Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
#805
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Hi
Would like to know how do you guys transport this bird. Do you split the fuse in 2 pieces? Are using a trailer or does it fit a SUV or van?
Regards
Would like to know how do you guys transport this bird. Do you split the fuse in 2 pieces? Are using a trailer or does it fit a SUV or van?
Regards
#806
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
I weighed the risk benefit on the rudder and inlight of problems with the skygate vertical fin and very short moment on the servo arm in the vertical fin made a decision to go with the long metal servo arm sticking out the vertical fin to engage the rudder.
I think mine will fit in my van with nose up on the dashboard and a special support for the wing spar. A trailer is another option for me also.
I think mine will fit in my van with nose up on the dashboard and a special support for the wing spar. A trailer is another option for me also.
#807
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Can someone measure the Hawk 66 for me?
I need wide, long and high measures from the Hawk 66 assembled and ready to fly...
regards
Heraldo
I need wide, long and high measures from the Hawk 66 assembled and ready to fly...
regards
Heraldo
#808
My Feedback: (48)
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
The problem with the main gear doors blowing open has resurfaced again.
I had problems with both of my Hawks at Top Gun.
My new Hawk actually had the door blown open and the dubro rod end ripped off the all thread rod. This happened twice to two brand new dubro rod ends. I finally aeropoxy the rod end on. the hinges were also being ripped away from the wood former. This is not good!
My red Hawk actually had the main door ripped off the Hinges completely!
So even though I am able to get doors closed and stayed closed the forces on the door is rediculous!
Peter Goldsmith has a new Comp Arf Hawk that he is flying and I was speaking with him about his problem of keeping doors closed. His is setup with air cylinders and he couldnt keep his doors closed. He said that he had measured the inside air pressure to be around 24-25 psi so he decided to try and limit the volume of air coming in. He choked down the incoming air by blocking off about 80% of the air coming into the intakes. He said the air pressure is now equal and a result of the baffled air intakes was lower motor temps and greater fuel efficiency.
While at Top Gun I decided to do an infield modification and try to do the same thing.
I blocked off about 70% of the air coming in to the intakes. I did not have any other issues with my doors and I also noticed better fuel efficiency.
I later also noticed that I have a burned up servo on one of my doors on the red arrows Hawk.
The air coming into fuse is too high of pressure.
My Red Hawk flew fine all year last year and seemed ok but over time the servos will likely give out if you dont loose a door first.
Might want to consider blocking off some of that air coming into the fuse.
I might have a revisit of my Scully intakes as a possiblity.
Scott
I had problems with both of my Hawks at Top Gun.
My new Hawk actually had the door blown open and the dubro rod end ripped off the all thread rod. This happened twice to two brand new dubro rod ends. I finally aeropoxy the rod end on. the hinges were also being ripped away from the wood former. This is not good!
My red Hawk actually had the main door ripped off the Hinges completely!
So even though I am able to get doors closed and stayed closed the forces on the door is rediculous!
Peter Goldsmith has a new Comp Arf Hawk that he is flying and I was speaking with him about his problem of keeping doors closed. His is setup with air cylinders and he couldnt keep his doors closed. He said that he had measured the inside air pressure to be around 24-25 psi so he decided to try and limit the volume of air coming in. He choked down the incoming air by blocking off about 80% of the air coming into the intakes. He said the air pressure is now equal and a result of the baffled air intakes was lower motor temps and greater fuel efficiency.
While at Top Gun I decided to do an infield modification and try to do the same thing.
I blocked off about 70% of the air coming in to the intakes. I did not have any other issues with my doors and I also noticed better fuel efficiency.
I later also noticed that I have a burned up servo on one of my doors on the red arrows Hawk.
The air coming into fuse is too high of pressure.
My Red Hawk flew fine all year last year and seemed ok but over time the servos will likely give out if you dont loose a door first.
Might want to consider blocking off some of that air coming into the fuse.
I might have a revisit of my Scully intakes as a possiblity.
Scott
#812
My Feedback: (15)
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Scott,
Sorry to hear about this for problem. I would guesss that routing the air is a very good solution and likely the most important. I know that despite the intakes being in the way of everything in my sm hawk that at least I am not going to have too much air to the fuse ( I think..)
After cutting down some air pressure through the fuse, would anyone consider adding a door lock like the real one? I think there is one outboard lock on the real one.
I would say that this idea in general is not my favorite but perhaps a small servo driven lock would solve this once and for all?
I am finishing my Sm Hawk with bigger cylinders and have had an eye on these bigger hawks, maybe for the Fall!
Good luck
Dave
Sorry to hear about this for problem. I would guesss that routing the air is a very good solution and likely the most important. I know that despite the intakes being in the way of everything in my sm hawk that at least I am not going to have too much air to the fuse ( I think..)
After cutting down some air pressure through the fuse, would anyone consider adding a door lock like the real one? I think there is one outboard lock on the real one.
I would say that this idea in general is not my favorite but perhaps a small servo driven lock would solve this once and for all?
I am finishing my Sm Hawk with bigger cylinders and have had an eye on these bigger hawks, maybe for the Fall!
Good luck
Dave
#814
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
This is interesting. I have always had issues with open turbine install Panthers, Cougars and the like where it has been pretty well impossible to keep those inner doors closed. As I recall our engines only require 1 .5 times the compressor inlet area for air. As the models get larger the inlets ( scale ) also increase in size resulting in these increased fuse pressure issues. A full flow bypass reduces the pressure but can be a nightmare for installation purposes.
This is very helpful information and is a very simple / practical solution...thanks
Dean W.
This is very helpful information and is a very simple / practical solution...thanks
Dean W.
#816
My Feedback: (18)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New City, NY
Posts: 3,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
ORIGINAL: jetpilot
Hi Dean,
Yes it was the Comp Arf one.
Heres a few pics of Peters and mine.
Hi Dean,
Yes it was the Comp Arf one.
Heres a few pics of Peters and mine.
Marty
#817
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Marty, i think Scott and the guys here are talking about the Large Carf/Skygate hawk not the 1/5.5 one we have. The 1/5.5 wing is totaly blocked off from the fuse.
#819
My Feedback: (48)
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Its actually not very noticable til someone gets a picture of it and you can see the doors blowing open.
I have the geometry so that you can not physically open the doors when they are closed, even with your hand. finally a year later the door was ripped right off the hinges!
I usually just do alot of crusing around but in competition I need to go to full power before entering into various manuvers. The higher speeds is what causes the higher pressure and doors blowing open or off. Theres no where for the air to escape.
The baffles are a fairly easy modification.
I have a Skygate L39 and a Tomahawk L39. The Skygate is fully bypassed and I dont have any issues. The Tomahawk L39 has inlets all the way back to the turbine and Im thinking it will probably not be an issue with the doors.
The inlets on the Tomahawk Hawk dump right into the landing gear area. Im sure this didnt help any. An inlet that continued on to the turbine area probably would help a bit.
Scott
I have the geometry so that you can not physically open the doors when they are closed, even with your hand. finally a year later the door was ripped right off the hinges!
I usually just do alot of crusing around but in competition I need to go to full power before entering into various manuvers. The higher speeds is what causes the higher pressure and doors blowing open or off. Theres no where for the air to escape.
The baffles are a fairly easy modification.
I have a Skygate L39 and a Tomahawk L39. The Skygate is fully bypassed and I dont have any issues. The Tomahawk L39 has inlets all the way back to the turbine and Im thinking it will probably not be an issue with the doors.
The inlets on the Tomahawk Hawk dump right into the landing gear area. Im sure this didnt help any. An inlet that continued on to the turbine area probably would help a bit.
Scott
#820
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
Scott
I took a closer look at the baffling concept and thought about it some. In the early days of ducted fan - turbine airframe conversions I had the opportunity to test several airframes
( BVM, Jet Hangar, Avonds ). One discovery that we made ( the boys at RAM and GWM ) was that if you narrowed the inlet you effectively increased incoming air velocity and caused considerable turbulence in the fuselage. In some cases this was enough to cause the turbine to flame out between idle - 1/4 throttle. Granted, today we are talking engines that are bigger and have a much better combustion pattern than years ago. I believe that you have a solution to the gear doors but I would tend to place the baffles as far forward in the inlet as practical.
