At 0:26 it's obvious that this gives the occupants great visibility - even looking down over the nose, as well as to the sides, up and down. More airplanes should have this layout. Most US-built light twins have a huge wing directly below the pilot, and the nacelles are placed for forward to reduce visibility even more. A simple two- or four-place airplane could be built with a pusher configuration and provide fantastic visibility as this machine does.
Agree with your comment on the brake position between the legs. Mostly wonder if the large wing areas will detract from the usually excellent performance of a gyro in turbulence. Interesting looking thing though.
Yes if that cockpit layout is faithful to the real aircraft the take off will be a real fiddlers dance! On the wing I wonder how it behaves at the high AoA in take off / landing
In regards to multi-passenger gyroplanes, we only have to look back to Cierva/Pitcairn's designs which flew prior to Cierva's unfortunate death. From the archive footage taken, the aircraft seemed to fly capable. Is this the, "what's old, has become new again" , historically resurfacing ??
Well, from the view of a non-flyer, this is the first gyro-anything that actually looks like an aircraft designed to fly. Most the others look like something designed by Dr Seuss or Rube Goldberg. I know, I know... this would not appeal to the typical back yard mechanic or 17 yr-old thrill seeker, but I really feel that the world of gyroplanes need a bit more legitimacy to become accepted by all the skeptics. Most of the "Gyro" channels I watch have a 3-item checklist; rotor speed, air speed, and wind direction... period!
What they need is better training mostly. We have a legacy of backyard tinkeres teaching themselves how to fly. Most glass cockpit gyros look like little helicopters but the accident rate is still far too high. Now I know enough helicopter pilots who also fly gyros to know helicopters are far harder to learn to fly. So its not the machines. Having an aeroplany gyro without proper training will do jotting for our reputation. Bringing down the accident rate will.
Heard about the Jaunt Air Mobility ??? The Holy Grail of eVTOL technology ? / Slow Rotor Compound (SRC) propulsion system ruclips.net/video/Y7jJJHwfasw/видео.html
What “skeptics”…? and what are they not “accepting”…? what does “legitimacy” mean in this context…? gyros were invented in the 1920’s and went through 20+ years of intensive development that established the technologies and understandings of aerodynamics that led directly to functional helicopters…. so that’s pretty legitimate it seems to me…
The USA has a high gyrocopter fatality rate compared to other countries operating the same machines. It would seem reasonable to assume that is because of the USA training regime.
"I like your preflight check illustration of the new T-600x craft. That is how an introduction should be. I feel? All small clinics or private medical practice facilities should have one of these(Gyro-Aircraft) stationed in their parking lot for emergency purposes. The company manufactures need to construct a larger flex-glass capsule fuselage to hold: a standard size stretcher, two occupants(A doctor with a med assistance personnel.) and a Pilot(Or multi-task med personnel)to carryout Med emergencies. Please note: Gyro must include a ballistic parachute deployment system referenced from Curti Industries; To avoid auto-rotation practices during engine failure for none experienced operators, and the safety of the patient during flight. Personally? I feel; This craft can save many lives. It moves and lifts? Quickly! And? That is what a patient needs most; Efficient transport. Meaning: No talk? No wait! Just simply?.. We have the ride ready, Let's go." 👍 ~I strongly support your development. It is needed, I know it could save many lives.~ Sincerely: A. Munnings, Date:Tuesday April 23(T=10:31pm, ET)- Wed. 24th(T=5:20pm, ET), 2024.
Drag is induced as a function of the square of the speed. Rotor wings and gyrocopters in particular are limited by their rotor dynamics and maximum speed thereof. Point is, gyros don’t move fast enough to get to the point where retracting the gear pays dividends. Whether the wing lifting surface can offload the rotor blades allowing them to slow appreciably is doubtful. That rotor speed is the critical to the top speed of the aircraft. Perhaps the fully expanded planform six place might be pushing the speed and dynamics range to justify the penalties a retract system entail but that’s a long ways off. Certainly the retract system illustrated in the VR presentation is of little practical value.
@@stephenwalton7079 not true, I used to fly open 3 stick bensens above 60mph force of air on you becomes huge your helmet feels like its going to rip off and that's at speeds up to 80mph, many gyros now cruise at 80-100mph so every little bit helps. Also consider thrust line vs CG. Reducing the drag below the cg will help limit twisting force below the cg.
Is the 60km best LD real? This was what all the machine i flew typically climbed at. My VW climbed out a 35mph. Perhaps they've got appropriate wing loading pitch etc? The wings would also add some lift.
I don't know about the 60km/h number but it does seem low for this type of aircraft - it will require pretty sharp reaction to save an engine failure after take off.
