G's - Blade and maneuvers

Well, I certainly screwed up that interpretation.
 
Jon, that's true and funny, in a sad way.
Jean speaks universal math fluently which is my 2nd language!!
It is also sad that most Americans cannot speak/interpret math correctly either.
US government schools suck!
US Government Schools- last I checked no such thing.
 
USMA, et al.?
Good point. I guess all the military academies, FBI academy, maybe the service schools, etc. Do the tribal schools still exist on tribal lands? I guess we should be careful when making blanket statements.
 
So far I've never got light in the seat of my pants in a gyro so it's not a problem to keep 1 G or more + G's making less than 1 G and negative G's a nonissue with normal gyroplane pilot control inputs.
Could perhaps occur in severe turbulence with a micro-down draft weather condition.

We are taught that if you find yourself in weather or pilot created negative G condition to enter a vertical descent to speed the blades back up and then slightly lower the nose and gently add power back in to straight and level.
How does the weather create a negative G event in a gyroplane?

How does a gyroplane pilot create a negative G event?

How would a vertical descent speed up the rotor flying a gyroplane?

In a gyroplane low G event I was taught and teach to reduce the chance of a power push over by reducing power.

Some people advocate loading the rotor in by entering a bank in certain specific low G maneuvers; for example at the top of a zoom climb. I recommend against a zoom climb because it unloads the rotor as I approach the top.
 
Good point. I guess all the military academies, FBI academy, maybe the service schools, etc. Do the tribal schools still exist on tribal lands? I guess we should be careful when making blanket statements.
For a time, while my father was stationed at and quartered on base at Eglin AFB in Florida, I attended Eglin Elementary, which was US Gov operated back then.

Generally, US public schools are indeed government run, it's just not the Federal government. When I was teaching, I was employed by a local district regional authority and paid through Santa Clara County.
 
Generally, US public schools are indeed government run, it's just not the Federal government.
Yes. I suspect Bobby was talking about the federal government, as was I. But as you and Tyler rightfully point out, there are numerous federally operated schools. I had literally forgotten about all the schools on DOD installations, all the service academies, etc. Odd, since my children went to school on military installations.
 
I was, but DoDDS still runs many schools for US Military dependents and then the Service Academies.
 
Well, I certainly screwed up that interpretation.

I generally avoid ad hominem arguments, but your postings are, in my opinion, egregious.

Normally I read foolish drivel and move on. But in this thread a newbie asks for info and dangerous nonsense is the response. Jon and Jean Claude begin a cogent explanation. Then you interject foolish, dangerous drivel into the discussion. When you figure out you were in over your head you write “Well, I certainly screwed up that interpretation."

It's much worse than a misinterpretation John.

As I age, I have developed an extremely low tolerance, actually an aversion, for poseurs. I can't abide wanna be, could have been, should have been, would have been, has been people that want to play “dress up” and run with the people that actually “walk the walk”.

Do you think about the stuff you type?

"The fatigue of the blade root due to the alternate drag under g= 1 is much more constraining" means:
Gyroplanes are constrained to flying at "least one G" if you do not want to risk your rotor RPM decaying because of the blade root failing to produce the same lift.”


What does that even mean? Jean Claude is describing a structural consequence and you're describing; what?

or.

“We are taught that if you find yourself in weather or pilot created negative G condition to enter a vertical descent to speed the blades back up and then slightly lower the nose and gently add power back in to straight and level.”

What are you talking about John? Taught by who?

Then you pontificate to a respected forum member: “get a G meter and fly a little less than 1 G. What do you feel?“

This member has 10 times the gyro experience you have and has demonstrated an enviable knowledge of aviation related subjects, and a grasp of physics, in multiple posts.

Then you describe your “favorite” fixed wing maneuvers. Problem is, you never did either one as you describe them.

“Bob Hover taught me how to hold one G in a loop keeping a glass of water on the dash the entire time. “(I'm assuming you meant Bob Hoover)

Please walk us through a 1G loop John? I assure you; Bob Hoover never did one

“The other is to ask a newbie passenger to hold a pen in their open hand at chest level.
Then reduce below 1 G exactly enough to keep the pen floating right in front of their nose.
Holding the pen exactly at nose level until I hit the red line (VNE) or 500 feet AGL and pull up.”


