FAA accident reporting error

A true believer, Walt, believes Don LeFleur could walk on water. I believe Mr. LeFleur warned about the dangers of installing horizontal stabilizers on RAFs; something to the effect that a stab makes them so stable as to be uncontrollable, a view apparently endorsed by his chief CFI.

The NTSB statistics are what they are irrespective of what the RAF manual says about nosewheel management.
 
The FAA’s job is to enforce the rules, not that of engineering your homemade flying apparatus for you. That’s your job.

That’s the reason you can’t use it for hire, carry passengers or fly over densely populated areas.

Amen to that! And be very careful when they start to decide what you can and can't fly or you will end up like the UK where CAA enforcement has restricted the adoption of known safe gyroplane configuration.
 
CE--You're better off remaining a lurker!

Thank you for the friendly advice reelmule, but surely you have to agree that since RAF went out of business the post rate went way down on this forum?

Could it be because the kill rate flying RAF's went down since their demise, or is it something else that is at play here?
 
Should a person of stature refrain from open criticism of bad design in order to retain
their dignity/stature? I think not.

The battle of the stabless wonder is largely over, at least in the U.S., soon in the U.K,
and the recession will probably take care of the rest.

Sort of like the Giant Panda, in many ways. Painted themselves into an evolutionary
corner.
 
With regard to posting on this forum, when I first started posting on Norms forum and later here I tried to give my opinion based on what I saw to be factual.

There were two distinct groups here at the time the pro RAF people and the anti RAF people.

As time passed the interaction between the two groups became more and more confrontational.

Having met Chuck B. and having worked at and with RAF in the early nineties gave me the opportunity to examine my original opinions of the RAF 2000. My separation from my association with RAf started when I expressed my opinion to RAf that it their machine was unstable and a potential killer. This opinion was reinforced by learning the physics and aerodynamics of this design from people like Chuck.

During the process of earning a FAA commercial gyroplane license there was nothing at all in my training that addressed the real issues of how and why gyroplanes are different from helicopters.

True I seldom post here anymore and the reason is attitudes like this.

CE--You're better off remaining a lurker!
 
Last edited:
CE

Thats one persons opinion.

I believe that creativity is forged in the cauldron of conflict and sharpened on the whetstone of dialogue.

In this case the creativity is safety through design. By being cowed you contribute to an inheritance of ignorance & misinformation for those who want to live.
 
CE

Thats one persons opinion.

I believe that creativity is forged in the cauldron of conflict and sharpened on the whetstone of dialogue.

In this case the creativity is safety through design. By being cowed you contribute to an inheritance of ignorance & misinformation for those who want to live.

Your comments are quite true fiveboy, however there are also the issues of.

Is the effort worth the results?

Next we must examine the issue of, has the messenger communicated the message in a manner that the message receivers can accept?

I quit posting here because I failed on the latter, making the answer to the former easy for me. :)

P.S..

I can state that I was the first person to try and advise RAF that their machine was unstable, especially in pitch and needed a H.S. to improve pitch stability.

I do believe I was the first on Norms forum to express my opinion to the gyro group, few believed me and it was years before enough people came to understand that I was correct.

However it was not me who convinced them it was people like Chuck B and Craig Wall and Doug Riley to name three.
 
Last edited:
CE,

I always enjoy your posts, you are a very experienced pilot but you have to admit that your first post on this thread was nothing more than stirring the pot trying to start conflict.

"I'm surprised this was not jumped on Chuck.

So I thought I would post to see how long it takes for someone to get all upset. "

Chuck was a little remiss for posting it in the first place but for you to post just to "see how long it takes to upset someone" is why you get responses saying you should continue to lurk.

Lets keep it nice and civil so that we can all learn instead of goading ppl into arguments and conflict.
 
CE,
I didn't mean to hurt your feelings with my politically incorrect, off the cuff, smartass comment. I apologize and feel your posts are important to all interested in gyro safety.
 
