Raf Options

What do you guy's think about the following?

Having 2 RAF models. One without HS and one with HS??????

Giving the pilot or owner the choice of aircraft he wants to learn to fly.

Then we can get rid of all this HS stabilator debating , because we are going nowhere according to me.

Regards

SARAF

Eben,

People already have a choice.

They can choose to fly their RAF stock, or with a stabilator, stabilizer, both, Boyer mod, Sparrowhawk mod, etc.

Other manufacturers are shifting over to more stable designs, but RAF still hasn't.
With their marketing skills if they were to produce a version that met, or exceeded, the ASTM stability tests they would truly dominate the 2-place market.

Personally, I think they're shooting themselves in the foot by not doing it.

SARAF,

I don't see why they didn't do that years ago; they'd be money ahead if they had.

I think it would be great. Do you think you have enough influence with them that they might listen to your suggestion?

Do what ever.

With the motorcycle market, same problem: With what motorcycle do you want to learn? with a classical motorcycle or with the all new Spyder from Bombardier???

Hi

Hi

Hi Chuter,

Maybe..........

I am of the opinion , lets satisfy everybody's needs gyro wise and provide a product or products to suit everybodys needs, RAF's with or without HS , the client chooses.......

I still recommend without HS and to get the proper training. I also recommend , even with a HS on the RAF you require training. There is no substitute for training......

The site of the All All new Spyder from Bombardier:

https://www.opentheroad.com/

gyromike said:

With their marketing skills if they were to produce a version that met, or exceeded, the ASTM stability tests they would truly dominate the 2-place market.

Personally, I think they're shooting themselves in the foot by not doing it.

Click to expand...

Indeed!

Shooting themselves in the foot, shooting the sport in the leg and shooting some of their customers in the head.


.

Saraf,
Give this a test:
Instruct a student in the stock RAF then after a few hours, instruct the same student in the RAF with a stab. I'm sure you would be able to see which one he would have better control.

I was instructed (25hrs dual) & flew my RAF in the stock configuration about 90 hours later I installed a stab. Several other RAF pilots flew in both configurations & left the stab on their machines.

So bek moet jam kry!!

So bek moet jam kry!!

As dit iets was wat julle gepromofeer het toe ek 'n gyro gesoek het, het ek waarskynlik 'n RAF gekoop. Maar die hardnekige houding wat agente moet inneem om nie hulle agentskap status te verloor nie dryf baie potensieele kopers na ander vis waters, hoop julle pluk die vrugte van julle oopkop houding.
Sorry for the language guys, i just wanted to speak to Eben jr in our mother tunge, basicaly said that if they had that option when i was out gyro hunting i would most probably have bought a RAF.

Tel us a bit more about the trip to Canada, and RAF's home ?

Regards Coen.

You know what i mean?

I have to agree. I flew my ship for 50 hours and was contemplating a stab. Then I did and trip to Crystial River to see Terry while Dolfin was checking him out. As I flew back the ship pitched up and down so bad going under the clouds then coming out, I thought I was going over. Couldn't do over 60mph. When I got back I ordered one of Pauls effective stabs. Never took it off. I was able to fly in much worst conditions, at higher airspeeds and the ship didn't porpuse at all. Matter of fact the normal ocillations I had to always correct disapeared too.
That's just my experience, but it was enough to convince me.

Helo

Helo

Hi

We have instructed students with a HS and without. The student that demanded he wanted the HS and who flew his RAF with it for 5h. He came back to us and asked us to take it off as it took away all the maneuverability of the RAF and he did not like it at all. He is still flying his RAF without the HS.

So you get the guy's that want them fly them and want to take them off afterwards. And then you get the guy's that does not want to take the time learn to fly the gyro safely and they put on the HS to make them feel more in control.

You get different kinds of people in this world. If we could accommodate everybody I would be so happy but unfortunately if you put a HS on the RAF in SA it is changes that you have made to the plane and therefore it will not be issued a ATF by our CAA.

Coen - Ons is nie hardnekkig nie, gaan ook nie ons agentskap verloor as ons nie doen soos wat hulle se nie!!!!!! Het jy al in n RAF gevlieg? indien wel saam met wie en waar? of het jy nog net die stories gehoor? ek sien jy het n Sparrowhawk gyro as n prentjie, is dit joune? of watse tipe gyro vlieg jy?
help my reg as ek verkeerd is maar ek weet nog nie van een sparrowhawk wat vlieg in SA nie. Coen doen jouself n guns, (net as jy wil) en gaan na Eben SNR of na my en ons sal jou wys en laat vlieg in die RAF stock standard net soos hy uit die fabriek kom, dan kan jy mos vir jou self besluit of dit wat die mense se waar is.

Guy's I ask myself this question everyday. I have 350+h on the RAF stock standard, why do I not experience the same as all of you? I went solo on 35h of dual training, why can't you? I only had about 200h on Microlights when I started with the RAF so I was not a very experienced pilot when I started.

Anyway, maybe in the near future there will be some changes to accommodate everybody's needs in the gyro Industry.

Enjoy your flying and fly save.

Hi

Hi

The student that wanted the HS had not flown the RAF before hand so he did not know how it flew.

I never said the RAF is unstable and will never!!!!!!

I don't know how a pilot can solo a fixwing in 5H nor do think a helicopter pilot will allow a student to solo a heli. in 10h. in SA you will not be allowed to go solo in fix wing nor in helicopter with those hours you will be laughed at. That is just stupid and insane.

how can you in 5 or 10h learn the full flight envelope of an aircraft you have never flown?????? I am telling you you will kill yourself in any aircraft if you have that amount of training behind your back. We don't even send microlight students solo in 10h.

4.5 hours of dual in a gyroplane and I was signed off to solo.

Average student learning to fly a stable gyro can be satsifactory trained in 10-15 hours max, and usually with no restrictions put on their solo certificate.....

Average student learning to fly a RAF needs 35-40 hours of dual and still has restrictions placed on his solo certificate, low wind speeds, low cruise speeds, etc........

Guys, until you get to the point where you have flown many different types of gyros it might be hard to understand this______________ BUT.... A gyro is a gyro, they all basically fly the same and do the same thing!

A RAF is not more manuverable or higher performance than other gyros that are considered more stable. The extra training the RAF requires is to teach the student how to handle the lack of stability of the RAF.

Alot of you guys think I am just full of crap, but I am telling you that without a doubt, if you took the same person and gave him training in a Dominator tandem or Magni OR a RAF 2000.... that person would take twice as long to learn to fly in the RAF.

Other than the enclosure, the Dominator or Magni would do everything the RAF does, the RAF is NOT a higher performance gyro.

People say that at fly-ins when the wind picks up the only ones that will fly are the RAF pilots. This means nothing, it has nothing to do with RAFs being better able to handle wind or gusts or thermals, it is simply the RAF guys want to prove to everyone else that they are not afraid.... that they will fly it in any conditions.... Heck I remember going to Bensen Days 2003 or maybe 2004 and I brought a Fixed wing ULTRALIGHT airplane.... And I would go out and fly it when no one else would fly. Here I was at a gyroplane event flying my plane while all the gyro people were grounded due to the gusty crosswind. It wasn't cause I had a better aircraft, it was me simply not being afraid of the wind and just wanting to fly. A few minutes after I would start flying the ultralight, I would see people jumping in their gyros to fly, they must have figured the winds couldn't be that bad if a ultralight airplane was up flying in them....

The RAF is not a bad gyro. With stability mods it can be a nice machine. In stock configuration it is dangerous, and there is no reason it has to be.

kc0iv said:

.......
Common sense tell me the workload for the student should be as low as is possible. Only after the student has gain experience should the workload be increased.

Maybe that is why I read time and time again people say it takes 35 hours of duel time before a student solos. I simply can't understand why a F/W can solo in 5-6 hours and a helo can solo in around 10 hours. Yet gyros take 20-30 hours before they solo. This just doesn't make sense.

