Lets get your Concept gyros in the open

John Stahl

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
826
Location
Missoula Montana
Aircraft
none
Total Flight Time
1
There are a lot of concept gyros out there lets get them in the open.
These are concepts not the finished product so lets not be nit picky

I thought that a gyro built from plans should have options like number of seats and tractor or pusher different landing gear configurations. This would allow the builder the opportunity to build a gyro to the builders liking.

This is what I came up with, I call it the A frame
The pusher has a cage around the prop. Like the paraglider’s have around there props. I joined the forum after shortly after a forum member was killed by a prop strike. That had a real impact on me. It shouldn’t happen to any one. Even if they have a brain fart.
 

Attachments

  • A frame tractor.JPG
    A frame tractor.JPG
    31.3 KB · Views: 0
  • A frame Gyro pusher.JPG
    A frame Gyro pusher.JPG
    33.9 KB · Views: 0
  • A frame Gyro 2.JPG
    A frame Gyro 2.JPG
    44.7 KB · Views: 0
Humm.. it would be neat to have a "standardised" gyro airframe. You could start with a single place and as time goes on add second seat, pod, go tractor....
 
I thought that a gyro built from plans should have options like number of seats and tractor or pusher different landing gear configurations. This would allow the builder the opportunity to build a gyro to the builders liking.

John.

I agree with you that a plans build Gyro should have options for the builder to build it as he or she likes. It is true that not all of us like the same kind of gyro.

We have designed a CLT Gyro that can be built with 2 or 3 seats, even 1 seat if you don?t mind building a bigger gyro for just 1 person. It has 3 options for the landing gear, 3 options for tail (normal tail, tall tail and twin boom) and 2 options for the mast.
We are currently testing the normal tail, triangulated gear and single mast version. More details when Giorgos will finish the test flying program.

Nicolas.
________
vaporizers
 
Last edited:
Screw-In

No need for a drop keel on a tractor.

Screw-Out
 
I wouldn't want to be in the back seat of those gyros! The rotor would be swinging by darn close to the top of my head during pre rotation
 
Screw

Yes tractors don’t need a drop keel. What I am depicting here is an inverted vertical stabilizer.

Ron
I asked you guys not to be to picky. You are right the mast isn’t high enough as depicted but I ran out of room.

Paul
Yes in the tractor configuration you would solo in the back seat.
The beauty of the air frame is if you don’t like that idea you can build a pusher instead and then solo in the front seat.
 
When I was considering building a two-place Little Wing and thinking about the solo-from-the-back-seat problem, I figured it might not be too hard to have a small removable weight that you could attach at the rear of the fuselage so you could fly solo from the front.

It may or may not be practicle depending on how much weight it would take to balance it out.
 
I like to use say a 39" bench seat for a side x side and fly it from the center using the outside foot controls . keeps the cg in the same place for all flying .
 
Nicolas
I would like to see some rough sketches of your gyro and its variations

the gyro is already built and is been tested without the composite frame for now.

i will post later some 3D sketches I did during the Designing period. Actual pictures will be posted when we finish test flying each option.

Nicolas
________
herbal vaporizers
 
Last edited:
Nicolas
I would like to see some rough sketches of your gyro and its variations

Sorry for delaying posting some rough sketches of the gyro we are testing. ;)

I made these long time ego in order to decide what lines to follow for our new Design.

The finished Gyro looks much nicer, with or without pot. Details and pictures... later!!
________
easy vape vaporizer
 

Attachments

  • Gyro2cnew2.jpg
    Gyro2cnew2.jpg
    23.2 KB · Views: 0
  • Gyro2cnew3.jpg
    Gyro2cnew3.jpg
    21.9 KB · Views: 0
  • Gyro2cnew4.jpg
    Gyro2cnew4.jpg
    22 KB · Views: 0
  • Gyro2cnew.jpg
    Gyro2cnew.jpg
    21.7 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
BRAG concepts

BRAG concepts

I have two more designs that I have played with.
I have been intrigued with the BRAG (bi rotor auto gyro) concept.
I took the afford a plane frame and converted it to a BRAG.
I call it the Afford too BRAG, and the two seater is called the Afford two BRAG
 

