LSA gyroplanes?

Doug Riley

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2004
Messages
6,390
The lingo could be clearer. The common-sense interpretation, though, is that the candidate must achieve controlled flight at minimum level flight speed, and then must show the ability to maneuver under control at behind-the-power-curve airspeeds.

Those familiar with gyros will recognize the underlying issue.
 

Philbennett

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
296
Location
London
The lingo could be clearer. The common-sense interpretation, though, is that the candidate must achieve controlled flight at minimum level flight speed, and then must show the ability to maneuver under control at behind-the-power-curve airspeeds.

Those familiar with gyros will recognize the underlying issue.
Well hang on Doug that maybe what is being done but if it is then it doesn't reflect the task as set by the FAA. I can hold height at an airspeed for minimum level but if I manoeuvre at an airspeed that is behind the power curve then I can not hold my height +/-100ft because if I'm behind the power curve then I must be sinking. It is neither a technique Bloggs has been taught for vertical descents - because those are with power at idle - and I can not climb behind the power curve either, but again why the reference to the +/-100ft if you are required to climb / descend?
 

Vance

Gyroplane CFI
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
16,220
Location
Nipomo,California
Aircraft
Givens Predator
Total Flight Time
2400+ in rotorcraft
Yeah perhaps, it is very poorly written and because of the wide range of interpretation that must follow one wonders what is being tested.

The section is titled "A. TASK: STRAIGHT-AND-LEVEL, TURNS, CLIMBS, AND DESCENTS AT SLOW AIRSPEEDS". The delta between minimum airspeed required to maintain level flight, descend and climb is huge, especially so depending upon the aircraft and configuration. Beyond which what is the utility of a slow airspeed climb and isn't the risk / reward of its execution for the novice pilot very bad?

What are people actually doing when they are briefed on this part of the test? I suspect you guys have actually done it.
Part of becoming an FAA certificated flight instructor is understanding the practical test standards so I can teach a client to meet the standards or conduct a proficiency check ride. When conducting a proficiency check ride I am not instructing.

I like the clarity of the practical test standards. Either the applicant meets the standards or he doesn’t without personality or personal predilection involved.

When briefing an applicant for the slow flight task we pick a slow flight speed that is above the minimum power required speed for the load and conditions.

The applicant picks an altitude that keeps us more than 600 feet above the ground throughout the maneuvers.

In The Predator the speed would probably be 30kts we would likely be at 1,300 feet mean sea level above my practice area (1,000 feet above the ground).

I would instruct the applicant to fly straight and level maintaining altitude to plus or minus 100 feet (1,200 feet msl to 1,400 msl), heading plus or minus 10 degrees (if I picked a heading of 090 degrees that would be between a heading of 080 and 100 degrees; it depends on the wind) and airspeed to plus or minus 5kts (25kts to 35kts).

I would instruct the applicant to turn to a heading of 180 degrees and climb to 1,500 feet.

I would instruct the applicant to turn to a heading of 090 degrees and descend to 1,300 feet. I would repeat as appropriate.

The examiners goal is to see if the applicant understands slow flight and can perform to standards. Allowances are made for conditions.

The FAA felt slow flight and recognition and recovery from low airspeed and high rate of descent would help to reduce accidents from flying well behind the power curve.
 

Vance

Gyroplane CFI
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
16,220
Location
Nipomo,California
Aircraft
Givens Predator
Total Flight Time
2400+ in rotorcraft
Never the less I'm going to call Bob Snyder out. I think it is highly unlikely that someone - even who already holds any licence - will be flying to the accuracy required in the practical test within 10hours of training.
Bob Snyder uses Gyropedia and I have heard good things about him although I have not flown with him. I speak with him several times a year.

My average for an add on Sport Pilot Gyroplane rating is seven hours of dual with ten hours of ground. My high is 15 hours of dual and my low is less than three hours of dual. Typically ground for an add on is around 140% of flight instruction. So far I have a 100 percent pass rate for the clients I have recommended for their proficiency check ride.

