Super Skycycle

[boB[_2_]]

Has anyone seen, or read about, that Skycycle?



http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/gallery.htm

http://javimoya.com/blog/youtube_en.php

http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/002.jpg

http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/012.jpg

http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/001.jpg

http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/010.jpg




--

boB
copter.six

[Shiver]

> Has anyone seen, or read about, that Skycycle?

> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/010.jpg

Well as everybody knows.... I'm just a little lurker, armchair pilot,
and always stand to be corrected.....

BUT.... Everything that I've ever read about gyros in this group always
comes back to the fact that if it does not have a centre line stab the
machine is prone to bunt over.

Too bad Kenny Sandy Eggo isn't around these days because he is very
knowleageble on the subject.

He's been flying gyros for years.

If you look at the Jpgs posted in the URL you will see how low the stab
is on these machines.

If I bought one of those I'd raise the stab up to be in line with the
centre line of the engine.

[boB[_2_]]

Shiver wrote:

>
> Well as everybody knows.... I'm just a little lurker, armchair pilot,
> and always stand to be corrected.....
>
> BUT.... Everything that I've ever read about gyros in this group always
> comes back to the fact that if it does not have a centre line stab the
> machine is prone to bunt over.
>
> Too bad Kenny Sandy Eggo isn't around these days because he is very
> knowleageble on the subject.
>
> He's been flying gyros for years.
>
> If you look at the Jpgs posted in the URL you will see how low the stab
> is on these machines.
>
> If I bought one of those I'd raise the stab up to be in line with the
> centre line of the engine.


Thanks.. I had read something about that earlier. I haven't seen any
recent articles about this thing and was hoping someone here had flown
one. There's no reference to any owners of the skycycle on their page.
I wonder if they have sold any.



--

boB
copter.six

[Steve R]

"Shiver" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Has anyone seen, or read about, that Skycycle?
>
>> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/010.jpg
>
> Well as everybody knows.... I'm just a little lurker, armchair pilot,
> and always stand to be corrected.....
>
> BUT.... Everything that I've ever read about gyros in this group always
> comes back to the fact that if it does not have a centre line stab the
> machine is prone to bunt over.

Actually, it's not the stab that needs to be center line, it's the thrust
line of the engine and prop. Having said all that, it is generally
considered preferable, at least from what I've read, to have he horizontal
stab in the prop wash. The idea being that the added air velocity will
improve the stabs stabilizing effect. I'm not sure I agree with that 100%
but I do agree that the horizontal stab is very import and should not be
dismissed as trivial. You'll still run into folks every now and then that
will claim the h-stab isn't needed on a gyro.

On a pusher style gyro, the engine thrust line should (ideally) be as close
to the vertical CG of the aircraft as possible. Many designs that have been
put out in past years had an engine thrust line that was some distance above
the vertical CG. That would induce a forward pitching moment. This force
was countered by the rearward inclination of the main rotor and as long as
you kept the main rotor loaded, everything balanced out and was fine. If
the pilot ever unloaded the rotor while under power, the forces involved
would not balance out and the aircraft was pitch forward (a bunt over, aka
"power push over") and the pilot would quickly find himself inverted and out
of options. Too many folks died this way.

These days, most manufacturers of any note are only producing centerline
thrust, or near centerline thrust gyros. Check out
http://www.aircommand.com and look at the designs of their single and two
place machine. Then do a search on "Air Command" and find pictures of their
older designs. The difference in the location of the engines thrust line
relative to the rest of the machine is dramatic. I've always been very
impressed that Air Command undertook this redesign of their product line in
the interest of flight safety. Some manufacturers have refused to do this
for fear of liability issues. It would be like admitting there was
something wrong with their older designs. At any rate, Air Command sells a
retrofit kit to convert their older designs into the new centerline thrust
model and recommends that the older bird not be flown until that
modification is done.

If you haven't seen it before, check out
http://www.rotaryforum.com/index.php. It's a discussion forum on
experimental rotorcraft and has lot's of good information on gyroplanes.
About the only down side to this one is that many of these guys have "very"
strong personalities and can be "very" opinionated. This means that
sometimes you have to wade through a lot of egos to get to the meaningful
information but if you're serious about getting into gyroplanes, it's well
worth the effort.

FWIW! :-)

>
> Too bad Kenny Sandy Eggo isn't around these days because he is very
> knowleageble on the subject.
>
> He's been flying gyros for years.
>

Agreed!

Good luck & Fly Safe,
Steve R.

