Most roomy Gyro or 4 seater ?

[ryanonthebeach]

I've been fascinated with gyros for a long time especially attracted to the STOL and the obvious benefits that brings but... I've not been able to find a gyro that's more than a 2 seater .. except the XEONON XL 3 seater but that has very limited storage space with 3 ppl, looks like a squeeze. I'm assuming there are no kit 4 seater gyros available to the US market or anywhere... I certainly can't find them. Very concerned I may have to settle for fixed wing kit like the Van's RV10. Need to haul 2 people 2 dogs and some small bags.

What gyrocopter has the most internal space available today?

Any technical reason why 4 seaters are so scarce? Understand the blade speed sound barrier limitation etc. but why zero offerings in the 4 seater range?

 

[WaspAir]

There is no technical constraint (check out the Groen Hawk 4, for example, or even the Fairey Rotordyne) but there's been no market for it.

 

[Carbongyro]

The Hawk4 was a large turbine powered model you'll find on youtube. I always liked the look of this, but the price was astronomical. Not sure if they are still in production

 

[Abid]

Not a technical restraint. Mostly a lack of market which for now is recreational.

 

[Murray Barker]

DiNelly makes one that will hold 2 pax,2 dogs 6 suitcases and your lunch.

First flight soon....

 

[ventana7]

Yeah Murray-- any day now.

Rob

 

[cluttonfred]

Autogyro Gmbh in Germany is rumored to have a four-seater in the works. Aviation Artur Trendak in Poland already has a three-seater flying (pilot in center forward with passengers seats staggered behind left and right behind).

 

[Arnie Madsen]

DiNelly makes one that will hold 2 pax,2 dogs 6 suitcases and your lunch.

First flight soon....

...HAAAAA.... and dont forget the 36 gallons of fuel .... I miss DiNelly ... the latest excuse is the secretary absconded with the investment money and that has "slowed" things down a bit.

 

[ryanonthebeach]

I did look at the Hawk4 ... but yes the price seems out of proportion.
Murray I detect a bit of sarcasm with DiNelly ...

Thanks for your responses, I guess I'll have to be patient and reach out to
Aviation Artur Trendak & Autogyro Gmbh... see how they are progressing.
Aviation Artur Trendak, looks like the same company as the Xenon, Celier Aviation..

 

[Steve_UK]

"Aviation Artur Trendak, looks like the same company as the Xenon, Celier Aviation.. "

They are two seperate companies but once were one.

A "brief" history on my Xenon/Zen1/Tercel Blog - search this Forum for a lot of dialogue on this subject.

http://xenongyroblog.blogspot.co.uk/

 

[Doug Riley]

Ryan: Be certain that your "mission" requires an autogyro, and not a helicopter or STOL airplane. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. The tradeoffs can be stark.

For cross-country work with family, dogs and such, keep in mind that your gyroplane almost certainly will be Experimental (yes, capital "E"). This means, frankly, that its safety and reliability have not been as well-explored as that of a certified aircraft (whether helo, gyro or FW plane). Personally, I would not use ANY Experimental aircraft as a flying version of the family minivan; no way.

Most Experimental gyros are more flying Harley than flying Dodge Caravan.

Second, the gyro has some unique qualities, but these have to do with maneuverability and engine-out safety, not speed, payload or (certainly) fuel economy. Among the FW plane, helo and gyro, the gyro has the worst fuel economy (and, related to that, the poorest payload-to-horsepower ratio) of the three. All that maneuverability comes at a price.

STOL performance? You must look closely here. The length of a gyro's takeoff roll is a function mostly of how much rotor RPM it can build up before it starts rolling. The certified McCulloch J-2 and A&S 18A both prespin to over 100%. Many of the Experimental gyros have minimal pre-spin units; it's not unusual to see them spin to 30% of flight RPM or less, and then use up 1000 feet of runway building up the rest.

I suggest you attend the upcoming Bensen Days flyin in Florida to see what today's gyros scan (and cannot) do.

 

[RotoPlane]

The two bladed gimbaled rotorhead used in our gyros is about maxed out with a two-place gross weight.

This is my favorite four place gyroplane:

 

[CGameProgrammer]

I'm pretty sure helicopters have far worse fuel efficiency than gyroplanes. Also, while in the U.S. all gyroplanes are Experimental, an Auto-Gyro was certified in the UK with few modifications needed, and there are many kit-built airplanes (and some helicopters) being flown.

 

[Vance]

The two bladed gimbaled rotorhead used in our gyros is about maxed out with a two-place gross weight.

In my opinion a two blade teeter rotor can easily manage 2,400 pounds making a four person gyroplane practical.

I don’t know why someone would want to limit a gyroplane to a two blade teeter rotor so I feel gross weight is not a gyroplane limitation.

Just because it can be done doesn’t mean it must be done.

I suspect someone will do it.

 

[C. Beaty]

For all rotorcraft, the rotor is the power hog. It is not efficient to have your wings going 400 mph while the rest of the machine goes 60 mph.

A helicopter rotor, driven by a mechanical transmission, receives 90%+ of the power applied by the engine.

A gyroplane rotor, driven pneumatically, has a power efficiency that is the product of propeller efficiency and rotor windmill efficiency; typically in the range of 50%.

Of all forms of aerial navigation, the gyroplane is the least efficient. A gyroplane’s forte is low and slow where stall proof and spin proof are valuable safety features.

 

[pancho]

It is definitely doable. BUT in most cases not worth it. The Bell 206 Jet Ranger has a 420 shaft HP turbine engine, a rotor diameter of about 33 ft and a chord of around a foot. Unless we can find a more efficient powerplant it would cost way more than that jet ranger to operate. It would likely also need a substantially different rotor system. Gyros need longer rotors than do helicopters. The Jet Ranger incidentally, has the same basic rotor system that most of us use.

 

[RotoPlane]

In my opinion a two blade teeter rotor can easily manage 2,400 pounds making a four person gyroplane practical.

I don’t know why someone would want to limit a gyroplane to a two blade teeter rotor so I feel gross weight is not a gyroplane limitation.

Just because it can be done doesn’t mean it must be done.

I suspect someone will do it.

A two-bladed semi-rigid rotor similar to a Bell Jet Ranger would not have a problem with more far more than a 2400 lb gross weight.
I would not want, however, to control a that same weight with a large gimbaled headed rotor and blades.....maybe if it had hydraulic assisted cyclic control.....um, nah.

 

[pancho]

The Jeg Ranger does have hydraulic assist. And it is said to be a pain to fly without it. I am just a lowley mechanic so my experience with it consists of a few minutes of stick time.i cannot firsthand report on it outside of that.

 

[Vance]

A two-bladed semi-rigid rotor similar to a Bell Jet Ranger would not have a problem with more far more than a 2400 lb gross weight.
I would not want, however, to control a that same weight with a large gimbaled headed rotor and blades.....maybe if it had hydraulic assisted cyclic control.....um, nah.

I am missing your point Ed.

As I recall the Jet Ranger has a maximum takeoff weight of 3,200 pounds and the rotor is operated by a swash plate.

I feel it would be easy to build a four passenger gyroplane with a maximum take off weight of 1,800 pounds.

The Predator has fairly light controls at 1,400 pounds with a two blade semi rigid teeter rotor. Even near two gs the controls are manageable.

 

[okikuma]

Hi Ed,

What model of 4 seat gyroplane is that? The rotor head resembles an early Hughes 500 rotor head & blades. The blades definitely look like helicopter blades with the nominal 8 degree "washout" at the tips, compared to the McCulloch J2 rotor blades with the "washin" tips.

Wayne