Real world performance for the MTO sport?

[Vance]

I was working on the performance parameters of the gyroplane I would like to build.

I turned to the MT web site to see how it compared with my fantasy performance.

The MTO Sport seems particularly alluring.

Some of the claims seem a little extravagant.

Does the MTO cruse at 120 miles per hour?

Can the MTO sustain a 1,500 feet per minute rate of climb at gross weight.

Can the MTO take off in 10 meters at gross weight?

Does the MTO have a range of over 300 miles?

What is the service ceiling?

I know we have several people here on the forums that fly MT gyroplanes. I would appreciate hearing some real world experiences.

I need an excuse to build a gyroplane and if I can’t match the performance of a standard gyroplane it takes some of the joy out of it for me.

Thank you, Vance

[ckurz7000]

Hi Vance, I'm going to give you my experiences regarding the MT03. The MTOSport is an improved version of the MT03 and does perform better. It is also more CLT than the MT03. I have flown an MTOSport and I have also done a climb performance comparison between the two flying side-by-side.

...
Does the MTO cruse at 120 miles per hour?


The MT03 with an in-flight adjustable Ivoprop does 100 mph TAS as a max cruise. The MTOSport will be a bit better (with the same prop), maybe 110. The quoted 120 mph seem a bit high, although not by too much. But a comfortable cruise is around 85 mph, burning around 18 liter/hour (4.8 gal/hr).


Can the MTO sustain a 1,500 feet per minute rate of climb at gross weight.


No way. My MT03 climbs at max 1200 fpm at sea level with 380 kg (450 kg MTOM). The MTOSport does a bit better, maybe 100-200 fpm better. So I can maybe believe 1500 fpm with single occupancy. Certainly not at gross. At gross in an MT03 I get about 700 fpm. Maybe the MTOSport comes to an optimistic 1000 fpm. But that's a guess. My MT03 is powered by a 912. A 914 will improve the climb performance a bit (maybe 10%).


Can the MTO take off in 10 meters at gross weight?


The MT03 as well as the MTOSport have a very powerful prerotator getting the rotor up to about 270 rrpm. At gross, the rrpm are about 390 rrpm and you might lift off at around 360 (a guess). But you don't get from 270 to 360 in 10 m (30 feet). That said, the take off roll is quite short, however. I guess (have never measured it): in my MT03 at gross and standard conditions I would estimate about 100 m (300 feet).


Does the MTO have a range of over 300 miles?


Yes. With my Ivoprop my maximum range is just that. 68 liters of fuel on board (63 l usable).


What is the service ceiling?


Have never measured it under standard conditions and full gross. But here is proof that the MT03 crossed the alps at 16.220 feet.

51537

That doesn't shock me if the MT03 was equipped with a boosted Rotax 914 and was flown without a passenger.

I hope that helps, -- Chris.

[Vance]

Thank you Chris,

I love your complete response, you are very thorough. That helps my confusion a lot!

Part of my confusion comes from the 914 engine, Rotax says that maximum continuous horsepower is 100 for the 914 and 95 for the 912. The 115 is only for 5 minutes for the 914 and 95 for the 912. Are your numbers continuous?

85 miles per hour cruse is a long way from 100, what does comfortable mean?


I would think that going over the Alps would be cold; do you know what the density altitude was?

Was the trip over the Alps solo?

These are still some very big numbers to shoot for, I love a challenge.

Thank you very much, Vance

[ckurz7000]

Hi Vance, I guess on some level your mind and mine work on a similar wave length. We both seem to love taking our gyros for an adventure in space and time. And we both apparently want the best platform for it.

...Part of my confusion comes from the 914 engine, Rotax says that maximum continuous horsepower is 100 for the 914 and 95 for the 912. The 115 is only for 5 minutes for the 914 and 95 for the 912. Are your numbers continuous?


The cruise numbers are for continuous operation.

My climb figures in the MT03/912 are maximum HP numbers. The side-by-side comparison of climb performance was between an MT03/912/Ivoprop and an MTOSport/914/standard prop. However, to level the playing field somewhat, the MTOSport did not engage the turbo, i.e. was operating at 100 hp.


85 miles per hour cruse is a long way from 100, what does comfortable mean?


I tried to distinguish between "max level flying speed" and "cruise speed". I can fly 100 mph straight and level. It is not a useful cruise speed because the Rotax guzzles gas gruesomely at that power setting. If you want to know a useful speed that's reasonable for actual cross country trips, then 85 mph is a better number.


I would think that going over the Alps would be cold; do you know what the density altitude was?


No, unfortunately not. But you can see the QNH (altimeter setting). It was 1026.5 hPa (30.40 inHg), which is higher than the standard 29.92 inHg. To calculate the density altitude, I would also have to tell you the temperature at altitude as well as the moisture content of the air. I don't know either.


Was the trip over the Alps solo?


Yes, it was solo. Remember, though, that the service ceiling is defined as that altitude at which you can still climb at 100 fpm at maximum gross. Sevice Ceiling for the MT03/912/standard prop per manufacturer info is 10,000 feet and for the MTOSport/914/standard prop it's 13,000 feet. In both cases with power at max continuous power.

Greetings, -- Chris.

[WHUBBS]

Chris or Vance, where could i get information about the Mt03 machine, cost, shipping, does the company sell in kit form or a web page, that might be in english, where i might contact them.

Thanks in advance.

Wayne Hubbs

[JEFF TIPTON]

This site might get you started.

http://www.rotorsport.flyer.co.uk/page3.html

[twistair]

I turned to the MT web site ...
Some of the claims seem a little extravagant.

Does the MTO cruse at 120 miles per hour?

Can the MTO sustain a 1,500 feet per minute rate of climb at gross weight.

Can the MTO take off in 10 meters at gross weight?



I'm a bit confused but, Vance, where did you find such numbers?

Factory website gives way moderate numbers which correpond with those Chris gave.

I fly MTOsport/912ULS with ground adjustable prop. It climbs 3.5-4 meter per sec. with two on board, which is 700-800 fpm. Cruise @4700 is 160-165 kmh which is 100 mph.

[WillyRose]

Vance, I don't know where you got your original numbers from?

These from the MTOsport Pilot's Handbook:
MINIMUM CLIMB RATE (with standard propeller)
Light single-seat 1,200fpm (912S) or over 1,500fpm (914T)
Two seat (500kg) 500fpm at MTOW (912S) or 700fpm (914T)

I see over 1,000fpm climb-rate solo with the 912 motor, so I have no reason to disbelieve these figures. I'll pay more attention to the VSI at the weekend.

Vne (not cruise) is 120mph.
A real world comfortable cruise speed is 80-90mph and at those speeds, solo or dual, our fuel consumption is 13-15litres/hour.
With a 70ltr tank, that gives a 300 mile range with a reasonable safety margin, dependent on the proximity of safe landing sites, of course.

If your nose is pointing into a 40kt breeze, you could probably do a vertical take off but I'm happy with a 50m roll after a 200rrpm pre-rotate.

Just because the MTOsport doesn't perform to the figures you found, Vance, doesn't mean you shouldn't aim for those parameters in the machine you build. I look forward to following your build thread (has it started yet?)

All the best,
Clive

[Vance]

Hello Alex,

I went to the website in 2008 and those were the numbers presented. Your numbers seem more realistic.

Thank you Clive, with two people and full fuel and I climb out at 700 feet per minute and have found a top speed a little over 100 miles per hour with the IO-320 B1A.

I generally cruse at around 70 miles per hour two up because Ed doesn’t have a windshield. The engine is happy at 80 miles per hour.

I have collected some parts and I have started a build thread called Building Mariah Gale. We are going to refine the bill of materials on Wednesday and order some steel.

It is going to be a slow build.

Thank you, Vance

[troed@aon.at]

As it turns out now this German company HTC, manufacturer of the MT03, MT0sport and Calidus, issued the world´s first and only single-use gyros. :mad:

According to the updated handbook of all these models the airframe and the entire rotorsystem have to be completely renewed and exchangend after 1.500 hrs on all gyros sold until now which is less TBO than the installed Rotax-engines.

These (already wrecks upon delivery) brandnew gyros by this announcement/issue of new handbook by HTC have no resell value any more.

The announcement of the worthlessness of HTC-gyros was furthermore kept deeply secret and could have been only detected when reading the handbook carefully. :tape:

No Service-Bulletin or any official explicit declaration was brought to the customers awareness concerning the fact that these critical parts have to be completely renewed after 1.500 hrs operation time. :tape::lalala:

The background to this clandestine change in the handbook was the fact, that the German company had to react on the multiple fractures of the frames and defects in vital parts of their gyros even on low time gyros with less than 500 hrs on the HOBBS and normal use (I posted some photos of the fractures already in this forum) to prevent legal consequences in case of inflight failure when in no way a pilot error can be demanded as cause, as it happened worldwide many times.

These defects (and other malconstructions) were reported already by midth of 2009 to the German authorities without any official reactions until now (Service Bulletins, Danger Awareness Warnings), keeping the dangers of flying a HTC-product secretly under the blanket.

This led to the fact that our respected member Chris offered his - at this time still under build and not delivered - brandnew Calidus for sale on the German gyro-forum since he was one of the very few that read the new handbook carefully ...............

[Resasi]

Ouch!!!

Cue for Magni owners all to break out in relieved smiles.

[Vance]

Ouch!!!

Cue for Magni owners all to break out in happy smiles.

Hello Leigh,

I saw this at 4:00 AM and I hoped that by the time I awakened at a more reasonable hour it would make sense to me. It still doesn’t.

What about this would cause the Magni owners to break out in happy smiles?

I have never seen a gyroplane with 1,500 hours on it. Perhaps the usage is different in Europe.

Thank you, Vance

[Passin' Thru]

What about this would cause the Magni owners to break out in happy smiles?

Valid question, Vance. It's bad form to rejoice at the misfortune of others, plus it's "bad KARMA". :tape:

[All_In]

1500 hours, that sucks!!! Sorry to hear that Chris, it did look good!

I know Leigh and he wasn't rejoicing just pointing out, that all the Magni owners can't help smiling that they made the correct choice. AT least that's how I understood his meaning.

[Passin' Thru]

John, I'm sure you're right. Maybe I just read it wrong.:twitch:

[Resasi]

Thank you John. Yes you are right gentlemen. I have chosen a bad way of expressing this new development for which I do apolologize.

I had thought of it as, not so much smiling at the misfortune of the MTO3 owners, more of relief in their choice of the Magni.

Both are very similar in looks and performance, now sadly apparent not so in construction. It will have probably been at least a consideration in the choice of a machine.

German machinery does have a worldwide reputation for quality, as indeed the Italians have for grace, performance and style.

This new information will undoubtedly have an impact on value, resale or otherwise, in addition to doubts about structural integrity.

My sympathy to those who will be effected by this.

[Vance]

It was just a question Leigh, not intended to be a criticism.

I do not know enough about etiquette to have an opinion.

I don’t recall having this reaction to others misfortune.

Thank you, Vance

[Resasi]

And certainly not taken from you as that Vance.:)

[StanFoster]

Vance- Sure you have seen a gyro with more than 1500 hours on it. Duane Hunns, Jim Logans, Pat Mcnears, I know there are others, I just am not aware of where all you have been. Birdy is another one, but I am talking about ones you have seen in person. Stan

[Vance]

Most of the Gyroplanes I see seem to have less than 500 hours on them.

The Predator has 766 hours on her and she first flew in 1999.

According the EAA the average experimental aircraft flies less than 50 hours a year.

Thank you, Vance

[bpearson]

Early Magni's (VPM's) have clocked up many thousands of hours training in the UK. Cracks have been found in a few masts. I think the later models have been 'beefed' up to conform to sec T.

[Friendly]

Most of the Gyroplanes I see seem to have less than 500 hours on them.

The Predator has 766 hours on her and she first flew in 1999.

According the EAA the average experimental aircraft flies less than 50 hours a year.

Thank you, Vance

Its hard to get a lot of hours when you have such limited range. I would agree with the less than 50 hours. We had a poll once and that seemed to be the norm of our gyros as well. Interesting perspective on the airframe issue none the less.

[twistair]

Now we should wait Chris to tell a story of how much he lost at evening poker last Saturday to advertise his sexy Calidus for sale. Or this was not Chris. Or this isn't his Calidus. Or this was not poker.