Dean W.
I took a closer look at the baffling concept and thought about it some. In the early days of ducted fan - turbine airframe conversions I had the opportunity to test several airframes
( BVM, Jet Hangar, Avonds ). One discovery that we made ( the boys at RAM and GWM ) was that if you narrowed the inlet you effectively increased incoming air velocity and caused considerable turbulence in the fuselage. In some cases this was enough to cause the turbine to flame out between idle - 1/4 throttle. Granted, today we are talking engines that are bigger and have a much better combustion pattern than years ago. I believe that you have a solution to the gear doors but I would tend to place the baffles as far forward in the inlet as practical.
Dean W.
#821
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
ORIGINAL: ddennison
Scott,
Sorry to hear about this for problem. I would guesss that routing the air is a very good solution and likely the most important. I know that despite the intakes being in the way of everything in my sm hawk that at least I am not going to have too much air to the fuse ( I think..)
After cutting down some air pressure through the fuse, would anyone consider adding a door lock like the real one? I think there is one outboard lock on the real one.
I would say that this idea in general is not my favorite but perhaps a small servo driven lock would solve this once and for all?
I am finishing my Sm Hawk with bigger cylinders and have had an eye on these bigger hawks, maybe for the Fall!
Good luck
Dave
Scott,
Sorry to hear about this for problem. I would guesss that routing the air is a very good solution and likely the most important. I know that despite the intakes being in the way of everything in my sm hawk that at least I am not going to have too much air to the fuse ( I think..)
After cutting down some air pressure through the fuse, would anyone consider adding a door lock like the real one? I think there is one outboard lock on the real one.
I would say that this idea in general is not my favorite but perhaps a small servo driven lock would solve this once and for all?
I am finishing my Sm Hawk with bigger cylinders and have had an eye on these bigger hawks, maybe for the Fall!
Good luck
Dave
Me too Dave.... Keeping an eye on this one...
As you probably know I already flew SM Hawk several times without intakes. I cut them off to install the fuel tank near CG. With arround 70psi, doors poped out in flight, but with 90-100psi, they stay closed every time with original SM cilinders. Canceled my Robart order
One of my problems with TH Hawk is trasnportation, and probably I would have to split the fuse in 2 parts for transport. Is this a good idea? Any one doing this?
L39 is easier because it splits in the rear from the pipe backwards, but the Hawk is tricky to assembly at the fiel. Can any of you guys share your experience?
Regards
Nuno
#822
My Feedback: (24)
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
I am watching this thread closely because I will pull the trigger on either the Hawk or the L-39. I hope to see one or both flying before I make my decision. Transportation is not an issue for me but simplicity is...I hate gear doors that are not reliable. Right now I think I am leaning towards the L-39 and having as much work done by Tomahawk before it ships to my builder. After I choose which jet the it will be time to pick the turbine.
#825
My Feedback: (206)
RE: Tomahawk-Design Bae Hawk 1: 3.5
ORIGINAL: dos007
I am watching this thread closely because I will pull the trigger on either the Hawk or the L-39. I hope to see one or both flying before I make my decision. Transportation is not an issue for me but simplicity is...I hate gear doors that are not reliable. Right now I think I am leaning towards the L-39 and having as much work done by Tomahawk before it ships to my builder. After I choose which jet the it will be time to pick the turbine.
I am watching this thread closely because I will pull the trigger on either the Hawk or the L-39. I hope to see one or both flying before I make my decision. Transportation is not an issue for me but simplicity is...I hate gear doors that are not reliable. Right now I think I am leaning towards the L-39 and having as much work done by Tomahawk before it ships to my builder. After I choose which jet the it will be time to pick the turbine.
As far as the gear doors as Scott said there is no problem with them blowing open.mine was flown at top gun this year and the only gear problem I had was my electric module. Other than that the plane flies very well and even belly lands very well....lol. The gear and gear door setup is very very sound on the bird.
George