quadcopters, rotorcraft, helis, and the modern world......

[davidbuzz]

Just a quick update for a few of you that aren"t up-to-date on the modern "quadcopter",

[MadMuz]

That"s what I reckon, if it is a rotorcraft that the average peraon can fly in. it should be under ASRAs wing....er, I mean, rotor

[gyroo]

Hello DavidBuzz,You"ve made some interesting observations in your post.The one that interested me most was your link to the co-axial single place helicopter, which are currently being produced in NSW. That design is actually an exact copy of the 1950"s vintage "Gyrodyne RON Rotorcycle" (Google that name), which was in turn developed into the much larger Gyrodyne QH-50 unmanned drone produced between 1962 and 1969 for the US Navy. In various trips to the States I"ve seen one QH-50, and 2 RON Rotorcycles, sitting on one and spending a couple of hours closely looking at it. It has an ingenious "tip-tab" yawing system that dramatically increases the drag of one of the rotors as against the other, which causes the machine to yaw in the direction commanded. The reason the tip tabs are needed is because with the earliest co-axial helicopters relied on differential torque for yawing which was fine until the engine failed, after which the pilots discovered that the operation of the yaw pedals were reversed. The earliest Hiller co-axials suffered from that problem.Personally, my very favourite single place helicopter is the Hiller YROE-1 (Google that). Strangely, no-one is currently producing these. I have also seen 2 of those in museums in the States, including one (of course) at the Hiller Museum in San Francisco. I had a really close look at the Hiller Museum example. It"s a really impressive design. I especially like the YROE-1 design because it lends itself so well to amateur construction, especially with the Hiller control rotor (which uses 2 aerodynamic "paddles"). About 30 years ago I went through a phase of scratchbuilding .60 powered model helicopters and scratchbuilt a couple of Hiller control rotors that could be adjusted easily from hovering by itself and hardly moving or tilting, right through to performing in a fairly zippy manner. The adjustability is - I reckon - just what the doctor ordered. A very light helicopter, if it uses the Hiller control rotor, doesn"t need to be twitchy at all and can be "tuned" to taste.It is on my "bucket list" to construct a YROE-1 full size clone (with gyro wheeled undercart and a keel mounted stick) at some point in the future, but for the time being gyros are fine for me.Cheers,Mark ReganTech Mgr, Melbourne

[MadMuz]

Another interesting coax heli to google is the "Nolan Coaxial Pendulum Helicopter"

[gyroo]

Also Buzz,I should add that lots of people in ASRA do know about helicopters because there are quite a few helicopter pilots within ASRA, including myself (although I long ago lost my Class 1 Medical and am chronically "un-current"). It has always been the case that because the purely recreational use of helicopters is generally confined to the "very seriously rich", so therefore many helicopter types migrate to gyros because of the much lower operating costs.We have at least one current GA helicopter CFI on our books at the moment, and quite a few other current or former helicopter pilots as well at any given time. It"s just that our current regulations don"t provide for helicopters. About 3 years ago I did a feasibility study on proposing to CASA that we enter the field of single-place helicopters as a supplement to gyros. There doesn"t seem to be any huge impediment, other the the tricky administrative, regulatory and legal work that needs to be put into such a proposal - and it IS very demanding and time consuming doing that sort of drafting work.Why we would limit ourselves to single-seat ultralight helicopters is because it would be institutionally and operationally much safer for us to take on people who had received an appropriate amount of conventional helicopter training in Robinson R22s or similar up to private standard or thereabouts, and then we would take them on. I can"t see ASRA ever having the resources or approval to undertake the full 2-place helicopter training function as we do with gyroplanes (where we currently have a monopoly with no competition), because there are already so many pre-established helicopter training organisations readily available in general aviation that I am quite sure that CASA will require that people should train up the a specified minimum level with them before coming onto ASRA"s books and also do a specified minimum level of 2-yearly refresher training with them as well. Whether the holding of a CASA student helicopter licence together with proof of a minimum 20 hours experience would suffice for the granting of an ASRA single-place helicopter pilot certificate is something that would have to be very comprehensively negotiated with CASA.Cheers,Mark Regan

[MadMuz]

Just wondering Mark, if a person has a kit heli, or single place heli, who are they covered by at present? GA? Ultralight?Are there many kit/single place heli"s in Aus?

[davidbuzz]

I"m not mark... but a 51% owner built kit heli with precision parts all factory supplied and the builder doing SAAA training is the only way...at present... and its still put in the experimental category. ..and gets a VH registration.

