Dubai - WAG - Gyro down 9.12.15

Zzackly.. out ther n da desert all fkn good ta ya fine one of them unexpected thermal thingys n you got nuffin cause ya rite at ya limits un lef ya self wide open for it . gooone
 
Exactly, Nick.

The game being played here is called obfuscation, which means to bewilder and confuse by overloading with extraneous information.

There’s a good chance this pilot would still be alive had his gyro had proper propeller torque compensation.

Seriously? Really?
I am sorry Chuck but this statement above is full of Bull**** with a Capitol B. I expected more sense out of you of all people.
Last time I checked a Dominator went down in a PIO in Florida. It seems that the LTL and different incidence on the stab did not overcome pilot induced oscillation from 150 feet plus to the ground.

Nick, I had no qualms with you but your claims are ridiculous. The guy went negative at extremely low altitude and you are sitting here marketing your design saying only if he had a proper Gyroplane. The only way you have any right to make such a claim is if you test going negative in your Gyroplane and then attempt to recover in less than 150 feet and capture that on video. If you don't have that proof you should not make such claims because they sound very self serving.
I am here to compete with AutoGyro Gmbh but not this way. This way only shows why gyroplanes are not taken seriously in the U.S. It's the reason I stayed away from them personally for the last decade.
 
Last edited:
Yeah cause ya never rolled Birdy n cause ya wouldn't be here tellun us about it.Heres a simple flight senario i experienced one day wif a climbing turn counter clock to about 1000 ft SLAM coastal wind that ripped me visor open and shoved me head back into the seat. Two brain prosses took place. Situational awareness.n Flight control. And just went with the influence. Totally unexpected but controlled wif out panic input. Now,... Dubi pilon racing ...SLAM hit wif an unexpected thermal at limit . i don't know if i could have enough to compensate.know what i mean.
Mike.
 
Abid.... read my early posts.... we did test negative G to the point the stick was shaking violently and bruising my legs.... so yes when i say it can be recoverable i have tested it. Unlike USA to get a certification in Europe requires tests. And just because i love to learn and experiment... i go a step further than the expected tests. i have demonstrated this in front of 14 people visiting from Greece. they actually have seen the rotor becoming flat instead of coned. I will not continue explaining my self or our models any more... it is not the right thread.

we have given the information, me, chuck, David some others.... but is up to each one of you to think and decide. happy landings to every one.
 
Abid.... read my early posts.... we did test negative G to the point the stick was shaking violently and bruising my legs.... so yes when i say it can be recoverable i have tested it. Unlike USA to get a certification in Europe requires tests. And just because i love to learn and experiment... i go a step further than the expected tests. i have demonstrated this in front of 14 people visiting from Greece. they actually have seen the rotor becoming flat instead of coned. I will not continue explaining my self or our models any more... it is not the right thread.

we have given the information, me, chuck, David some others.... but is up to each one of you to think and decide. happy landings to every one.

ARE U serious .... you tested Neg G and to get cert you actually had to do tests in EUROPE WOW. And of course you go a step further than the expected test. Hey you don't have to explain how you have experienced violent stick shake or your quest for the extra step or experience at least for the 14 other spectators and yeah your choice on which thread you share this experience.DICK See ya.
Hopefully the accident report stays there too.
 
So it's obfuscation when it's a European disign but pilot error when it's a dominator style of disign. Mr Beaty you and Birdy are truly amazing in the art of my way is the only way just listen to my Bull Sh*t. Iam a new pilot and have followed this sight for about a year. In that year I've come to notice the self serving rettoric some seem to use in the name of safety. The high thrust line flaws are played down or give to pilot error. I think high center of gravity and short wheel base that make it unstable for to minor flight features,TAKE OFF AND LANDING. Are no big deal to a new low time pilot. You seem to forget that any aircraft has its own flaw some where in the design even the ones you tell people are the safest. The Truth Is any Aircraft flown in side it operational limits is usually safe. This was a RACE people are not always flying inside the limits and even if they are if the pilot unloads the rotor a low altitude he's going to pay even in your favorite design. But now you can tell me Iam a low hour pilot and don't know what Iam talking about and how your just doing the right thing for the good of sport and the new pilots. Really YOU ARE. You gentlemen are what wrong with h this sport.

