McCutchen vs. Dragon Wings

[MMorgan]

I've heard all the testimonials about the Dragon Wing blades out-performing most other blades but has anyone made a direct comparison between Dragon Wings and McCutchens??

I have 23 ft. Dragon Wings on my Air Command but have never flown it with any other blade.

I also have 23 ft. McCutchen's on my Benson and it is considerbly heavier. I'm wondering how they would compare keeping in mind that the McCutchen's have an 8" chord and the Dragon Wings are 7".

I will probably swap the blades and compare them myself one day but would like some comments first.

[Udi]

Mike,

I have not read about any objective comparison between these two blades. It would be great if you could do that.

When you swap the blades, in addition to your subjective like/don't like feeling, make some objective measurements. A few obvious ones are climb rate (at the same airspeed), max climb rate (Vx - each blade may have a different Vx), minimum sustained level powered airspeed, and maximum level airspeed (if you are comfortable with that). Try to do the tests in the same density altitude. This would probably mean that you can't test one in the morning and the second one in the afternoon.

I am looking forward to reading your results.

Udi

[barnstorm2]

I would like to see that data also. I have an AirCommand but with a 447. I could use some better performance.

[gyropilot]

I've heard all the testimonials about the Dragon Wing blades out-performing most other blades but has anyone made a direct comparison between Dragon Wings and McCutchens??

I have 23 ft. Dragon Wings on my Air Command but have never flown it with any other blade.Mike,

A few words of caution...

I'm not certain just by looking at that tiny picture of your Air Command, but it appears to be the old inverted-engine high thrustline version with the tiny horizontal stab. Correct?

If you put the much lighter Dragon Wings on your gyro in place of those heavier McCutchens, then you'll make the high thrustline situation worse by lowering the vertical CG location of the airframe. Add to that, Dragon Wing blades can make an unstable airframe pitch more rapidly in turbulent air, possibly leading to PIO... and then something worse!

Don't get me wrong though... Dragon Wing blades are *excellent* on any properly stabilized gyro (one with centerline, or nearly centerline thrust, and an adequate horizontal stab). Use extreme caution when putting them on an unstable airframe.

Regards,

John L.

[Udi]

I second John's warning.

Udi

[GyroRon]

John and Udi, you guys are right but yet still wrong! Mike has been using the Dragon Wings on the aircommand for some time, not the skywheels. The skywheels are on the Bensen I sold him a month or two ago. So taking what you guys are saying, Mike Would be better off leaving the Skywheels on the Aircommand after the tests.

[MMorgan]

Ron is correct. The Air Command has always had the Dragon Wings. Several people have flown the Air Command and commented on how nice it flew and did not have any bad habits in the stability. I'm sure it would be even better with a CLT kit but as it is it does not try to kill you every time you hit some turbulence.

I recall at BD, Doug Riley asked me how it flew and told him very nice. He commented on how an older model he had was extremely unstable and was downright scary to fly. Mine is a 1999 model so it is fairly new and some improvements were obviously made.

The Bensen is also very stable, confirmed by Mike Gaspard as he has flown it several times. It has the McCutchen blades and the horiz. stab in the prop wash so it is rock solid in turbulence.

I started this thread to ask anyone if they had made a direct comparison between the McCutchen Skywheels and Dragon Wings to see if the Dragon Wings would make much of a difference on the Bensen.

[scottessex]

I had posted earlier in a different thread, My Arrow powered Bensen almost doubled its climb rate, and I picked up 10 mph on my cruise speed with John Stevens dragon wings, over my rotorhawks. The only McCutchens I have flown were on Steve McGowans trainer.

[MMorgan]

Scott, I had read your post in the other thread and I know they outperform most any blade but I have not heard of anyone that made a direct comparison to the McCutchens. The McCutchens are about an inch larger in chord so that is why I'm wondering if it will be a huge improvement like in other comparisons.

[scottessex]

My Rotorhawks are 8.5in. chord, Quite a bit larger about 1.5in. than the dragonwing chord.

[Screw]

Screw-In

I think the big differance will be in the wieght of the blades and inertia. Those McCutchens are very heavy and full of energy, while the DW are light and don't take anytime to bleed off the energy.

Given the cost differance, Dragon Wings IMHO is the way to go period!

Screw-Out

[stuart]

I have heard that DWs can be gotten with weighted tips, which would give you some of the advantages re. inertia that the heavier McCuthens have at a much lower cost--opinions? stuart

[gyromike]

I have heard that DWs can be gotten with weighted tips, which would give you some of the advantages re. inertia that the heavier McCuthens have at a much lower cost--opinions? stuart

Dragon Wings come standard with brass tip weights.

1 lb. tip weights for single place.
2 lb. tip weights for two place.

(if I remember correctly)

[CLS447]

Mike, I have an AC 447 with all upgrades except CLT & upright engine. It has no partial enclosure either. All I have ever known was the Skywheels(23'). I love them,I think?

