Piper PA38 - The Traumahawk
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 вер 2024
- My latest Vlog from a log as featured on Shimodapilot.com. I'm about as comfortable on camera as a tramp is in a tux so I missed a load of technical info out so here it is;
Crew: one
Capacity: one passenger
Length: 23 ft 1¼ in (7.04 m)
Wingspan: 34 ft 0 in (10.36 m)
Height: 9 ft 0¾ in (2.76 m)
Wing area: 124.7 ft² (11.59 m²)
Airfoil: NASA GA(W)-1
Empty weight: 1,128 lb (512 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 1,670 lb (757 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Avco Lycoming O-235-L2C air-cooled flat-four piston engine, 112 hp (83.5 kW)
I used to fly these in the late 70s. I enjoyed it.
I did spin training over the Everglades in one back in '83. Full throttle, stand it on it's tail, then my CFI says "right full rudder". The tail was already making a noise like someone flapping a thin sheet of metal....when I kicked the rudder all hell broke loose! Most fun you can have with your clothes on! If you're gonna spin one, be sure and wear the brown pants.
its called "Oil Canning" sound
I learned to fly in a Tomahawk with exactly the same paint! The classic 70's colors, and the plane was so "Mod" looking with its bubble cockpit and T-tail, when every other light plane you ever saw was either a Cessna or a Cherokee. Not much power, but a fun plane to learn in, and all that visibility was great for learning to fly in a busy TCA! I forgot all about this paint scheme until I saw this video. Mine looked exactly like this one.
Ditto here
Owned it and drove for many fun years
I love your selfie stick. I never did fly the "Traumahawk". but did check out and fly both the Arrow III T-tail, and the T-tail Lance. I like to do thorough pre-flights, and it always required a ladder to get a good look at the tail. Also, as you pointed out, the Stabilator is out of the prop wash. That kind of sucked when operating out of our grass strip. Impossible to blow the tail down on soft ground. The T tail Lance has a bad safety record, because it flies more like a jet. It is solely dependent, as is the Tomahawk, on relative wind over the Stabilator. On a heavy takeoff, if you are holding aft pressure, when that tail comes to life, it is easy to over rotate if you are not quick. Same with landing. You had better have your flare nailed when the tail quits! Throttle makes no immediate difference as a low tail does. Airspeed is life! Piper got it right, when they built the Saratoga, which is still my favorite cross country single. Not the fastest, but roomy, and carries a lot. Hope you get the chance to fly these other models, as you progress in this amazing science! Just remember, Maintain thine airspeed, 'lest the earth rise up to smite thee! Happy Contrails Dyf...
You summed up the mighty Thomashawk very well! I also learned to fly on one - ZK WAD back in the 1980s. Didn't do spins but i researched recovery from them just in case! 70kts was drummed into us for climb and approach as i remember. From that we went on to PA161 Cherokees and ended up on PA 200R Arrows which had constant speed props and retractable gear - another nice aircraft to fly. However the Tomahawk remains one of my favorites.
I have quite a bit of time in the arrow. My favorite retractable even over the venerable Comanche. The simplicity of their systems to me was a comfort in actual IMC.
Fantastic Video!! My favorite light plane design. I have only flown Cessna's and Piper warriors because there were no tomahawks available at my airports but I did fly radio control tomahawks and oddly enough we nicknamed them the "Traumahawk" too!
My memories of maintaining the traumahawk are not very good lying on the bottom of the tail cone doing dye penitent checks on the structure looking for cracks caused by the violent shaking of the tail in a spin. All those chemicals with little ventilation was a nightmare. I haven't seen one in so long I wondered if any were left flying.
Ever turn around and look at the T tail during a stall ? That will cause some trama. BTW, love the selfie stick.
What does it do?
@@ianrkav The whole tail section oscillates wildly back and forth, looks like it going to fall off.
@@stevemasoero8489 Don't forget to mention the Oil Canning sounds :)
@@teenagerinsac Yea, there is that too... LOL
Mainly happens clean, much reduced full flap as the aircraft attitude is lower at stall full flap.
Had my first Solo at Swansea in the Tomahawk in 1986 with Phil from Cambrian Flying Club. ;)
Great little aircraft. Lots of fun!
I did spin training in a Thawk...spins great! Panel vibrated quite on bit on takeoff. I don't understand why anyone would have difficulty in this bird.
It stalls very easily
According to the NTSB, the Tomahawk's wing design was modified after FAA certification tests, but was not retested.[2] Changes included reducing the number of full wing ribs and cutting lightening holes in the main spar.[3] The aircraft's engineers told the NTSB that the changes made to the design resulted in a wing that was soft and flexible, allowing its shape to become distorted and possibly causing unpredictable behavior in stalls and spins.[3] The design engineers said that the GAW-1 airfoil required a rigid structure because it was especially sensitive to airfoil shape, and that use of a flexible surface with that airfoil would make the Tomahawk wing "a new and unknown commodity in stalls and spins."[3]
Airworthiness Directive 83-14-08 issued in September 1983 mandated an additional pair of stall strips to be added to the inboard leading edge of the PA-38 wing to "standardize and improve the stall characteristics".[4]
Wing has typical narrow chord reaction to stalls, gets there quickly, unlike much wider chord say Cherokee.
@@flybobbie1449 Yup- also, it's difficult to fully stall a Cherokee because of the limited up-stabilator travel. You'd basically need to stall it from a zoom attitude.
I believe the production model reduced the number of wing ribs that the prototype had. While the airfoil remained the same (certification is based on airfoil). During a spin, the more deeply stalled wing could twist, exacerbating the differential of AoA and resulting in the possibility of an unrecoverable spin. I love your enthusiasm. That was me, 4000 hours ago!
I've heard others say similar things. I haven't looked into it myself but I would imagine that would be something fixed through AD's and the next round of production models very quickly. I doubt any of the ones that are flying today have that issue. I have over 1000 hours in tomahawks. I think we had 20 of them in our fleet. I spun most of them teaching other CFI candidates and I never had an issue.
Piper widely surveyed flight instructors for their input into the design. Instructors requested a more spinnable aircraft for training purposes, since other two-place trainers such as the Cessna 150 and 152 were designed to spontaneously fly out of a spin. The Tomahawk's NASA[1] GA(W)-1 Whitcomb airfoil addresses this requirement by making specific pilot input necessary in recovering from spins, thus allowing pilots to develop proficiency in dealing with spin recovery.
According to the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Air Safety Foundation, which published a Safety Highlight report on the Piper Tomahawk, the Piper Tomahawk has a one-third lower accident rate per flying hour than the comparable Cessna 150/152 series of two-place benchmark trainers. The Tomahawk has a higher rate of fatal spin accidents per flying hour. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) estimated that the Tomahawk's stall/spin accident rate was three to five times that of the Cessna 150/152.[2]
According to the NTSB, the Tomahawk's wing design was modified after FAA certification tests, but was not retested.[2] Changes included reducing the number of full wing ribs and cutting lightening holes in the main spar.[3] The aircraft's engineers told the NTSB that the changes made to the design resulted in a wing that was soft and flexible, allowing its shape to become distorted and possibly causing unpredictable behavior in stalls and spins.[3] The design engineers said that the GAW-1 airfoil required a rigid structure because it was especially sensitive to airfoil shape, and that use of a flexible surface with that airfoil would make the Tomahawk wing "a new and unknown commodity in stalls and spins."[3]
Airworthiness Directive 83-14-08 issued in September 1983 mandated an additional pair of stall strips to be added to the inboard leading edge of the PA-38 wing to "standardize and improve the stall characteristics".[4]
I did my instrument training in a Tomahawk. Most in actual night IMC. Also spin training. (It had the rudder AD completed). I really like the bird. Add some wheel pants and it is decent looking too.
Vlog from a log! Nice one:-)
Damn, that title killed me!
Piper Tomahawk explained. Thank you!
I think the Tomahawk is perfect for active spin recovery training. I
don't really get why you would get one if you want to do something else.
That's one aircraft I'm proud to say I've NEVER FLOWN...!
That's one aircraft I'm proud to say I have.. Over 1000 hours in...
Gordon McCoy A comment made without knowledge is an opinion based in ignorance.
If ignorance is the basis for your pride I feel sorry for you Mr McCoy.
