Anyone Consider a Gyrocoptor for a BOV?.... Seriously. [Archive] - When SHTF

knox45

08-26-2008, 12:47 PM

Ok, seriously, I am interested in a gyrocopter as a BOV. Here’s the deal, I live in NJ, but my family has a home in NH that would be defendable and is fairly off of the beaten path. We use it for hunting and ATV’n. I am worried that if the SHTF, I would not be able to get there by car because of mass panic traffic (ala Katrina). I know, I know, I should be bugging out to Idaho or MT, but that is just not possible. For those of you who don’t know, a gyrocopter looks like a mini helicopter, but operates differently. They weigh about 900lbs, and are about the size of a Jeep Wrangler, or maybe a Cherokee, but they fit in a normal garage. They only need about 100 feet to take off and can land basically in a big parking spot. If you loose engine power you can still land safely. They have a range of 300-400 miles and cruise at 75-100mph. To get licensed only requires 20 hours of flight time

The down side is that they cost about $25k. It only seat two people, although it is just my wife and I. The other drawback is that payload is only about 600-700 lbs, including people, so that only leaves about 275-375 for gear. Now I bet with a bigger/ better engine that the payload could be increased. But the NH house is always pretty well stocked.

So, what do you guys think- If you had the cash would you consider a gyrocopter for a SHTF BOV? Keep in mind that I could use this recreationally, and I can probably write it off as business expense (advertising) if I put my company logo on it.

madmyk

08-26-2008, 01:00 PM

Personally, I would think it would make you too much of a target. If the SHTF you are going to have your share of crazies, the real crazies (uberparanoids), that are going to think it is all a gubment plot and see you as a drone that is watching them. These are the nutjobs that will be taking pot shots at you. There is not alot to hide behind up in the air.

knox45

08-26-2008, 01:27 PM

These are the nutjobs that will be taking pot shots at you

I was thinking about that too, but some of these things have a ceiling of up to 10,000 feet, at a few thousand feet, a don't thin that your average nut job could see you, let alone hit you. Also, I dont even know how high a rifle bullet would go. Any way, it seems like a better alternative to sitting on a highway in my car in countless hours of traffic.

madmyk

08-26-2008, 01:47 PM

I was thinking about that too, but some of these things have a ceiling of up to 10,000 feet, at a few thousand feet, a don't thin that your average nut job could see you, let alone hit you. Also, I dont even know how high a rifle bullet would go. Any way, it seems like a better alternative to sitting on a highway in my car in countless hours of traffic.

I will agree it is most likely better than sitting in the 4 lane parking lot, but here is another thought....

What if the SHTF is caused by air. Be it EMP, nuclear, chemical, or another Hijack attack. If the FED shuts down the air I would imagine not only would EVERYONE be shooting at you, so would the F16's.

I would consider it as a possible, but not primary BOV.

E`omer

08-26-2008, 03:55 PM

If you have good preps where you can fly off to , it could work . A problem I see is knowing when to fly away .Fly too early and you violate some FAA rule , wait too late and the whole neighborhood will want to ride with you . Panicked people will try to take it from you .

BobS

08-26-2008, 04:31 PM

Out of curiosity, knox45, have you ever flown one? I haven't-only fixed wing singles and twins, hence my curiousity.

Best regards,

Bob

hitech_hick

08-26-2008, 11:30 PM

I was thinking about that too, but some of these things have a ceiling of up to 10,000 feet, at a few thousand feet, a don't thin that your average nut job could see you, let alone hit you. Also, I dont even know how high a rifle bullet would go. Any way, it seems like a better alternative to sitting on a highway in my car in countless hours of traffic.

At 3,000 feet (1,000 yards) you are still within the range of quiet a few rifles, but the odds of someone being able to hit you are pretty slim. As mentioned though, at that height you are opening yourself of up to other aircraft. I can't imagine the radar signal being very large though, my guess is that you would probably go unnoticed.

hick

Encato

08-27-2008, 01:01 AM

id love to have one 1/4 mile to take of and all u have to land in a tight spot is kill the moter and it will glyde down but i have a large family and my B O L is onley 35 miles away but i would like two of those miny dune buggys 1 as a scout and the other as a escort

ICDUMBPEOPLE

08-27-2008, 09:26 AM

About 4 months ago, me and some friends were out on a weekend excursion and we stopped at a park about 2 hours from our home. The park had a wide river running though it and there was a large bridge that went over the river for traffic. Out of nowhere one of those flying machines with the engine on the back and a parachute came rolling thru and he was flying about 60- 100 ft above the river. He seemed to have the machine under control and then a gust of wind came and took over. He lost control and was headed straight for the concrete bridge at about 40 mph. If he would have hit that bridge, im sure he would have been a dead man. Luckily, at the last second, the wind subsided and he was able to dodge the bridge but he had lost altitude and control and landed into a patch of thick trees. His machine was destroyed and he was cut up and bruised badly, but hes lucky to be alive.

