7 July 2018 - N623AG Calidus - hard landing - Tacoma Narrows Airport - minor injuries

Vance;n1135603 said:
Witnesses reported 623AG crashed on takeoff.
It is sad to see so many gyroplane crashes.

This makes thirteen reported gyroplane crashes just in the USA so far in 2018 with one fatality (also in a Calidus on takeoff).

We most defiantly are all sad about the accident rate in gyros.

I did an NTSB search for all Gyro accidents from 2000 and broke them down by phase of flight.
187 Total Gyro Accidents since 1/1/2000
62 Take off
37 Landing
33 Maneuvering
14 Cruise
12 Approach
3 Climb
1 Descent
1 Standing (18A ground resonance)
0 Go around
0 Other
0 Taxi

To simplify we can combine some phases into 3. Take off - 65, Flight - 60, and Landing - 37.
Take off--62 Take off + 3 Climb = 65
Flight--33 Maneuvering + 14 Cruise +12 Approach + 1 Descent = 60
Landing--Landing = 37
Throwing out the 18A "Standing" accident making a total of 186

*We can take mechanical and engine failure out of the stats. That reduces Flight by 10 and Take off and Landing by 1 each.

So we end up with:
Take off - 64
Flight - 50
Landing - 36

It's clear take offs are the weak link here with 43% of all accidents*. The 0 accidents under "Go around" points to the transition from 0 mph to climb/rpm speed as the crux of the issue.

It seems clear to me the accepted take off practice of managing the slow speed nose wheel pop up and then take off while staying in ground effect until climb speed is reached is simply too complex. Throw in another thing to manage like wind gusts, traffic, or some slight mechanical event to distract and one's mind is overwhelmed while still too slow to climb.

A way to stay on the ground until climb speed is achieved would eliminate wheel balance and put you in the air at climb speed with better rudder authority. In an earlier post I pointed out a couple videos from an instructor demonstrating a technique that does just that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kW65IY39MPU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJPgQQtLF7w&feature=youtu.be

Eddie mentioned he moved his mains to keep his nose wheel down. https://www.rotaryforum.com/forum/rotorcraft/training/1135175-no-pop-up-take-off-technique

I remember reading that Raphael Celier did the same thing on a Xenon.

Something needs to change despite what the Pilots Operating Handbook says. The 18A jump take off is starting to look good as long touted by WaspAir.

I plan to quiz manufacturers on the "non pop up" take off technique and Eddie's main adjustment. I wish I had know about both earlier so I could have done just that personally at AERO Friedrichshafen.

John
 
No Title

I feel there is value in studying what went wrong and feel you are doing a good job.

I don't agree with your conclusion that the takeoff procedure is too complicated in the POH.

There is no "pop up" if the POH procedure is followed and no premature climb out at low speed.

If I had to choose between lifting off at 45kts (52mph) or 60kts (69mph) I would pick 45kts every time; particularly in a gyroplane with a hard linked nose wheel. Gyroplanes with their high center of gravity, short wheel base and narrow track don’t make good ground vehicles. The faster you go on the ground the more unstable a gyroplane is.

In many of the takeoff accidents the pilot simply forgot to manage the rotor.

I see a lot of people forget that on the ground the rudder is what steers the gyroplane and in the air the position over the runway is controlled by the cyclic. A hard linked nose wheel adds some extra confusion and many gyroplane pilots decide that having the nose high is safer than balancing leading to lift off at low speed and challenges climbing away from the runway.

Typical of a low time primary student with the wind from the left is to have right rudder and right stick in. As soon as they lift off they are in a very vulnerable position as they slid across the runway to the right. Most will pull the cyclic back bringing the gyroplane right back down to the runway badly misaligned and sliding right.

The correct procedure is so simple I can usually have someone taking off in no wind conditions in the second hour of dual instruction. It of coarse depends on the experience and learning ability of the student. The challenge then becomes how to get them to always use the simple procedure.

