Piper Tomahawk

[Captain Smithy]

The Skipper seems pretty rare. I think it was produced in very small numbers but it is almost identical to the Tomahawk both in spec and appearance. In terms of flying I don't know though, and I haven't come across anyone who's been around one. Like I say they are pretty rare.

Mad Jock - the Marmite description is most justified... few aircraft provoke such strong pro/anti feelings as the humble Tommy... its a shame though that most of its detractors are talking out their fartpiece as most have never flown one!

Smithy

[Big Pistons Forever]

Originally Posted by Captain Smithy

... its a shame though that most of its detractors are talking out their fartpiece as most have never flown one!

Smithy

I flew the first one ever imported into Canada, Sn 31, and by chance got an hour in one of the very last ones built. It was, if I recall, about 25 units from the end of the traumahawk production run. The build quality of the early ones was simply terrible and while the last were a bit better they were still had a very Yugo-ish feel. I think one wing on a C 152 has more rivets than the entire tomahawk and you only have to look at the great long list of major structural Airworthiness Directives as an indication of what a POS this airplane is. As for flying qualities as a trainer, this is a purely subjective area of personal opinions, but as far as I am concerned the C 152 is the clear winner. It is easy to fly but surprisingly hard to fly really well.

In the end it doesn't matter because the market has spoken. The C 152 is significantly cheaper to own because it is so robust. I know of at least 2 major schools in Canada that went from C 150's to Tomahawks but then after 10 to 12 years sold all the Pipers and went back to C152's, a decision made purely due to the relative costs of operation, between the 2 types.

[FlyingKiwi_73]

I have to agree with Captain Smith, most people i have talked to about this (some of these are CPL chaps) who tell me how unstable and 'twitchy' the tommies are have never flown one.

I'm not a gifted pilot, chuck Yeager or similar but i survived and enjoyed nearly 100 hours in the 'Traumahawk' I don't understand how this whole myth came about.

As an Ag pilot i know once eloquently quoted "if you F**k about in it, it will tell you to F**k off!" spot on!

[Captain Smithy]

If you big jessies are worried about the tail moving about, I suggest you don't fly on any passenger jets, or if you do don't look out across the wings.

I like your Ag-pilot's quote Flying Kiwi. Rather apt with a certain to-the-point!

Smithy

[Mictheslik]

Have to agree with the above....just switched over to a cherokee 180 after starting and completing 10 hours on a tomahawk. The 28 is much more benign and easier to handle in a crosswind after flying the 38 which is twitchy and requires a bit more work....very fun though

.mic

[A and C]

When looking for two aircraft to lease out I was first tempted with the PA38, to fly it is a delight but when it comes to the operating cost Big pistons is correct when he says that the C152 is cheaper to run. So with some regret I had to buy the Cessna on economic grounds.

[Cat.S]

I loved it. Far more shoulder room for me than either the 172 or the Warrior.

[foxmoth]

"most of its detractors are talking out their fartpiece as most have never flown one"

"I have to agree with Captain Smith, most people i have talked to about this (some of these are CPL chaps) who tell me how unstable and 'twitchy' the tommies are have never flown one. "

Well I have flown it, I do NOT think it is unstable and 'twitchy', but I still think it is a rubbish trainer and can point to the specifics - harmonisation is poor, being sensitive in pitch and sluggish in roll. It does not teach trimming well as a lot of pitch changes are lost with the T-tail (great in an aircraft that is NOT used for training). It does have its plus points, having a well thought out cockpit layout and good viz. This does not mean I am a big fan of the 152, but I can at least see why schools use that for economic reasons!

[FlyingKiwi_73]

Having recently flown a C152 and having trained almost exclusively in the Tommie i have the opposite opinion of the trim? I found the trim to be in effective on the 152 needing large amounts of movement to effect any change. where as the tommie can be 'flown' with the trim tab. accidently wind on a bit more pitch than is usual on take off and watch that nose come up real fast, ask me how i know!

FK

[foxmoth]

I did not say that the trim was innefective, but once trimmed that is pretty much it, when training you want the trim changes that you get with change in power/flap in order to get the student in the habit of using the trimmer - in the Cessna you get those changes, in the Pa38 you do not because of the T-tail!
But why so much emphasis on the Pa38 Vs Cessna, I have already said I am not an advocate of EITHER, personally I would rather a Beagle Pup, Chippie or one of the 2 seat Robins but for spares/finance these are not realistic for most clubs

[FlyingKiwi_73]

Oh i totally agree anything like to beagle pup, or the Bulldog would be far more fun than either! There is a DR200 here for sale,.. its in mint condition but they want just a little too much for a 2 seater.

I guess some of us sticking up for the tommie are slightly dismayed at its alleged twitchy nature by some to the high wing chaps. I found the thing pretty docile (except for the wing drop stall). what i do like is the speed your forced to land it at, i feel it would give you a bit of experience when you proceed to faster craft.

[PotentialPilot]

I know of a tomahawk for sale if anyones interested.. Just to drop in the topic

[FlyingKiwi_73]

If its crated up and heading to NZ let me know!

Otherwise i'll have to pass

[Mrya]

Best trained ever

Well Gentleman,

In my opinion (150h teaching, 80h in C172 the rest in Pa38) the Tommy make a fantastic trainer in some points:

- for future CPL... specially if you have Tommy -> Arrow -> Seminole (first question when i entered the Seminole: "who put two engines on a that poor ol' Tommy??") Step up is great, controls feel of a way heavier plane (i'm coming from Bonanza school....)

- for people at aeroclub level who think of stepping up on a low winged, high performance (VP and or RG)

As for training a bit elder people (no offense meant) who wish to fly a Cessna for fun and that's it, I believe training in a C172, or C152+stepup C172 would be a better option.

But it's true that if you know the Tommy you can fly almost anything. By the matter of fact I learned CPL IR all exclusively on a Bonanza and going back to the Tommy after that wasn't as easy as i bragged about.

For spins...well flat spins area deadly, and we have too much stuff (emergency equip) in the back (CG!!) to risk it. On top, ours has 3500h and is year '78, which isn't the youngest, if you see my point... We have a no-spin policy. Just teachin' the spin entry recovery and the stud's get it darn well Enough in my (our) opinion.

Wouldn't mind getting a nice fleet of 3-4 Tommies, 2 Arrows and a Seminole, overhauled, new panel (or new Arrow+Seminole) for a nice CPLIRMEPfATPLmaybeMCC outfit

Enjoy your Tommy , and if you don't like it, stick to you Whatever ...

Happy landings!

Mrya

[TCU]

Flew in the former Cape Town Flying Club's PA-38 a few years ago and after flying PA-28's, 172 and 182's it felt like starting all over again...could I trim that thing....could I hell. But the view from that cockpit...amazing!

Anyway after nice 3 hrs jaunt from CPT to Cape Agulhas and back I finally felt I was coming to terms with the little beastie and am certainly glad to have the little Tommie in my log book