PW_Plack
Active Member
John, did you look at the photo in post #21? It shows the obvious clearance issue with the machine parked and off, the blades straight. Obviously this "problem" is a real one for some of the machines, even if not for yours.
Airworthiness Alert,MTO Sport Gyro's
- Thread starter Murray Barker
- Start date
John, did you look at the photo in post #21? It shows the obvious clearance issue with the machine parked and off, the blades straight. Obviously this "problem" is a real one for some of the machines, even if not for yours.
TheFossil
Newbie
I did take note of the rotor position in the pic. However, this is really no different to mine as it is quite possible that with the rotor stationary, the rear facing blade could come to rest at that angle. My argument is really that with the rotor spinning at the appropriate speed, the blades would assume a certain rigidity and will not come into contact with the tail. In order to have the tail chopped, you would have to mis-manage the rotor in quite a serious way.
John
ZU_REB
John
ZU_REB
JAL
Member
I also own a MTOsport but is the older model which does not have the problem.
The first photo is the older model's rotorhead (push pull bar orientated down)and the second is the later model's rotorhead (push pull bar orientated forward). The distinction is the orientation of the push-pull bar, by orientating the bar forward it will allow a longer travel. I guess also the rotorhead back stop must also be adjusted to allow for this extra travel. The photos show that it is easy to distinguish between the types.
I dont think this adds any extra stresses on the control system, although it would mean that the actual vertical rods would have to be longer or the threaded rod ends have to be wound out further, but either way I dont see there is much of a problem there.
However, it does look like it is a deliberate attempt to increase the amount of angle the rotor can be tilted, and the factory will no doubt have reason why they did this, perhaps it improves perfomance.
The issue we have here in Australia by making this change is the machine no longer conforms to Australian standards (or British for that matter). What complicates this is that the change did not correspond to a model change and the new machines have been imported here under the older models certification, when clearly a rotor head change would require new certification (as according to ASRA regs). So ASRA has had to restrict the usage of all MTOsports regardless of what head they have because they have been imported under the same certificate.
This problem would not have occurred if the importer had noted the change when it happened and either got the change certified or ask the factory to only supply the older heads.
ASRA are sympathertic to us MTOSport owners here and trying to sort this out and the last thing that anyone wants is to end up restricting anyone's machine. For those who have an older machine we need to measure the rotor blade clearance from the prop and tail and submit the results and a letter of excemption will be issued to each machine which passes the test.
As for the bit about the chopping of the prop and tail accident which occurred here, there will be much debate about whether it is blade flap, it certainly does sound like the classic blade flap scenario, T & Gs with the last minute decision to do one more circuit powering up and pulling on the stick before checking rotor speed. However, because of the design of the new rotorhead it would only require the blades to slow down to a minumum speed that results in the coning angle to decrease which would be enough to chop the tail if the stick is bought all the way back. This could happen in no wind conditions and the gyro stationary, which is technically not blade flap but simply chopping your tail off. If the blades are kept above a certain rpm then the coning angle will always be great enough to clear the tail and no real danger exists, but then MTOsport pilots will always have to be vigilant about this and dont have momentary brain fart and pull the stick to early or have it slip out your hands when slowing the rotors or something like that and inadvertantly chop your tail. Although the factory does state that the pre-rotator is required equipment for flight, if you ever got stuck away from home base (say the belt broke) it would be a brave man to try and and hand start the rotors if you new that the rotors could come in contact with the tail, especially when considering that you would probably not practice these very often and be pretty rusty at it.
The first photo is the older model's rotorhead (push pull bar orientated down)and the second is the later model's rotorhead (push pull bar orientated forward). The distinction is the orientation of the push-pull bar, by orientating the bar forward it will allow a longer travel. I guess also the rotorhead back stop must also be adjusted to allow for this extra travel. The photos show that it is easy to distinguish between the types.
I dont think this adds any extra stresses on the control system, although it would mean that the actual vertical rods would have to be longer or the threaded rod ends have to be wound out further, but either way I dont see there is much of a problem there.
However, it does look like it is a deliberate attempt to increase the amount of angle the rotor can be tilted, and the factory will no doubt have reason why they did this, perhaps it improves perfomance.
The issue we have here in Australia by making this change is the machine no longer conforms to Australian standards (or British for that matter). What complicates this is that the change did not correspond to a model change and the new machines have been imported here under the older models certification, when clearly a rotor head change would require new certification (as according to ASRA regs). So ASRA has had to restrict the usage of all MTOsports regardless of what head they have because they have been imported under the same certificate.
This problem would not have occurred if the importer had noted the change when it happened and either got the change certified or ask the factory to only supply the older heads.