Many inexperienced gyroplane pilots go searching for a better way because the correct way takes some practice to be done well. Once they learn to do the POH method well they understand the point and wonder why they had so much trouble learning.

I went flying with an ultralight pilot on Sunday with very little briefing and no rotorcraft experience. He did very well in turbulent conditions with smooth progressive control inputs. Most would have been over controlling in gusting conditions (17kts gusting to 24kts). He felt his ultralight experience helped him to be gentle with the controls and let her drift.

I wish you well on your gyroplane adventure.
 

Attachments

  • photo127825.jpg
    photo127825.jpg
    61.7 KB · Views: 0
It makes me wonder if the accident ratio for FW is similar to gyros; most during takeoff and landing.

Vance, I guess I'm tired but I have to ask why a student would have right rudder and right stick in for a wind from the left? I am not questioning that you have seen it countless times but I am puzzled and wonder what is the cause in your opinion?
 
I moved my mains back 6" because if the nose came down during takeoff and contacted the pavement it was at a severe angle because the rudder is

just about all the way to the right,and so was the nose wheel, there was a couple of times that I almost turned over at a high rate of speed because of

that and realized it was just a matter of time before I rolled my gyro up into a ball. By moving my mains back I can keep the nose wheel in contact with the

pavement for positive direction control and at the same time achieve a better angle of attack on the rotor for a shorter takeoff and lower takeoff speed.

When I raise my nose I am in a positive rate of climb at about 45-50 mph.

From my experience I believe the takeoff accidents could be reduced by just simply moving a little more weight on the nose wheel.

Balancing on the mains was necessary for the bensen types as that was the way they were built and no one knew better is was just accepted that way,

The modern gyro's are heavier and with larger rotors,more speed and distance is required at takeoff and trying to balance that type of gyro on its mains is just

asking for a accident to happen, Why do you think the accident rate on fixed wings was reduced with the advent of the tricycle landing gear replacing the

tail dragger (conventional gear). Changes need to be made in the name of safety.
 
HighAltitude;n1135680 said:
It makes me wonder if the accident ratio for FW is similar to gyros; most during takeoff and landing.

Vance, I guess I'm tired but I have to ask why a student would have right rudder and right stick in for a wind from the left? I am not questioning that you have seen it countless times but I am puzzled and wonder what is the cause in your opinion?

I gone over this at great length and I understand that no matter how I try to take them through it step by step it is a fact that people often don't understand why they did just what they did. The will look me in the eye and say yes you have shown me throttle is for altitude and pitch is for speed. When I suggest they are a little high the nose goes down before they touch the throttle. In other words below is a wild guess as to what they are thinking. I will write in the first person.

As a primary student (and more than a few experienced fixed with pilots) I have three common but serious misunderstandings.
  1. I believe the cyclic is the up lever. I learned this on my own when learning to land. If I want to arrest my descent I pull the cyclic back.
  1. I believe that she steers with the rudder. I learned this taxiing the mile to the run up area and on the take ff roll. I have learned she steers with the rudder despite what my flight instructor tells me.
  1. I believe in flight she will go where her nose is pointed. Everybody knows this. To keep my car in the lane I point the nose down the road.
I am flying a side by side gyroplane with a hard linked nose wheel. I have not scared my flight instructor for a while so we are doing takeoffs with five knots from the left cross wind component.

I see two hundred rotor rpm and release the brakes, bring the cyclic back and add a little power.

At first she steers just fine so I add more power and the nose comes up and I find I need right rudder. I put in right rudder but we are still drifting left and my instructor insists I stay near the centerline despite the 150 foot wide runway.

When I was learning to land right cyclic made her go right so I put in a little right cyclic. As a low time pilot I don't have a good feel for cyclic position anyway.

I don’t like what is happening and I want to get away from the ground so I give her some back cyclic and force her off the ground early. I may not have full throttle in.

