I Wanna Build an Aeroplane

Hey! I have a PhD....not as often as when I was younger, but once in
awhile anyway...(Pretty Hard Dick).

Ken J. - Sand on E's Egg......Oh.


BBWWAAAAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!

God one Ken .

Hey, you still manufacturing those horizontal stabs? If so, do you
have one that will work on my Snobird gyroscope?

BWB

(Badwater Bill) wrote in message ...
Hey! I have a PhD....not as often as when I was younger, but once in
awhile anyway...(Pretty Hard Dick).

Ken J. - Sand on E's Egg......Oh.


BBWWAAAAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!

God one Ken .

Hey, you still manufacturing those horizontal stabs? If so, do you
have one that will work on my Snobird gyroscope?

BWB

Hi Bill,

Nah. After I came out with mine, a few others came out with cheaper
imitations and the market soon got flooded. I sold about 34 of them
though, which is not bad considering that they were designed
specifically for the RAF because of the canted vertical stab and the
small available market. Mine won't fit on anything else.

I since have had my gyro converted by American Autogyro (Div. of Groen
Bros). She now flies like a 172 on a calm day. It now has centerline
thrust instead of that foot-long too high thrustline the RAF comes
with and that sent so many innocent, poor slobs to their deaths. All
of them were flying without a horizontal stab, which RAF (Don LaFleur)
refrred to as a "contraption." Here's a link to AAI. The main photo
on the main page is my gyro and is on the bottom of the photo page. I
recently turned 406 hours on her.

www.americanautogyro.com

They'll be coming out with their own kits by the end of this year,
using only aircraft grade components and hardware, something RAF never
heard of. Take care.

Ken J. - Sandy A Go

Ken Sandyeggo wrote:

It now has centerline
thrust instead of that foot-long too high thrustline the RAF comes
with and that sent so many innocent, poor slobs to their deaths.

Ken.... Would this, or does this, stop that buntover problem that
you have talked about before.

Bernie the Bunion wrote in message ...
Ken Sandyeggo wrote:

It now has centerline
thrust instead of that foot-long too high thrustline the RAF comes
with and that sent so many innocent, poor slobs to their deaths.

Ken.... Would this, or does this, stop that buntover problem that
you have talked about before.

Yes Bernie it does. With centerline thrust, there is no force above
the vertical center of gravity to push it over. You need thrust above
the vertical center of gravity in order to experience
(once-in-a-lifetime only) a buntover. Once you do it, at least you
don't ever have to worry about doing it again.

Ken J. - Psandie Aygowe

In article , Ken Sandyeggo
says...

Yes Bernie it does. With centerline thrust, there is no force above
the vertical center of gravity to push it over. You need thrust above
the vertical center of gravity in order to experience
(once-in-a-lifetime only) a buntover. Once you do it, at least you
don't ever have to worry about doing it again.

Actually, Ken, you could still manually bunt the thing over with the stick.
Can't think of why anyone
would. The AAI redesign does seem to eliminate power pushover (the most common
cause of
bunting), and reduces the divergent pitch-recovery mode that leads to PIO (the
next most common
cause). It also takes out that long slow oscillation that RAF's have.

I have been following the AAI thing for a while... spent a couple hours with Jim
Mayfield at
Mentone... spent more time at Fondy during OSH... flew it slightly (not much).
The demonstrators
they have been using are not their new gyro but modified RAF's like yours.
Theirs is going to have
a slightly larger cabin as well.

I have a big story I'm working up on the whole AAI vs RAF thing... RAF is
demoralised, and many of
their dealers have bailed. But others are standing by out of loyalty. It's kind
of a mess.

RAF's answer is a sort of a trim vane mounted to the rotor mast, behind the
cabin. They call it the
Rotor Stabilator. Seen it?

cheers

-=K=-

Rule #1: Don't hit anything big.

Kevin O'Brien wrote in message ...
In article , Ken Sandyeggo
says...

Yes Bernie it does. With centerline thrust, there is no force above
the vertical center of gravity to push it over. You need thrust above
the vertical center of gravity in order to experience
(once-in-a-lifetime only) a buntover. Once you do it, at least you
don't ever have to worry about doing it again.