Maybe - it would be interesting to see the interplay between the wing and rotor - especially the AoA of the wing because I’d think the climb out would be fairly steep at 60km/h
Well its a good point but logically if you think about lift from a fixed wing then it comes from the wing's profile, size, AoA and airspeed. We can see the wing isn't that large. Its profile doesn't look extreme [and no slots or flaps] and in any case any extra manipulation of that for the benefit of take off at 60km/h won't be helpful in the cruise and so you're left with AoA and airspeed. We know airspeed is low so AoA?? I'm not so sure. I think its more likely the 60km/h is either an error or is something that gives an on paper performance but won't figure in the PoH as it ultimately kills people!
How does the lift provided by the wing reduce the drag of the rotors such that they say it can go faster. Is it because the rotors need less pitch? Though does that benefit not get cancelled then by the drag of the wing. 200KPH is a nice number plus takes off within 50 meters represents a great little packet.
Essentially it will be the case that at a given speed you’ll need less pitch - the wing drag is assumed to be less. VNe is comparable to a Calidus actually.
The disk angle will be shallower for any given speed less backwards lift but also means you are more likely to unload the disk I'd think. Not sure how this has been factored in perhaps the lift might give the disk time to wind up but I'd be nervous, hope they have considered this. The original gyros had wings but they also had a fixed rotor so the stabiliser was actually stabilising the disk directly. We can overcome any stabiliser as our disk is independent. They got rid of this to gain control at all speeds. Interesting though
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 At the higher speed, the majority of the drag on the aircraft is parasitic, rather than lift-induced. Reducing the AoA of the rotor will contribute, but not a whole heap. Remember, at high speeds, the angle is already pretty flat. I wonder if the idea of the wings is (like in the case of some helicopters) designed to increase the lifting capacity. Not sure what their plans are, but this would (could) provide increased lift (at the same speed) and also additional fuel capacity. Of course, depending on the final intended cruise speed it could also be used to counter the effect on increased asymmetry of lift. Or, it could just be to look cool.
@@darrylwalker1867 Reducing the disk loading reduces the stalled region on the retreating side of the disk. Most of the drag reduction comes from this.
@@MrSunrise- DEpending on the AoA of the advancing blade. At higher speeds, the AoA decreases, and so too do the CL and CD. The reduction in loading requires that less lift (per unit of blade area) is produced. As such, there is less (lift-induced) drag as well.
I do not understand why modern gyro's are not effectively helicopters whereby a fly-by-wire system simply will not allow the rotors to fall below a suitable speed for the given forward movement, including take-off.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Ok then let me put it another way: I do not understand why some modern helicopters do not transition into autorotation for forward flight.
Rotax power. You say that like it’s some special engine. 40 grand for the engine. Couldn’t you buy a lycoming 0 200 for that much ? Let me know if I’m wrong as I’m trying to learn here.
Hi - I say "power" when I could just have said "engine" i.e. Lycoming power rather than lycoming engine. Nothing special with a Rotax just the way I've described the engine.
The gyrocopter is really cool, but will they sell me one of those cursor things that zap passengers with the green ray gun? One of those would really be useful for deleting the middle seat passenger in economy class.
Where in the take off checklist do they mention stick full back, then as speed and lift increase check forward to maintain wheel balance prior to lift off? '"As air speed comes alive pull stick firmly for take off", what tha... Throttle management was not informative enough. Am I missing something? His climb speed was increasing to 100kph. Yes I know its a flight sim for fixed wings.
Sounded like an enthusiast going through the checks without understanding that it's a rotorcraft and that rotor RPM = life. Ugh... "just build airspeed and yank that stick on bank!" Frightening.
haha but in fairness the title actually says.... compound gyro AND a 6 seater, the 6 seat version being their long term aim, the flying version the technology demonstrator.
That climb-out is at 60 knots, NOT kilometers, per hour. She's a heavy one. Engine loss is not a cause for concern even at low altitude. A hard turn to load the rotor (increases rotor RPMs ergo sink resistance) level out and do a vertical sink landing in the space of a tennis court. I've never found a sim gyro that performs correctly. A pity, isn't it, that the finest gyro in the world ended up being bought out by China. The ArrowCopter AC20 was a dream to fly. Do you know Jukka Tervmaaki's work?
?? Sir - respectfully almost nothing you said there was accurate. The film expressly says 60 KM/H and the ASI is in KM/H, so what is the source of your information?? Engine failure is very concerning for all pilots and especially so a low level. Vertical landing? You are very misinformed. The AC20 was a dog. I do his work.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Sir, that pre-rotator would need to be spinning at well over 300rpm's. A Rotax pushing against that much resistance ? I guess there's a reason for "radio silence" on what is actually just a version-2 CarterCopter. What kind of gyro do you fly? An RAF "dog"? Where did you get your training? You're talking like a fixed-wing or helo pilot ... or one without proper gyro training. The AC20 WAS a "dog" ... a 120 knot (that's 222.24 k/h for non-pilots) greyhound with combined 70liter fuel tanks. I'm not "informed". I'm a retired pilot ... as in ... actually flew the things ... but never one of the Benson/Robinson deathtraps.
Genuinely you have lost me with where this is going. Why are you now referring to a pre-rotator and a figure of 300rpm? Then why the question mark about a Rotax in that context? What radio silence on Cartercopter? I've never mentioned them although now you have how many of these aircraft have been sold? At what price? and where can my channel subscribers buy one from? Standing by for radio silence.... Now we turn to licensing. Lets not because it is exceptionally lame and usually leads to embarrassment. Being generous to you running the most popular gyrocopter resource channel on RUclips with 100's of film - many of which are of me instructing I think that speaks for itself. I am looking to your own channel to gauge your own experiences but it says:- This channel has no videos.... I have flown the Arrowcopter in Austria and at the speed you mention it developed a terrible dutch roll [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_roll]. The aircraft failed the airworthiness requirements in the UK and the factory suffered a "timely" fire. Hmm. Here by way of completeness is the last communication I had personally with the head of sales in June 2015 [I heard nothing since]:- Hello Phil, thank you very much for your patience. According to our certification manager the UK papers will be delayed and at the moment we cannot tell how long. We are facing the same issue that some competitors had in the past during the UK certification process. CAA requires a better longitudinal static stability and with the current design we will not be able to achieve that. The solution is quite simple in theory in the form of a slight shift of the rotor hinge point. This is nonetheless an unexpected R&D project which will take some time on our side. I will keep you in the loop about the progress and we are certainly open to discuss a future cooperation with you further in the meantime. Best regards Lukas Lukas Schweighofer Head of Sales lukas.schweighofer@arrow-copter.com Mobile: +43 (0) 660 170 66 41 FD-Composites GmbH Friedlmühle 430 | 3311 Zeillern / AUSTRIA T. +43 (0) 7472 240 53 180 F. +43 (0) 7472 240 77 W. www.arrow-copter.com Skype: arrowcopter.lukas
What advantage do the "wings" give to this Gyro? They look cool but I'd rather see them left off if they don't add anything aerodynamically to it. Otherwise, it looks like a "pretend-a-plane".
Hey - I don't have any engineering insight to this specific model but I suspect that it does generate lift that is contributory to the design, likely a smaller rotor or a higher payload for the same rotor size.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Yes. There is an early Gyro-copter company that is now working with A GC with actual wings although smaller than a regular plane (can't remember the name of the company off the top of my head). It's jump power is stored in high rotating rotors then after vertical liftoff, it moves forward to it's airspeed fast enough for the wings to hold it aloft. The rotors are then allowed to slow to the point where they don't create lift anymore but their windmilling (at a horizontal attitude) give a much reduced drag.
Hi no not in the way I think you mean. However with the wing providing lift it will necessarily unload the rotor to degree and the rotor will be slower than it would otherwise be at similar airspeeds.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 It is difficult to see if the wings are providing lift or down lift without in-flight data provided by them. The AoA of the wings is in question and that is usually done by adjusting the HS, then trimming the rotor. Slowing the rotor, even just a little, can reduce rotor drag quite a bit.
Personally I wouldn’t ever buy an aircraft like this. It seems like the designer has deliberately sought to remove every advantage of a gyro over a regular 3axis airplane whilst retaining all of the limitations!
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 yes I dont know, it was slower than I expected and seemed to pivot quite high up the mast somewhere. I guess there are other configurations that could be explored, I recall a RC model chinook type tractor gyro that flew very well
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Ок. Поясняю: Изобретатели по всему миру давно ищут конфигурацию " индивидуального летательного аппарата". придумывают маленькие самолёты (складной самолёт Джеймса бонда, Кри-Кри и тому подобные), маленькие вертолёты (Робинсон, Хьюз), реактиные ранцы и Квадрокоптеры-мясорубки)). Н все понимают, чтоэто НЕ ТО! Либо нужен Аэродром, сложное обслуживание и много денег, либо это просто утопия. А хочется сесть как в автомобиль и просто взлететь откуда угодно, в костюме и с портфелем. И тогда начали "совмещать" автомобиль с самолётом. Но вот проблема-КРЫЛЬЯ! их НЕКУДА девать! Их складывали вдоль, их делали легко съёмными, их возили на прицепе. Но опять получался САМОЛЁТ! Это дорго, громоздко и сложно. По дороге не покатаешься и к своему дому не подъедешь. Крылья нужно УБРАТЬ! И вот я увидел "Летательный аппарат своей мечты" -Автожир ARGON GTL, который является наследник XENON. И второй -это чешский NIRVANA (с электроприводом на колёса!). Оба этих аппарата обладают несколькими необходимыми качествами (это не реклама!): -ими хочется владеть -в них удобно сидеть -отличный обзор -посадка "плечом к плечу" -2 распашные, автомобильные двери -удобная посадка в ARGON -они компактные. -можно сесть на картофельное поле -можно ехать по дороге прямо до авто заправки или до Кафе! ( NIRVANA) Это стало возможным именно благодаря ОТСУТСТВИЮ крыльев! А что у Вас? Посадка "тандем" и два ДЛИННЫХ крыла сразу ликвидируют почти все преимущества Автожира (гирокоптера) перед Самолётом и вертолётом! Крылья -Это ОШИБКА. если сравнивать ARGON (XENON) с аналогичными, то Вы заметите, что лобовая проекция у него- КВАДРАТ! Обтекаемый, "облизаный", но квадрат. А это значит, что внутри он не давит пассажирам на плечи! и даже в "тандемной" NIRVANA голова пилота не упирается в лобовое стекло (а у многих- упирается, они сидят как мухи под стеклом)). Пилотажные качества обсуждать нет смысла. Наличие Крыльев у Вашего аппарата никаких принципиальных преимуществ не даёт. Ну немного быстрее, ну немного маневреннее. КОМУ это нужно?! А вот удобство и простота исчезает! Лично я бы выбрал (чисто теоретически, это мне не по карману)), из всего мирового авиапарка Гирокоптеров именно ARGON GTL и приделал бы к нему электропривод на колёса. Это позволит ездить по дорогам общего пользования.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 п.с. Я инженер-механик. Но автомобиль для себя выбирарал не по "надёжности" (они примерно все однинаковые), и не по супер мотору", а по...удобству посадки-высадки и удобству салона! Если при посадке я бьюсь головой об переднюю стойку, то мне такой автомобиль не нужен. Если он "страшный", то на его супер надёжность мне начихать, он мне не нужен. Если внутри не удобно сидеть, то он мне не нужен. Если он может ехать быстрее всех, но просвет лобового стекла меньше, чем в танке, то он мне не нужен! И влезать внутрь как мартышка я тоже не хочу. У нас в доме есть подземный Паркинг. Но я держу машину ....возле входа вдом! Потому что это УДОБНО! Конь долже стоять у двери!))
Sorry dude. I gotta tell ya to work on your sound!.. BLEW MY FREAKING EARS OUT!!!! Had to put on headphones to hear you, then switched to VR and now I have tinnitus! Either talk INTO THE MIC, or figure out how to natch the sound levels on your video. Sorry, won't be subscribing.
![Gyrocopter parachute rescue system or ballistic recovery system [BRS]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qroG2u4A2Q0/mqdefault.jpg)
![Gyrocopter parachute rescue system or ballistic recovery system [BRS]](/img/tr.png)
Sexy design. The only thing missing are a couple of rocket pods.
At 0:26 it's obvious that this gives the occupants great visibility - even looking down over the nose, as well as to the sides, up and down. More airplanes should have this layout. Most US-built light twins have a huge wing directly below the pilot, and the nacelles are placed for forward to reduce visibility even more. A simple two- or four-place airplane could be built with a pusher configuration and provide fantastic visibility as this machine does.
Carter, that's it! Carter is the company that has this design!
Agree with your comment on the brake position between the legs. Mostly wonder if the large wing areas will detract from the usually excellent performance of a gyro in turbulence. Interesting looking thing though.
Yes if that cockpit layout is faithful to the real aircraft the take off will be a real fiddlers dance! On the wing I wonder how it behaves at the high AoA in take off / landing
You'd want to be careful your wing wasn't helping to unload the rotor at high speeds when the disk is already shallow.
Круто, very good!! Это лучшая конструкция!!
@GÜNEY ÖZDEMİR ))
In regards to multi-passenger gyroplanes, we only have to look back to Cierva/Pitcairn's designs which flew prior to Cierva's unfortunate death. From the archive footage taken, the aircraft seemed to fly capable.
Is this the, "what's old, has become new again" , historically resurfacing ??
Well, from the view of a non-flyer, this is the first gyro-anything that actually looks like an aircraft designed to fly. Most the others look like something designed by Dr Seuss or Rube Goldberg. I know, I know... this would not appeal to the typical back yard mechanic or 17 yr-old thrill seeker, but I really feel that the world of gyroplanes need a bit more legitimacy to become accepted by all the skeptics. Most of the "Gyro" channels I watch have a 3-item checklist; rotor speed, air speed, and wind direction... period!
What they need is better training mostly. We have a legacy of backyard tinkeres teaching themselves how to fly. Most glass cockpit gyros look like little helicopters but the accident rate is still far too high. Now I know enough helicopter pilots who also fly gyros to know helicopters are far harder to learn to fly. So its not the machines. Having an aeroplany gyro without proper training will do jotting for our reputation. Bringing down the accident rate will.
Heard about the Jaunt Air Mobility ???
