When CLT is discussed on the forum it sometimes appears to be a new discovery, but it has been around a long time. When Dr Bensen built his gyro he retained the CLT, or at least close enough for it to be stable. It was only when ppl wanted larger engines and consequently larger props that the thrust line started to move significantly above the CofG.
Sadly a lot of ppl died as a result of this forgotten history.
I often think that we also lost other safety features.
BTW. This is not an attack on the great Mr Bensen just an observation.
Early Gyro's had substantial undercarriage that would absorb landing forces making it more tolerant to misjudged landings. We are only just starting to see aircraft fitted with G-Force landing gear, and I suspect we are all amazed at its performance. Gyro's of course were capable of this feat many years ago.
Likewise early gyro's had a substantial fuselage structure making any accidents more survivable.
All early Gyro's had a large horizontal stab to provide damping and stability.
Early gyro's were very heavy compared to what we see today making them more resistant to turbulance and gusts.
I havn't worked it out yet but I think it possible that by using the teeter rotor to reduce complexity, we may also be losing some of the stabalising forces of a an articulated head.
Almost all of the information we need to build a safe gyro is readily available, all we have to do is learn from history then apply modern materials and standards.