“The highest form of ignorance is when you reject something you don’t know anything about”.
Where did you get your selfie stick from..... can I find it on Amazon?
Damn that selfie stick is on point
Very informative video i fly out of swansea and flew that particular tomahawk and asked my instructor Lori years ago to spin a tomahawk and recovery was beautiful very good visibility certainly prefer it over a 150 love low wings anyway a great club/learing plane.
Negetives..it just skims in the flare needs a diffrent set of skills
Problem i find the wing doesn't produce much lift at very low speed, you need to fly it onto the runway. It won't "parachute" down like a 152/172 or say a Warrior if you misshandle the flare.
Lovely colour scheme on that bird :)
As a piper fan and Cherokee owner the tamahawk is definitely my least favorite plane to fly in the piper family. Nice shirt.
I was under the impression that spins with aircraft that have a T Tail is a bad idea and can lead to unrecoverable spins. In the United States I wasnt aware that the Tomahawk was ever approved for spins. I know it wasnt in the 80s when I flew it getting my Private. I had to go find one outside of my normal schools because of the, then lack of trim capabilities that forced pilots to be on the controls all the time and more tireing to fly than the 150 and 152s. At least that was the rumor and was why so few were sold worldwide although my personal impression was very good.
The big trouble owning one is the spar has a time restriction I believe it's 11000 hrs and it needs to be replaced!! Not repaired or put on condition. Huge set back to owning one
I'd like to see you put 11,000 on any airplane. Even a used one.
My ai taught me to check the rear spar carry through that runs through the baggage compartment. If one pushes aft on a wingtip it will often buckle. Treat the tommy hawk gingerly.
There's a life extension mod you can do.
@@rp6523 We have mod on our Tomahawk, all is fine.
Tomahawk would be great if it had a wider wing and low tail....Cherokee!
owned 5374T drove it for many enjoyable years good times thx for video
BTW i never stalled/spun that plane ever! check for that AD fix
Needs paint for sure
Original selfie stick
I never noticed this before but the Tommy has a lot of washout.
Was looking at NTSB reports on the Tomahawk a few I found strange one CFI and his student crashed while doing touch and goes the student died CFI lived. Engine quit on take off the fuel selector valve has a Polymeric insert which cracked and the fuel selector was not allowing more then 20% fuel to flow to the engine. The CFI attempted a turn back instead of landing straight ahead I checked Runway 20 on google maps there were places to open fields slightly off to the left straight ahead. Accident Number ERA17FA112 Turning back a Tomahawk at 400 feet land back on the runway is foolish. 2nd one I found student pilot was solo practicing and aileron turnbuckle fell apart he lost Aileron control on one side it the cause was the turnbuckle someone had substituted the safety clips Piper says to use for safety wire the inside turnbuckle had no wire or clips. Accident Number LAX04FA167 The rest of the accidents in the last 20 years were typical VFR pilots flying into IMC or bad weather scud running though the mountains. I could not really find any actual spin accidents in the last 20 years there was only 7 fatal accidents in the last 20 years listed.
Bro I had carsick watching your video.
nice selfie stick
Hey Mate, if that Piper is so great as you've been pointing out then why are you calling it the "Traumahawk"??!
A horrible nick name from long ago, from pilots that never learned to fly it properly.
Nice!
I just found one of these online for 20000 euros...not sure whether its worth it or not but this video gave me a lot of good information.
It is a nice little plane indeed
oh wow cambrian i fly there hahah, i moved from gower flight centre
Well the C42 is a microlight so not a comparison really
Cessna 150 poorer safety record due to the drag on full flap goarounds.
Not the planes fault. The pilots. I actually prefer the 40 degrees of flap versus the 30 on the 152. I have landed the 150 in strong winds, in 100 feet, and stopped right on the fuel pad, which was just off to the side, and 100 feet from the threshold.
@@ConvairDart106 That is true, nice to have the 40 setting.
I learned in a Beech Skipper... a much better plane than a Tomahawk.......... Tim
good for you sir...... so .... how... does.. that... ad.d... anything :) like saying oranges are better than bananas.... or puree if i need to get down to the punctuation level..... (dot dot dot dot)