Astral tractor gyroplane

Rene,
Are those two hydraulic line fittings or is that a cooling (water) pump in the last and next-to-last picture?
Brian
 
This is the hydraulic pump for the prerotator direct in line with the crankshaft

I use the pneumatic clutch CALIDUS prerotator
 
Last edited:
J'aime ton travalle tres inteligen , et moi j'aime sa le recyclage.

Garde nous au courant de toute tes avancement.
ou de tes pepin.
 
Last edited:
Sanding the fuselage structure with the help of the modified truck for rotation





 
Last edited:
Welcome to the Rotary Wing Forum René!

Welcome to the Rotary Wing Forum René!

That is quite a project René.

Thank you for sharing it with the Rotary Wing Forum.

I will look forward to your progress.

I wish you all the best on your gyroplane adventure.
 
I installed a rotor 8.70 meter built by myself. I used the extruded profile AVERSO blades. I stuck with Araldite balancing bars, spacers and drilled, screwed the whole and balanced rotor





I clench conical screws to always get the same alignment of the blades

 
Last edited:
instruments panel
All instruments come from the CALIDUS


 
That's a fine looking ship. I wish you all the best with that !
Randy
 
An important advantage of tractors over pushers is that it’s difficult not to have CLT and tail surfaces centered in the propeller slipstream.

That eliminates most of the usual coffin corners of pushers.
 
An other advantage of tractors over pushers is that it eases of flow non-separate behind the cab: Very low parasitic drag.
 
JC, specs for a Cessna 377 “Mixmaster”:
A non-turbo 1967 model has a single-engine ceiling of 7,500 feet with the rear engine out, and 9,500 feet with the front engine shut down. Surprisingly, efficiency appears to be better on the rear engine than the front one.

My guess is that there is flow separation on the belly of a 377 with rear engine out.
 
Surprisingly, efficiency appears to be better on the rear engine than the front one.
My guess is that there is flow separation on the belly of a 377 with rear engine out.
Chuck. The drag of a same shape is always more high in the prop wash, because the airspeed is higher there. Not sure that the flow is smoother during the operation of rear engine.
 
Last edited:
JC, specs for a Cessna 377 “Mixmaster”:
A non-turbo 1967 model has a single-engine ceiling of 7,500 feet with the rear engine out, and 9,500 feet with the front engine shut down. Surprisingly, efficiency appears to be better on the rear engine than the front one.

My guess is that there is flow separation on the belly of a 377 with rear engine out.

Chuck,
I think you mean the 337, and you're right about the difference in single engine climb performance. A popular mod for that was to remove the rear landing gear doors oddly enough.
Randy
 
Randy, I’ve seen 337s with a belt of turbulators under the belly, just before the upsweep to the prop. Their purpose, I suppose, was to help keep the flow attached.

Were the turbulators a Cessna mod of an aftermarket mod?

********
Sorry to disrupt your thread, René; it is refreshing to see creativity rather than the usual slavish copying.
 
Randy, I’ve seen 337s with a belt of turbulators under the belly, just before the upsweep to the prop. Their purpose, I suppose, was to help keep the flow attached.

Were the turbulators a Cessna mod of an aftermarket mod?

********
Sorry to disrupt your thread, René; it is refreshing to see creativity rather than the usual slavish copying.

Chuck,
That is one mod for that aircraft that I have not heard of till now. There are a slew of them though and all of them from aftermarket vendors. Interestingly enough Cessna went on to produce the 172RG,182RG and 177 w/o gear doors as soon as they saw how well they worked when removed from the 337.
Randy
 
These turbulators try to suppress detachment of the flow.
Can they succeed?

NASA tested the efficiency of turbulators in a wind tunnel ?

 
Top