[Stuart & Kathryn Fields]

boB: I know a little bit about the Butterfly thing. The 4th picture down
on the left of the first website listed is a picture of me in my crack hat
sitting on the Super SkyCycle. I met Larry Neal, the SkyCycle designer a
number of years ago when we were producing the Popular Rotorcraft Magazine.
Larry had just acquired the job of Test Pilot of the Carter Copter, which
BTW, he successfully flew to an airspeed exceeding Mu 1. Larry is a very
ethical guy and a very knowledgeable gyro pilot and designer. I have
watched him demonstrate that landing gear of his by stopping the gyro about
10' in the air and letting it come down on its own from losing blade speed.
He adds throttle and takes off again to repeat the maneuver. I believe that
if Larry gives you a performance spec about his machine, you can take it to
the bank. If I was going to go back to the gyro flying, his ship would be
the first in line for me.
BTW squared, In the process of doing the PRA magazine we met and spent some
time with Comander Ken Wallis who is the UK gyro king. He did all of the
flying for the James Bond movie that had the "Little Nellie" gyro. He
doesn't share the statements that both horizontal stabilizers and center
line thrust are a must. At least in his experience, and I might add mine
(both my wife and I self taught in a Benson back in the late 60s and never
dinged the ship and flew in a variety of conditions). This is not to say
that some ships with an abundance of body work forward of the mast can't
benefit from both things tho. I think that the two seat side-by-side gyros
like the RAF and Sparrohawk would certainly fly different in gusty winds
than the skimpy single seat Benson that I used to fly.

--
Stuart Fields
Experimental Helo magazine
P. O. Box 1585
Inyokern, CA 93527
(760) 377-4478
(760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
(760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell

www.vkss.com
www.experimentalhelo.com


"boB" > wrote in message
...
>
> Has anyone seen, or read about, that Skycycle?
>
>
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/gallery.htm
>
> http://javimoya.com/blog/youtube_en.php
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/002.jpg
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/012.jpg
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/001.jpg
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/010.jpg
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> boB
> copter.six

[Steve R]

"Stuart & Kathryn Fields" > wrote in message
.. .
> boB:
> BTW squared, In the process of doing the PRA magazine we met and spent
> some
> time with Comander Ken Wallis who is the UK gyro king. He did all of the
> flying for the James Bond movie that had the "Little Nellie" gyro. He
> doesn't share the statements that both horizontal stabilizers and center
> line thrust are a must. At least in his experience, and I might add mine
> (both my wife and I self taught in a Benson back in the late 60s and never
> dinged the ship and flew in a variety of conditions). This is not to say
> that some ships with an abundance of body work forward of the mast can't
> benefit from both things tho. I think that the two seat side-by-side
> gyros
> like the RAF and Sparrohawk would certainly fly different in gusty winds
> than the skimpy single seat Benson that I used to fly.
>
> --
> Stuart Fields
> Experimental Helo magazine
> P. O. Box 1585
> Inyokern, CA 93527
> (760) 377-4478
> (760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
> (760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell

Not trying to start any arguments here, there's been too many of them on
this subject through the years, but....

I believe you when you say that h-stabs and centerline thrust are not
necessarily a must. I know that many folks have flown gyros without these
features for years without incident. I also know that in my first 5 years
as a PRA member, it seemed like every time I turned around I was reading
about "another" member who had killed themselves in a high thrust line gyro
and "many" of these folks were not low time beginners. They were well
established members of the PRA who's opinions and experiences were very much
respected. Not all of these incidents were directly related to the high
thrust line issue but some of them were, at least many folks seemed to think
so.

In the past few years, there have been a number of people who have converted
a high thrust line gyro to centerline thrust and/or added a horizontal
stabilizer and in each case, there have been nothing but "glowing" reports
on the improvements in the handling of the aircraft, especially in turbulent
air. I've read hours upon hours of posts and information and waded through
heated arguments and respectful conversations on the subject and I firmly
believe that, while an experienced pilot can safely handle a high thrust
line gyro, I think a beginner or relatively low time pilot will be
infinitely better off in a centerline machine w/h-stab. I'm not a gyro
pilot so maybe my opinion on this isn't worth squat but I know what I've
seen and I know what I've read and I firmly believe that a pusher style gyro
should have a h-stab and the engine thrust line should be as close to
centerline thrust as possible. JMMOC, FWIW!

Respectfully,
Steve R.

[boB[_2_]]

Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote:
> boB: I know a little bit about the Butterfly thing. The 4th picture down
> on the left of the first website listed is a picture of me in my crack hat
> sitting on the Super SkyCycle. I met Larry Neal, the SkyCycle designer a
>


That is You! Nice to meet you and you look like you're having fun.
Looking at the rear wheels and tires, do you think it is limited when
used as a motorcycle? Is it something that shouldn't be used as a "get
around town" motorcycle?

