Tall tail

[RickE]

Geez Max, sounds like paradise...........

[mad max]

Got so used to the tail now and the gyro has such a good personality (flies so well) that I"m in love with it, so have re-named the gyro "Pretty Dove". Did a croc. patrol up the beach but only saw a school of fish, 3 turtles, one small shark and two manterays.

[MadMuz]

Looks awesome Max..... you dun reel good

[mad max]

Best part is it cost only $400. for rudder and stabiliser. One and a half sheets of 6x4 alclad including freight ex Melbourne. (Airport metals have a good deal with TNT)

[asra]

While I applaud your enthusiasm, building skills and penchant for attractive females, it seems all the effort many people inside and outside of ASRA to get the stability message across i.e. the benefits of CLT, has gone grossly unheeded.

[mad max]

"Arr" you"re an old kill-joy Murray. Your likely to fall out of one of your high cabins while on the ground and break your neck. ;D

[Brian]

"Arr" you"re an old kill-joy Murray. Your likely to fall out of one of your high cabins while on the ground and break your neck. ;DThere"s another way of looking at it Max, if it does fall, then you will be the one in the danger area. Even to my untrained eye, your gyro Max must have a thrust line about in the danger area or even above it.

[asra]

My concern is not with you Max,I have been involved in many accident investigations where the deceased knew everything and didn"t listen.

[asra]

Assuming it is ever registered two seat compliant.

[mad max]

I take it you chaps would prefer not to be seen in an Xeon or an M24 also?

[asra]

I don"t intend to have a "Trail by forum" but....The Xenon,Magni, and most of the new breed have high thrustlines and different ways to combat such.Most would be 8-10 inch HTL.The magni,has a large air-foil shape horizontal stabilizer,albeit out of the prop wash so only effective at higher speed ranges.It also has very nose heavy rotor blades that resist cyclic inputs. It is a widely held view that a magni would be "buntover proof" just by that fact alone , i.e the body of the gyro unable to outrun the rotor.The Xenon has a very large HS directly in the prop wash so it is effective at all airspeeds and power settings.The other Euro types all have large air-foil shape Horizontal Stabilizers in the prop-wash.The Arrow copter has a large air-foil shape HS in the centre of the prop.The Aviomania gyros have a large HS in the prop wash plus anti torque built in to one side of the HS plus centerline thrust.Your gyro has a 160 horsepower engine with corresponding god knows how much torque acting at LEAST 12-14 inches above your centre of gravity.Your gyro has no effective horizontal stabilizer at low speeds.your gyro has no anti torque mitigation at low speeds.Your gyro has tail heavy rotor blades that have low resistance to large cyclic inputs, i.e. over-controlling.

[mad max]

In other words it will take more skill to fly like my short twitchy Rosco clone with high thrust line, 76 inch prop., tiny tail and stabiliser that I"ve been flying safely with passengers since 1994. My new machine flies more stable than the Rosco clone trainer. An absolute pleasure to fly

[gyroo]

