To bee or not to bee that is the question

[John Stahl]

:confused:

Guys I want to build a bee but I have some reservations. I want to keep the bee an ultra light.
BUT
I weigh 250 lbs
The landing strips I will use are between 3000 and 6200 feet in elevation.
What motor would you recommend?
What type of rotors would you use? And what size?
With my weight, and at the elevation I live at. Is building a bee even practical?

[Bob]

Hummm, I can tell you from practical experience, the airport i have been useing in Shingletown ca. is 4800ft in elevation and it makes alot of diferance in your take off run... your speed must be faster in my case instead of the 15 to 20 mph at sa level i have to go 20 to 25 mph to achieve lift off .
I have a modified Bumble Bee , very much like the Gyro bee in its original form, but the gyro bee is much more forgiveing from what i've read . I have the documention on the Gyro Bee and if i remember right it said it could handle a pilot of your weight fine... even with the Rotex 447 engine with gear reduction. but that is at sea level .
sense i don't know if the rotex 503 can be got with the gear reduction or not I heasitate to say go to a 503 rotex and i believe the Gyro bee plans call for Rotordyne blades on a 4 foot hub makeing it a 24foot diamator for the blades. I don't think I would change that, but thats just me too <grin> ... personally I think the Gyrobee stright from the plans will do you quite well even with your weight and altitude , but to be honnest I am guessing ! Hopefully some others with a Gyro bee will shed some light on this for ya !
....

Bob....

[KDOG]

John, welcome!
Hmm, you definetly want to ask around on that. But from what I know, yes you will be able to fly an ultralight gyrobee. However, you DEFINETLY won't be putting any extras' on the bird. I think you'll need longer rotor blades. I don't know about the 503 and keeping it ultralight. Its possible, but you definetly want to get more opinions.....

[GyroRon]

I will save you alot of time and hassle. The short answer is a big no. It ain't going to fly a big guy like you in true ultralight configureation at that elevation. It may get you off the ground, but if it makes it over the trees at the end of the runway it would be doing good.

Your going to need more power which takes you out of the true ultralight class, or find a nice fixed wing ultraight as there is many of those that would have no trouble lifting a big guy like you at tht elevation and still be a legal UL.

[KDOG]

I'd listen to Ron, he knows more than me - which isn't very difficult. :(

[Doug Riley]

Yes, (sigh), it probably isn't going to work with that combo of weight and density alt. unless you wait til it's freezing out to fly.

[John Stahl]

You are confirming my research .
Drats!!!
I had hoped that there was a way to improve performance and stay in 103 compliance.
Lets hope that the FAA decides to modify the 103 rules so they resemble the rest of the worlds definition.

I feel that the bee is still the best beginning machine out there.
So scrap the 103 compliance.
With my weight (250lbs)and thin air(3000+ feet) how would you Build a bee?

[Brian Jackson]

I'm speaking purely from memory and with limited knowledge because I'm not yet a pilot, but am currently building a GyroBee.

I believe Ralph recommends a 25' rotor due to lesser RRPM = less rotor drag. A 503 engine is suitable for a 'Bee but nothing more powerful. Build it LIGHT! Dragon Wings blades are extremely light and efficient, and StarBee is making a very light hand-start prerotator, which will save a few pounds as well. Couple this with a very efficient prop.

To my understanding, these are the areas that will most improve performance.

[Doug Riley]

I think you're going to have to get more power than a 503. Also, a tall tail will improve performance a bit. Since you can't stay within (the current version of) 103, and since the 'Bee isn't designed for the more powerful 582, I'd suggest you build a light Dominator and call it a Light-Sport Experimental. There's more regulatory hassle, but you won't have to try to fly with marginal performance. A decent climb rate is a safety requirement.

[PW_Plack]

John, is remaining at 250 pounds a foregone conclusion? Two guys here in PRA Chapter 73 decided to address that aspect of gyroplane performance. Both were too big to fly ultralights, and I'm guessing both might have had issues getting the third class medical, so they might have had trouble getting the PPL to even fly experimentals. Between them, they've lost 100 pounds in the past year. It's been pretty inspiring!

[Brent_Brown]

A KB 3 has a 582. I would put a tall tail an keep it 103. with DW blades and pull start prerotator or no prero like I did with a KB2.

[GyroRon]

a kb-3 with a tall tail and more importantly... Raising the seat up about 6-8 inches would be perfect. It would have to be done carefully to be legal 103, but it would be close. A light machine with a 582 Rotax will climb out like a bat outta hell!

