Safest side by side Gyro in the world? M24 vs Cavalon

Very strange is this forum, where instead of focusing on technique, improvement, creative work, discussion of details active participants have most questions about what does not concern them....
Because your stuff doesn’t add up.

That's the point! The question of whether to trust a merchant or even a manufacturer of an aircraft depends crucially on whether everything seems plausible. As far as I understand, Mr. Wronowski @ARGON Producer was involved in the development of the Xenon together with Mr. Celier from the very beginning. Together with Mr. Celier, “Celier Aviation Sp z o.o.” was then founded. This was followed by “Celier Aviation Europe”, which was later renamed “ARGO Aero Sp z o.o.”, which in turn was closed around 4 years ago. Then “Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o.” was founded by Mr. Wronowski without the participation of Mr. Celier.

Mr. Wronowski now sees himself and “Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o.” as the sole holders of the rights to Xenon, which is now called Argon. “Rotor-Tech Poland” is again only a brand of "Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o." and "AirGyro" is a distribution partner in the USA putting his sticker onto the aircraft manufactured in Poland by “Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o.” and on the other hand "FlyArgo" is insolvent/defunct and was taken over by Mr. Wronowski. "MBL Classics Sp z o.o." and/or "MBL Poland Ltd." used to manufacture parts of the Xenon/Argon, but this is no longer the case. Is that understood correctly?

So if “Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o.” and Mr. Wronowski are the sole and exclusive rights holders, how is it that “Aviation Artur Trendak” has been manufacturing and selling the same or almost the same gyrocopter under the name “Tercel” for almost a decade? And that only a few kilometers away from “Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o.” in Poland under the same jurisdiction? Furthermore, the Xenon/Argon gyrocopter is also manufactured and sold in Germany by “German Gyro Aviation GmbH” under the name “MATTO” by a Mr. Strauß. How is that possible?
 
When you don't have patents, and sales expose your tech to the piblic, there's not much you can do to keep a design exclusive.
 
"First gyro for test to India we send 2016, from this time we working on the legislation there...."

"That gyroplane did not even get to fly and was returned the customer's money never given back. It was Celier I thought who did that. It was you?"


Yes that was the re-born Celier Aviation ( after the big split ) - "Celier 2" initially built at Radom briefly and then moved down to Piotrokow Trybunal building approx 25 gyros ( mix of Xenon 2, Xenon IV, Xenon XL and the C-44 ambulance prototypes ) before further twists and turns in the saga of the Xenon family story. I recall a photo of a white Xenon IV on display in India marked with the Celier test registration D-MCXT.

The WWW shows the import and re-export of this particular machine to India in 2016 by Celier, see attached image.
 

Attachments

  • [RotaryForum.com] - Safest side by side Gyro in the world? M24 vs Cavalon
    Xenon_India_DMCXT.webp
    18.8 KB · Views: 0
That's the point! The question of whether to trust a merchant or even a manufacturer of an aircraft depends crucially on whether everything seems plausible. As far as I understand, Mr. Wronowski @ARGON Producer was involved in the development of the Xenon together with Mr. Celier from the very beginning. Together with Mr. Celier, “Celier Aviation Sp z o.o.” was then founded. This was followed by “Celier Aviation Europe”, which was later renamed “ARGO Aero Sp z o.o.”, which in turn was closed around 4 years ago. Then “Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o.” was founded by Mr. Wronowski without the participation of Mr. Celier.

Mr. Wronowski now sees himself and “Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o.” as the sole holders of the rights to Xenon, which is now called Argon. “Rotor-Tech Poland” is again only a brand of "Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o." and "AirGyro" is a distribution partner in the USA putting his sticker onto the aircraft manufactured in Poland by “Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o.” and on the other hand "FlyArgo" is insolvent/defunct and was taken over by Mr. Wronowski. "MBL Classics Sp z o.o." and/or "MBL Poland Ltd." used to manufacture parts of the Xenon/Argon, but this is no longer the case. Is that understood correctly?

So if “Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o.” and Mr. Wronowski are the sole and exclusive rights holders, how is it that “Aviation Artur Trendak” has been manufacturing and selling the same or almost the same gyrocopter under the name “Tercel” for almost a decade? And that only a few kilometers away from “Manufaktura Lotnicza Sp z o.o.” in Poland under the same jurisdiction? Furthermore, the Xenon/Argon gyrocopter is also manufactured and sold in Germany by “German Gyro Aviation GmbH” under the name “MATTO” by a Mr. Strauß. How is that possible?
You make such a great point, I'm very happy that the situation is finally clear.