The amount of time for a primary student (no aviation certificates) varies so much there is no point in quoting an average. It depends on their willingness to study, their frequency of flights and their ability to learn. The minimums are 15 hours of dual and five hours of solo with a knowledge test and a pre-solo test.

The requirements are spelled out clearly in the Federal Aviation regulations.
 

Philbennett

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
296
Location
London
That is amazing Vance. What is interesting, especially if the Gyropedia is being used (and nothing to do with the Gyropedia per se just that it is based on the UK syllabus), is working from your average number is that is less than half the minimum requirement of a UK licence (so existing UK licence holder needs 15hrs dual minimum) and with the UK/US broad requirements being consistent it is quite efficient getting through the workload.
 

Vance

Gyroplane CFI
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
16,220
Location
Nipomo,California
Aircraft
Givens Predator
Total Flight Time
2400+ in rotorcraft
That is amazing Vance. What is interesting, especially if the Gyropedia is being used (and nothing to do with the Gyropedia per se just that it is based on the UK syllabus), is working from your average number is that is less than half the minimum requirement of a UK licence (so existing UK licence holder needs 15hrs dual minimum) and with the UK/US broad requirements being consistent it is quite efficient getting through the workload.
Some flight instructors in the USA feel 15 hours of dual is the minimum for an add on rating so don’t judge the USA flight instructors by what Bob and I do.

A typical fail rate is about 20% for the Sport Pilot proficiency check ride. I have been lucky so far.

Based on what Phil Harwood has told me Bob Snyder uses the Gyropedia website more than any other flight instructor in the USA.

I have not been successful with Gyropedia so far and have only been trying it out on primary students.

I don’t know if the requirements are consistent between the USA and the UK as I don’t know any of the requirements for an add on rating in the UK.

For a gyroplane add on rating we teach the applicant to fly to practical test standards, gyroplane aerodynamics, emergency procedures, preflight procedures and rotor management.

The assumption is they learned the rest to get their other certificate. I make an effort to see that they remember what they learned and often find I am teaching weather, navigation, flight planning or Air Space.

In my experience most pilots of other category and class aircraft with some exceptions pick up the gyroplane flying pretty quickly and can learn most of the knowledge from the Rotorcraft Flying Handbook and their pilot’s operating handbook.
 

Philbennett

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
296
Location
London
Here is the UK Syllabus - over here (which I think is the same as in the US?) the test a new pilot would take is the same as that for an existing pilot of a different class of aircraft. The short cut (as you suggest) is that they are much more air-minded and therefore their practical flying skills are more intuitive. Ground exam wise and existing pilot would just need to take the gyroplane technical element - the remainder of our ground exams consistent with other class of aircraft (i.e Air Law, Navigation, Met, Human factors).

One big difference seems the solo element and I have to be honest regardless of the UK CAA minimums of 15hours dual and 10 hours solo prior to gaining a licence I know very few guys that you can send solo with single digit hours. I picked up in a separate thread (it was the linked nose wheel one) that your aircraft was very benign in terms of yaw change with power. Of course in the UK we are stuck with the AutoGyro / Magni product and they are hugely influenced yaw wise with power changes and that causes a lot of issue. (In actual fact someone has evaluated a gyroplane via the Cooper-Harper handling scale and Bedford workload rating for ADS-33 rotary wing and it fails the lateral deviation requirements in the accel-decel manoeuvre)

Regardless if you just simply look at the volume of material to go through in our PPL(G) and for sure the gyropedia lessons are all based from that syllabus then it seems unlikely to me that anyone could realistically get all that work done in any meaningful way inside 10hours.
 

Attachments

Vance

Gyroplane CFI
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
16,220
Location
Nipomo,California
Aircraft
Givens Predator
Total Flight Time
2400+ in rotorcraft
Here is the UK Syllabus - over here (which I think is the same as in the US?) the test a new pilot would take is the same as that for an existing pilot of a different class of aircraft. The short cut (as you suggest) is that they are much more air-minded and therefore their practical flying skills are more intuitive. Ground exam wise and existing pilot would just need to take the gyroplane technical element - the remainder of our ground exams consistent with other class of aircraft (i.e Air Law, Navigation, Met, Human factors).

One big difference seems the solo element and I have to be honest regardless of the UK CAA minimums of 15hours dual and 10 hours solo prior to gaining a licence I know very few guys that you can send solo with single digit hours. I picked up in a separate thread (it was the linked nose wheel one) that your aircraft was very benign in terms of yaw change with power. Of course in the UK we are stuck with the AutoGyro / Magni product and they are hugely influenced yaw wise with power changes and that causes a lot of issue. (In actual fact someone has evaluated a gyroplane via the Cooper-Harper handling scale and Bedford workload rating for ADS-33 rotary wing and it fails the lateral deviation requirements in the accel-decel manoeuvre)

Regardless if you just simply look at the volume of material to go through in our PPL(G) and for sure the gyropedia lessons are all based from that syllabus then it seems unlikely to me that anyone could realistically get all that work done in any meaningful way inside 10hours.
It appears to me I am not communicating well.

The seven hours average is for an add on rating with no minimum hours and no solo.

More typical in the USA is twice that.

In the USA for an add on rating (for example they may already hold a private pilot single engine land certificate and just want to add Sport Pilot, gyroplane privileges) we only teach them how to fly to the practical test standards in the air. Emergencies, preflight and gyroplane aerodynamics are taught on the ground.

The proficiency check ride only tests them on these things.

They already know how to use the radio, national airspace system, airport procedures, navigation, flight planning, accident reporting, and lost procedures.

They understand weather and where to get weather information. The know where to find things in the Federal Aviation Regulations and the Aeronautical Information Manual.

They have had a flight review in the preceding 24 calendar months.

I can do everything in the practical test standards in two hours and likely only a few things will need to be brought up to standards.

Most people have something that takes a few hours of instruction to overcome and usually several somethings.

I have had people fly to practical test standards with nothing more than ground instruction.

Most of my clients took their proficiency check ride in a Magni M16, an MTO Sport or a Cavalon depending on what is available and I transition them into it.

The Predator (the gyroplane I train in) is too heavy for a Light Sport pilot to fly as pilot in command so they can’t take the check ride in it.

For a primary student (no other pilot certificate) the minimum is 15 hours of dual and five hours of solo with a knowledge test and a pre-solo test. I usually go over a little and with some instructors in the USA double is the norm.

There is more time required for Private Pilot, Rotorcraft- Gyroplane.

I just spent several hours preparing a friend and primary student for Private Pilot-Gyroplane. He has over a hundred hours of dual (1.5 from me) and probably 20 hours of solo getting more each day. I don’t know how much ground he has. I expect to spend a few more hours of ground with him before he takes his practical test with a designated pilot examiner.

I had close to 120 hours of flight experience (54 hours of dual) when I took my practical test for Private Pilot, Rotorcraft-Gyroplane and failed. With another hour of dual and two hours of ground I passed the next day.
 

Philbennett

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
296
Location
London
I guess my point of highlighting the UK syllabus and the relationship to the online system is this. Obviously when Bloggs arrives at your school and he is a current pilot in a different class of aircraft whilst he maybe capable of taking a practical test with reduced hours surely there is some element of validation of that competence? That seems only prudent if your own rating is at stake in the event of future piloting issue.

My assertion is that to properly validate that Bloggs can hold a height and a heading, change speed, direction, heights, decend vertically, execute an emergency landing, make accurate take offs and landings and plan and fly a navigation ex. probably takes more than 10hours even with zero snags?

On the basis that is the context of the online system Bob will be doing a lot of meaningless box ticking without actually doing the flying in significantly fewer hours.
 

