11 AM.
02-20-2015, 07:11 PM
#25
Disco if you look you will see the tube for main spar. It is just like the smaller hawks across the board. The Airex is the same that is used now by most of the China jet manufactures.
I am pretty sure a lot of these come from one plant in china. That is the main molds. The difference seems to be is the final assembly, glue, paint and the type of formers. It appears some use carbon fiber and others use hardwood or a combo of them. Also some us a different landing gear. They use a different vendor or make it themselves.
I have asked if 2 of the new offers of the large 1.3? scale hawk coming out will be available in the 100 and neither is offering at this time.
I am pretty sure they are waiting for the mold maker to build the 100.
I am pretty sure a lot of these come from one plant in china. That is the main molds. The difference seems to be is the final assembly, glue, paint and the type of formers. It appears some use carbon fiber and others use hardwood or a combo of them. Also some us a different landing gear. They use a different vendor or make it themselves.
I have asked if 2 of the new offers of the large 1.3? scale hawk coming out will be available in the 100 and neither is offering at this time.
I am pretty sure they are waiting for the mold maker to build the 100.