She lifts off early and immediately starts moving rapidly right so I use left pedal because I know she steers with the rudder and I want to go left so I point the nose left with the rudder. The right edge of the runway is coming up so I put in more left rudder and pull the cyclic back to get away from the runway. Between the early lift off at slow speed in uncoordinated flight she does not have enough power to even maintain flight and settles back down; hitting the ground hard badly misaligned with our direction of flight.

I am frightened so my feet are hard on the pedals bracing for impact and trying to find the brakes.

I try to steer with the pedals but the high center of gravity and tilted rotor get the better of me and over I go.

My challenge as an instructor is to know when to say; "MY AIRCRAFT!"

If I take the controls too soon they won"t learn, if I wait too long I may not be able to save us from a mishap.
 
Last edited:
Vance;n1135670 said:
There is no "pop up" if the POH procedure is followed and no premature climb out at low speed.

Thanks for the considered response Vance. I believe I said "slow speed take off into ground effect". Very different from slow speed climb out.
Maybe I need to clarify my use of "pop up". I'm referring to the nose wheel coming up during take off roll, requiring a quick stick forward to avoid very slow speed lift off.

Are you saying your Cavalon take offs don't require the nose wheel lift management and balance?

Here's a video of a Cavalon take off that is typical of what I've seen dozens of times in videos, at Mentone, and even experienced during my demo ride in a Calidus.

The take off occurs at 3:40 and one can see the nose wheel bouncing up and down as the pilot tries to steady it. On lift off you can see it level off in ground effect until climb speed is reached.

I'd be thrilled to eliminate the entire wheel balance procedure and go straight from 3 wheels on the runway to lift off. Lift off into ground effect is manageable and is what I do in my Challenger. The wheel balance has to go.

John
 
HighAltitude;n1135680 said:
It makes me wonder if the accident ratio for FW is similar to gyros; most during takeoff and landing.

3700 Experimental airplane accidents since 1/1/2000
935 During Take off 25%
800 During landing 22%

I did not subtract mechanical and engine failures.

I'm a bit surprised take offs top landings. Landings are far harder than take offs in FW. An instructor may let you have the yoke on take off during an introductory ride. You basically solo once you have landings under your belt.
 
NJpilot;n1135690 said:
Thanks for the considered response Vance. I believe I said "slow speed take off into ground effect". Very different from slow speed climb out.
Maybe I need to clarify my use of "pop up". I'm referring to the nose wheel coming up during take off roll, requiring a quick stick forward to avoid very slow speed lift off.

Are you saying your Cavalon take offs don't require the nose wheel lift management and balance?

Here's a video of a Cavalon take off that is typical of what I've seen dozens of times in videos, at Mentone, and even experienced during my demo ride in a Calidus.

The take off occurs at 3:40 and one can see the nose wheel bouncing up and down as the pilot tries to steady it. On lift off you can see it level off in ground effect until climb speed is reached.

I'd be thrilled to eliminate the entire wheel balance procedure and go straight from 3 wheels on the runway to lift off. Lift off into ground effect is manageable and is what I do in my Challenger. The wheel balance has to go.

John

Good morning John,

The nose lifting is a gyroplanes way of letting me know she is ready to fly.

When I fly a Cavalon I follow and teach the POH for takeoff procedure.

If I let the nose come up too far she will lift off early and I need to lower the nose to pick up airspeed to climb. There is no reason to do this.

If I plant the nose I may outrun the rotor, stall a blade and hit the tail.

There may also be a divergent disk angle that can lead to trouble as the rotor rpm and airspeed increase.

Gyroplanes don’t work well on the ground so in my opinion holding her down longer is inviting trouble on several fronts.

I suspect when you get some lessons it won’t take long for you to wonder; what is so hard about balancing on the mains?

I can tell you from personal experience the procedure can be done badly without consequences.

In my opinion most of the takeoff mishaps happen because the pilot strayed a long way from the POH procedure on several fronts.

