Does gyroplane community really want S-LSA?

[Vance]

Originally Posted by fara

Greg: Yes of course its not a buntover magnet. All you have to do is look at buntover statistics for that make/model.

I figured that out in about 2 months of getting interested in gyroplanes.

Although I also figured out that many will never figure that out regardless of field experience stats.

So its like religion. Don't argue about it .

Hope you had a great Halloween.

Hello Abid, I hope one day you will come to understand that just because a few people are confused; it does not mean that most gyroplane enthusiasts are confused.

I have been on this forum for a long time and I don’t remember anyone saying that a Magni is a dangerous gyroplane.

I also hope that one day you will realize that when you misinterpret what someone says and misstate their opinion it does not mean that you are correct and they are wrong.

It is my observation that the gyroplane community is made up of individuals, often with divergent opinions. To imagine that you understand what the “community is thinking” from a thread like this particularly with no price point is in my opinion not reasonable.

Thank you, Vance

[PW_Plack]

Originally Posted by Vance

...I would like to point out that there is no mention of oscillations.

It does sound like a power push over and the gyroplane did have a high thrust line...

Vance, at one time I had my nose pretty deep in accident reports, (both NTSB and anecdotal,) trying to make sense of the "More training!"/"More stability!" debate. I noticed quite a few bunt accidents appeared to start with at least a couple of growing pitch oscillations, culminating in the final, big one.

Faced with a frustrating lack of adequate data, I concluded that the reason experienced pilots of uncompensated HTL machines escape bunts might be because they learn to quickly snuff any pitch oscillations that start.

I also feel the term "PIO" is often misused. I suspect many of these oscillations are uncommanded, not induced by the pilot, and the pilot simply didn't respond quickly enough to damp them.

[Gyro_Kai]

Hello,

very enlightening.

Greg, may I ask a maybe too simplistic question:

If a pilot makes the mistake of pushing the stick at the end of a zoom climb with near zero airspeed, what stops a Magni from toppling over? There are no incidents reported, so it must work somehow.

Clearly the prop pushes above CG, the fuselage still drags, but the rotor lost its induced drag. Is is the Hstab pushing the back down?

Toward the ASTM rules.
In the British section-T the point of discussion is expressed in a way that if the thrustline is more than 2 in deviant from the CG (either way) additional tests and confirmation on the stability must be performed.
With the either-or attitude you don't get anywhere, and as mentioned above, gyroplanes need to appear with a closed front before the FAA.

Kai.

[ckurz7000]

I am a bit reluctant to post in this thread because it's hard to determine exactly what it is about: SLSA gyroplanes, HTL vs. CTL, the workings of the US legal system or personal issues? While this is so, it also makes it hard for my post to be "off topic"

Having just gone through a certification process in all its glorious detail and now going through the arduous process of becoming a certified manufacturer of ArrowCopter gyros (to which I am only an interested bystander), I feel that my opinion might be interesting to some, even if only as anacdotal evidence.

Personally, I only fly aircraft that I have every reason to believe are safe. The intention of any certification efforts is to prove, with some measure of authority, to a prospective pilot that a particular aircraft is safe to fly. This usually works well with certified aircraft involving engineering design reviews, ground tests, flight testing, and a lot of documentation of everything. A host of knowledgeable and experienced people are involved in this. Therefore I am convinced that -- generally speaking -- certification improves safety.

With the current liberties afforded by the FAA to EAB aircraft (no real design, build or flight test standards to speak of) it is unlikely that the safety record of gyros, which are 99% EAB aircraft, will improve out of its own accord.

So here is the catch-22 situation that Greg already pointed out: gyros have a bad safety record. They want to also move into the SLSA category but the FAA requires first to demonstrate that there even exists a safe standard to which gyros can be built so that their safety record improves. And that's where things stand with little likelihood to change in the near future.

To sum up:

(1) I believe that the FAA is reluctant to accept gyros into the SLSA category because, in their perception, it has not yet been demonstrated that there exists a safe standard at all to which gyros can be built.

(2) The current EAB regulations are insufficient to produce accident statistics which would change the FAA's perception.

(3) The community should instate a means of self-regulation which aims at improving the safety record.

(4) The PRA could become an organisation which would be accepted by both the FAA and the gyro community.

(5) Over time, trust would form, the safety record would improve, and minds would open.

