Gyrocopter Part 2: Search for the Holy Grail

[BobS]

Introduction:

In Part 1, we did a quick feasibility study to determine the validity of the basic concept of carrying approximately 750 lbs of load in a gyrocopter, using off the shelf parts in a kit built aircraft. The recommendation was that, while there are limitations, there are no insurmountable issues and such a vehicle would cost roughly $20,000-$45,000 USD to build.

In this section, I will look at what is required to optimize the idea, to fit current commercially available aircraft kits.

Starting point:

I found this kit:

http://www.aircommand.com/siteimages/actandem912-top.jpg

...from a company called Air Command (http://www.aircommand.com/models.php) which, when you look at the link, has a model specifically for the Subaru engine that meets all the defined criteria so far:

http://www.aircommand.com/siteimages/bradleyact-s.jpg

...which is using the twin cam 2.5L Subaru engine. Now, I agree with yugoshooter that the older pushrod engine is mechanically simpler, but the fuel injected engine, computer controlled engine has one BIG advantage over it's earlier siblings....the FI system is altitude and temperature compensating, which as you may or not know, is one of the leading issues with any carburetted engine-ice forms in the venturi of the carb and stalls the engine from air, and cannot properly distribute the fuel air mix at very high density altitudes. For the word "issue" you can interpret that to mean mechanical system caused crashes.

By feeding the fuel into the port, downstream of the throttle body venturi (where the butterfly valve is, controlling the air incoming to the engine cylinders) there is greater vaporization of the fuel (the fuel is aimed at the intake valve, leading to longer valve life due to cooling, and faster, more complete vaporization of the fuel due to the added heat to the fuel FROM cooling the valve) and a more homogenous mixture of fuel and air for more even combustion, and hence, more stable and reliable power levels from the engine.

http://www.drive.subaru.com/Spr08/_images/ill_FSS.gif

CAPTION: Subaru Fuel Injection System from http://www.drive.subaru.com/Spr08/Spr08_whatmakes.htm

Also see http://www.drive.subaru.com/Win03_Manifold.htm for a description of the intake system of the Subaru. The point to this is that the Subaru engine, because it is water cooled and fuel injected, make this the IDEAL powerplant for a light aircraft.

Downfalls of the Subaru

The biggest problem converting a gasoline automotive engine to aircraft use is one of engine speed. Lycoming and Continental aircraft engines simply do not go over 3000rpm, in general, because of the limitations of the sound barrier at the propellor tip. For this reason, the curise speed of the engine, in RPM, is usually 2000-2500 rpm (yes, I know this is a really simplified statement to those of you that are pilots, but it's applicable here). An automotive engine, to develop the same power, is generally over 3500 rpm.

Obviously something must be done to slow the prop down, relitive to engine rpm. This is where I have heartburn with Subaru engines in most conversions.

Air Command, like many other homebuilt aircraft, uses a geared prop stepdown drive to maintain the necessary engine rpm without overspeeding the prop.

Shown is a sample geardrive for a 2.2L Subaru engine, made by GAP (http://gappsru.com/):

http://gappsru.com/db4/00377/gappsru.com/_uimages/2.jpg

The issue with gear drives, in general, is that of gear lash and chatterring during part throttle operation (meaning when the throttle is advanced or retarded, there is a point of "overrun" that allows the gears to slop together, chattering of the teeth together, causing wear and in certain frequency ranges, shattering the teeth). For this reason, I prefer belt drives (less loading on the crankshaft main bearing, which are none too good for the excessive side loading of a virtual 6 foot diameter flywheel-the propellor).

http://www.ultralightflyer.com/images/ranchair/engine2.jpg

CAPTION: Note this belt reduction drive on a homebuilt VW air cooled engine.

[E`omer]

How about EMP effects on the engine ?

[BobS]

How about EMP effects on the engine ?

I will cover that shortly, but in short-that is what the spare parts weight allotment is for- keeping a spare set of electronic system parts in a sealed Faraday cage. If it happens when you are airborne, you simply do a power out soft landing, which is the advantage of the rotorcraft over a fixed wing aircraft. If it happens on the ground-you swap out the parts and keep on flyin'....