To be serious there may be two opposite reactions to manufacturer's statement which limits airframe and rotor hours. One would think that manufacturer is honest and doesn't want somebody to die in his aircraft. And one simply doesn't like this particular manufacturer so one is instantly looking for any information which may serve as unfavourable.

[GyroRon]

In reality, I think having a life limit stated by the manufactor might not be such a bad thing. When you think about and consider the stress and vibrations a airframe and rotor system is subjected too, It makes sence that it won't last forever. Most gyros have no listed life limits, so you just fly it till it breaks or if your luck you see a crack or problem before it becomes a fatal issue. Better to be safe than sorry

[JAL]

I own a MT03 sport and now that I have few hundred hours flying behind me I can certainly see things a lot differently from when I first started. Considering the airframe is stainless steel then it is no surpise that a fatigue life limit might be applied. This I suspect would not be too different to any machine constructed using stainless steel with a forward tilted mast.

But for me the reality if you have a machine constructed of stainless, you vibrate it many times a minute that at some point fatigue will become a factor. Better to be aware of it then think it wont happen. The frame and welds are really easy to inspect. As part of my preflight I carry out an inspection for cracks, particluraly the mast welds, and I expect that cracking will occur at some point, if it does happen early I will be spewin because that is a quality control issue, if it late then it is probably fatigue and I have to cop it on the chin. However, I do think that any dealer selling MT03s or calidus is oblidged to be upfront and clearly set out the life limits on all the critical components, and not to do so is unethical.

The choice of materials is obviously critical with any design. I am sure there are other materials which might be better to builld a gyro than stainless when considering fatigue life, however, invariably there will be an Archillies heel in all materials such as weight, corrosion, price or quality assurance. I would love my frame to be built out of carbon fibre but the cost would be prohibitive and I could probably go through two stainless frames for the same price.

[ckurz7000]

...This led to the fact that our respected member Chris offered his - at this time still under build and not delivered - brandnew Calidus for sale on the German gyro-forum since he was one of the very few that read the new handbook carefully ...............

Thank you for the respect, Angelo. I wonder, though, how you can have the audacity to make the above statement? You can wash your own dirty laundry and fight your own little war against Auto-Gyro GmbH -- I don't care about this. But don't you ever abuse me for your own cause!

I don't want to -- and cannot -- speak for Auto-Gyro GmbH. For myself, the 1500 hours pose no great restriction. They are "on condition" if the gyro is not used commercially. So, for private pilots, they are not an issue. I also expect to see this limit of 1500 hours for commercial use be pushed out as more hours are accumulated.

Fact is that up to today there didn't exist any limitation on the lifetime of the frame. Fact is also, that the original MT03 frame did develop cracks under certain conditions. This was way before the 1500 hours and has been remedied by the new frames of the MTOSport (the MT03 has not been sold for a couple of years anymore). Fact is, that Auto-Gyro performs (and mandates to be performed) dye penetration test on regular intervals (I forgot how often but believe it is every 200 hours after the initial 500, but I might be wrong). I believe that putting some conservative limit on the frame is prudent. I also believe that this limit will be increased as more experience is gathered. I don't know of any machine Auto-Gyro sold which would have close to that number of hours. So this kind of experience simply doesn't exist.

-- Chris.

[Schlagschrauber]

Hi, Vance!

I have never seen a gyroplane with 1,500 hours on it. Perhaps the usage is different in Europe.

Especially in flight schools you may find gyros with 1500+ hrs! I learned on a Magni M19 having 1700 hours several years ago. It had its second Engine but still the first framework.

As we say in Germany: You will learn riding on old horses! :)

Holger

[PW_Plack]

I'll bet Steve McGowan and Ron Menzie have run their Parsons trainers up way higher than 1500 hours. (Of course, the way Steve babies his, it oughta last...;))

[HotelMike]

HI Guys,

I just have to have my say here: re the Angelo whaffle which is misinformed and incorrect - yet again he rose like a rocket and fell like a stick!
I fly an Mt and have been for the last 5 years without a hitch and the 1500 hour issue on all MTs/MTOS and Calidus you referred to is a 1500 hour close inspection of the airframe and rotosystem. This is because, whilst there are around 800 in service, few have passed 1500hrs. There have been no concerns on these, but we have little real life experience from which to judge the life limits of the aircraft. Non destructive inspection of the aircraft at 1500hrs will give data and increased confidence, and once gathered, this will then allow extended inspection times. Just like Rotax or any other aircraft manufacturer.
There will be an 'official' clarification of the handbook from AutoGyro shortly.

So Angelo, better get your facts straight before you inform everyone of what's what! Heaven forbid there might be people out there listening to you.

Kai

[Schlagschrauber]

Hi, Kai!

Please go to MTOsport manufacturer's homepage: http://www.auto-gyro.com/en/News-Support/Downloads/ for supports and downloads.

Click on the "MTOsport Flughandbuch 4.0" PDF file (= Pilot's operating handbook)
Go to page 8.1

There it clearly says:

Rahmen
Der Rahmen ist nach 1500 Betriebsstunden auszutauschen.
Rotorsystem
Das Rotorsystem ist nach 1500 Betriebsstunden auszutauschen.

Translation:

Framework:
The framework has to be replaced after 1500 operation hours.
Rotor System:
The rotor system has to be replaced after 1500 operating hours.

So this is what is written by the people from Auto-Gyro themselves.

Holger

[HotelMike]

Holger,

I have read what it says in the handbook - ist mir schon seit einiger Zeit bekannt. However please note the announcement on the Autogyro Germany website today.

Cheers, Kai

[Schlagschrauber]

I noted this statement right now - it explains the reason for this safety measurement. But still the revision 4.0 of the Flight Manual is valid telling something different: framework and rotor system "have to be replaced" !!!

So we have 2 different statements from the same manufacturer.

I think we can wait for the version 4.1 or 5.0 of the Flight Manual in order to get rid of this inconsistency. Perhaps the FM 4.1 or 5.0 will be earlier than the first 1500 h on a HTC gyro?

Regards, Holger

[HotelMike]

Holger,

Interestingly enough Hotel Mike (which is an HTC gyro) has close to 900 hours on the hobs and still runs like clockwork and doesn't m iss a beat, but let's see what happens now. Is yours an HTC as well?

Cheers, Kai

[troed@aon.at]

Holger,

I have read what it says in the handbook - ist mir schon seit einiger Zeit bekannt. However please note the announcement on the Autogyro Germany website today.

Cheers, Kai

I have read what it says in the bible - it is known to me already for some time. However please note the announcement of the Holy Pope on the Vatican-website today.

I have read what it says in the environment secretarys bulletin - it is known to me already for some time. However please note the announcement of British Petrol on BP-website today.

I have read what it says in the Wall Street Journal - it is known to me already for some time. However please note the announcement of Lehman-Brothers on LM-website today.

Man, is it beautiful still to BELIEVE, it makes life so much easier to close one´s eyes in front of facts................... ;)

[gyrogreg]

Early Magni's (VPM's) have clocked up many thousands of hours training in the UK. Cracks have been found in a few masts. I think the later models have been 'beefed' up to conform to sec T.

Just a reference point. Dr. Paul Salmon's current M16 was flown 1900 hours in training operations. We overhauled the 914 engine, inspected and touched up paint on the airframe, replaced most of the bearings, and it currently has about 2600 hours on it.

We have had Mag i gtyros in the U.S. for about 10 years now, so we don't have much more data - but the U.S. fliers are averaging at least 100 hours a year, some over 300 hours a year.

Not aware of any cracks on the M16s. Those cracks were on VPMs - an earlier version of the M16, 2000.

[bpearson]

Greg. I think one machine in the UK (early VPM) has over 4000 hours... mainly training. We also have MT's with over 1000 hours with no issues. Again training machines.

[StanFoster]

Just as a casual observer of the Magni, I am very impressed with the reports from the men and women that fly them. I love sitting under the Magni tent at Shelbyville, and listening to the enthusiastic real world flying reports from highly respectable people like Greg, Paul, Bob ,and the dentist who I can't recall his name, Mr. And Mrs. Jeff Wright, and a few other Magni owners I can't put a name on. These people go on these huge cross country trips from St. Louis to Bensen Days, or the upcoming trip to the Grand Canyon. They are truly comfortable in what has to be in my opinion, the most reliable gyro out there. I have never ridden in one, but just sitting around listening to everyone talking so nonchalantly about their adventures is very impressive. Stan

[gyrogreg]

It really would be nice if the manufacturers would collect and publish accident, reliability and maintenance data. I've tried to collect accident data on this forum on several populr gyro models, but I'm not sure everyone is willing to share. Data from around the world is inconsistent and unreliable.

