Microlighters

Hi john,
refering to Len, as he is a moderator on this forum...........nothing against you wanting to lock it. Do as you think best.i will post my views on his question to me in due time.

He started it, we will finish it.......

Hey John,

Leave it unlocked - that's my vote... its quite funny actually - almost like reading a bad old Chinese kung fu movie crossed with Rambo .... "you have crossed the ways of the dragon and now you must pay" BWHAAA ha a haaa ha - You drew first blood... or he started it I will finish it ?? really guys....Haaah aaahhh haaaa

Look on the right hand side of your avatar - there is a button called pm... pm the oke, ask for his number and have it out. But throwing it around on what's usually a good natured forum, not really the stuff we all wanna read about ???

Now go buy the oke a beer and

Look on the right hand side of your avatar - there is a button called pm... pm the oke, ask for his number and have it out. But throwing it around on what's usually a good natured forum, not really the stuff we all wanna read about ???

Hi dish, did that exactly a couple of years ago, but the phone got put down in my ear and i was told that i am a "lytie that thinks he knows it all"........

Unfortunatly i have to at some stage protect my product from hearsayers and the inexpierianced.

I'm confused.

Whats this got to do with the game of darts. Please enlighten.

"Unfortunatly i have to at some stage protect my product from hearsayers and the inexpierianced."

Fair enough -

Since I have personally been named in this thread, I then must accept that I am a "hearsayer and inexpierianced"
I then have to accept that the Professors of Aerodymics of the Glasgow University and the United Kingdom Accident Investigation Board and their Test Pilots are also "hearsayers and inexpierianced".

Please read for yourselves and then pass judgement;

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cf ... 003-10.pdf

In the event that you dont feel like reading the whole report, here is a small extract of significance.

Mandatory Permit Directive (MPD)
Following a series of fatal accidents involving gyroplanes, including two RAF 2000s, G-CBAG (see AAIB Bulletin 9/2003) and G-REBA, the UK CAA conducted flight tests on the RAF 2000.1
The tests revealed that, although the RAF 2000 manufacturers claimed a VNE of 100 mph, at 70 mph natural turbulence caused a divergent phugoid which had a period of approximately five seconds and a time to double amplitude of approximately 10 seconds. Testing was curtailed after eight seconds to prevent excessive pitch attitudes being reached. Maintaining a constant pitch attitude ±4° at 70 mph was considered to be ‘very difficult’, requiring continual small (2mm) inputs to the cyclic.
At 80 mph the test pilot rated the handling qualities as six on the Cooper-Harper scale2; this is equivalent to: ‘very objectionable but tolerable deficiencies. – Adequate performance requires extensive pilot compensation.’. In the report the test pilot commented: ‘Given poor visual cueing it would be extremely difficult for an inexperienced pilot to fly the aircraft at speeds in excess of 70 mph and momentary distractions to tune radios, IFF, operate trim etc could lead to a large pitch excursion going unnoticed.’.

Following this a MPD 2006-013 was issued by the CAA on 1 December 2006 which, together with other restrictions, limited the RAF 2000’s VNE to 70 mph.

Summary
The gyroplane was destroyed by a pitch excursion causing the main rotor to contact the propeller, fin and rudder assembly. The unmodified RAF 2000, without a horizontal stabiliser, has demonstrated dynamic longitudinal instability at speeds in excess of 70 mph. The reduced VNE, applicable in the UK, avoids the most objectionable aspects of its handling characteristics but a loss of control due to a pitch excursion remains possible below this speed. Any distraction or technical problem that could have caused such an excursion to go unnoticed may have been transient in nature and left no evidence.

I feel that, in the light of the above report, it is immoral, if not bordering on illegal, for RAF SA to continue marketing the machine in SA with a Recommended VNE of 100 mph and a Maximum speed of 120/140 mph. (http://www.rafgyro.co.za/index.php?opti ... Itemid=125)

Saraf, you may have taken punches, based on facts, innocent people may die by denying these facts exist.

Don't know why I'm getting involved here but...
Bladerunner - "mothers of RAF pilots gave birth to legends" as you say. Surely you know that "RAF'refers to Royal Airforce or more recently Rhodesian Airforce and not Rotary Airforce. Now that is a fine example of what you call ignorant!

Calling Len Klopper "inexperienced" or "ignorant" is derogatory to say the least. He is one of the most respected and knowledgeable gyro pilots South Africa has to offer. I for one perk my ears and pay attention when he voices opinion or advice. Adding to that, the mere fact that being awarded the prestigious AeroclubSA Don Tilly Safety Award and honorable mention for various other achievements surely contradicts the comments made?

Further to the references made by the UK reports, I am curious as to why the specs are different here. I raise eyebrows eg. we all remember the Flamingo that had a catastrophic failure in flight participating in the PTAR a couple of years ago and here too, reference was made to the advertised VNE's etc.

For us others that are "lacking the appropriate knowledge" and wish to learn and be informed... educate us!

[quote="For us others that are "lacking the appropriate knowledge" and wish to learn and be informed... educate us! [/quote]

Hi John

I am a bit of a too low hour pilot to educate you on the RAF and its flight behaviour, but let me give you the experience of one of the most respected and knowledgeable gyro pilots South Africa has to offer.


viewtopic.php?p=138778

I Survived! Viva RAF2000

Postby Gyronaut » Wed Sep 01, 2010 11:22 am
Let me begin with a confession (I seem to be doing lots of confessing nowadays) but here goes.

I have always been "bang" of flying in a RAF. Quite simply because I was afraid of 'tuck' or the lack of a paddle out the back to give pitch stability, this thing worried me. To me 'tuck' is if the blade, or rather disc, angle of attack goes through 0 degrees causing airflow over the top of the disc, unloading and tucking in nose over. Lack of a true, full understanding of the dynamics of this machine had me slightly skeptical so I avoided offers of a flip on several occasions before.

I have to confess "ek leen my ore uit" when people discuss pro's and cons of Gyro designs and I am very wary to comment. If I do comment I try to make it clear that it is my uninformed opinion only.
I am a gyronaut first so I support everyone that promotes safe gyro flying. Now of course I have heard the RAF is slow, That it a bitch to take-off and land, that its twitchy, that it guzzles fuel, sommer stops bla bla bla.

So we met up with MarkB in RAF DYP just north of Yserfontein and then we flew coastwise back to morningstar. Flying comfortably sided by side speed certainly wasn't an issue. Looked all ok from where I was watching. Mark has thousands of hours of blik experience dropping meatbombs in paradise and he has over 400hrs on his RAF already. After taking him for a spin in the M24 he offered me a ride in his RAF. I could not think of any reason not to trust Mark in the RAF (the precision engineering is evident) so in I got.

Felt a little strange sitting very upright at first, but I soon got used to that. Prerotator, brakes, throttle systems are easy and work nicely. Almost intuitively. They are where you expect them. It has a strong trim and the trim setting indicator is a bonus. Set the trim to 65mph and she climbs like a homesick angel. Its pretty much point-and-go from there. I did not notice any pitch instability at various speed and power settings. Landing on the back wheel and holding it off the ground feels a bit strange the first time, then normal after that. Even in no wind its an amazingly short landing roll (if any). I am never going to compete with a RAF in a spot landing competion.

I got out of it thinking, What a lekka earrie! Sure, they shake a little (any two bladed teetering system will) but it is certainly not excessive or irritating, lots of grunt, if flown safely as just demonstrated, then 10 out of 10. I now understand why the RAF owners LOVE their machines so much.

What would a RAF with an ARPlast prop perform like and will it sound very different?

Thanks for the flight Mark. Opened my eyes.

Viva RAF2000
082 COME FLY

There where no changes on the RAF from the time of the UK CAA report until this post was made.
So what must I believe now?

I for one starts to think that this whole post has nothing to do with gyro's and will not educate any of us.

Fly safe
Gompou

This is not good for either party involved or the sport of gyro flying itself. Both parties are highly respected pilots and instructors. Let's keep it that way. Suggest you agree to disagree or take it offline...

J.

Gompou, I was most certainly not aware of the UK AIB accident report and subsequent test results at the time of the flight with Mark B or the posting. The more recent accident in SA had also not taken place in which a 600m debris field was mentioned which drew my attention to the UK report.

Jean, I agree, You will note that I said I am done with this topic and considered the subject closed. Subsequently however, being called an "ignorant know it all" by name by Eben Mocke Jr is not only derogatory and insulting in the extreme, it makes a mockery of SAGPA and its members (which includes you), who chose to award the Sean Klopper Airmanship trophy 2013 to me for Knowledge, Skill and Attitude. It also insults the Aeroclub of SA, and all its members, for choosing to award the Don Tilley Safety Trophy 2013 to an "ignorant know it all".

The veiled threats by Saraf and Bladerunner have also not gone unnoticed. What does 'done taking punches' mean? That they are going to start handing them out?

For the record, The conversation Saraf refers to where he claims 'the phone got put down in my ear and i was told that i am a "lytie that thinks he knows it all"' was in relation to a request from him to have the minimum hours on Gyro's increased from 30 to 50 overall. I felt this would be detrimental to the sport in general and I disagreed with him. He was adamant and when I questioned him as to what professional training he had undergone which qualified him to make the statements he was, he took exception. I honestly do not think I put the phone down in his ear since this is not in my nature and I also do not recall ever using the words he quoted. I will, however, openly admit to questioning his credentials in making the statements and claims he was making at the time in relation to the issue of what the minimum hours should be. This was put to the vote at a subsequent SAGPA meeting and the members decided to keep the minimum hours required, unchanged.

As for being chosen to be a moderator on this site, I did not solicit it, have NEVER used the status and therefore request the mods to remove me.

Saraf, Please refrain from insulting me in person on a public forum.

I for one agree to disagree and AGAIN... Subject closed from my side.

Now let it go mods. Please...

Len

"Saraf, you may have taken punches, based on facts, innocent people may die by denying these facts exist."

I think this must be the question .....!!!!

According to you and the AAIB, how many fatalities in the last 15years was the result of the RAF 2000 no matter what the cause...????

Hi All .

I have been reading this thread everyday , and wanted to comment several times , but refrained from doing so as i have the utmost respect for both the parties involved .

I agree with Jtresfon that this is not good for our sport in general if on an open forum we go on like above .

However i understand that Len has got a passion for safety in our sport and will always question things till they make sense to him .

Perhaps then if questions are still unanswered from which ever party , should we not then raise these questions in a formal manner to SAGPA or CAA for clarification , And i am not just talking about the discussion here , any question which needs to be answered , be that of of safety concern .

Just a suggestion , as i am also keen to learn.

I trust that both parties would see this rather as a positive rather than negative and lets try refrain from attacking .

Regards

Paul