I have been tempted, even more so lately, to try a set of DW's due the great performance increase claims that I keep on reading about.

I feel the same way about it that Doug Riley did. I only fly in relatively calm conditions because of this.

But due to statements such as the ones John Landry made I am not sure that I want to try them.

You seem more comfortable with your AC than Doug or I. You own both brands of the same diameter. Why don't you put the Skywheels on the AC & tell me what you find?

Could it be that the DW's actually improve the handling of this machine? What blades did Doug R. fly on his 447?

If the DW's really give my 447 the boost it needs, I would probably spend the money to make it CLT & really have a little kickass single place! Then someday upgrade to the engine I wished I would have bought in the first place.... the 503. But nooooo... I wanted a "true" ultralight. Yeah right! Who knows, with DW's it might actually be under 254 lbs!

[MMorgan]

Mine do have weights in the tips.

Like Mike said, 1# sounds right.

[MikeBoyette]

Hey Everyone,
Mike G. is correct there is no such thing as an un-tipweighted Dragon Wings blades. The inertia is pretty close. If I remember correctly a couple of guys here in Florida did a direct comparison in the mid 90's. I don't recall the exact findings. I would love to hear what you find out Mike M. Damn too many Mikes around here.

[scottessex]

Hey Mike B, let me know when your Dad has a sale on blades. :D


A new set of dragon wings are on my wish list.

How many hours are they good for? I know where I might be able to get a used set, but they have over 1000 hours on them, are they time limited?

[GyroRon]

Mike Morgan, I don't know what your waiting for? Get out there and swap out the blades and compare them and let us know how it turns out!

[MMorgan]

I will Ron but I need to do a few things first.

I'm still playing with the timing trying to get the temp a little lower without losing any rpm. I have retarded the timing quite a bit from where it was when you had it and it runs a little cooler but is harder to start. I also have a leaking exhaust valve in one of the cyl so I'm trying to resolve that also.

Before I swap the blades I want to make some notes on rpm's, rate of climb, etc but with no rotor tach or altimeter I will have to be innovative. Also, as you know the electric prerotator is not capable of spinning the DW's fast enough so I will have to be really careful getting them spun up.

So....I will swap the blades and report the results but I need to do a few things first.

[MMorgan]

Chris,

I know the DW's are 30 or so pounds lighter than the McCutchens so I think that alone would be enough to make a difference on your 447 machine.

I probably will not fly the Air Command with the McCutchens simply because I know it will not help the performance and why put 30 more pounds over my head and make the gyro even more unstable.

I don't know anything about the machine that Doug Riley was referring to in our conversation at BD....maybe if he is lurking around here he will see this and comment.

As to the performance of my 503 A/C....I weigh 155 lbs. and I find it performs very well....much better than the Bensen with the Subaru although I'm still tweaking it and with the DW's it may be closer to the same.

[Rotornut]

Ernie have a SALE!! When and If Sunstate Members want first bids on the Sale Item or could we go so far as to say Item's!

Dont We all Wish that Rotor Flight Dynamics, Inc. would have a BIG SALE!

But Richard buys his Dragon Wings Anyway. MJ :)

[Dean_Dolph]

Mike, the combination that Chris is using should be more stable than if he switched to a lighter blade such as Dragon Wings. The heavier weight on top will raise the vertical Cg as John L. has pointed out and the old AC with the high thrust line needs all the help it can get. If the newer AC has in fact a significantly higher vertical Cg then there wouldn't be as much effect.

When people start talking about stable machines, especially ones that have a bad rep as killers, then I think about the joke where the guy jumps off the Empire State building and as he passes the twentieth floor reports that so far so good!

The only way a gyro can be considered stable is if it is put thru all the stability tests by an independent test pilot and passes. The proof is in the puddin' not by the seat of the pants feel. A gyro may feel stable right up to the moment it bites you; like the guy in the joke, so far so good!

There are static and dynamic tests spelled out in the soon to be released LSA gyro standards and some of them should not be performed by anyone other than an experienced pilot or at least until specific tests have been passed. Greg Gremminger has discussed the tests in the PRA magazine.

[GyroRon]

Yes Mike, I would try them out on the Aircommand for now. The heavier blades will probably hurt the performance some, but how much we won't know till you try them. Heck they may even do better....

Using the Skywheels on the Aircommand will only make it SAFER as Dean posted above.

[Screw]

Screw-In

Sorry in advance.

Who is Dean? He posts alot and some good stuff I might add, but to my knowledge doesn't fly. Although alot of his post make perfect sence, been a PRA member about as long as I've been alive, and obviously a very smart fellow. No offense, but I'm not gonna risk my life on his idea of the way things should be simply because of the lack of, or no experience in gyros.

I mean no harm Dean, I like you, and appreciate your posts, but having never flown gyros or having no knowledge first hand of what some of us deal with, especially blades and feelings while in flight, I just don't think your in a position to offer safe advice, or have an opinion on the subject.

If your non experiance advice and calculated tables cost someone alot of money, I'm sure they can live with that, but it can get worse. :eek:

I wasn't sure about Dragon Wings, McCutchens, Brocks, or Rotor Hawks. I had Brocks, and on the advice of everyone I knew "Flying," they recommended DragonWings. I found a used set on sale, and I took the leap of faith, and bought them knowing full well I might not like them. My airspeed increased to to 74 mph without breaking a sweat and I float on landings. I love them! I've flown McCutchens with Steve McGowan, and I like them fine, I just don't have 4k lying around. If I did, I still don't think I'd buy them. I don't think the performance differance justifies the cost differance. IMHO and I fly.

I've wanted Scott Essex to try my Dragon Wing for a long time. He flies Rotor Hawks. Now that he has, the DW are on his Christmas list. He too flew the McCutchens with Steve.

I guess the point I'm tring to make is, numbers and performance aint everything. IMHO the most bang for the buck is the DW.

Dean, you haven't flown iether one and you don't know period. Takeoffs are optional, landings are manditory.

Again sorry, but I gotta post what I feel.

Screw-Out

[Dean_Dolph]

Hey, John, no offense taken! I've never covered up my lack of piloting skill or experience but then you don't need any to understand the physics.

It has taken me a long time to even get in the same book with C. Beaty, Doug R. and others, let alone the same page but I feel pretty comfortable pointing out the obvious to those that haven't been around as long as I and are waiting on a response. I figure if I do give a response that is way off base or dangerous that one of the experts will quickly correct me. And the near experts will certainly challenge my views that they aren't comfortable with. In either case every one gets an education. I don't know about you or others but that is what I'm here for.

Opinions? Come on John, anyone can offer an opinion! But the only post I have made in this thread was based on fact or a restatment of what the 'respected experienced pilots' have said. If I offer an opinion then I try my best to make sure everyone understands that is what it is. But you now have me curious as to what you considered an opinion and what fact(s) you disagree with.

Gotta go, chapter meeting today and prep for Mentone to do.

[gyromike]

Screw-In

Sorry in advance.

Who is Dean? He posts alot and some good stuff I might add, but to my knowledge doesn't fly.

(snip,snip)

Again sorry, but I gotta post what I feel.

Screw-Out

John,

what point of Dean's are you disagreeing with?

[Russell]

The heavier weight on top will raise the vertical Cg OK if the machine is hanging from the blades how does extra weight of the blades change the vertical CG??? I just woke up so be easy now.
Russ :confused:

[MMorgan]

I obviously was only using half my brain when I typed the A/C would be MORE unstable with the heavier blades....adding weight above the CG would absolutely raise the CG and place it closer to the thrust line.

The extra weight would hurt the performance but I think I will try them just to see. Also there is a rotor tach on the A/C so I can report the difference. The DW's now turn 330-340 rpm.

[Udi]

This is a good conversation and I haven't seen any comments that were out of line with the spirit of public discussion. For whatever it's worth, I think that Deans comments are right on the ball and his lack of gyro piloting experience has nothing to do with his input. Most of the aeronautical engineers, as it turns out, are not pilots! Yet, they know what they are doing. Dean is in the short list of my favorite posters.

Russell - the rotors are bolted to the airframe. They are part of the total flying mass. Their mass, and its location, affect the CG like anything else.

Udi

[Screw]

Scrw-In

Dean, I'm not attacking your previous post, and your post does make sense. The question is, "How would you know?"

I'm not that well educated nor made of money and I don't know you. I get alot of usefull information here that helps my rig my gyro in a safe and most bang for the buck way.

The thread is McCutchens Vs. Dragon Wings. I've flown both and have an opinion. Do you?

Buy your post, if I understand it correctly, all high thrust line gyros like Old Air Commands would be safer/more stable with the heavier more expensive McCutchens rather than the light wieght affordable high performance Dragon Wings.

Right or wrong doesn't matter, the fact is, you are a highly respected poster, and that opinion or "Restatement" of fact is pretty bold for not ever flown. IMHO

I don't about you, but the seat of my pants tells me alot about the stability of my gyro. I hope I'm not passing the 20th floor, because I sure enjoy flying my light wieght machine with my light wieght blades. Hell, I'm not sure if my VW would climb out with the additional wieght of mcCutchens. For me with my machine, anything I can do to reduce wieght, increases my performance.

I just don't see how adding wieght to anything that flys is a good thing from a performance perspective. Rebalance your machine if you want to, but I don't advocate buying expensive heavy things to change the balance. You could hurt performance.

Again, sorry in advance. MHO

Screw-Out

[GyroRon]

John my dear Friend, I have to tell you that you ARE wrong on this concerning Dean. Everything he has said is right on the money and is fact. Like Udi said he doesn't have to fly to know these things. A fact is a fact and if you know the facts as a landbased person or a pilot it makes no difference, a fact is still a fact.

Now number one, Mike Morgan has two gyros and two sets of blades. One set of D.W.'s and one set of Skywheels. I don't think he is in the market for new blades just yet, but I think he wants to know if the Dragons will boost the performance of the Subaru gyro I sold him, Possibly so he can run the engine less hard and have lower coolant temps. I think Mike justs wants to know has anyone compared D.W.'s to Skywheels on the same machine with same length blades.... I myself have flown under both brands and yes the Dragons are nice, but I also have not flown the same machine with both brands. YOU have flown with two brands on the same machine and can make a comparison between Brocks and Dragons, Same as Scott can with his Rotorhawks and your Dragons....

Two, Deans points about stablity have nothing to do with the " feel " of a stable gyro, which your making a point of him not flying seems to want to discredit, which is a reasonable arguement since how could Dean know if a change of blades will give a gyro a better feel since he doesn't fly. BUT..... The stability Dean is referring to is not a " feel " thing but instead the stability of the machine in pitch due to the better thrustline CG offset. On a non centerline trust machine like Mikes Aircommand, a set of blades that weight nearly twice as much as Dragon Wings may make a huge difference in the offset of the trustline. And the closer the trustline is to the CG the more Stable a gyro will be overall. You flew my Dominator, it has Centerline trust, didn't it feel rock solid to you? Your machine has nearly Centerline trust but yet we all could see you on the ground as you flew by at Scotts place and at full power fly bys your machine was very much flying nose down, at lower speeds it was more level in flight. Was my dominator flying by nose down on my high speed fly bys? This is all part of what it means to be stable in a gyro. The " feel " is just a part of gyro stability.

Hope you not mad, I love ya man!

[MMorgan]

Mike Boyette.......if you are still lurking around this thread......does 25 ft. DW's use the same hub bar as my 23's or do you go to a longer one??

I guess what I'm really asking is can I make my 23's into 25's by changing the hub bar??

[gyromike]

Scrw-In

The thread is McCutchens Vs. Dragon Wings. I've flown both and have an opinion. Do you?

Screw-Out

John,

Did you fly them both on the same machine?

[Screw]

Screw-In

Dean, Ron, and all. Sorry for my opinion.

Mike, No.

Screw-Out

[Greg Mitchell]

G'Day Gents,

I got told on the Oz forum way back that opinions I held based on fact didn't hold because I was a Newbie and not flying. In fact I was told I would never fly. I don't post much anymore, only to put up progress pics of my Butterfly build process.

We were (still are) associated with Patroney Blades here in OZ. We asked Rob to develop his composite blades to a 23 foot disc and have 12" hub bar and bring the weight in around a target of 45 lbs. Larry Neal did all his prototype testing on Benson blades 21'9" disc, I believe weight was 42.5 lbs.

Cutting a long post short, fisrt set of blades for Monarch in OZ came in at 58-59 lbs, roughly 16 lbs over our target. I knew (without being a pilot) that this would affect our thrustline to CofG offset. Concerned by this I obviously looked for advice and direction from Larry, Matt Pearson and others here and abroad. The bottom line is IMHO you don't need to be a pilot to post quality info or refer people to quality articles and participate in theory discussions, all the while gaining valuable knowledge on this vast learning curve.

Shifting the CofG up closer to a HTL by flying heavier blades (given they don't have any nasty habits) should theoretically make for improvement with respect to longitudinal stability, though added weight will probably affect overall performance. Having said that, someone may (may have already)develop heavier blades which perform better, which in turn could off set, the weight/performance issues.

My worry was that by adding 16 lbs at the top we would possibly, dramatically change the offset relationship on the Butterfly which has thrustline at 1 1/2" below CofG. We are doing comparisons between Benson/Patroney/and hopefully Dragon Wings here in Oz. Larry strongly recommends the DW's as they weigh slightly less than the Benson's provide more lift, are less draggy and they hang in there longer in the flare. I look forward to posting some results for you over the comming months.

Mitch

[Chuck Irby]

Mike Morgan, It appears that Mike B. is no longer lurking around the forum. So... a 3 foot hub bar should work to make your blades into a 25 (providing you are using a 1' bar now). I'm pretty sure that 12' blades are the longest Ernie makes, thus anything over 25' would require a longer hub bar. I have a 2 foot hub bar, in case you want to try your blades as a 24.

[GyroRon]

John your opinion is just a valued as anyones here, But I have read all of Deans posts here on this forum and have had the pleasure of meeting him in person at Bensen Days a few years ago and I don't think he has said anything that was wrong in his posts yet.

Your opinion that someone who is not flying or hasn't yet flown is a good opinion, but with time if a person pays attention, you can learn alot without ever leaving the ground just by reading and remembering others posts that do fly.

Here is a blurry pic of Dean and his new better half

[Dean_Dolph]

Hey, John, everyone has an opinion. Opinions and facts both have value and if we think about it we realize that our facts started out as someone's opinion. So there is no reason for you to not offer yours.

Now for 'How would you know?'

Well, the last time I checked Mother Nature didn't have a separate set of rules for pilots and non-pilots. Her rules are the rules are the rules are the rules........ Ron clarified my position nicely. Thanx Ron!

I certainly try and avoid offering any advice on equipment where flying and building experience carries the most weight. So if you catch me doing it then you have not only the right but also an obligation to question the validity. None of us want to lead new people in the wrong direction.

One thing you did do was cause all the 'young' guys to come to grandpas defense. Thanks youse guys!

[Screw]

Screw-In

Meant no harm, just disagree. I'm out of this thread.

Screw-Out

[CLS447]

Dean, just one question, no offense but..... Why don't you fly?

[MikeBoyette]

Mike M,
While Chuck is correct I don't believe Dad will do that. You might want to give him a call after Mentone. I would test fly them first.

[Dean_Dolph]

Chris, there are several reasons starting with the fact that over a 48 hour period I lost 100% of my hearing in my right ear in 1964. This was one week after I had made my initial contact with a Long Beach CA. flight school. I was advised by my doctor at that time to not fly in anything but commercial aircraft. The thought at the time was that a sudden change in air pressure could damage a person's ears and I only had one left and it wasn't the best. That thinking has changed so that is not a problem now.

However I've since lost considerable hearing in my left ear to the point that without my hearing aide it is very difficult to communicate. The two hearing losses are unrelated. The doctors at the House Institute in CA. were never able to determine exactly what caused the first event. The problem with the one ear I have that still works is that I have inner ear autoimmune disease. This means that my immune system sees my inner ear (the cochlea) as a threat and tries to destroy it. I take a steroid to suppress the immune system and to slow up the attack. Eventually I'll probably need a cochlea implant.

In a quiet environment my hearing isn't much of a problem but in a noisy one like a small aircraft then it is next to insurmountable. I've tried to train in tandem trainers and I can't understand what is being said over the intercom so the instructors wisely make a decision to stop the training. I did manage to get some training with Steve Graves in his SXS Marchetti while I was doing a personal evaluation of my ability to fly. I enjoyed it and felt comfortable but I can't pass a third class med so a PPL is out of the question. The only possibilities for me are ultralight and maybe Sport Pilot.

There is the remote possibility of using an in ear device in conjunction with anti-noise circuitry that gets its signal from a loop worn around the neck. I use a similar device with my cell phone to feed the telecoil on my hearing aide. This device is used in the entertainment industry by camera men and others. In fact it was a former PRA chapter member in that business who made me aware of it. While we were discussing it, it dawned on us that such a setup might be beneficial to normal hearing folks. The in ear device would have to be custom made just like a hearing aide mold but there would be no large ear muffs and the neck loop could be easily attached inside a helmet. It should be much more convenient and comfortable to wear and possibly enhance a pilots understanding. I have this on my to do list and hope to eventually do some serious investigation. If some one else wants to investigate then they can start here. http://www.comtek.com/IFBCueing/ifbcueing.html

There are other reasons that I stated in a reply to Chuck Irby. See http://www.rotaryforum.com/forum/showthread.php?p=17655&page=2&pp=15

You asked, Chuck asked so now if anyone asks in the future all I have to do is refer them to these two posts!

[CLS447]

Sorry to read about your hearing, but with your knowledge I'm sure you could do it easily. I would certainly go for a heck of alot of rides. I think a passenger can tell alot about different machines without actually taking the stick.

[MMorgan]

TEST FLIGHT RESULTS FROM BLADE SWAP:

I flew my A/C with the DW blades and made the following notes in order to compare how the same machine flies with the McCutchens:
rotor rpm--- 330-340
time to climb to 1000ft.----2 min 10 sec @50 mph
speed at 6000rpm, level flight-----65mph

And 15 minutes later I flew with the McCutchens:
rotor rpm----355-360
time to climb to 1000ft.-----2 min @50 mph
speed at 6000rpm, level flight----70mph

Both blades are 23ft, temp was 90-92 degrees with a light north wind. Climb was made from a flying start just above the runway at 50mph to 1000ft. Only one climb was done so the result is subject to more error than if I had done several and averaged them. More stick shake was noted with the McCutchens.

It was very obvious right after liftoff that there was not much difference in the blades as far as climb rate. The McCutchens turn 20-25 rpm faster to fly the same machine.

[MMorgan]

I put the DW blades on the Benson a few minutes after I did the A/C test. I do not have a rotor tach or altimeter on the Benson.

Takeoff and climb felt about the same. I had no trouble with blade flapping as I was concerned the electric prerotator would not spin the DW's fast enough. The was quite a bit more shake with the DW's than with the McCutchen's. With the lighter blade I was expecting a little more performance and I may be getting a better climb rate but until I do a time to climb I cannot be sure. I can say absolutely that there is very little difference in the blades. I did not do a speed test.