Best regards,

Bob

[Alredneck]

What about a small diesel engine,it would be fuel injected so no altitude problems, have long life expectancy, and its power band would be with in the range of rpm stated. Also fuel economy would be greater than a similiar sized gas burner, and the availabilty to use biofuels which can be homemade or bought. Also if mechanically injected it would be almost completely immune to EMP all you would have to worry about is the electronics for the starter! .02

[BobS]

What about a small diesel engine,it would be fuel injected so no altitude problems, have long life expectancy, and its power band would be with in the range of rpm stated. Also fuel economy would be greater than a similiar sized gas burner, and the availabilty to use biofuels which can be homemade or bought. Also if mechanically injected it would be almost completely immune to EMP all you would have to worry about is the electronics for the starter! .02Diesels have strong second order harmonics, too much weight per pound of thrust delivered, and a higher purchase price for this size engine. There are simply not enough lieghtweight diesels available for this size aircraft. If we were talking a 4 seat Cessna 172, it's a different story...but for this, a usable diesel does not exist today....


That being said, you are quite correct in your comments-I agree wholeheartedly.

Best regards,

Bob

ADDENDUM: For the starting issue, I would use a compression relase mechanism and a recoil starter that can be "hand wound" from the pilots position for midair restarting.

[BobS]

Electrical system requirements:

For the time being, let's assume the Air Command Tandem will do what we want-now we have to figure out how much power we are going to need.

Earlier I mentioned electrically heated snowmobile suits, instead of the complexity and weight of a full cabin heater, for cold weather operations. A company called Gerbing's (http://www.gerbing.com/Products/outerwear.php) has developed a line of heated industrial and sportwear that will tie into the electrical system of snowmobiles, cars, etc. to allow a greater degree of comfort in artic and extreme climate situations.

http://www.gerbing.com/images/productImages/Outerwear/heatedJacket_orig.jpg

CAPTION: Gerbing's Jacket-heavyweight (http://www.gerbing.com/Products/Outerwear/heatedJacket.html)

http://www.gerbing.com/images/productImages/Outerwear/heatedPants_orig.jpg

CAPTION: Gerbing's heavy weight heated pants. (http://www.gerbing.com/Products/Outerwear/heatedJPants.html)

http://www.gerbing.com/images/productImages/Gloves/textile_orig.jpg

CAPTION: Gerbing's heavy weight heated gloves. (http://www.gerbing.com/Products/Gloves/atvWinter.html)

http://www.gerbing.com/images/productImages/socks_orig.jpg

CAPTION: Gerbing's heavy weight heated socks. (http://www.gerbing.com/Products/socks.html)

Now, using those references for the power requirements (by adding up all the components for a single person and multiplying by 2) we see that roughly 29 amps (actually 28.8 amps) of continous power is required for this equipment for 2 people. When you add in the requirements for the engine computer, starter, fuel injectors, etc....you quickly see a little, standard 15amp aircraft alternator ain't gonna cut the mustard. To provide excess power as a reserve to charge the batteries after starting, we should use roughtly 60 amp minimum without nite flying strobes, or 90 amp minimum if you are going to use night IFR capabilities (strobes, transponder, etc required by the FAA in "peacetime"- use your own discretion in this and don't get caught if you break the rules...).

As an example, a non-certified alternator of 60 amps for a Lycoming is:

http://www.bandc.biz/L-60R.jpg

PDF file of dimensions and weight (http://www.bandc.biz/L60outlineREVB.pdf)

...which costs a staggering (to me, anyway) $685.00 (http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?16X358218)!!!!!

Obviously, we can save a bit of money by going to a conventional automotive alternator of 60 or 90 amps and belt drive it in the same manner as Subaru did (this is assuming a belt reduction drive also for the prop).

Great description of the basics of a production light aircraft electrical system.

http://www.pilotfriend.com/training/flight_training/tech/elec.htm

Note the reference to a 28VDC electrical system-this is the cause of many bits of confusion-in a homebuilt, you may legally use whatever you wish and most people opt for automotive 14vdc components (a car system is NOT 12VDC, contrary to common beliefs).




Basic conversion parts suppliers and information for homebuilt aircraft:

While not all inclusive, there are a few of the referance websites I have used to put this information together:

http://home.adelphia.net/~aeroengine/Subaru.html basic Subaru information and other engines

http://www.pra.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=61&Itemid=55 Popular Rotorcraft Association

http://www.homebuilt.org/vendors/powerplants/accessories.html Various engine accessories

http://www2.tech.purdue.edu/at/Courses/at403/Aircraft_electrical_systems.ppt PowerPoint review of basic aircraft electrical system-criteria and design parameters


More later....

