Microlighters

On Friday 7 August I was privileged to do a type conversion onto an MT03 with Johnny de Jager at Kitty Hawk.

After having inspected FO Gyro's MT03 thoroughly at FAFK I was wrongfully under the impression that the machine was a little on the 'weak' side. I found it to be a robust, well designed and well engineered quality machine.

Positives:

I love the pneumatic pre-rotator and brake system. It is smooth and efficient and very easy to use. Small details have been taken into account and perfected. For example, it is impossible to take off with the pre-rotator engaged. A micro switch disengages the pre-rotator system the instant you pull the stick back. Similarly, it is impossible to pre-rotate with the rotor-brake engaged since switching to 'flight' in order to pre-rotate disengages the rotor-brake. (Who hasn't forgotten the rotor-brake or pre-rotator in the take-off?) The shoulder harnesses are a major plus in my mind. Even with the shoulder harness tight the controls and instruments are well appointed and easy to reach. The unique rotor-head temperature gauge should be compulsory in all gyro's if only for the peace of mind that it gives that all is well up there!

I found the machine to be light and responsive with more than adequate power without engaging the turbo, even at altitude. Its directional stability is superp requiring virtually NO pedal input during flight. I kept over controlling on the pedals during steep turns due to muscle-memory. Landing this machine is an absolute pleasure and I found it 'floats' well after round-out resulting in a smooth and tidy touch-down.

Negatives: (Difficult to find any but to remain unbiased I must find something)

The seats are high and it initially feels as if you are sitting ON the machine and not IN it. This feeling goes away the minute you take off and it is easy to become 'one' with the machine. The exposed fuel tanks under the passenger seat may be a little disconcerting to novice passengers. In most other types the passengers don't realise that they are sitting in/on the fuel tanks.

I hasten to add that I did not fly the MT03 Sport which I believe is an improvement on the standard MT03 when it comes to performance.

My overall impression of the MT03 is extremely positive and I honestly believe that it is very good value for money.

Well done to Theuns Eloff and his team for supplying a great gyro with good after sales service.

My thanks to Johnny for his thorough Convex. I am in awe of his ability and his experience.

VIVA GYRO's; VIVA MT03

Len
GPI Aerosport
Fisantekraal

Congrats Len on doing the MT-03 conversion. I've been quite happy with my machine over the last 2 years or so.

Very little to dislike on it. The one thing I did notice is more of a "cabin hop" compared to other gyro's, but then the stick feels much lighter, so you can't have it both ways I guess. There will always be some vibration from the teetering rotor head in a rotorwing, no matter how good the tracking is.

I just wish gyro's could perform jump take-off's like they used to in the early days of gyro's (early 1900's), but they were dangerous manoeuvres if not performed 100% correct. That would be even more magic than the present magic we experience in our present day gyro flying.

Now you're talking FO!

Hydrogen peroxide tip rockets with pitch control will do the trick. We just need a clever engineer to design a system. No anti torque rotor (tail rotor) required because the rotor itself is driving and not being driven. The propwash at idle over the rudder would be adequate for directional control. While there is rotor thrust you can control the ascent descent with pitch, then transition into 'gyro-autoration, switch off the rotor thrust and vice versa for landing... Voila.

If I am not mistaken the Fairey Rotodine 24 seater had tip rockets in the early 60's and worked!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pv6Gr2mLo1Y

Here is a nifty little one-seater heicopter that is driven by hydrogen peroxide tip rotors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9S_Qmn-CEM

Come on, where are the clever people that do this kind of thing? Vertical take-off and landing with auto rotation in flight would be the ultimate in my book too.

As for your comment about 'cabin hop' I dont think this is what you are experiencing except perhaps at very high speed. All gyro's begin to 'hop' at VNE but I think this may be because of reverse-airflow. (Don't ask me to elaborate because I dont fully understand it) I found the MT03 I flew very smooth compared to most other types I have flown. Tracking on rotors is crucial and a fine art and really makes a big difference. The guru's on here understand it better than I do. Any rotor system that has an advancing/retreating blade on a teetering hub will tend to have some shake due to dissymmetry of lift and even large helicopters (like the Bell206L) experience this - its just a fact of life.

Enjoy the Magic!

Rgds

Len

RAF Canada did this successfully 8 year ago....

Regards

Eben Jnr

Eben, are you referring to the jump take-off? Obviously a costly exercise to develop this, and to make it successful. What happened, did they can the idea due to costs?

HI FO

Yes i am referring to Jump take off, VERY expensive exercise , RAF even went so far to fly the RAF 2000 by remote control......This I was so lucky to see with my own eyes

Here is a short video of Dick DeGraw's jump take-off at Mentone 2009.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7Qq0HV88es

Awesome stuff

Regards

I agree, jump take-off must be the ultimate gyro, like the catercopter and Groen brothers Hawk 4.
See in the new Aviation Safety mag that Sikorsky is busy with a prototype helicopter with a pusher prop to try and achieve 250knot speed record. Looks like a gyro with jump take-off capabilities, but with counter rotating coaxial rotors.
A few questions to the clever guys:
To what speed will we need to pre-rotate to achieve a jump take-off.
If we could pre-rotate to say 400rpm, will we be able to control the torque effect on the ground with our prop & thrust.
Will we need a lot bigger engine to pre-rotate up to 400rpm, thus making it a lot more expensive.
Will we be able to do jump take off with our current rotors or will we need expensive heli rotors.
Will it be able to do a smooth and safe transfer from vertical take-off (power to rotors) to autorotation (power to prop) as a lot of helicopter accidents happen during the transfer to autorotation during training.
Read somewhere on the forum about kinetic energy being used on some F1 cars these days. Would this be enough to pre-rotate our rotors.

Obviously you have to be able to control the pitch of the rotorblade for vertical take-off. Could be interesting to design something like that.
I read somewhere on the web rotor rpm to be 150% of normal flight speed for vertical lift off, and have to get forward speed before the rotor
rpm get under normal take-off rpm.

JetRanger wrote:Hydrogen peroxide tip rockets with pitch control will do the trick.

The peroxide jets is an excellent idea, played with the peroxide rockets a few years ago. Only problem was the catalist was bracking up into small pieces, and
reduced thrust because the hydrogen peroxide could not get through the filter fast enough after a while.

In the Oct '98 edition of SA Flyer was an article about the smokeless helicopter, using H2O2 rocket and could fly 100mph.
It was called the Intora Firebird. Check this movie. Unbelievable!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9S_Qmn-CEM

Let the clever guys spend time and money on that, I am saving for a gyro!