anthom
Member
Having survived two major gyroplane accidents, I believe that there may be some benefits in using a folding mast setup that may help mitigate some of the airframe damage and injury to the pilot/s. I'm particularly referring to the new Euro-style gyroplanes that have a welded frame. Of course, luck and God may have played a significant role. I don't know, other than having faith in the Almighty.
The first accident was in my AR1 on Dec 15, 2018. The machine was damaged substantially, but I got away with hardly any injury. The aircraft had rolled to the right side after a hard landing. This accident was discussed extensively in another thread.
Danny suffered a similar fate three months later in his AR1 and sustained very similar damage and injury after the aircraft rolled over on its right side after ground contact.
Both AR1s have since been repaired/rebuilt, and currently fly great. (So a good bang on the ground may actually be a good thing? Just kidding.)
A week ago, Danny and I crashed in an RAF2000 during a test flight. We both sustained minor injuries, whereas the aircraft sustained substantial damage. Interestingly, again, the aircraft rolled onto its right side after impacting the ground with forward speed.
In all three accidents I see a common theme:
1. The machines roll to the right immediately after impact.
2. The masts get bent at the foldable joint. In the RAF, it broke at that joint. The energy of the rotors is quickly dissipated to the ground.
3. Pilots survived in all three accidents.
Of course, the injuries could have been a lot worse if the rotor blades would have struck the occupants.
It has been my observation that most of the gyros that have fixed or non-folding masts suffer worse airframe damage with the rotors turning when ground impact is made. They seem to roll over multiple times. They also seem to have much more serious injuries to the occupants, and many include fatalities. This could possibly be due to the fact that the energy of the rotors transfers to the whole airframe. I don't really know, nor have I done any research on this.
My question is this:
Is it more beneficial to have folding masts rather than non-folding ones?
It would be interesting to know if there is a pattern regarding survivability of machine and occupants based on mast design.
P.S. Crashing is never good. Crashing is not fun, and I'm running out of lives!
The first accident was in my AR1 on Dec 15, 2018. The machine was damaged substantially, but I got away with hardly any injury. The aircraft had rolled to the right side after a hard landing. This accident was discussed extensively in another thread.
Danny suffered a similar fate three months later in his AR1 and sustained very similar damage and injury after the aircraft rolled over on its right side after ground contact.
Both AR1s have since been repaired/rebuilt, and currently fly great. (So a good bang on the ground may actually be a good thing? Just kidding.)
A week ago, Danny and I crashed in an RAF2000 during a test flight. We both sustained minor injuries, whereas the aircraft sustained substantial damage. Interestingly, again, the aircraft rolled onto its right side after impacting the ground with forward speed.
In all three accidents I see a common theme:
1. The machines roll to the right immediately after impact.
2. The masts get bent at the foldable joint. In the RAF, it broke at that joint. The energy of the rotors is quickly dissipated to the ground.
3. Pilots survived in all three accidents.
Of course, the injuries could have been a lot worse if the rotor blades would have struck the occupants.
It has been my observation that most of the gyros that have fixed or non-folding masts suffer worse airframe damage with the rotors turning when ground impact is made. They seem to roll over multiple times. They also seem to have much more serious injuries to the occupants, and many include fatalities. This could possibly be due to the fact that the energy of the rotors transfers to the whole airframe. I don't really know, nor have I done any research on this.
My question is this:
Is it more beneficial to have folding masts rather than non-folding ones?
It would be interesting to know if there is a pattern regarding survivability of machine and occupants based on mast design.
P.S. Crashing is never good. Crashing is not fun, and I'm running out of lives!
Last edited: