Rotary Wing Forum  

Go Back   Rotary Wing Forum > Rotorcraft > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-09-2017, 03:39 PM
Richard Anderson Richard Anderson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Eureka,Illinois
Posts: 263
Default Powered Sport Flying magazine

Just received the latest PSF magazine. Great issue!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-11-2017, 01:12 PM
Joe Pires's Avatar
Joe Pires Joe Pires is offline
star hoarder
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Geneva FL FD92
Posts: 2,651
Default

From page 36 - "The next idea that gained popularity ...was the idea of placing engine thrustlines higher in order to avoid the pilot induced oscillations."
__________________
"at 55 I did'nt GO over the hill, I FLEW over it"

Sport Pilot Powered Parachute
Sport Pilot Gyro

I don't always fly a gyroplane, but when I do I fly a Dominator. Stay airborne my friends!

Currently building an Aviomania GS2 powered by a Viking 2015 130 HP Engine. Expected completion about two weeks. Wait a minute....I finished it!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-12-2017, 12:24 AM
All_In's Avatar
All_In All_In is offline
Gold Supporter
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: San Diego, CA. USA
Posts: 13,522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Pires View Post
From page 36 - "The next idea that gained popularity ...was the idea of placing engine thrustlines higher in order to avoid the pilot induced oscillations."
Hi Joe
What's up with that? Really had to think hard for that quote.

As far as I know there was only one manufacture claiming and defending High Thrust lines reduced PIO!
It was Jim Field and his Honey Bee. He gave a Chapter 2 online presentation and allows us to ask questions presenting his claims for HTL's.
I called him back the next day and sent him some calculation showing him the physics and he was incorrect in his conclusions. He did not agree.

Your point I think is the same as mine that's not what happened? It was only one manufacture.
There is another quote that is not exactly correct too... about why gyroplanes did not get their sport pilot category. He states it was because of the heated debate going on at the same time on this forum (I suspect he did not name us) regarding center line thrust OR whether to place the tail further back.

I wasn't here back then but from what I read of the past debates was whether or not to have an HS at all!
All of the pro's said to put a large HS way back to counter the effects of NON CLT machines and you need a smaller HS with less drag if it is CLT.

But there are some insightful points and some hopeful information for gyro's getting a sport category.
__________________
Resistance is futile…… You will be compiled!
Cheers,
John Rountree

PRA- Director
PRA- Volunteer Coordinator

PRA31 - Vice President of S.D. Rotorcraft Club
http://www.Pra31.org

U.S. Agent for Aviomania Aircraft... the most stable gyroplane on the market today.
See: Aviomania USA http://www.AviomaniaUSA.com

OEM Dealer for MGL Avionics - glass cockpit EFIS for Experimental aircraft Ask about DISCOUNTS for PRA MEMBERS

Last edited by All_In; 01-12-2017 at 12:27 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-12-2017, 04:09 PM
Richard Anderson Richard Anderson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Eureka,Illinois
Posts: 263
Default

I've found that when articles are printed with incorrect or misleading information, the best way to counter is to send a short, thoughtful "Letter to the Editor" to the magazine. As co-owner of a publishing company, I can assure you that Editors take these very seriously, as maintaining credibility is paramount. The Editor then sends it on to the writer of the article, so they can respond with a correction of the article, or a rebuttal. And they will be printed in the "Letters to the Editor" column.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-12-2017, 10:00 PM
phantom phantom is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Eagle River
Posts: 1,373
Default

People come up with some very far out ideas when they don't understand how things really work, my gyros always had oversized horizontal stabilizers by gyro standard due to not using an off set gimbal head and it was to far back by Bensen standards, I was told that my machines were dangerous because of my stabilizers, in rough air it was thought that it would make the machine uncontrollable.
Norm.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-13-2017, 08:52 AM
fara fara is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 2,519
Default

The main thing for gyroplanes I see in PSF magazine is not thrust line.
Its the presentation of NTSB statistics for modern gyroplanes till end of 2015, from a recognized fleet of about 197 registrations to make the case for allowing factory built gyroplanes under a consensus standard to collect further data from participating manufacturers and get Part 1 definition changed to include gyroplanes as SLSA.


That's the main thing. I for one am willing to sign up for that now. We already build SLSA trikes. Our QA manual already complies with ASTM QA standard for LSA, as well as Continued Airworthiness standard. Would not take us too long to implement its provisions to factory built gyroplanes under an exemption by an entity like LAMA or USUA. Those exempt gyroplanes would have to be maintained like a SLSA machine by participants and should be grandfathered in when SLSA is allowed down the road.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Ad Management plugin by RedTyger