Dean Wilson Aviation
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Brisbane
Age: 47
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dean Wilson Aviation
The website of Dean Wilson Aviation, manufacturer of the Whitney Boomerang, has been replaced by a holding page: dwaviation.com
Does anyone know what's happened???
Does anyone know what's happened???
ASIC Free Company Name Search
ASIC Free Company Name Search
I hope it's not as bad as it looks.
It was a promising venture, but I suppose like everything in Australian Aviation it's about why we can't do something rather than why we can.
What will happen to companies like Minnos in WA who operate the type?
Such a bloody shame.
ASIC Free Company Name Search
I hope it's not as bad as it looks.
It was a promising venture, but I suppose like everything in Australian Aviation it's about why we can't do something rather than why we can.
What will happen to companies like Minnos in WA who operate the type?
Such a bloody shame.
and what a great little machine the Boomerang is
The Airvan on the other hand, I did fly that, it was well finished and flew well.
Having said that it is a real shame seeing a company fold after giving a project like the Boomerang their best shot. Sadly the market in this part of the world is very small and export orders are a necessity in order for a manufacturer to survive. It's very hard to break into overseas markets especially the US which is where you really need to be with light aircraft.
Another problem is scale of production, apparently PAC were touting the CT4E or one of the CT4 variants a few years back and one air force (Israeli I think) said yep we'll take x many, Thanks (30 or 40 from memory), thinking PAC had them all ready to ship. Oh, that will be 2 to 3 years production. Sorry if you can't deliver now or very shortly we don't want them.
You obviously didn't fly it for long then
It was certainly much nicer to fly compared to the 206 with regards to pitch changes that come with power changes on the 206.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They must have made a truck load of improvements from the one they brought over here a couple of years ago. I saw it but didn't fly it, the build quality wasn't that flash and a couple of people I know that did fly it weren't that impressed with it.
What did they want in an economical little trainer, a PC9 perhaps ? Bloody ratites.
What did they want in an economical little trainer, a PC9 perhaps ? Bloody ratites.
What did they want in an economical little trainer, a PC9 perhaps ?
The build quality wasn't a patch on the Alpha 160A and I'm comparing with the very early build Alpha's.
One comment I remember from those that flew the Boomerang was the fact you needed a double jointed neck in order to read the compass, there were other comments as well but I don't recall them right now.
I agreee the Boomerang had a lot of promise but to say "what a great little machine the Boomerang is" does not rfeflect what I saw and heard about it, unless, they made a lot of improvements.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ChCh NZ
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that Piper have moved away from the LSA, do you think talk of a new Tomahawk production run would carry any credence.. ?
Was the Boomerang that much different from the PA-38.. really ?
Shame to hear about a well set-up local venture not going the distance, I'm afraid it happens all too often in our small part of the world.
I am a big fan of the Tomahawk, not so the C152..
Was the Boomerang that much different from the PA-38.. really ?
Shame to hear about a well set-up local venture not going the distance, I'm afraid it happens all too often in our small part of the world.
I am a big fan of the Tomahawk, not so the C152..
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, no actually, just something that would replace the PA38/C152.
They got that in the Boomerang. The PA38 was designed and built as a trainer, the 150/152 was actually intended as a tourer. FWIW, I think the Boomerang is a great little machine, maybe, as in all prototypes/early models there is the need for adjustments and improvements. Take the stall strips on the T'hawk for example.
It just costs so much to design/manufacture and have certified any VH intended aircraft in Australia. Christ i was there when the Gazelle gained certification.....under the same tests a Warrior would have flown to bits!! I have approx 3000hrs in a traumakhawk and distinctly liked what i found when i flew the Boomerang....but with all the RAA available at the moment economics come into play. I think had times been different (GFC/downturn in aviation) the little bird may have had a chance.
They got that in the Boomerang. The PA38 was designed and built as a trainer, the 150/152 was actually intended as a tourer. FWIW, I think the Boomerang is a great little machine, maybe, as in all prototypes/early models there is the need for adjustments and improvements. Take the stall strips on the T'hawk for example.
It just costs so much to design/manufacture and have certified any VH intended aircraft in Australia. Christ i was there when the Gazelle gained certification.....under the same tests a Warrior would have flown to bits!! I have approx 3000hrs in a traumakhawk and distinctly liked what i found when i flew the Boomerang....but with all the RAA available at the moment economics come into play. I think had times been different (GFC/downturn in aviation) the little bird may have had a chance.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Tomahawk production run would be interesting but I assume the costs would be astronomical. You could buy a couple of metal European GA LSA aircraft for the same figure and "make" twice as much money from operating them.
I saw one of the Boomerangs in the flesh, but it may have been the proto. The metal work on the side of empenage was a little average at best, looked like some extra pieces had been riveted on over the top for strength.
I saw one of the Boomerangs in the flesh, but it may have been the proto. The metal work on the side of empenage was a little average at best, looked like some extra pieces had been riveted on over the top for strength.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never even been up close to one, but: a 95 knot aircraft that can barely take two grown men and reasonable fuel yet costs A$210K? It may make an impression on some busy training outfits if it really is very tough, but you're not going to sell them to anyone else, are you?
Smart shoppers would buy an LSA or something like a DA20 instead, if they want certified GA.
I'm surprised it took them this long to go under. I never wished them ill, but I also wished they'd have made a more commercially viable aircraft. There's a market for $200K GA two seaters, but you have to make it competitive.
Smart shoppers would buy an LSA or something like a DA20 instead, if they want certified GA.
I'm surprised it took them this long to go under. I never wished them ill, but I also wished they'd have made a more commercially viable aircraft. There's a market for $200K GA two seaters, but you have to make it competitive.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: queensland
Age: 67
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boomerang Owners Group
I know what happened.We have bought back the Type Cert and are going to build a new DW200B machine that has a bigger O-320 fuel injected engine along with a constant speed unit. We will also build the old DW200A machine that we have been operating for some 5 years now with no problems. some of the older machines are approaching 2000 hours so we know we have the right basic airframe.
Good luck to you Mr Dean.
Finesse the finish, spec up the cabin, and most importantly, team-up with somebody O/S and sell as many to airline flying schools and academies as you can.
Hats off to your ambition.
Finesse the finish, spec up the cabin, and most importantly, team-up with somebody O/S and sell as many to airline flying schools and academies as you can.
Hats off to your ambition.
Moderator
I've probably got more hours in Boomerangs than anyone after operating them for over four years and they are a good sturdy reliable little trainer, I didn't want some plastic fantastic (many of which have been not exactly been huge successes for some now defunct flying schools).
I wanted something economical that would get the job done safely, last a long time, use tried and tested technology without gimmicks and fit in with a fleet of Pipers and the Boomerang has achieved that with the bonus of supporting Australian expertise and manufacturing.
As with the Tomahawk, many of the people who knock the type have not actually been using them day in day out and seen the results but went in with a negative attitude to start with and can hardly be seen as "experts".
Good luck Gary, you and the team at DW have built an aircraft up to a standard not down to a price and have always personally gone out of your way to provide a good service to your customers.
I wanted something economical that would get the job done safely, last a long time, use tried and tested technology without gimmicks and fit in with a fleet of Pipers and the Boomerang has achieved that with the bonus of supporting Australian expertise and manufacturing.
As with the Tomahawk, many of the people who knock the type have not actually been using them day in day out and seen the results but went in with a negative attitude to start with and can hardly be seen as "experts".
Good luck Gary, you and the team at DW have built an aircraft up to a standard not down to a price and have always personally gone out of your way to provide a good service to your customers.