Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
12-09-2011, 06:00 AM
#303
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
There are two approx. 1/8th inch thick carbon strips running horizontally each side of opening for support. They extend past about 4 to 6 inches each side. Then its just boxed in with some ply. Tons of flights, zero problems. My new Zimbabwe Hawk is identical.
Scott
Scott
12-09-2011, 06:13 AM
#306
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: farnborough, , UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
I guess also if you were planning this mod you could even arrange to relocate the servo mounts for the stabs to behind the opening (with some reinforcement) shorten the stainless push rod and have the hatch free from obstructions?
marcs
marcs
12-09-2011, 12:26 PM
#311
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
If you saw it in person, you would really wonder why you even doubted it. It's on my heavy azz Skygate conversion to T 45 with P200sx. No worries!
Scott
The only reason its not there to begin with was for weigh savings and scaleness.
Scott
The only reason its not there to begin with was for weigh savings and scaleness.
12-10-2011, 01:47 PM
#314
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: villeneuve loubet, FRANCE
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Hello , i m interessed about this plane but.i would like to have your opinion for the transport , i have a vw touran , do you think it can go inside ? How are you doing for the transport on a "normal car"?
Thanks
Best regards
Nicolas
Thanks
Best regards
Nicolas
12-10-2011, 06:56 PM
#315
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Auckland, NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
So I've changed my mind and have a razor saw in my hand. Planning to do a hatch on the panel lines forward of the louvre section.
Easier now than to moan later I suppose. Thanks for the shots and the insight. Should help with service and day to day functionality.
Easier now than to moan later I suppose. Thanks for the shots and the insight. Should help with service and day to day functionality.
12-10-2011, 08:53 PM
#316
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
LOL!
After seeing your work, its obvious it will be a piece of cake for you. Youve done some really nice stuff!
I really couldnt imagine flying, working, servicing the jet without it. Trying to get to engine through canopy is rediculous!
Opening the canopy everytime to fly? No thank you. Ive seen a fancy opening canopy fly off and hit the fin. Rather know mines not going anywhere!!
I cant wait to see your hatch!!
Scott
After seeing your work, its obvious it will be a piece of cake for you. Youve done some really nice stuff!
I really couldnt imagine flying, working, servicing the jet without it. Trying to get to engine through canopy is rediculous!
Opening the canopy everytime to fly? No thank you. Ive seen a fancy opening canopy fly off and hit the fin. Rather know mines not going anywhere!!
I cant wait to see your hatch!!
Scott
12-11-2011, 01:10 AM
#317
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Auckland, NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Thanks for the comps... will work on it this week. Keen to look a invisible latch somehow.
How does your heavy hawk with the 200 perform?
cheers
How does your heavy hawk with the 200 perform?
cheers
12-11-2011, 02:18 AM
#318
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SevenoaksKent, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 5,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
ORIGINAL: tobba
Thanks for the comps... will work on it this week. Keen to look a invisible latch somehow.
How does your heavy hawk with the 200 perform?
cheers
Thanks for the comps... will work on it this week. Keen to look a invisible latch somehow.
How does your heavy hawk with the 200 perform?
cheers
I'd imagine Scott's heavy hawk with a 200 flies how a hawk should and not all floaty floaty......
Mark
12-11-2011, 02:55 AM
#319
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: farnborough, , UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 3,294
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Craig, you will be fine, I was itchng to do this on the green one.
Regards 'secret' latches etc I used the two air intake scoops above the rear canopy to conceal two wire snakes which went back from just inside these two inlets to the two hatches I made for the fuel and air charging points. You could probably use a similar
access point for your design.
It might also be worth considering hinging this hatch down one side, so it opens like the canopy and has one side 'fixed' so that security is improved should whatever system you use for the other side fail. A wire retainer could hold the hatch nicely open when required.
Pics of the wire system I used on the SGH build.
marcs
Regards 'secret' latches etc I used the two air intake scoops above the rear canopy to conceal two wire snakes which went back from just inside these two inlets to the two hatches I made for the fuel and air charging points. You could probably use a similar
access point for your design.
