Mini-500 parts selling on eBay

Scratch, Kevin and cloudster,

You have absolutely no respect for anyone, and now you prove that you
have no respect for yourselves.

As for you making fun of someone's typo's and spellchecker oversights,
it only proves my point. I have to type 10 times the amount as any of
you to post my answers. And this is only a small part of my day. It's
only the law of averages that I will overlook something. Setting my
technical accomplishes aside, the big difference between you and me is
respect for others. I would not discredit myself by making fun of
someone's grammatical errors, as you would to yourselves.

I'm glad I had to post this private email to Jim, because it shows
people the true nature of my detractors. When you make fun of someone's
sincere expressions of gratitude as you did, it shows people the dark
side of your hearts, and shows them the evil behind what you do, and
then they know that you have the ability to say anything, no matter if
it's true or not. Because we all know what hate can make someone do, or
say.

During this same time, you have proven to all of us that you don't know
what you're talking about, and that you are just being disrespectful for
the sick fun of it. You have had nothing to do with a Mini-500, nor have
you ever done business with me. You have nothing to complain about, and
no bone to pick with me. You do it because the faceless newsgroups allow
you to make unjust fun of others. You are worse than the bully on the
block. At least he has the gonads to face the ones he attacks. The one
person that appears on the newsgroup in defense of his Mini-500 is
attacked and ridiculed. No wonder they stay away, who can blame them.

But on the other hand, I must thank you. When people like you make
untrue comments about the Mini-500 and myself, it gives me the
opportunity to not only post the truth, but to expose the nature of the
people making the untrue comments, which only adds to my credibility and
others education on the subject. In this way, you help me by allowing
the conversations to continue, and providing the forum to post my side
in direct response to your inaccurate allegations and parroting of false
roomers. You are unwittingly helping me, and I couldn't do it without
you. Keep up the good work, boys.

Dennis Fetters


Scratch wrote:

Dennis Fetters wrote:

Dear Jim,

I tried to email this to you privately, but it returned. So, I'll post
it here as a privet email. Those who read it are reading something not
meant for anyone but Jim.


Riiiight.

Important message, for Jim... only for Jim...

Dear Jim,


Thank you for your post, I'm happy to read what you said, but it will
only cause you problems. These people live by "do not confuse the
issues with the facts, we already made up our minds". They are mostly
crippled with blinders, and unable to comprehend the facts. I only
post here in rebuttal against what these few robot minded people
parrot, and then only for those with open minds and hearts to have an
opportunity to at least read the other side. Then, they can make up
their own minds.

It is a burden I bare alone, and no need for you to suffer by trying to


I'm getting all weepy.

say something contrary to what they want all others to believe. If all
happy Mini-500 owners were as brave and forthright as you, and would
stand and fight back, then it would be a victory, but that will never
happen. Thank you for the bit of kindness, but you do not deserve
their wrath.


I need a tissue sniff

Most sincerely,

Dennis Fetter


You spelled your name wrong.

Well Dennis I've certainly read my share of Mini 500 stories over the
years.

As a lurker I can't make any comments because I like many have no
direct knowledge of the facts or issues regarding the history of RCI.

BUT ----- I will give you full credit for coming into this newsgroup
numerous time and presenting your point of view good bad or indifferent
in a rationale and logical manner, devoid of rants and cursing.

Hindsight being 20/20 vision I'm sure that if you had to do it over
again you would have done many things different.

Being a curious person I'd like two ask a few questions.

Since a lot of these machines suffered from engine failure regardles
of how they were supposed to be set up or run, what did the engine
manufacture say, or what was their position on these failure.

And why didn't you change engines to either a different manufacturer or
a higher horsepower. I'm not trying to put you on the spot because I
know there was a lot of controversy regarding the engines being used
and how they were being run at high rpm.

And if you don't mind..... what are you personally doing these days.

Greeter at Wal Mart, growing flowers at a greenhouse, running a
manufacturing plant, retired.....??????

I'm curious as you can see.

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your kind post, and taking the time to do so.

Shiver wrote:
Well Dennis I've certainly read my share of Mini 500 stories over the
years.

As a lurker I can't make any comments because I like many have no
direct knowledge of the facts or issues regarding the history of RCI.

BUT ----- I will give you full credit for coming into this newsgroup
numerous time and presenting your point of view good bad or indifferent
in a rationale and logical manner, devoid of rants and cursing.