Attachments

  • Afford to Brag.JPG
    Afford to Brag.JPG
    47.9 KB · Views: 0
  • Afford two Brag.JPG
    Afford two Brag.JPG
    25.7 KB · Views: 0
The Razorback

The Razorback

Hi,
As far as I can tell, there are no compelling reasons to design a new pusher gyro, other than nostalgia or the feeling of familiarity they provide. For my money, it is tractors all the way. Every time I have tried to design a pusher, I have run into the issues of obtaining CLT without resorting to the "daddy-long-legs" approach adopted by the Dominator, a look I find personally unappetising.

I can also see no valid reason to design yet another RAF look-alike, with its cruciform tubular airframe (with or without dropped keel), chopped off pod, exposed engine, and tail feathers tight up against the prop. There are already a host of machines available with variations on this basic configuration. Why add another?

For me, the entire concept had to be re-thought. My design guidelines needed to include as must-have's:
  1. Tractor configuration
  2. Large tail moment arm
  3. Hidden mast pylons
  4. Enclosed and aerodynamic fuselage

In the "Nice to have" department were:
  1. JTO (or VSTO)
  2. Collective pitch control
  3. Residual Rotor Power
  4. Wings

In order to get the rotor head in the correct position relative to the aircraft CG, all tractor designs to date have opted for rotor pylons either fixed to the cabin roof (eg: Littlewing) or an arrangement which obscure the view of the pilot (eg:Michael Guard's tractor design, the Russian tractor featured on this forum some time back, the Raven Redrive tractor et al). I decided that this was inelegant and unnecessary, so designed a cantilevered beam reaching from behind the pilot to place the rotor head in the correct position. My initial fears were that this would place too great a strain on the beam - but is has been designed to withstand over 10G's, yet weighs very little indeed.

The next major concern was providing sufficient tail and HS authority. Try as I might, I found it impossible to provide this sort of authority by using the traditional tail surfaces fixed from below. My best attempts were marginal at best, and I did not want to resort to the main tail + side winglets solution. I think it looks yuk. It all has to do with that pesky rotor blade swinging so close... So I opted to use a "rafter" fixed to the rotor head angling down, and invert the tail feathers. This provides a guaranteed rotor clearance, and also provides more than sufficient tail authority. Sufficient clearance between rotor blades and tail can be achieved two ways: Use elevators on the tail for pitch control, and save 9 degrees of rotor incidence by fixing the rotor head in the fore/aft plane (eg: early Littlewings). In this configuration, there only needs to be 19 degrees of clearance between the blades and the tail. Or, use the more usual fully articulated rotor head design, and raise the mast to provide 28 degrees of clearance.

Finally, the enclosed fuselage. If you want to sit on a broomstick out in the open air and fly low and slow, I have absolutely no problems with this. None at all. But if you want to fly fast, and in a degree of comfort, this aspect of gyro design needs a radical overhaul. My reading of this forum over the years has highlighted a number of current concerns in this gyro community, and near the top of the current wish-list for most pilots is the desire to fly faster. Almost every discussion about engines, props or blades has as a major theme our desire to fly faster. So - design a gyro with as clean an aerodynamic fuselage as fixed wing aircraft.

In order to do this, consideration needs to be paid to construction techniques. A good enclosed fuse has to include fairing in the engine, either pusher or tractor, and this can certainly be accomplished using the traditional aluminum tubing airframe. But it is so much more elegant (in my opinion) to build the airframe out of composite materials. The lines can be more subtle, the angles more gradual. I am building a completely composite (CF/Kevlar) fuselage not only for aesthetic appeal, but also because it is hugely strong for its weight.

The remaining "Nice to have" list is optional, of course. I'll be introducing each of them after the gyro is built and flying. No rush.

That about sets the scene for the Razorback. Check out the drawing below. I've been stalled by local companies taking extended Christmas breaks of late, but everything is back on track to begin construction this month, so actual photos soon.

Regards,
Duncan
 

Attachments

  • Razorback 7 Feb.JPG
    Razorback 7 Feb.JPG
    33.4 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Top