The Holy Grail of eVTOL technology ? / Slow Rotor Compound (SRC) propulsion system
ruclips.net/video/Y7jJJHwfasw/видео.html
What “skeptics”…? and what are they not “accepting”…? what does “legitimacy” mean in this context…? gyros were invented in the 1920’s and went through 20+ years of intensive development that established the technologies and understandings of aerodynamics that led directly to functional helicopters…. so that’s pretty legitimate it seems to me…
The USA has a high gyrocopter fatality rate compared to other countries operating the same machines. It would seem reasonable to assume that is because of the USA training regime.
That’s a great looking machine.
Muito bonito, mas ficaria melhor se os bancos fossem lado a lado. 👏🇧🇷
"I like your preflight check illustration of the new T-600x craft. That is how an introduction should be. I feel? All small clinics or private medical practice facilities should have one of these(Gyro-Aircraft) stationed in their parking lot for emergency purposes. The company manufactures need to construct a larger flex-glass capsule fuselage to hold: a standard size stretcher, two occupants(A doctor with a med assistance personnel.) and a Pilot(Or multi-task med personnel)to carryout Med emergencies. Please note: Gyro must include a ballistic parachute deployment system referenced from Curti Industries; To avoid auto-rotation practices during engine failure for none experienced operators, and the safety of the patient during flight. Personally? I feel; This craft can save many lives. It moves and lifts? Quickly! And? That is what a patient needs most; Efficient transport. Meaning: No talk? No wait! Just simply?.. We have the ride ready, Let's go." 👍
~I strongly support your development. It is needed, I know it could save many lives.~
Sincerely:
A. Munnings,
Date:Tuesday April 23(T=10:31pm, ET)-
Wed. 24th(T=5:20pm, ET), 2024.
What would be the value of retractable gear on a aircraft limited by its rotor dynamics? Weight, complexity, maintenance and cost in return for what?
Big cool 😎 factor. :)
Streamlining. But yes one more thing to go wrong.
A reduction in parasitic drag. Increases significantly at the upper end of the airspeed range.
Drag is induced as a function of the square of the speed. Rotor wings and gyrocopters in particular are limited by their rotor dynamics and maximum speed thereof. Point is, gyros don’t move fast enough to get to the point where retracting the gear pays dividends. Whether the wing lifting surface can offload the rotor blades allowing them to slow appreciably is doubtful. That rotor speed is the critical to the top speed of the aircraft. Perhaps the fully expanded planform six place might be pushing the speed and dynamics range to justify the penalties a retract system entail but that’s a long ways off. Certainly the retract system illustrated in the VR presentation is of little practical value.
@@stephenwalton7079 not true, I used to fly open 3 stick bensens above 60mph force of air on you becomes huge your helmet feels like its going to rip off and that's at speeds up to 80mph, many gyros now cruise at 80-100mph so every little bit helps. Also consider thrust line vs CG. Reducing the drag below the cg will help limit twisting force below the cg.
It looks a lot like the CarterCopter.
Is the 60km best LD real? This was what all the machine i flew typically climbed at. My VW climbed out a 35mph. Perhaps they've got appropriate wing loading pitch etc? The wings would also add some lift.
I don't know about the 60km/h number but it does seem low for this type of aircraft - it will require pretty sharp reaction to save an engine failure after take off.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 unless its a slower ld? Perhaps the extra lift of the wings?
Maybe - it would be interesting to see the interplay between the wing and rotor - especially the AoA of the wing because I’d think the climb out would be fairly steep at 60km/h
I wonder if they feel the wing will assist the rotor enough for 60kph departure?
Well its a good point but logically if you think about lift from a fixed wing then it comes from the wing's profile, size, AoA and airspeed. We can see the wing isn't that large. Its profile doesn't look extreme [and no slots or flaps] and in any case any extra manipulation of that for the benefit of take off at 60km/h won't be helpful in the cruise and so you're left with AoA and airspeed. We know airspeed is low so AoA?? I'm not so sure. I think its more likely the 60km/h is either an error or is something that gives an on paper performance but won't figure in the PoH as it ultimately kills people!
This looks a whole like a CarterCopter to me. That design didn't seem to prove out.
Je to fantasie a vrchol Gyrocopter Machine.
How does the lift provided by the wing reduce the drag of the rotors such that they say it can go faster. Is it because the rotors need less pitch? Though does that benefit not get cancelled then by the drag of the wing. 200KPH is a nice number plus takes off within 50 meters represents a great little packet.
Essentially it will be the case that at a given speed you’ll need less pitch - the wing drag is assumed to be less. VNe is comparable to a Calidus actually.
