Why aren‘t other side by side cabin gyros CLT, like the S.Copter is?

[ricardoramalho]

Hello! As I learned here, gyros should have a center line thrust. (is this controversial??? Why many don´t have?).
I find the Sportcopter II has an unparalleled design, as an enclosed cabin, center thrust line, side by side seat. Xenon is HTL, RAF is HTL, M24 Magni is HTL. Please clarify this issue. Why so many HTL cabin side by side? Is the Sportcopter II the only right thing?
Sportcopter II link bellow:
http://sportcopter.com/Gyroplanes/Sp...3/Default.aspx

Ricardo Ramalho

[willisbr]

What you have read is that all gyros should be CLT. That statement is equivalent to all cops should be men or everyone should drive a hummer because they are safer. These issues can be debated till the cows come home. The above statement is an opinion. A fact from the whole issues is that CLT and HLT have different flight characteristics. Its up to you to decide exactly what makes something "better" over the other. There are hundreds of HLT birds out there that have very happy pilots. I would hazard an estimate that most gyros that are flown today are HLT. Being said, theres not a revolution To CLT. Many have just determined it's a better way to go for safety reasons. Again, you will have to determine what that means to you too. Is safety wearing a helmet playing football or is it just not playing at all? Things that make you go hmmmm. good luck!

[Timchick]

Brian, You're fairly new to gyros yourself. The fact is a lot of pilots in recent years have been converting over to CLT or as close to CLT as they can get. To say the choice for CLT or HTL is simply just a preference and nothing more is wrong. Some HTL gyros add a bandaid and seem to do OK. That's great. When looking at the accident reports of gyros that bunted the overwhelming trait that is common in all of them is the HTL designs.

[willisbr]

I was overspeaking that there is not a revolution going to CLT. There are people coverting their HTL. But there are still many models that are flying and selling HTL which speaks to "preference". That's not my opinion. They just are. That's what I meant.

[bmoore2156]

Ricardo,
Everyone has an opinion, so here is mine.
A HTL machine has the ability to PPO (Power Push Over) where CTL machines can not. A HTL machine has a flaw. Is the answer to design the flaw out of it and make it CLT? OR teach the pilot how to manage the flaw, and hope he never forgets?....
One small mis-step when your flying a HTL machine and you can bunt over. You could probably fly in all kinds of weather for 100's of hours and then have one wind gust unload the rotor and it's good night... unless you lower the throttle quick enough of course. If you don't, and die, they will call it pilot error and it will be your fault.
So the question of the day... Train the pilot and hope? Buy a CLT machine?
Brad

[ventana7]

The goal is stable aircraft that will not bunt over. CLT is one way to get that. The slightly high thrustline of a Magni or Xenon is counterbalanced by a large surface area horizontal stabilizer, far aft so it is on a long lever arm and maybe centered in the prop wash so it has maximum effectiveness. SC II, Magni and Xenon are all completely stable machines they just get there slightly different ways.
Like most designs for aircraft, boats, cars- everything is a compromise. To get CLT or nearer CLT you have to have a tall gyro so you can still have adequate prop clearance. This makes it more top heavy and therfore gives you less ground stability as well as making it harder to climb into- in other words no free lunch. Each designer tries their best to juggle the various compromises.

The real answer is to test each gyro using the newly adopted Gyroplane consensus standards. If it passes the stability tests in the standards it should be a safe machine.

[C. Beaty]

The Magni M-16 gyro has a propeller thrust line to CG offset of 8.4 to 11 inches, about the same as an RAF-2000.

http://www.caa.co.uk/AANDocs/28705/28705000000.pdf

[SamL]

Originally Posted by ricardoramalho

Hello! As I learned here, gyros should have a center line thrust. (is this controversial??? Why many don´t have?).
I find the Sportcopter II has an unparalleled design, as an enclosed cabin, center thrust line, side by side seat. Xenon is HTL, RAF is HTL, M24 Magni is HTL. Please clarify this issue. Why so many HTL cabin side by side? Is the Sportcopter II the only right thing?
Sportcopter II link bellow:
http://sportcopter.com/Gyroplanes/Sp...3/Default.aspx

Ricardo Ramalho

Hi Ricardo
Have a look at the link below. This is the KRUZA by GT Gyroplanes. This is another gyro designed as CLT, side by side and fully enclosed. And no you dont need a step ladder to climb in.

http://www.rotaryforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24740

Regards SamL............

[ROTORTEC]

another one .. the CD II from Rotortec is CTL

[C. Beaty]

Most gyroplane designers have been cut-n-try empiricists whose concept of aeronautical engineering has been to mimic the looks of a Ferrari; low slung and racy.

Occasionally, one will stumble across a combination that seems to work; then the others start copying.

Nearly anything, no matter how much offset, can be kept from tumbling out of the sky with enough horizontal stabilizer located in the propeller prop wash. Flying boats are a good example.

With flying boats, there’s good reason for mounting propellers on top of the wing, as far away from the water as possible.

There is no technically sound reason for designing either gyros or normal fixed wing aircraft with gross offsets between CG and propeller thrust lines and then imposing an artificial burden in the form of a downloaded horizontal stabilizer.

[utahgyrocop]

Although it is not currently in production, the sparrow hawk is also clt. Stay safe.