Wow! I'd never considered that the new increased rotor-RPMs possible with newer designs could actually INCREASE the take-off distance if you don't adjust your technique to compensate. It makes 100% sense once you've heard it explained, but it's not the kind of thing that's intuitively apparent unless someone explains it like you have.
Hi I'm glad you're finding the little films useful. As you say unless people give you some good colour you have to re-learn the mistakes others have made before! My biggest advice is when faced with a new situation or aircraft try and run through it with your own local instructor pilot first. A few hundred bucks spent with him/her will save you tens of thousands in the long run!
A gyro is not a short takeoff machine, although it is often touted as being so. It is a short landing machine, which is much more important. Many/ most of the takeoff accidents in the Eurotubs are at least partly due to rushed and mishandled takeoffs. Relax, and don't push it. Much more enjoyable.
The only gyros I have flown are in a computer simulator but I have wondered why the only instrument information available to the pilot is the rotor rpm. Why not have an instrument to show the rotor rpm acceleration so a pilot can try to maximize his stick position? How about small wireless devices in the outer portion of the rotors to show the relative speed of the retreating wing? Seems better instrumentation might change take-offs form an art to a science. :)
Blades are in autorotation you have litetally no direct control over them so if you maintain airspeed youre fine. These modern machines all use pre rotators us older blokes all hand wound our rotors and learned to see where ourcrotors were at so i have never used a rotor rpm and rarely flown in machine with pre rotators. My instructor had literally zero instruments. Soneone critised him that by regulation he require a pre rotator so he got out a pemanent marker and drew one on. Whe being trained hed cover up the asi and make us fly by feel (stick pressure). Of course he made us fit ASI etc but you dont NEED them if yoi really know how to fly.
Hi - The first is that the technique I highlight from the 2017 Sport POH isn't actually widely known although (I'll just talk about the UK as I know the landscape better) only 1 or 2 UK instructors have ANY flight time in the aircraft so it is a snag lurking in the background right now. The technique in the POH is somewhat similar to one I was talking about back in 2017 and a subject I covered in a video in early 2018. That has actually been quite controversial in the UK because there is a fear of pilots leaving the stick forward during the take off roll and sailing the blades - you won't if you follow my instructions - but sadly because it is a departure from the established view there has become a level of stubbornness and entrenchment. To whose benefit I've no idea but thats how it is. As far as the Magni take off is concerned clearly that is a well controlled, smooth, unhurried take off BUT (and this is a big point) it is important that students and low time pilots understand that the technique required to achieve the POH take off distances is very different (in terms of speed of events happening and your ability to stay mentally ahead of the aircraft) from the technique your instructor was happy with as you fly from 1km runway to the 800m runway...
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 I fly an Air Command 503 single seat and I've used the modified technique you taught in the prior video (keeping the stick forward slightly from full back and all that) and it has dramatically improved my take-off performance. I reckon if it works in an AC as well then it probably is an all-around better take-off technique for most gyro types.
Performance isn't everything. Safety and a progressive balanced takeoff is a better option. Longer takeoff, but better margins. I hate to hear the word 'aggressive' used in this context. To quote WngCdr Wallis, " You invite the machine to do what you want. You don't force it" If your runway is too short for this, it is too short.
EIGYRO yes I do agree in general but the point of this is to highlight the fact the data in POH for what is possible will vary by some margin from that...
You might think but you know people still don't get it. Just look at this accident report:-assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5f105182e90e070318d2d4dc/Rotorsport_UK_MTOsport_G-TYRO_08-20.pdf I genuinely don't think the potential snags could have been any highlighted any better and yet....
I wonder if we did videos on every accident and every flying machine This seems suspicious to me were so concerned about safety and the children always the children something smells funny here
Lots of video of Negative & how Not to fly. Let see how we Need to fly.. rotor RPM, V speeds, rotation / wheel balance, throttle in put ie: 100% or less for P-factor, ground roll speed vs air speed.. etc.. and more Real data & less congector... ie: a "rear stabilizer".. just throw one on... give me some Mathematical equations... like for a MD600 or ec135 or mbk117.. no more BS.
Hi - yes please do feel free to look through the other videos on the channel. I think there are 173 videos to date and about 65 that relate to instruction. Of the ones that might fit what I perceive to be your "Lets see how we need to fly" narrative. You could see how to take off, land, vertical decent, unusual attitude, crosswind landings, rotor management along side hours of webinars on similar subjects. Best thing is take a look and then please do feel free to critique and tell me your view. You have lost me on the "no more BS" comment. Tell me were did I say "just throw one on?" in relation to the tailplane? Again if you can be bothered to look, particularly in the webinar sections there is enough detail. What mathematical equation would you like that is similar to a MBK117? Tell me and I'll write it up in a specific film. Cheers.
@@leneanderthalien I find non aerobatic flight, dull, boring. WHY have the complication of a rotor with lots of moving parts to wear and fail? TBO for helicopter rotor heads is a measly 20 hours odd. cf. a 777's engines with a TBO of 100,000 hours or about 14 years of commercial flying. One person here, claims to fly IFR in a gyrocopter. Sure! Full panel, eh? Certified altimeters alone start at $5000. Then need gyros for artificial horizon, turn and bank, rate of descent/climb, directional compass. And a standby horizon. Then comms needed. Why bother? Slow, noisy toys waiting to bite and kill you.
@@davidwheatcroft2797 I kind of agree stupid glass panels like someone is going to fly a Gyro in IFR statement. They do have advantage of being stable in higher winds when compared to other light aircraft such as a trike, or light sport. You talk about aerobatics do you own an Extra 300 likely not the guys I know who do own those have deep pockets would never say "I find non aerobatic flight dull". You sound like your young person maybe fly RC airplanes? Join the Military if you want to pull G's.
@@Mike-01234 I built C-IAVW, an aerobatic biplane with differential frieze ailerons; push-pull control tubes - The Cadillac way. I flew for 3 years in the RAFVR, earning my licence, instrument rating, and aerobatic/formation/low level endorsements....HM the Queen gave me a Permanent Commission in the highest paid branch of the British armed forces, GD(P) with accelerated promotion and double pay...minimum 16 year contract. Nearly killed in a spiral dive; I flew MORE hours than anybody else in the Squadron; had dinner with Prince Charles and the Minister for Defence, UK. I have pulled 7G several times - we had recording G meters on the floor, and numbers recorded after each flight. Got some jet time, too. I speak 5 languages and passed my Chem/physics degree in just 2 years. I have watched an H bomb being loaded on a Victor. Have you? I have an O level in Latin verse. Also a forensic auditor - how are YOU on Number Frequency Analysis? Hm? Speak Swahili like I do, hm?
@@Mike-01234 I built C-IAVW, an aerobatic biplane. I served 47 years in the RAFVR. I speak 5 languages and paased my Bsc Chem exams in 2 years. Have a nice day.
The best series of gyro videos by a long shot. Well done.
Wow! I'd never considered that the new increased rotor-RPMs possible with newer designs could actually INCREASE the take-off distance if you don't adjust your technique to compensate. It makes 100% sense once you've heard it explained, but it's not the kind of thing that's intuitively apparent unless someone explains it like you have.
Hi I'm glad you're finding the little films useful. As you say unless people give you some good colour you have to re-learn the mistakes others have made before! My biggest advice is when faced with a new situation or aircraft try and run through it with your own local instructor pilot first. A few hundred bucks spent with him/her will save you tens of thousands in the long run!
A gyro is not a short takeoff machine, although it is often touted as being so. It is a short landing machine, which is much more important. Many/ most of the takeoff accidents in the Eurotubs are at least partly due to rushed and mishandled takeoffs. Relax,
and don't push it. Much more enjoyable.
EIGYRO agree with that
@@EIGYRO You could land but end up in a situation can't take off from there good thing a Gyro can be put on a trailer.
Fantastic and informative, thanks!
Good to see you back.
The only gyros I have flown are in a computer simulator but I have wondered why the only instrument information available to the pilot is the rotor rpm. Why not have an instrument to show the rotor rpm acceleration so a pilot can try to maximize his stick position? How about small wireless devices in the outer portion of the rotors to show the relative speed of the retreating wing? Seems better instrumentation might change take-offs form an art to a science. :)
Blades are in autorotation you have litetally no direct control over them so if you maintain airspeed youre fine. These modern machines all use pre rotators us older blokes all hand wound our rotors and learned to see where ourcrotors were at so i have never used a rotor rpm and rarely flown in machine with pre rotators. My instructor had literally zero instruments. Soneone critised him that by regulation he require a pre rotator so he got out a pemanent marker and drew one on. Whe being trained hed cover up the asi and make us fly by feel (stick pressure). Of course he made us fit ASI etc but you dont NEED them if yoi really know how to fly.
Why has the perceived wisdom been to balance on the mainwheels with aft stick when other techniques give a better performance? It doesn’t make sense.
Hi - The first is that the technique I highlight from the 2017 Sport POH isn't actually widely known although (I'll just talk about the UK as I know the landscape better) only 1 or 2 UK instructors have ANY flight time in the aircraft so it is a snag lurking in the background right now. The technique in the POH is somewhat similar to one I was talking about back in 2017 and a subject I covered in a video in early 2018. That has actually been quite controversial in the UK because there is a fear of pilots leaving the stick forward during the take off roll and sailing the blades - you won't if you follow my instructions - but sadly because it is a departure from the established view there has become a level of stubbornness and entrenchment. To whose benefit I've no idea but thats how it is. As far as the Magni take off is concerned clearly that is a well controlled, smooth, unhurried take off BUT (and this is a big point) it is important that students and low time pilots understand that the technique required to achieve the POH take off distances is very different (in terms of speed of events happening and your ability to stay mentally ahead of the aircraft) from the technique your instructor was happy with as you fly from 1km runway to the 800m runway...
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 I fly an Air Command 503 single seat and I've used the modified technique you taught in the prior video (keeping the stick forward slightly from full back and all that) and it has dramatically improved my take-off performance. I reckon if it works in an AC as well then it probably is an all-around better take-off technique for most gyro types.
Performance isn't everything. Safety and a progressive balanced takeoff is a better option. Longer takeoff, but better margins.
I hate to hear the word 'aggressive' used in this context. To quote WngCdr Wallis, " You invite the machine to do what you want. You don't force it" If your runway is too short for this, it is too short.
EIGYRO yes I do agree in general but the point of this is to highlight the fact the data in POH for what is possible will vary by some margin from that...
Ok, ok you did it. After watching so many accident videos flying a gyro, I quit.
You might think but you know people still don't get it. Just look at this accident report:-assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5f105182e90e070318d2d4dc/Rotorsport_UK_MTOsport_G-TYRO_08-20.pdf
I genuinely don't think the potential snags could have been any highlighted any better and yet....
The Magni's Ive seen fly were grossly underpowered and climbed like sh..... crap
You have flying experience shows.
Also sprachlich ist ein Rollstuhl einfach ein Rollstuhl und kein Rollstuhlsproduktz !!!
Why is the volume so low?
soap box orator !
Yikes.
And…. practice with R/C autogyro first.
I wonder if we did videos on every accident and every flying machine This seems suspicious to me were so concerned about safety and the children always the children something smells funny here
Voice only, no view
Hi - it seems to be working this end, take a look at your connectivity.
frickin waste of time as it doesn't snow ANY accidents !
In the context of the channel its an educational film for pilots or those interested in the dynamics of gyroplanes.
Lots of video of Negative & how Not to fly. Let see how we Need to fly.. rotor RPM, V speeds, rotation / wheel balance, throttle in put ie: 100% or less for P-factor, ground roll speed vs air speed.. etc.. and more Real data & less congector... ie: a "rear stabilizer".. just throw one on... give me some Mathematical equations... like for a MD600 or ec135 or mbk117.. no more BS.
Hi - yes please do feel free to look through the other videos on the channel. I think there are 173 videos to date and about 65 that relate to instruction. Of the ones that might fit what I perceive to be your "Lets see how we need to fly" narrative. You could see how to take off, land, vertical decent, unusual attitude, crosswind landings, rotor management along side hours of webinars on similar subjects.
Best thing is take a look and then please do feel free to critique and tell me your view.
You have lost me on the "no more BS" comment. Tell me were did I say "just throw one on?" in relation to the tailplane? Again if you can be bothered to look, particularly in the webinar sections there is enough detail. What mathematical equation would you like that is similar to a MBK117? Tell me and I'll write it up in a specific film. Cheers.
Allahol
Death machines! Why bother with silly flapping rotor? Build and fly a regular aerobatic a/c for Christ's sake.
gyros are not aerobatic aircrafts...
@@leneanderthalien I find non aerobatic flight, dull, boring. WHY have the complication of a rotor with lots of moving parts to wear and fail? TBO for helicopter rotor heads is a measly 20 hours odd. cf. a 777's engines with a TBO of 100,000 hours or about 14 years of commercial flying. One person here, claims to fly IFR in a gyrocopter. Sure! Full panel, eh? Certified altimeters alone start at $5000. Then need gyros for artificial horizon, turn and bank, rate of descent/climb, directional compass. And a standby horizon. Then comms needed. Why bother? Slow, noisy toys waiting to bite and kill you.
@@davidwheatcroft2797 I kind of agree stupid glass panels like someone is going to fly a Gyro in IFR statement. They do have advantage of being stable in higher winds when compared to other light aircraft such as a trike, or light sport. You talk about aerobatics do you own an Extra 300 likely not the guys I know who do own those have deep pockets would never say "I find non aerobatic flight dull". You sound like your young person maybe fly RC airplanes? Join the Military if you want to pull G's.
@@Mike-01234 I built C-IAVW, an aerobatic biplane with differential frieze ailerons; push-pull control tubes - The Cadillac way.
I flew for 3 years in the RAFVR, earning my licence, instrument rating, and aerobatic/formation/low level endorsements....HM the Queen gave me a Permanent Commission in the highest paid branch of the British armed forces, GD(P) with accelerated promotion and double pay...minimum 16 year contract.
Nearly killed in a spiral dive; I flew MORE hours than anybody else in the Squadron; had dinner with Prince Charles and the Minister for Defence, UK.
I have pulled 7G several times - we had recording G meters on the floor, and numbers recorded after each flight. Got some jet time, too.
I speak 5 languages and passed my Chem/physics degree in just 2 years. I have watched an H bomb being loaded on a Victor. Have you? I have an O level in Latin verse.
Also a forensic auditor - how are YOU on Number Frequency Analysis? Hm? Speak Swahili like I do, hm?
@@Mike-01234 I built C-IAVW, an aerobatic biplane. I served 47 years in the RAFVR. I speak 5 languages and paased my Bsc Chem exams in 2 years. Have a nice day.