Uh-huh! Sure you did! Golly! Yeah.

You post nonsensical stuff John. You pretend you know things you don't know. You tell fantastic, impossible, flying stories filled with adventure and danger. You describe stuff that just couldn't happen. You interject yourself into serious discussions when it is clear you don't have the foggiest idea what you are talking about. When you get caught, you contrive fantastic excuses for your antics, try to deflect the question or slink away and don't post for a while.

John, when I read the writings of Vance Breese, Tyler Hathaway, Jon Stark, Abid Farooqui, Ron Awad, Ben Suissa, Jean Claude Debreyer, Greg Vos, Leigh Allison, Jamie Wolfe, Stan Foster, Brian Rodgers, Chuck Roberg, Doug Riley, Chris Burgess, Rod Stringer, and dozens of others, I receive valuable information; usually written entertainingly. Their writings make me grateful that they share their thoughts. These folks walk the walk.

When I read your posts, I read random, disjointed, inaccurate, untrue, Walter Mitty stuff that is literally painful to read and dangerous to those that might believe your prevarications. In essence, prattle.

Rather than pretend you have something to contribute, you should read, study, and ask questions of those who really do have the knowledge you crave.
 
Last edited:
I generally avoid ad hominem arguments, but your postings are, in my opinion, egregious.

Normally I read foolish drivel and move on. But in this thread a newbie asks for info and dangerous nonsense is the response. Jon and Jean Claude begin a cogent explanation. Then you interject foolish, dangerous drivel into the discussion. When you figure out you were in over your head you write “Well, I certainly screwed up that interpretation."

It's much worse than a misinterpretation John.

As I age, I have developed an extremely low tolerance, actually an aversion, for poseurs. I can't abide wanna be, could have been, should have been, would have been, has been people that want to play “dress up” and run with the people that actually “walk the walk”.

Do you think about the stuff you type?

"The fatigue of the blade root due to the alternate drag under g= 1 is much more constraining" means:
Gyroplanes are constrained to flying at "least one G" if you do not want to risk your rotor RPM decaying because of the blade root failing to produce the same lift.”


What does that even mean? Jean Claude is describing a structural consequence and you're describing; what?

or.

“We are taught that if you find yourself in weather or pilot created negative G condition to enter a vertical descent to speed the blades back up and then slightly lower the nose and gently add power back in to straight and level.”

What are you talking about John? Taught by who?

Then you pontificate to a respected forum member: “get a G meter and fly a little less than 1 G. What do you feel?“

This member has 10 times the gyro experience you have and has demonstrated an enviable knowledge of aviation related subjects, and a grasp of physics, in multiple posts.

Then you describe your “favorite” fixed wing maneuvers. Problem is, you never did either one as you describe them.

“Bob Hover taught me how to hold one G in a loop keeping a glass of water on the dash the entire time. “(I'm assuming you meant Bob Hoover)

Please walk us through a 1G loop John? I assure you; Bob Hoover never did one

“The other is to ask a newbie passenger to hold a pen in their open hand at chest level.
Then reduce below 1 G exactly enough to keep the pen floating right in front of their nose.
Holding the pen exactly at nose level until I hit the red line (VNE) or 500 feet AGL and pull up.”


Uh-huh! Sure you did! Golly! Yeah.

You post nonsensical stuff John. You pretend you know things you don't know. You tell fantastic, impossible, flying stories filled with adventure and danger. You describe stuff that just couldn't happen. You interject yourself into serious discussions when it is clear you don't have the foggiest idea what you are talking about. When you get caught, you contrive fantastic excuses for your antics, try to deflect the question or slink away and don't post for a while.