Sincerely SWilliams
 
Last edited:
Nick how high were you when you did your zero G test? How mutch altitude did you lose? How many flight hours do you have? And this was a controlled test not a unexpected loss of rotor correct?

Sincerely SWilliams
 
Abid.... read my early posts.... we did test negative G to the point the stick was shaking violently and bruising my legs.... so yes when i say it can be recoverable i have tested it. Unlike USA to get a certification in Europe requires tests. And just because i love to learn and experiment... i go a step further than the expected tests. i have demonstrated this in front of 14 people visiting from Greece. they actually have seen the rotor becoming flat instead of coned. I will not continue explaining my self or our models any more... it is not the right thread.

we have given the information, me, chuck, David some others.... but is up to each one of you to think and decide. happy landings to every one.

I actually would like to see the data on your Negative g test. Did you have a G meter? I have been at close to 0 g a few times in an MTO remember - G is below 0 not below 1 G. I have a G meter in my Gyro and have done many agressive moves. But a true -g will not just flatten the blade it will truely uncone them to a slight reverse cone unsually causing a mast bump or worse chopping off something. This is why it is unrecoverable. It also has reverse airflow slowing down the blade speed.
I do alot of gyro testing in the USA and put machines through some good hard work. I have had an MTO in a 90 degree bank at 100 knots before and recovered. I have done full deflection slips at full power in them. Sometimes we fixate on things and do not see the entire picture of what was going on.
I think this unfortunate accident had multiple things happen that compounded to cause the loss of life for a new pilot.
It is not anybodys fault but his. Just like the Reno air races. They have crashes as well some times stuff happens. But trying to blame others for the actions and problems of the pilot who is ultimatly responsible does not searve any useful purpose.
It is not the Air race responsibility to zip up the fly of each of the pilots! So every pilot should know to check over the machine buckle there seatbelt, strap the helmet, and zip up there fly.
 
Easy Tiger this is a flight parameter that will kill you. If you unload your rotor you no longer have a rotor there just two metal flaps that will shake all way down. The altitude just gives you more time to think about your impact. This is what annoys me. The heroism and ignorance of flight parameters or theory. You have done an endorsement for Gyro copter, Think about it, Read your flight manual again...and again... got it now. what has been promoted in the previous post is the last flight you will ever experience, and to the euro hero your call but it's irresponsible to promote this as a suggested certified NEXT flight experience, For the sake of love of experience, violent stick shake or bruising legs , still cant fathom where your going wif this **** as it will kill you 10% of the 100% of chance.Guaranteed. actually i think your just taking the piss and looking for an informed response. actually just take it to another forum and you'll kill less. DIIIIICK. Let me guess GERMAN? Yers so full of S#!T
Hey you go or i go happy either way cause you're irritating **** out of me rite now.
 
Easy Tiger this is a flight parameter that will kill you. If you unload your rotor you no longer have a rotor there just two metal flaps that will shake all way down. The altitude just gives you more time to think about your impact. This is what annoys me. The heroism and ignorance of flight parameters or theory. You have done an endorsement for Gyro copter, Think about it, Read your flight manual again...and again... got it now. what has been promoted in the previous post is the last flight you will ever experience, and to the euro hero your call but it's irresponsible to promote this as a suggested certified NEXT flight experience, For the sake of love of experience, violent stick shake or bruising legs , still cant fathom where your going wif this **** as it will kill you 10% of the 100% of chance.Guaranteed. actually i think your just taking the piss and looking for an informed response. actually just take it to another forum and you'll kill less. DIIIIICK. Let me guess GERMAN? Yers so full of S#!T
Hey you go or i go happy either way cause you're irritating **** out of me rite now.