I have no control over what happened before I and Celier opened Celier Aviation Sp z oo in 2010 and the first model produced in the company was XENON 4

Trendak together with Celier operated until 2010 and together they produced the XENON 2 model and started work on XENON 3 which was renamed TERCEL after the partners parted ways.

XENON 2 (separate Type Certificate) could be produced and by Celier and Trendak.

Xenon 4 (separate Type Certificate) only by Celier Aviation Sp z oo

Tercel (separate Type Certificate) only by Trendak

Finally ARGON and ARGON GTL have separate Type Certificate and any other company can’t produce it

About Matto I know only that it was copied (3D scan) the cabin to which was attached a huge mast chimney from which the parachute was to fly out. An unsuccessful dead project that never flew, nothing is heard of it either.
 
Last edited:
Because your stuff doesn’t add up.
You possibly can’t think two countries pointing nukes at each other which both have close to 200 and unofficially already having ICBMs are going to buy for defense from the same source easily.
Check the documents i have sent you trough WhatsApp…
 
Well, since you know better ... :)

Very strange is this forum, where instead of focusing on technique, improvement, creative work, discussion of details active participants have most questions about what does not concern them....
Would you consider the GWS as a "technique, improvement, creative work"??
Mike G
 
Would you consider the GWS as a "technique, improvement, creative work"??
Mike G

Creative work done with care to create an overall improvement in making pilot technique less sloppy.
How is that?
 
Would you consider the GWS as a "technique, improvement, creative work"??
Mike G
I consider GWS a much-needed and innovative system, especially if we consider the average age of pilots. From my observation, in the US mature men with an average age of over 60 want to be Gyro pilots, in Europe this average age is much lower and is around 40. This can be invaluable in alerting and reacting to what is happening with the gyro during takeoff, landing and maneuvers. As we know, in most accidents the cause is human factor. Recently in Poland a Gyroplanes crashed during takeoff because the pilot accelerated it without the stick engaged and the rotor loaded - a schoolboy mistake that ended with the gyro crashing, fortunately the two aged “pilots” were fine.

In conclusion, this is an excellent and innovative project worth supporting, which as a manufacturer I am absolutely ready to do, moreover, as I confirmed to you Mike during a private conversation.
 
Kris
The last message I have with you dates back to March 2023, when I proposed to come to Poland to help you install and setup a GWS. I have no records of a reply, if you sent one and I missed or lost it, sorry, please resend.
Mike
 
Thank you for sharing the report. I did metallurgical failure analysis & accident investigation for 40 years. This report seems quite thorough.
 
Kris
The last message I have with you dates back to March 2023, when I proposed to come to Poland to help you install and setup a GWS. I have no records of a reply, if you sent one and I missed or lost it, sorry, please resend.
Mike
Have you talked to Magni about the GWS?
 
Have you talked to Magni about the GWS?
I gave Luca Magni a presentation of an early version of the GWS at Blois (France) Sept 2021. Smart Avionics and I have tried to contact them numerous times since with no success.

The GWS final version has been available to all manufacturers since August 2022.

From your post#67 you’re optimistic that you will have no problems communicating with Magni. I offer you a test, contact them and say that you want your M24 with the GWS fitted. If they reply that they are developing their own GWS, ask for details, has it been tested, sold to other users, the cost, are there videos of it working, how does it compare to the GWS???

I'm sure others here would be interested in their replies.

Mike G
 
Kris
The last message I have with you dates back to March 2023, when I proposed to come to Poland to help you install and setup a GWS. I have no records of a reply, if you sent one and I missed or lost it, sorry, please resend.
Mike

Mike, you're welcome, we can install GWS in our ARGON GTL demo and do some tests, it will be a great pleasure for me to meet you in person.

In March 2023 we were preparing for the AERO Fridrishafen and the Ocean flight of our GTL, and then we were terribly busy developing the helicopter project and certified Gyro in Germany, sorry.

The GWS project is very interesting and promising for our future customers and I will implement it as a standard in our Gyro with great interest.
 
Abid, you are absolutely right. If we analyze the causes of fatal accidents, the human factor is the overwhelming cause of most of them. Most modern serial gyroscopes are built with enough care for the pilot. Unfortunately, if a human fails, we have to rely on the design of the gyro to protect us at least a little.

I don't know what they do at Magni and AutoGyro to take care of safety, below I'll give some design facts on what we did to make ARGON keep passengers safe when a human fails.

So why is ARGON the safest Gyroplanes in our opinion?