Vance

Gyroplane CFI
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
16,220
Location
Nipomo,California
Aircraft
Givens Predator
Total Flight Time
2400+ in rotorcraft
I see no reason to doubt Bob Snyder’s average of ten hours for an add-on Sport Pilot Gyroplane rating. He seems a very straight forward flight instructor. I have been trying to learn how to be more efficient with Gyropedia from him.

I can fly and test everything in the practical test standards in two hours and likely only a few things will need to be brought up to practical test standards with a proficient pilot fixed wing or helicopter pilot.

I then sign a form so they can take a proficiency check ride with another certificated flight instructor. The proficiency check ride typically takes two hours of dual.

I do not think of any of it as meaningless box ticking and will not sign someone off for their check ride who cannot fly to practical test standards.

When I am an examiner for a proficiency check ride I don’t teach, I just verify the applicant can fly to practical test standards.

I have not seen Bob’s syllabus.

For for me a typical syllabus for mission one, one hour; fly to the practice area to practical test standards for heading, altitude and airspeed with emergency landing scenarios. When we arrive at the practice area; Turns around a point, S turns over a road, recognition and recovery from low airspeed and high rate of decent and on the way back to the airport slow flight with turns, climbs and descents with a normal approach and landing.

Typical syllabus Mission two, seven tenths; rectangular course, normal takeoff and landing, cross wind takeoff and landing, short field takeoff and landing, soft field takeoff and landing, lift off at low airspeed and high angle of attack, engine at idle accurate landing and a go-around. I like to throw in an engine failure on takeoff although it is not required.

I can usually make ten landings an hour at the Santa Maria Public Airport (SMX).

Typical syllabus for Mission three, three tenths; steep turns and lost procedures.

Lots of traffic may take a little longer.

Two hours of dual instruction, five hours of ground instruction and enough for the day.

Mission four the next day to be determined by perceived client weaknesses.

The very best pilots take just under three hours of dual for an add Sport Pilot, Gyroplane rating. They were all military trained test pilots or certificated flight instructors.

Average for me for a Sport Pilot, Gyroplane add on rating is seven hours of dual.

Most flight instructors I know in the USA double that.

The slowest for me was fifteen hours of dual and we spent a lot of time just flying around having fun.

I do keep alert for pilot knowledge. If they are active pilots they have had a flight review in the preceding twenty four months.

A primary student is a much longer more involved process involving two knowledge tests, solo and cross country planning. It also involves a proficiency check ride with a designated pilot examiner (DPE).

A Private Pilot, Rotorcraft-Gyroplane is also a longer, more involved process even for an add-on rating and requires solo time and a check ride with a DPE.

Most of my clients are coming from more than 150 miles away and are staying in a motel. They want to learn and head for home.

I typically send them home with video of their flights and my instruction so they can review it before their proficiency check ride.

The man in the back seat of The Predator is an Edward’s trained test pilot and flight surgeon with a specialty in human factors. He was well under seven hours of dual for his sign off.
 

Attachments

Philbennett

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
296
Location
London
I used Bob in my example merely because he was referenced in this thread.

I can fly and test everything in the practical test standards in two hours and likely only a few things will need to be brought up to practical test standards with a proficient pilot fixed wing or helicopter pilot.
Remarkable, especially given:-

I then sign a form so they can take a proficiency check ride with another certificated flight instructor. The proficiency check ride typically takes two hours of dual.
Yet you are doing it, although whilst I might be prepared to accept that your Edwards test pilot might cope with your first one hour trip of this:-

For for me a typical syllabus for mission one, one hour; fly to the practice area to practical test standards for heading, altitude and airspeed with emergency landing scenarios. When we arrive at the practice area; Turns around a point, S turns over a road, recognition and recovery from low airspeed and high rate of decent and on the way back to the airport slow flight with turns, climbs and descents with a normal approach and landing.
Your average pilot will be swamped. If yours aren't then that in and of itself is a factor worthy of investigation. I find it quite remarkable that during the transit to a practice area any existing pilot in a AutoGyro/Magni product can fly accurately enough to test standard "for heading, altitude and airspeed" then demo some emergency landing scenarios. Then on the way back nail slow flight.


