Gyroplane Spinner System

[jsada]

Who in this forum could be interested in experimenting with a powered ground base to function as a "super" prerotor in order to achieve a vertical or short roll takeoff and become a very economical cuasi-helicopter? It, perhaps, become a less expensive air taxi than anything out there for short distances

 

[GyroChuck]

Lime this.

 

[GyrOZprey]

ELA seems to have developed something for a short-roll-jump TO!

Modified video for clarity!

 

[jsada]

For Jump Takeoff you need about 80% higher power. Say, instead of 100 hp, you now need 180 hp. This carries some penalties: Higher empty weight, higher fuel consumption, lower useful load, higher maintenance cost due to the more expensive engine and the rotor variable pitch mechanism. Another drawback is that you must get a rotorcraft license. You can't spin the rotor to very high rpms without a zero lift pitch mechanism because as lift is increased with the fixed pitch rotors, the gyro will start spinning just like a helicopter without a tail rotor

 

[GyroChuck]

For Jump Takeoff you need about 80% higher power. Say, instead of 100 hp, you now need 180 hp. This carries some penalties: Higher empty weight, higher fuel consumption, lower useful load, higher maintenance cost due to the more expensive engine and the rotor variable pitch

The gyro in post #2 has a Rotax 65hp engine. So I'm not sure about your 80% higher power.

 

[Abid]

Who in this forum could be interested in experimenting with a powered ground base to function as a "super" prerotor in order to achieve a vertical or short roll takeoff and become a very economical cuasi-helicopter? It, perhaps, become a less expensive air taxi than anything out there for short distances

Why don't I just design a simple helicopter and call it a day? Just wondering.
Wouldn't be too much more work than designing a modern gyroplane. Maybe 15% more. That's it.

 

[jsada]

Well, what I am sure of is that with enough headwind any gyroplane or fixed wing can takeoff with a negligible ground roll. I can share with you the engine power of the De la Cierva, Kellet, Avian, McCulloch J-2, Pitcairn, Air & Space, Cartercopter, Dick Degraw, ROSA, jump takeoff design data that I have collected and show how much power per seat they use.
I do not pretend that my proposal uses less power. It's just that it is delivered offboard and that does not need any FAA approval as assured to me by a FAA inspector who was part of the team that certified the V-22 Osprey. The head of the aeronautical engineering dept of Embry Riddle sent me to his expert and he said it would work and was a brilliant idea as it was very simple and very economical in concept. But then, I am a human and not always right. We can't be absolutely sure until we build a full scale launching base and try it

 

[Abid]

For Jump Takeoff you need about 80% higher power. Say, instead of 100 hp, you now need 180 hp. This carries some penalties: Higher empty weight, higher fuel consumption, lower useful load, higher maintenance cost due to the more expensive engine and the rotor variable pitch mechanism. Another drawback is that you must get a rotorcraft license. You can't spin the rotor to very high rpms without a zero lift pitch mechanism because as lift is increased with the fixed pitch rotors, the gyro will start spinning just like a helicopter without a tail rotor

Nah man. You just need a way to de-pitch the rotor blades so they don't provide resistance, you need a bit heavier duty transmission to power the pre-rotation and perhaps a way to de-pitch the prop during pre-rotation. That does not mean you need 80% more power. But by the time I am done doing all that, I have gotten rid of the (to me) most desirable thing about a gyroplane. It's simplicity and yet its ability to handle turbulence like a rotorcraft.

 

[jsada]

Why don't I just design a simple helicopter and call it a day? Just wondering.
Wouldn't be too much more work than designing a modern gyroplane. Maybe 15% more. That's it.

The idea is not to have to build any aircraft. We would use existing ones. Again, the only way to make it takeoff vertically today is to use any jump takeoff aircraft of the past or buy some Russians designs I have seen (hahaha), or fund Jaunt Air Mobility's ROSA gyrodine

 

[jsada]

Here is a power comparison of the main types of VTOL aircraft. A V-22 Osprey uses 340 shp per seat

 

[Abid]

Here is a power comparison of the main types of VTOL aircraft. A V-22 Osprey uses 340 shp per seat

What is the empty weight and max takeoff weight of the Osprey? Don't by the seat. Second it is a tilt rotor aircraft not a helicopter. There is a difference there.
A Robinson R22 2 seat helicopter uses a derated 131 HP engine

 

[Abid]

The idea is not to have to build any aircraft. We would use existing ones. Again, the only way to make it takeoff vertically today is to use any jump takeoff aircraft of the past or buy some Russians designs I have seen (hahaha), or fund Jaunt Air Mobility's ROSA gyrodine

All that Urban Air Mobility Pump and Dump eVTOL saga aside because that is all there to make money like Icon did, you don't have to buy an old gyroplane or buy any Russian design (Godforbid), if you want to get a JTO gyroplane, you are welcome to give me $$ and for the right price I will make you a design guaranteed to work. You then go market it. That headache will be yours.

