I wondered why the tail boom had a slight downward angle, until I saw the ballastic chute. I then realized then if there was some kind of failure to the rotor, the aircraft would plunge vertically, engine first. The ballastic chute would be pointing up skyward.
The seat belts must then be able to survive a 20 - 50G load, otherwise the pilot and passenger would be thrusted into the instrument panelif the belts fail.
I'd seen this video before, but looking at it again, I'm struck by (a) how much of the aircraft's weight is on the nosewheel, and (b) the lack of a tailwheel or other protection for a tail with very little ground clearance. If we do see it fly, I'll be interested to see how it takes off and lands.
First I´d like to say that all pics on the website belong to the prototype we took to the Aero exhibition in Germany last april. Many things were missing then as we had no time to finish it for the show. We´ve been working hard since then to finalise the aircraft and get it into the air.
At present we are about a month away from first flight tests.
Answering some of your questions:
- We will have a tail protection on the central fin.
- Yes we know there is a lot of weight on the front leg and it has been properly calculated. However in the next model we are going to change the position of the main undercarriage 30 centimeters (a foot roughly) to the aft. The original idea of positioning it so far back was related to the fact that we didn´t want the mast to stand right in the middle of the cabin, obstructing passenger view. The only way to achieve that was carrying as much weight we could to the rear sections (one of the reasons for the parachute). Luckily on the latest hang test we were very happy to discover that we even had to bring the mast more to the rear (8 centimeters from original position) so now it does not interfere at all.
- According to the figures we got from the parachute manufacturer (Junkers Profly) for our particular model (Magnum 450), we calculated an impact speed to the ground of aproximately 30 kilometers per hour. All items involved with this impact speed and higher for a convenient safety factor, have been designed to be able to protect the passengers (engine mount, firewall, 4 point safety belts, etc.)
We are sure that we may have to change some things in the future, this is just the prototype and that´s what it´s meant for. We plan to fly it extensively to obtain all the information we need to produce a safe aircraft in serial in a near future.
Thank you for your interest in our project and your kind words. We will try to update our website once we get in the air and start getting feefback from the tests.
If you have any more questions I´ll be glad to clarify any doubts.
Yes that is correct. You would drift down nose first. Not comfortable but it would be better than nothing if you really should need to deploy a parachute.
We need 15 kilograms weight on the tail section to keep the mast where it is now. So instead of putting a dead piece of ballast why not put something that MAY be useful to someone some day. You never now. Personally I agree that you shouldn´t need a parachute on a proper built and flown gyroplane but as I said, we need that weight right there. Pricewise it wasn´t that important to the end price of the machine anyway, so it wasn´t difficult to take the decission.
15 kilograms is a lot of repair tools and a heavy battery! And at the end it would be of no use. You can carry up to 30 kilograms of luggage or whatever you want in our luggage compartment right behind the seat bulkhead.
n anyNobody can say that you will never use a safety parachute, even in a gyro.
Out of the several fatal accidents thru out the world related to gyros, I´m sure that at least one could have made the pilot/passengers survive in the case they could have correctly deployed a safety parachute. I bet that particular one would be very grateful to have it.
In your particular case and considering your concern of the importance of repair tools and spare batteries (that you can carry in our luggage compartment as mentioned before) if you ever buy one of our aircraft and you want 15 kilograms of repair tools and a spare battery at the back instead of the parachute, no problem, you can have it!
If by any remote chance (hopefully not!) you should hit the dirt nose first, the very last thing you are going to see is the benefits of carrying 15 kilograms of repair tools and a spare battery at the back... LOL
Now seriously, anything you design in life and you want to share with the rest of the world is condemned to be loved or hated. We can´t build an aircraft that will make everybody happy and that will meet everybody´s requirements. That´s why we like to listen to people to learn how to improve our project.
In the case of the parachute, up to date we have had more positive feedback on the idea of the parachute than negative so that´s green light for us. You don´t like it? We respect your point of view and thank you for your opinion.
No certification process will accept a ballast that is possible to be dismantled and not be replaced properly by the owner that will turn out in a dangerous center of gravity unstable condition for the aircraft´s handling.