You will be the pilot in command so you can takeoff with whatever procedure works for you.

Ground effect will not be as noticeable in a gyroplane to the point some people feel it doesn’t exist.
 
I agree completely with Vance. I think the most important skill to be learned when taking off (and landing for that matter) is CONTROL of the nose wheel.And this applies for fixed or castoring nosewheels, with the only difference is that the margins of safety are likely greater with a castoring nosewheel. Holding the nose wheel down too long is bad, allowing it to pop off without control is bad, both creating potentially disastrous situations. Every gyroplane pilot must learn to control the nose wheel, and every take off and landing always involves a transitory balancing on the mains. It is simply not possible to land or takeoff a gyroplane safely without controlling the nosewheel and balancing on the mains, however brief or transitory this process is. So I agree with Vance that balancing on the mains is a necessary and unavoidable skill required to safely takeoff and land a gyroplane. Of course the concept of learning to balance on the mains for an extended period is something that has been debated ad infinitum, but it's done at least in transitory fashion every time one successfully takes off or lands.
 
Thanks Vance, that clears things up for me.

Vance;n1135692 said:
The nose lifting is a gyroplanes way of letting me know she is ready to fly.
More accurately it's trying to fly too early, and begs the question: With everything the same including speed, rotor angle, and rpm is there any reason why the fuselage can't stay on all 3 wheels until lift off speed. Moving the mains back like eddie and Ceiler did on the Xenon would seem a good solution. I suppose it would need more back stick to flare on landing.

Vance;n1135692 said:
Gyroplanes don’t work well on the ground so in my opinion holding her down longer is inviting trouble on several fronts.
Given this, wouldn't keeping it on 3 wheels as long as possible, instead of balancing on 2, help stability during this vulnerable phase of flight?
Could you elaborate on the several fronts?

At AERO Friedrichshafen I asked most of the manufactures why they don't use differential brakes and a castering nose wheel. They all discounted it as not worth the effort or being too twitchy.

Vance;n1135692 said:
Ground effect will not be as noticeable in a gyroplane to the point some people feel it doesn’t exist.
Interesting... so leveling a bit high to gain speed will have no downside.
 
Eddie moved the gear back on my RAF after the 2.5 Turbo Conversion. I trained with Dofin Fritz in the RAF with normal gear and no H/S and with Ron Menzie in his Sparrowhawk Modified RAF with normal gear.
Although I taught myself how to fly a Bensen years ago, I realized the RAF is a different beast. Moving the gear back makes it more difficult to screw up. As Eddie has mentioned it is easier to keep the nose wheel on the ground while the rotor builds speed. I don't necessarily go to full throttle at 200 (initially it is a more gradual increase in rpm) but about the time the nose wheel is wanting to lift up I am at 45-50 mph and the rotor is 290-300. I lift off as I go to full throttle while staying close to the ground. Almost immediately the airspeed goes to 60-65 and I continue the climb. It is not exactly the way I was taught but it works and feels comfortable.
 
NJpilot;n1135701 said:
Thanks Vance, that clears things up for me.



Given this, wouldn't keeping it on 3 wheels as long as possible, instead of balancing on 2, help stability during this vulnerable phase of flight?
Could you elaborate on the several fronts?

I think there is a real misconception about this process, the idea is neither to keep the gyro on the ground on 3 wheels for longer periods as the speed of the aircraft continues to accelerate (a potentially dangerous situation), nor is it to continue to balance on 2 wheels indefinitely. As one accelerates in a gyroplane, the weight on the front wheel will lighten, the trick is neither to put more forward pressure on the stick to force it down, nor to put excessive back pressure on the stick so that the nose pops up prematurely and possible the whole aircraft lifts off the ground behind the power curve, or before it is ready to fly as Vance describes. Ready to fly means there is enough lift generated not only to lift the front wheel, but the whole aircraft and it's payload. This is the skill called balancing on the mains that is absolutely essential to be able to feel to safely control a gyroplane on landing on takeoff or landing. I don't believe there is any way to avoid acquiring this skill if one wants to safely fly a gyroplane. When I learned to fly a gyroplane, I felt I could narrow down the process to one essential skill, controlling the nosewheel, the rest is up to the gyroplane to fly when it is ready as Vance describes.
 
Loftus by having a little more weight on the nosewheel I can achieve a better rotor angle for takeoff,this angle allows the rotor

to come up to flying speed faster and when its ready to fly the Gyro just elevates itself from the ground,however when I feel it getting light I

slightly move the cyclic aft and the nose comes up and I am flying. Keeping the gyro on all 3 wheels is a whole lot safer than doing a balancing

act down the runway on only 2 wheels. I have complete control with all the wheels planted solidly on the runway, speed is not a problem.

I have also reduced my takeoff distance by a least 250 feet,therefore reducing both time and distance during takeoff.Also the landing and flair

sequence feels the same as before the gear was moved back,keeping the nose up during the landing feels the same I stay on my tailwheel until

completely stopped as before.
 
Last edited:
eddie;n1135707 said:
Loftus by having a little more weight on the nosewheel I can achieve a better rotor angle for takeoff,this angle allows the rotor

to come up to flying speed faster and when its ready to fly the Gyro just elevates itself from the ground,however when I feel it getting light I

slightly move the cyclic aft and the nose comes up and I am flying. Keeping the gyro on all 3 wheels is a whole lot safer than doing a balancing

act down the runway on only 2 wheels. I have complete control with all the wheels planted solidly on the runway, speed is not a problem.

I have also reduced my takeoff distance by a least 250 feet,therefore reducing both time and distance during takeoff.Also the landing and flair

sequence feels the same as before the gear was moved back,keeping the nose up during the landing feels the same I stay on my tailwheel until

completely stopped as before.

I can't speak to the specifics of your design, and clearly you have developed and modified things that work well for you and your machine. I am speaking general principals of the admittedly only 6 different types of commercially available gyros I have flown and I think this would apply to most gyros except for yours.
I am not advocating doing a wheelie type balancing act down the runway on routine takeoffs and landings, I am advocating getting a feel for the 'lightness' of the nosewheel as the aircraft accelerates, and controlling this 'lightness' to keep the nosewheel barely touching the ground till enough lift is generated for the whole aircraft to lift off and effectively fly itself off the ground as Vance explains. In most gyroplanes this is the sweet spot that one must learn to control the nose to avoid excess ground speed, possible blade flap as a result and on the other side of the coin, premature lift off and getting behind the power curve. I suggest you try a simple excercise which was taught to me by Des Butts. On a very long runway, somewhere near Houston, we practiced an exercise taxiing along the runway at approximately 2500 - 2800 RPM in the MTO after prerotation and playing with forward and aft movement of the stick and observing the effect on rotor RPM and aircraft forward speed. The result as I am sure you are aware was that as the stick is pushed forward the nosewheel will be more firmly planted on the ground, RRPM will bleed off, and as less drag is created the aircraft will accelerate. This combination can of course result in blade flap if the aircraft were to accelerate too much and the RRPM bleed off excessively. Conversely, pulling the stick back will increase RRPM, slow the aircraft, and tend to lighten the nosewheel. Carried too far this could result in premature liftoff behind the power curve, particularly at takeoff power.
So the object of this exercise is not only to demonstrate this inverse relationship of rotor RPM and aircraft forward speed and the resultant dangers on each end of the spectrum, but also to teach this optimum sweet spot or 'balanced' position of the aircraft that will lift off safely when she is ready to fly. Whether or not one needs to truly learn to do the balancing on the mains in a 'wheelie' position has been debated ad infinitum, but I truly believe a safe gyro pilot needs to have a good feel for this sweet spot and the ability to safely control the nose position, neither too high nor too low, both on takeoff and landing. On landing of course excess forward or aft stick have their own set of potentially disastrous consequences. Call it 'barely' balancing on the mains if you like. It's not the fact that the nosewheel is lifted off the ground that is the important part of balancing on the mains. It is the ability to control the weight on the nose wheel effectively until enough lift is generated for the whole aircraft to fly, and neither delay this longer than necessary, nor lift prematurely behind the power curve. Control the nose wheel and you control the aircraft, this is of course particularly important in direct linked rather than castoring nosewheel aircraft, but nevertheless applicable to both.
 
