I don't suppose you've given much thought to "Chicken Hawk". Well, I don't blame you either.

Sky Rooster

Golden Hawk
Silver Hawk
EZHawk
Country Hawk
Billy Hawk
TailHawk

Rite-Way conversion

Emory Bored wrote:I don't suppose you've given much thought to "Chicken Hawk". Well, I don't blame you either.

Sky Rooster

Golden Hawk
Silver Hawk
EZHawk
Country Hawk
Billy Hawk
TailHawk

Rite-Way conversion

Not a "silver and gold" kinda guy. Country Hawk was also a possibility, until Ir emembered my mother's Country Squire station wagon taking me to school in the morning

EZ Flapper?

Gump

The whole point of the conversion is to land on rougher ground. Ergo, the Ruff Hawk.

How about Backcountry hawk or BC Hawk?

The Mountain Hawk

The Ranger Hawk

The Incredible Hawk (offered in Green)

Tail Hawk?

'Greg

How about Skybucket? ...not quite a Skywagon.

And to think I'm supposed to be the big smart-ass of the group...

Back Country Hawk was actually a contender, but I figured some people on this forum would accuse me of pandering and brown-nosing. The forum admin might sue my ass for copyright infringement and identity theft. But Back Country Hawk was a strong contender, and sounds really good, and says what the product really is, and if everyone here (including the big boss man) thinks it's OK and not pandering then I'll do it.

The offer above (world's first audience interactive aircraft naming project!) is sincere.

Skyhawk TW?

Hawkdragger

Are these aluminum gear legs based on Cessna 180 gear legs? Would they fit on a 180? If they would, would you pursue an STC for that? That would be interesting.

EZFlap wrote:And to think I'm supposed to be the big smart-ass of the group...

Back Country Hawk was actually a contender, but I figured some people on this forum would accuse me of pandering and brown-nosing. The forum admin might sue my ass for copyright infringement and identity theft. But Back Country Hawk was a strong contender, and sounds really good, and says what the product really is, and if everyone here (including the big boss man) thinks it's OK and not pandering then I'll do it.

The offer above (world's first audience interactive aircraft naming project!) is sincere.

I like being pandered too. Brown noses I'm not so sure..... Back Country Hawk sounds fine. Here's some more:
Retro Hawk
Sierra Hawk
Mountain Hawk
Wilderness Hawk
Wild Hawk
Montana Wild Hawk (Just kidding; you'll have to dig deep in the memory banks for that one. Think Slaughterhouse Five. Valerie Perrine. Why is it I can't forget that scene)

EB

There's already the Texas taildragger, pretty much applied to any C150 taildragger even if it's been done under a different STC. "172 taildragger" works for me but it's apparent that you need some sort of catchy name that gets people's attention. Considering where you're located, how about the Tujunga Taildragger? (Topanga? Tarzana?.....)

Tundra Hawk

Excellent, Tadpole, thanks !

So at present we have SportHawk, Back Country Hawk, and Tundra Hawk as the prime candidates. To do the right thing, and because of the context of how it came up, Back Country Hawk would kinda need the permission of the forum admin to not have a problem with. The other two are open season.

What say ye, o peanut gallery?

BTW FedEx just charged me a f***in' fortune to ship my stuff up to Anchorage for the show. You guys better show up and buy some stuff or it's gonna be named the Chapter 11 Poverty Hawk !

EZFlap wrote:Excellent, Tadpole, thanks !

Not sure why we didn't think of it earlier, but I like it. I'd be interested in any brochure or anything you put out....might sway to me look for a 172 to convert since I'm kind of looking at 170s a little more now lately. If I did your conversion, regardless of what you call it, I think I'd have to call it the Tundra Hawk anyway

I will be happy to send you whatever I come up with for print literature. Basically, per a previous post I made on this, it will be a lot easier and less mayhem in the airplane than it was originally, and (when approved) the parts will cost a fraction of OEM parts. That fraction is looking like just over half at this early stage. There will also be a worthwhile savings in weight, not finalized how much yet.

To answer another poster's question, the gear legs for the 172 conversion are based on 170B legs, which is what is really appropriate for the weight of the 172 and 175 airplane. But yes I will be making (different) gear legs as part of adding the 182 to the STC. That is a project which will immediately follow the 172 PMA kit.

A straighttail 172 would be a good choice for you Jason. You can usually find them a lot cheaper than a 170, especially a 170B. Then you can do the taildragger conversion on your own and have yourself a nice backcountry plane.

robw56 wrote:You can usually find them a lot cheaper than a 170, especially a 170B. Then you can do the taildragger conversion on your own

One other thing to consider is that a converted 172 allows someone to start flying immediately, and save up or set aside money for the conversion, and still be flying while that saving and squirreling away money is happening.

It is also my limited understanding that (like the 182/180 parallel) there are more lower time, less beat-up & damaged or corroded 172's out there cheap than there are 170's. Perhaps some of the more experienced 170/172 experts can address the issue of factory corrosion protection, whether they did 172's any better than 170's etc.