An interesting thought. Since it's street legal, can a pilot land out on
a country road, drive to a nearby gas station, then take off from the
road again. Just a thought since there are so many little airstrips
dotting the countryside that you could land on then drive for gas from
there.


--

boB
copter.six

[boB[_2_]]

Steve R wrote:

> >
> On a pusher style gyro, the engine thrust line should (ideally) be as close
> to the vertical CG of the aircraft as possible. Many designs that have been
> put out in past years had an engine thrust line that was some distance above
> the vertical CG. That would induce a forward pitching moment. This force
> was countered by the rearward inclination of the main rotor and as long as
> you kept the main rotor loaded, everything balanced out and was fine. If
> the pilot ever unloaded the rotor while under power, the forces involved
> would not balance out and the aircraft was pitch forward (a bunt over, aka
> "power push over")


That sounds similar to my MX Sprint II back when I was instructing (see
note) out of Charping field near Temple Texas. The thrust was quite a
bit higher than the vertical CG. Cutting the throttle caused the nose
to pitch up but it was just something a person had to be aware of.


>
> If you haven't seen it before, check out
> http://www.rotaryforum.com/index.php. It's a discussion forum on
> experimental rotorcraft and has lot's of good information on gyroplanes.
> About the only down side to this one is that many of these guys have "very"
> strong personalities and can be "very" opinionated. This means that
> sometimes you have to wade through a lot of egos to get to the meaningful
> information but if you're serious about getting into gyroplanes, it's well
> worth the effort.
> >
> Good luck & Fly Safe,
> Steve R.
>
>

Thanks again Steve. I did visit the rotary forum once. I think I'll try
again but you all are pretty knowledgeable here.


--

boB
copter.six

[Stuart & Kathryn Fields]

boB: Well I sure wouldn't plan on going to Sturgis from Southern Calif. but
from home to the airport? Yep. Flying off of a public road has been done,
but swinging those rotor blades would sure create a potential traffic
hazard. We met a guy in Alaska that had an RAF gyro in a hangar down a dirt
road not too far from the Dalton Highway who would taxi it out to the
pavement, take off and fly down to the gas station, gas up and fly, with
skis down his trap line landing on the frozen river. I doubt that the CHP
would find it very amusing tho to see a gyro land on the highway, convert to
MC and drive off. Probably get busted for excessive width in the gyro mode.

--
Stuart Fields
Experimental Helo magazine
P. O. Box 1585
Inyokern, CA 93527
(760) 377-4478
(760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
(760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell

www.vkss.com
www.experimentalhelo.com


"boB" > wrote in message
...
> Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote:
> > boB: I know a little bit about the Butterfly thing. The 4th picture
down
> > on the left of the first website listed is a picture of me in my crack
hat
> > sitting on the Super SkyCycle. I met Larry Neal, the SkyCycle designer
a
> >
>
>
> That is You! Nice to meet you and you look like you're having fun.
> Looking at the rear wheels and tires, do you think it is limited when
> used as a motorcycle? Is it something that shouldn't be used as a "get
> around town" motorcycle?
>
> An interesting thought. Since it's street legal, can a pilot land out on
> a country road, drive to a nearby gas station, then take off from the
> road again. Just a thought since there are so many little airstrips
> dotting the countryside that you could land on then drive for gas from
> there.
>
>
> --
>
> boB
> copter.six

[Stuart & Kathryn Fields]

Steve: I know what you are talking about. We got into a controversy when
we produced the PRA magazine for publishing a letter from Cdr. Wallis
outlining his opinions on the CLT and HS. I was kind of taken aback with
all of the sudden inflammatory kinds of statements putting down the non
CLT/HS ships as I had never encountered any problem flying my Benson and I
flew it in the desert turbulence and winds strong enough to allow hovering
takeoffs. My wife flew the ship and she had only soloed a Piper Colt. So
we had no experience to support the damning criticisms of the Non CLT/HS
ships. A conversation with Ken Brock trying to see if I had just lucked out
and never experienced the close call in my Benson and he seemed to agree
more with Cdr. Wallis than the current PRA position. I tended to use Ken as
my expert on gyro things.
BTW, as I recall, we had to set my Super Mac up even higher than the stock
Benson because I was driving a larger diameter prop. I also had the
outboard motor fuel tank that set below the seat. I'm sure that my thrust
line was above the vertical c.g. with full fuel. The little rock guard on
the Benson sure didn't qualify as a HS either.
I guess I was either luckier than the others, or a good gyro pilot, or my
ship was somehow more stable than the others. I know for sure there has
been oodles of opinions and calculations floating about supporting the need
for CLT and HS. Now that I'm flying adefinitely unstable aircraft (helo) my
dog is not in the CLT/HS fight.
--
Stuart Fields
Experimental Helo magazine
P. O. Box 1585
Inyokern, CA 93527
(760) 377-4478
(760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
(760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell

www.vkss.com
www.experimentalhelo.com


"Steve R" > wrote in message
...
> "Stuart & Kathryn Fields" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > boB:
> > BTW squared, In the process of doing the PRA magazine we met and spent
> > some
> > time with Comander Ken Wallis who is the UK gyro king. He did all of
the
> > flying for the James Bond movie that had the "Little Nellie" gyro. He
> > doesn't share the statements that both horizontal stabilizers and center
> > line thrust are a must. At least in his experience, and I might add
mine
> > (both my wife and I self taught in a Benson back in the late 60s and
never
> > dinged the ship and flew in a variety of conditions). This is not to
say
> > that some ships with an abundance of body work forward of the mast can't
> > benefit from both things tho. I think that the two seat side-by-side
> > gyros
> > like the RAF and Sparrohawk would certainly fly different in gusty winds
> > than the skimpy single seat Benson that I used to fly.
> >
> > --
> > Stuart Fields
> > Experimental Helo magazine
> > P. O. Box 1585
> > Inyokern, CA 93527
> > (760) 377-4478
> > (760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
> > (760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell
>
> Not trying to start any arguments here, there's been too many of them on
> this subject through the years, but....
>
> I believe you when you say that h-stabs and centerline thrust are not
> necessarily a must. I know that many folks have flown gyros without these
> features for years without incident. I also know that in my first 5 years
> as a PRA member, it seemed like every time I turned around I was reading
> about "another" member who had killed themselves in a high thrust line
gyro
> and "many" of these folks were not low time beginners. They were well
> established members of the PRA who's opinions and experiences were very
much
> respected. Not all of these incidents were directly related to the high
> thrust line issue but some of them were, at least many folks seemed to
think
> so.
>
> In the past few years, there have been a number of people who have
converted
> a high thrust line gyro to centerline thrust and/or added a horizontal
> stabilizer and in each case, there have been nothing but "glowing" reports
> on the improvements in the handling of the aircraft, especially in
turbulent
> air. I've read hours upon hours of posts and information and waded
through
> heated arguments and respectful conversations on the subject and I firmly
> believe that, while an experienced pilot can safely handle a high thrust
> line gyro, I think a beginner or relatively low time pilot will be
> infinitely better off in a centerline machine w/h-stab. I'm not a gyro
> pilot so maybe my opinion on this isn't worth squat but I know what I've
> seen and I know what I've read and I firmly believe that a pusher style
gyro
> should have a h-stab and the engine thrust line should be as close to
> centerline thrust as possible. JMMOC, FWIW!
>
> Respectfully,
> Steve R.
>
>

[Steve R]

"Stuart & Kathryn Fields" > wrote in message
...
> Steve: I know what you are talking about. We got into a controversy when
> we produced the PRA magazine for publishing a letter from Cdr. Wallis
> outlining his opinions on the CLT and HS. I was kind of taken aback with
> all of the sudden inflammatory kinds of statements putting down the non
> CLT/HS ships as I had never encountered any problem flying my Benson and I
> flew it in the desert turbulence and winds strong enough to allow hovering
> takeoffs. My wife flew the ship and she had only soloed a Piper Colt. So
> we had no experience to support the damning criticisms of the Non CLT/HS
> ships. A conversation with Ken Brock trying to see if I had just lucked
> out
> and never experienced the close call in my Benson and he seemed to agree
> more with Cdr. Wallis than the current PRA position. I tended to use Ken
> as
> my expert on gyro things.
> BTW, as I recall, we had to set my Super Mac up even higher than the stock
> Benson because I was driving a larger diameter prop. I also had the
> outboard motor fuel tank that set below the seat. I'm sure that my thrust
> line was above the vertical c.g. with full fuel. The little rock guard on
> the Benson sure didn't qualify as a HS either.
> I guess I was either luckier than the others, or a good gyro pilot, or my
> ship was somehow more stable than the others. I know for sure there has
> been oodles of opinions and calculations floating about supporting the
> need
> for CLT and HS. Now that I'm flying adefinitely unstable aircraft (helo)
> my
> dog is not in the CLT/HS fight.
> --
> Stuart Fields
> Experimental Helo magazine
> P. O. Box 1585
> Inyokern, CA 93527
> (760) 377-4478
> (760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
> (760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell
>
> www.vkss.com
> www.experimentalhelo.com
>
>