Last edited:
NJpilot;n1135701 said:
Thanks Vance, that clears things up for me.


More accurately it's trying to fly too early, and begs the question: With everything the same including speed, rotor angle, and rpm is there any reason why the fuselage can't stay on all 3 wheels until lift off speed. Moving the mains back like eddie and Ceiler did on the Xenon would seem a good solution. I suppose it would need more back stick to flare on landing.


Given this, wouldn't keeping it on 3 wheels as long as possible, instead of balancing on 2, help stability during this vulnerable phase of flight?
Could you elaborate on the several fronts?

At AERO Friedrichshafen I asked most of the manufactures why they don't use differential brakes and a castering nose wheel. They all discounted it as not worth the effort or being too twitchy.


Interesting... so leveling a bit high to gain speed will have no downside.

I will be careful with the words I use so you don't jump to conclusions John.

In my opinion it would not be more accurate to say the nose coming up indicates the gyroplane wants to lift off prematurely. If I let the nose come up too far she will lift off prematurely. If I pay attention and keep the nose close to the ground most gyroplanes will lift off near the best speed for a safe climb out.

I will try to explain the reason I feel many gyroplanes I have flown are more stable with two wheels on the ground than three.

I want the transition from ground to flight to be as smooth as possible. With the nose on the ground I am steering a short wheel base narrow track tricycle with a high center of gravity trying to go near 60 miles per hour. On most gyroplanes I have flown with linked steering the steering becomes twitchy as the speed builds.

With a hard linked nose wheel I deal with three phases of control on takeoff.
  1. The nose wheel is on the ground and there is no compensation for cross wind because she is controlled by the tire contact patch. A wind from the left may require left pedal to stay on the centerline.
  2. The nose wheel in the air where I am controlling my ground track with the rudder and dealing with the effects of a cross wind. This tends to be less twitchy and the faster I go the better it works. For a wind from the left I likely have right pedal in to keep her on the centerline.
  3. The lift off; when she first lifts off I will have the correct rudder in and if I have guessed correctly I will have the correct cyclic position. If I have guessed wrong it doesn’t take long to correct the cyclic to keep her over the centerline because now the cyclic controls my position over the centerline. I prefer to keep her aligned with the runway using the rudder pedals incase a gust sets me back down although this may require uncoordinated flight that will slow my climb out. She no longer steers with the rudder pedals.
I prefer to have her operating in the number two mode as soon as possible so she is more stable. I keep the nose low so I don’t lift off prematurely and stay light on the pedals in case I accidently set the nose wheel back down

If all takeoffs were the same then I could develop a more mechanical procedure. At most of the airports I fly from the direction and strength of the wind may change as I proceed down the runway so I have found every takeoff is unique and requires slightly different control inputs. The wheel balancing is how the gyroplane tells me what it wants. The stronger the turbulence the more important the balancing is to me.

I have never tried Eddie's technique and I might grow to like it.

If I have full fuel and a heavy person in the front seat of The Predator the nose stays down longer and I don’t care for it. It makes her lift off at higher speed. The Predator has a free castering nose wheel so I don't have a phase one. At anything over 10kts she steers with the rudder on the ground and the cyclic in the air.

This is not intended to be flight instruction and I strongly recommend you pay attention to your flight instructor as to the takeoff technique that works for him.

If you were training with the instructor who made the video I recommend doing it his way because in my opinion he will not teach you the method in the POH well because he feels he has found a better way.