Best regards,

Bob

[BobS]

OK...next item to discuss is the lack of a "roof" and windows-one of the reasons of wind buffeting and fatigue.

Windscreens:

The AirCommand design shown has a formed windshield (strech molded of various heights) much like the windshield on a touring motorcycle. Personal comfort, air temperature, windspeed, etc., all will create an astonishing array of conditions to those that have never flown in an open cockpit or ridden a long distance on a motorcycle. What I am going to cover is based on military investigations into the human body and those factors that affect human performance. See:

http://www.hf.faa.gov/docs/508/docs/milstd14.pdf FAA referance library PDF of MIL STD 1472F, 1999

http://hfetag.dtic.mil/docs-hfs/mil-hdbk-759c.pdf General miltary referance for design requirements

http://aero-defense.ihs.com/document/abstract/PYTVDAAAAAAAAAAA Military anthropomorphic dimensions of military personnel (sorry- this is a link to purchase-it ain't free on the 'net)

In going through that above referances, the conclusion that a fully enclosed cockpit will allow the pilot and observer to maintain the highest level of attentiveness and functionality, is justified and I consider a requirement, regardless of my personal preferance for open cockpits in this type of vehicle. Now, the question becomes, how do we close up an existing design that has no provisions for a "roof"?

If you notice below:

http://airbornecombatengineer.typepad.com/photos/aircraft/supercobra20mmsafe.jpg

CAPTION: A real SuperCobra AH-1W.

http://www.largescaleplanes.com/articles/Helicopter/TedTaylor/Cobra/04-ah-1w-stbd-front.jpg

CAPTION: A model-but shows the opening canopy on the left and right for the pilot and observer.

http://www.largescaleplanes.com/articles/Helicopter/TedTaylor/Cobra/05-ah-1w-stbd-rear.jpg

CAPTION: Another picture of the same model-but shows the opening canopy on the left and right for the pilot and observer from the rear.


Now, while these are strech molded Lexan panels to form the windows and lightweight metal to form the support and hinge structure, the basic idea can be utilized on the Air Command gyrocopter by taking a step back to the flat screened Cobra, the Apache, or even the Soviet HIND-24A

http://home.hetnet.nl/~mobyfoby/mi-24a/images/100_1965_JPG.jpg

CAPTION: Soviet HIND- 24A

http://www.armyrecognition.com/europe/Allemagne/Exhibition/ILA_2006/images_pictures/Cobra_Helicopter_Germany_ILA_2006_001.JPG

CAPTION: Note the totally flat Lexan panels on this example of the Bell Cobra gunship.

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/apache/images/apache1111.jpg

CAPTION: Apache AH-64A/D front the front.

You could follow the hinging method of the Cobra (middle image) and mounting to the fibreglass sides of the fuselauge of the Air Command with a perimiter frame of aluminum angle (made on a brake forming press or a finger press) and 2 hoops to providee a sealing surface for the aluminum angle framed flat screens and "doors" for egress and ingress.

This added structure should not weight more than a total of 12 pounds, once fit and assembled, so this number would need to be added to the gross load of the gyrocopter, raising it to 767.85 pounds.

More later...

Best regards, Bob

[BobS]

AIRCRAFT RECOGNITION and the Ground Observer:

This discussion will primarily center on the methods to prevent you getting shot down, as far as possible. Paint color, size, contours, general appearance all affect your visibility once you leave the ground.

Reference document:

http://www.aircav.com/recog/recogtoc.html Military manual in HTML form for Aircraft Recognition.

I will address items in relation to the applicable chapter in this web link....

ROE-From the manual:
Air defense personnel follow rules of engagement (ROE). Under one ROE, the right of self-defense against air or ground attack is never denied in peace or war. Air defenders include hostile target criteria, IFF, sensors, and air defense warnings in making their engagement decisions. Additionally, weapon control statuses (WCSs) apply to air defense systems in particular, and may be a part of the supported ground force SOP as well.

WCS sets the degree of control over the firing of air defense weapon systems. During wartime, aircraft are fired on according to the WCS in effect.

The WCSs are —

WEAPONS FREE. Fire at any aircraft not positively identified as friendly.
WEAPONS TIGHT. Fire only at aircraft positively identified as hostile according to the prevailing hostile target criteria.
WEAPONS HOLD. Do not fire except in self-defense. This status may be set in an area in terms of aircraft type and time. For example, “WEAPONS HOLD, rotary wing, 1400 to 1500 hours” only applies to helicopters, and at that time of day.