I did not have the intent to promote anything dangerous in my post just pointing out the fact of negative G. Not every pilot has the same ability. So if some how you read into my post that I was ever promoting you should go out and try aerobatics in your gyro this absolutely was not what I meant.
 
Last edited:
Show It

Show It

Abid.... read my early posts.... we did test negative G to the point the stick was shaking violently and bruising my legs.... so yes when i say it can be recoverable i have tested it. Unlike USA to get a certification in Europe requires tests. And just because i love to learn and experiment... i go a step further than the expected tests. i have demonstrated this in front of 14 people visiting from Greece. they actually have seen the rotor becoming flat instead of coned. I will not continue explaining my self or our models any more... it is not the right thread.

we have given the information, me, chuck, David some others.... but is up to each one of you to think and decide. happy landings to every one.

I know quite a lot about certification tests both in the US and in Europe.
Number 1, the claim that somehow European tests and requirements are harder is absolute and complete BS. Doing more paperwork and having more red tape from NAA and EASA and getting even a DOA and POA does not amount to tests on the aircraft, its red tape at its zenith and Europe has more of it than even FAA. So lets not go into certification testing in Europe being required is superior to the US. In fact its the other way around. The problem is gyroplanes do not require certification because they are not factory built in the US. You would test to something close to BCAR Sec T. It is open and available to anyone to see.

If you went to negative G than you don't need to explain. You simply need to list the test sequence and record max negative G on a G meter or an EFIS equipped with AHRS in its flight log and show the recovery in 150 to 200 feet of altitude loss.

BTW, what you are describing sounds like lower than 1 G but not negative G in my educated guess but without proper data its hard to say either way.

This would be equivalent of showing a spin resistant airplane design (like ICON) per some agreed upon standard (like Part 23 spin resistance) and would be great for you and your design but that type of thing is not required even in Part 23 certification because spin avoidance is taught to the pilots and if they do spin, many of them do die. FAA does not run around telling Cessna then to stop making 172 because only if they had spin resistance, the pilot who made the mistake had a chance.

That is essentially what you and Chuck are saying. Instead of training pilots, we ought to poo poo any aircraft that does not have equivalent of spin resistant behavior because pilots die in spins. Exactly one airplane has shown spin resistance per Part 23 for the record and the compromise is they needed an extra 150 pounds of structure to do it and lost a lot of maneuverability and got a weight exemption. We all know (at least engineers and designers) that nothing in nature is for free. You make something work, you only do it by giving up something else and the pros and cons need to be weighed.

Still that does not make it right to claim about this accident and about AutoGyro's design what you and Chuck are claiming in regards and relevance to this accident. It is not fair.

Bottom line is the poor pilot was unfortunately not at the level where he should have participated in a pylon race for gyroplanes at World Air Games and did not even secure his helmet properly causing further contributing factor to his distraction when something went wrong and shoving stock forward is the wrong reaction (a la fixed wing) for a gyroplane pilot and leads to a negative G maneuver that is if not impossible, extremely improbable to retrieve from just like a flat spin in an airplane or tumble in a trike. Nothing in this is different in gyroplanes than in any other categories. Learn from this to honor his memory. Each category of aircraft has its gremlins. You want to do negative G stunts, fly an airplane. It is superior to gyroplane in this regard both is safety and controllability, no doubt about it.
 
Last edited:
It costs no more to arrange the propeller thrust line to pass through the aircraft CG than it does to offset it.

It costs no more to provide aerodynamic propeller torque compensation than it does to ignore it.

It costs no more to eliminate slip-roll coupling than it does to ignore it.

These coffin corners are so easily eliminated that their inclusion is indefensible.


Rong, rong n rong CB.
You know it too.
There is a BIG cost.
Asthetics, (apparently).
In these modern times, if it looks the best, it is the best.
And apparently , glorified bathtubs are the ducks nuts, no matter their configuration?
.

