And they said it couldn’t be done..!?

All kits should be available WITHOUT the engine. Then you can get your own when you are ready for it.

These companies want to sell you the engine also.....I never liked that.
 
Looks like that Magni has welded frame members, including the rotorhead cheek plates(?) Anyone know if the frame is aluminum or steel? And check out where the muffler is integrated into the frame? That seems a bit too close for comfort. I'm guessing there's no way they'd do that with an aluminum frame.
 
Last edited:
Not all quite contrary, it relay flays like a charm, maybe after seeing the video you might want to go Subaru too…

http://www.autogiro.be

raton

Raton, how in the hell would you know if it flys like a charm? I haven't been paying you a whole lot of attention, but after all the fighting with your Aussie Mates, I have kept a better eye on your posts, and I am finding that in many cases you clearly have no experience in what your talking about.

Just be clear and honest, what is your purpose here on the forum? Do you want to sell Subaru engine packages? Are you just a Subaru fan? Or what???

People here already like Subaru engines. They are already very popular for conversion. Gyros like the RAF, Sparrowhawk, came standard with Subaru engines. And the Subarus were very popular with other kit built gyros such as Parsons, Mad Max, RFI's, Falcons, Even Aircommands and Dominators.

I see no reason you couldn't put a Soob on just about any gyro if the time and desire is there to make it happen.

The soob has advantages in some aspects over all other engines, and also has disadvantages. In cases of light aircraft the main disadvantage is weight. Compared to the Rotax 912 series engines, the Subarus weight anywhere from 60-160+ pounds more.
 
Raton, how in the hell would you know if it flys like a charm? I haven't been paying you a whole lot of attention, but after all the fighting with your Aussie Mates, I have kept a better eye on your posts, and I am finding that in many cases you clearly have no experience in what your talking about.

Just be clear and honest, what is your purpose here on the forum? Do you want to sell Subaru engine packages? Are you just a Subaru fan? Or what???

Ron, I have been wondering who these Raton guys are.
In some post's, his grammar and translation are almost unintelligible, like me talking to a Frenchman.
In others, he is clear and concise, and non-combative.
It reminds me of Steve Mc, his post's are either redneck slang, or professor perfect.
I wish Raton were clear and honest with what they are trying to achieve.
 
sub power on magni

sub power on magni

Looks like a neat setup but I have to be concerned that is a heavy chunk of aluminum hanging off of that mast. I can see they cross braced it but I can tell you from experience that 2x2 is no way going to hold up to a robust landing should they come in hard. Snap, crackle POP ! is going to have new meaning.

J
 
Issues on auto conversions.

Issues on auto conversions.

The main reason for tossing the auto conversion on the SC 2 was the fact that when put on a dyno the 2.5 only put out 170 hp. ! A big ship like the SC2 needs A solid 180 HP, to over 200 prefer, 225hp to make it have the snappy performance you would expect from a kit costing that much. For a few grand more you can have a certified rated aircraft engine with all the hp, parts and reputation to go with it.

2. 90% of auto conversions fail or "have issues" is because of the prevailing attitude here in the gyro community and the rest of aviation.

A. Ignorance

B. Impatience

C. Cheap $.O.B's.


Ignorance, : Hell bubba did it this way so I should be able to as well....copying failure results in failure.

Impatience: I got to fly now, I will fix that stuff later. Who needs training ? I can train along the way......

Cheap: I do not want to spend money on those gauges to monitor that stuff...when it stops I will fix it, I can always land off field safely !



Jonathan





" Auto conversions will always have their reputation defined by the 90% that wind up with issues. :"Rotax, Lycoming, Continental all offer purpose-built aircraft engines that can be bought off-the-shelf with good track records and warranties. If you're building it for yourself, go for it. If you're building it to sell in volume production into the aviation marketplace, use an aircraft engine.[/QUOTE]
 
Raton, how in the hell would you know if it flys like a charm? I haven't been paying you a whole lot of attention, but after all the fighting with your Aussie Mates, I have kept a better eye on your posts, and I am finding that in many cases you clearly have no experience in what your talking about.

Just be clear and honest, what is your purpose here on the forum? Do you want to sell Subaru engine packages? Are you just a Subaru fan? Or what???

People here already like Subaru engines. They are already very popular for conversion. Gyros like the RAF, Sparrowhawk, came standard with Subaru engines. And the Subarus were very popular with other kit built gyros such as Parsons, Mad Max, RFI's, Falcons, Even Aircommands and Dominators.

I see no reason you couldn't put a Soob on just about any gyro if the time and desire is there to make it happen.