ASRA are sympathertic to us MTOSport owners here and trying to sort this out and the last thing that anyone wants is to end up restricting anyone's machine. For those who have an older machine we need to measure the rotor blade clearance from the prop and tail and submit the results and a letter of excemption will be issued to each machine which passes the test.
As for the bit about the chopping of the prop and tail accident which occurred here, there will be much debate about whether it is blade flap, it certainly does sound like the classic blade flap scenario, T & Gs with the last minute decision to do one more circuit powering up and pulling on the stick before checking rotor speed. However, because of the design of the new rotorhead it would only require the blades to slow down to a minumum speed that results in the coning angle to decrease which would be enough to chop the tail if the stick is bought all the way back. This could happen in no wind conditions and the gyro stationary, which is technically not blade flap but simply chopping your tail off. If the blades are kept above a certain rpm then the coning angle will always be great enough to clear the tail and no real danger exists, but then MTOsport pilots will always have to be vigilant about this and dont have momentary brain fart and pull the stick to early or have it slip out your hands when slowing the rotors or something like that and inadvertantly chop your tail. Although the factory does state that the pre-rotator is required equipment for flight, if you ever got stuck away from home base (say the belt broke) it would be a brave man to try and and hand start the rotors if you new that the rotors could come in contact with the tail, especially when considering that you would probably not practice these very often and be pretty rusty at it.
Attachments
Last edited:
bones
Gold Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2004
- Messages
- 1,278
- Location
- Chtrs Twrs Australia
- Aircraft
- a/c
- Total Flight Time
- cant remember, didnt have log books before, but since over 3000
As far as im aware the mto3 pilots are not even shown how to hand spin up the rotors, correct me if im wrong but doesnt this quote from your post
"Although the factory does state that the pre-rotator is required equipment for flight"
Basically says the aircraft is not airworthy, and would also explain why an instructor partially cut the tail of a calidus, when the prerotator failed, and he tried to hand start because he was at a field with lots of on lookers?
So if the instructors cant do it and dont teach it, how would one do it??
SamL
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
- Messages
- 312
- Location
- Melbourne Australia
- Aircraft
- GT Gyroplanes "KRUZA" G-762
- Total Flight Time
- 700+
I was always taught to start machine, then conduct pre take off (before flight) checks.
How can you do this if your blades will hit both your tail and prop.
Even if you do this with no motor going there is a real good chance of hitting your tail and prop anyway. And I would certainly not do it with blades spinning at 200 rpm unless you want to lay the machine onto its side.
Can I raise another question, When the machine in question is raised so its tail sits on the ground, will the blades also hit the ground ?
Regards SamL..................
How can you do this if your blades will hit both your tail and prop.
Even if you do this with no motor going there is a real good chance of hitting your tail and prop anyway. And I would certainly not do it with blades spinning at 200 rpm unless you want to lay the machine onto its side.
Can I raise another question, When the machine in question is raised so its tail sits on the ground, will the blades also hit the ground ?
Regards SamL..................
Last edited:
Gyro_Kai
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 3,279
- Location
- near Frankfurt, Germany
- Aircraft
- MT-03, Calidus (rent)
- Total Flight Time
- about 150
JAL,
I have never seen that change of push rod mounting before. This is really strange, and clearly this change requires additional approval in any country.
Kai.
I have never seen that change of push rod mounting before. This is really strange, and clearly this change requires additional approval in any country.
Kai.
bpearson
Senior Member
In the UK, if you want to stick a gps to the dash of a factory built gyro/microlight you need a mod approval! Sec T is a box ticking excercise. A Dominator would never pass.
helipaddy
Junior Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,987
- Location
- 005'N 005'E
- Aircraft
- Dominator, ELA 07, B206L4 and B407, ICP Savannah
- Total Flight Time
- Around 250 days
A Dominator might pass if somebody tried.
bpearson
Senior Member
A friend of mine was told it was unlikely that the nosewheel ass would pass. The CAA want a gyro that can be re-used after a crash that would leave the pilot stone cold. I believe the Dom is designed to bend in a heavy incident protecting the pilot.
But to be honest thats not really the point. It would cost many tens of thousands of pounds to put it through the beaurocratic quagmire with little marketplace at the end of it. The idea of experimentation, inovation and personal risk is virtually dead in the UK!
helipaddy
Junior Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2005
- Messages
- 1,987
- Location
- 005'N 005'E
- Aircraft
- Dominator, ELA 07, B206L4 and B407, ICP Savannah
- Total Flight Time
- Around 250 days
Its a shame Brian, because its an excellent aircraft.
JAL
Member
Mark as you know we have two types of ratings for gyro pilots here in Australia. For those who train on the new generation two seaters (Mt03, magni, ELA etc) are only licensed to fly thier respective types. The second type of rating allows you to fly any gyrocopter.
When training on an Mt03 we are not taught much rotor management. We are taught to taxi with the blades stopped and can only fly the aircraft if the pre-rotor is functioning. There are plenty of arguments whether this is right or wrong. Taxing with blades spinning: to be or not to be! and I am sure it has been subject to many disscusions here on the forum.
I actually intend to get further instruction on rotor management, especially taxing with rotors spinning and I will want to be able to hand start my blades just in case the pre-rotor fails. I want to do this just so I know and can make informed decisions on technique and to allow me to upgrade my rating so I can try different gyros.
However, I am pretty happy with my Mto3sport and would not hesitate to recommend them to anyone but I have only ever flown MTOs so my opinion really doesnt count for much in this respect. The machine has actually performed flawlessly for me and I often use it for work in remote locations and so far it has been very reliable. I am intending to make some modifications for mission specific reasons and to introduce some locally made components so I dont have to keep importing from Germany, which will save considerable time and money (freight alone adds a far bit to the cost and can take a long time to arrive,also the exchange rate often works against us down here)
When training on an Mt03 we are not taught much rotor management. We are taught to taxi with the blades stopped and can only fly the aircraft if the pre-rotor is functioning. There are plenty of arguments whether this is right or wrong. Taxing with blades spinning: to be or not to be! and I am sure it has been subject to many disscusions here on the forum.
I actually intend to get further instruction on rotor management, especially taxing with rotors spinning and I will want to be able to hand start my blades just in case the pre-rotor fails. I want to do this just so I know and can make informed decisions on technique and to allow me to upgrade my rating so I can try different gyros.
However, I am pretty happy with my Mto3sport and would not hesitate to recommend them to anyone but I have only ever flown MTOs so my opinion really doesnt count for much in this respect. The machine has actually performed flawlessly for me and I often use it for work in remote locations and so far it has been very reliable. I am intending to make some modifications for mission specific reasons and to introduce some locally made components so I dont have to keep importing from Germany, which will save considerable time and money (freight alone adds a far bit to the cost and can take a long time to arrive,also the exchange rate often works against us down here)
Skidbiter
Junior Member
The MTO Sport offers three factory blade options with two different diameters 8.0 & 8.4
Is this a factor?
Is this a factor?
I seem to remember that the MTOSport is available in a special option with a more sensitive stick. Meaning less stick travel needed to move the rotorhead the same amount. Could this be the problem?
-- Chris.
-- Chris.
TheFossil
Newbie
Hmmm...I now see the problem!
Hmmm...I now see the problem!
Hi All
What I have been clearly focussed on is 'the normal operation' of the MT Sport which, if one sticks to the rules and has no mometary lapses of concentration, will not result in any problems. However several points were raised regarding abnormal situations that can, and probably will occur - what then?:rip:
What really grabbed my attention is that of 'manual pre-rotation' in the event of pre-rotator failure. Someone said 'it would take a brave man to try it with the latest MT Sport', and I must agree. This would be very risky and the chances of the tail being struck are extremely high. The rotor rpm would be very low and any change in wind, stick position, etc could easily result in the retreating blade striking the tail. (I did some careful experimenting with my gyro and concluded that it's something I'd not chance.)
It will be interesting to see what solution is offered, but I can't see too much being done, except the (serious) modification of the the rotor head or a return to the previous model.
Regards
John
ZU-REB
Hmmm...I now see the problem!
Hi All
What I have been clearly focussed on is 'the normal operation' of the MT Sport which, if one sticks to the rules and has no mometary lapses of concentration, will not result in any problems. However several points were raised regarding abnormal situations that can, and probably will occur - what then?:rip:
What really grabbed my attention is that of 'manual pre-rotation' in the event of pre-rotator failure. Someone said 'it would take a brave man to try it with the latest MT Sport', and I must agree. This would be very risky and the chances of the tail being struck are extremely high. The rotor rpm would be very low and any change in wind, stick position, etc could easily result in the retreating blade striking the tail. (I did some careful experimenting with my gyro and concluded that it's something I'd not chance.)
It will be interesting to see what solution is offered, but I can't see too much being done, except the (serious) modification of the the rotor head or a return to the previous model.
Regards
John
ZU-REB
SamL
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
- Messages
- 312
- Location
- Melbourne Australia
- Aircraft
- GT Gyroplanes "KRUZA" G-762
- Total Flight Time
- 700+
Still waiting for the answer to this question????
bones
Gold Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2004
- Messages
- 1,278
- Location
- Chtrs Twrs Australia
- Aircraft
- a/c
- Total Flight Time
- cant remember, didnt have log books before, but since over 3000
This is really going to prove much sam, the old A/C i had the rotors would gladly did some dirt behind, but still wouldnt touch the prop or the tail.