John, when I read the writings of Vance Breese, Tyler Hathaway, Jon Stark, Abid Farooqui, Ron Awad, Ben Suissa, Jean Claude Debreyer, Greg Vos, Leigh Allison, Jamie Wolfe, Stan Foster, Brian Rodgers, Chuck Roberg, Doug Riley, Chris Burgess, Rod Stringer, and dozens of others, I receive valuable information; usually written entertainingly. Their writings make me grateful that they share their thoughts. These folks walk the walk.

When I read your posts, I read random, disjointed, inaccurate, untrue, Walter Mitty stuff that is literally painful to read and dangerous to those that might believe your prevarications. In essence, prattle.

Rather than pretend you have something to contribute, read, study, and ask questions of those who really do have the knowledge you crave.
Exactly what I've wanted to say for years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
US Government Schools- last I checked no such thing.
Perhaps John meant to say, "U.S. public schools suck." Which in a manner are government operated schools because the school districts operate under municipal or county jurisdiction by way of legislated school boards and receive Federal and State funding. The litmus test is that every public school, every public college or university teacher, instructor, professor, educator, administrator, employee are "Public Employees" and thus "Government" employees. The second litmus test is the ban on prayer in public education because of the separation of Church and State (i.e. Government).
 
...when I read the writings of Vance Breese, Tyler Hathaway, Jon Stark, Abid Farooqui, Ron Awad, Ben Suissa, Jean Claude Debreyer, Greg Vos, Leigh Allison, Jamie Wolfe, Stan Foster, Brian Rodgers, Chuck Roberg, Doug Riley, Chris Burgess, Rod Stringer, and dozens of others, I receive valuable information; usually written entertainingly.
OMG, he's revealed our real names !! 😳
 
In some cases, it may be more like witless protection...
 
The Walter Mitty I was referencing above was the James Thurber character, not the movie. If you have not done so, check out some of Mr. Thurber's more famous aphorisms. An example: “All human beings should try to learn before they die what they are running from, and to, and why.”-James Thurber
 
Last edited:
Getting WAY back to ChromeX's question in Post 1:

I'll risk being cynical here. In my experience, designers of components for homebuilt gyros usually do not design to a G loading. The "designers" of gyro components are typically amateurs, just like their customers. They eyeball their creations, copy liberally from each other and, largely by trial and error, arrive at an "industry standard."

This trial-and-error process has, over the years, occasionally resulted in problems with rotor blades. We've seen low-time cracking (or worse) in rotor blades that were "scaled up" from smaller versions that worked fine on light 1-place gyros, but not so well on 3/4 ton gyros. The spanwise cracking from 2/rev in-plane bending loads, as mentioned by Jean Claude, has been one of these unpleasant surprises. Fortunately, clever people have come up with a couple of design solutions.

I've observed that many, many gyro folk do not know how to calculate the disk area of their rotors, never mind centrifugal loads on blades.

Unlike the case of certified aircraft, therefore, you really have to do your homework to discover which of the many designs out there have the best safety records.

One more thought about G-loads on autogyro rotors: it's true that, in steady-state flight, rotor RPM is roughly a function of the square root of the load. For example, if you double a gyro's gross weight but don't change the rotor, RRPM will increase by approximately a factor of 1.4. However, the blades' tips experience a disproportional increase in drag as RRPM goes up. The blades more or less hit an RRPM "wall" that they cannot break through with the amount of drive they receive from our "windmill" system of rotor power. This behavior is the source of the "gyros won't exceed 2.5 G" rule of thumb.

However, a gyro rotor CAN momentarily achieve a higher G load when a maneuver abruptly adds load. It does this in the instant before RRPM rises to meet the load.

The mechanism that (briefly) creates the extra rotor thrust is an increase in the blades' angle of attack, caused by increasing the rotor disk's angle of attack. That is, we force the disk downward through the air at a greater disk AOA than is apparent from the rotor spindle's angle. You might say that the disk is temporarily "falling through" the air.

This can happen in any sharp stick-back maneuver that is done with high airspeed. One example is a loop entry. IIR, Jim Vanek of Sportcopter has recorded over 4G's on a G-meter in loop entries. This obviously places a greater-than-normal bending load on the blades' roots, since they must bear the added load without the help of extra centrifugal effect.
 
Top