-- Chris.

[Vance]

I reviewed the NTSB reports on gyroplane accidents since January 1, 2011 and in my opinion only one of the twelve may have involved gyroplane instability.

In my opinion the reports are incomplete but that is not likely to change although in the NTSB’s defense the reports are getting better.

In my opinion ASTM standards or S-LSA wouldn’t have made any difference because the one that may have involved stability had a lot of experienced people helping him and it involved an experimental. The accident gyroplane was not built in an information vacuum.

It is my observation there are many unreported gyroplane accidents.

Given how few gyroplanes are flying in the USA and how little they fly this is an appalling number of bent machines and broken pilots.

I don’t know what can be done to make flying gyroplanes safer.

I suspect the FAA feels the same way.

Why would the FAA want more gyroplanes flying?

In my opinion until we do better things are not likely to change on the S-LSA front.

Thank you, Vance

[Steve_UK]

I think the posts above from Chris & Vance have hit the nail on the head.

When I browse this forum I read a lot of messages from those aspiring to own their own gyro, with many looking to build a kit ( cheap ) or a one off design, over many years, in a lock up - some have limited engineering skills, some have no flight time in gyros, some work in apparent isolation others getting contradicatory advice from nearby gyro pilots.

Some appear to take very little preparatory flight training take - the day of the first flight beckons - this must be an incredibly anxious moment, a pilot with limited experience, in a machine that's never flown before, add in impatience ( after a multi year build ) and maybe windy gusts and it can all end in tears or tradegy.

There has to be a better way.

[Fly Army]

Originally Posted by Steve_UK

I think the posts above from Chris & Vance have hit the nail on the head.

When I browse this forum I read a lot of messages from those aspiring to own their own gyro, with many looking to build a kit ( cheap ) or a one off design, over many years, in a lock up - some have limited engineering skills, some have no flight time in gyros, some work in apparent isolation others getting contradicatory advice from nearby gyro pilots.

Some appear to take very little preparatory flight training take - the day of the first flight beckons - this must be an incredibly anxious moment, a pilot with limited experience, in a machine that's never flown before, add in impatience ( after a multi year build ) and maybe windy gusts and it can all end in tears or tradegy.

There has to be a better way.

Steve,
I couldn't agree more. As a fixed wing CFI for the last 22 years I can't even begin to get my head around a parallel situation. It would be like having a student show up with the intentions of getting the minimum amount training to solo in a two place trainer and then release him/her with all good intentions to go fly in their (likely vastly different) single place EAB ! It's no wonder we don't have even greater tragedy than what we already do.

In the fixed wing side of the house the student would have the ability to continue to rent the trainer aircraft and even get an actual rating in it. Here in the U.S. gyroplane world no such "luxury" exists. I do know, and it has been discussed in other parts of this forum that a few instructors do allow their students to fly their training aircraft solo at least a little bit in order to build confidence but that's really putting the instructor out on a limb. And doubtful any have the faith to allow their students to get more than an hour or two in this manner. Insurance only goes so far - if at all in this instance.

While in Europe because renting a gyro is at least feasible albeit somewhat expensive at least a newcomer there that bought an old B-8 in a barn has the ability to build up an experience base before taking that HUGE leap of faith.

That's just one more reason why I think we do NEED to have the ability to rent gyroplanes here in order to begin to FIX our safety record. The only way I see that can happen is to have some type of certified gyroplane available.
Randy

[fara]

Originally Posted by Vance

Hello Abid, I hope one day you will come to understand that just because a few people are confused; it does not mean that most gyroplane enthusiasts are confused.

I have been on this forum for a long time and I don’t remember anyone saying that a Magni is a dangerous gyroplane.

I also hope that one day you will realize that when you misinterpret what someone says and misstate their opinion it does not mean that you are correct and they are wrong.

It is my observation that the gyroplane community is made up of individuals, often with divergent opinions. To imagine that you understand what the “community is thinking” from a thread like this particularly with no price point is in my opinion not reasonable.

Thank you, Vance

Vance: That's your opinion.
I think I can sense the writing between the lines in the gyroplane community in the US (not elsewhere).
There is a very solid and significant block of people who are totally CLT --> Tall Tail close by. Anything else, is less able, capable, stable, less safe.

That's what I am saying and this is a fact. Denying that IMO is of no use.