I prefer the method in the POH that includes leveling the aircraft in ground effect to build up speed after a premature lift off.
 
an extract from the Pilot Operating Handbook for the MTOsport



Take-off Run



Check min. 5400 RPM for take-off. Otherwise, abort take-off



Minimize lateral drift by applying appropriate lateral control stick input into cross wind

direction



Maintain directional control i.e. runway alignment with sensitive pedal input



When nose comes up allow nose wheel to float at about 10 – 15 cm above the

runway by a balanced reduction of control stick back pressure



Maintain attitude until speed increases and gyroplane lifts off



Allow gyroplane to build-up speed in ground effect

VPP:

With a variable pitch propeller installed, refer to the respective

flight manual supplement in CHAPTER 9 for correct power setting and

handling procedure.

WARNING

Gyroplanes are fully controllable at very low speeds without exhibiting any

signs of wing stall or soft flight controls, as it would be perceived in a fixed

wing aircraft. However, operation ‘behind the power curve’ may have fatal

consequences during take-off, initial climb or in any other situation within

ground proximity. Always allow aircraft to build-up safe climb speed before

allowing it to gain height


The full POH is available to read on the link below ( you'll find that not all POH are so easy to find )



https://www.auto-gyro.com/chameleon/public/14ee9ec2-299f-8956-bf6a-137f06b6c017/POH_M7_1-0_EN.pdf
 
While polycarbonate will not break as easily (which may avoid jagged shards in a crash),
if used in gyro windscreens or doors they should be able to be kicked out. Adrenaline will supply ample energy.
Sport Copter, for example, glues their doors in the door frame. They will push out in their entirety without any sharp edges.

I also believe in having emergency egress tools, as fara described. I've such in my RAF within reach of either myself or a passenger.


_____________
I moved my mains back 6" because if the nose came down during takeoff and contacted the pavement it was at a severe angle because the rudder is

just about all the way to the right,and so was the nose wheel, there was a couple of times that I almost turned over at a high rate of speed because of

that and realized it was just a matter of time before I rolled my gyro up into a ball. By moving my mains back I can keep the nose wheel in contact with the

pavement for positive direction control and at the same time achieve a better angle of attack on the rotor for a shorter takeoff and lower takeoff speed.

When I raise my nose I am in a positive rate of climb at about 45-50 mph.

From my experience I believe the takeoff accidents could be reduced by just simply moving a little more weight on the nose wheel.

Balancing on the mains was necessary for the bensen types as that was the way they were built and no one knew better is was just accepted that way,

The modern gyro's are heavier and with larger rotors,more speed and distance is required at takeoff and trying to balance that type of gyro on its mains is just

asking for a accident to happen, Why do you think the accident rate on fixed wings was reduced with the advent of the tricycle landing gear replacing the

tail dragger (conventional gear). Changes need to be made in the name of safety.

I agree, however, the real solution is a castering nosewheel.
Only one mfg. does so, and has since the 1980s. Sport Copter.
The engineering is more complicated, sure, but that's what engineering is for.
Jim Vanek demonstrated with me some crabbed landings in his 2-place breezy trainer.
Such would have dumped over an RAF, AutoGyro, etc.

I will inject a note of caution here: anybody who first learns in a NW-castering Sport Copter must receive
transition training if every going to a "normal" (i.e., wrong) hard-linked NW gyro.


I learned in an RAF without an H-stab, and it did train me to handle something twitchy (on ground and in air).
My new M2 this year will be an easy delight in comparison. And much safer on the ground.



At AERO Friedrichshafen I asked most of the manufactures why they don't use differential brakes and a castering nose wheel.
They all discounted it as not worth the effort or being too twitchy.
Hah! The real reason is this: a unishell body won't readily permit such engineering.
They're stuck with a hard-linked NW (the very definition of "twitchy"). It's a matter of "can't" vs. "won't".