CB,
Thankyou for helping me decide the "true believer issue." I never thought that Don LeFleur could walk on water nor did He or anyone I met at RAF. I don't think Don did any type of flying and was therefore dependent on the assessment of his Pilots. During this time in gyro development the stabless crowd was in control. I believe Don found himself in the same predicament as Beechcraft did with the V tail bonanza. For years, denial that their was a problem (legal issues) and eventually discontinuing the V tail line. I believe Don to be a skilled CEO who possesses expertize in manufacturing, marketing, product support,etc but he is not a pilot and no, he doesn't walk on water. Therefore, I am NOT A TRUE BELIEVER.
 
GYROGUY,
I'm so glad you find it necessary to "pass on a good laugh"
I had a rotor strike.
I admit pilot error, It was not the RAF being at fault like so many would like to believe.
Glad I have big shoulders and can admit I made a mistake.
And oh Ya, Thanks, I wasn't hurt, except my pride.
Jeff Miller
 
P.S. Vance, Thank You for saying"Glad he wasn't hurt" I appreciate it.
 
Hello Jeff,

I hope you realize that the laugh was at the FAA and about the tail rotor.

I am glad you are ok.

We have all made mistakes.

Are you going to rebuild?

Thank you, Vance
 
Jeff- I know how you must feel reading this here on the forum. I know Kerry was referring to the tail rotor strike as about the part of "passing on a good laugh". I know Kerry, and I assure you he wasnt passing on a good laugh because of your misfortune.....but simply the FAA mentioning a tail rotor on a gyroplane. I would have had a chuckle over that myself if that were a report on me.

Vance said the most proper thing...."glad you werent hurt" and I know that is a unanimous feeling amongst the rotorcraft people here.

Stuff happens ......and we go on.

Good luck on many more flights.


Stan
 
Last edited:
Jeff, you missed Kerry's whole point. The "innovation" was:

...ON LANDING TAIL ROTOR AND MAIN ROTOR STRUCK THE GROUND...

We're all glad you're OK, but that was a pretty major boo-boo by government folks.
 
I appreciate what you are all saying. It's just that as a PRA safety guy, You'd think he'd give a darn about the pilot first in his reporting the incident. I didn't get that take on reading his statement.Just that he wanted to pass on a "good Laugh" I read the FAA report and figure we all make mistakes, even the FAA!
 
I thought that N-number sounded familiar, and once I saw a picture of it, I just had to check my logbook. I test flew that machine back in 7/05 for a guy here that owned it at the time. It looks like it is getting around. Hope it gets back in the air again. Really glad you are ok Jeff.
 
Thanks Gary!
I appreciate the message.
I'm ok. No damage to me. But to the RAF, that's another story.
I'll evaluate it next week and determine its fate.I have to say that the RAF cabin protected me very well. I'll either rebuild or part out. Not sure at this time. Interesting how pilot error leads some to start the condemming of the RAF all over again. If I've learned anything after all. it's training thats the key to any gyro. Not just the RAF.
Thanks Again,
Jeff
 
Jeff,

Glad you are OK.

Seriously, you need to take a little time off from the gyro before you make a decision. THe first week after my prop strike, I was all over the map, and had to wait until the embarrassment, fear, and adrenaline wore off before I could get back on the horse.

I wish you all the best, and any landing you walk away from is a good one, my friend. I am seriously glad for you that you weren't hurt. The best lessons you learn in life are usually the most painful...

Your pocketbook may not agree, but then again, you are still around to make more money, rebuild, and get back on the horse.
 
Jeff,

Glad you're OK. A machine can always be rebuilt or replaced. A life (or a limb or an eye) maybe not, so you got away well.

One question: your gyro has a self-assigned serial number from the first owner, REW-01. You don't happen to know what the original RAF contract number was (looks something like "H2-01-12-499" with the second group of two digits being the model year, and the last three digits being the consecutive unit number). Yours is one of the RAF's I can't attribute to any specific place in the production line. There are about 35 of them like that.

About 672 kits were produced in Canada before production moved to the RSA. SARAF uses a different serial number scheme. Because yours was registered by 2002 and is a GTX-SE-FI it was almost certainly produced between 1999 and 2002.

cheers

-=K=-
 
Top