No, sorry
I never meant to imply such a decent to landing should be done ( at zero airspeed) I did see such at an air show in Texas which I was the Show Boss. The pilot was flying a Bensen and had installed a bolt which was too long. He was demonstrating a vertical decent with a peddle turn. The rudder installed bolt got forced over the top of another resulting in the rudder being jammed. The EMS and the fire trucks were below me. As the aircraft descended through 400’ and he had not recovered, I told the emergency people to roll because he was crashing. He went in into a thicket of Mesquite trees, scattering tree limbs and parts like a large lawn mower. He survived with compression fractures in his back.
My example of rudder inefficiency at certain airspeeds related to Minimal Controllable Airspeeds in as we know is something not very thought of but it is a thing. Also as a few fixed wing aircraft such as a Stinson will not stall but that does not mean it will not develop a sink rate which can be deadly. My statement about not approaching a landing with out the power of an engine at less than best glide speed was meant to say in a power off glide to landing in a Gyroplane will or can result in a harder and injurious landing. That is all.
The point I was attempting to make is there is a condition where at a diminished airspeed, the rudder no longer will affect the pointing of the direction of the fuselage.
As was stated, at times during a vertical decent at zero indicated airspeed a slow turn will commence. I am guessing this is despite how the rudder is deployed.
This in itself is interesting because that turning motion has to be from a force from somewhere. A fixed wing in a spin is not fully stalled, despite popular belief. The upper wing is imparting lift otherwise it would fall like a rock with no turn to it.
We see the skilled among us, with great trust in their skill, engines and machine, float along the runway, engines Screaming and with the Gyroplane standing on its tail. Fine but risky if the engine hiccups. I expect the rudder is deployed to counter the torque of the engine and at the time the engine quit, what happens? A roll? A nose swing one way or the other? Does it drop straight? Quite doubtful. With no directional control you are at the mercy of the elements.
A Gyroplane indeed has minimal controllable Airspeed.
I do feel I owe the group an apology as I drifted off topic.
The original question was why was the aircraft on the upwind and left side of the runway ( which can be explained by blade sail, retreating blade stall by too much speed and not enough rotor rpm). But why was it laying on its right side?
I offered an alternative which was not accepted by several. I got off topic trying to support my premise. That premise being the pilot had deployed left rudder to counter the drift ( a common fixed wing technique ) but has too much aft stick, generating so much drag, a decent to the runway occurred. The aircraft being in a crab then contacted the runway with the right main and right side of the fuselage. This is where the aircraft came to rest, on its right side not the left.
I am guilty, very guilty of, as it has been said, of over thinking things. I want to know every nuance of the machines we love. I am consumed by them.
How may times has the common accepted explanation of science and physics been wrong or at least needs tweaking. Right now at this very moment we still are trying to figure out how airfoils work. Bernoulli is a partial answer yes. Viscosity is a partial answer yes. There is so much more to learn.
I pray this group never tires of a good, honorable and respectful debate.