[blakemorem]

Hey Buzz, yeah i think these coaxil machines are the next revolution but i"ve done some home work and warning be careful as it looks like there is a dodgy opps over here and the govment is looking for them for fraud i can dig some more if you need it. the American dealer is legit apparently, shame to have such a good concept get misrepresented, I"m really keen to get into this category is there any good resources on ASRA and fellars in the know.

[gyroo]

Currently in Australia the only route for ultralight helicopters is via the SAAA "approved person" (as CASA appointed supervisor) route which leads to CASA "experimental" registration and permit to fly. We don"t have a 51% rule like in the States. Also, there"s no such thing as "SAAA training", because to fly an ultralight helicopter you need a full CASA HPPL or HCPL. SAAA don"t do training.I have been contacted by a number of disgruntled helicopter constructors extremely dissatisfied with the SAAA oversight and supervision, principally because the persons approved as supervisors are very few in number and have have widely varying credentials and accreditations, which leads to huge differences in the way each approved person goes about their role. In other words, one supervisor might absolutely refuse to approve a sub-assembly, whereas another will.As to configurations, I must respectfully disagree with several contributors to this thread - co-axial is most definitely NOT suitable for successful amateur construction. The Nolan Brothers creation (or rather, abomination) is a total death-trap reportedly with extremely poor controllability in all axes and is absolutely incapable of autorotation. An abomination such as that takes helicopter technology 94 years backward and completely ignores the body of helicopter engineering and scientific knowledge that has been painstakingly accumulated through blood, sweat and lots of tears since 1925.I maintain my opinion that the Hiller YROE-1 Rotocycle is by far the historically best design. But, I must also say that the modern Mosquito certainly deserves consideration, as does the CH-7.Mark R

[MadMuz]

Funny you should say that about the Nolan Mark, I have a video of it from the 90"s, they never go more than a few feet off of the ground for some reason? Might have something to do with the fact that if the transmission were to fail, the pilot would not survive? Yes, if coaxial was of any use, there would be various factory machines available..... however coaxial got laid to rest way back as in "yes will fly, but not practical"I don"t know if anyone else has tried to fly one of the various RC coaxial helicopters with any precision? I have tried many times to get mine to go from one place to the other via the shortest possible route..... not very successful inside.... outside, it basically goes where it likes

[blakemorem]

Parachute For Sale ad:“Like new...only used once…never opened” Helli copters don"t fly either,they are so ugly the ground repels them.Hey what do you do if your log book shows more takeoffs than landings is a crash counted as a landing, if a chopper"s running time is used trying to kill you does less fuel improve your odds.Thanks Mark Just looking at the enterprise here in Brisbane.

[davidbuzz]

Hey Mark...

[davidbuzz]

Anyway... to keep this thread on topic and help encourage diversity for ASRAs future... here"s another "rotorcraft" that kinda falls through the cracks of what can"t really be developed or flown in australia.... its a Peroxide powered Dragonfly..

[gyroo]

Hey David Buzz -Read Tony Carmody"s info page more carefully - He correctly says "...The original CASA intent for a 51% work input by the owner ...", which was historically correct.However, unlike in the States, in Australia there is no slavish adherence and scrutineering of what percentage of work is done by the original manufacturer and what is done by the ultimate purchaser or homebuilder. Neither CASA, nor SAAA, have the resources available to administer and monitor any percentage rule in the way it is still emphasized in the States.The aim of the game in Australia is to get experimental aircraft into the air as long as they are safe and don"t endanger others. What percentage of work has been done by the "homebuilder" is not a huge concern here.Mark R

[gyroo]

I would love to be able to make a "prop copter" or something else ... under the guidance of smart people in ASRA ... if it was allowed.Well, Buzz,The category under consideration within the ASRA Constitutional re-write of "thrust-borne manned aircraft" is intended to cover ducted fan and propeller STOL or VTOL experimental aircraft, but don"t start banging something up yet, because under that category any proposed project has to run the gauntlet of a Technical Panel at concept stage, design stage and proof-of-concept stage (expected to usually involved model trials), key construction inspections, and initial flight testing phase. Also, no project will even be accepted into that category unless a "near zero-zero" survival capability is provided for, meaning that the design must incorporate safety features to ensure survival in the event of engine failure even from very low level and zero airspeed.The severe restrictions that will accompany this new category are intended to ensure that ASRA"s time is not wasted by dreamers and wannabees who spend their time rendering really slick and fancy futuristic design graphics on their computers, and do fancy animations, and think that such daydreaming can be regarded as a serious design effort. ASRA"s focus is squarely grounded in REALITY and the laws of physics.In fact, the only machine that might qualify for that category would be the NZ Martin Jetpack.I stress that this proposed category is purely at concept stage being incorporated into a draft Constitutional re-write.Mark R