I understand what you're saying about the inflammatory attitudes of some
folks. As a very raw newbe in the PRA, some of them had me seriously
wondering if I really wanted to be involved in this group? It was very
difficult to figure out who to believe and who not too. I think it's better
these days because there seems to be more of a consensus as to what's
appropriate in a pusher design and what's not. Back then, it seemed like
everyone had their own pet designs and very few folks ever agreed with each
other! ;-)

On the subject of the Bensen you learned to fly! One thing I remember
reading about the original design that Mr. Bensen developed and flew was
that it was relatively underpowered and/or used a smaller diameter prop than
most of the modern (the original Air Command comes to mind) gyros do. As a
result, the early generation Bensen's were much closer to centerline thrust
than the larger, stretched out versions that have come afterwards. Is this
something you'd agree with? Also, you mention putting a "super mac" on your
Bensen and having to raise the engine to accomodate a larger prop which
also, naturally enough, raised the engine's thrust line relative to the
aircrafts CG. Do you remember how far you had to raise the engine? Makes
me wonder if you were still under whatever magic number in thrust offset
that kept you in a safe zone. I know that machines like Jim Vanek's
SportCopter are not true centerline thrust designs but they seem to have
(from what I've read anyway) very favorable flight characteristics. It
makes me wonder if you simply didn't get far enough out of line for the bad
characteristics to be a significant issue. Either way, I'm glad it worked
out for you. I'd appreciate any comments you care to make on that.

Thanks,
Steve R.

[Stuart & Kathryn Fields]

Steve: My Benson was definitely not under powered. I had a ball type
airspeed indicator that as I recall topped out at 85. I stuck the ball all
the way up in the tube so far that I had to take a pipe cleaner and knock it
loose. I was never passed by any other gyro. At the time we figured that I
had done close to 100mph in straight and level flight. The Super Mac was
very light and under ideal conditions delivered 95hp. The engine mount was
raised some 2" to get the bigger prop installed. I can remember racing
another Benson that had a Super Mac but a smaller prop and a streamlined
body and I never saw them after I passed. The Benson manual recommended
taxiing without the rotor installed to get used to the steering. The first
time I did that I ground the wood front wheel brake almost in two and never
got the throttle much off idle. The thing felt like a dragster without the
rotor. After installing the rotor and getting it up to speed before taxiing
very far, the thing became much more controllable. As I recall the thrust
line on mine was just a couple of inches below my shoulders. Yeah if I was
cruising along at say 50 indicated and firewalled the throttle without some
aft cyclic, it would push my nose down a bit. I think that if I would have
had a side-by-side fuselage up front to provide additional drag as the nose
pitched forward, I might have had a different experience. I do remember
that once in a while doing those Brock spirals, (zero forward airspeed and
enough throttle to blow the tail around) the nose would sometimes get lower
and lower giving me the feeling it was going to try to split S. I never let
it get beyond about a 45 degree nose down before I stopped the spiral and
flew out.
Yep Vaneks bird looks pretty good and he can fly the thing. We have seen
his loop and roll and it is darned impressive. I've also seen him get off
the ground in a very short span. Take a look at the Magni in a front on
view with Greg Greminger on board. I know he weighs at least 250 and
imagine a passenger in the back. I can't believe that it is very close to a
CLT. The Magni does have a HS though and the tandem seating doesn't give a
real draggy front end.
I rode in the Sparrow Hawk prototype which has all the CLT/HS and found it
very stable but the control feel was monstrous. I had never flown anything
including a T-38 that had such heavy controls. Even the Bell 47 with the
hydraulics turned off didn't have such a heavy feel. Also the take-off roll
was as long as a Cessna 150 on a hot day.

--
Kathy Fields
Experimental Helo magazine
P. O. Box 1585
Inyokern, CA 93527
(760) 377-4478
(760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
(760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell

www.vkss.com
www.experimentalhelo.com


"Steve R" > wrote in message
...
> "Stuart & Kathryn Fields" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Steve: I know what you are talking about. We got into a controversy
when
> > we produced the PRA magazine for publishing a letter from Cdr. Wallis
> > outlining his opinions on the CLT and HS. I was kind of taken aback
with
> > all of the sudden inflammatory kinds of statements putting down the non
> > CLT/HS ships as I had never encountered any problem flying my Benson and
I
> > flew it in the desert turbulence and winds strong enough to allow
hovering
> > takeoffs. My wife flew the ship and she had only soloed a Piper Colt.
So
> > we had no experience to support the damning criticisms of the Non CLT/HS
> > ships. A conversation with Ken Brock trying to see if I had just lucked
> > out
> > and never experienced the close call in my Benson and he seemed to agree
> > more with Cdr. Wallis than the current PRA position. I tended to use
Ken
> > as
> > my expert on gyro things.
> > BTW, as I recall, we had to set my Super Mac up even higher than the
stock
> > Benson because I was driving a larger diameter prop. I also had the
> > outboard motor fuel tank that set below the seat. I'm sure that my
thrust
> > line was above the vertical c.g. with full fuel. The little rock guard
on
> > the Benson sure didn't qualify as a HS either.
> > I guess I was either luckier than the others, or a good gyro pilot, or
my
> > ship was somehow more stable than the others. I know for sure there
has
> > been oodles of opinions and calculations floating about supporting the
> > need
> > for CLT and HS. Now that I'm flying adefinitely unstable aircraft
(helo)
> > my
> > dog is not in the CLT/HS fight.
> > --
> > Stuart Fields
> > Experimental Helo magazine
> > P. O. Box 1585
> > Inyokern, CA 93527
> > (760) 377-4478
> > (760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
> > (760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell
> >
> > www.vkss.com
> > www.experimentalhelo.com
> >
> >
>
> I understand what you're saying about the inflammatory attitudes of some
> folks. As a very raw newbe in the PRA, some of them had me seriously
> wondering if I really wanted to be involved in this group? It was very
> difficult to figure out who to believe and who not too. I think it's
better
> these days because there seems to be more of a consensus as to what's
> appropriate in a pusher design and what's not. Back then, it seemed like
> everyone had their own pet designs and very few folks ever agreed with
each
> other! ;-)
>
> On the subject of the Bensen you learned to fly! One thing I remember
> reading about the original design that Mr. Bensen developed and flew was
> that it was relatively underpowered and/or used a smaller diameter prop
than
> most of the modern (the original Air Command comes to mind) gyros do. As
a
> result, the early generation Bensen's were much closer to centerline
thrust
> than the larger, stretched out versions that have come afterwards. Is
this
> something you'd agree with? Also, you mention putting a "super mac" on
your
> Bensen and having to raise the engine to accomodate a larger prop which
> also, naturally enough, raised the engine's thrust line relative to the
> aircrafts CG. Do you remember how far you had to raise the engine? Makes
> me wonder if you were still under whatever magic number in thrust offset
> that kept you in a safe zone. I know that machines like Jim Vanek's
> SportCopter are not true centerline thrust designs but they seem to have
> (from what I've read anyway) very favorable flight characteristics. It
> makes me wonder if you simply didn't get far enough out of line for the
bad
> characteristics to be a significant issue. Either way, I'm glad it worked
> out for you. I'd appreciate any comments you care to make on that.
>
> Thanks,
> Steve R.
>
>

[Steve R]

Thanks Kathy, I appreciate the feedback! :-)

Fly Safe,
Steve R.


"Stuart & Kathryn Fields" > wrote in message
...
> Steve: My Benson was definitely not under powered. I had a ball type
> airspeed indicator that as I recall topped out at 85. I stuck the ball
> all
> the way up in the tube so far that I had to take a pipe cleaner and knock
> it
> loose. I was never passed by any other gyro. At the time we figured that
> I
> had done close to 100mph in straight and level flight. The Super Mac was
> very light and under ideal conditions delivered 95hp. The engine mount
> was
> raised some 2" to get the bigger prop installed. I can remember racing
> another Benson that had a Super Mac but a smaller prop and a streamlined
> body and I never saw them after I passed. The Benson manual recommended
> taxiing without the rotor installed to get used to the steering. The
> first
> time I did that I ground the wood front wheel brake almost in two and
> never
> got the throttle much off idle. The thing felt like a dragster without
> the
> rotor. After installing the rotor and getting it up to speed before
> taxiing
> very far, the thing became much more controllable. As I recall the thrust
> line on mine was just a couple of inches below my shoulders. Yeah if I
> was
> cruising along at say 50 indicated and firewalled the throttle without
> some
> aft cyclic, it would push my nose down a bit. I think that if I would
> have
> had a side-by-side fuselage up front to provide additional drag as the
> nose
> pitched forward, I might have had a different experience. I do remember
> that once in a while doing those Brock spirals, (zero forward airspeed and
> enough throttle to blow the tail around) the nose would sometimes get
> lower
> and lower giving me the feeling it was going to try to split S. I never
> let
> it get beyond about a 45 degree nose down before I stopped the spiral and
> flew out.
> Yep Vaneks bird looks pretty good and he can fly the thing. We have seen
> his loop and roll and it is darned impressive. I've also seen him get off
> the ground in a very short span. Take a look at the Magni in a front on
> view with Greg Greminger on board. I know he weighs at least 250 and
> imagine a passenger in the back. I can't believe that it is very close to
> a
> CLT. The Magni does have a HS though and the tandem seating doesn't give
> a
> real draggy front end.
> I rode in the Sparrow Hawk prototype which has all the CLT/HS and found
> it
> very stable but the control feel was monstrous. I had never flown
> anything
> including a T-38 that had such heavy controls. Even the Bell 47 with the
> hydraulics turned off didn't have such a heavy feel. Also the take-off
> roll
> was as long as a Cessna 150 on a hot day.
>
> --
> Kathy Fields
> Experimental Helo magazine
> P. O. Box 1585
> Inyokern, CA 93527
> (760) 377-4478
> (760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
> (760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell
>
> www.vkss.com
> www.experimentalhelo.com
>
>