The above are standard military rules of engagement. You must, basically, try to steer clear of ANY military unit in a scenario that involves ground fire on aircraft. Obvious, no? Think about it-when are you going to know with certainty? Civilians are not going to play by the same rules, either-and police, FEMA, Sheriff' private security guards, etc. AIN'T the military. Neither is Blackwater (remember the firearm confiscation that was later judged to be unlawful-too late for those that lost their weapons) or the like. Flying over a road or gathering of people is an invitation to disaster-and if you are below 500 feet AGL, you are in violation of FAA laws also. Stay high, quiet, and innoculous, and you won't have to worry in MOST (emphasis on "MOST"), not "ALL", situations.

http://www.aircav.com/recog/chp02/ch02-002.gif

CAPTION: This is what you DON'T want to happen!!

If you notice, in the manual, SHAPES are used for identification, NOT COLORS. For that reason, you do not want to appear as a threatning aircraft, so doodads like stub wings on the pod we are going to add are OUT. Simply put, you want to appear as a simple recreational Light Sport Aircraft (this is a specific legal definition of a class of aircraft. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-sport_aircraft )

From Wiki link:

..."Light-sport aircraft, or LSA, is a classification of aircraft specific to the United States.

The Federal Aviation Administration defines a light-sport aircraft as an aircraft with a maximum gross takeoff weight of less than 600 kilograms (1320 pounds) for aircraft designed to operate from land, 649 kilograms (1,430 pounds) for seaplanes; a maximum airspeed in level flight of 120 knots (222 km/h); a maximum stall speed of 45 knots (83 km/h); either one or two seats; fixed undercarriage and fixed-pitch or ground adjustable propeller; and a single electric motor or reciprocating engine, which includes diesel engines and Wankel engines.

Aircraft which qualify as LSA may be operated by holders of a Sport Pilot certificate, whether they are registered as Light Sport Aircraft or not. Pilots with a private, recreational, or higher pilot certificate may also fly LSA, even if their medical certificates have expired, so long as they have a valid driver's license to prove that they are in good enough health to fly. LSA also have less restrictive maintenance requirements and may be maintained and inspected by traditionally certificated Aircraft Maintenance Technicians, by individuals holding a Repairman: Light Sport certificate, and (in some cases) by their pilots and/or owners."...

...emphasis on the applicable parts of the definition added by RWS....

By appearing as an unthreatening aircraft, you will minimize the military threat to you, by not being interpreted or identified as a threat to THEM. A word of warning...DEA operated 2 of these:

http://www.aircav.com/recog/chp09/ch09aclist/ov-10.gif

CAPTION: OV-10D Bronco

These are NOT your friends!!!


More later...

Best regards,

Bob

[BobS]

To continue with recognition....

From http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/id/FSI%20contextual%20influences.pdf :

..."it seems that our findings of inconsistent identification
decisions may reflect cognitive flaws and limitations
in conducting objective and independent processing and
evaluation of the information. It is important to note that
such problems arise mainly in the more difficult and challenging
cases, such as with latent fingerprints collected at
crime scenes that are distorted, partially missing, and contaminated.
In such cases subjectivity is more pronounced"...

This document identifies the manner in which people are "fooled" by their prejudices and perceptions in making identification correctly, almost impossible. In other words, "don't look like what you are". Paint, shape, and altitude will make identification of your aircraft, speed, direction, and most importantly, intent, problemmatical and in most cases, irrelevant to a civilian observer on the ground.

The determination from the above information would be that, as Ioriginally guessed, the color of the aircraft should be a neutral grey or light blue to blend in daylight.

Additional referance:

http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/id/JEP%20A%20aircraft%20recognition%20training.pdf

A Marine Corps position paper on Aerial observation in a military context:

"Aerial Reconnaissance: A Dedicated Squadron

CSC 1993

SUBJECT AREA - Intelligence

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Title: Aerial Reconnaissance: A Dedicated Squadron
Author: Major Wayne E. Breakfield, United States Marine Corps

Thesis: Although the OV-10 Bronco must be replaced, the Marine Observation Squadrons must be retained for the support and expertise they provide.

Background: With the probability of confIict shifting towards the low intensity end of the spectrum the requirement for a dedicated observation squadron still exists.

The deactivation of Marine Observation Squadrons creates a gap in aviation support to the MAGTF that attack helicopter and fighter/attack squadrons can not fill. Attack aircraft crews lack the expertise to accomplish the
mission and are already overtasked. Additionally, flight characteristics of attack helicopters and fighter attack jets make them unsuitable for the observation mission.