Most Gyroplanes are built around a metal chassis (Magni, AutoGyro) to which everything else is mounted, much like cars until recent years. ARGON is different. Utilizing the latest carbon fiber technology, the ARGON cabin is built around a lightweight but extremely strong monocoque protective shell, like that of a Formula 1 car. This shell provides both a crush-proof protective enclosure for the crew and allows all other components to be mounted directly, without the weight of a chassis or additional structural frame. This provides a tremendous degree of safety for the crew in the event of any accident, as the cabin can withstand loads many times greater than gravitational acceleration. The monocoque fuselage design means that forces are transmitted through the fuselage, rather than through the frame rods and tubes. ARGON is one of the few Gyroplanes in the world to use a monocoque design, and is now available in a carbon fiber version that offers unmatched strength and low weight for safety and performance.

The width of the landing gear also has a not inconsiderable impact on maintaining stability during landing and takeoff. The ARGON 915 Classic, our standard model, has an 85' wheelbase, providing much greater stability, especially when taking off and landing on grass or uneven fields. Landings on grass, uneven and rough runways pose much less risk for the wide wheelbase.

ARGON's high-inertia rotor made of carbon-Kevlar composite ensures stable rotation during flight and maneuvering, eliminating the risk of rapid loss of rotation and blade flapping effects.

ARGON has more than twice the ground clearance of its competitors, thanks to our taller landing gear and dual tail beams designed to keep the device stable above the ground during takeoff, landing and taxiing. It should be noted that competitors who use a single tail beam that curves under the propeller have very little ground clearance. The tail boom is much lower to the ground than the cabin and can touch the ground if the airfield is not quite level and smooth.

When the entire horizontal stabilizer and tail rudders are mounted on a single curved tube, flat and harmonic vibrations are much more frequent and more difficult to control. Two straight tail beams are much stronger and almost free of vibration. What's more, ARGONs have large vertical stabilizers and dual rudders, greatly improving maneuverability at low speeds during takeoff and landing.

A weakness of early Gyroplanes was the problem of “power push”; engine thrust tilted the Gyroplane forward and relieved the rotor or led to pilot-induced oscillations when the pilot retracted the rotor control stick to compensate. Elevating the cabin relative to the engine, as some gyro manufacturers have done to achieve a centerline thrust, is a half-measure that creates a tall, clumsy shape.

A better solution is to add a much larger horizontal ballast to solve the power pushout problem. ARGON has a much wider ballast to ensure maximum stability. Note that the height of this stabilizer is directly aligned with the centerline of the propeller thrust to maximize its effectiveness. This is the best solution on the market.

Gyroplanes' unparalleled flight pleasure is manifested in the unlimited visibility of the surroundings. ARGON maximizes visibility with a much larger windshield that wraps around the sides, with windows in the front floor, windows in the roof, extended downward visibility in the doors, and even windows behind the doors. Being able to see the runway directly below you, through the windows in the floor, has helped many new pilots better judge landings and master the art more quickly. This is an advantage we greatly appreciate. Our partially open back doesn't look as streamlined as a fully enclosed Cavalon. But the open space eliminates the heat buildup problems that Cavalons have.

What we admire at first glance - putting the turbo engine, water cooler and oil cooler, etc. in a small engine compartment - turns out to be a nightmare when we try to get to the components for inspection or service.

With our design, we can see and inspect all components and systems at a glance before flight, making pre-flight inspections much easier

The ARGON GTL has 25 more cubic feet of cargo space behind the seats than the ARGON Classic, and the cabin is wider and larger than our competitors Cavalon and Niki and Magni. When you want to travel, you need room for luggage or camping gear, and when you use the Gyro for work, you need room for cargo, scanning equipment or camera gear. Our ARGON models are designed to be more functional, useful and efficient than the competition's two-seat Gyroplanes, which fit two passengers and not much more in the cabin. A wider cabin with more space between the seats is a major comfort benefit of our Gyroplanes.

There is also a padded armrest between the seats. The hidden advantage of this extra space between the seats is that the center instrument tunnel is much wider. This makes it easier to access all the control cables and sensor wires. We've spent hours trying to fix something in Cavalon's small tube tunnel that only takes a minute or two in the wide tunnel of our Gyroplanes.

You may consider this information marketing, but it is factual and tangible.

View attachment 1162534View attachment 1162535View attachment 1162536View attachment 1162537
View attachment 1162538View attachment 1162539View attachment 1162540View attachment 1162541View attachment 1162542
But where are the performance specifications? I haven’t found them on the website.
 
But where are the performance specifications? I haven’t found them on the website.

Sub page for Gyro:

Sub page for ARGON


Sub page for ARGON GTL


Sub page for ARGON GTL Triple


Best Regards

[RotaryForum.com] - Safest side by side Gyro in the world? M24 vs Cavalon
 
560 kg is not 992 pounds and 600 kg is not 1234 pounds. Might want to correct that.
 
Back
Top