Most builders of gyros this light in the US are hoping to operate them under FAR Part 103. There is no Pilot's Operating Handbook required in this case, but Part 103 requires documentation of a max speed of 55 knots in straight-&-level flight at max power, as well as compliance with other limitations, documentation which is supposed to be available on demand by an inspector.I believe you can STATE the max airspeed in your aircraft operating manual. There is no requirement to demonstrate it. So, the entire issue may be moot.
§103.3 Inspection requirements.
(a) Any person operating an ultralight vehicle under this part shall, upon request, allow the Administrator, or his designee, to inspect the vehicle to determine the applicability of this part.
(b) The pilot or operator of an ultralight vehicle must, upon request of the Administrator, furnish satisfactory evidence that the vehicle is subject only to the provisions of this part.
Here you have a good example of why training is so important even for an ultralight. Most of my clients could look at this and tell me what went wrong after their first hour of ground and all after their first takeoff.Video of original gyo. Crashed during takeoff. Don't what the engine is or the hp rating.
Many helicopters have a vertical tail fin of some sort, not just a tail rotor, and at a decent forward speed the airflow over that fin reduces the work that needs to be done by the tail rotor. In hover, of course, it can require lots of anti-torque pedal, but comparisons there aren't valid anyway because the gyro can't maintain a true hover as you observed. At speed, the tail rotor doesn't need to work as hard thanks to the fin, using less energy, and the relative efficiency of direct drive over fluid coupling for the main rotor wins the day.Indirectly, a helicopter might be more efficient; however, it needs to deal with the torque created by the rotor and that energy is wasted. So, depending on how stream line and how efficient the pusher prop are, a gyro might just be a little more efficient than a helicopter. And in most cases, the helicopter comes out ahead. Another handicap for gyro is it can't takeoff vertically and hover.
Yeah. The push prop torque is much more apparant in an ultralight, and even more so when the rotor is not loaded.In my opinion it has nothing to do with power or lack of it.
Gyroplanes don't kill pilots; pilots kill gyroplanes.
That engine only produce 28hp max. Might just be enough to power a fix wing UL. The new engine on that gyro is Thor 250 and it has 36hp. Guess 8hp makes a big difference. Then again, that's amost 29% more power.The engine in the video looks like simonini mini 2 ,I have seen this ( first) gyroplane in another video or picture.
A FW can fly with much less power. My JCD03 of 175 lbs and span 23 feets was powered by a 12 hp SOLO engine and a propeller 28 inchs rotating at 5800 rpm.That engine only produce 28 hp max. Might just be enough to power a fix wing UL.
If you can save 50lb, the extra expenses is worth it. You can use a less powerful engine and get the same performance.A single-piece graphite-fiber fuselage for a Bensen-style gyro could weigh considerably less than the typical bolted product. It might well come in at only 200 lb -- but at great expense compared to our cheap bolted frames.