It might also be worth considering hinging this hatch down one side, so it opens like the canopy and has one side 'fixed' so that security is improved should whatever system you use for the other side fail. A wire retainer could hold the hatch nicely open when required.
Pics of the wire system I used on the SGH build.
marcs
12-11-2011, 09:13 AM
#320
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
The leading edge of the hatch has some poly ply that extendes out about 3/8ths inch and slides under fuse and a hatch latch in the back. Only thing you see is latch of course.
If i remember correctly, mines weighs about 56, 58 lbs dry and has a Marc S. (Scully) Giant fuel tank. Flys great!!
I never converted it to marc s. bypass and inlets and with the T45 speed brakes out it slows down very fast and needs a good bit of power to fly and land.
It will still launch of runway in a hurry without power management. I believe with the P200 and no bypass gives it tons of static thrust. good and bad i guess.
My new Zimbabwe scheme has full Marc S. conversion with giant tank,flys with wing tanks and pylons, wasnt built with weight savings in mind and flys very, very nice as well. I prefer the full inlet, bypassed set up myself.
Scott
If i remember correctly, mines weighs about 56, 58 lbs dry and has a Marc S. (Scully) Giant fuel tank. Flys great!!
I never converted it to marc s. bypass and inlets and with the T45 speed brakes out it slows down very fast and needs a good bit of power to fly and land.
It will still launch of runway in a hurry without power management. I believe with the P200 and no bypass gives it tons of static thrust. good and bad i guess.
My new Zimbabwe scheme has full Marc S. conversion with giant tank,flys with wing tanks and pylons, wasnt built with weight savings in mind and flys very, very nice as well. I prefer the full inlet, bypassed set up myself.
Scott
12-13-2011, 01:01 AM
#321
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Auckland, NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
So help me out here people... I think I'm excited but I now have a rather large hole in my fuse and need a few votes of confidence please.
The fuse is definitely a whole lot less rigid now so a rear former that hooks up with the turbine mount or at least many lengths of carbon tow acting as a former glued to the fuse will be required. Some fore and aft strengthening too.
Definitely changes the thinking re setup and access instantly. Also makes for an easier assembly of the turbine mount area etc.. better glue joints. The engine will come and go through the hole even with the elev pushrod in place I'm pretty sure.
Now for a nice way to remove it easily within hidden fixings - liking the slide forward radio antenna at the moment Mark, but also like the BVM style nyrod and music wire Marc. Might be a combination of the two.
The fuse is definitely a whole lot less rigid now so a rear former that hooks up with the turbine mount or at least many lengths of carbon tow acting as a former glued to the fuse will be required. Some fore and aft strengthening too.
Definitely changes the thinking re setup and access instantly. Also makes for an easier assembly of the turbine mount area etc.. better glue joints. The engine will come and go through the hole even with the elev pushrod in place I'm pretty sure.
Now for a nice way to remove it easily within hidden fixings - liking the slide forward radio antenna at the moment Mark, but also like the BVM style nyrod and music wire Marc. Might be a combination of the two.
12-13-2011, 07:53 AM
#323
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Wow, thats nice Maikel (but a pity you have sold it) !!!
Is it practically possible to make the cockpit interior so that the fuse can be disassembled with "relative" ease ?
I see the interior covers the 4 screws that holds the fuse together, is it possible to get to the 4 screws ?
Is it practically possible to make the cockpit interior so that the fuse can be disassembled with "relative" ease ?
I see the interior covers the 4 screws that holds the fuse together, is it possible to get to the 4 screws ?
12-13-2011, 09:06 AM
#324
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: lage zwaluwe, NETHERLANDS
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Hello Carsten,
The fusalage is with 6 screws .
I made it that i can screw the screws from the gear doors in the fusalage.
Only the screws on the top are not easy from the geardoor but it is possible.
I think you can better buy a Tomahwk L39 for transport.
Regards Maikel
The fusalage is with 6 screws .
I made it that i can screw the screws from the gear doors in the fusalage.
Only the screws on the top are not easy from the geardoor but it is possible.
I think you can better buy a Tomahwk L39 for transport.
Regards Maikel