I do not think of any of it as meaningless box ticking
Context. The comment refers to the relationship to an online system that not only will be certainly new to the student but has so many individual actions that a suggestion that all were properly observed and validated in (using your metric) 2 hours of flying would make it meaningless box ticking. If it isn't please educate Phil Harwood who can educate the CAA and a conversation can be had regards the validity of our existing pilots requirement for min 15 hours dual. The delta is so wide that one system must be inefficient / ineffective.

Average for me for a Sport Pilot, Gyroplane add on rating is seven hours of dual.

Most flight instructors I know in the USA double that.

The slowest for me was fifteen hours of dual and we spent a lot of time just flying around having fun.
Why do you think?

Typical syllabus Mission two, seven tenths; rectangular course, normal takeoff and landing, cross wind takeoff and landing, short field takeoff and landing, soft field takeoff and landing, lift off at low airspeed and high angle of attack, engine at idle accurate landing and a go-around. I like to throw in an engine failure on takeoff although it is not required.
Not that it is really the main point but student crashes and in the subsequent investigation it is claimed that all of that had been accomplished in a meaningful way with a new pilot in 42 minutes... I think it would be laughed at.

The briefing alone for such a flight for someone with no prior understanding of a gyroplane would be some fete.

Then the final eyebrow raise is that Bloggs does all of this in your Predator and then takes the check ride in a Magni / AutoGyro... ?

Most of my clients took their proficiency check ride in a Magni M16, an MTO Sport or a Cavalon depending on what is available and I transition them into it.
So whats the pipeline with this process? Bloggs does his initial training in the Predator, does check ride in an AutoGyro then you continue to do any additional transitional training as required? Which in itself is odd in so far that it is odd to do a check in anything other than the aircraft you've been trained in. Why not just fly the AutoGyro/Magni from hour 1?

If you might agree that part of any learning process includes an instructor demo and student forgetfulness and that part of that is helped by so element of repetition whilst any student inconsistency is highly likely there obviously comes a point where the shear volume of exercise requires a number of hours to make a credible evaluation / validation.

I'd suggest that even 10 hours dual is at the margin and certainly any UK instructors reading this could not fail to agree that even the very best of their existing pilot students do not really find much"idle" time with 15hours of dual instruction.
 
Last edited:

Vance

Gyroplane CFI
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
16,220
Location
Nipomo,California
Aircraft
Givens Predator
Total Flight Time
2400+ in rotorcraft
I used Bob in my example merely because he was referenced in this thread.



Remarkable, especially given:-



Yet you are doing it, although whilst I might be prepared to accept that your Edwards test pilot might cope with your first one hour trip of this:-



Your average pilot will be swamped. If yours aren't then that in and of itself is a factor worthy of investigation. I find it quite remarkable that during the transit to a practice area any existing pilot in a AutoGyro/Magni product can fly accurately enough to test standard "for heading, altitude and airspeed" then demo some emergency landing scenarios. Then on the way back nail slow flight.




Context. The comment refers to the relationship to an online system that not only will be certainly new to the student but has so many individual actions that a suggestion that all were properly observed and validated in (using your metric) 2 hours of flying would make it meaningless box ticking. If it isn't please educate Phil Harwood who can educate the CAA and a conversation can be had regards the validity of our existing pilots requirement for min 15 hours dual. The delta is so wide that one system must be inefficient / ineffective.



Why do you think?



Not that it is really the main point but student crashes and in the subsequent investigation it is claimed that all of that had been accomplished in a meaningful way with a new pilot in 42 minutes... I think it would be laughed at.

The briefing alone for such a flight for someone with no prior understanding of a gyroplane would be some fete.

Then the final eyebrow raise is that Bloggs does all of this in your Predator and then takes the check ride in a Magni / AutoGyro... ?