[Aussie_Paul]

Great Mike. That is the sort of info that I enjoy.

Aussie Paul.

[mceagle]

Mike M,
That makes interesting reading. As you quite correctly stated, you would have to average several runs to get an accurate result. However, your initial test in that flight regeme and weight configuration suggest that the McCutcheons are a more efficient blade, especially considering that they were carrying extra weight.
This goes against popularly held belief.

[Greg Mitchell]

Tim and All,
As I stated in previous post on this topic, the possiblility of a heavier blade performing better than lighter blades is what we are hoping for with the heavier Patroney blades on Butterfly/Monarchs Down Under. We should have that data soon, Allan's not far off getting into the air.
regards
Mitch.

[Aussie_Paul]

It's not the weight of the blades for normal flight performance Greg, it is the airfoil section and twist etc that counts. I believe, rightly or wrongly, the weight will only change the ease of landing and the rough air ride, not the climb or cruise performance.



Aussie Paul.:)

[Greg Mitchell]

I'd agree with that Paul. What we are talking about is how a heavier Patroney 8H12 composite profile blade will perform against 18-19lbs lighter DW's, given that weight is the issue and that as Tim said, the McCutchen example seems to fly in the face of popularly held beliefs.

Regards.
Mitch

[GyroRon]

The skywheel blades also have a wider chord....

[Aussie_Paul]

Greg,Tim and all, the Patroneys fly slightly better than McCuchens, and due to the 1/4 chord balancing difference, Patroney blades are pitch stable and don't shake.

So all Patroney blades have to do now, is outperform the SC blades!!!!!, and that we will know by the end of the year when I get to compare them.

Geez, I live up to my "stirrer and troublemaker" signature, don't I?

Aussie Paul.:)

[Aussie_Paul]

Geez!!! I was a little bit incorrect. I was not taking into acount the difference in gross weight!!!! :o

Aussie Paul. :)

[Chopper Reid]

Hey Paul, sorry to tell you but the set of 28 ft of Patroneys I received vibrated so badly that they scared me . Plenty of lift but what a shake. !! Swapped them for 27 ft 6 in tapered and twisted which were as smooth as silk but didnt lift as well at full gross weight[as compared to 27 ft alloys.[ RR's] but flew very well at half fuel load. Defiantely quicker in indicated airspeed and very stable. Rob tried to tell me that the starter motor [pre rotator ] was the cause of the shake but I dont think so !! :(
Big thing I noticed [alloys versus glass] is that the glass rotors dont perform as well when the leading edge is dirty [bugs etc]
The 27 alloys rev at 350 versus 320 /315 for the Patroneys 27 ft 6in.
Brian

[birdy]

Wot are these Sport copter blades??Are they extruded alum.[same as Jef's AKs.]

[KenSandyEggo]

They're bonded aluminum with a spar, Birdy. First-class quality, an extremely smooth ride and they are the cat's-ass. I love 'em.

[Brian Jackson]

Ken,
How well do the SportCopter blades stack up against Ernie's Dragon Wings, both weight- and performance-wise? I've heard great things about both. I'm building a Part 103 stock GyroBee with a (probably) Wunderlich prerotator. Since weight is an issue, would Vanek's SportRotors put me over the limit that you're aware?

Thank you.

Respectfully,
Brian Jackson

[MikeBoyette]

Steve,
Funny we haven't noticed a decrese in sales. If anything Sport Copter has boosted our sales. Most people are surprised to find out we ship our blades as soon as we verify funds. The price difference does not hurt either. I don't want to make this we're better than they are war of words. There seems to be room both for DW's and SR's. I personally have never flown a set of SR's but then why would I.

[KenSandyEggo]

Brian, I can't compare DWs and SCs in any way. Ernie doesn't make rotors for the heavier RAFs and Sparrowhawks. I will say this; Reis Evans has a Brock or Bensen gyro and used to have Brock blades on it. He switched to DWs and he is ecstatic over the increase in performance. I also watched the DWs rotate up over 100 rrpm with just a gentle push from Reis and a slightly brisk wind did the rest.

[Chuck Irby]

In a fairly hard turn my 24' DW's will go from 335 r's to 400.

[GyroRon]

I have the chance to try a set of 24 foot Sportcopters - 7 inch chord - anytime I want. I am now flying with 24 foot - 7 inch - chord dragonwings. When I get a chance I will see what is what between these two blades.

The 8 inch chord sportcopter blades are a whole other ballpark. I don't believe it would be fair to compare those to Dragon wings. Of course those start at nearly twice the price of dragonwings and can take months to recieve - after you already paid for them...

[KenSandyEggo]

Ron, while picking soybean chaff from between his toes, posted: "Of course those start at nearly twice the price of dragonwings and can take months to recieve - after you already paid for them..."

