A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Rotorcraft
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

High altitude Helicycle



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 2nd 09, 07:30 PM posted to rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Stu Fields
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default High altitude Helicycle

A report in of a Helicycle climbing at 600fpm at a density altitude of
8,000. Of course the passenger capacity is limited to only 6 politicians
with the lies removed.


Ads
  #2  
Old August 3rd 09, 04:52 AM posted to rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Steve R.[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 31
Default High altitude Helicycle

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...
A report in of a Helicycle climbing at 600fpm at a density altitude of
8,000. Of course the passenger capacity is limited to only 6 politicians
with the lies removed.



Stu,

I take it from your comment that you don't entirely believe this? ;-)

I have "no" idea what kind of performance the Helicycle has one way or the
other. I have heard that turbines in general do better at altitude, at
least on fixed wing aircraft. Would that apply to rotorcraft too? Do you
think the 2-stroke engines that Mr. Schramm originally tried to put in the
Helicycle would be flying at all at that kind of density altitude?

Just wondering! :-)
Steve R.

  #3  
Old August 3rd 09, 03:27 PM posted to rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Stu Fields
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default High altitude Helicycle


"Steve R." wrote in message
...
"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...
A report in of a Helicycle climbing at 600fpm at a density altitude of
8,000. Of course the passenger capacity is limited to only 6 politicians
with the lies removed.



Stu,

I take it from your comment that you don't entirely believe this? ;-)

I have "no" idea what kind of performance the Helicycle has one way or the
other. I have heard that turbines in general do better at altitude, at
least on fixed wing aircraft. Would that apply to rotorcraft too? Do you
think the 2-stroke engines that Mr. Schramm originally tried to put in the
Helicycle would be flying at all at that kind of density altitude?

Just wondering! :-)
Steve R.


Steve: I believe the report. The birds have an abundance of power. People
flying in the low lands of Illinois, Louisiana etc. have modified their
engines, in effect halving the power to get better fuel consumption and
still don't seem to have much trouble flying. There have been other reports
of flying the Helicycle above 11,000. My comment about the passengers was
just a slam at politicians.
I don't know what the performance of the 2 stroke would be. If I had to
guess, I would expect the 2 stroke to be encapable at that high of a density
altitude. Some form of Mixture control would be necessary. I think that
there is one Helicycle flying with the 2 stroke, but I've never heard any
performance reporting.

Stu


  #4  
Old August 3rd 09, 05:03 PM posted to rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Stu Fields
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default High altitude Helicycle


"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"Steve R." wrote in message
...
"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...
A report in of a Helicycle climbing at 600fpm at a density altitude of
8,000. Of course the passenger capacity is limited to only 6 politicians
with the lies removed.



Stu,

I take it from your comment that you don't entirely believe this? ;-)

I have "no" idea what kind of performance the Helicycle has one way or
the other. I have heard that turbines in general do better at altitude,
at least on fixed wing aircraft. Would that apply to rotorcraft too? Do
you think the 2-stroke engines that Mr. Schramm originally tried to put
in the Helicycle would be flying at all at that kind of density altitude?

Just wondering! :-)
Steve R.


Steve: I believe the report. The birds have an abundance of power.
People flying in the low lands of Illinois, Louisiana etc. have modified
their engines, in effect halving the power to get better fuel consumption
and still don't seem to have much trouble flying. There have been other
reports of flying the Helicycle above 11,000. My comment about the
passengers was just a slam at politicians.
I don't know what the performance of the 2 stroke would be. If I had to
guess, I would expect the 2 stroke to be encapable at that high of a
density altitude. Some form of Mixture control would be necessary. I
think that there is one Helicycle flying with the 2 stroke, but I've never
heard any performance reporting.

Stu


Got another report of HOGE in excess of 8500' These things are sounding
better and better.

Stu


  #5  
Old August 4th 09, 03:29 AM posted to rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Steve R.[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 31
Default High altitude Helicycle

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...

"Steve R." wrote in message
...
"Stu Fields" wrote in message
...
A report in of a Helicycle climbing at 600fpm at a density altitude of
8,000. Of course the passenger capacity is limited to only 6
politicians with the lies removed.



