Can you elaborate on your theory that the CG is dynamically moving?I agree with this if the center of gravity never moved. Center of drag may be another issue. The pusher will also be pushing against the cg and the center of drag which will always be dynamically moving and not in the center of thrust.
Thank you. Pretty cool!Here you can see Jean Claude in person as well as a couple of photos of his wooden tractor gyroplane out of his workshop:
It seems even smaller outside the workshop Relief, I can nevertheless sit me in the cab Of course an asymmetrical tail stabilizer is provided to compensate the engine torque. Also two vertical surfaces.www.rotaryforum.com
There used to be more photos on the French Autogire site, cannot locate them now...
A novel, and very interesting peculiarity of JC's gyro design is the articulated, three-side truncated pyramid that replaces the mast. If I'm not mistaken, the rotor head is controlled, both in pitch as in roll, directly with the hanging stick, that tilts the smaller base of the pyramid in the desired direction...
Jean Claude, I agree with you. Thank you for your input. You are very helpful. Are you able to share the spreadsheet? my email is [email protected]. Again, I appreciate you and respect your great knowledge.Designing a 2-seater tractor side by side is difficult, because the pitching balance needs to be kept with two heavy passengers as well as with light one
This means that the seats must be on the rotor thrust line.
In these conditions the rear airframe must be heavy enough to balance the weight of the engine. It's unfortunate for rise performance.
You can arrange the different masses in a spreadsheet to monitor the hanging angle during your design. As here:
View attachment 1145465
It looks like you will have easy entry and exit to the cockpit but I think you need to triangulate more somehow between station 4 and 2.
Jim, thanks for the input. Yes. I fully agree about the lack of support between 2 and 4. I actually redrew the fuse (see attached) with a little more length for stability, but I still haven’t addressed the 2-4 structure yet. I need to really study that part. I agree about the rear shock as well. I am hoping to never need the shock. It’s there for plopping down out of the sky during an engine out with poor landing options.It looks like you will have easy entry and exit to the cockpit but I think you need to triangulate more somehow between station 4 and 2.
The way you have your rear shock geometry the shock motion ratio is digressive, if you were to have the top of the shock mounted back on (or towards) the same station as the trailing arm pivot the motion ratio will be progressive. With progressive damping you can achieve a soft ride at ride height and bottom out control also.