[fara]

Originally Posted by Gyro_Kai

Hello,

very enlightening.

Greg, may I ask a maybe too simplistic question:

If a pilot makes the mistake of pushing the stick at the end of a zoom climb with near zero airspeed, what stops a Magni from toppling over? There are no incidents reported, so it must work somehow.

....

Kai.

You do that in a trike and you will get what we call a possible tumble with no recovery. But that does not seem to happen in the last decade much at all because of training, awareness and also dynamic and static pitch testing requirements --- basically section S derivatives.

[Vance]

Originally Posted by fara

Vance: That's your opinion.
I think I can sense the writing between the lines in the gyroplane community in the US (not elsewhere).
There is a very solid and significant block of people who are totally CLT --> Tall Tail close by. Anything else, is less able, capable, stable, less safe.

That's what I am saying and this is a fact. Denying that IMO is of no use.

That is understandable Abid,

It appears to me the words just go in one eye and out the other.

Why read the words when you can simply make things up that support your fantasy?

What gyroplane is this significant block of people who want centerline thrust and a tall tail close in flying?

Thank you, Vance

[PW_Plack]

Originally Posted by Vance

...I suspect the FAA feels the same way...Why would the FAA want more gyroplanes flying?

Vance, that begs another question. Where does the FAA find its empowerment to decide how many gyroplanes should be flying?

You've also touched on another of my pet frustrations. A great majority of gyroplane accidents are officially blamed on pilot error, not aircraft stability. Yet, the FAA shuts off the only cost-effective access to rentals for training, complicating the safe development of all gyroplane pilots, in a misguided attempt to prevent a very small number of accidents blamed on mechanical or stability issues.

This implausible philosophy has "government" written all over it.

[fara]

Progressive Aerodyne, Inc., (PA) the manufacturer of SeaRey, Light Sport Amphibian Airplane, successfully passed FAA Light Sport Aircraft Prototype Audit by the audit team from FAA AIR-200 in Washington D.C. and obtained airworthiness certification from FAA Orlando MIDO office on November 8, 2012. PA who has been selling the same model kit of two place amphibian airplane for the past twenty years has been working for a few years diligently to meet relevant ASTM standards and FAA regulations. PA was the first one out seven Light Sport Aircraft manufacturers in the past two years to pass the FAA audit without any major findings.

PA will start production of the compliant airplane immediately to meet the long expected market desire. PA is committed to make continuous effort providing customers with high quality SeaRey with proven extraordinary performance by following strictly the ASTM standards and FAA regulations to keep its leading position on the sport amphibian airplane market.

[fara]

Originally Posted by Vance

That is understandable Abid,

It appears to me the words just go in one eye and out the other.

Why read the words when you can simply make things up that support your fantasy?

What gyroplane is this significant block of people who want centerline thrust and a tall tail close in flying?

Thank you, Vance

What do you think they are flying? Seriously. You want me to answer that?
They are flying and will only fly what they think is safe.

[Vance]

Originally Posted by fara

What do you think they are flying? Seriously. You want me to answer that?
They are flying and will only fly what they think is safe.

If I knew the answer I would not have asked Abid.

You claim; “There is a very solid and significant block of people who are totally CLT --> Tall Tail close by. Anything else, is less able, capable, stable, less safe.”

I have not met gyroplane people who believe that so I am wondering who you imagine you are listening to.

I have not seen a gyroplane like that so I would like to know what this very solid significant block of people are flying.

Thank you, Vance

[fara]

Originally Posted by Vance

If I knew the answer I would not have asked Abid.

You claim; “There is a very solid and significant block of people who are totally CLT --> Tall Tail close by. Anything else, is less able, capable, stable, less safe.”

I have not met gyroplane people who believe that so I am wondering who you imagine you are listening to.

I have not seen a gyroplane like that so I would like to know what this very solid significant block of people are flying.

Thank you, Vance

Vance: Its not proper for me to name names of particular models etc. I have nothing against one gyroplane model or the other. I do not want to come across as such either and you are not going to take me there. If you want those answers, you have get out of your state and talk to people and have a keen sense of observation and you will get the same impression as me, I am sure. That block is there. It is significant and yes IMO they do not understand somethings as one would expect them to after so many years of flying experience etc. Unfortunately there is no Mythbusters episode I can point them to.