The soob has advantages in some aspects over all other engines, and also has disadvantages. In cases of light aircraft the main disadvantage is weight. Compared to the Rotax 912 series engines, the Subarus weight anywhere from 60-160+ pounds more.

After seeing a few times the video a layman can clearly observe the fine take off and very neat landings some without power, it has a strong climb rate and looks very balanced, don’t you agree with this..? I am a huge Subaru fan and come to this board to learn the wealth of information related to Gyros, that in term will clear my confusion about which gyro will suit best my proposes. Hope this answers your questions.

raton
 
We have half a dozen Sub 81 powered Magni's over in the UK. All old VPM's (old Arrow powered). The EA 81 weighs the same as 914 with nearly the same power.......newer turbo has more power and lighter.

The 2.5 was too heavy for ultralight rules.....I think!

Magni will not sell you an airframe without engine though.
 
The main reason for tossing the auto conversion on the SC 2 was the fact that when put on a dyno the 2.5 only put out 170 hp. ! A big ship like the SC2 needs A solid 180 HP, to over 200 prefer, 225hp to make it have the snappy performance you would expect from a kit costing that much. For a few grand more you can have a certified rated aircraft engine with all the hp, parts and reputation to go with it.

2. 90% of auto conversions fail or "have issues" is because of the prevailing attitude here in the gyro community and the rest of aviation.

A. Ignorance

B. Impatience

C. Cheap $.O.B's.


Ignorance, : Hell bubba did it this way so I should be able to as well....copying failure results in failure.

Impatience: I got to fly now, I will fix that stuff later. Who needs training ? I can train along the way......

Cheap: I do not want to spend money on those gauges to monitor that stuff...when it stops I will fix it, I can always land off field safely !



Jonathan





" Auto conversions will always have their reputation defined by the 90% that wind up with issues. :"Rotax, Lycoming, Continental all offer purpose-built aircraft engines that can be bought off-the-shelf with good track records and warranties. If you're building it for yourself, go for it. If you're building it to sell in volume production into the aviation marketplace, use an aircraft engine.
[/QUOTE]

Hammer on the nail…!

raton
 
Looks like a neat setup but I have to be concerned that is a heavy chunk of aluminum hanging off of that mast. I can see they cross braced it but I can tell you from experience that 2x2 is no way going to hold up to a robust landing should they come in hard. Snap, crackle POP ! is going to have new meaning. J

Are you referring to 2x2 aluminum or steel? What if the frame is made of steel? (especially with internal reinforcement/stiffeners) The way it appears to be welded suggests steel construction, but I dunno maybe someone knows for sure? Also, look at where the exhaust collector and muffler are nestled. Even if it's well ventilated/cooled and with a good insulative heat shield, can't imagine they'd so directly expose aluminum structural members to the exhaust system of a powerful (heat producing) engine like that.
 
Try this Raton . . .
That sideway look and say:
My name is Raton . . .James Raton!
Or flash some kind of badge: FBI!
Cambada de burros! (where is Craig Wall?)
I suggest you all look again at the Youtube posts by Greg Mitchell, (Sorry Mitch) :D
See that tree line way in the back? See the Magni taking off with two?
See the Golden taking off with two and all that metal?
Bingo!
Now you are in the know!
Now get reports on Brad King´s Mad Max II with 2.5 no cam grind and with that feature added. Night and day.
Are you assuming that someone made mods you don´t know about and therefore they are wrong?
After you balance and tune a gyro with Sub 2.5, the extra power will make it a better machine. Changes will happen for sure: higher rrpm, landing speed, etc.
Unless . . .you know . . .
I was the balast for two engine change tests in Pat McNear´s RAF, missed the last one that (rumor has it) pushed it over 210 horses. Great changes.
Now, if you did not get it, Raton is looking for a traveling machine, heavier, confortable, long range and good speed, same as me and we went through this caca before.
Most said it coul not be done, I was crazy, dreaming etc. Five years later and we have some good machines around doing that.
Now we are looking to further improvements, adding active suspensions, short take off and the like, but . . .(hate buts) weight is already up in the marks.
Heron
 