Maybe the instructors should step back and and take a look at the training and find out why it is taking so long

Leon
kc0iv

Click to expand...

Great Post Leon. I agree completely. I did not solo so fast as Ron but I did not have any significant previous aircraft experinece. I soloed (with signoff) at 9.5 hours in a HTL gyro with a HS.

Putting a student in an unstable gyro (yes the stock raf is unstable) to learn in is like saying it is better to teach someone to ride a bicycle by starting them out on a unicycle. Of course its going to take them #$%# longer. But at least when you fall on a unicycle you don't kill yourself and distroy the cycle. Also, a student is no good judge on how manouverable a gyro is. Certainly he/she got this opinion from an instructor or someone else.

If someone had 300 hours in a microlight why on earth would they need 35 hours to learn to solo a gyro unless the thing was an unstable death trap???

SARAF said:

The student that wanted the HS had not flown the RAF before hand so he did not know how it flew.

I never said the RAF is unstable and will never!!!!!!

I don't know how a pilot can solo a fixwing in 5H nor do think a helicopter pilot will allow a student to solo a heli. in 10h. in SA you will not be allowed to go solo in fix wing nor in helicopter with those hours you will be laughed at. That is just stupid and insane.

how can you in 5 or 10h learn the full flight envelope of an aircraft you have never flown?????? I am telling you you will kill yourself in any aircraft if you have that amount of training behind your back. We don't even send microlight students solo in 10h.

Click to expand...

Just how many hours do the microlight students take for solo? I would like to see the honest answer. In my opinion it should be NO GREATER than a gyro student so long as that gyro student is learning in a safe stable gyroplane.

I praise your dedication to training and the fact you are putting so much time into training your RAF students. There is no question that if all RAF pilots got that much training deaths would be reduced. However, the stock RAF is still unstable and I still see no logic in starting out bicycle students on a unicycle that can kill them.

If you don't admit that the RAF is unstable then I am very concerned about your understanding of basic physics and aerodynamics. I would strongly suggest you stop all training activites and gyroplane flying activites until you posses a competitent understanding of stability. I don't mean to sound like an ass but your life and your students lives depend on the understanding of these basic principles.

GyroRon said:

4.5 hours of dual in a gyroplane and I was signed off to solo.

Average student learning to fly a stable gyro can be satsifactory trained in 10-15 hours max, and usually with no restrictions put on their solo certificate.....

Average student learning to fly a RAF needs 35-40 hours of dual and still has restrictions placed on his solo certificate, low wind speeds, low cruise speeds, etc........

Guys, until you get to the point where you have flown many different types of gyros it might be hard to understand this______________ BUT.... A gyro is a gyro, they all basically fly the same and do the same thing!

A RAF is not more manuverable or higher performance than other gyros that are considered more stable. The extra training the RAF requires is to teach the student how to handle the lack of stability of the RAF.

Alot of you guys think I am just full of crap, but I am telling you that without a doubt, if you took the same person and gave him training in a Dominator tandem or Magni OR a RAF 2000.... that person would take twice as long to learn to fly in the RAF.

Other than the enclosure, the Dominator or Magni would do everything the RAF does, the RAF is NOT a higher performance gyro.

People say that at fly-ins when the wind picks up the only ones that will fly are the RAF pilots. This means nothing, it has nothing to do with RAFs being better able to handle wind or gusts or thermals, it is simply the RAF guys want to prove to everyone else that they are not afraid.... that they will fly it in any conditions.... Heck I remember going to Bensen Days 2003 or maybe 2004 and I brought a Fixed wing ULTRALIGHT airplane.... And I would go out and fly it when no one else would fly. .......

The RAF is not a bad gyro. With stability mods it can be a nice machine. In stock configuration it is dangerous, and there is no reason it has to be.

Click to expand...

Excellent post.

I remember that day at Benson days. I wish I would have had my gyro down there at the time.

I wish some RAFer would please explain in detail why they think the stock RAF is somehow more 'manouverable'.