TheFossil
Newbie
Hi SamL
Here's the answer you've been waiting for ...
With tail on the ground the rotor blade misses the rudder/prop by about 40cm, but the blade firmly strikes the ground behind, with still probably some 30 cm to go!
This is however, with the blade stationary and flexible, ie abnormal situation.
Regards
John
ZU-REB
SamL
Senior Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
- Messages
- 312
- Location
- Melbourne Australia
- Aircraft
- GT Gyroplanes "KRUZA" G-762
- Total Flight Time
- 700+
Thanks John
That is very dissapointing, such a machine could not be signed off in Australia.
A heavy tail landing could cause the blades to flex down and strike the ground, causing a role over.
Hope MTO people come up with a suitable fix for you and all other owners.
Regards SamL.....
TheFossil
Newbie
I think it will take some pretty heavy / bad landing to result in ground strike, but then anything can happen, I suppose.
Just as a matter of interest, do you know if the Calidus shares the same apparent problem? This will certainly prevent accepotance in Aus.
John
ZU-REB
Just as a matter of interest, do you know if the Calidus shares the same apparent problem? This will certainly prevent accepotance in Aus.
John
ZU-REB
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2003
- Messages
- 18,374
- Location
- Santa Maria, California
- Aircraft
- Givens Predator
- Total Flight Time
- 2600+ in rotorcraft
Please help me understand.
Please help me understand.
I have written rules before and I know it is not easy.
I hate to think that I am so out of touch and this makes sense to everyone else.
It is really none of my business since I don’t fly in Australia or England.
‘T 661 Rotor-blade clearance (See AMC T 661.)
There must be enough clearance between the rotor blades and other parts of the structure to prevent the blades from striking any part of the structure, or passing through any area likely to cause injury to occupants during any [permitted] operating condition.’
The ASRA standard does not seem to me to be equivalent because it includes blade flap.
4. The current equivalent ASRA standard is found within the ‘Construction Requirements for Compliant Gyroplanes’ (December 2008), specifically:
‘D100 Rotor Blade Clearance
There must be enough clearance between the rotor blades and other parts of the structure to prevent the blades from striking the propeller or any part of the structure or passing through any area likely to cause injury to occupants during any operating condition (including blade flap)’.
I have yet to fly a gyroplane that wouldn’t hit something with the rotor blades if the blades flapped.
In my personal experience when the blades flap they will bend quite a ways.
It is hard for me to imagine the rotor blades hitting anything when they are coned up and stable even at full back stick.
When I am practicing stop and goes in the gyroplane I fly the rotor usually doesn’t get below 150 rpm and it is coned up.
On initial take offs I don’t go to full back stick until I am over 120 rpm on my 30 foot blades.
I have a tall mast and the blades will still hit the tail if I flap them.
Will the gyroplanes sold in Australia not hit anything with the rotor blades when they flap?
Thank you, Vance
Please help me understand.
I have written rules before and I know it is not easy.
I hate to think that I am so out of touch and this makes sense to everyone else.
It is really none of my business since I don’t fly in Australia or England.
‘T 661 Rotor-blade clearance (See AMC T 661.)
There must be enough clearance between the rotor blades and other parts of the structure to prevent the blades from striking any part of the structure, or passing through any area likely to cause injury to occupants during any [permitted] operating condition.’
The ASRA standard does not seem to me to be equivalent because it includes blade flap.
4. The current equivalent ASRA standard is found within the ‘Construction Requirements for Compliant Gyroplanes’ (December 2008), specifically:
‘D100 Rotor Blade Clearance
There must be enough clearance between the rotor blades and other parts of the structure to prevent the blades from striking the propeller or any part of the structure or passing through any area likely to cause injury to occupants during any operating condition (including blade flap)’.
I have yet to fly a gyroplane that wouldn’t hit something with the rotor blades if the blades flapped.
In my personal experience when the blades flap they will bend quite a ways.
It is hard for me to imagine the rotor blades hitting anything when they are coned up and stable even at full back stick.
When I am practicing stop and goes in the gyroplane I fly the rotor usually doesn’t get below 150 rpm and it is coned up.
On initial take offs I don’t go to full back stick until I am over 120 rpm on my 30 foot blades.
I have a tall mast and the blades will still hit the tail if I flap them.
Will the gyroplanes sold in Australia not hit anything with the rotor blades when they flap?
Thank you, Vance