Recommendation: To ensure continued tactical aerial reconnaissance and supporting arms coordination support, Marine Observation Squadrons must not only be retained but also equipped with modern aircrait designed to accomplish the observation mission.

OUTLINE

Thesis: Although the OV-10 Bronco must be replaced, the Marine Observation Squadrons must be retained for the support and expertise they provide.

I. Marine Observation Squadrons support to the MAGTF
A. Tasks
B. Unique crew composition
II. lnability of attack helicopter and fighter/attack squadrons to adequately perform observation mission
A. Insufficient ground combat arms experience
B. Lower priority of observation mission
C. Fight characteristics of helicopters and jets
D. Improper avionics
Ill. Requirement for an observation squadron
A. Dedicated to the mission
B. Higher probability of low-to-mid intensity conflict
IV. V-10 replacement
A. Flight characteristics
B. Avionics

AERIAL RECONNAISSANCE: A DEDICATED SQUADRON

The United States entered the age of aerial reconnaissance during the Civil War. Both the Union and Confederate armies used hydrogen balloons to provide tactical reconnaissance to their commanders. By carrying a
telegraph line aloft, an observer could adjust artillery or provide intelligence about troop movements. (8:12) After the invention of airplanes. aerial reconnaissance became more flexible during World War One. Observers, free to move over the battlefield, provided information about enemy units,
defensive trenches, and massing of enemy forces for an attack. The Marine Corps deployed Marine Observation Squadron One to Nicaragua in 1927 to support 2nd Battalion, 5th Marines. In addition to providing aerial
reconnaissance, VMO-1 flew close air support. medevac, and resupply missions.(5:101) Since their establishment, Marine Observation Squadrons have reduced the commander' s uncertainty by providing tactical, aerial furnishing detailed information of critical times and places.

Marine Observation (VMO) Squadrons provide valuable support to the Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAG TF). Support provided includes day and night aerial reconnaissance, Forward air control airborne (FACA) Tactical air coordinator airborne (TACA), artillery and naval gunfire air spot, radio relay, light attack, and other utility missions. Although the OV-10 bronco must be
replaced the Marine Observation Squadrons must be retained for the support and expertise they provide. Deactivating Observation squadrons will create serious deficiencies in support provided by the wing to the MAGTF.

The deactivation of the Marine Observation squadrons creates a gap in aviation support. Attack helicopter and all weather fighter attack squadrons can not provide adequate support because of lack of crew expertise, other
priority missions and aircraft unsuitability. Even a cursory examination of existing missions and training syllabi exposes the flawed concept of tasking these overly committed airframes with more missions. Air frame limitations of both strike aircraft and helicopters also make them unsuitable as an OV-10 replacement.

One of the first points to consider is the VMO squadron' s unique crew composition of a naval aviator and a Supporting Arms Coordinator (SAC) or an Aerial Observer (AO) . The crew furnishes expertise essential to accomplishing the observation mission. Each SAC or AO begins aviation training only after completing a ground combat arms tour. His ground background combined with the pilot's aviation expertise forms a team unparalleled in the Marine Aircraft Wing. This crew, the smallest of MAGTFs,
often functions as a critical link between ground units and aviation assets. The observation crew, drawing on their combined expertise, matches the proper aviation support to the situation.

Attack helicopters and strike aircraft crews do not bring this same level of expertise to the observation mission. Two pilots man the attack helicopter the AH-1W Cobra. A naval aviator and a naval flight officer flew the
fighter/attack jet the F/A-18D Hornet. These Marines take their responsibilities seriously and train diligently toward their missions. However, no requirement exists for these marines to serve a tour as a ground combat arms officer prior to flight training. The training received at The Basic School also does not develop the expertise in ground operations acquired by an officer serving a tour in the fleet Marine forces. Aviators without significant experience in ground operations simply cannot provide the detailed support available from an observation squadron.

Another factor to consider is primary tasking for mission accomplishment. Observation squadrons fulfill their mission by accomplishing two primary tasks: tactical aerial reconnaissance and supporting arms coordination.(3:46) The training and readiness (T&R) syllabus reflects the squadrons priority by dedicating 56 percent of their training toward these two tasks.(4:1122) Expertise in performing this mission comes only long hours of dedicated training conducted by a squadron focused on accomplishing
this mission. The VMO squadron trains for and performs other assigned tasks, but its priority remains aerial reconnaissance and supporting arms coordination.