Oh, then I suppose we can expect a totally unbiased report from you. :rolleyes:

[GyroRon]

Ken you can and should. I have always said I like Sportcopter blades the best. Do a search on my posts and I think you will see that. I do however think the time it takes to get the blades is a bit much and the cost IS quite high.

From my experience with sportcopter blades - I have not been able to compare blades head to head on a machine yet so that type of experience will have to wait - the fit and finish is a 10, the blades fly smooth and at least for the cheaper 7 inch blades, the small additional price over other brands seems worth it to me. For all out performance we will see, I plan to try Barrys sportcopter blades by this weekend and will have some numbers to compare.


My experience with Dragonwings has been good too. And I like the fact that blades are built and waiting to be shipped as soon as you place a order. The fact that they have one of the best blades on the market and the price is about the cheapest you can find also helps!

For a light machine if I wanted blades I would choose in this order, 1. Dragonwings 2. Sportcopter 3. Skywheels 4. RAF and that is it, I wouldn't even consider the rest of the choices.

For a heavy machine I would choose in this order 1. Sportcopter 2. RAF 3. Dragonwings 4. Skywheels and that is it.

[GyroRon]

and Ken the point I guess I was making with that comment is Why won't Jim V hire some help? Why do people have to wait so long for the blades?

[SNelson]

10-4 Ken :D

[GyroRon]

I should clairify my post above that I would consider other blades such as rotorhawks, rotordynes and etc... if I were going to buy a used gyro that had those blades, or I needed a cheap set of blades and found a screaming deal on say a set of Brock blades. But if I were to have to come off my wallet as Ernie Boyette would say, and buy a new set those are the ones I would shop and consider and with all factors considered that is probably the order in which I would rank them. For light or heavy machines I like Sportcopter best, but if I were buying a set of blades for a light machine I would buy the Dragons wings cause I can get them within a few days and they would cost me a few hundred bucks less money. For the heavy machine I would want Sportcopters and feel they are the best but at 4 grand I would have a hard time not wanting to spend 2500$ on some RAF blades... Just my opinion.

I will let you guys know if Sportcopter 7 inch blades out perform Dragonwings soon. Matt Pearson did a compairison a few months ago and I think I remember him saying the dragonwings were far better in Performance, but I don't remember if he used the same length blades with both brands and that alone can make a difference.

[KenSandyEggo]

Ron, he once told me (and I can relate) that it is extremely difficult to find employees that give a s**t about something other than when their check will be ready on payday. I went through I don't know how many numb-nuts trying to find someone to just show up on time and do what they're told and use their brain just a little. In fact I did that with 2 separate businesses I had over the years. I could see where he'd be especially wary with a product that people's lives depended on.

O.K., I'll expect you to be fair and square. How the heck do you think I'd be able to keep up with what everyone's posted in the past? I can't even remember if I had a fish taco or Chinese for lunch yesterday.

[Aussie_Paul]

Brian there have a number of reports of rotor shake being reduced/eliminated by the removal of or shifting the starter motor to the rear of the torque tube.

I have always had my starter motor at the rear due to the raf control rods being at the front.

I set mine up at one stage to be able to have a direct drive and a geared starter motor mounted at the same time for testing. I had 2 buttons for the selonoids. I could only conduct one flight due to the rotor shake that developed after I added the second starter.

I have flown 23, 26, 29 and 30 foot Patroney blades and have never had any shake problems. The larger blades have only been flown with the starter out the back. The shorter blades have been flown with the starter out the front.

I hope this little bit of info is of possible use. :confused:

Aussie Paul. :)

[Aussie_Paul]

Can you remember if you actually had lunch Ken???

Aussie Paul.:)

[Steven_Kozned]

For those that are curious, here's a look at the Sport Rotor hub bar for the single place Sport Rotor 25 X 8 AP blades. The dual place version is built a bit heavier (notice the shims under the largest bolt -- there are none in the dual place bar!).

[KenSandyEggo]

No........

[birdy]

I' stuffed that up properly,I ment to ask about DWs,are they extr alu??

[gyromike]

I' stuffed that up properly,I ment to ask about DWs,are they extr alu??

The spar is extruded Birdy. The top and bottom are two aluminum skins that are bonded to the spar and at the trailing edge.

[birdy]

Do any of you blokes fly full extruded blades and wot are they called.??

[Chopper Reid]

Hi Paul, :)
If the pre rotator [starter motor] is the source of the problem, then why would Patroney's 27 ft 6 in rotors be so smooth??? Is 6 inches going to cause a massive shake ? I dont think so. Unfortunately, I did not get the chance to try the 28's without any pre rotator but another fellow who tried to tame the 28's HAD the starter motor to the rear and experienced the same conditions as I did.
I was told by Patroney ] that these rotors were as smooth as silk when test flown on a light machine[ with probably little fuel and a light pilot].
The reality is that a "bad shake " is a bad shake and due to the fact that the head was taken off and checked and blue printed down to a figure that was better than any other rotor head around, means that the rotors WERENT balanced correctly or have some other inherent fault !! That is not to say that all other 28's have the same shake, I'm led to believe that glass rotors are difficult to get right and thats why most rotor manufacturere's go for the extruded alloys.
Im my humble opion, the extruded alloys that Ricks Rotors produced [27 ft] are the toughest,versatile and user friendly to use !! Absolutely no vices and performed when the chips were down.

