Fusioncopter Nano Ultralight Gyroplane USA Distributor

An accident report from September - original in Polish then a "Google Translate"

Pilot ultralekkiego wiatrakowca podczas lotu na wysokości około 100 m nad powierzchnią ziemi zauważył wyłączenie się silnika wiatrakowca. Pilot podjął próbę uruchomienia silnika w locie, lecz zakończyła się ona niepowodzeniem. Wówczas pilot podjął decyzję o lądowaniu awaryjnym na pobliskim lądowisku w Karczewie. Podczas wykonywania lądowania, po przyziemieniu,wiatrakowiec przewrócił się na prawą stronę. Uszkodzeniu uległ wirnik, śmigło, przezierna owiewka oraz usterzenie wiatrakowca. W trakcie zdarzenia pilot nie doznał obrażeńi opuścił wiatrakowiec o własnych siłach.



The event was as follows: The pilot of the ultralight gyroplane during the flight at an altitude of about 100 m above the ground noticed the gyroplane engine shutdown. The pilot attempted to start the engine in flight, but it failed. Then the pilot decided to make an emergency landing at the nearby landing strip in Karczew. During the landing, after the touchdown, the gyrocopter turned over to the right side. The rotor, the propeller, the transparent fairing and the tail of the gyroplane were damaged. During the incident, the pilot was not injured and left the gyroplane on his own.
 
Sorry to hear that, glad to hear he got away without too much personal damage, though it sounds a bit expensive for the gyro.
 
I know it sounds like a Nano but no definite identification that it was?
 
Yes it was a Nano
 
. . . altitude of about 100 m above the ground noticed the gyroplane engine shutdown. The pilot attempted to start the engine in flight, but it failed. Then the pilot decided to make an emergency landing at the nearby landing strip in Karczew.
It might be just the way the story is reported, but from only about 300 feet, I'd be headed toward a good landing spot FIRST, and only THEN might attempt a restart (the opposite order from this description). At engine-out sink rates on a gyro, 100m doesn't give you much time (or much glide distance). You're essentially already on final for someplace, intended or not!
 
Last edited:
A restart on the Nano is a simple push of a button.... but I agree.... once a 2 stroke stops.... it’s usually not worth a restart attempt.
 
Practise engine outs pretty much every flight.

Usualy a worst case scenario of low and going with the wind. I want to know how low a 180 into wind is possible.

Between 2 and 300ft you have to get the nose down immediately to preserve at least 50-55Kts and you will be on the ground in seconds. Its make the best of what you're over.

Only when you get higher can you start thinking about a call, trying a start, or getting fancy about choosing a spot.
 
Barry, I'm 6'2", down from 6'4" of my youth, and will wear a helmet. Will I fit in the Nano? The photo below, of you I assume, looks like there is a good bit of headroom for a helmet. How tall are you and could you give me the distance between the seat and top of canopy without seat cushions?

Thank you,
John

bd0b7156-c78c-41a5-baf1-8a2cbb8502b0-jpeg.1149243
 
I’m 6’1” and I do wear a helmet. I’ve got room to go with about another 2’’ to spare. There are attached cushions but they are about 1/4” thick and not removable. Seat distance to canopy is not the issue.....getting yourself bent around to get your head into the machine due to the canopy sides would be!
It’s taken some practice to get in and out without looking like an idiot! 😂🤣
 
I’m 6’1” and I do wear a helmet. I’ve got room to go with about another 2’’ to spare.

Thanks!, that's great news and something that can't be said about any overhead canopy tandem. Fingers crossed the Magni M26 will, but it appears to be another overhead hinged canopy type so I'm not holding my breath. Magni's conservative natural may push them to allow for tall helmeted pilots.

Any hint of adding doors? Seems at least with the 36 hp motor it would still fall under 254 lbs and maybe that big tail could still hold it straight.
 
No way doors would fit a normal human and it would definitely not qualify for UL category.
 
Barry: Haven't seen this covered b/4 in this thread. How high of rrpm is achieved w/ the hydraulic prerotater prior to beginning the take off roll?
 
Barry or Charles: Have any of you weighed the complete rotorblade assembly to compare to other rotorblade brands available?

I see on the Gyro103 website that the rotors are extruded aluminum, and are about 7" (175mm) chord compared to many other rotorblades that are about 8" (200mm) chord.

Also, under the FAQ section, they state that upon reaching 500 hrs., the rotorblades must be replaced, but that Nano provides the new replacements for FREE, except for shipping charges.

Wondering if the timed-out RB must first be returned in order to receive the new ones, & if the original pair are then examined/tested for how well they held up during those 500 hrs.?

Also under the FAQ section is the statement that Nano warrantees the airframe for two yrs., & the engine for one yr. Impressive...
 
Barry: Haven't seen this covered b/4 in this thread. How high of rrpm is achieved w/ the hydraulic prerotater prior to beginning the take off roll?
Hey Kevin.....I’ve hit 200 rpm with the rotor without pushing it......no need for anything mate than that.
 
Charles: As a follow up to your Nano, how did the promised delivery time compare to actual?
Delivery was about a month off....mostly due to shipping it by DHL which is notoriously unreliable.
 
Barry or Charles: Have any of you weighed the complete rotorblade assembly to compare to other rotorblade brands available?

I see on the Gyro103 website that the rotors are extruded aluminum, and are about 7" (175mm) chord compared to many other rotorblades that are about 8" (200mm) chord.

Also, under the FAQ section, they state that upon reaching 500 hrs., the rotorblades must be replaced, but that Nano provides the new replacements for FREE, except for shipping charges.

Wondering if the timed-out RB must first be returned in order to receive the new ones, & if the original pair are then examined/tested for how well they held up during those 500 hrs.?

Also under the FAQ section is the statement that Nano warrantees the airframe for two yrs., & the engine for one yr. Impressive...
Too busy having fun to weight the rotors.....the rotors are really smooth with no stick shake and light controls.....very very impressed with the machine. It performs well with the Polini engine but the 50 hp would be really nice......I have more confidence in the Polini as it is widely used in aviation.
 
Probably going to bring it to Bensen Days in April.
 
I have more confidence in the Polini as it is widely used in aviation.
Yes, I've heard good things about the 35 hp Polini Thor 250 and it's been around a while. I've seen comments on its smoothness. https://www.beliteaircraft.com/polini-thor-250-engine-review-the-best-ultralight-engine-weve-seen/

The 50hp air cooled Minari Stratos 400 is a brand new design and their first 2 cylinder model. Polini has an increased hp Thor called the Thor 303 that has 38hp with 288cc over 244 for the Thor 250. Given it's an iteration of the 250 I'd be more confident using that for a bit more hp over the Minari. Would the 3 more hp of the Thor 303 be impactful? Any chatter from Fusioncopter about the Thor 303?

I've seen a few videos of Nano take offs and it seems pretty eager to lift off with the Polini. Where would the 50 hp be most useful?... climb rate and cruise speed or muscling out of unintended situations? Also, does the Nano have trim controls?
 
Yeah....the polini powered nano still lifts off quick......only thing the 50 hp would do better is climb and cruise speed. Polini Nano is a lot like the standard gyrobee.......does everything well at 45-50 mph.......although I have hit over 60 with the Nano!! It's definitely a well built...well thought out...fun little ultralight.
 
Top