Several manufacturers have petitioned the USFAA to be allowed to sell factory built, ASTM compliant gyroplanes in the U.S. The FAA purpose for this would be to collect NTSB accident data to see if "compliant" gyros are safer. I am hopeful those exemptions would be granted soon!?!?!? - but it will then also take many flying hours and several years to actually have some comparable accident data.

Since both Auto Gyro and Magni now have Section T compliant gyros flying in the UK, is the British CAA or PFA collecting hours and reliability and accident data? I beleivethe factories for these Section T gyros are required to collect and document such data. If we ever get approval for ASTM compliant gyroplanes in the U.S., that data will also be collected and available.

[gyrogreg]

Just as a casual observer of the Magni, I am very impressed with the reports from the men and women that fly them. I love sitting under the Magni tent at Shelbyville, and listening to the enthusiastic real world flying reports from highly respectable people like Greg, Pauln Boban the dentist who I can't recall his name, Mr. And Mrs. Jeff Wright, and a few other Magni owners I can't put a name on. These people go on these huge cross country trips from St. Louis to Bensen Days, or the upcoming trip to the Grand Canyon. They are truly comfortable in what has to be in my opinion, the most reliable gyro out there. I have never ridden in one, but just sitting around listening to everyone talking so nonchalantly about their adventures is very impressive. Stan

Stan,

I did just also have a great flight from Missouri out to the other side of the Chesapeake bay - around the other side of the Washington, DC SFAR - a little over 760 miles. What a trip, across the Appalachians and 21 miles over the Chesapeake bay - no place to land - pucker factor. The flight restrictions in the DC area require the long water-only leg.

We flew over 40 Law enforcement officers, DOJ people, even some Homeland Security people - over the Bay Bridge area - a 2900 ft strip that extends out over the bay! Good visibility made for really grand views. We played cops & robbers, simulating scenarios and ways gyros could be used in law enforcement. They also had PPC and Trikes and a lot of other LSA aircraft there doing the same things - what a hoot!

Guido Scheidts, the Porto Rico Auto Gyro dealer was also there with an MT Sport. I didn't get to fly in it - Guido had problems with FAA permissions until the last 1/2 day of demo flying. But, we encouraged all there to try both the Magni and the MT Sport. I think both opened some DOJ eyes - I know they opened a lot the "law enforcement aviation assets" eyes. - Officers who do fly in support of police ground operations - in about anything that flies.

Guido flew with me one eve out toi a small grass strip where teh DOJ was demopnstrating some UAVs for police work.

The trip back to MO was a real adventure. Nothing but strong headwinds and chances of severe storms predicted! Tried to get as much done on the first morning before the T storms started popping! Got about 100 miles west of the Aps on the first day, before low ceilings and poor visibility and rain shut me down for the night. Next day had to wait for VFR conditions, then made it back home that afternoon - just before a T storm arrived at my home base - Perryville MO. Much thanks to Connie and Tim O'Connor for the quick fuel pit stops at their hangar in Cincinnatti.

We should have some really exciting new stories to spin at Shelbyville again this year. Ya'll come!

- Greg

PS: The Dentist is Scott Gaitros. He has a new (second) M16 - this one with variable speed prop! Few can keep up with him now! I try to keep him under the published Vne, but I'm not sure I'm always succesful. He did the VP mostly to get out of his grass strip with a heavy load.

[All_In]

Sounds like a great trip Greg, and thank you for promoting our sport!

[Chuck Roberg]

Wow Greg. Sounds like an exciting trip back. Hope to see you at Mentone.

[ckurz7000]

Now, Greg, this is something right up my alley. It sounds like a great adventure and fun event all around. If I could only persuade you to post nice long descriptions and some photos...

Greetings, -- Greg.

P.S.: Did Guido wind up taking a Sport Pilots flight test with you? I did recommend it to him.

[gyrogreg]

Now, Greg, this is something right up my alley. It sounds like a great adventure and fun event all around. If I could only persuade you to post nice long descriptions and some photos...

Greetings, -- Greg.

