Another contribution to the "ultra-simple, ultralight tractor" class..

[quoj]

I found this machine by Tim Blackwell (who, as it turns out, is a PRA boardmember).At this time it is unfinished and un-tested.He vows to finish it this year and, assuming there are no nasty flight characteristics, will make plans available.I like it because:1) It"s a tractor2) It"s almost as simple as the standard Benson style design3) It gets around the age-old issue of trying to fly with a dirty, great rotor mast smack bang in your face!There are a few other designs around that are simple tractors by people such as the late George Pate (whose tractor design looks like an old silver-plated WWI fighter with a rotorblade) but it is unknown as to if and how they flew.In an interview, Ron Herron explained that if you don"t have a dirty, great powerful (preferably) rotary donk up front, you"re not going to get the most out of your Little Wing. Any ideas why?Thoughts?

[Greg Mitchell]

Looks familiar.

[quoj]

Yes, I think that your picture is of the Hornet gyrocopter design, also under construction by Tim Blackwell.I am actually more interested in the experimental "Gyro-Deere" in the foreground.

[Greg Mitchell]

I took those two pics back in 2005 at Mentone.I also have some,

[Mark Horan]

I almost like the look of thatMark

[Greg Mitchell]

Found the other pic I took back in 2005...........maybe this year he"ll be done you think!I knew I had been close up and personal with that aircraft. 6 years ago Mitch.

[quoj]

Off the top of your heads, does anyone know any reasons why this design of "rotor mast" (as it were!) should not work?I"ve not seen one of this design, but there have been a couple of other ideas that were similar but none (that I know of) that are real, flying aircraft.For example, see the attached piece of "vapourwear".

[quoj]

Would anyone happen to know the what/where/how/why/who of this particular machine?Who built it?Did it fly?How well did it fly?Thanks.

[MadMuz]

In an interview, Ron Herron explained that if you don"t have a dirty, great powerful (preferably) rotary donk up front, you"re not going to get the most out of your Little Wing. Any ideas why?Thoughts?The reason you need a big powerful and preferably rotary donk, is because of a couple of things, one being balance, both for final hang angle, and also the long the nose (how far from the cog the prop is) the tail has to be longer than this distance, plus a factor. So, the shorter radial engine maked the nose much closer to the cog and therefore the tail doesnt have to be so long.If for example you built a tractor with a ford 6 cylinder motor (as an example of a long engine) it is probably 5 times longer than a radial.... so the tail would have to be at least the length of the engine further back, which would look funny and put any sort of tail fin in a place where the rotor droops more, therefore making a tail strike by the main rotor much more likely, especially when taxiing.I am aware this is an old thread, but it is still relevant