Didn't somebody roll over on landing their white AutoGyro at Mentone last year?
Parts replacement may be a significant portion of sales for some mfg.

Regards,
Kolibri
 
Last edited:
""Didn't somebody roll over on landing their white AutoGyro at Mentone last year?""


lets have a look


the NTSB Factual report #CEN17LA302 states - "On August 3, 2017, about 0917 central daylight time, a Hake MTO Sport gyroplane, N571UJ, was substantially damaged when it tipped over on landing at Mentone Airport (C92), Mentone, Indiana. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. The personal flight was being conducted under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 without a flight plan. The pilot sustained minor injuries. The local flight originated about 0930. According to the pilot's accident report, when he touched down on the main landing gear, he applied "moderate" right rudder to maintain runway alignment and to avoid slipping. He stated he should have raised the nose to reduce airspeed, but instead he lowered the nose and struck the runway. The pilot explained that on this particular gyroplane, the nose wheel and rudder are interconnected; that is, the nose wheel does not pivot on a caster. When the gyroplane touched down, it 'jerked" abruptly to the right and tipped over. The pilot concluded, "This accident was the result of pilot error. There was no malfunction [of the gyroplane, flight controls, or engine]."
 
Its not rather the nose wheel castors or not its the pilot that's the basic problem.I was taught to land with the nose off the ground and keep the

cyclic back until stopped,in a low wind condition.If your landings are like that there wont be any forward speed for the nose to deal with.Everyone is

taught to land like that,so why don't they ?
 
Kolibri;n1135722 said:
While polycarbonate will not break as easily (which may avoid jagged shards in a crash),
if used in gyro windscreens or doors they should be able to be kicked out. Adrenaline will supply ample energy.
Sport Copter, for example, glues their doors in the door frame. They will push out in their entirety without any sharp edges.

I also believe in having emergency egress tools, as fara described. I've such in my RAF within reach of either myself or a passenger.


_____________


I agree, however, the real solution is a castering nosewheel.
Only one mfg. does so, and has since the 1980s. Sport Copter.
The engineering is more complicated, sure, but that's what engineering is for.
Jim Vanek demonstrated with me some crabbed landings in his 2-place breezy trainer.
Such would have dumped over an RAF, AutoGyro, etc.

I will inject a note of caution here: anybody who first learns in a NW-castering Sport Copter must receive
transition training if every going to a "normal" (i.e., wrong) hard-linked NW gyro.


I learned in an RAF without an H-stab, and it did train me to handle something twitchy (on ground and in air).
My new M2 this year will be an easy delight in comparison. And much safer on the ground.




Hah! The real reason is this: a unishell body won't readily permit such engineering.
They're stuck with a hard-linked NW (the very definition of "twitchy"). It's a matter of "can't" vs. "won't".

Didn't somebody roll over on landing their white AutoGyro at Mentone last year?
Parts replacement may be a significant portion of sales for some mfg.

Regards,
Kolibri

I feel it is a mistake to say only one system is correct and the rest are wrong. On some soft or rutted surfaces I prefer a linked nose steering.

In my opinion it is simpler (less engineering) to have a free castering nose wheel than linked nose steering.

For hard smooth surfaces I prefer a free castering nose wheel and differential braking for steering like Rotary Flight Dynamics and Sport Copter use to a hard linked nose wheel steering like the AutoGyro products and RAF use.

Some designs have used lots of trail and soft linked nose steering as a sort of compromise. The Titanium Explorer and the American Ranger use this system successfully.

The Predator has a free castering nose wheel and toe brakes for steering.

Some of my primary students prefer hard linked steering and have difficulty learning to guide The Predator with the brakes.

A few clients have imagined that they should use the brakes to steer during takeoff or slow down on landing and have not been successful at keeping her going in the desired direction. In The Predator there is a transition from needing the brakes for steering to using the rudder for steering at around 7kts of indicated airspeed. On taxi with a tail wind the brakes are used to manage the steering.
 
Top