[boB[_3_]]

Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote:

> skis down his trap line landing on the frozen river. I doubt that the CHP
> would find it very amusing tho to see a gyro land on the highway, convert to
> MC and drive off. Probably get busted for excessive width in the gyro mode.
>

I was thinking about the "wide" profile and I believe you, they would
probably ticket a pilot for that. But would the ticket be for a traffic
violation and untouchable by the FAA????? It's a thought but there are
so many unrestricted grass strips around I doubt it would ever be
necessary to land on a public road.

--

boB
copter.six

[Linc]

boB,

When I'm done with my current flying gig, I'm getting into an autogyro.
Probably one of the more reputable ultralights, but it will be an
autogyro. I figure it will be more fun than a Harley. I'm also hoping
for a bit more hospitable climate than the one I currently live in.

And my last thought today is, wait till Orange County Choppers gets a
hold of that one!

Linc

boB wrote:
> Has anyone seen, or read about, that Skycycle?
>
>
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/gallery.htm
>
> http://javimoya.com/blog/youtube_en.php
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/002.jpg
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/012.jpg
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/001.jpg
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/010.jpg
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> boB
> copter.six

[boB[_4_]]

"Linc" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> boB,
>
> When I'm done with my current flying gig, I'm getting into an autogyro.
> Probably one of the more reputable ultralights, but it will be an
> autogyro. I figure it will be more fun than a Harley. I'm also hoping
> for a bit more hospitable climate than the one I currently live in.
>
> And my last thought today is, wait till Orange County Choppers gets a
> hold of that one!
>
> Linc

I would be grateful if you posted your research on which Gyros you looked at
and of course which one you choose and why. I really do like the SkyCycle I
just wish it had more protection for the occupants. It doesn't have to be
enclosed though.

I'm waiting to see one wind up at Sturgis. What a trip that would be,
flying in.

I wonder what the rule would be at Oshkosh? Could a person fly in, get a
tiedown spot, then drive the skycycle in and out of the airport for maybe
some gormet dining. :)


--
boB
copter.six


U.S. Army Aviation (retired)
Central Texas
5NM West of Gray Army/Killeen Regional (KGRK)

[601XL Builder]

boB wrote:

>
> I'm waiting to see one wind up at Sturgis. What a trip that would be,
> flying in.
>
> I wonder what the rule would be at Oshkosh? Could a person fly in, get a
> tiedown spot, then drive the skycycle in and out of the airport for maybe
> some gormet dining. :)
>
>

Has one of these EVER been licenced for street use in the US? The prop
as a propulsion method while driving down the street seems like a law
suite just itching to happen.

[Flyingmonk[_1_]]

601XL Builder wrote:
> boB wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm waiting to see one wind up at Sturgis. What a trip that would be,
> > flying in.
> >
> > I wonder what the rule would be at Oshkosh? Could a person fly in, get a
> > tiedown spot, then drive the skycycle in and out of the airport for maybe
> > some gormet dining. :)
> >
> >
>
> Has one of these EVER been licenced for street use in the US? The prop
> as a propulsion method while driving down the street seems like a law
> suite just itching to happen.

Hey buddy,

http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/010.jpg

Take another look at the power shasfts going to both rear wheels.

The Monk

[601XL Builder]

Flyingmonk wrote:
> 601XL Builder wrote:
>> boB wrote:
>>
>>> I'm waiting to see one wind up at Sturgis. What a trip that would be,
>>> flying in.
>>>
>>> I wonder what the rule would be at Oshkosh? Could a person fly in, get a
>>> tiedown spot, then drive the skycycle in and out of the airport for maybe
>>> some gormet dining. :)
>>>
>>>
>> Has one of these EVER been licenced for street use in the US? The prop
>> as a propulsion method while driving down the street seems like a law
>> suite just itching to happen.
>
> Hey buddy,
>
> http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/010.jpg
>
> Take another look at the power shasfts going to both rear wheels.
>
> The Monk
>

Well I'll be. I looked for such on some other photos and never saw it. I
do note that it still missing a license plate though so the first part
of my question is still out there.