Thank you, I try.


Hindsight being 20/20 vision I'm sure that if you had to do it over
again you would have done many things different.


As with anything...

I feel that my biggest mistake was assuming anyone could build, operate
and maintain a kit helicopter. I was wrong there, very few can do so,
even with the certified helicopters. Our assembly manual was excellent.
Very nice exploded drawings, pictures and step by step instructions. The
common mistake that about 90% of the Mini-500 builders made was the
same; they didn't read the instructions and only followed the drawings
and pictures. Believe it or not, but true. This lead to many common
mistakes, from not heating the parts before installation to missing
parts. I can't tell you how many times an owner would come to the
factory with his Mini-500 for the free inspection we offered, only to
hold out his hand and ask why he had extra parts, and always after he
had 40 hours of flight time on his Mini-500. They most all came to the
factory after something was going wrong, and it was always a simple
overlooked procedure or something assembled wrong, and always after they
flew it until it broke. Some aircraft were so far out of balance that
they shock themselves apart in only 40 hours, and only because the
builder didn't bother to balance it, or did it wrong and ignored the
fact that he did it wrong.

On the other hand, we had some design problems that had to be addressed.
Since we were shipping 5 to 6 complete kits a week, and since the
average time for the builder to complete the kit and fly 40 hours was
about 4 months, we could have shipped 80 or more aircraft by the time we
received word of a problem a builder may be encountering. So by that
time, it's a major deal, not like Uglysport or Angle helicopters that
have only sent out a handful of aircraft over a long time. So this also
made the situation seem worse because it involved much more people.

What would I have done differently using hindsight? I would have tripled
the price of the Mini-500 and sold much less of them to people that can
actually afford to own a helicopter, and built it under our complete
supervision. Then I could have had a much smaller factory with less
overhead, and fewer customers that would have paid more, and maintenance
or improvement costs would have not mattered to them so much, because
they could afford it, like in the commercial aircraft field. It would
have just been too bad for someone that wanted a helicopter but couldn't
afford one, which the Mini-500 did fit the bill.


Being a curious person I'd like two ask a few questions.


I would be honored.


Since a lot of these machines suffered from engine failure regardles
of how they were supposed to be set up or run, what did the engine
manufacture say, or what was their position on these failure.


The engine manufacturer always read our reports, but they never
pretended to understand the needs of helicopters. They just supplied the
engines. They were concerned but satisfied with the reasons of the
failures, and supported our continuing effort to make the builder follow
instructions or find ways to make the engine more resilient to misuse.

As we learned and experimented, this was done with the mandatory
addition of the Power Enhancement Package system, "PEP" for short. That
was a tuned exhaust system that moved the power band up to operational
RPM's where a helicopter operated. That not only took care of the low
rotor RPM's that our low time pilots were having by increasing the
torque, but gave the helicopter more overall performance, and reduced
the exhaust back pressure which made it much less sensitive to EGT
change, and took away the need to rejet for density altitude changes.
And yet, even with all it offered, not even half of the Mini-500 owners
installed the PEP in their aircraft, and they continued having failures
due to the reasons above, while the PEP Mini-500's are still performing
well. You can led a horse ot water, but you can't make him drink.


And why didn't you change engines to either a different manufacturer or
a higher horsepower. I'm not trying to put you on the spot because I
know there was a lot of controversy regarding the engines being used
and how they were being run at high rpm.


Back in 1990, when I first started the Mini-500 project, there was only
one engine manufacturer that could provide 5 engines "new-in-the-box a
week", that had a performance history, and had service all around the
world. That was Rotax. The Mini-500 was designed around the 582 Rotax
engine. There was nothing else available. That is still as true today as
15 years ago.

The 582 Rotax is a good choice for the Mini-500. It has the power
necessary to do the job, at the price people will pay. The engine was
only ran at 6600 RPM's, which is still a 100% duty cycle for the engine
at 70% power reduction. Remember, the same engine in the snowmobile
industry will produce 110 hp at 8500 rpm's. Rotax simply derated the
engine for aircraft by lowering the RPM's. If you look at the power
charts of the snowmobile, the output HP at 6500 rpm is 64HP. No Rotax in
a Mini-500 has ever failed due to overexertion, if operated properly.
Only to improper installation or improper (or lack of) maintenance. It
is the finest light-aircraft engine ever made.