So whats the pipeline with this process? Bloggs does his initial training in the Predator, does check ride in an AutoGyro then you continue to do any additional transitional training as required? Which in itself is odd in so far that it is odd to do a check in anything other than the aircraft you've been trained in. Why not just fly the AutoGyro/Magni from hour 1?

If you might agree that part of any learning process includes an instructor demo and student forgetfulness and that part of that is helped by so element of repetition whilst any student inconsistency is highly likely there obviously comes a point where the shear volume of exercise requires a number of hours to make a credible evaluation / validation.

I'd suggest that even 10 hours dual is at the margin and certainly any UK instructors reading this could not fail to agree that even the very best of their existing pilot students do not really find much"idle" time with 15hours of dual instruction.
The point of my post 30 was to answer your question about how long does it take to find out what they can do as it relates to the practical test and to assure you that Bob Snyder was truthful in his estimate of transition time.

It appears to me you have taken my post 30 to mean I claim to transition people to gyroplanes is two hours and you feel I am not truthful. I can’t help you if you won’t make an effort to understand what I have written.

In two hours I can find out what people can and can’t do and create a syllabus to address their challenges. I have not signed off anyone in two hours and as I said at the beginning the average is seven hours of dual instruction for a sign off.

I have found most experienced fixed wing pilots can do the air work in a gyroplane with some homework, a good pre-mission briefing and a little coaching in flight.

If your clients can’t do that the fault is probably in your briefing.

The takeoffs and landings are what usually take the time for an experienced fixed wing pilot to learn to perform well.

The really good pilots can manage takeoffs and landings in a gyroplane with very little coaching. Interestingly they are also the ones who are the most patient with my briefings and do their homework.

I had one client who taught carrier landings that came up with his own syllabus and essentially flew the practical test like an airshow transitioning from one maneuver to the next seamlessly; describing his errors and corrections as he performed each maneuver. He easily flew to half the tolerance of the practical test standards and did it all in just over an hour.

The first day I described with five hours of ground and two hours of dual is typical. I train on the ground and demonstrate in the air. My initial briefing is two and a half to three and a half hours and my first post flight briefing is usually close to and hour.


You ask why do many flight instructors take longer to transition an experienced fixed wing pilot?

To date I have flown with 38 flight instructors. Most only address a task or two on each mission and there is a lot of flight time spent going to and from the practice area. This may be a more thorough way to teach; it certainly takes longer and it is not my way.

Many do not have a lesson plan or have a standard lesson plan for everyone.

The briefing for the lesson is often inadequate and doesn’t give the client an opportunity to ask questions about the specific tasks.

Some are unwilling to listen to or respond to the clients questions.

Some are just more cautious and want more time with the client.

I let the client fly deeper into the mistake than most flight instructors I know and I feel they learn more from their errors that way.

There is never a question about who is flying the aircraft. I found I couldn’t learn anything if someone was “helping” on the controls.


You ask why not start clients in the aircraft they will take the test in.

I train in The Predator because that is the gyroplane I own. She has a wide stance with good suspension front and rear and very little power-pitch-yaw coupling. She has a free castering nose wheel with differential braking for steering. I feel these are all useful for a gyroplane trainer.

The Predator is rugged, benign and capable of taking abuse that a Magni or Autogyro gyroplane may not. I have only aborted two training missions because she had a mechanical issue in almost 2,200 flight hours. She usually manages her 100 hours inspections with only scheduled maintenance.

If the client has a gyroplane available I may train them in that gyroplane.

I recently refused to train a client in The Predator because he had a gyroplane with a spindle head rather than an offset gimbal. I felt the Predator’s heavy control inputs would confuse him flying the Spindle Head so we flew in his gyroplane. I had to learn to fly his gyroplane before I could help him.


As for additional training after they have their certificate; if a Sport Pilot Gyroplane Pilot wants to fly to an airport with an operating control tower they need an endorsement (61.325). This typically takes a half hour of ground and a half hour of dual instruction.