P.S.: Did Guido wind up taking a Sport Pilots flight test with you? I did recommend it to him.

Hi Chris,

I did not even take a camera with me - this was just a rush to get there ahead of weather - left a day early, and a rush when I got there - swamped with demoflights. Then a rush to beat weather all the way back! I did take some low res photos on my cell phone, but, I really don't know how to get them off of my camera. When I got over the Appalachians, I realized - I should have brought my camera! When I got over the Chesepeake bay and bridge, I really wished I had had my camera. There were some magazine types there I flew with also - police "gazzette" types, so I may still be able to get some of the spectacular shots of the Chesepeake bridge and bay!

I did not do any FAA Sport Pilot flight with Guido. I think the FAA accepted his PR or German license. I think his problem was permissions for the gyro. Some of that might have been some slight shipping damage that required certified repair documention before permissions to fly - although Guido did get a few flights in right after he arrived. But, when the FAA arrived, he got shut down! That's a bit of a difference between being a "certified" aircraft, and my experimental aircraft. If I had had that damage, I could probably have simply repaired it and signed it off myself in my logbook. Guido had to jump through a lot of bureacratic "hoops" - that I don't think he or anyone else much understood!?!? That was really too bad because lots of people were clamoring to get a ride with him also!

The DOJ organizers, and Guido and myself, really wanted the event participants to get some good comparison experiences, not just between the two gyroplanes, but between the PPC and Trikes and other Light Sports and helos to see what worked best for them. What they all told me at the end or nearly every flight was several things:

- Visibility s good as with a PPC (Considered the best visibility AC for some of their work)

- Maneuverability they had no idea any aircraft could do - we'd loiter over a "target", race to another site, trail suspicious vehicles in their "blind spot", go down to look under trees and cover, twist and turn to keep "suspects" in continuous site, etc. This even applied to the helicopter types! Since law enforcement needs has little requirement for hover and vertical takeoffs, the gyroplane filled their surveilance, loiter and ground support needs for much less cost! - At least that was a lot of the comments I had heard.

- Wind turbulence had no impact - they could not fly a lot of the other AC during a lot of the day,

- Minimal operating and purchasing costs - compared to Helos and airplanes - even SLSA airplanes. A lot of departments do already fly PPCs, Trikes, SLSA airplanes, and regular helos and airplanes.

--- Ease of flying! Every flight I did was a real "training lesson" - where I turned over the control to the "student" immediately on climbout. This was for pilots, PPC and Trike pilots, observers who never handled AC before, and experienced helo pilots who then had a chance to compare with helo. Many, they expressed how surprisingly "intuitive" the gyro was to fly, and how easily they could accomplish their mission with unrivaled visibility! I am sure they would have felt the same about the MT Sport, it's just that Guido did not have time to take a lot of people up in the 1/2 day the FAA allowed him to fly. But, he was busy that 1/2 day. Probably neither of us were privy to comparison comments between the two gyros, but I'm sure Guido heard a lot of "we've got to get one of these" comments too!

- I do know the DOJ and the rest had completely changed their minds about gyros - they had ruled them out several years ago after some discouraging experiences at the same event. The DOJ's British counterparts convinced the them they needed to give gyros another shot - the British apparently use Magnis and MTs for the same purposes and really love them.

By the way, flying over the Appalachian mountains where I did was not equivalent to flying the Alps. I crossed where there was essentially just about 100 miles of rugged forested hills - great scenery, but not more than a few thousand feet tall. And, there were surprisingly a lot of emergency fields available - at least where the clouds were not obscuring a lot of it on a short 60 mile segment after some rain storms moved through. I have to say my Garmin 496 with weather radar and obstacle and terrain warnings probably saved my butt on that short stretch!

[Gyro_Kai]

Greg,

this sounds great. In Germany the police of one state evaluated MTs for their purposes and had an overall good impression. However, here they are limited to 450 kg (992 lbs) gross weight, no IFR, no night flying as they belong to the UL category. The limited usability in our changeable weather and the lack of payload finally ruled them out.

In other countries they are approved for 560 kg (1234 lbs) and can do instrumental. And moreover there are many areas in the US with 300 cavok days, so the chances are much better, to make good use of them.

Good luck on your mission!

Kai.