Actually, Ken, you could still manually bunt the thing over with the stick.
Can't think of why anyone
would. The AAI redesign does seem to eliminate power pushover (the most common
cause of
bunting), and reduces the divergent pitch-recovery mode that leads to PIO (the
next most common
cause). It also takes out that long slow oscillation that RAF's have.

I have been following the AAI thing for a while... spent a couple hours with Jim
Mayfield at
Mentone... spent more time at Fondy during OSH... flew it slightly (not much).
The demonstrators
they have been using are not their new gyro but modified RAF's like yours.
Theirs is going to have
a slightly larger cabin as well.

I have a big story I'm working up on the whole AAI vs RAF thing... RAF is
demoralised, and many of
their dealers have bailed. But others are standing by out of loyalty. It's kind
of a mess.

RAF's answer is a sort of a trim vane mounted to the rotor mast, behind the
cabin. They call it the
Rotor Stabilator. Seen it?

cheers


Kevin,

I'm not a real technical bug, but you're right, I should have said
"power-pushover." I've seen photos of it. Minds that are more
scientific and knowledgeable than mine analyzed the RAF "stabilator"
and pronounced it basically worthless on the gyro forum. RAF says
that it "stabilizes the rotor." The gyro forum is down right now.
When it comes back up, I'll copy and paste the analysis of the RAF
stabilator. As far as I know, they only have 3 dealers left in the
U.S. There were four left, but the one in Florida got all his tickets
suspended for a year. (They had around a dozen just a few years ago.
They lost their New Zealand and Australian dealers also.) It was for
instructing in an illegal gyro, but he's the one that had about 4
students and a passenger die in unstabbed RAFs after taking lessons
from him in less than a year. I think you have to read between the
lines on the FAA's findings. I think that they needed to get him on
the ground for awhile someway.

My converted gyro flies like a dream now. It was a great investment
on the conversion. No more pitching and yawing all over the place.

Ken J. - Sandy A. Ghowe




-=K=-

Rule #1: Don't hit anything big.

(Ken Sandyeggo) wrote in message . com...
Kevin O'Brien wrote in message ...
In article , Ken Sandyeggo
says...

Yes Bernie it does. With centerline thrust, there is no force above
the vertical center of gravity to push it over. You need thrust above
the vertical center of gravity in order to experience
(once-in-a-lifetime only) a buntover. Once you do it, at least you
don't ever have to worry about doing it again.

Actually, Ken, you could still manually bunt the thing over with the stick.
Can't think of why anyone
would. The AAI redesign does seem to eliminate power pushover (the most common
cause of
bunting), and reduces the divergent pitch-recovery mode that leads to PIO (the
next most common
cause). It also takes out that long slow oscillation that RAF's have.

I have been following the AAI thing for a while... spent a couple hours with Jim
Mayfield at
Mentone... spent more time at Fondy during OSH... flew it slightly (not much).
The demonstrators
they have been using are not their new gyro but modified RAF's like yours.
Theirs is going to have
a slightly larger cabin as well.

I have a big story I'm working up on the whole AAI vs RAF thing... RAF is
demoralised, and many of
their dealers have bailed. But others are standing by out of loyalty. It's kind
of a mess.

RAF's answer is a sort of a trim vane mounted to the rotor mast, behind the
cabin. They call it the
Rotor Stabilator. Seen it?

cheers


Kevin,

I'm not a real technical bug, but you're right, I should have said
"power-pushover." I've seen photos of it. Minds that are more
scientific and knowledgeable than mine analyzed the RAF "stabilator"
and pronounced it basically worthless on the gyro forum. RAF says
that it "stabilizes the rotor." The gyro forum is down right now.
When it comes back up, I'll copy and paste the analysis of the RAF
stabilator. As far as I know, they only have 3 dealers left in the
U.S. There were four left, but the one in Florida got all his tickets
suspended for a year. (They had around a dozen just a few years ago.
They lost their New Zealand and Australian dealers also.) It was for
instructing in an illegal gyro, but he's the one that had about 4
students and a passenger die in unstabbed RAFs after taking lessons
from him in less than a year. I think you have to read between the
lines on the FAA's findings. I think that they needed to get him on
the ground for awhile someway.