You couldnt pay me to get on one of these machines. They are to lightweight and their construction is not desinged for them to take a impact and provide protection to the occupants.

My sincere advice to anyone wanting to get one of these :

FIND ANOTHER HOBBY.

all it takes is one unlucky instance on one of these things , and your life would probably be changed forever...and not for the better. I do not like engaging in hobbys that can be easily life threatening if a unexpected gust of wind pops up out of nowhere or if my engine decides to shut down , etc..

ICDUMBPEOPLE

08-27-2008, 09:33 AM

The funny thing about this whole scenario is, when I ran over to help this man , he was actually wearing a helmet cam and was recording the whole incident to post on youtube . This nutball was actually excited that he caught this accident on tape and he repeatedly asked me to keep an eye for it on youtube because he was gonna post it { at the time, I think youtube was having a contest where you could win money by posting your videos }

I also remember that he seemed more disturbed that he lost his glasses in the impact and couldnt find them , and it was almost like he didint even realize he almost lost his damn life. I will never forget that day ...just starring at him and his machine being controlled by the wind and him being virtually helpless , at the pure mercy of fate itself.

He did say that this would be his last flight :} .....His machine was in really bad shape. The metal tubing was all bent, the wooden prop snapped . Another thing is, that when he crashed , he was strapped into the machine , and needed assistance to get out of the damn thing and because the impact was so hard , the motor/ gas tank was leaking gas all over the machine. This guy could have easily been burnt alive . I really dont know if he knew how fortunate he was to walk away with only needing stitches in his arm .

Christian for Israel

08-27-2008, 09:42 AM

gyrocopters are a lot different than para-sailers. that said, high winds can affect them. of course, the farther away from the ground you are the less a sudden gust matters and gyros are inherently safe aircraft.

one problem with putting a bigger engine and rotor on to increase payload capacity (yes, a larger rotor is needed or the extra power is wasted) is take-off distance is also increased. if you don't have a pre-rotator your take-off run can be excessive. the main rotor of a gyrocopter isn't powered, it turns due to the force of wind travelling over it. a stiff headwind can get it going pretty good and shorten the takeoff run but a calm wind can result in needing several thousand feet to lift with a full payload.

for those curious about just what we're talking about, the little aircraft in the movie 'road warrior' is a gyro.

yugoshooter

08-27-2008, 09:48 AM

ICDUMBPEOPLE

08-27-2008, 09:55 AM

If you don't take Chance's in life it can get very boring. You could have been on your way home in your car and blown a tire and crashed over a cliff. So why not be a little adventuresome, You only live once so enjoy it!

The consider me a sissy ;)

Ill take my chances in the car , over those lightweight machines defying gravity and not built to protect the occupants in case of a crash 100s of feet in the air .

The most risk I like to limit myself to is a motorcycle.....and even then im not fond of the risks . Because of that , I recently purchased a 3 wheel street legal trike . Which still has inhereint risks and isnt made to protect me in a crash...but at least its on the ground...and not defying gravity .

I know , I know...the old saying that planes are the safest way to travel . But this is one instance where I choose not to submit myself to the reported statistics . I like my feet and body close to the ground ...I sleep easier that way :sleepy::sleepy:

knox45

08-27-2008, 11:29 AM

Out of curiosity, knox45, have you ever flown one? I haven't-only fixed wing singles and twins, hence my curiousity.

I have not flown one, but I remember when I was high school, there was a guy down the street from my cousin who had one. It was a 1 seater that he build himself, but he was a welder by trade. it had an old Harley sportster motor. When ever we say him, we would go over and pick his brain and ask him all sorts of questions. He could take off and land on his driveway. We witnessed this probably half a dozen times. He said that his machine would cruise at about 60-70mph, and that he had had it up to 120mph. He said that he could do 200 mile trips and still have about an hour or so worth of fuel left.

Honestly, this is the only experience that I have with one. From the research that I have been doing, the newer ones have better controls, and built in stability devices. I don't know, maybe this is a stupid idea, but we do have a great bug out spot that is well supplied, with food and water (well and natural springs), vehicles (pickup truck and 2 atv's) and plentiful game and wild berries... but it is 400 miles away.

Buying another place is not an option, nor is moving. Also, the type of SHTF that we face are more the Gov't instability type, and not the natural disasters type like hurricanes, tornadoes, or blizzards that you might see in other parts of the country. The worst that I remember was being stuck in the house for 2 days due to a freak snowstorm, but if you can't weather 2 days (with electricity) you are screwed any way.

BobS

08-27-2008, 11:44 AM

I have "heard" different things-most of which I dismiss as agenda driven, whether good or bad. I have never flown one, nor have I had a chance to even look one over closely. The closest I have ever come to one is being carted around as a passenger in helo's in service. One comment I would GUESS at....once airborne and at cruise speed, you would be a hard target for most people to hit. A wingshooter might, but the average deer hunter I know wouldn't. From experience in service, hitting a target moving 120knots at 500 feet AGL is not an easy task.

No guarantees, but I think it might be worth considering and discussing further, depending on the limits of payload, flight experience, and pure guts (to know you are a target for someone). The biggest advantage is, as you said (or implied, I should say) is visibility. Observation of "situations", and the avoidance of them, is far easier from 5000 feet AGL. Time is safety.

Best regards,

Bob

E`omer

08-27-2008, 11:58 AM

The range could be extended with prepositioned fuel or a prepositioned vehical . It would have to be checked regularly and very easy to find from the air . The route should be chosen with lots of land marks to follow .
I do like the idea of hopping over all the panic jamed road traffic .
The gyrocopter could be a valued asset to a community of prepers . Jericho could use an air recon unit .

E`omer

08-27-2008, 12:05 PM

BobS

08-27-2008, 12:20 PM

A couple more point to consider:

Maintenance- How intensive is the required maintenance for a gyrocopter? After doing some quick research, I found a mil-spec reference about helos-they require 4 hours of maintenance for 1 hour of flight time to maintain their airworthyness. Does a gyrocopter require the same, more, or less?

Fuel consumption- A quick look at a couple of homebuilder sites show a variey of powerplants are used- both of 2 stroke and 4 stroke variety of gasoline engines. I did not see any that were built with diesels (I would guess because of weight, but that may not still hold true with some of today's lightweight aluminum diesel engines....further investigation would be required). 2 stroke engines are notoriously ineffecient, burning on the order of 0.49-0.57 lbs. of fuel per horsepower per hour. One of the common engines I found was a Subaru flat 4 water cooled engine-more complexity than the old VW flat 4, or just lower availability for the VW engine?

Flight characteristics in adverse weather- How does rain, wind, cold, and heat affect the flying properties of the gyrocopter? Are there any limits on altitude density, for example (obviously, there are, but what are they? Power built into the airframe would change this)?

Best regards,

Bob

knox45

08-27-2008, 12:29 PM

No guarantees, but I think it might be worth considering and discussing further, depending on the limits of payload, flight experience, and pure guts (to know you are a target for someone).

BobS- while being shot at IS a concern, it is no where near as big of a concern as being stuck on a highway indefinitely with hundreds or thousands of desperate folks who are getting more and more desperate by the minute. I remember the news footage of the highways from NOLA. Hundreds of abandoned cars/ trucks with all of those folks stuff in them. What good are Bug out provisions if they (and possibly you) don't make it to the bug out location?

The other thing (and I don't know that answer yet) is at 500, 1000, 2000, etc feet, how well could I even be seen? Especially if it is a sunny day. What if you paint the underside pale blue/ light gray?

The range could be extended with prepositioned fuel or a prepositioned vehical

E'omer- actually, that is a good idea. I was thinking of adding a second fuel cell. Based on the info at hand, I would need an additional 10 gals of fuel... Of course, I would feel more comfortable with more, say 15. But that would add an addition 125lbs (aprox) including the fuel cell, which would cut down drastically on the payload.

Aerial recon would be another plus. I bet you could see pretty far (with a good pair of bino's) and make sure that the bug out house was safe before landing, or seeing what was going on around the area.

BobS

08-27-2008, 12:39 PM

BobS- while being shot at IS a concern, it is no where near as big of a concern as being stuck on a highway indefinitely with hundreds or thousands of desperate folks who are getting more and more desperate by the minute. I remember the news footage of the highways from NOLA. Hundreds of abandoned cars/ trucks with all of those folks stuff in them. What good are Bug out provisions if they (and possibly you) don't make it to the bug out location?

The other thing (and I don't know that answer yet) is at 500, 1000, 2000, etc feet, how well could I even be seen? Especially if it is a sunny day. What if you paint the underside pale blue/ light gray?

E'omer- actually, that is a good idea. I was thinking of adding a second fuel cell. Based on the info at hand, I would need an additional 10 gals of fuel... Of course, I would feel more comfortable with more, say 15. But that would add an addition 125lbs (aprox) including the fuel cell, which would cut down drastically on the payload.

Aerial recon would be another plus. I bet you could see pretty far (with a good pair of bino's) and make sure that the bug out house was safe before landing, or seeing what was going on around the area.
You got my point in your statement. The choice is a tradeoff. In a Katrina type evac, it would be a "no brainer", assuming the other needs (fuel, etc.) would be met since the likelyhood of being shot at would be very low. In a "all bets off" scenario, I still agree with you it would be worth considering.

Visibility from 500 feet AGL is great "down" from that height-even in rainy conditions of 1/4 mile visibility. From the ground, you would be practically ignored with a silencer on the engine to dampen the transmitted moise (you would not attract attention prior to your overflying any given point on the ground). From 2000 feet, you are a dot in the sky and extremly hard to hit, as there is no visual referance to the uniniated as to your size-meaning most people would assume you are a light plance 3 times your actual size.

As far as painting the underside, a light color of grey or blue might be of some help, but you are not going to have a constant, single level, low contrast condition, so I think that idea of "camo paint" might be moot. A simple white or light grey overall paintjob would not call attention to yourself any more than the fact of it being a gyrocopter, PRIOR to the scenario we are talking about.

Best regards,

Bob

knox45

08-27-2008, 12:41 PM

And important ones.

Maintenance- I don't know yet. Keep in mind that a helicopter has a lot more parts, but I honestly just don't know. I am just beginning my research, and I have a long way to go.

As for fuel consumption one of the ones that I was considering uses a Subaru 165 hp EJ25 power and is claimed to burn 6.5 gal/ hour at cruising speed.

in bad weather, once again, I don't know yet, but this was one of my original concerns. Also, flying at night is something that I have to look into.

Basically the Gyrocopter is something that I have always been fascinated with since I saw my cousin's neighbor take off from his driveway. It was something that I began looking into for recreational purposes, but then thought that might be an answer to a bug out problem.

BobS

08-27-2008, 02:14 PM

OK, let's look at this logically.....

First you have to set the requirements, meaning "what do you want to do with this?"

Requirements:

All weather capable/ all temperature capable
100mph cruise speed to give a max of 4 hour travel time (point to point)
Low observability from ground (visual and radar)
High visibility in flight to observe ground action
Low maintenance/high durability/low complexity
Travel distance: 400 miles plus a reserve of 30 miles
Load:
2 people @ 150 lbs each
72 hours food
Personal weapons-

2 each AR15
2 each .45 ACP Colt Government model
Basic combat load per weapon (total 420 rnd 5.56, 50 rnd .45ACP), including magazines

Full fuel load (number of gallons TBD- by fuel burn rate to achieve the distance required)
Fluids-

Cooling system fluids weight
Oil system fluids weight
1 full fluid system refill
Spare parts (TBD, based on engine and airframe selection)

Observation/Navigation equipment-

Binoculars
Night vision device
Maps
GPS
Air to Ground radio communication and antennas
Aircraft instrumentation

What else? Does the above seem reasonable for what you want? (Anyone else-feel free to chime in here with your requirements to add to this list).

Remember-forget that we are considering a gyrocopter completely-"what do you want to do"?

Best regards,

Bob

knox45

08-27-2008, 03:41 PM

that is pretty dead on-

The load is pretty spot on. Both rifles are AR's. My rifle is a 6.5 Grendel, the wife's is a light weight .223. Side arms are a HK USP45 and SIG 229 (9mm). "combat load for the 6.5 is 13.2 lbs (in mags) and 11.6 for the 223. Side arm weight should be similar to what you were thinking. Food is about right. maybe a few liters of water. As for 2 legged cargo, I weigh 175ish, the wife is 125ish. Spare parts: I couldn't even take an educated guess at this point in time.

The weight of the machine/ payload that I was referencing was a "wet weight", meaning all fluids and a full tank of gas (standard tank, enough for 300mi).

Observation/Navigation equipment- you about got it right again. I don't have night vision equipment, and the weight of the machine accounts for the instruments (except radio).

I think that there would also be some clothing, first aid kit, and personal items like photos, electronic document back ups, etc. Maybe a few hygiene items, but not too much.

like I said, I don't know if this is a dumb idea or not, and each situation is different, but I am looking into one of these as a recreational toy none the less.

For bug out transport. I was also thinking of on road/ off road motorcycles, as I have been riding dirtbikes since I was 10 and street bikes since I was 19, but it would be hard to carry that kind of gear either comfortably or without being noticed (especially the AR's). Also, fuel could become an issue on a trip that long. Weather is another factor. Riding a bike in the rain/ snow/ cold could be, um... less than fun.

Bottom line. In the event of SHTF- What I want to do is get my wife and I to our mountain house as quickly and as safely as possible with our supplies and weapons intact, and not be stuck on the highway because dumb people who did not prepare ran out of gas or broke down. I would love to drive there in my Jeep, but that just might not be an option if the roads become impassable like the highways around NOLA. And just think how many more people and cars there are in this part of the country. Heck- traffic on a normal friday would make that 6 hour drive 14 hours. Now throw in a major shtf situation....

BobS

08-27-2008, 04:43 PM

OK, am working on gross weight calculations to see what kind of total loading we are looking at. After that is completed, we'll take a look at what is available on the net for Gyrocopters and the capabilities. Finally, we'll look at the basics of performance and costs.

This is going to take a bit, so everyone, please join in the discussion here with your needs or wants to ensure knox45 and I are not forgetting or overlooking anything....

Best regards,

Bob

yugoshooter

08-27-2008, 06:46 PM

If I was going to build one I would use the Subaru EA81 that is capable of 200 hp and used more then any other Subaru engine because it is a push rod engine with no timing belts to snap in flight. http://hometown.aol.com/jsgyro/models.htm

BobS

08-27-2008, 07:38 PM

Requirements:
1.All weather capable/ all temperature capable
2.100mph cruise speed to give a max of 4 hour travel time (point to point)
3.Low observability from ground (visual and radar)
4.High visibility in flight to observe ground action
5.Low maintenance/high durability/low complexity
6.Travel distance: 400 miles plus a reserve of 30 miles
7.Load:
2 people @ 175 lbs each (including street clothing and heated snowmobile “flight suit” for cold weather flying) 350 pounds

72 hours food for 2 people http://www.mtnhse.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=M&Product_Code=80694 8 pounds

5 gallons of water in 1 litre bottles (8.33 pounds per gallon) 41.7 pounds

Personal weapons-

2 each AR15 http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=11101&langId=-1&productId=44930&tabselected=tech&isFirearm=Y&parent_category_rn=33803
13.48 pounds
2 each .45 ACP S&W M1911 DK model http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10001&catalogId=11101&langId=-1&productId=14723&tabselected=tech&isFirearm=Y&parent_category_rn=15709
5.12 pounds
2 each Galco Shoulder holster for M1911 http://www.usgalco.com/HolsterPG3.asp?ProductID=653&GunID=269 3.50 pounds

Basic combat load per weapon (total 420 rnd 5.56, 50 rnd .45ACP), including magazines 22.25 pounds

5.56 ammunition .45 ACP ammunition M16 aluminum magazines - 20 round mags – 21 each M1911 magazines – 7 round – 7 each

2 each Flight vest for magazines, personal first aid kit, misc “stuff” 9.5 pounds

Full fuel load (number of gallons TBD- by fuel burn rate to achieve the distance required) Initial estimate = 8gal/hr (burn rate)*4.5 hours (flight duration to “0” fuel-includes reserves)

Total fuel for initial study 36 gallons (87 octane MoGas)*6.2 (weight of 1 gallon of gasoline) 223.2 pounds

Fluids-

Cooling system fluids weight 12 quarts distilled water (antifreeze assumed but not calculated as pure water is heavier) 25.0 pounds

Oil system fluids weight 6 quarts including filter and cooler 7 pounds per gallon 10.5 pounds

1 full fluid system refill 35.5 pounds

Spare parts (TBD, based on engine and airframe selection) Belts, plugs, plug wires, hand tools
This will be detailed later-shown is an approximation 10.5 pounds

Observation/Navigation equipment-

Binoculars (including case) 3.5 pounds

Night vision device (for unlit night operations-NOT legal for night VFR, but reasonable in this situation and including case) 7.5 pounds

Maps (backup to handheld aviation GPS) 1.0 pound

GPS (aviation type) 1.0 pound

Air to Ground radio communication and antennas (hand held VHF-AM air band and UHF-FM GMRS- including 1 spare set of batteries or 1 solar recharging panel and cord) 5.6 pounds

Aircraft instrumentation (basic IFR engine and flight instruments-assuming the all weather capability) 25.0 pounds

TOTAL WEIGHT 755.85 pounds

OK....looks like we may have to shed some weight here-but let's keep this number for the time being. Next installment will be an overview of the gyrocopters that may be able to accomodate this load.

