What would be the/your perfect Gyro??

[Learjet]

ok.. here goes...

I crossed over (from FW PPL training) to gyros in 2005...
My decision to buy the Magni M16 at the time (instead of the newly introduced, and more competitively priced MT-03 - my other "shortlist" option) was primarily due to Ed Thompson's (WW2 RAF pilot) famous quote,

"Never fly the 'A' model of anything."

I had neither the experience nor the desire to be the "test-pilot" customer of a new-to-market non-type-certified aircraft. ( my view hasn't changed... )
Magni was (is) an established gyro manufacturer, with several decades of production expertise, enjoyed a highly-regarded reputation for its "tried and tested" design, excellent pitch-stability and impressive safety record to match.
I wanted a Chrome-Moly 4130 airframe (rather than Stainless Steel) due to its better vibration / fatigue attributes - particularly in a high-vibration ac like a gyro. (i.e the reduced risk of metal stress-fatigue in chrome-moly steel was a more important safety criteria for me than the better anti-corrosion, but poorer "metal-fatigue" properties of S/S).
Ditto the preference for composite (unlimited lifespan) versus aluminium extruded (limited lifespan*) rotors with their the mandatory timex. (*usually approx. 1,500 hours). Also, at the time there had been instances of stress-fractures in aluminium hub-bars and IIRC, Australia had recently instituted 500 hour limitations on all ali hub-bars.
Lastly, Magni offered very good local agent support - and due to it's high popularity in SA there was the advantage of benefitting from the pool of experience and knowledge sharing from other local Magni pilots.

Would I buy another Magni? .... I have and I did. The M22
Would I buy anything else? ... Yes. If Auto-Gyro Mbgh ever offers a chrome-moly airframe and composite-rotor option for the Calidus I'll have a very serious look at it - with my cheque-book in hand!
Ditto when the Arrow-Copter releases their "B-model" - but rather than going with my cheque-book I may have to be there on my knees with the bank-manager!

[Knighthawk]

So did you test out any of the other Gyro’s on the market at that time, or did you go directly for M16? There are lots of other well established manufacturers as well?
Is most of the Gyro’s in this day and age not been greatly “tried and tested”?? Since 2005??
As for the framework I saw pictures on the web of rigid airframes that have cracked and broken due to the excessive vibration? Is there gyros that have records of none vibration fatigue or that has systems in place to reduce vibration and so reduce the fatigue on the airframe?

So all of these Gyro’s that you like, must be imported? And with the economy today?? Big Bucks!!!!!!

So the RAF and Sycamore is the only Gyro’s manufactured locally??

Can you give me some specs on the rotax VS Subaru?

Just an observation….
Why don’t you mention anything about the locally built Gyro’s???

[Baitbird]

Apart from the RAF (Upington assembly) which gyro's are truly SA Built?
Sycamore is not built/available new anymore.

Doubt that there's any SA built gyro's vs imported and partly / final SA assembled. (if that makes sense)
BB

[Learjet]

So did you test out any of the other Gyro’s on the market at that time, or did you go directly for M16? There are lots of other well established manufacturers as well?

I ended up opting for the Magni M16. Back then, choices were pretty much limited to the Magni, MT03, ELA, RAF and Sycamore. There were probably not more than 10 gyros in the Cape - some 7 or 8 of which were Magni's so I guess it was inevitable that my exposure / choice would be pretty much limited to Magni. Of course these days there's a much greater selection to choose from!

Is most of the Gyro’s in this day and age not been greatly “tried and tested”?? Since 2005??

Depends how you define "tried and tested". For me it was about having several decades of manufacturing expertise and an established safety track record.
Gyro "newcomers" are popping up all the time. Some of the more recently introduced gyros for example: Arrow Copter, Trixy, PAL-V, Phenix, Rotortec, Gyrotec, Hummingbird, DTA's J-Ro, TAG etc. etc. etc. I have no doubt that some of these will be success stories!

As for the framework I saw pictures on the web of rigid airframes that have cracked and broken due to the excessive vibration? Is there gyros that have records of none vibration fatigue or that has systems in place to reduce vibration and so reduce the fatigue on the airframe?

It comes down to metallurgy and the fact that every 2-bladed teetering rotor creates a 2-vibration per revolution cycle. Masts are designed to absorb much of that vibration (to reduce stick-shake) - a 'too rigid mast" will be unable to do so and will fatigue. Steel generally has an infinite flex lifecycle i.e. if it can "flex" within a certain parameter it will continue to do so happily ever after... (I'm talking in VERY general terms here).
Aluminium and stainless steel has a finite flex lifespan. i.e. it will withstand a finite amount of "flex cycles" and then fail. That's not to say that a stainless steel airframe is unsafe - far from it! It just means that the s/s frame or ali rotors will have a finite lifespan and the aircraft designer will factor this into account accordingly. There were some reports of the MT-03 suffering some incidences with mast-cracks in it's early days, and also alu rotor bolt-hole cracking. The later Magni models have had the keel reinforced. Xenons suffered instances of mast bracket cracking. Zen1 has introduced a modified mast design from the earlier version...

I guess old Ed Thompson wasn't wrong about "A models"......

So all of these Gyro’s that you like, must be imported? And with the economy today?? Big Bucks!!!!!!

The reality is that the "new wave" of European gyro design and manufacture is precisely what is driving the current renaissance in gyro aviation.
The development of lighter, more reliable and powerful engines (such as the Rotax) enabled the design & emergence of 2-seater gyros, which in turn facilitated better and safer, dual-instruction and training.
The down side is the exchange rate and the USD $30k plus cost of a Rotax 914.

Can you give me some specs on the rotax VS Subaru?

Google is your friend.

Why don’t you mention anything about the locally built Gyro’s???

Sycamore production stopped several years ago. Currently, I think that the only gyro being locally built / assembled is the RAF (and perhaps Wagtail's Trojan?).
I'm not type rated on these so can't offer any meaningful insight there. SARAF will be able to give you all the info on their RAF2000.

[Steve_SP]

Hi


A couple of observations,


Learjet - great pie chart but I think you also need to consider the ELA fleet - I would guesstimate that there are at least 50-60 ELA 07/08 gyros in SA ? plus a couple of Zen1 too.

The highest RAF SA construction number i've seen is ship #039 - registered in 2013.

What's en route - a thread a few days ago mentioned a container with four brand new Caliduseseses packed in it - plus I understand a new Zen1 is en route too. Shout if you know more about what's on order.

Regards


Steve

[Learjet]

Hi


A couple of observations,


Learjet - great pie chart but I think you also need to consider the ELA fleet - I would guesstimate that there are at least 50-60 ELA 07/08 gyros in SA ? plus a couple of Zen1 too.

The highest RAF SA construction number i've seen is ship #039 - registered in 2013.

What's en route - a thread a few days ago mentioned a container with four brand new Caliduseseses packed in it - plus I understand a new Zen1 is en route too. Shout if you know more about what's on order.

Regards


Steve

Your're quite right - thank you Steve - I forgot to include the ELA's (60)

[Knighthawk]

So if I want pure performance which of the gyro's will give me great power and maneuverability...?

Rotax 914

Maximum Power
(5 minutes) 115HP / 84.5KW @ 5800 RPM
Maximum Power (sustained) 100HP / 73.5KW @ 5500 RPM
Maximum Torque 106ft-lb / 144NM @ 4900 RPM


Subaru 2.5
The EJ251 is a 2.5 L (2457 cc) Horizontally Opposed DOHC Engine with a bore of 99.5 mm (3.92 in) and a stroke of 79.0 mm (3.11 in). Intake volume is
regulated by the use of a MAP sensor, unlike the EJ253 which uses a MAF sensor. Compression ratio is 10.0: 1. Power ISO:

123 kW (165 hp) and 226 N•m (167 ft•lbf)

What I gather from these specs is a great difference in Hp
And that with rotax you have only a short amount of time at maximum Hp
And with Subaru you have 165Hp available at all time.........

And I gather that maintenance cost is better on Subaru or am I wrong?

Which Gyro's comes with Subaru and which with rotax?

[Learjet]

In aviation, "engine power" is meaningless without reference to weight ratio.
Engine weight, the aircraft's maximum all up weight, the aircraft's aerodynamics and design (and purpose) are all going to influence it's "power" (to weight ratio) requirements, and ultimately, it's overall performance.

Quit playing this....



and GO FLY them.

[Yoda]

Good one Dave...
Knight hawk, All I can add is that you got some very good honest advice from Dave. He knows what he's talking about...
Go get your license first, I know there are a lot of guys buying first and then do training on there own machine to save some money, I did that, but with hindsight, I can tell you its money well spent to do your training on a flight schools machine and then take it from there.... Forget about going for flips with all the different agents.... With all due respect, that will only confuse you even more.... You go do your flips when you have your wings....

That's the way it goes... you don't know what you don't know until you've been through the whole process of first learning to fly and develop a feel to be able to feel the differences and decide what you like best....
The info and knowledge you get from hangar talk with fellow aviators and your instructor is priceless in the long run and most of the questions you now have will be answered by the time you get your wings. From that position you will be able to know what you want and what will suit you best....

[Knighthawk]

Dave....

RAF 2000 GYROPLANE

GTX SE FI EJ25

Lenght
4.15 meter
Height
2.59 meter
Width
1.53 meter
Aircraft Dry Weight
367 Kg
Payload
340 Kg

M16 Gyro

WEIGHT
Empty weight 261/ 266 kg
Maximum take-off weight 450/ 500 kg.
payload 234 kg
AT SEA LEVEL.....
Interesting google fact....

The UK specs state the following
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
Empty Weight: 285kg
Maximum all up weight (MAUW): 500kg
payload 215kg

why would there be a 15kg difference????

So by the specs of these CARDS......
it seems to me that the subaru powered RAF2000 has a better power to weight ratio.....

I've also noticed that the M16 uses 27ft rotor system and the RAF2000 30ft(also composite)
so by my knowledge this gives the RAF a bigger wing area......


I've made some arrangements to go and fly most of them....
and will broaden my knowledge this way....

thanks for the insight so far...

[Steve_SP]

Hi


The following gyro manufacturs use Rotax engines

Auto-Gyro gmbh - over 1070 MT-03/MTOsport delivered, over 285 Calidus delivered over 135 Cavalon delivered

Magni - Over 810 examples of the Magni range deliverd - M16, M22, M24 etc

Xenon - - Approx 160 examples delivered

Zen1 - Approx 25 examples delivered

Arrowcopter - Approx 25 machines delivered

Trixy - Approx 45 machines delivered

ELA - Approx 200 gyros delivered

Sport Coprer - Vortex / Lightning - approx 160 machines delivered

DTA J-RO - approx 15 machines delivered

Can you see a trend here.

The Rotax is an aero engine, design for aviation - certified in many countries.

Why have the above manufacturers including the most prolific manufacturers opt for Rotax engines.


The Subaru is a motor vehicle engine adapted for flying.

Which gyro companies build today with the Subaru - RAF SA - approx 40 gyro delivered plus some home builds.

Enjoy your trial flights.


Regards

[Learjet]

why would there be a 15kg difference????

Most likely due to manufacturing compliance requirement as per the UK's BCAR Section-T regulations, or simply local spec variances for that particular market. ASRA, Australia, for example, specs a slightly longer mast.

So by the specs of these CARDS......
it seems to me that the subaru powered RAF2000 has a better power to weight ratio.....

image.jpg (14.74 KiB) Viewed 4853 times

Alas, when it comes to forces acting upon an aircraft (and it's resultant performance) there's a little more to the equation than just power to weight...

I've also noticed that the M16 uses 27ft rotor system and the RAF2000 30ft(also composite)
so by my knowledge this gives the RAF a bigger wing area......

What does this "bigger wing area" mean to you performance wise?

More lift? Yes
More drag? Yes
Less airspeed? Yes

Knighthawk, I'll be bowing out of this discourse now if you don't mind - the next step for you really is to go (as per Yoda's good advice) and get your wings. This will enable you to then fly and evaluate all the gyro options from a better position of knowledge and experience. To try and do it from an armchair is a waste of time.
Best of luck and I look forward to seeing you in the air.

Regards, Dave

[saraf]

Steve,

Just to correct you, There are more than 600 RAF2000's sold with Subaru engines.

Regards

[Steve_SP]

Hi Eben,

Yes 600 of the type since the early 1990s but 93% of these were built over in Canada by the now defunct R.A.F of Canada. The RAF 2000 has some history.

""Which gyro companies build today with the Subaru - RAF SA - approx 40 gyro delivered plus some home builds.""

Regards

[crazydoc]

Just out of interest
How does a magni M24 orion (hope ive got it right) compare to a cavalon? i know its cheaper and heard it might be a bit less stable.