Why is it such a big deal to just put a large HStab on the fricken RAF??? Its easy to do, cheap, makes the craft fly better and saves your life!!??!!???

Het toevalig met Garth by Potch lug skou gevlieg voor julle al betrokke was by hulle operasie. Toe twee keer met jou pa nadat ons speciaal opgery het upington toe net om weer te kyk na die RAF. Maar nadat ons gevis het oor julle standpunt omtrend STABS en ander modifikasies was dit moeilik om julle te ondersteun want ek hou nie van die politiek nie.
Ja dit is 'n Sparrowhawk die eerste om te vlieg in S.A maar het probleeme met die agent en CAA om die goet te rigestreer, lyk tog of dit binne die volg maand sal regkom.
Groetnis Coen.

i Just want to apologise for the difirent language guys, please excuse me it wont last long.

TIME OUT...I gots to come off the sideline and make a post.


Until, and I mean UNTIL youse guys have flown an RAF, (any configuration, preferably with at least an HS or a Stabilator)...cause I don't want you to die...SOLO for at least 25 hrs. preferably more...cause I don't want you to die...you cannot possibly tell anyone how, why, when ANYONE will experience this, that or whatever.

If you haven't been there and done that in the RAF, you cannot say what it can and cannot do. Do you understand what I'm trying to say??? What other 2 place machines, tandem, side by side, open frame or enclosed, performances are...you cannot compare them to an RAF until YOU fly the RAF thru the same maneuvers. Save your comparison comments until you do.

It just stands to reason. :boink:


Cheers

Harry,

I have no gripe with a well trained person who flys a RAF with a HStab. I would glady accept a ride is such a machine!

I also very much agree that gyros perform very differently from model to model and even between 2 builds of the same make and model.

HOWEVER, I don't think you need (as apparently expressed in your post) to have X hours of experience in a RAF to understand:

A. Stability Physics
B. That a new student should be given a safe, easy, STABLE platform to learn in.
C. A HStab is a cheap, easy way to add stablity, saftey and ease of flight to any gyroplane especally one with SxS, pod, big prop, big engine, and very HTL.
D. It is easer and safter to learn in a gyro that is stable, easy to fly and less dangerous and it is harder and just plain stupid to learn in a gyro that is unstable, more difficult to fly and dangerous.

If any pilot or (oh my gosh) an instructor came up to me and said they did not understand the basic physics of stablity, center of gravity, and how to tell and unstable aircraft from a stable one I certainly would not fly with him/her and I would want to warn their students to find a new instructor!!!

If that pilot or instructor was flying an unstable gyro especally one with a fully enclosed pod, very high thrust line, powerfull engine and side x side seating I would be fearing for the life of the pilot, his/her passingers and the students!

Harry,

I know you are a smart and reasonable man. You have added a HS to your RAF. I would gladly fly with you any day and feel safe. Would you not agree that these conclusions can be drawn without flying the RAF?

I agree that the RAF likely has some easy to learn aspects. I would bet they are easy to taxi and land compaired to a CLT machine. And in matters like these you are absolutly correct. Walk a mile in the RAF shoes before opening a mouth to state a fact.

However, Bunt over is very serious and is NOT something you can practice! But we can understand the physics of it and we can understand from an abstract perspective that an unstable aircraft is very likely going to be harder to learn in then a stable one. Thus, reducing the time to solo and increasing the ease of learning.

Although I may not say 'Stock RAF' when I talk about RAFs in my posts that is what I mean. A RAF with a effective HStab is a machine that I consider stablized under the majority of the flying envelope.

I wish all RAF owners were as smart as you and the others that have added HStabs.

If someone had a *Gizmo* that was cheap, easy to install and would make my gyro safer, easyer to fly, increase the effectiveness of my trim system and SAVE MY LIFE, I would order one right away.

I don't understand why the RAF owners arnt beating doors down to get HStabs???? I might be COMPLETELY WRONG about this but it seems the only answer I can think of is that the factory is misleading them about the need for an HStab, what it does, why and the effects (or lack of ) on performace.