Best regards,

Bob

BobS

08-28-2008, 12:18 AM

In my previous post, you may have noticed that I made a couple of additions and changes to the original list. This was simply to "flesh out" this feasibility study.

General notes for consideration in this section:

2 people @ 175 lbs each (including street clothing and heated snowmobile “flight suit” for cold weather flying) 350 pounds

I added the heated snowmobile suit for 2 reasons:

1. To provide environmental control seperate from the air vehicle to minimize complexity, by utilizing COTS parts that have little to no development or "aclimatization" period. This means the item is self evident to use and simple to integrate into the system.

2. By using an electrically heated suit- a standard power level can be used from the vehicle without complex plumbing, ducting, or expensive fabrication, as would an internal heat and cooling system in an aircraft cabin.

This will satisfy the needs of Requirement #1 in cold weather, and, in hot weather, provides additional load capacity if the suits are deleated from the loading and replaced with more food or fuel, as an example.

Initial estimate = 8gal/hr (burn rate)*4.5 hours (flight duration to “0” fuel-includes reserves)

Here, I took the worst observed burn rate, in order to provide a small safety factor in range and load capacity versus streamlining of the cockpit area. In other words we have no better accessment of the market products, so it is better at this point to assume the worst.

Cooling system fluids weight 12 quarts distilled water (antifreeze assumed but not calculated as pure water is heavier) 25.0 pounds
Oil system fluids weight 6 quarts including filter and cooler 7 pounds per gallon 10.5 pounds

For fluids, I have assumed, at this point, a water cooled engine for several reasons-temerature stability in varying environments for less engine wear, more uniform combustion-leading to greater effeciency and lower burn rate-, and availability of parts from a scavenged engine post SHTF.

Best regards,

Bob

BobS

08-28-2008, 12:50 AM

I picked 3 different styles of gyrocopters as representative of the market to discuss the good, bad, and ugly of each compromise....

First up:

http://www.sportcopter.com/images/ss_large_04.jpg

The Sportcopter II from http://www.sportcopter.com/supersport.php

This is an enclosed cockpit design that appears to be the most like a conventional fixed wing aircraft with heater, doors, etc. Specs are available at the Sportcopter II link.

Next:

http://www.rotorcraft.com/bandit/photos/2Place/2place_closeup1_b.jpg

The 2 Place Bandit from Joe Sousa Gyroplanes http://www.rotorcraft.com/bandit/2Place_photos.htm

This is a low profile open cockpit kit that offers far greater air to ground visibility, at the cost of less load capacity or speed. The specs are on the linked page.

Finally:

http://www.rotorcraft.com/dominator/IMGS/flagler3.gif

The 2 place Dominator from Rotor Flight Dynamics at http://www.rotorcraft.com/dominator/tandem.html

This is a spindly looking thing, but offers the visibility of the Bandit with an even greater advantage that may not be apparent....that of the ability for you to build a detachable carbon fibre pod below the pilot and observer positions (like an Apache helo, and for the same reasons) to carry all your "stuff" in a single, quickly removed or attached, 1 shot storage module so nothing is lost and offers the greatest "cubage" (or "space") for the gear.

One problem quickly becomes apparent however-see the specs. This is woefully underpowered and under loaded.

The next part-tomorrow- will address these concerns and how they can be overcome.

Best regards,

Bob

knox45

08-28-2008, 09:30 AM

Thanks, that is some great work. I really like that sportcopter. I am interested to know, does "useful load" include the weight of the pilot and passanger?

Christian for Israel

08-28-2008, 06:12 PM

useable or useful load includes all additions to the basic airframe. usually engine fluids, fuel and all other parts of the aircraft are included in the net vehicle weight. useful weight is everything else that brings you up to gross vehicle weight.

maintenance on a gyrocopter is a fraction of that required on a helicopter or even a fixed wing aircraft. the rotor is fixed in place and doesn't tilt or change blade pitch like a helo, and there are only the engine controls along with elevator and rudder controls to worry about. the only routine maintenance to worry about are standard engine maintenance and ensuring that the propeller and rotor are undamaged. gyros are easier to fly than helos and fixed wings. they have all the advantages of a fixed wing over a helo but lack the ability to stall. in fact, if you lose forward motion relative to the wind you simply land, as the rotor will gradually lose lift. in addition, in a stiff headwind you can hover, though in a dead calm this is not possible.

BobS

08-29-2008, 01:21 AM

Haven't forgotten you guys... still assembling the info for next post. I hate it when people do not return phone calls when they promise....

:)

Bob

BobS

08-29-2008, 11:33 PM

OK, here's what I have learned so far about this idea....

