Gyro factory in china

Friendly
NO factory will ever build an engine for this kind of market, we have always to adapt.
From back in 2000 when I got my feet wet in gyros, lots have changed, my initial dream machine is in the past, we are boldly moving to beyond . . .
Can´t compare horses, each for its course.
I´ve flown all kinds of gyros, the ones that can keep up with heavy guys in it are the best and I have seen the skynny bunch terrorising the skies with heavy machines.
When and if I want to travel in a gyro, it will have wings for speed.
The cost of creating an engine and no market to sell it is way to big.
I have not tested a RX-8 yet but I think that is where it will be.
Unless . . . novelties arise . . .
Heron
 
Heron,
I will keep my bias and still play. If you want to fly those heavy auto engines, I have no problem with it. But there is a trade off. There are plenty of two seats with that engine to confirm it works and works well. But when you say a factory machine, I have a bias that it will include a light engine designed for that application.

Correct if I’m wrong , but aren’t you flying with a soob?
 
MS80831......... I dont understand your comments about 51% kit home build, I never mentioned any % at all. Its intended to have a factory built craft

I am sorry, I assumed you were familiar with US LSA and Experimental/ Homebuilt rules.

In the US, any engine can be used if it is NOT factory built, but rather an Experimental homebuilt in which the assembly and fabrication is done 51% or greater by the homebuilder. It then requires an inspection, and usually 50 hours of test flying before you can carry passengers.

Q & A on 51% rule below.

http://www.eaa.org/govt/ab_qa.asp

Some of the suggestions and examples you are talking about are homebuilts (ie: dominator, Sparrowhawk, RAF, etc.) They don't meet the LSA or Part 23 requirements for a factory built aircraft and can have any engine they like (because they are registered Experimental). Only the Xenon(LSA), A&S 18A, J2, and 1930's era Pitcains and Kellets are FAA certified Gyroplanes.
 
Last edited:
Correct if I’m wrong , but aren’t you flying with a soob?

Karl,
I learned to fly with the Mac. After my 3 rd engine out, decided to replace the engine. I looked at 4 strokes and was almost decided on the Jabria, but someone posted that they just did not perform well in a Gyro. I looked at everything I could find on the web and over a dinner with some friends who fly gyros, I was asked the question "What do the manufactors of successful gyros put on their gyros?" I said Rotax but what about the cost! My wise friend ask me if what I bought did not work out, would I still have the money to buy a Rotax. The answer was no. So I gave up on the alternative motor in favor of having a Gyro that was ready when I was. I bought a 582 Rotax that flys very well with my 250 lbs in it.
When I can afford it, I will buy a 750 Weber to experiment with.
I bought a Soob EA 81 with a plantary redrive that came off of a Zeneith Airplane last year. The man asked me what I would give for it. I told him I was not even interested in the motor. He said he need to get it out of his shop. He ask me to give him 350 for the motor. I used his airport, so I agreed to keep my good standing with him. I sold it the next week for about the same and shipping.
I recently gave away a EJ 2.5 with delta cams. I am not interested in Soobs at this time. I may have to change if I build a 2 place in the near future.
 
Friendly

I have not tested a RX-8 yet but I think that is where it will be.
Unless . . . novelties arise . . .
Heron

With the push for the 1 liter and smaller engines in the automotive field and the phasing out of the 2 stroke, I believe we are on the verge of some novelties.

I read an article on the Yamaha snowmobile that said the factory was not going to advertises HP. They were aiming at a smooth transition from idle to full power with out breaking the snow loose from under the sled and sinking it. They said they would push for more torque.
I was thinking that may even suit our needs more than what they have now. It does appear that the Todd conversion is working.
Any way, I think we will soon have some good engines to consider as an alternative to Rotax that is in the same weight category.
 
Well, for cars the one liters are ok, but just for roundabout stuff. WE have plenty of them here, I would love to see a race formula with same cars and all the factories fighting for the market. I think we have 7 brands now.
Back in Pompano circa 2005 I went to a Honda dealer and they had a jetski race engine going 210 hp for 5 grand, not bad . . .I think that was a snowmobile engine also.
For single seaters we have plenty of power, but for traveling or commercial uses we need more beef, body and heart wise.
Heron
 
PKK
I apologize for directing your thread in another direction. But as you can see the engine is very important to us. The only other thing that will get this much discussion is the H/S and rotors. But then what else is left.
 
I think Paul wants to read anything we view as important to us Mark.....and certainly, as you pointed out, the engine being used is very important.
 
Hello Rotor 46

It is possible to built a gyro in China at very low price and aviation
quality with Chinese Rotax type 912 or even a 914.

Can we all research to find a Gyro factory in Shandong
please post, we all would be very grateful.

Regards.
 
