new single place gyro

Looks cool. The first thing that grabbed my attention was the double mast stitch-welded together. Is there some flexible element in the design to prevent total rigidity? My next question would be about the load imposed on the lower member of the (welded?) pylons that the main gear struts fit into. To my inexperienced eye this looks like a weak point but I am unfamiliar with the design.
 
I don’t understand what happened that designers don’t tilt the mast back at the blades natural angle of 9 degrees anymore. It relieves a whole lot of stress.
I saw a couple new machines at El Mirage (maybe AR's?) with vertical masts and was wondering if they were chrome-moly, or DOM.
The fatigue life of aluminum in that configuration would be worrisome at best.
The fore and aft forces impose a lot more flex towards the bottom of the mast with every power change and AOA change.
It is most likely just to move the seats farther back in the tandem arrangement and not an issue if the right materials are used.....
 
Also noticed that the main gear is substantially raked back, which explains its nosewheel-down resting stance without tail support. I am told this could necessitate a longer takeoff run, although Sport Copter rests this way too. However this design appears to lack drag struts as well, so again I'd want to revisit the main gear strut pylon, specifically the rear leg compression strength. It's probably fine but I'm the guy who looks at all the bolts and bearings before getting onto carnival rides. Sorry, can't help it.
 
Looks cool. The first thing that grabbed my attention was the double mast stitch-welded together. Is there some flexible element in the design to prevent total rigidity? My next question would be about the load imposed on the lower member of the (welded?) pylons that the main gear struts fit into. To my inexperienced eye this looks like a weak point but I am unfamiliar with the design.
Those are excellent questions... I hope they had some qualified engineers look at the design. I know we have several mechanical engineers on faculty at my university who specialize in and have extensive experience in aeronautical/aerospace engineering who would be qualified.
 
Also noticed that the main gear is substantially raked back, which explains its nosewheel-down resting stance without tail support. I am told this could necessitate a longer takeoff run, although Sport Copter rests this way too. However this design appears to lack drag struts as well, so again I'd want to revisit the main gear strut pylon, specifically the rear leg compression strength. It's probably fine but I'm the guy who looks at all the bolts and bearings before getting onto carnival rides. Sorry, can't help it.
Just from being here on the forum for a while, I'd feel safer with a tail wheel on the gyro just in case.
 
I saw a couple new machines at El Mirage (maybe AR's?) with vertical masts and was wondering if they were chrome-moly, or DOM.
The frame and mast of the AR-1 appears to be built from high strength welded stainless steel.
 
The gyroplane in the video appears to me to have a tail wheel.
OK - I didn't see it, but I didn't watch the entire thing. From what I saw, it looked like it did not have one.

I see it now - it's TINY. No wonder I didn't notice it before.
 
One concer I have going back to the landing gear is the wide low slung stance of the struts appears to me to be conducive to bending on a harder landing.
 
One concer I have going back to the landing gear is the wide low slung stance of the struts appears to me to be conducive to bending on a harder landing.
That strut design looks a bit sketchy to me... I'll have to consult my wife (mechanical engineer) for a more informed opinion, but I don't see anything to absorb any force other than the tires and bending those long struts. There needs to be something that requires less force to move than the force required to bend those struts (e.g. a standard shock absorber design) or those struts are going to bend on a hard landing.

And the same thing on the nose wheel - there's nothing other than the tire to absorb shock.
 
Another issue is the low mounted pitot tube....had that once and was forever walking or banging into it!
As for an on demand compressor for a rotorbrake? Why? Is it lighter then the traditional one?
It is a pretty color🤷‍♂️. I am glad we have choices...it would not be one I picked but....
 
I am interested in how the simonini engine plays out in the future of aircraft engines...
 
That strut design looks a bit sketchy to me... I'll have to consult my wife (mechanical engineer) for a more informed opinion, but I don't see anything to absorb any force other than the tires and bending those long struts. There needs to be something that requires less force to move than the force required to bend those struts (e.g. a standard shock absorber design) or those struts are going to bend on a hard landing.

And the same thing on the nose wheel - there's nothing other than the tire to absorb shock.
Actually, there are several aircraft that use tubular steel landing gear legs as shock absorbing devices. The Cessna 152 is a good example. There are also several aircraft that use upper and lower weldments with a fiberglass rod between as the shock absorbing element.

I don't think I am fond of the way they have done that on this aircraft. If the silver colored item between the upper and lower weldment is a steel tube, I like it even less.

As an aside, I prefer Mechanical engineers over Civil engineers. Mechanical Engineers build weapons, Civil engineers build targets.

Jim
 
Last edited:
I am interested in how the simonini engine plays out in the future of aircraft engines...
They been around for years. One of Dad’s customers put one on a two place Dom like 15 years ago. He said the HP wasn’t what was advertised but it was good engine.
 
Top