We have already determined our requirements for such a vehicle and have 3 potential "suitors" that may fulfil the needs.....maybe. Each one has some serious defeciencies associated with it.

CUBAGE

First off, lets look at cubage- we need to supply a total of 72" x"48" x 16" to pack all this stuff into a single "box", or spread this volume all over the vehicle to load it. From my fixed wing days, weight and balance was one of the critical areas affecting flight performance-there is a specific rage fore and aft that the total airframe and loading must be contained within to fly safely, AND a maximum payload. For all of these vehicles, each manufacturer has told me that the weight of basic VFR instruments is included in the empty weight, varying from 19.7 pounds to 22.14 pounds of the empty weight. I will discuss the limits of VFR flight shortly and only concern myself with the weight at this time.

In the Sportcopter II and the Dominator are both 2 place, high cabin designs, offering an advantage of space to allow the size "box" to be constructed under the fusealge, but, in the case of the Sportcopter, you have to maintain a higher ground clearance, due to the suspension of the landing gear. The dominator has greater room, because of it's fixed gear-but the load availability of the Dominator is far lower, due to the design and low power.

The Bandit would need to have "baskets" built similar to the FAV:

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l189/KORNET-E/Desert_Patrol_Vehicle.jpg

...as shown between the wheels. Again, the issue is not space, it's cubage.

Shown is a removable cargo pod for a Cessna 337 Skymaster:

http://www.aviatorshotline.com/images/emails/aircraftforsale/Mac70Cessna_big.jpg

SPEED

Speed and performance are a function of the fastest attainable cruising speed versus the aerodynamics of the airframe, versus the thrust and lift of the airfoils. In fixed wing aircraft, the takoff roll ia given by the distance to clear a 50 foot high obstacle, NOT to get the wheels off the ground. I have been told by the 3 manufacturers that their roll depends on rotor speed and the amount of headwind, if any. The problem is they do NOT quote a true takeoff roll as I am used to seeing it. The pbest I can do is approximate it using the listed maximum climb rate at gross load and calculate a distance based on time. Even with this, my first reaction is that, at gross, you will take 500-1000 feet to clear that 50 foot tall obstacle, even in a "perfect" gyrocopter. You would have to define your operational terrain and altitude to get a meaningful number here. Just be careful and don't guess.....

Aerodynamics affecting the cruise speed are also critical for a couple of reasons:

Pilot and passenger comfort and fatigue.
In this case-buffeting with "beat you to death" and you will become tried and sloppy in a short time. For this reason, the enclosed cockpit of the Sportcopter II is going to protect you except for.....

Visibility and situational awareness.
For obvious reasons, the Sportcopter II offeres the least amount of visibility around you, because a. It is a side by side design, instead of a tandem, "stadium seating" arraingment as on the Dominator (and as previously mentioned, the Apache helocopter). With the observer in front and the pilot in the rear, your observer can keep tract of the entire airspace surrounding the gyrocopter and b. it has supports for the various windows, that block vision, around the aircraft.

yugoshooter

08-30-2008, 08:54 AM

Bobs, Just wondering if you could mount a small rocket assist for takeoffs?

Christian for Israel

08-30-2008, 09:59 AM

speed over the ground is not the important factor for take-off, rather it is rotor speed. rocketing the gyro faster across the ground would actually increase the take-off roll as the craft would travel further while the rotor was spinning up.

there IS a way to decrease take-off distance though...by pre-rotating the rotor. this can be done by diverting some power from the engine to turn a shaft connected to the rotor, usually by a belt, until it is near operational speed. power is then disconnected and the craft is taken off normally with the bonus that you can get off the ground in 50-100 feet depending on weight.

one thing to remember about ready built gyros, most are designed for sporting use. typically they don't have much storage and they are under powered. by increasing the size of the rotor disc, mounting a larger or more aggressive propeller and increasing the power of the engine you can greatly increase the speed and lifting capacity of the craft. of course, the tradeoff will be in operational range, but if some of the added payload were in the form of fuel, range may be increased while still carrying more supplies.

