Perhaps, and this is just a thought, if all these companies had perhaps invested time and money in tractor gyros, rather than one failed pusher gyro after another, they might have made a success of the company and concept. I'd love to hear their reasoning, lets make a variation on previous failures, and make a variation on a failed theme, yes, another dangerous push gyro, that's what the world wants.
Very good analysis. I flew in an air command two up when I was being trained in the gyro glider. Two up it was docile. But those blades were effecient and very wide chord. 8inches and from memory about 23ft on a light 532 Rotax. I watched my instructor fly it one up and it had a spectacular rate of climb. I don't think people get just how big a difference it is in gyros in which the airframe weighs very little now loose 80kg on a powerful light machine which now is also flying at a much shallower disk angle for any given airspeed. People should really have been encouraged to fly smaller rotors on the lighter machines. But the people follow the wrong numbers they were always looking for lift and top speeds were always pushed too. Wallis who at the time held all the world records broke his speed record with 19 ft rotors bensen had flow gyro gliders for GE down to 15 ft. I knew one guy who built a 503 gyro with 18ft rotors, flew great tiny little gyro he built to fit in the back of a station wagon. Chrome Molly frame with the motor and seat assembly and joystick detachable from the nose, tail, mast and wheel struts which slid in beside. He bolted it all together and it climbed well, had a good speed range and the blades spun up really quickly. The air command would have been far safer with two sets of blades a shorter set for the higher performance machine and a bigger set for the two seat. Or just fly at sensible speeds. Great video I'm loving this series.
That’s some good colour and something I’ve not heard from the UK side where the view has really been focused upon the rapid growth / lack of training time and the peaky engine characteristics with the 532 version and how in the UK pretty much all sales were the bigger power 532 variant. But you are absolutely right jumping out of the two seater into the very light single seater and it must have felt you were going to the moon!!
Actually one other thing one of the outcomes I mentioned was the CAA commissioned study into gyroplane dynamics it took years to finally come out (17 years to be exact) but the report looked at the Air Command for completeness- it was no longer a feature anymore in the UK market but given it was the aircraft that kicked the study off the scientists felt the need to review. The summary conclusion was as I said in the film - no real worse stability than a basic helicopter- but also they commented on the stick arrangement of the single and two seaters which I see as the same and it’s one element of the study that confuses me. That said I do feel that those around Gyroplanes at the time were somehow able to ignore some very basic elements that make a big difference and I’ve never really been able to square that off in my head as to why. Just how can we have ever thought it was cool to fire someone off solo after 5hrs??? I think with the Wallis era accidents and then this new set in the early 90s it’s given Gyroplanes a death trap label which even today lingers.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 yes I read the report too and at the time was in email contact with one of the leads on the report from Glasgow University I think. I noted the mentioned that too,. They also stated h stabs wouldn't be very effective at low speeds at as the higher speeds were dangerous anyway. What I find frustrating was and still is the doging of the basic human issue here. I don't doubt that stable and unstable Configs exist between thrust line cg,. But I note that all the Boyett style machines down here have 0 degrees downthrust and given many of our guys fly off rough strips most have large balloon tyres. Low drag moment. My VW with short blades and correct downthrust doesn't require any adjustment in thermals. However don't learn to fly them... Few of our instructors wanted to take responsibility especially those that were also selling machines. I collected and read years ago the previous 16 years of accident reports down here. I have a theory I'd be interested in your feedback on seeing as you've clearly researched the hell out of this. How many blunted over on windy days going from downwind to upwind on final? There were a significant number down here, this is my hypothesis. You're a low hours pilot flying downwind. You turn base and you find yourself drifting as you haven't been taught about reference frames and are instinctively trying not to drift you increase your bank. They lift vector being less vertical you increase power and tighten the turn pulling in more back stick. You hold height and then turn onto final. Your rotors have massive energy stored and as you flatten out the disk you now scene vertically as your rotors wash off excess rpm so you push the stick forward. The disk now shallower than before has an even more vertical component so you push it forward again and bang! Now consider this the Air Command had an advertised cruise speed of 50mph,. My instructor claimed it's best LD was 30mph. That's what we flew it at. Now imagine the extra energy and how much shallower your disk is with high lift low wing loading rotors 15-20 mph faster than it needed. My concern particularly with the concept that the machines limitations can be overcome by say high cg etc is not that there is not a there there but that it's contribution is mabey 5,% and we ignore the 95%. Think about this thought experiment. Bolt your gyro down to the ground. Do the same in a fixed wing. Now imagine your blades are spun up in say 40mph wind. Both you and the cessna parked beside you cand move the fuselage. Now if the pilot pushed his stick full forward how much does his wing change angle? If I push my stick full forward how much does mine change. Can I unload it and how hard was it to do? This I think is what we fail to confront. Design everything perfectly high cg to thrust line (like Wallis's) which also had downthrust. And it takes very little pressure to punch it over. I've read very few accident reports where someone was witnessed to be in pio and more where they just reported it usually on just turning into final bunting over. I'd love your thoughts. Again excellent series.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 also how many have read the report do you think? I found it very useful. The maths was beyond me mostly but it was a well written report. Most down here ignored it completely. We initially got a summary but almost no one down here was interested. Same with the original Wallis accident report. Very similar conclusions and both ignored. One thing I note they missed was any analysis into torsional flexibility of rotors in the final report. This was a pity as I had been instructing in the gyro glider and had trained on and built wooden rotors. Wood when properly tuned are far far more stable. Than metal and glass. Our club had a member have a go at making a set for our club glider as we were training on a borrowed set of metal blades and I was afraid a student would bend them. Anyway they looked fine but he'd measured the chord balance point wrong and they were slightly over balanced. They were incredibly stable. I hit a massive thermal with a student (we get some whoppers in summer down here). The ASI hit the top at 80mph I yelled my machine and whacked the surprised students hand off the stick but nothing happened. It stayed level the wind was roaring and we flew out if it with maybe 5ft gained. I hit ones like this before and you end up looking down at the top of the car with your nose bobbing down from the boom and had to be really careful. Unfortunately the blades had other issues he'd run out of glue finishing the top skin of one blade so thinned it out. As that trim tab was pushed up to track the blades we got a two foot delamination in flight which was an experience I could tell you. But I read up in Bensens design manual he'd discovered the same. They became ornamental but I think we're trying to stabilise the wrong thing. In fact I'd prefer to fly normally balanced wood any day. They need great care in transport etc. But they are so forgiving in flight we gave away a lot for convenience. Our blades aren't so great now. Watch on you tube how many of these machines are flying with massive stick shake. Cadis seem to have that sorted but for the money some of these machines are to be putting up with the cumulative stress of constant stick shake. Worries me.
Cameron Lapworth hi yeah I have some views on last two posts - I’ll get back later today but yes quickly on the Glasgow report. What makes me quite angry on the report is that it was 17 years in the making and a lot of clever people did a lot of work... it comes out and basically a bunch of guys who literally need a calculator to sum 2 beans added to another 2 beans rubbish in 5 mins when it takes them half a day to decode the airfield TAF.
Gyrocopter flying club This is a great service to the sport and fantastic footage/commentary combo!! I have always wanted a vtol capability. Why happened to it? No one seems willing to work on a two position or full variable collective head any more, what gives? It strikes me after reading some of the discussions between you guys with experience, that collective might solve some problems.
It is a slight exaggeration to say that there hasn't been a bunt/pio/ppo accident since the adoption of horizontal stabilisers, but only a slight exaggeration. QED. The modern accidents are nearly all down to patchy instruction and pilot impatience. The good news is they are mostly non-fatal. The bad news is that insurance is becoming a problem. I flew my Bensen VW without and with a stabiliser. The difference in pitch stability was stunning.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Yes. After all the discussion about thrustline /VCG alignment, training etc, etc, the character of accidents in general changed radically with the general adoption of horizontal stabilisers. All gyros now have horizontal stabs. The only anomaly I would see would be the Cricket, which seems to have not had a bad record, despite not having a stab. Minimising Thrustline/CG divergence is obviously desirable, but it is the stab that made all machines more pitch-stable.
EIGYRO yeah sorry I was asking as I hadn’t mentioned them! But it’s an interesting point you make and a question for you. I always wondered peter lovegroves view on them only he obviously didn’t use them on the cricket but was conscious of the thrustline and of course Wallis never used them.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 I gather Peter Lovegove is no longer accessible, but Mike Concannon might know what Peter's views were. Some of Wallis's machines did have various horizontal stabilisers, (the faster ones), but his machines were very squat, and it may have been less of an issue. I think Wallis's machines were near centreline thrust anyway. I should also clarify that my stabiliser is fully immersed in the propwash, which is alleged to be more effective.
Im so mad that these are banned just because people flew without training.... Are there any barebone gyrocopters that look like this one that I can buy/build/fly?
Gyros are like fixed-wing aircraft: You do NOT learn to fly one by hopping in and teaching yourself to fly....
Perhaps, and this is just a thought, if all these companies had perhaps invested time and money in tractor gyros, rather than one failed pusher gyro after another, they might have made a success of the company and concept.
I'd love to hear their reasoning, lets make a variation on previous failures, and make a variation on a failed theme, yes, another dangerous push gyro, that's what the world wants.
Very good analysis. I flew in an air command two up when I was being trained in the gyro glider. Two up it was docile. But those blades were effecient and very wide chord. 8inches and from memory about 23ft on a light 532 Rotax. I watched my instructor fly it one up and it had a spectacular rate of climb. I don't think people get just how big a difference it is in gyros in which the airframe weighs very little now loose 80kg on a powerful light machine which now is also flying at a much shallower disk angle for any given airspeed. People should really have been encouraged to fly smaller rotors on the lighter machines. But the people follow the wrong numbers they were always looking for lift and top speeds were always pushed too. Wallis who at the time held all the world records broke his speed record with 19 ft rotors bensen had flow gyro gliders for GE down to 15 ft. I knew one guy who built a 503 gyro with 18ft rotors, flew great tiny little gyro he built to fit in the back of a station wagon. Chrome Molly frame with the motor and seat assembly and joystick detachable from the nose, tail, mast and wheel struts which slid in beside. He bolted it all together and it climbed well, had a good speed range and the blades spun up really quickly. The air command would have been far safer with two sets of blades a shorter set for the higher performance machine and a bigger set for the two seat. Or just fly at sensible speeds. Great video I'm loving this series.
That’s some good colour and something I’ve not heard from the UK side where the view has really been focused upon the rapid growth / lack of training time and the peaky engine characteristics with the 532 version and how in the UK pretty much all sales were the bigger power 532 variant. But you are absolutely right jumping out of the two seater into the very light single seater and it must have felt you were going to the moon!!
Actually one other thing one of the outcomes I mentioned was the CAA commissioned study into gyroplane dynamics it took years to finally come out (17 years to be exact) but the report looked at the Air Command for completeness- it was no longer a feature anymore in the UK market but given it was the aircraft that kicked the study off the scientists felt the need to review. The summary conclusion was as I said in the film - no real worse stability than a basic helicopter- but also they commented on the stick arrangement of the single and two seaters which I see as the same and it’s one element of the study that confuses me. That said I do feel that those around Gyroplanes at the time were somehow able to ignore some very basic elements that make a big difference and I’ve never really been able to square that off in my head as to why. Just how can we have ever thought it was cool to fire someone off solo after 5hrs??? I think with the Wallis era accidents and then this new set in the early 90s it’s given Gyroplanes a death trap label which even today lingers.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 yes I read the report too and at the time was in email contact with one of the leads on the report from Glasgow University I think. I noted the mentioned that too,. They also stated h stabs wouldn't be very effective at low speeds at as the higher speeds were dangerous anyway. What I find frustrating was and still is the doging of the basic human issue here. I don't doubt that stable and unstable Configs exist between thrust line cg,. But I note that all the Boyett style machines down here have 0 degrees downthrust and given many of our guys fly off rough strips most have large balloon tyres. Low drag moment. My VW with short blades and correct downthrust doesn't require any adjustment in thermals. However don't learn to fly them... Few of our instructors wanted to take responsibility especially those that were also selling machines. I collected and read years ago the previous 16 years of accident reports down here. I have a theory I'd be interested in your feedback on seeing as you've clearly researched the hell out of this. How many blunted over on windy days going from downwind to upwind on final? There were a significant number down here, this is my hypothesis. You're a low hours pilot flying downwind. You turn base and you find yourself drifting as you haven't been taught about reference frames and are instinctively trying not to drift you increase your bank. They lift vector being less vertical you increase power and tighten the turn pulling in more back stick. You hold height and then turn onto final. Your rotors have massive energy stored and as you flatten out the disk you now scene vertically as your rotors wash off excess rpm so you push the stick forward. The disk now shallower than before has an even more vertical component so you push it forward again and bang! Now consider this the Air Command had an advertised cruise speed of 50mph,. My instructor claimed it's best LD was 30mph. That's what we flew it at. Now imagine the extra energy and how much shallower your disk is with high lift low wing loading rotors 15-20 mph faster than it needed. My concern particularly with the concept that the machines limitations can be overcome by say high cg etc is not that there is not a there there but that it's contribution is mabey 5,% and we ignore the 95%. Think about this thought experiment. Bolt your gyro down to the ground. Do the same in a fixed wing. Now imagine your blades are spun up in say 40mph wind. Both you and the cessna parked beside you cand move the fuselage. Now if the pilot pushed his stick full forward how much does his wing change angle? If I push my stick full forward how much does mine change. Can I unload it and how hard was it to do? This I think is what we fail to confront. Design everything perfectly high cg to thrust line (like Wallis's) which also had downthrust. And it takes very little pressure to punch it over. I've read very few accident reports where someone was witnessed to be in pio and more where they just reported it usually on just turning into final bunting over. I'd love your thoughts. Again excellent series.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 also how many have read the report do you think? I found it very useful. The maths was beyond me mostly but it was a well written report. Most down here ignored it completely. We initially got a summary but almost no one down here was interested. Same with the original Wallis accident report. Very similar conclusions and both ignored. One thing I note they missed was any analysis into torsional flexibility of rotors in the final report. This was a pity as I had been instructing in the gyro glider and had trained on and built wooden rotors. Wood when properly tuned are far far more stable. Than metal and glass. Our club had a member have a go at making a set for our club glider as we were training on a borrowed set of metal blades and I was afraid a student would bend them. Anyway they looked fine but he'd measured the chord balance point wrong and they were slightly over balanced. They were incredibly stable. I hit a massive thermal with a student (we get some whoppers in summer down here). The ASI hit the top at 80mph I yelled my machine and whacked the surprised students hand off the stick but nothing happened. It stayed level the wind was roaring and we flew out if it with maybe 5ft gained. I hit ones like this before and you end up looking down at the top of the car with your nose bobbing down from the boom and had to be really careful. Unfortunately the blades had other issues he'd run out of glue finishing the top skin of one blade so thinned it out. As that trim tab was pushed up to track the blades we got a two foot delamination in flight which was an experience I could tell you. But I read up in Bensens design manual he'd discovered the same. They became ornamental but I think we're trying to stabilise the wrong thing. In fact I'd prefer to fly normally balanced wood any day. They need great care in transport etc. But they are so forgiving in flight we gave away a lot for convenience. Our blades aren't so great now. Watch on you tube how many of these machines are flying with massive stick shake. Cadis seem to have that sorted but for the money some of these machines are to be putting up with the cumulative stress of constant stick shake. Worries me.
Cameron Lapworth hi yeah I have some views on last two posts - I’ll get back later today but yes quickly on the Glasgow report. What makes me quite angry on the report is that it was 17 years in the making and a lot of clever people did a lot of work... it comes out and basically a bunch of guys who literally need a calculator to sum 2 beans added to another 2 beans rubbish in 5 mins when it takes them half a day to decode the airfield TAF.
I’ve really enjoyed these videos. Fantastic work, thanks
Gyrocopter flying club This is a great service to the sport and fantastic footage/commentary combo!!
I have always wanted a vtol capability. Why happened to it? No one seems willing to work on a two position or full variable collective head any more, what gives?
It strikes me after reading some of the discussions between you guys with experience, that collective might solve some problems.
Hello, where could I buy the Air Command 447 Commander Gyroplane and for how much, or where can I get the documentation to make such a model?
Hi - Sadly i have no idea
Keep it up Smeg Chops...
Eloquent as ever butt muncher xx
It is a slight exaggeration to say that there hasn't been a bunt/pio/ppo accident since the adoption of horizontal stabilisers, but only a slight exaggeration. QED. The modern accidents are nearly all down to patchy instruction and pilot impatience. The good news is they are mostly non-fatal. The bad news is that insurance is becoming a problem.
I flew my Bensen VW without and with a stabiliser. The difference in pitch stability was stunning.
EIGYRO you making a statement re: the horizontal stabs??
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Yes. After all the discussion about thrustline /VCG alignment, training etc, etc, the character of accidents in general changed radically with the general adoption of horizontal stabilisers. All gyros now have horizontal stabs. The only anomaly I would see would be the Cricket, which seems to have not had a bad record, despite not having a stab. Minimising Thrustline/CG divergence is obviously desirable, but it is the stab that made all machines more pitch-stable.
P.S. By way of context. I trained by the Bensen method, with a lot of online help and advice from others.
EIGYRO yeah sorry I was asking as I hadn’t mentioned them! But it’s an interesting point you make and a question for you. I always wondered peter lovegroves view on them only he obviously didn’t use them on the cricket but was conscious of the thrustline and of course Wallis never used them.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 I gather Peter Lovegove is no longer accessible, but Mike Concannon might know what Peter's views were. Some of Wallis's machines did have various horizontal stabilisers, (the faster ones), but his machines were very squat, and it may have been less of an issue. I think Wallis's machines were near centreline thrust anyway. I should also clarify that my stabiliser is fully immersed in the propwash, which is alleged to be more effective.
Im so mad that these are banned just because people flew without training....
Are there any barebone gyrocopters that look like this one that I can buy/build/fly?
Hey - in a word if you mean new / in the UK then no...
Where are you located?
What do they mean by "un-augmented helicopters"? 05:27
In simple terms it just means manual controls.
thanks@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148