My converted gyro flies like a dream now. It was a great investment
on the conversion. No more pitching and yawing all over the place.

Ken J. - Sandy A. Ghowe




-=K=-

Rule #1: Don't hit anything big.


Here are some comments by Doug Riley, a pretty knowledgeable person
regarding gyro aerodynamics, and his comments on RAF's "Rotor
Stabilator."

"It's hard to tell from the pictures just what this thing is. I'm
assuming that it's a small airfoil linked to the torque bar, with
in-flight variable incidence.

If this assumption is accurate, then it's a pleasant gadget that will
act as a semi-intelligent flight adjustable trim spring. Like the
gimbal head, such a device can produce control pressures that tend to
return the craft to a selected trimmed airspeed after a small
disturbance. Nothing that "stabilizes" the aircraft using rotor
forces can solve the problem caused by a high thrustline, however.

That's because the rotor takes a vacation during zero G events.
Aerodynamically, the rotor "disappears" when it's no longer lifting
the gyro. In such conditions, it doesn't matter in the least where
the rotor points. As a result, it sure doesn't matter whether a
highly trained pilot, or the gimbal head, or the rubber mast or the
magic trim vane is manipulating the rotor; REGARDLESS, THE ROTOR CAN
APPLY NO THRUST TO THE FRAME IN ZERO G.

If, without the rotor's restraining force, the airframe wants to flip
end over end, it's going to. The only way to prevent this is to
arrange the airframe so that it tracks straight and level in a zero G
situation WITHOUT help from the rotor. A no-HS gyro with 500 ft-lb. of
nose down force at full throttle will not track straight and level for
even an instant, once rotor thrust is lost.

A stable airframe is the key to ending the PPO."

I'll see if there are any more pertinent comments and post them later.

Ken J. - SDCAUSA

Hi Bill,

Nah. After I came out with mine, a few others came out with cheaper
imitations and the market soon got flooded. I sold about 34 of them
though, which is not bad considering that they were designed
specifically for the RAF because of the canted vertical stab and the
small available market. Mine won't fit on anything else.

I since have had my gyro converted by American Autogyro (Div. of Groen
Bros). She now flies like a 172 on a calm day. It now has centerline
thrust instead of that foot-long too high thrustline the RAF comes
with and that sent so many innocent, poor slobs to their deaths. All
of them were flying without a horizontal stab, which RAF (Don LaFleur)
refrred to as a "contraption." Here's a link to AAI. The main photo
on the main page is my gyro and is on the bottom of the photo page. I
recently turned 406 hours on her.

www.americanautogyro.com

They'll be coming out with their own kits by the end of this year,
using only aircraft grade components and hardware, something RAF never
heard of. Take care.

Ken J. - Sandy A Go

Thanks for the update. You saved a lot of lives. Where flittering
fetters was milking the market with his piece of crap AirCommand,
there were guys like you who were trying to make it better. You have
a good spot in heaven for your efforts. Tony and I followed your
efforts more closely than you might think. You did a good job Ken.
You are to be commended. You made the problem of the high thrust line
in a pusher more docile to the newbee. I really do claim that you are
responsible for saving many lives. You should feel good about
yourself for that. You did a good job.

Best Wishes,

BWB

Hey BWB!

Gonna take that Vette to the lake? Watch out for that Ranger!

I was in Thailand this past New Year and had a blast. Anyways, if you
ever want to feel young again, go to Thailand with me for a week or
two. I am a US citizen of Thai decent. I speak, read and write Thai.
I'll bet you will want to go back at least twice a year. "Live like
a king in the US = $$$$$$$, Live like a king in Thailand = $". The
whole coutry is structured to serve the allmighty greenback.

Regards,
Bryan

P.S. I told you to tell them that the tide went out on you.

Have fun with the Vette.