Stu,

I take it from your comment that you don't entirely believe this? ;-)

I have "no" idea what kind of performance the Helicycle has one way or
the other. I have heard that turbines in general do better at altitude,
at least on fixed wing aircraft. Would that apply to rotorcraft too?
Do you think the 2-stroke engines that Mr. Schramm originally tried to
put in the Helicycle would be flying at all at that kind of density
altitude?

Just wondering! :-)
Steve R.


Steve: I believe the report. The birds have an abundance of power.
People flying in the low lands of Illinois, Louisiana etc. have modified
their engines, in effect halving the power to get better fuel consumption
and still don't seem to have much trouble flying. There have been other
reports of flying the Helicycle above 11,000. My comment about the
passengers was just a slam at politicians.
I don't know what the performance of the 2 stroke would be. If I had to
guess, I would expect the 2 stroke to be encapable at that high of a
density altitude. Some form of Mixture control would be necessary. I
think that there is one Helicycle flying with the 2 stroke, but I've
never heard any performance reporting.

Stu


Got another report of HOGE in excess of 8500' These things are sounding
better and better.

Stu


Cool, Thanks!

Steve R.

  #6  
Old August 8th 09, 03:31 AM posted to rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Stu Fields
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default High altitude Helicycle


"The OTHER Kevin in San Diego" skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 3 Aug 2009 09:03:09 -0700, "Stu Fields" wrote:


Got another report of HOGE in excess of 8500' These things are sounding
better and better.


Probably with a couple gallons of fuel and a 150lb pilot on board...

I wish someone would make an experimental/hombuilt capable of housing
my 74" and 225 lbs.


Kevin: You are a candidate for my guaranteed power-to-weight enhancement
program. It is 100% money back guarantee to work. It involves a hockey
goalies face mask and when worn at meal time will cut your 225 down a bit.
I know the Helicycle says that for pilots less than 180# it is possible to
add a 5 gal. aux tank to increase the range. Well my 194# didn't look to
good anyway (73") so after looking at the 72" 170# guys on WEC I decided
that I can go there. My 194# is now @ 182# and going down. I didn't have
to resort to the goalies mask yet.

Stu


  #7  
Old August 18th 09, 08:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.rotorcraft
Stu Fields
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default High altitude Helicycle


"The OTHER Kevin in San Diego" skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net wrote in
message ...
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 19:31:38 -0700, "Stu Fields" wrote:


Kevin: You are a candidate for my guaranteed power-to-weight enhancement
program. It is 100% money back guarantee to work.


Since it's evidently free, I don't see how you'd be risking anything
form YOUR side.

It involves a hockey
goalies face mask and when worn at meal time will cut your 225 down a bit.


I imagine that wouldn't go over too well when I take the wife out to
dinner.

I know the Helicycle says that for pilots less than 180# it is possible to
add a 5 gal. aux tank to increase the range. Well my 194# didn't look to
good anyway (73") so after looking at the 72" 170# guys on WEC I decided
that I can go there. My 194# is now @ 182# and going down. I didn't have
to resort to the goalies mask yet.


Man, I was 170 lbs at my HS graduation, 175lbs when I got married 6
years later... I can't blame anyone but the cook in the house - me!


Update: 180 and headed for 170#. BTW don't worry about the goalies mask in
a restaurant. If a very large number of people ever decide to avoid
diabetes and high blood pressure., you will look strange without a mask.
Obesity seems to be a very popular sport right now.
For some reason the helicopters attract a lot of people who would primarily
only qualify for a two seat Huey. Or a 1/2 seat R-22?

Stu


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
High altitude flutter - Vne bildan Soaring 58 January 8th 09 08:04 PM
High Altitude Linnies TTaylor at cc.usu.edu Soaring 4 August 4th 06 10:47 PM
High altitude & RPM abripl Home Built 1 September 1st 05 12:12 AM
High-altitude autorotations? Bill McClain Military Aviation 17 March 15th 04 04:23 PM
Low and high altitude airways David Megginson Instrument Flight Rules 7 September 9th 03 01:18 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.