.

yeah...I'm an instrument rated PPL fixed wing...and I've been head scratching on that for a while now. Don't really get it....except that most gyros I see on the market would be ill suited for it with their uncovered open cockpits and all...
still, for low VFR to light IFR type conditions having the capability to just file would be useful for sure.

Just curious...for scud running, how slow can these gyros comfortably cruise...on the low end?

You want to be on the right side of the HV curve, so if your engine quits, you stand a chance of a successful landing. Generally that is about 65 mph for low altitude. --Never mind that low altitude flying leaves you with no time to find a landing spot, and you have lots of hazards (power lines, tower guy wires, etc) that are hard to see in good visibility. Scud running is not recommended with low ceilings and great visibility. Hell no if you need to worry about slowing down to avoid hazards
 
Just curious...for scud running, how slow can these gyros comfortably cruise...on the low end?

I don't know about lowest comfortable cruise, but Vmin (Minimum level flight speed) = 25 kt according to Magni POH.
 
Unfortunately, there's no such thing. The FAA doesn't offer gyro instrument ratings or approve instrument flight in gyros with any other instrument rating.
I was thinking there might be a path with a LODA
 
I don't know about lowest comfortable cruise, but Vmin (Minimum level flight speed) = 25 kt according to Magni POH.

I'd say 50 knots. But that's just my opinion/experience with my M24. 'Comfortable speed' is anyway a fuzzy concept...
 
I was thinking there might be a path with a LODA
Never heard of one granted for that purpose. The instrument instruction needed for ratings can all be done under the hood and without filing IFR, so it's hard to justify.

I've got both helicopter instrument and airplane instrument ratings and it does me no good in a gyro.
 
I've got both helicopter instrument and airplane instrument ratings and it does me no good in a gyro.

If you wound up in unintended visual flight into IMC, and the gyro had the right equipment, it might do you good, even if it wouldn't allow you to legally file intentional IFR.

I think the FAA is still laboring under the misconception that a gyro cannot be made stable enough to be flown in IMC, perhaps because inadequate design practices continue. A gyro might not be the greatest candidate, but I think it's potentially just as IFR-capable as many aerobatic airplanes, and certainly as capable as a helicopter.
 
Blw2 - What is nice about the gyro if scud running, is you can fly very slow then if encounter a sail mast from a boat easily fly around it or if encounter something larger like protruding rock cliffs from the beach you can do a quick 180 to avoid them... Also can just land on the beach. Harder to do these things in a fixed wing plane. Just don’t want to get your nose wheel in the water. That would make for a bad day. Problem with scud running is very hard to see land marks normally visible for spotting wires such as poles and things. Once you run into wires they slow you down and down you go and then get shocked and have to go to hospital. Then It takes a year to rebuilt your gyro back into a new one after spending mega bucks. So I wouldn’t recommend it. I was very surprised to hear about the helo crash with Coby since I would have assumed they would have just landed if caught in fog. I heard it crashed flying very fast. Not sure why the pilot would do that in fog. Sad.
 
Last edited:
I can't help myself and have to speak out. For a private pilot, weather minimums in class G (generally within 1200 feet above the surface ) are 1 mile visibility and clear of clouds. And you can't fly within 500 feet of any person or structure if your staying legal. -So, you could go fly in 1 mile of visibility and 200 foot ceilings, skirting structures and people. This is dangerous (91.13). There are all sorts of things sticking up from the ground and with 1 mile of visibility, you will not see something and hit something. And slowing down is still not that slow. Generally a minimum of about 40mph to hold altitude, unless you are about 15 feet above the ground or lower. Further, if your flying at 40mph, and slow down more, your going to descend. And you can't go back up, unless you go faster. And if the engine quits, your landing right where you are, and you will hit very hard because you are on the wrong side of the HV curve. Lets not even talk about how easy it is to get lost. And if the FAA found out, you would probably get cited with 91.13 (Careless or reckless operation)

On the other hand, flying with a 1300 foot ceiling and 10+ miles of visibility at 1200 feet AGL can be relatively safe and does not require you to "slow down". You can cruise along at 65mph (max efficiency in a Magni), stay on the right side of the HV curve, legally fly over a house, and have a chance a picking your landing spot if the engine quits. Even at this altitude, you can still get lost, depending on the terrain. --If you've never done it, go up to 5000 or 6000 feet on a clear day and look how far you can see.

Anyway, both are considered skud running. The latter often happens in Class D with a special VFR clearance. The former should not ever happen. In a gyro, if you are so concerned with visibility that you need to slow down, you should not be flying in it.
 
so not really much slower then a cessna 150 in slow flight then....

i should have been more clear... i was not trying to insinuate that I thought scud running in any way was desirable....
my thought was more along the lines of theory....if slow enough to be done reasonably safe ....as in near hover to see and avoid

point of reference.... I've been reading some biographies lately..helicopter pilots in Vietnam who had little instrument training doing stuff in hard ifr conditions down in the trees....
 
Yes - Would not recommend scud running, but would rather be stuck in gyro than fixed wing anytime if caught in unavoidable bad weather.
 
What are you using for fuel flow? Does it work well?

I also wonder where is the main sensor placed. Unless the return flow detour is placed upstream of main sensor, the return fuel flow has to be accounted for (with another sensor).
The best solution is to use only one sensor, placing it downstream of the flow return detour, so that the sensor measures only the volume of fuel that will end up in the carbs/injectors, something that is often difficult...
 
What are you using for fuel flow? Does it work well?
Fuel Flow data is provided by engine management unit of 915 among other engine related data. Kanardia miniDAQU module broadcast the data received from Rotax ECU on Kanardia CAN-bus making all of it available for any Kanardia gauge connected to the bus. So, it can be shown on Kanardia DIGI panel, for example. Very flexible and extremely easy customizable set of instrument Kanardia makes.
 
Last edited:
That solution is not the best and will not work on M-24 fuel lines arrangement.
[/QUOTE]

It is the best, in general terms, because it's simpler and because the return line flow is often so small that the sensor doesn't record it.
It may be, however, difficult or impossible to use in the M-24. In a non-turbo, like the 912, it can be installed easily. I have one in my ELA...
 
What does turbo have to do with it? Did you mean fuel injected? Then 912iS version come with fuel injection too.

In a 914 turbo, the fuel lines are metal, not rubber/plastic. Installation of the sensor is not impossible, but more difficult.
 
Hi Inquiring Mind,
Very nice layout. I'm closely following this thread because I am in the process of re-building my AR1 that had crashed in Dec 2018. I'm installing the 915is. Interestingly, the above fuel line kit is the same one that I just bought too. You seem to have a really good handle on things. Will it be ok for me to ask you some questions, as and when they arise, to help me with my installation please. Thank you.
 
Nice setup on the 915. This pictures help, especial the Electronics International label. ;)
 
Top