New Tomahawk I designed in CAD...

[Bravo One-Eight]

It's three in the morning and I'm still chugging away.

I actually had this running for a long time, but I decided I'd just fix up a few things I didn't like about it earlier and then post it. So... here's my latest little design for something new.

I can't build this at the moment, because I don't have the tools, but I thought it would be cool to design it anyways.

Design Information
These specifications are preliminary only and subject to change.
Material Specification: AISI S7 Tool Steel, Oil Quenched & Tempered at 400 Degrees Centigrade.
Total Weight (Estimated): 975 Grams
Longitudinal Point Of Balance (Estimated): 177mm from front fiber
Edge Hardness (Specified): 55 Hardness Rockwell C to 58 Hardness Rockwell C. 50 Hardness Rockwell C is permissible on shaft and axe head.
Overall Length: 460mm
Width of Head: 195mm
Maximum Thickness of Material: 10mm
Grind Angle: 40 degrees (bilateral)
Bevel Type: Hollow Ground

Some notes I just made:
Although draft angles are shown on the Mark IV Black Ops to facilitate closed-die forging, it's likely that what I'll have to do is simply buy the plate, then send it for water jet cutting, then to a CNC shop to have the "Bravo 18 Tactical" engraved (although I've shown it embossed). The grinding will have to be done by hand and then the heat treatment done by someone else. I figure that the best way to give it a good grip would be to wind MIL-C-5040 Type III Paracord around the webbings of the handle to form a nice gripping surface.

Any opinions? Any feedback, help, suggestions, comments, or criticism is welcome.

I will post high-quality renders tomorrow.

 

[Tbaggin]

That's pretty cool. No feedback on changes, only cause I think it's unique and intimidating

 

[chuxwan]

Awesome! Looks like a way more aggressive version of a hawk idea I've been drawing up (skeletal integral with a paracord wrap), except mine would be for backpacking rather than fighting, and yours looks to be done about 1000x more professionally. After seeing some hawks on the market with somewhat fantastical ideas about safe weight removal, it's refreshing how well and straightforwardly this is engineered. I'm absolutely clueless about fighting, so I don't know if the balance makes sense the way it appears. Are you considering tapering the tang? I also question the pommel shape, while it looks awesome, it seems like it extends beyond what could reasonably be purchased by fingers.
Looking forward to seeing the renders, this is exciting!

 

[teclis22]

awesome !!
Do you do CAD work for hire ?
DANG that looks great. Wish i knew how to use a CAD programm :/

 

[coreboy]

looks pretty sweet. i'm not a Hawk guy, but I would proudly own that beast

 

[LG&M]

Nice work, I would leave the head solid giving it more mass.

 

[foxx]

That looks very cool. I like it, but have some questions...
Your estimates of weight @ 34oz, and length of over 18" make this a pretty large hawk. That's when compared to other integral hawks, not wooden hafted traditionals.
I'm curious about your balance point, what do you mean "177mm from front fiber"? Most want the weight shifted forward in the head, with a balance point around where your Bravo 1B logo is.

This looks like a fighting hawk, so why S7? I've seen S7 used for breachers, while more fighting hawks are in something with better edge retention. S7 is a great hard use steel, but there are better options out there for a fighting hawk. Just saying....I've never made a hawk or designed one, I just buy and use them. So you've done more than I have, I'm just asking some questions.

One criticism of the GG&G Battlehawk is the large hole in the head. Ryan Johnston, of RMJ Tactical, pointed out that during breaching it can get hung up on the material that's being cut. I have experienced this myself, on a steel chair. Even a fighting hawk could get hung up on gear or bone..
So, I have to ask, why the holes in the head? Are they for making the hawk lighter, or for balance? One option would be to make a false edge across the top of the head, and do no holes. That would take weight out of the head, and maybe you wouldn't have to have those holes?

 

[Bravo One-Eight]

Okay, the renderings finished, I woke up and these were waiting for me .

Yep, I use Siemens NX for doing the designs. But for the actual 'pretty' rendering, I use Inventor because Inventor has a much better and more feature-rich rendering application. Here's the full colour rendering!

Awesome! Looks like a way more aggressive version of a hawk idea I've been drawing up (skeletal integral with a paracord wrap), except mine would be for backpacking rather than fighting, and yours looks to be done about 1000x more professionally. After seeing some hawks on the market with somewhat fantastical ideas about safe weight removal, it's refreshing how well and straightforwardly this is engineered. I'm absolutely clueless about fighting, so I don't know if the balance makes sense the way it appears. Are you considering tapering the tang? I also question the pommel shape, while it looks awesome, it seems like it extends beyond what could reasonably be purchased by fingers.
Looking forward to seeing the renders, this is exciting!

Thank you Chuxwan! Much appreciated, I really thought it would be fun to try some different approaches to reduction of weight, similar to the way they do it in a lot of the aerospace industry, with skeletizing the parts to trim the fat.

Yes, I'm a CAD Operator by profession! I'm either going to become a Technologist, or return to university to become an engineer; I love the design work. I'm actually clueless about fighting as well, never tried it, but I'd be interested in trying to learn sometime.

The "droop" in the knob at the end was a bit of an afterthought, I can tone that down in the later versions. I thought to do it a bit for style, but I can flatten the droop on the next run.

I don't know what you mean by tapering the tang, do you mean to reduce the thickness of the handle as it gets further away from the head?

Nice work, I would leave the head solid giving it more mass.

Thanks, I think I've got something coming up!

That looks very cool. I like it, but have some questions...
Your estimates of weight @ 34oz, and length of over 18" make this a pretty large hawk. That's when compared to other integral hawks, not wooden hafted traditionals.
I'm curious about your balance point, what do you mean "177mm from front fiber"? Most want the weight shifted forward in the head, with a balance point around where your Bravo 1B logo is.

This looks like a fighting hawk, so why S7? I've seen S7 used for breachers, while more fighting hawks are in something with better edge retention. S7 is a great hard use steel, but there are better options out there for a fighting hawk. Just saying....I've never made a hawk or designed one, I just buy and use them. So you've done more than I have, I'm just asking some questions.[...]

Hey Foxx,

Thank you for your advice, I really appreciate it! Ask all the questions you like, I'm very happy to answer them and discuss.

This morning, with the modifications above I was able to cut the weight down the weight to just a little over 29 ounces. The extra weight wasn't intentional, it was because I was unsure of where to make some material take offs. I've corrected it with this iteration. I thought to make the haft a little bit longer than most to add a bit of extra reach and give a bit more leverage.

177mm from the frontermost fiber would mean measured from the furthest point on the front - the head. That places it about maybe a little over a quarter's way down the haft. I'll show you a diagram:

The longitudinal point of balance is shown where the faded little blue and red arrows meet on the haft.



About the S7, I picked it because I didn't consider a few things you pointed out; I haven't had any training with this sort of thing and have never had to use my tomahawk in a "Tactical" situation. It wouldn't be hard to switch the material specification to SAE 5160 or 8670, which will still be good for heavy impact use and both - especially 8670 - will take a slightly longer-lasting edge. I had guessed that most soldiers in the field will be using their Tomahawks as tools first and weapons after, so I wanted something that would stand up to a lot of abuse, but still be usable as a weapon, which was why I added a sharpened beard, and a pick on the back. The pick is for helping to climb with as well as for puncturing things like helmets or body armour. I suppose I wanted to compromise in some ways.

[...]One criticism of the GG&G Battlehawk is the large hole in the head. Ryan Johnston, of RMJ Tactical, pointed out that during breaching it can get hung up on the material that's being cut. I have experienced this myself, on a steel chair. Even a fighting hawk could get hung up on gear or bone..
So, I have to ask, why the holes in the head? Are they for making the hawk lighter, or for balance? One option would be to make a false edge across the top of the head, and do no holes. That would take weight out of the head, and maybe you wouldn't have to have those holes?

Ah yeah, I'd made the holes in the head to help reduce the weight and try to keep the total deadweight down. I always find it kind of funny that they call it "Light Infantry" when the soldiers need to carry two-hundred pound backpacks on their marches!

I didn't thing it'd get stuck or hung up on things or on bones or equipment like that, that's a good point and it didn't occur to me. I'll remove the holes and this is what it looks like without them...

This is the same Tomahawk with a solid head. Surprisingly, this only makes about 20mm of difference in the point of balance because most of the material removed is actually close to the logo, although it makes a huge amount of difference in the weight. Without the cutouts in the head, the estimated weight is an even 1000 grams, or 35 ounces.

I can try a 'recess' cut out of the head without the holes on the next iteration, stay posted! So, next version, I'll look at or try to:

A) Flatten the 'droop' in the knob to make it easier to grasp,
B) Remove the cutouts from the head and replace them with a recess;
C) Evaluate a tapered handle to reduce weight;
D) Evaluate material specification switch to SAE 5160 or SAE 8670 Alloy Steel.

Thank you! Next one will be coming up soon.

 

[Silverthorn]

My 2 cents, It looks great.
Minor changes I would suggest.

1; Don't recess the head, that will still leave a spot for hang up.
Instead, Move the logo to the head, and drill out the area the logo used to be, this solves 2 problems, PoB, and weight.
2; A false edge at the top of the head, or a shallow crescent cut out from the end of the edge on the spike, to the thickest part of the axe bevel would drop some additional weight.
3;You can thin the spike a little,(Say a taper back to its base) but I wouldn't do it a ton because the thick spike helps to balance the head, very much like a traditional poll would.
4; I like the idea of flattening the droop some.(Maybe birds head it a little.)
5; I would be careful thinning the handle too much, as other hawk and axe users can tell you a thin handle hurts when its used, and it doesn't allow for very good control,(although a wrap, or thin scales of G10 or Micarta might weigh less and provide a beefy handle while still dropping weight.)

Overall I think this is a dang sharp design. Nice Job.

 

[Camber]

I would not go hollow grind...for anything that requires deep penetration, it's like driving a T into the material. Due to the shape, the cheeks are constantly fighting the penetration as they do nothing to spread it, but rather ram into the top of it.

Also, I think S7 is a fine choice. I would imagine the hawk would see more use for utility chores with a soldier, and even if it were to see use as a weapon, bones, zippers, plates body armor, helmets are very hard and in a stressful situation I would guess the blows would be less than ideal and run the risk of putting a lot of lateral stress on the edge.

 

[TwinStick]

I think that is AWESOME !!!

That being said, I also have experienced the heads getting stuck/wedged, when something being cut/breached wedges into a hole, in the head of hawk. Triangles are STRONG !!! (I know this to be fact as 35 yrs ago, i built a bridge out of toothpicks & elmers glue that held over 1000 lbs for a school project !). The only thing i would change is the tip of the handle. I would make it more pry friendly. Keep us posted on this project please.

 

[Leading Edge Fab]

Nice modeling work!

 

[Sled]

Just fantastic. I agree with "TwinStick" with making the handle base more pry friendly. A little curve might make it less likely to go "flying" Already picking out my paracord colors for the handle wrap!

 

[Liam021]

Wow that looks so awesome!

Dose anyone know where I can get CAD, Looks a lot nicer then pencil and paper.

 

[Square_peg]

The handle looks uncomfortable. The fawn's foot is turned to support spike use not axe use. Unless you intend for the axe bit to be rarely used then I'd change the shape of the handle.

The 'Black Ops' and 'Tactical' verbiage will appeal to mall ninja types.

 

[marenoa]

I would get rid of most of the fawns foot, I think it would snag in just about everything it touches

 

[chuxwan]

Bravo, the renders look awesome. Yes, that's exactly what I meant by tapered tang.

 

[Edwood7]

Are you going to add handle scales? May i suggest horse stall matt material for the handle. It’s a dangerous thing to have a slippery handle on an hawk.

 

[JayGoliath]

Better idea to leave more pass on the head for inertia.
Why not remove the fawn foot and modify it into a little pry-bar.

On the handle,instead of cutting chunks out of it, why not cut it like how you did on the Bravo 18 Tactical recess? That way you will have more lateral strength when it comes to prying.

 

[Simple Jumper]

I like where this is going, the only issue I (personally) notice is that the spike is fairly large. To me it looks a lot like a full tang remodeled M48, not necessarily bad but I find the spike on that thing is far too long and can make it difficult to wield as a fighting hawk. It's your creation, of course, but we can all learn from past mistakes made by others!

Just my $.02.