[Linc]

boB,

It's gonna be a while. I have a few more years to go before I can put
that (Ret.) after all my information. I remember looking at a few that
were decent that I had somehow found through the discussion you had
with Kevin about simulators. A couple of them had a lot of enclosure,
especially the side-by-side duals. Of course, those may not have been
ultralight category. I'm gonna use mine like people ride their
Harleys...good weather on a weekend, go for a flight. The ones that I
have looked at are the Air Command (www.aircommand.com) Commander Sport
and the Sportcopter (www.sportcopter.com) Lightning gyros. Air
Command's ultralight appears to be out of production, so I may have to
go with a full-size gyro (maybe a tandem to give the kids rides), but
it about doubles the price.

I'll keep you posted if I find any good options.

Linc

boB wrote:
> "Linc" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> > boB,
> >
> > When I'm done with my current flying gig, I'm getting into an autogyro.
> > Probably one of the more reputable ultralights, but it will be an
> > autogyro. I figure it will be more fun than a Harley. I'm also hoping
> > for a bit more hospitable climate than the one I currently live in.
> >
> > And my last thought today is, wait till Orange County Choppers gets a
> > hold of that one!
> >
> > Linc
>
> I would be grateful if you posted your research on which Gyros you looked at
> and of course which one you choose and why. I really do like the SkyCycle I
> just wish it had more protection for the occupants. It doesn't have to be
> enclosed though.
>
> I'm waiting to see one wind up at Sturgis. What a trip that would be,
> flying in.
>
> I wonder what the rule would be at Oshkosh? Could a person fly in, get a
> tiedown spot, then drive the skycycle in and out of the airport for maybe
> some gormet dining. :)
>
>
> --
> boB
> copter.six
>
>
> U.S. Army Aviation (retired)
> Central Texas
> 5NM West of Gray Army/Killeen Regional (KGRK)

[Stuart & Kathryn Fields]

I sat on the Skycycle at Oshkosh and it had a license plate on the rear.

--
Stuart Fields
Experimental Helo magazine
P. O. Box 1585
Inyokern, CA 93527
(760) 377-4478
(760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
(760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell

www.vkss.com
www.experimentalhelo.com


"601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@coxDOTnet> wrote in message
...
> Flyingmonk wrote:
> > 601XL Builder wrote:
> >> boB wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm waiting to see one wind up at Sturgis. What a trip that would be,
> >>> flying in.
> >>>
> >>> I wonder what the rule would be at Oshkosh? Could a person fly in, get
a
> >>> tiedown spot, then drive the skycycle in and out of the airport for
maybe
> >>> some gormet dining. :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Has one of these EVER been licenced for street use in the US? The prop
> >> as a propulsion method while driving down the street seems like a law
> >> suite just itching to happen.
> >
> > Hey buddy,
> >
> > http://www.thebutterflyllc.com/sscycle/images/010.jpg
> >
> > Take another look at the power shasfts going to both rear wheels.
> >
> > The Monk
> >
>
> Well I'll be. I looked for such on some other photos and never saw it. I
> do note that it still missing a license plate though so the first part
> of my question is still out there.

[boB[_4_]]

"Linc" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> boB,
> Harleys...good weather on a weekend, go for a flight. The ones that I
> have looked at are the Air Command (www.aircommand.com) Commander Sport
> and the Sportcopter (www.sportcopter.com) Lightning gyros. Air
> Command's ultralight appears to be out of production, so I may have to
> go with a full-size gyro (maybe a tandem to give the kids rides), but
> it about doubles the price.
>
> Linc
>
>



The Super Sport looks nice, large cabin and all, but I don't see an actual
picture, just a drawing. If it appears it seems a good candidate for a
cross-country aircraft.


http://www.sportcopter.com/supersport.php


If and when I fly again it will be a Sport Category aircraft. I've never
failed a medical so my drivers license is all I need. Not that I couldn't
pass a physical, stop taking pain meds and I'm fine.

boB

[Linc]

I liked that one too, it's just questionable as to whether or not
they've actually built and certified that model. The more I look at
price, the more an autogyro for local cross-county purposes looks like
the best option. I might also get a stuck-wing certificate to
facilitate longer trips.

Linc

boB wrote:

> The Super Sport looks nice, large cabin and all, but I don't see an actual
> picture, just a drawing. If it appears it seems a good candidate for a
> cross-country aircraft.
>
>
> http://www.sportcopter.com/supersport.php
>
>
> If and when I fly again it will be a Sport Category aircraft. I've never
> failed a medical so my drivers license is all I need. Not that I couldn't
> pass a physical, stop taking pain meds and I'm fine.
>
> boB