This was intentional on Beechcraft’s part in print ads, the Skipper was touted as using “the T-tail design of the Super King Air turboprop.” And while theTomahawk’s gear attaches at the wing, the Skipper’s is slightly narrower and attaches to the fuselage’s belly.īeyond those differences, the two models are near carbon copies in terms of appearance. The Tomahawk’s vertical stabilizer extends above the horizontal stabilizer while the Skipper’s is a true T-tail, resembling that of its big brother, the Beechcraft King Air. The Tomahawk has square side windows and a full wraparound rear window, for example, while the Skipper has trapezoidal side windows and two separate triangular rear windows. The visual differences are few and minor, and differentiating them requires some attention to detail. In terms of outward appearance, the Piper PA-38 Tomahawk and Beechcraft Skipper look nearly identical. The skipper has relatively narrow main gear that are attached to the fuselage rather than the wing. Here, we explore Beechcraft’s take, the Model 77 Skipper. After compiling a list of the most desired improvements, both Piper and Beechcraft went to work developing their own modernized entries into the primary trainer market and came out with new models. Cessna’s competitors wanted a piece of the pie, and the process started with thorough, competitive analysis. Back in the early- to mid-1970s, Cessna dominated the primary training market and accordingly, the company had a target on its back. Additional fuel capacity would likely come up, and some might mention a desire for a more modern design. Better visibility from the cockpit would also be mentioned. More cabin space would likely top the list. Gather a few thousand Cessna 150 pilots and ask them how they’d improve the airplane, and the resulting feedback would be both consistent and predictable.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |