AmericanAutogyro

[jacester]

I notice that the Sparrowhawk 3 on the AmericanAutogyro website and the RAF look like similar or the same aircraft. What is however interesting to me is the photos in the photo gallery of the conversion done on the RAF to fit a vertical stabiliser. Looks quite nice. Has this been done to any Raf's flying in South Africa.

[johnht]

I believe you mean 'horizontal' stabilizer not 'vertical'.

The RAF's not using a horizontal stab is a very old and painful discussion. The builders/agents (the Mocke's) have explained at great length that the RAF does not require one, and that they see no reason to fit one just to please those who think it should have one!! In my opinion they should know, and the accident stats don't appear to contradict this.

MTCW

John

zu-jht

[hersham]

There seems to be relatively few hours flown by RAF'S in South Africa, so their stats still very vague.Very serious limitations placed on them by authoraties in Britain.Most RAFS overseas seems to have a stab retro fitted and looking at commentary by owners who fitted them they are very pleased and I have yet to come across anyone that has removed it again,unless it was of a very poor design.

[NickL]

As far as I can tell one cannot have both the rotor stabiliser and the H-stab. My logic (not maths!) tells me they will work against each other. Wonder if all those that fitted the H-stab had an R-stab? One thing for sure, the R-stab corrects the 'incorrect' response the old Bensen (which I flew for many years) had in an up/down draft which in turns removes the tendancy to over-react in the wrong direction!!!=PIO So although my RAF (first one has 490+ hours (now on 3rd owner) and second one has just clocked 375 hrs - time for another service...) flies more like a Robbie than a plane and with a landing a touch more difficult than other gyros, I think it is perfectly safe and wonder why I should go through the HUGE effort with CAA and the works to remove my R-stab and fit an H-stab?

Did you guys also have such a magnificent weekend of flying - was like a magic carpet ride. I love March/April in the WCape!!!!

[jacester]

I do not know what is meant by painful discussion as I was not part of it. I only commented on the horizontal stabiliser(not vertical) and just wanted to know if there are any flying in south Africa and what difference if any it had on the flying characteristics of the plane. Looking at the photos I am sure that the pilots doing the conversion had something in mind when doing it and I just wanted to find out from someone actually flying one why and what the results were. This is not an attack on the RAF as I was a Sycamore owner and also always responded violently to unnesessary criticism due to a lack of knowledge or perception. I have never flown a RAF so I will not comment on the flying. Look at my comments on the smaller rotor vs 33 foot rotor on the Sycamore. A huge difference.
Therefore my question again to anyone with first hand experience how does this change the flying behaviour of the plane. Is it making a good product better or just different.

[mikemat]

Look at the topic (misleadingly) called "RAF gyrocopter accidents" and I think most of your queries will be addressed. There is also a very good article which also painstakingly explains why the RAF's flexible mast system also obviates any HS requirement. I will try to find it.

As an RAF owner, I really can't think why a HS mod would enhance my flying experience, or make it safer. To the contrary, I think it would make my aircraft less responsive (another surface for the wind to mess with), a bit heavier, cost me money and not make it safer. As they say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Also, as far as I am aware, RAF apparently did experiment unsuccessfully with a variety of horizontal stabilisers, but the Mockes can give you more on that. My perception is that a lot of people feel that it 'looks' like it needs a HS. Truth is, it doesn't.

[coen]

Hi there, firstly there is no RAF that has been retrofitted with a Sparrowhawk kit. One cant realy compare the two gyro's because they have been designed differently, and thus have different flying caracteristics.
Regards Coen.

[jacester]

Hi Coen

I am referrring to these photos as per the following web address.
http://www.americanautogyro.com/Photo%20Gallery.htm
According to this there are definitely RAF 2000's with the conversion as per the photos and one of them appear to be in South Africa. Going onto the website this is a conversion that they advertise on the web site.
What I can not understand is why not a single RAF pilot is even interested to have first hand feedback on the changes in flight behaviour especially if like in the case of the Sycamore if it could possibly enhance the flying experience for a small additional investment.
I also read on their training that they will only train on a RAF with the horizontal stabiliser fitted as per following:
Please note that American Autogyro will not conduct training in non-centerline thrust, yaw unstable, non-horizontally stabilized aircraft
I like the RAF and with the specs and being manufactured in SA this is a option that must be considered in acquiring a new plane. I would however like to have all the information available to me before I make a decision.

[saraf]

The SparrowHawk is not a design, it is a copy of the RAF.

Jacester, you are more than welcome to contact me on 0833758841 or eben@rafsa.co.za if you would like more information about the RAF.
Where are you situatued?
When buying a gyro , I recommend that you go and fly all the gyros available in SA, Then you come and fly the RAF in Upington with me or my Dad. You are going to spend allot of money and taking peoples word for something or listening to people is not the way to do it. You have to go and fly all and then decide what you like and what you would like to fly. Mabe the RAF is not for you , mabe the magni is not for you, but the only way to find out is to go and fly them all to make sure. All gyros have there pro's and cons's.

I am looking forward to hear form you.



Regards

Eben Jnr

[coen]

Hi there is a big difference in the cabin of the SH and Raf both have their good and bad points . Most of the fotos on their site is of Raf converted to SH, there is NO such examples in S.A only true SH. Yes Ebie alot of things got coppied from Raf but ALOT is VERY different, maar ek will nie baklei nie ek hou van julle en julle produk net nie my keuse nie. Bad luck that the factory has stopped production so no retrofitting of Raf to SH. My problem is that im no sky god, so i need something that does its own flying even with an idiot like me at the contols, and for the money avalable to me the SH was the only option.
Cheers Coen

[whirly]

I heard yesterday that there are 60+ RAFs in the country but I can only find 36 on the SA register, are the others still being built? One more thing that I noticed is that 20 them are registered to two owners??

I am confused!!

Whirly.

[Low Level]

I am confused!!

Why
.
.
.
.
...they love their RAF's.

[flying-i]

Hersham

As per your quotes below..
"There seems to be relatively few hours flown by RAF'S in South Africa, so their stats still very vague."
How did you determine how many hours are flown in RAF's? It would be interesting to look at all the types of gyro flying hours...

"Very serious limitations placed on them by authorities in Britain.?"
Are these limitations on gyro's in general? As far as I know the RAF is one of the very few Gyro's that has an approved flight training manual and is approved for student training by the UK CAA...