[KDOG]

Well, to answer the guyz question, could he put a 582 on a bee if he beefed up the engine mount? If so, could he keep the bird UL legal?

[John Stahl]

How about a MZ 202 with a weight of 87lbs with gear box and 60 hp
Or
MZ 201m with a weight of 72lbs with gear box and 50 some hp
I don’t know about its reliability and price and Compatibility with a bee

[John Stahl]

Weight reduction is all ready in motion with the loss of 10 lbs since march. 25 to go
Cold weather gear will negate my weight loss. It was 39F out this morning , toped out at 61F

[GyroRon]

I know of at least one gyrobee with a Rotax 582. Dana at Starbee gyros knows the owner of this ship well - his name is Jay I think. So it could be done.

[Brent_Brown]

I saw it fly at ROC. It had 10 gal of gas on it too.

[Brent_Brown]

I fly a MZ 202 and have said it is as light and will out pull a 503. The KB 3 makes weight with the tiny main wheels that I don't like. with the mz and DW blades you should be able to make weight and use bigger wheels. Just with the MZ you save 25 pounds.

Ron a BEE seat looks lower than or as low as a KB, and that fuel tank on the keel VS. in the seat? I think the KB wins in the VCG here. The KB I had in the photo flew great, it was the first gyro I SOLOed and I feel that the tail with HS saved my butt.

I'm not a big fan of the BEEs. I know everyone likes that you can build it from plans did you know plans can be had for the KBs too.

The BEE killer

[scottessex]

I think that was Jay Boyce with the 582 Bee, yes he carried 10 gallons of fuel, and Jay isn't a little guy.

[REDHORSE556CES]

How about a MZ 202 with a weight of 87lbs with gear box and 60 hp
Or
MZ 201m with a weight of 72lbs with gear box and 50 some hp
I don’t know about its reliability and price and Compatibility with a bee

One other suggestion: The Limbach L550E. I don't know anything about the reliability or price and there was nothing about a PSRU. But it weighs 37 pounds sans, exhaust stacks, starter ,generator and is rated at 50 hp @7500 rpm. Any comments?

[Brian Jackson]

One other suggestion: The Limbach L550E. I don't know anything about the reliability or price and there was nothing about a PSRU. But it weighs 37 pounds sans, exhaust stacks, starter ,generator and is rated at 50 hp @7500 rpm. Any comments?
http://www.limflug.de/doc/eng/produkte/L550e.htm

[GyroRon]

I fly a MZ 202 and have said it is as light and will out pull a 503. The KB 3 makes weight with the tiny main wheels that I don't like. with the mz and DW blades you should be able to make weight and use bigger wheels. Just with the MZ you save 25 pounds.

Ron a BEE seat looks lower than or as low as a KB, and that fuel tank on the keel VS. in the seat? I think the KB wins in the VCG here. The KB I had in the photo flew great, it was the first gyro I SOLOed and I feel that the tail with HS saved my butt.

I'm not a big fan of the BEEs. I know everyone likes that you can build it from plans did you know plans can be had for the KBs too.

The BEE killer

I believe the Gyrobee has the looks of a much worse HTL gyro than a KB-3, but I think that the gyrobee with the taller mast and Normally Larger and heavier blades helps offset the highness of the thrustline. Plus the gyrobee is supposed to be powered with a Rotax 447, not a 503 or 582. The larger engines on the gyrobee may be just as dangerous on a bee as a KB..... If bee builders didn't use stabs as KB-3 builders often do. So in other words, I think the gyrobee and kb aren't too far off in CG to thrustline relationship, but the gyrobee is normally underpowered and normally has a big stab, where as the kb-3 is a rocket ship powerwise and normally has no stab. Many kb-3s have bunted killing those pilots.

I myself would really like to fly a KB-3 with a 582 and with your tall tail. I think that with that combo and raising the seat a few inches to further help the thrust to CG offset the gyro would be reasonably safe and would be a screaming hot rod to fly.

[Brent_Brown]

I want to be clear, I want to see all KBs, Bensens and anyother gyro use a big HS. I wish they would stop selling KBs without one. If you have not put a HS on your gyro try it your like it.

Ron the seat on a KB 3 is Higher than the 2. I order the 3 mast to use one the pegleg gyro and the seat and mast support angles were to shortabout 2". and I was hoping to just change out the mast but no.