PDA

View Full Version : Hawk question



jrees
12-15-2013, 08:49 PM
In my search for an ultralight, i saw a 93 CGS hawk on Barnstormers for $4,500. It has a 447, rebuilt with around 30 hr. now, it had a recent hard landing that damaged the landing gear, which also has been repaired and flown since. They say the sails are in good shape. Is this something you would even consider getting for a first UL? I would rather have something with a 4 stroke, but all considered, ... just thinking... any thoughts??

jrees
12-16-2013, 04:01 PM
No replies so far, so i guess this was a stupid question on my part!

zaitcev
12-16-2013, 05:14 PM
Just be patient. I, for one, do not have first-hand experience with Hawk. But to tell the truth I expect boilerplate replies: *if* the sails are good, and *if* the repair was proper, and *if* a 447 is rebuilt well, it's a good deal. There's just no way to know. Personally, I would pass... Sounds more like a plane for a cheap old guy who already has a hangar full of tools and junk and wants to tinker with it. Also... The deal is just a bit _too good_, if you ask me.

martymayes
12-16-2013, 07:43 PM
What's the empty weight?

Greg Wilson
12-16-2013, 07:45 PM
I'll give the "boiler plate" response on this. I have not flown a CGS Hawk since about 1988 that one had a dual carb Kawasaki 440/belt redrive. It fist had sail cloth and was later covered with lightweight Stitts and a thin coat of silver dope. It was a great flying machine very predictable and mixed well with traffic at a GA airport. The gear should be easy to check, first does it sit straight/level? check the doubler saddle weldment and gear legs for cracks /rivets/kinks in gear tubes. I think newer ones have fiberglass gear so cracks/delamination in the glass rod gear legs. I don't know about sail cloth but if the stitching is good and you cant push a pencil eraser though it it is likely ok,(piper tripacers were originally fabric (cotton) tested that way, by pushing down the flaps with a pencil. The Rotax engine would be heavier than the Kaw. that we had but a lot of places will work on rotax parts and service are no problem. It will fly like a VERY light GA airplane, that was the design goal and it met that goal. The pilot weight is important with any pusher, you balance the engine, I had to put weight in front of the seat to get it to fly with-out forward stick,(I think 2 qts. of oil). The stabilizer should be adjustable for trim with bolts at the leading edge, I was the lightest of three that flew it so it was trimmed for the heavier guys. I currently fly an Aeronca Champ and a Team Mini-Max ultra light. The mini-max is another great "airplane" type ultra-light but it is wood the Hawk being metal is better if it is to sit out at all.

jrees
12-16-2013, 08:49 PM
Thanks for the input. Not sure on empty weight. The owner built this one, and has built other UL's also, so he says. I'm a little leary also, just like the design of the Hawk, full enclosure, etc., still rather have a 4 stroke if possible. Just a thought..

Ozzie
12-17-2013, 01:37 AM
As a UL pilot from the early days but not having flown one, not many made their way to Australia, I can say from what I have read over the years is that they have a good operational history. The designer was well respected in the industry. Try searching yahoo groups or similar for a owners forum.

FlyingRon
12-17-2013, 07:32 AM
Chuck's still around. I've seen him on Facebook. Not sure if he's still in the business.

The company is still around and has a link to "owners forum" on their site http://cgsaviation.com

jrees
12-18-2013, 09:33 PM
Looks like they're still selling new UL's, called the "ultra". A bit more pricey than the others out there, plus only 2 stroke options. These companies have to get on board with 4 stroke engines on UL's.

zaitcev
12-18-2013, 10:19 PM
I do not know Danny much, but he may not have the expertise to lighten the Hawk design significantly enough without Chuck. He's a business owner and an enthusiast, not an engineer. Although original Hawk was known to be one of the most lightweight in 1980s, it's not like that anymore.

Note though that the blurb at the Ultra's page says that it was, in fact, re-engineered from Classic. So hopefuly I'm wrong and it's a question of money.

martymayes
12-19-2013, 06:02 AM
I knew someone back in the early 90's that had a '92ish Hawk. It was close to 300# empty weight. I'd like to see one under 254#, the max allowable under Part 103. I'm sure it could be done but wow, I bet it would be "bare bones."
Options for a 4-stroke powered UL are somewhat limited because: a) lack of suitable/available, off the shelf engine b) Part 103 weight constraints.

Sam Buchanan
12-19-2013, 08:42 AM
I knew someone back in the early 90's that had a '92ish Hawk. It was close to 300# empty weight. I'd like to see one under 254#, the max allowable under Part 103. I'm sure it could be done but wow, I bet it would be "bare bones."
Options for a 4-stroke powered UL are somewhat limited because: a) lack of suitable/available, off the shelf engine b) Part 103 weight constraints.

Yep, as much as most folks would prefer a 4-stroke, supply is a problem. The Hummel (Scott Casler) 1/2 VW is only 87lbs ready-to-fly, but this is a custom-built engine with limited supply. It usually has about a six-month lead time. But the engine is very suitable for Part 103 in a carefully designed, light airframe such as the Legal Eagle.

jrees
12-19-2013, 05:53 PM
Thanks for the input. Looks like i'm going to have a wait no matter what i decide to go for.