FMFM 5-1, Organization and Functions of Marine Aviation, tasks attack helicopter squadrons with performing aerial reconnaissance and supporting arms coordination. however, their primary mission is to provide anti-armor
support and close in fire suppression to the MAGTF.(3:4-17) The squadron' s T&R syllabus reflects its priority by allocating only six percent of the syllabus for observation mission training. With so little training allocated to performing aerial reconnaissance and supporting arms coordination, the support provided by an attack helicopter squadron will not compare favorably to similar support furnished by a dedicated VMO squadron.

Like the attack helicopter squadron. the all weather fiqhter/attack squadron's priorities are not aerial reconnaissance and supporting arms coordination. FMFM 5-1 tasks them with providing day and night under the weather
offensive air support. Training for their primary mission occupies 33% of the T&R syllabus. However only 7.2% of the syllabus is devoted to the mission of supporting arms coordination and visual reconnaissance. (4:121-122) (emphasis added-RWS) By the time aircrews finish air-to-air intercepts, low altitude training, and carrier qualifications, little time remains for developing expertise in supporting arms coordination and reconnaissance. Limited numbers of fighter/attack squadrons, performing critical and highly visible close air support missions, will find it difficult to make time to train for and accomplish the deactivated VMO squadron's mission.

Further, the observation mission requires an airframe that can cruise at medium altitudes and medium airspeeds for extended periods of time. The AH-1W and F/A-18Ds limitations in speed, altitude, time-on-station, and avionics make both aircraft poor replacements for the OV-10.

For example, the AH-1W is designed to fly low and relatively slow. The AH-1W's maximum speed of 190 knots makes it too slow to accomplish the observation mission and survive. The AH-1W lacks sufficient speed to allow its crew to dash into and safely out of areas requiring aerial surveillance. (emphasis added-RWS) The AH-1W flies too slowly to rapidly relocate from one area on the battlefield to another. Also as the AH-1W climbs, its maneuverability decreases making it more susceptible to anti-aircraft weapons.

Like otner fighters, the F/A-18D is designed to fly at super-sonIc speeds. In order to accomplish the observation mission the F/A-18D would have to fly at an uncomfortably slow speed limiting its maneuverability and increasing its
susceptibility to anti-aircraft weapons. Furthermore, flying at medium altitudes will decrease the F/A-18D's time-on-station through increased fuel consumption. Due to decreased maneuverability and increased susceptibility,
neither of these aircraft would survive on the modern battlefield attempting to perform the missions of the VMO squadron.

Time on station is critical for accomplishing the observation mission. Observation squadrons developed a relationship with ground units by staying on station for four or more hours. Neither the AH-1W nor the F/A-18D
remain airborne long enough to build the situational awareness required to support ground units. The AH-1W carrying a typical ordnance load can remain aloft for two hours (emphasis added-RWS): the F/A-18D stays airborne one hour and 45 minutes.(2:360:439, 6, 7) The F/A-18D can extend its time on station by aerial refueling, but the crew still loses
situational awareness when leaving to refuel. Trying to replace the OV-10 with tne AH-1W or the F/A-18D will not work because neither aircraft has sufficient on station time.

The avionics in the OV-10D provide capabilities not available with the AH-1W and F/A-18D. The OV-10 has four radios: the AH-1W and F/A-18D each have only two radios and neither is a high frequency radio necessary for communicating on some supporting arms nets. Unlike the OV-10, neither the AH-1W nor the F/A-18D is equipped with a LASER designator for target marking. Further, the AH-1W and F/A-:18D lack an integral Forward Looking Infrared (FLlR) system and rely on the less capable night vision goggles for
night reconnaissance. The F/A-18D carries a FLIR pod, but the squadrons have insufficient FLIR pods to equip all aircraft (2:36O:439) (emphasis added-RWS)

Does the Marine Corps need an observation squadron? Why can not it accomplish the mission with the observation support provided by the fighter/attack and attack helicopter squadrons? Although all combat forces need sound tactical intelligence, forces fighting low to mid-intensity conflicts
or executing peace-making or peace-keeping missions are even more dependent on current, tactical information for mission accomplishment. Observation squadron crews are dedicated to providing the combat information commanders require for making expeditious but sound decisions.

Attack squadrons provide observation support as a secondary or tertiary mission: their primary mission, steel on target, takes priority. The finely honed skills of observation crews will save Marine's lives by providing timely combat intelligence or supporting arms coordination.