All FAA pilots need a flight review in the preceding 24 calendar months to be legal to fly so I will typically see them in two years (61.56).

A few clients ask for training in advanced maneuvers outside the practical test standards.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Philbennett

Junior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
296
Location
London
Thats good colour - thank you.

I wasn't trying to be a wise guy, nor say that you you don't do what you are doing - the confusion over the 2 hours was the explanation of your sorties and then this:-

The very best pilots take just under three hours of dual for an add Sport Pilot, Gyroplane rating. They were all military trained test pilots or certificated flight instructors.
Which just surprised me as I explained.

I guess you are working to the FAA requirement and it seems that the Predator is a stable platform.

Any failings of my student could well be a manifestation of my own deficiency I would accept that, although as it relates to hours flown I'm unsure if that is of such great focus in the UK. The biggest element that focuses our minds is the student solo requirement and our limitation to either AutoGyro or Magni product. Of course solo flight is quite a change weight/balance wise.

It is surprising the FAA allow the candidate to go to any practical test in an aircraft they have not trained in. Aside from the fact that (just using your own example) none of these things are features of any Magni or Autogyro product!

She has a wide stance with good suspension front and rear and very little power-pitch-yaw coupling. She has a free castering nose wheel with differential braking for steering.
But basic cockpit layouts likely differ and operation / scan of basic instrumentation is clearly not ideal. Not to mention the engine difference.

As I suggested earlier you are doing it and guys are obtaining the rating (or however you term it) but I think given the points I raise here if I reflect upon the average (to mean the usual not un-exceptional talent) UK student who is current in aeroplane or helicopter there is no way you could operate as you do, even if it were possible by regulation.

Firstly they would be unlikely to consistently manage the solo element in such a short space of time and they would certainly struggle with the transition to AutoGyro/Magni product from a benign aircraft and given those factors alone were the student ever to have an issue [having either gone solo <10hours in any aircraft or trained in one aircraft and tested in a totally new aircraft without transition] the CAA would likely remove your instructor rating.

One thing that I think is going to be interesting over coming years with the (seemingly) trend toward the Magni/AutoGyro product and the wide range of models / engine configuration is if or how the FAA will react to what is (in my opinion) the inevitable accident rate.

When you read the NTSB reports it is easy to read the summary and miss some of the devil of the detail. I read the 882M Cavalon accident and had the AAIB report on that in the UK then differences training would have been a recommendation, and even if you look at the investigation docket the detail the pilot gives makes interesting reading. He highlights how he has only experience of 100hp in the Cavalon (so thats 912) and states (sadly a realisation too late) that pilots should be checked out by another....

316MG - questions around the interpretation of warnings
498AG - question around flight planning process

In the end all of these things are training and I'm not sure that it becomes sensible for the marketing to major on being able to jump in and get going in a handful of hours. I've no idea this guy Bob and like you he reports the facts of the matter and how students are gaining a rating in the few hours they are. Is that a good thing? My judgement would say no. Bob and I would also disagree that in practice a Cavalon with the stick disconnected will not be flown successfully for long using the trim system alone. Its all a question of judgement....
 

Vance

Gyroplane CFI
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
16,220
Location
Nipomo,California
Aircraft
Givens Predator
Total Flight Time
2400+ in rotorcraft
A small point.
498AG’s pilot was a Sport Pilot Gyroplane with no other ratings so he would have been a primary student and required to do two hours of cross country flight with an authorized instructor planning and a solo cross country of flight of at least 50 nautical miles. He would need a minimum of 15 hours of dual instruction in a gyroplane and five hours solo.

He would have been tested by a designated pilot examiner who is required to check his flight planning as a part of the check ride.

If you want to find out more read FAR 61.309 through 61.315 to understand the training and experience required for a primary student seeking Sport Pilot Gyroplane privileges. It is not the same as an add on rating that I have been writing about.
 
Top