Greg Wilson
12-23-2013, 08:59 AM
Yep, as much as most folks would prefer a 4-stroke, supply is a problem. The Hummel (Scott Casler) 1/2 VW is only 87lbs ready-to-fly, but this is a custom-built engine with limited supply. It usually has about a six-month lead time. But the engine is very suitable for Part 103 in a carefully designed, light airframe such as the Legal Eagle.
I Agree, supply of a light weight 4-stoke is a problem. For the "airplane like" ultralights the 1/2 VW is a good choice but at 87+ lbs it is too heavy for most. Remember that most "airplane" types, fisher 202, mini-max, etc. used the Rotax 277. The 277 was only about 69 lbs. with redrive, exhaust , ready to fly. The earlier machines did not have brakes or any instrumentation other than for the engine, (CHT,EGT), sail cloth was not just easier to install it is much lighter than a fabric/paint system also. The Lazair and Maxair Drifter were covered with Mylar film like a model airplane for weight savings. Just like the LSA's have gained weight because people want all the "stuff", the part 103 machines got fat as well. The 4-stroke is doable but full attention must be given to weight control.

jrees
12-23-2013, 11:09 AM
The more research i do, the more i am convinced that the BYF is the best choice. More than i want to spend, but looks like i have no other choice. I will have to add a couple of instruments, but am considering the tri-gear with full enclosure. It does not come with a VSI, or altitude indicator, but Belite sells guages reasonable. BYF said to send them any additional guages and they will install them. There's around a year waiting period with the BYF, and delivery will be around $700.00 or so. I also like the Belite, but the BYF appears to be built more solid than Belite, plus a Belite with a 4 stroke is a LOT more money than the BYF. I sure would like to be able to talk to someone that has flown a BYF!
I sure appreciate all the input and info from everyone here, and if anyone know of anyone that has flown a BYF, please let me know.

zaitcev
12-25-2013, 12:36 PM
There was a guy in the BYF thread at the HomebuiltAirplanes who posted a sensible-sounding write-up. Their forum is down right now, but from I recall, he said to watch out for the moment of tail-down. The BYF tailwheel has no springs in it, so you have to straighten the rudder momentarily as the tail comes down. It's the same habit as straightening the nosewheel of Piper Cherokee when nose comes down and it's easy to master. Start with zero cross-wind and work your way up. Another thing he posted was that the braking system takes a bit of practice too, since you always have to brake with both feet (one can step stronger than the other of course). Otherwise, it's pretty much a normal airplane without any vices, apparently.

That said, I don't know how hot a pilot you are... You might want to take it seriously. When I bought my quasi-ultralight, I pranged it on the second flight by letting it three-point before the stick was all the way back. Did $800 in damage. I have 250 hours, 14 in tailwheel.

P.S. Oh yeah, I forgot that they have a nosewheel model now. That makes it much easier.

jrees
12-26-2013, 03:00 PM
Zaitcev,
Thanks for the info. We're about the same in total flying time, although i have zero time in taildragger. If i go with the BYF, i will get the tri-gear. I've flown the Skipper, C-152, Sundowner, Warrier, an Ercoupe, and a couple others, although it's been a few years. I'm planning on going up with a guy in Ohio that has a 2 place Challenger to get the feel of a UL. Safety is number one, so i do take flying anything very serious. I've always been extremely picky, making sure the weather is good and the equipment all works right. Just looking for a little Ul to fly around my local area, i miss flying, thought about going lsa, but there's still too much red tape for me going that way. I plan to keep it and fly out of K-62 (Falmouth, Ky.) airport, where i'm on the board of directors. Thanks again, and hopefully i can read the write-up you mentioned. I believe the've only sold around a dozen or so BYF's so far, so there's not much info available yet.

Sam Buchanan
12-26-2013, 03:37 PM
Zaitcev,
Thanks for the info. We're about the same in total flying time, although i have zero time in taildragger. If i go with the BYF, i will get the tri-gear. I've flown the Skipper, C-152, Sundowner, Warrier, an Ercoupe, and a couple others, although it's been a few years. I'm planning on going up with a guy in Ohio that has a 2 place Challenger to get the feel of a UL. Safety is number one, so i do take flying anything very serious. I've always been extremely picky, making sure the weather is good and the equipment all works right. Just looking for a little Ul to fly around my local area, i miss flying, thought about going lsa, but there's still too much red tape for me going that way. I plan to keep it and fly out of K-62 (Falmouth, Ky.) airport, where i'm on the board of directors. Thanks again, and hopefully i can read the write-up you mentioned. I believe the've only sold around a dozen or so BYF's so far, so there's not much info available yet.

Get your tailwheel endorsement--you will have a lot of fun and it will open up your options when looking for a plane.

jedi
01-22-2014, 12:58 PM
Get your tailwheel endorsement--you will have a lot of fun and it will open up your options when looking for a plane.

I second the motion. Tail wheel flying is not difficult just different and requires some transition. I have not flown the BUF but would like to. In the past I did considerable Hawk flying and will highly recommend the model, especially with the tail wheel.