Political unrest, illegal drug production and smuggling, and ethnic wars indicate that no shortage of potential conflicts. Disaster relief also provides opportunities for Marines to be deployed to crisis areas. Recent Marine deployments to Somalia, Bangledesh, Panama, Greneda, and Iraq demonstrate America's resolve to continue her role as a world leader. The United States, as a world leader, must maintain the ability to respond with an
appropriate force across the spectrum of conflict. (emphasis added-RWS)

The world is more unstable now than it was four years ago. However, future conflicts will probably occur at the low-to-medium level of the spectrum. The Vietnam War, another low intensity conflict, validated the need for a
dedicated observation squadron and platform. Super-power influence that prevented wars between satellite states, like the war for control of Bosnia-Herzegovina, no longer exists. An observation squadron enhances effective and efficient employment of all MAGTF assets in low intensity conflicts.

The deactivation of the Marine Observation squadron creates a gap in support for the MAGTF. Relegating the functions of the VMO squadron as secondary tasks to heavily tasked squadrons, like the all weather fighter/attack squadrons and attack helicopter squadrons, ensures less than
optimum performance of the observation mission. Only a squadron dedicated to the mission of tactical reconnaissance and supporting arms coordination ensures proficient crews dedicated to the accomplishment of the mission.

Just as the OV-10 was built with off-the-shelf technology, its replacement, using current technology- could be built and fielded at relatively low cost. Mission parameters will dictate the aircraft's physical capabilities and avionics. Mission accomplishment and survivability require an aircraft with a cruise speed of 275 knots, a loiter speed of 200 knots, a dash speed of 400 knots, on station time 3.5 hours, and an aerial refueling capability for self deployment. Like other Marine tactical aircraft, this replacement must be ship-board compatible.

While mission parameters drive a modern aircraft's performance characteristics, anti-aircraft weapons influence an aircraft's design from a survivabilty perspective. To perform the observation mission, an aircraft must fly in harms way. Modern technology for reducing susceptability,
such as chaff/flare buckets, signature reduction, and maneuverability must be designed in not added on. Also, to reduce vulnerability, component placing and redundancy along with shielding techniques, must be designed into modern aircraft. Combat survivability must be built into any
aircraft expected to operate on the modern battlefield; the OV-10s replacement can be no exception.(1:3-4)

The OV-10's replacement must also provide light attack support and therefore must be capable of carrying a variety of general purpose ordnance. Additionally, the airframe must be capable of carrying laser-guided Hellfire or Maverick Missiles. These weapons not only destroy enemy
equipment but can also be used as precision marks for strike aircraft. The plane should also mount a 20mm cannon in place of the OV-10's four 7.62mm machine guns.

Additionally, situational awareness is critical to mission accomplishment. Modern avionics can provide the communications capability, day and night optics, and position information necessary for crews to maintain situational awareness. Using off-the-shelf avionics systems, a properly equipped aircraft will effectively accomplish the observation mission well into the next
century.emphasis added-RWS)


The three AN/ARC-182 multi-band radios with appropriate encryption devices and one enciphered high frequency radio provide sufficient communications to accomplish the observation mission. Integrated through a cockpit management system, the aircrew can maintain a high degree of situational awareness while coordinating supporting arms with distant fire support coordination agencies. The system would also support cross band and inband automatic radio relay for ground or airborne units.

Modern electro-optics provide day and night, long range target acquisition and identification. Combining a laser designator for target marking with a FLIR/electro-optic camera, allows the crew to provide enhanced support for day and night visual reconnaissance and coordination of close air support missions. A simple ground mapping radar would enhance target location and all weather operations.

Avionics and human engineering combined into a modern cockpit allow aircrews to effectively manage vast amounts of information and provide effective support without becoming bogged down in information overload.