Christian for Israel

08-30-2008, 10:23 AM

youtube has gyro video's (of course). here's an interesting one. the guy is using a pre-rotator to get a short take-off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33Wyr4yvaTA&feature=related

Christian for Israel

08-30-2008, 10:32 AM

here's a much larger, more powerful gyrocopter, which gives an idea of what you COULD do with one.

http://www.groenbros.com/images/VideoCvrBack.jpg
The Hawk 5 (five place) Gyroplane brings to aviation a unique aircraft with many utilitarian qualities. The Hawk’s performance and exceptional versatility also offer a safe and affordable alternative to helicopters and airplanes in many applications. The aircraft’s simple, robust, design translates into lower operating costs than any comparable turbine powered helicopter. The wide operating speed range, from 46 - 162 mph, of this highly maneuverable gyroplane also ensures the Hawk 5 a new niche in the aviation marketplace. The Hawk 5 design, intended for series production following certification, incorporates modifications gained from GBA’s experience with its Hawk 4 (four place) prototype. These include a weight reduction program and an extended cabin that will permit an additional passenger. The Hawk 4 was an integral part of security during the 2002 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games. The Hawk 4, during its operational period for the Utah Olympic Public Safety Command (UOPSC), was available 24-7, completed 67 missions and accumulated 75 hours of maintenance free flight time. The production model Hawk 5 Gyroplane offers many improvements to this already impressive aircraft. Most notably are: higher capacity; vertical take-off and landing; a marked increase in useful load, range and endurance; and higher maximum and cruise speeds. Easy to fly and always in autorotation, the Hawk 5 offers uncompromising safety in the realm of flight.

Hawk 5 Provisional Facts and Figures
Performance specifications are at sea level,
standard temperature and pressure.
Designer & Manufacturer Groen Brothers Aviation, Inc.
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

Type of Aircraft - VOTL gyroplane

Missions - Utility/passenger transport
Airborne law enforcement
Air surveillance

Aerial application
Power Plant - Rolls-Royce Model 250 C20S (420shp) gas turbine
Rotor Blade - 42 ft. 2 blade system
Fuselage Length - 24 ft.
Height - 13.5 ft.
Fuel Capacity - 100 gal.
Max. Gross Weight - 3,500 lbs.
Useful Load - 1,525 lbs.
Rate of Climb (ft./min.) - 1,500
Max. Speed (VNE) - 162 mph (140 kts)
Cruise Speed - 140 mph (122 kts)
Service Ceiling - 16,000 ft.
Range at Cruise - 508 miles (no reserve)
Endurance - 5 hours (no reserve)
Seats - 5

Projected Operating Costs (per hr)

Fuel $120.00

Oil/Lubricants $3.60

Maintenance Labor* $25.60

Parts, Airframe* $42.45

Engine Overhaul* $55.62

Propeller Overhaul* $9.34

Dynamic Comp. Life Ltd Parts* $21.33

Direct Operating Costs (per hour) $277.94

BobS

08-30-2008, 01:48 PM

Bobs, Just wondering if you could mount a small rocket assist for takeoffs?

A couple of issues, although you could mount one, the real question is why? The early JATO bottles used by early jet designers were, in general, a failure because they could not get enough "oomph" into a jato bottle to allow it to appreciably shorten the takeoff run. Shorten it some, certainly, but it way not cost effective, nor performance effective.

You would need to ask yourself 2 questions:

1. What are you going to do with the empty weight of the assist? If it is permanently mounted, you could not use it for a storage space when empty (you are obviously in flight at that time) and the JATO would be weight dragging you down.

2. If you make the rockets releasable when empty, where are the JATO's empty bottles going to go? (Said somewhat tongue in cheek, I admit, but a valid concern-hitting someone's house with 2 each 20 pound aluminum cylinders traveling 100 mph or more is not good opsec from 5000 feet...LOL)

Overall, JATO is a bad idea, except as a last, bandaid, resort for an overloaded vehicle (I am not mentioning the cost or legality of building your own liquid or solid booster rockets. I am sure if ATF found out...you would be in violation of the "destructive devices" section of USC and ATF rules. I don't fancy being a guest of ATF for any reason.)

Best as always,

Bob

BobS

08-30-2008, 02:03 PM

Part 2 of Post #32 above http://www.whenshtf.com/showpost.php?p=39741&postcount=32

Purchase Costs:

Of the 3 gyrocopters I mentioned, that come close to meeting your needs, the range of costs is almost 3x. With a starting price of a kit for the Dominator of $19,000 (approximately) and a high end cost (projected) of the Sportcopter II of $48,000.00.....there is a wide range of money to be spend on a kit, which still does not encompass all the incedentals not included or the time to build. The Dominator, while it does not meet the initial specifications, comes in just under $20,000 for it's kit.

Initial Conclusions:

To meet your needs, the Sportcopter II, at this first level of decision making, seems to be the most value for the dollar spent within this group, but still offers operating limitations. Overall I would judge the original idea to be valid and possible, however we have discounted other potential solutions due to your primary desire for a gyrocopter, specifically.

Next, I will try to find a more capible gyrocopter that offers a better "bang for the buck"

Best regards,

Bob