The disk angle will be shallower for any given speed less backwards lift but also means you are more likely to unload the disk I'd think. Not sure how this has been factored in perhaps the lift might give the disk time to wind up but I'd be nervous, hope they have considered this. The original gyros had wings but they also had a fixed rotor so the stabiliser was actually stabilising the disk directly. We can overcome any stabiliser as our disk is independent. They got rid of this to gain control at all speeds. Interesting though
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 At the higher speed, the majority of the drag on the aircraft is parasitic, rather than lift-induced. Reducing the AoA of the rotor will contribute, but not a whole heap. Remember, at high speeds, the angle is already pretty flat. I wonder if the idea of the wings is (like in the case of some helicopters) designed to increase the lifting capacity. Not sure what their plans are, but this would (could) provide increased lift (at the same speed) and also additional fuel capacity. Of course, depending on the final intended cruise speed it could also be used to counter the effect on increased asymmetry of lift. Or, it could just be to look cool.
@@darrylwalker1867 Reducing the disk loading reduces the stalled region on the retreating side of the disk. Most of the drag reduction comes from this.
@@MrSunrise- DEpending on the AoA of the advancing blade. At higher speeds, the AoA decreases, and so too do the CL and CD. The reduction in loading requires that less lift (per unit of blade area) is produced. As such, there is less (lift-induced) drag as well.
fantastic
I do not understand why modern gyro's are not effectively helicopters whereby a fly-by-wire system simply will not allow the rotors to fall below a suitable speed for the given forward movement, including take-off.
As you say then it becomes a helicopter....
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Ok then let me put it another way: I do not understand why some modern helicopters do not transition into autorotation for forward flight.
TheBaconWizard see Lockheed Cheyenne- needs a prop for propulsion
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Nice, thanks for that :)
@@TheBaconWizard see Carter Copter.
am Schluss macht man die Rechnung !
Ich fürchte, an eine solche Zahl zu denken!
This looks and sounds like another fly-by-wire... Err, I mean fly-by-night company... LMAO
It reminds me of the 4-place Cartercopter prototypes - which began flying in 2001. Nothing new here.
The latest attempt to see how much gyro a 912/914 can actually force into the sky.
aiming at 115 kts top speed they will soon get a 915 installed
Propellers, blades still old school lets go for something new after all the technology is here let used it and stop stalling. Thank you
What is the new technology?
Electrogravitics
Yeah, i'm using a teleporter, blades are so old fashioned.
...yes, I know, historically the early gyro-PLANES had wings....
Rotax power. You say that like it’s some special engine. 40 grand for the engine. Couldn’t you buy a lycoming 0 200 for that much ? Let me know if I’m wrong as I’m trying to learn here.
Hi - I say "power" when I could just have said "engine" i.e. Lycoming power rather than lycoming engine. Nothing special with a Rotax just the way I've described the engine.
The gyrocopter is really cool, but will they sell me one of those cursor things that zap passengers with the green ray gun? One of those would really be useful for deleting the middle seat passenger in economy class.
Where in the take off checklist do they mention stick full back, then as speed and lift increase check forward to maintain wheel balance prior to lift off? '"As air speed comes alive pull stick firmly for take off", what tha... Throttle management was not informative enough. Am I missing something? His climb speed was increasing to 100kph. Yes I know its a flight sim for fixed wings.
Sounded like an enthusiast going through the checks without understanding that it's a rotorcraft and that rotor RPM = life. Ugh... "just build airspeed and yank that stick on bank!" Frightening.
Can’t see the point of the stubby wings and tail assembly….just added weight and drag.
What’s the cost of these things
The capacity is only 2 people, not 6. Dislike for misleading «…a 6 seater» info.
haha but in fairness the title actually says.... compound gyro AND a 6 seater, the 6 seat version being their long term aim, the flying version the technology demonstrator.
I stumbled upon this video on accident and I'm going to give it a like to offset your dislike. Now what are you going to do?
That climb-out is at 60 knots, NOT kilometers, per hour. She's a heavy one. Engine loss is not a cause for concern even at low altitude. A hard turn to load the rotor (increases rotor RPMs ergo sink resistance) level out and do a vertical sink landing in the space of a tennis court. I've never found a sim gyro that performs correctly.
A pity, isn't it, that the finest gyro in the world ended up being bought out by China. The ArrowCopter AC20 was a dream to fly.
Do you know Jukka Tervmaaki's work?
?? Sir - respectfully almost nothing you said there was accurate. The film expressly says 60 KM/H and the ASI is in KM/H, so what is the source of your information?? Engine failure is very concerning for all pilots and especially so a low level. Vertical landing? You are very misinformed. The AC20 was a dog. I do his work.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Sir, that pre-rotator would need to be spinning at well over 300rpm's. A Rotax pushing against that much resistance ? I guess there's a reason for "radio silence" on what is actually just a version-2 CarterCopter.
What kind of gyro do you fly? An RAF "dog"?
Where did you get your training? You're talking like a fixed-wing or helo pilot ... or one without proper gyro training.
