FW and Gyros
Chris Lord was my first gyro CFI, and a friend.
I'm respectfully trying to do right by him. Most people here seem to understand that.
I'm respectfully trying to do right by him. Most people here seem to understand that.
I think gyro's are somewhat limited in terms of terrain more by the punishment the rotor assembly and blades might take on take off and landing roll/taxiing, rather than their undercarriage and suspension. Level dirt roads etc are fine, but some of the back country terrain that appropriate FW's can fly into would be very punishing, possibly unsafe in an aircraft with an unpowered rotor.Kolibri;n1140331 said:
Have you looked into the Magni M24? It still uses the old style steel rods for control and seems bullet proof. I built one with the 915 and the power with two 180+ pound people is incredible. Mine is currently being shipped from Italy, but if I remember right from the post construction test flights, we were climbing at close to 1,000 ft/min with two people. Almost 2,000 ft/min with one person. 5 bladed Duc prop. Photo shows Flash blades. Ended up with Flash 2 blades after side by side testing with another M24 with 915.Jtnock;n1140267 said:I crashed a Tercel a few months ago due to this very thing. Lost left and right cyclic control... thankfully not fore aft control...and was stuck in a moderate right hand turn. Of course on touch down the gyro rolled over to the right and destroyed the gyro.
Trendak had no interest in determining what failed and the faa investigator said "experimental aircraft with no injuries... opened and closed case" and then wrote in his report that no malfunction was found? Well I suppose that's true since no investigation was done.
My best guess is that one of the poorly and under-designed mounting brackets holding the control cable to the mast became weak and broke due to vibration exposure. The bracket I suspect broke prior to impact had no bending or twisting and was very clean as compared to the other broken parts which were all twisted and bent from breaking on impact.
I spent several hours on the phone with Chris Lord discussing my crash and whether to purchase another gyro. He was an awesome guy and gave me completely unbiased advice even though he had an obvious vested interest in autogyro. He in fact convinced me not to purchase another gyro because the gyro I needed "hasn't been built yet". I now own a carbon cub.
I loved the gyro, but I will never fly another one with control cables. Control cables are one thing in an environment with minimal vibration and wear, but they have no place on an inherently vibration inducing gyro. Worse yet is that the manufacturer has no interest in investigating and potentially preventing future incidents.
Check those cables.
You've a point there, loftus, but I think such limitation is greatly reduced if the gyro's prerotator can achieve 100+% flight rrpm.I think gyro's are somewhat limited in terms of terrain more by the punishment the rotor assembly and blades might take on take off and landing roll/taxiing, rather than their undercarriage and suspension.
I agree with you that M198LT's mechanical issues were probably specific to that gyro (and its build quality) vs. the design as a whole.It stands to reason that some type of issue or damage relating to the previous accident(s) and not appropriately resolved is the most likely cause.
It is not hard to imagine the date of the completion of phase one slipping particularly if the owner hired it done.Kolibri;n1140365 said:If N198LT had a rollover, and IF the cables were compromised but not replaced, then perhaps they failed on that day.
There are people (including CFIs, as I understand it) who had flown that Cavalon.
They have an opinion about its build quality and flight characteristics. It would be helpful if they spoke up.
Also, its repair history seems rather muddled. Some say it had been rolled over, but another person allegedly in the know says that it hadn't.
That should be resolved, as it's an important point of post-crash analysis.[/COLOR]
The oddest thing to me about N198LT is its hours discrepancy.
16.6 hours on 4 October 2018 for its annual condition inspection.
Yet 40TT weeks earlier on 15 August in its Barnstormers ad.
The same 40TT was claimed on 4 September in Trade-A-Plane.
In what way does the ad address the confusion you feel Ed?EdL;n1140373 said:To me, the “possible relevance” is the apparent confusion over whether this was a damaged gyro that was rebuilt (and possibly incorrectly) or a new one with a possible design/manufacturing flaw. Seems very relevant.
A catastrophic failure of a control cable would not likely have given any indication during the preceding two flight hours.
Vance, you'll probably be surprised to learn that I agree with that.It seems likely Chris would have noticed poor flying qualities and excess rotor vibration in his morning flight.
It seems unlikely to me that Chris would take a friend flying in a gyroplane that had poor flying qualities and excess rotor vibration.
Not "my" gossip. I've heard it from three different sources, and Christine Toevs mentioned it twice on FB.As I interpret Kolibri's gossip many knew N198LT flew like a pig and had excess rotor vibration.
Well, that's a stretch. Folks, including myself, are speculating aloud in order to hash out possibilities.In my opinion repeating unsubstantiated rumors and pretending they point to a probable cause is of no benefit to anyone but a personal injury attorney
I feel I do not have enough reliable information to speculate about what the probable cause was.
Well, not only are you generally alone on that, if it wasn't a control system failure that caused a nosedive from 150' AGL . . . you've only pilot error left.I am not convinced it was a control system failure.
loftus, I agree. Even though I am not a fan of AutoGyro products, I do not believe that their designs or materials are so badAs the aircraft was a relatively new aircraft with low hours, it is extremely unlikely that the loss of control was due to a defect of a well proven aircraft design, or normal and usual possible failure of a component so early in it's life cycle. It seems we are left with some defect in the initial build or any repairs to the aircraft that resulted in premature failure of one or more components.
Amen, Doug,Whatever the cause of this accident, we should design and build our control systems to be brutal. Good old 4130 steel (not stainless and not aluminum) is an ideal material. Pushrods with 3-piece aircraft rod end bearings of 3/8" shank are simple, inspectable and reliable as long as the rod ends don't jam at angles that are achieved in use. The more bellcranks, "scissors," and other intermediate doohickeys, the more failure points you've voluntarily created.
In all your extensive answers can you show me where you pointed out demonization, ignored facts, and embraced gossip? I didn’t see any of those in this entire thread so would appreciate the clarification.Vance;n1140298 said:I doubt he would want someone to demonize him and denigrate the gyroplane community as Kolibri has done ignoring facts and embracing gossip.
So far, it seems to me much more of a control issue, so I disagree.I think the facts point to pilot or engine more than or as much as machine.
19-11-17 - Casa Grande airport, Arizona, USA - Auto-Gyro Cavalon - N953LS
23-10-16 Hondo airfield, Texas, USA - Auto-Gyro Cavalon - N477AG
20160819 - St Marienkirchen, near Suben, Austria - Auto-Gyro Cavalon - D-MXDR
14th June 2016 - Morningstar airfield, Western Cape, South Africa - Auto-Gyro Cavalon - ZU-RKR
Feb 15th 14 - Kitty Hawk, South Africa - ZU-RKC
John Rountree posted on FB:...this accident aircraft I understand was an accident re-build and was known to be a pig to fly & called a "death-trap"
by many who spent a few minutes in it - landed & vowed ...never to fly it again! ....YES ...that IS hearsay! ..... but from more than one source!
The gyro was known "problem child" from initial construction ....was it also rolled over and rebuilt???? ...THAT is the ?
I think Christine and John appropriately qualified what they'd heard as "rumors" or "hearsay".Here are the best RUMORS I have to go on.
I only have rumors on both sides of being rolled over [or not].
"Regarding Chris Lord's N198LT, it seems confirmed from multiple sources that it had previously been rolled over,EdL;n1140386 said:In all your extensive answers can you show me where you pointed out demonization, ignored facts, and embraced gossip? I didn’t see any of those in this entire thread so would appreciate the clarification.