themonarch
Newbie
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2010
- Messages
- 223
- Location
- hart michigan
- Aircraft
- '06 Monarch 582. 150 hrs. tt. Purchased from the builder. Please see my aircraft on Craigslist.org.
- Total Flight Time
- 46 hrs tt. 36 hrs CFI. The additional 10 with accomplished privates. Snuck in an optional solo.
I have an elder sibling, this being my esteemed brother Michael. He and family live in Great Britain. Michael is working towards his pilots license for flying fixed wing microlights. He already owns a Chevvron and recently bought a Kolb. Michael has been consistently critical of my choice of aircraft, that being a gyroplane. He is convinced that they are man killers and that "God didn't mean for them to fly". I'm having him check out the Euro gyros: the MTO line, The Arrow Copter, the Magni and others. Michael comes back and concedes the "new interest" in these "radically designed" machines. He continues to think poorly of gyros, (oh boyee, not good for me the younger brother!). So I came up with a parallel between the dynamic of auotorotation as found in nature and how I think it applies to gyroplanes. I used the example of the single winged maple seed, and how nature designed it to float or glide or even soar depending upon the wind. This leads me to ask you, the reader, which of mans creations for flight most imitates nature? Nature being birds, bats, squirrels, fish, and whatever else that can remain aloft in the air for a time and then eventually return safely to earth. Once again, which of all of these creations of nature, and others that you may add, is best imitated by the various inventions of man? And which one is best at doing just that? In closing, where do you think the gyroplane fits in here? Thanks. MJD.