[Aussie_Paul]

......we report what we find. Rob Patroney kept changing things all the time. I always knew what I was getting because we were working together, but I gathered from what Rob said, a number of blades went out with a change that Rob thought would work. Unfortunately, like all of us, he was not always right.

I was the first one to put Robs rotors on a 1/2 ton gyro, and that was a whole new ball game for Rob. It was an area that he had not experienced at that time. I would find different characteristics than what he found with his lighter tandem trike frame gyro.

When Rob stopped/reduced his rotor blade manufacture, to build his house, we were starting to make progress.

The RR blades were/are good. I have only flown 2 sets of 25' I think they were. They are the 8H12 section the same as the Skywheels, and Robs standard blades, but the RR and Robs are balanced at the correct point. The RR rotors were a much smoother finish than other extruded blades I have seen and flown. It is a shame that Rick did not hang in the industry.

I would probably bet that the Patroney blades that people have had trouble with, will be those that Rob has experimented with.

The larger diameter, 28' plus, blades really sort the blade manufacturers out. I have now worked out, from the testing that I did with Rob on the 30 footers, how I want the next set of blades set up.

Aussie Paul. :)

[PW_Plack]

Ron,

You may have old info. I believe the current backlog for SC blades is about 8-12 weeks, and has been pretty consistent since early this year. The long delays experienced by some people earlier seem to be the exception now, not the rule.

I believe Jim has some help with the construction process now, but he still paints and test-flies every set himself. He's a little obsessed with quality, but he's one of very few guys I'd want building my blades or packing my parachute.

When you offer so many different lengths, chords, and multiple hub setups, stocking quantities of everything gets less practical. If you hear of someone waiting a long time for SC stuff these days, it's usually because he (a) asked for something SC doesn't normally build, or (b) changed his order partway through the process.

[Ralph]

Sorry guys, but 8-12 weeks is 2-3 MONTHS! Up here that is the better part of a flying season. These blades will be a great option when they can get delivery down under 30 days and hit the target.

Ralph

[PW_Plack]

Guys,

A matter of perspective. An order made in November here in Portland which takes 8-12 weeks to arrive beats the start of flying season by at least two months. Granted, if you bang up a set in June and need more, that's a drag, but I expect to routinely wait that long for things as mundane as manufacturer rebates and toys ordered from cereal boxes.

I suspect that AAI buys enough blades that they can afford to order blades ahead of kit production. I know at least one SparrowHawk owner who got his SC blades before the rest of the kit. AAI also orders the same length, chord and hub bar for every kit, right?

Luckily, we live in a land of choices. There are other blade manufacturers, and other places that sell bolts. If you're in a hurry, Sport Rotors may not make it onto your short list.

[Chopper Reid]

." It is a shame that Rick did not hang in the industry."

I and a few other's agree with you there Paul, such a shame to loose a man of his ability to produce a quality rotor at a very competitive price !!

"The larger diameter, 28' plus, blades really sort the blade manufacturers out. I have now worked out, from the testing that I did with Rob on the 30 footers, how I want the next set of blades set up."


The big rotors seem to cause a lot of problems for manufactures , they rev less so I guess that gives them more time to play up while rotating as well as being heavier .

[John_Read]

To return for a moment to the topic ... :)

I trashed my McCutcheon blades in a silly accident, and replaced them with Dragon Wings. I bought the McCutcheons originally because they were available second hand, and bought the Dragon Wings subsequently for the same reason.

Having flown them both on the same machine, I can give you my impressions, though - one of them being trashed - I can't do a "scientific" comparison. But my impressions are these:

The machine flies faster and climbs better with the dragon wings. The McCutcheons span up more readily, turned slower in flight, and were very, very forgiving when it came time to land. After eleven hours with the DWs, I still do not land as elegantly as I did with the McCutcheons.

The McCutcheons were hard on the prerotator rubber wheel - possibly due to their inertia. In fact I just replaced the wheel because it was egg shaped! The improved DW performance may be entirely due to their light weight; after all, that is forty pounds less weight to cart about..

I took comfort from the knowledge that the heavier blades made my gyro more nearly CLT, but the fact is I am more "comfortable" in the turbulent air with the DWs ... although that may be entirely due to a little more experience and the good advice of forum members! Or it may be that the McCutcheons tended to baloon up a bit and scare me somewhat more.

I think I prefer the Dragon Wings ... but I would like another go with the Macs to be sure!