Also in the light-aircraft industry, 98% of all Rotax failures are due
to poor installation or inadequate maintenance. If you want a
bulletproof idiot-proof engine, buy an O-200.

The Rotax was, and is still the only choice of engine for the Mini-500
size helicopter, for the price people want to afford. Some people have
tried to replace the engine with something else, and all have failed.
Even the Solar APU engines will never work as intended. They burn more
fuel than you can carry, have no explosion proof protection, and the low
duty cycle makes them burn out quickly. They are not turbine engines,
they are merely self-propelled turbochargers meant to power generators
and pumps. To this day no one has been successful, except me with the
Rotax engine.


And if you don't mind..... what are you personally doing these days.


I have a Research and Development business where I design and build
rotorcraft of various types for customers around the world. I'm doing
what I want, and that's not to have to deal with people any longer. I
have found that large businesses and governments have much more money to
spend.

If you would like, I would be happy to send you some pictures of my
previous accomplishment, the Star-Lite UAV helicopter, and the new
helicopter I'm designing and building for another customer.

Again, thank you for asking, and I hope I was able to answer your
questions effectively.

Most sincerely,

Dennis Fetters

The OTHER Kevin in San Diego wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:56:33 GMT, Dennis Fetters
wrote:



I rarely do so, and then only when it's factual. There is already some
history with Beavis and his out of line comments.
But, few else here hesitate to insult me. I don't see you standing up to
them. Why? double standards? I hope not.


Don't know of any history between you two and frankly, I couuld give a
rat's ass about any. That's between you two.


As it should be... Along with anything else not concerning you about me.

Dennis Fetters

Dennis Fetters wrote:
Dave Jackson wrote:

B4RT wrote;

So unless you have 1000+ hours or [of] rotorcraft time..



For the homebuilder; is that 1000 hours of flying experience, or 1000
hours
of maintenance experience, or perhaps 1000 hours of experience in
manufacturing and assembling rotorcraft?



Dave, from my experience, that sounds about right.

If Kit aircraft had the same laws backing them as certified aircraft,
then people would by law have to build and maintain their aircraft to
factory standards, and in most cases that would vastly reduce the
accident rate.

Sincerely,

Dennis Fetters

And, of course, complexity explains all of the deaths in your generation
of Air Command gyroplanes. They were banned in Britain, and your
successors, thankfully, have worked very hard to overcome the deadly
design flaws in your machines.

You are so full of **** I can't believe it. Go peddle your wares
somewhere else.

So, let's see where we're at...

The sappy letter (only for Jim, wink-wink) was indeed yours.

Next, you cry out
"You have absolutely no respect for anyone"
"the big difference between you and me is respect for others."

Shiver commends your
"rationale and logical manner, devoid of rants and cursing."

And your impeccably gracious reply contains:
"not like Uglysport or Angle helicopters"

Uncalled for, childish name calling against two other kit heli
manufacturers. See, folks?

As for the guy that originally asked the question about places to buy
Mini-500 parts, no, there is nowhere to purchase parts.

Most sincerely,
Dennis Fetters

Parts at Muna's Treasures on eBay
Certainly you ain't most sincere

wrote:
So, let's see where we're at...

The sappy letter (only for Jim, wink-wink) was indeed yours.


I was waiting for someone to say I wrote the letter that Jim posted.
Typical paranoia. Why don't you do a Google search, and you'll see he
has been posting before.


Next, you cry out
"You have absolutely no respect for anyone"
"the big difference between you and me is respect for others."


Cloud, I said "(You) have absolutely no respect for anyone". You have
demonstrated that to us all, right?


Shiver commends your
"rationale and logical manner, devoid of rants and cursing."

And your impeccably gracious reply contains:
"not like Uglysport or Angle helicopters"


It's shameful how you try and pick works out of a statement to make it
sound like a different meaning. What I said is below:

"On the other hand, we had some design problems that had to be
addressed. Since we were shipping 5 to 6 complete kits a week, and
since the average time for the builder to complete the kit and fly 40
hours was about 4 months, we could have shipped 80 or more aircraft by
the time we received word of a problem a builder may be encountering. So
by that time, it's a major deal, not like Uglysport or Angle helicopters
that have only sent out a handful of aircraft over a long time. So this
also made the situation seem worse because it involved much more people."


Uncalled for, childish name calling against two other kit heli
manufacturers. See, folks?


When I was in competition with them selling a comparable helicopter, I
had a policy that we would not resort to badmouthing the competition. I
wish they would have had the same policy, professionalism and
politeness. Guess what Cloud, I'm not in the business anymore, and I'm
free to express my opinion, but unlike you I didn't trash the helicopter
or the designers with unfounded or false statements. If you think the
Mini-500 is ugly, fine, it's a factual statement and you have the right
to express it, it's a matter of preference. But, it's not right for you
to talk about performance when you have absolutely no knowledge about
what you're saying.

Dennis Fetters

P.S. I think some boats, automobiles and buildings are ugly too, in my
opinion.

wrote:



As for the guy that originally asked the question about places to buy
Mini-500 parts, no, there is nowhere to purchase parts.

Most sincerely,
Dennis Fetters


Parts at Muna's Treasures on eBay
Certainly you ain't most sincere


I'm sure since you're doing the research, you have seen that
munastreasures offers sales assistance to people, and they have sold
many items for others, including aircraft and other aviation related parts.

Why would you assume something sinister about them selling Mini-500
parts for somebody? Anybody? The owner sold me the transmissions, engine
and other parts for a project where I needed them, and asked
Munastreasures to sell the rest of the aircraft for him. He is selling
it all because he had developed health problems after he purchased it,
and it was just sitting around. What are you referring to as it is not
sincere, our what business of it is yours anyway?

I told the guy the truth. Don't buy a Mini-500 because there are no
parts available. You didn't see me saying, "sure, sure, buy that
Mini-500, I'm sure you'll find the other parts".

Most sincerely,

Dennis Fetters

Peter Wendell wrote:
Dennis Fetters wrote:

Dave Jackson wrote:
For the homebuilder; is that 1000 hours of flying experience, or 1000
hours
of maintenance experience, or perhaps 1000 hours of experience in
manufacturing and assembling rotorcraft?

Dave, from my experience, that sounds about right.

If Kit aircraft had the same laws backing them as certified aircraft,
then people would by law have to build and maintain their aircraft to
factory standards, and in most cases that would vastly reduce the
accident rate.

Sincerely,

Dennis Fetters


And, of course, complexity explains all of the deaths in your generation
of Air Command gyroplanes. They were banned in Britain, and your
successors, thankfully, have worked very hard to overcome the deadly
design flaws in your machines.


I have posted about this before, in case you didn't read. I went to
Britain myself and set a person up as our Air Command dealer. Some
mouths after I had left, that dealer took it upon himself, without my
knowledge, to turn his Commander customers loose after only 5 hours of
training, even after I told them before they need a minimum of 20 hours,
and then strict supervision afterwards.

The result was some of his low time customers tried to fly on very windy
days, and that wind caused circumstances that exceeded their ability to
fly the gyroplane with the experience they possessed, causing them to
loose control and crash.

Afterwards, the dealer was contacted by the CAA and asked why he would
release his customers only after 5 hours of training. The CAA also sent
me a letter asking what we recommended the training time should be. The
dealer asked me to tell the CAA 5 hours, but I refused, and told them
what we told the dealer originally. The dealer felt betrayed, and to
avoid legal circumstances left the country.

The CAA will not allow a kit aircraft to fly without dealer
representation, and had no choice but to ground the fleet. Before all
this, I was made an offer to sell the Commander business. At that same
time I was already working on the Mini-500, and decided to sell the
Commander line. If I would not have sold the Commander line, then I
would have took the time to reestablish a new dealer in Britain and help
with the crash investigation, and the fleet would not have been
grounded. But, since I sold the company, it was up to the new owners to
do that, and they never did.

So, the meaning of your statement above is not actually in the light you
tried to present it. As a matter of fact, you can go to any gyroplane
air show and see original Air Command gyroplanes that are 25 years old,
still flying with the newest designs, and keeping up or staying ahead.
There is no better testament of the design than that.


You are so full of **** I can't believe it. Go peddle your wares
somewhere else.


Maybe so. But I'm not here belittling myself by cursing and name
calling, unless the shoe fits. I'm not here making statements out of
context to portray a false meaning, like you are.

So, be careful Peter, even if you're making the standards you are still
being judged. Where will it put you on your totem poll?

Dennis Fetters