The AC20 WAS a "dog" ... a 120 knot (that's 222.24 k/h for non-pilots) greyhound with combined 70liter fuel tanks.
I'm not "informed". I'm a retired pilot ... as in ... actually flew the things ... but never one of the Benson/Robinson deathtraps.
Genuinely you have lost me with where this is going. Why are you now referring to a pre-rotator and a figure of 300rpm? Then why the question mark about a Rotax in that context?
What radio silence on Cartercopter? I've never mentioned them although now you have how many of these aircraft have been sold? At what price? and where can my channel subscribers buy one from? Standing by for radio silence....
Now we turn to licensing. Lets not because it is exceptionally lame and usually leads to embarrassment. Being generous to you running the most popular gyrocopter resource channel on RUclips with 100's of film - many of which are of me instructing I think that speaks for itself. I am looking to your own channel to gauge your own experiences but it says:- This channel has no videos....
I have flown the Arrowcopter in Austria and at the speed you mention it developed a terrible dutch roll [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_roll]. The aircraft failed the airworthiness requirements in the UK and the factory suffered a "timely" fire. Hmm. Here by way of completeness is the last communication I had personally with the head of sales in June 2015 [I heard nothing since]:-
Hello Phil,
thank you very much for your patience. According to our certification manager the UK papers will be delayed and at the moment we cannot tell how long. We are facing the same issue that some competitors had in the past during the UK certification process. CAA requires a better longitudinal static stability and with the current design we will not be able to achieve that. The solution is quite simple in theory in the form of a slight shift of the rotor hinge point. This is nonetheless an unexpected R&D project which will take some time on our side.
I will keep you in the loop about the progress and we are certainly open to discuss a future cooperation with you further in the meantime.
Best regards
Lukas
Lukas Schweighofer
Head of Sales
lukas.schweighofer@arrow-copter.com
Mobile: +43 (0) 660 170 66 41 FD-Composites GmbH
Friedlmühle 430 |
3311 Zeillern / AUSTRIA T. +43 (0) 7472 240 53 180
F. +43 (0) 7472 240 77
W. www.arrow-copter.com
Skype: arrowcopter.lukas
we would to know of your product gyro 6 seat...did some body know contacted...
What advantage do the "wings" give to this Gyro? They look cool but I'd rather see them left off if they don't add anything aerodynamically to it. Otherwise, it looks like a "pretend-a-plane".
Hey - I don't have any engineering insight to this specific model but I suspect that it does generate lift that is contributory to the design, likely a smaller rotor or a higher payload for the same rotor size.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Yes. There is an early Gyro-copter company that is now working with A GC with actual wings although smaller than a regular plane (can't remember the name of the company off the top of my head). It's jump power is stored in high rotating rotors then after vertical liftoff, it moves forward to it's airspeed fast enough for the wings to hold it aloft. The rotors are then allowed to slow to the point where they don't create lift anymore but their windmilling (at a horizontal attitude) give a much reduced drag.
Carter Aviation........
6 seater?
That aircraft looks very interesting. Where can we find the GA specifications?
Hey Charlie www.fraundorfer.aero but I suspect it will never happen...
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 LOL I first read that as - fraudoffer -
Is this a slow rotor gyroplane?
Hi no not in the way I think you mean. However with the wing providing lift it will necessarily unload the rotor to degree and the rotor will be slower than it would otherwise be at similar airspeeds.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 It is difficult to see if the wings are providing lift or down lift without in-flight data provided by them. The AoA of the wings is in question and that is usually done by adjusting the HS, then trimming the rotor. Slowing the rotor, even just a little, can reduce rotor drag quite a bit.
Has anyone actually bought this? Is it on sale?
No I don't believe it is on sale
Looks like a death trap. I should get one for my ex
Looks like a Rotovox
What ever happened to them??!!
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 , looks like they are still in business.
Thinking about charging you for new speakers! Doesn't your editing software have volume leveling????
The audio makes you sound like you're talking into a coffee can 3 m away from the microphone.
Yeah that was the previous set up...ruclips.net/video/ObENInkG6EY/видео.html
Serious volume issues in this video.
Yar...hence ruclips.net/video/ObENInkG6EY/видео.html
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 - Yep, that is MUCH better!
Price?
yeah for now its just an experimental demonstrator
Personally I wouldn’t ever buy an aircraft like this. It seems like the designer has deliberately sought to remove every advantage of a gyro over a regular 3axis airplane whilst retaining all of the limitations!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Seemed a tad sluggish in roll manoeuvre
Yes I would think the winglets have a damping effect
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 yes I dont know, it was slower than I expected and seemed to pivot quite high up the mast somewhere. I guess there are other configurations that could be explored, I recall a RC model chinook type tractor gyro that flew very well
Flying a modern gyro is too complex to be fun. Instead, it is a workload.