Try this Raton . . .
That sideway look and say:
My name is Raton . . .James Raton!
Or flash some kind of badge: FBI!
Cambada de burros! (where is Craig Wall?)
I suggest you all look again at the Youtube posts by Greg Mitchell, (Sorry Mitch) :D
See that tree line way in the back? See the Magni taking off with two?
See the Golden taking off with two and all that metal?
Bingo!
Now you are in the know!
Now get reports on Brad King´s Mad Max II with 2.5 no cam grind and with that feature added. Night and day.
Are you assuming that someone made mods you don´t know about and therefore they are wrong?
After you balance and tune a gyro with Sub 2.5, the extra power will make it a better machine. Changes will happen for sure: higher rrpm, landing speed, etc.
Unless . . .you know . . .
I was the balast for two engine change tests in Pat McNear´s RAF, missed the last one that (rumor has it) pushed it over 210 horses. Great changes.
Now, if you did not get it, Raton is looking for a traveling machine, heavier, confortable, long range and good speed, same as me and we went through this caca before.
Most said it coul not be done, I was crazy, dreaming etc. Five years later and we have some good machines around doing that.
Now we are looking to further improvements, adding active suspensions, short take off and the like, but . . .(hate buts) weight is already up in the marks.
Heron

Now, if you did not get it, Raton is looking for a traveling machine, heavier, confortable, long range and good speed, same as me and we went through this caca before.Most said it coul not be done, I was crazy, dreaming etc. Five years later and we have some good machines around doing that.
Now we are looking to further improvements, adding active suspensions, short take off and the like, but . . .(hate buts) weight is already up in the marks.


Heron

So truth, at my initial question, most said it couldn’t be done for all sort of reasons, mentioned my choice of engine the tread degenerated, get a warning, public likes show ponies, don’t whistle, get insulted. Furiously reading the board, learning about balancing and waking up not so difficult after all, discover it can be done with any machine, Yes, Xenon too. One member hit the nail (http://www.rotaryforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20581&page=2) is he a mind reader? Deep silence. 3 bladed gyros, retractable landing gear, full avionics, auto pilot, Subaru better than a Rotax and two strokes coffee grinders , are you crazy..? Can’t be done, and so it goes on.. Maybe we should look to the old country..? Innovations.

raton
 
Raton.........maaate

Some weeks back, on another thread here, i asked if you could clarify your involvement with soobs / gyros / aero

the reason being, you gave conflicting answer to to an earlier question.
That first query was along the lines........were you involved in the selling of soob for aero use engines, this you replied no to.

Ok.........fair enough. But in another thread you stated you were involved in such a venture, commented along the lines of having website / catalogue.....or something..????

Reading the latter post of yours, i then asked for clarification [ me being confused ]........maate, i'm still waiting, and i think others here are confused as well.

You are engaged here regularly, but you have evaded a response to the above. ???
 
Reading the latter post of yours, i then asked for clarification [ me being confused ]........maate, i'm still waiting, and i think others here are confused as well.

I won’t let anyone make me responsible for their confusion ,I already have enough to do sorting out my own without worrying about yours, hate to abuse their wisdom with confusion....

raton
 
Your "Bonafides" are.........???

Your evasivness to a straight question is akin to the average politician.

Me thinks you is "plagiarizing" whatever you post here, but that's just my view.

The Oz gyro folks back here are reasonably knowledgable of other gyro folks, but you is well and truely a mystery.........strange situation.
Your ongoing secretness only adds to this situation.
Why...............got me buggered.

C YA........:wave:
 
Your "Bonafides" are.........???

Your evasivness to a straight question is akin to the average politician.

Me thinks you is "plagiarizing" whatever you post here, but that's just my view.

The Oz gyro folks back here are reasonably knowledgable of other gyro folks, but you is well and truely a mystery.........strange situation.
Your ongoing secretness only adds to this situation.
Why...............got me buggered.

C YA........:wave:

I don’t agree with your statements and reject it completely…

raton
 
Anything can be done; getting it to work well is another thing entirely.

It will be interesting to see how it performs. It doesn’t look like he moved the rotor head to compensate for all the extra weight out back.....


Thank you, Vance


How can you see this?

Cita
 
2x2`

2x2`

2x2 is strong, steel will bend, and crack, but not near like aluminum, its small dimensions are not as robust as say 2x3 or 2x4. Of course this will only matter on a hard landing or worse. As long as you fly it nice you do not need any structural margin of error.

Jonathan.


Are you referring to 2x2 aluminum or steel? What if the frame is made of steel? (especially with internal reinforcement/stiffeners) The way it appears to be welded suggests steel construction, but I dunno maybe someone knows for sure? Also, look at where the exhaust collector and muffler are nestled. Even if it's well ventilated/cooled and with a good insulative heat shield, can't imagine they'd so directly expose aluminum structural members to the exhaust system of a powerful (heat producing) engine like that.
 
I am not involved with Subarus but I will IF I can find a good source and some mods (conversion)
It is my egine of choice and I will not use any others for the effect I want.
Maybe you already know Raton or suspect who he is, what does that have to do with our cordial conversation?
Now we got to the point where, having answered his questions, Raton will, either get his hands dirty or move to another area of learning.
Heron
Aussies! :D
 
Top