You had me, right up to the 45k/95k

You had me, right up to the 45k/95k

Rotoplane........ Thnxs for your comments but I said serious price for a serious craft, maybe I never explained what is going to be presented to market well enough and cant give too much details at this sensitive stage. What I can say is though it will not be a kit but initially but a fully factory built craft, which at the moment I would say that any thing out there in the market at the moment that is sold from a well known brand must be at least 45K for a kit and at least 95K for something like the M24 delivered built. So 10K is not realistic or commercial, although I would like to say yes.

I know that most would say that the joy of building your own is the main reason for enjoying the flight and the sport but thats not the aim at the moment. So if you or any others have any serious thoughts I am sure they would be well noted

I dont think thats what people want. Gyros are for fun not commercial use so why do they have to cost as much as a house? Oh, and one more thing PKK. Have someone from the US write the manuals so we can understand the instructions. No offense but have you ever seen an Chinese instruction manual written in English? Something seems to always get lost in the translation. Im open for the job should it come open. I could at least interpret the chinese/english manual before it goes to print.:usa:
 
Bravo, Well said.

Bravo, Well said.

I hope you knew I was kidding about the price Paul, kinda ;).
It's in a very affordable range for CEO's, lawyers, doctors and bankers......

Man you hit the nail right on the head there.
 
Pedantic? Slag?

Pedantic? Slag?

Leigh........no need to be so pedantic or slag off someones country or countryman, I thought that this thread has gone well with some valid points. I am sure that others would agree, only you seem to work for Mi5. As explained earlier that this is a sensitive subject in certain areas at the moment , get off my back. if you think I am being conspicuous, thankyou for the compliment, isn't that what one is meant to achieve in this forum and bring news to fellows supporters ?

I dont know what those mean but it doesnt sound good. Back to what I said about English translation and manuals.:usa:
 
Not to worry.

Not to worry.

When I worked in advertising, there was an introductory technique. It was called a "trial balloon." I think it got its name from filling up big balloons with hydrogen or helium. Before a big balloon was filled up, they filled up a little one. If the little "trial balloon" worked, the big one should, too.

It costs PKK nothing to join the Rotary Forum and send up a trial balloon on his proposed project. There are more people knowledgeable about gyros on this forum than probably anywhere else in the world. Would we be interested in his project? Do we have any ideas, suggestions, advice, criticism, or recommendations about it? Where else could PKK get this, and get it free for the asking?

So far it appears to me that there is excellent acceptance for PKK's proposed project. His "trial balloon" is a success.

However, this is a commercial project. Commercial projects I have worked on have had proprietary information -- that is, information I could not freely disclose without written permission in advance from the manufacturer. "Proprietary information" is another way of saying "secret company information."

Let us say for talking's sake that PKK's gyro is going to use high-pressure air tanks filled to 6000 psi for jump-takeoff capability. Let's say that these tanks will be vented through small airlines in the rotor blades, with the vent at the tips of the rotors. Let's say that the design of this system has cost thousands of dollars. And let's be honest, no one else has it. This would be a good example of proprietary information.

In my opinion, PKK would be foolish to tell us about this development on a public forum. What one company can invent, another can invent also -- once the second company knows it is possible.

So if you want to know all about PPK's project, I suggest you wait and see. If and when the project succeeds, you will be able to buy one of these gyros. Read the owner's manual, and read the maintenance and repair manual, and you'll know all about it.

Until then, it is fair for us on the Forum to try to get PKK to tell us anything we want to know. It is fair for PKK to tell us anything he wants us to know, and no more. That's the way the game is played. Fun, huh?

At the prices they are throwing around only the rich will buy them.Or should I say only the rich can afford to buy them.:usa:
 
Jim...Jim, he's not answering right now.

I did see a very interesting picture on a military facility over there recently that had what looked like a considerable number of machines very similar to RAF 2000's

It makes perfect sense to me. Rotor craft transition at minimal cost.

I think that Stan had commented that his Sparrow Hawk experience he though had stood him in good stead when he went to the R22. I don't know what a R22 costs per hour to operate but a gyro has to be cheaper as a transitional trainer, and to see who would be suitable for further training on choppers.

Oh... and I am not MI5, and do wish Paul well in his venture. Anything to bring the price down, with the proviso of course, that quality does matter.
If you are building those in volume, then why not market them abroad for foreign exchange.

P.S Jim, how's Guns? Has she had a chance to start on her machine yet.
 
Good luck PKK.

Good luck PKK.

I have had several email conversations with people in China who heard about my China involvement early this decade, and wanted me to help. If I hadn't had my accident I would have loved to be involved. Good luck PKK.

Aussie Paul. :)
 
vision

vision

Hi everybody, how is everyone! Well, I hope. My thinking on the rotary wing guy from ching-chong province in china is to say go for it man! Keeps everybody in their toes, yeah. View, verify, then think about what you have just seen. JD.
 
Top