🌹🌹🌹👉🏻🌹💐👍🏻
tomuch shit to it , for me
Ugh, a CG voiceover.
Ah - yet another cgi video of this aircraft which doesn't actually exist.
ส่วนเรื่องฝาครอบใบพัดต้องไปศึกษาหลักอากาศพลศาสตร์ดูเพราะถ้ามันใส่มันจะลดแรงต้าน
In Jesus name. Amen.
Фигня. Не правильный гирокоптер.
Хотите дать немного больше объяснений или вы просто хотите оставить грубый комментарий?
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 если вам действительно интересно услышать аргументы, то я напишу.
@@АлексСим-л5г
Да, конечно, я заинтересован, и благодаря переводчику Google мы можем делиться ими на всех языках!
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 Ок. Поясняю:
Изобретатели по всему миру давно ищут конфигурацию " индивидуального летательного аппарата". придумывают маленькие самолёты (складной самолёт Джеймса бонда, Кри-Кри и тому подобные), маленькие вертолёты (Робинсон, Хьюз), реактиные ранцы и Квадрокоптеры-мясорубки)).
Н все понимают, чтоэто НЕ ТО! Либо нужен Аэродром, сложное обслуживание и много денег, либо это просто утопия. А хочется сесть как в автомобиль и просто взлететь откуда угодно, в костюме и с портфелем. И тогда начали "совмещать" автомобиль с самолётом. Но вот проблема-КРЫЛЬЯ! их НЕКУДА девать! Их складывали вдоль, их делали легко съёмными, их возили на прицепе. Но опять получался САМОЛЁТ! Это дорго, громоздко и сложно. По дороге не покатаешься и к своему дому не подъедешь. Крылья нужно УБРАТЬ! И вот я увидел "Летательный аппарат своей мечты" -Автожир ARGON GTL, который является наследник XENON. И второй -это чешский NIRVANA (с электроприводом на колёса!). Оба этих аппарата обладают несколькими необходимыми качествами (это не реклама!):
-ими хочется владеть
-в них удобно сидеть
-отличный обзор
-посадка "плечом к плечу"
-2 распашные, автомобильные двери
-удобная посадка в ARGON
-они компактные.
-можно сесть на картофельное поле
-можно ехать по дороге прямо до авто заправки или до Кафе! ( NIRVANA)
Это стало возможным именно благодаря ОТСУТСТВИЮ крыльев!
А что у Вас? Посадка "тандем" и два ДЛИННЫХ крыла сразу ликвидируют почти все преимущества Автожира (гирокоптера) перед Самолётом и вертолётом! Крылья -Это ОШИБКА.
если сравнивать ARGON (XENON) с аналогичными, то Вы заметите, что лобовая проекция у него- КВАДРАТ! Обтекаемый, "облизаный", но квадрат. А это значит, что внутри он не давит пассажирам на плечи! и даже в "тандемной" NIRVANA голова пилота не упирается в лобовое стекло (а у многих- упирается, они сидят как мухи под стеклом)). Пилотажные качества обсуждать нет смысла. Наличие Крыльев у Вашего аппарата никаких принципиальных преимуществ не даёт. Ну немного быстрее, ну немного маневреннее. КОМУ это нужно?! А вот удобство и простота исчезает!
Лично я бы выбрал (чисто теоретически, это мне не по карману)), из всего мирового авиапарка Гирокоптеров именно ARGON GTL и приделал бы к нему электропривод на колёса. Это позволит ездить по дорогам общего пользования.
@@gyrocopterflyingclub6148 п.с. Я инженер-механик. Но автомобиль для себя выбирарал не по "надёжности" (они примерно все однинаковые), и не по супер мотору", а по...удобству посадки-высадки и удобству салона! Если при посадке я бьюсь головой об переднюю стойку, то мне такой автомобиль не нужен. Если он "страшный", то на его супер надёжность мне начихать, он мне не нужен. Если внутри не удобно сидеть, то он мне не нужен. Если он может ехать быстрее всех, но просвет лобового стекла меньше, чем в танке, то он мне не нужен! И влезать внутрь как мартышка я тоже не хочу. У нас в доме есть подземный Паркинг. Но я держу машину ....возле входа вдом! Потому что это УДОБНО! Конь долже стоять у двери!))
Sorry dude. I gotta tell ya to work on your sound!.. BLEW MY FREAKING EARS OUT!!!! Had to put on headphones to hear you, then switched to VR and now I have tinnitus! Either talk INTO THE MIC, or figure out how to natch the sound levels on your video. Sorry, won't be subscribing.
น่าจะทิ้งระเบิดได้แค่อย่างเดียวละมั้งโครงสร้างมันได้รับการออกแบบมาสำหรับการยิงไปด้านหน้า
ขนาดเท่ากระสุนปืนคอบางรุ่นน่าจะติดตั้งได้