 

[wolfy]

Why don't I just design a simple helicopter and call it a day? Just wondering.
Wouldn't be too much more work than designing a modern gyroplane. Maybe 15% more. That's it.

Only 15% more, you are dreaming

wolfy

 

[Abid]

Only 15% more, you are dreaming

wolfy

Not really. Not for a simple helicopter from an engineering point of view.
There is not much new under the sun. Many things are figured out. You apply the concepts that are well understood.
Its actually gyroplanes where there are still people running voodoo engineering even though there is no such need but they do anyway. When you are new in gyroplane world you fall for the one eyed guy leading the blind routine but then you realize later what a crack of junk you were fed.

 

[jsada]

What is the empty weight and max takeoff weight of the Osprey? Don't by the seat. Second it is a tilt rotor aircraft not a helicopter. There is a difference there.
A Robinson R22 2 seat helicopter uses a derated 131 HP engine

My apologies. You are right. I looked it up in a different place and got 180 hp. anyway, a gyroplane does not cost but a fraction of the price and a smaller fraction of the maintenance as compared to a helicopter

 

[jsada]

Not really. Not for a simple helicopter from an engineering point of view.
There is not much new under the sun. Many things are figured out. You apply the concepts that are well understood.
Its actually gyroplanes where there are still people running voodoo engineering even though there is no such need but they do anyway. When you are new in gyroplane world you fall for the one eyed guy leading the blind routine but then you realize later what a crack of junk you were fed.

Can I write to you Abid and show you some stuff? My e-mail is [email protected] at work and [email protected] personal

 

[Aaron R]

FAA inspector who was part of the team that certified the V-22 Osprey

The FAA certified a military aircraft?

 

[jsada]

The FAA certified a military aircraft?

I was also surprised at this
If you ask Mr Google, he will point you to articles that say that it has been FAA approved for the military aircraft to carry civilians aboard. It is not certified for commercial civil service

 

[WY-Benjamin]

Would I be wrong if I called this a ground supporting pre - rotor. The idea being that it could weigh a ton . no matter , you would be detached and not taking it with you. It would put no torque on the air frame . When I was flying my Air-Command at an elevation of 4000 feet. I could land in my driveway, but the distance for takeoff was twice what my sister needed for her Cessna 172. I have learned of some tricks to greatly reduce this and am excited to try them once I get the new gyro-plane home and air worthy. I like how simple the gyroplane is, and a complicated rotor head with pitch control seems like extra weight, and more parts to cause problems.I have never had much desire to own a helicopter because ot this. A small vertical dive shaft from the pre-rotor bendix to the pre-rotor platform seems like a very simple idea. The question I have ask myself is how much torque can you put on the rotor head without compromise to its integrity . Moments of fear when I was flying came from knowing my life was hanging from three soft bolts each a single pivot point in which if any one of the failed my rotor would detach. I have always felt that a gyro launch platform was possible and would make gyro copters much more appealing. I have thought about this for many years, and might pursue this for my own self interest.

 

[jsada]

You are not wrong at all to call it a ground support pre-rotor. That's exactly the idea. The limit is not the stress on the rotor blades rpms. A Magni M-16 is limited to 500 rpms. You cruise at around 260-270 rpms. There are some limitations if you apply more power : 1.- Higher stress on the crown gear and supports. They must be strengthened 2.- The present flex shaft will shred to pieces with the way much higher torque, You will have to use a solid (hollow) tube shaft that is strong enough 3.- If you get close to the flying rotor rpms it will start becoming very light (if you put a weighing scale below it) and will start spinning because the tires lose friction power with reduced weight (think you were above an ice sheet on a frozen lake). You must restrict it from spinning. Lateral tire chucks will do. Using the Magni M-16 as an example, if you spin the rotor, to say, 270 rpms, it will start lifting off the ground and jump, say, only, a few inches. Better have disconnected before that. You must hold it down from a strong anchor point. If you send me your e-mail I will send you some stuff