Really? What about putting the tub way close to the rotor blades, which would reduce very significantly what Chuck calls slip-roll coupling.
The problem with that and so called CLT which also place occupants high up is that it increases the chances of flip overs or duck walking on the mains on the ground very significantly and those would be much more plentiful with new pilots than a PPO or slip roll accident because most of the pilots do not fly sideways at high speeds and new pilots tend not to slip much beyond coming in to land in crosswinds.

Have you considered that in your calculus?
 
A Cessna is CLT.

A Dominator has its CG above the propeller thrust line.

“Duck walk” is a function of suspension geometry, not CG height. Too much tire scrub Vs suspension travel.

Obfuscation.
 
Really? What about putting the tub way close to the rotor blades, which would reduce very significantly what Chuck calls slip-roll coupling.
The problem with that and so called CLT which also place occupants high up is that it increases the chances of flip overs or duck walking on the mains on the ground very significantly and those would be much more plentiful with new pilots than a PPO or slip roll accident because most of the pilots do not fly sideways at high speeds and new pilots tend not to slip much beyond coming in to land in crosswinds.

Have you considered that in your calculus?

I have flown several Dominators and not had them “duck walk” as I understand the term.

I have watched several Dominators “duck walk” and it appears to me to be landing gear geometry and piloting technique causing it.

All of the Dominators I have flown have been low thrust line gyroplanes rather than near centerline thrust.

The Predator has a high body and even while training I have not had a student make it “duck walk” or even get one wheel very far off the ground while the other is on the ground.

I hope I may get some training from Greg in your gyroplane so I can better understand how you have resolved the issues I have experienced in high thrust line gyroplanes that appear similar to me (MTO and Magni M16).

I don’t think it would be a bad thing if the AR1 flew like either the MTO or the Magni M16 as they felt very safe to me.
 
When I have seen duck walk it usually starts from side loading the mains or landing crabbed then gets aggravated by the pilot. This happens because they tend to move the stick forward or in an erratic manner. If this starts I try to teach keeping the stuck back because it holds the mains on the ground and prevents the nose wheel from contacting the runway. If the front contacts the pavement roll over can happen.
 
Yes duck walking is a geometry force issue but obviously force vectors have magnitude and direction and if you mass distribution is higher up you produce more magnitude to the wheel due to moment arm.
Duck walking can start due to a bad landing technique (side load) or if the wheel toe-in (more than 2 degrees) is not correct or becomes incorrect over time. You point the fronts of your main wheels towards each other a bit much and land slightly wrong and you will have a duck walking incident. Flexure of the landing gear leaf backwards or forwards alternately can also create it in a bad landing.
Slop in frame (bolted frames) that develops over time, the wheels being close to the hang point instead of further behind them, they all create duck walking issues which almost always results in a flip over of a trike or a gyroplane.

The dominator develops a bit too much toe in after some time because the slop develops in the frame. It can be easily corrected with a bushing to size the holes right again (or in some cases make the hole square to the tube) and the toe in at rest should be checked each annual by owners to be less than 2 degrees, preferably 0. That's just how the design of Dominator is in placement of its mains to the hang point.

In airplanes you want slight toe in on tri-gear mains and slight toe out on mains on tail draggers We are talking about a degree.

But yes CG comes into play. Now lets move on. I am giving away too many tricks.
 
Last edited:
Steve thanks for the link.

Sincerely SWilliams
 
Cierva’s last FW design, a trimotor bomber designed for the Spanish Air Force, crashed during its first flight when the pilot made a low, slow turn and stalled.

His search for a safe, stall proof and spin proof aircraft led him to the invention of the Autogiro.

He didn’t stop with spin proof and stall proof. He eliminated all of the coffin corners one by one.

According to Peter W. Brooks in “Cierva Autogiros,” 30,000 hours were flown in Autogiros before the first fatality occurred. The fatality rate for general aviation in the US in 1939 was one per 5,000 hours.

Now some are saying, “leave in the coffin corners and blame the pilot for splattering.” Or; “propeller torque can be solved by trim springs, offset of rotorhead and harmony.”
 
Top