Hello all,I"m getting involved in this, having only in the last few days become aware of the existence of G0023. I agree that this should not become "trial by forum", but a few observations need to be publicly noted.The first thing I"ll say to Max is that absolutely no-one is doubting your piloting skills and lengthy experience. And I very much envy your NT lifestyle.The consternation expressed by Murray - and now by me - (and also now under active Board discussion) is based on the concern that the general configuration of G0023 appears to involve a total rejection of the "plus or minus 2 inches" propeller thrust line to Centre of Gravity "sensible design aim" advocated by the UK CAA and clearly endorsed and promoted by ASRA for the past 3 years. I regard it as involving retrograde design choices. Clearly G0023 is a "new build", and could - should - have very easily been configured to take advantage of the UK scientific research.You have set the surplus Kruza pod much lower than the Morrison brothers ever did on any of the Kruzas they built, and hence the mass of the pod and occupant(s) will be much lower and contributing greatly to G0023 being a VERY High Thrust Line machine. No-one doubts that a pilot of your experience would very likely subconsciously deal with any dynamic aberrations that occurred in flight - and possibly not even notice them - but ASRA must always be vigilant to protect unsuspecting passengers, whether they be sightseers or potential students, or any inexperienced low-flight hours purchaser should you sell it down the track.The thrustline of G0023 appears to be at least as bad as a RAF 2000 and possibly even worse. Your design choice seems baffling, seemingly disregarding the progressively accumulated body of government-funded scientific knowledge on gyroplane dynamic stability coming out of the UK over the past 15 years. The RAF 2000 is a well and truly obsolete configuration and those still flying remain potentially dangerous in the wrong hands, as the type"s sorry international accident history clearly shows (including further very recent fatalities in the US and South Africa) and the Brits have slapped on severe performance restrictions on the remaining examples still in use there. The remaining 6 examples on the Australian register are being "closely watched". If any further RAF issues emerge with our remaining examples, the UK restrictions might have to be imposed here.Referring back to your G0023, as another Board member commented in discussion tonight ....... "it would have been just as easy to build right than build wrong". In other words, it would have been just as easy at the initial build stage to have arranged for the pod to be 10 to 14 inches higher than it now is.Until proved or demonstrated otherwise, I"ll be regarding G0023 as a pointier RAF 2000 clone likely to have all the lurking dynamic issues that bedevil RAFs in the wrong or inexperienced hands, and I"ll be regarding it as a problematic step back into the "bad old days" of the 80"s. Truly regrettable.I will shortly be calling for reliably accurate and corroborated empty weights and all details of G0023, plus corroborated and verified hang test and tilt back A4 photographs of G0023, plus all the registration paperwork. I trust all is in order?I thank you in advance for your future co-operation with the Board"s inquiries.Kind regards,Mark ReganMelbourne(as Technical Manager)

[WEST OZ FLYER]

Mark and Murray,I don"t intend to have a "Trail by forum" but....Sorry but post #34 says differently The Xenon,Magni, and most of the new breed have high thrustlines and different ways to combat such.Most would be 8-10 inch HTL.The magni,has a large air-foil shape horizontal stabilizer,albeit out of the prop wash so only effective at higher speed ranges. Max has a airfoil shaped HS of approximately the same surface area as a Magni and in approximately the same locationIt also has very nose heavy rotor blades that resist cyclic inputs.Agreed. Could be detrimental on an evasive manoeuvre. It is a widely held view that a magni would be "buntover proof" just by that fact alone , i.e the body of the gyro unable to outrun the rotor. Would need conclusive proof to agree to this.The Xenon has a very large HS directly in the prop wash so it is effective at all airspeeds and power settings. IdealThe other Euro types all have large air-foil shape Horizontal Stabilizers in the prop-wash. Just and only just in the prop wash!The Arrow copter has a large air-foil shape HS in the centre of the prop. same a XenonThe Aviomania gyros have a large HS in the prop wash plus anti torque built in to one side of the HS plus centerline thrust. I know of a bloke waiting over 12 months for one. Can"t comment because I haven"t seen it yet but looks good on paper.Your gyro has a 160 horsepower engine with corresponding god knows how much torque acting at LEAST 12-14 inches above your centre of gravity.Your gyro has no effective horizontal stabilizer at low speeds. Same as the Euro bathtubsyour gyro has no anti torque mitigation at low speeds. I would say that a tall tail has some anti torque properties and this very high thrustline you speak of would have less torque roll than CLT especially as it would have a high empty weightYour gyro has tail heavy rotor blades that have low resistance to large cyclic inputs, i.e. over-controlling. over controlling is no fault of the machine. Maybe that is bad training!Now Max has made, in my eyes, the equivalent of a home made Magni m24. Look closely at the similarities. Long moment arm HS, side by side with weight against the mast ( no pilot over 1mtr out the front like the bathtubs. Less leverage for bunt over). Similar centre of pressure/drag. He has put on the internet a modification that he believes works appropriately. (knowing Max he will alter that until it is perfect) Just because it doesn"t have Magni on it doesn"t mean that it is not going to fly safely. ( put some Magni stickers on it max

[mad max]

This machine is my personal long distance vehicle. It shall not be used for training or TIF"s. The only person who will learn to land it will be my wife who shall be travelling with me. In my opinion, if someone is incapable of flying an RAF safely, they were prematurely given a licence.