With the probability of conflict shifting towards the low intensity end of the spectrum, the requirement for a dedicated observation squadron still exists. The deactivation of Marine Observation squadrons creates a gap in aviation support to the MAGTF that attack hel icopter and fighter/attack squadrons can not fill. Attack aircraft crews lack the expertise to accomplish the mission and are already overtasked. Additionally, flight characteristics of
attack helicopters and fighter attack jets make them unsuitable for the observation mission. To ensure continued tactical aerial reconnaissance and supporting arms coordination support, Marine Observation Squadrons must be
equipped with modern aircraft design to accomplish the observation mission

Bibliography

1. Ball, Robert E. The Fundamentals of Aircraft Combat Survivability
Analysis and Design. New York, New York: American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics, INC, 1985
2. Jane's All the World's Aircraft Coulsdon, Surrey, United Kingdom:
Jane's Information Group, 1991.
3. FMFM 5-1 Organization and Function of Marine Aviation. Quantico,
Virginia Marine Corps Combat Development Command, 1991.
4. Marine Corps Order P35O0.15c Training and Readiness Manual Volume 3.
Washington, DC: Headquarters Marine Corps, 1991
5. Simmons, BGen Edwin H. The United States Marine Corps 1775-1975.
New York, New York: The Viking Press, Inc, 1976.
6. Speer, Maj Jeffery L. Interview, Command and Staff College, March
1993.
7. Stockwell, Maj Harmon A. Interview, Command and Staff College,
February and March 1993.
8. Timpe, Lt Col Earl W. "Tactical Aerial Reconnaissance in Decline,"
Marine Corps Gazette Dec 92: 12-14."

[Polara]

How does the cost of a gyro compare to the cost of a small fixed wing craft? It has been a while since I looked at ultralights, but I thought they were lower cost than that.

I have no idea what the takeoff and landing distances would be though.

As I posted in the other forum, didn't notice the second one.

[BobS]

As I posted in the other forum, didn't notice the second one.
The pricing came from the 4 manufacturers I talked to directly, for a completed gyrocopter. The one CFI posted about would have to be over $160,000 (that is the current cost for the Allison 250 engine only -ok, Rolls Royce engine-they bought the AGT (Allison Gas Turbine) division from GM)..... :)

A new Cessna 162 (2 place and comparible in load and speed) is over $106,000.

Best regards,

Bob

[Polara]

I am thinking way more primitive than a Cesna. Something home built or kit built along these lines.

http://www.princeton.edu/~wikelski/research/assets/ultralight.jpg

http://www.air-and-space.com/20060819%20Camarillo/_BEL0906%20Quicksilver%20MXL%20ultralight%20left%2 0side%20in%20flight%20l.jpg

Those are just a couple random ones I found on google. I have seen them offered in kits and also with pontoons for water landings.

[BobS]

Simply put, you get what you pay for. Those 2 (and the rest of the brothers to those 2) do not even come close to meeting knox45's requirements and needs, which is what these 2 threads on gyrocopters are all about. There is a WORLD of difference between those U/L's and a serious, licencable gyrocopter (far too much to contain in the context of this thread without going completely off topic) or fixed wing aircraft.

If you wish, we can discuss ultralights in another thread.

Best regards,

Bob

[BobS]

ADDENDUM: there is a thread already on U/L's...

http://www.whenshtf.com/showthread.php?t=3614

Best regards,

Bob

[JUNGLEBILL]

i have a friend that has a benson gyro for sale,he is over in cocoa fl,,drop me a noe if you want his #,i think he wants 4k,,bill,,lakeshore@netscape.com

[Polara]

The original thread was about a small aircraft to transport two people to an already selected location that would presumably be equiped.

I was simply bringing other light aircraft into the discussion, but apparently you don't want a discussion so I will leave you to your lecture on gyrocoptors.

[BobS]

The original thread was about a small aircraft to transport two people to an already selected location that would presumably be equiped.

I was simply bringing other light aircraft into the discussion, but apparently you don't want a discussion so I will leave you to your lecture on gyrocoptors.

NO, the title of the original thread was:

"Anyone Consider a Gyrocoptor for a BOV?.... Seriously:"

...and the first couple of paragraphs set the parameters, in case you forgot:

"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.


Sounds to me like knox45 knew exactly what he wanted to discuss in his thread......and in no place was "small aircraft" mentioned as you claim. I even gave you the link to another thread on ultralights. If you wish to attempt to be condecending towards me, you are going to have to try harder than saying "but apparently you don't want a discussion so I will leave you to your lecture on gyrocoptors", as you have in your comment. Calling my responses a "lecture" is rediculous, as I have only done research to help knox45 and supported it with facts directly from the manufacturers. No "lecture" has been given...by myself or anyone.

It appears YOU are the one that wants to derail this double thread. These are good people on this board and don't need an attitude.

[doc762399]

Nice idea, but as i have stated before and with an ultralight also, your a sitting duck literally. They don't move very fast, so i would have plenty of time to practice shooting you down? Plus the cost?