Any idea of the Cost ?

Yeah. Rotarywing aircraft are not aerobatic machines. Not to say you can't do those kinds of things if you're careful and know what you're doing, but just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD.

@@virginiahansen320 Absolutely!, that machine's rotor can sure handle some G's & of course with an highly experienced pilot!!

Perhaps if Igor would not have infringed on Harold Pitcairn’s patents which Igor illegally used to successfully fly his first helicopter, Harold would have not put a gun to his head. The Pitcairn estate finally won the lawsuit in the mid seventies. Pitcairn was the United States licensee and had improved the rotor head design including jump take-offs.

@@crawford323he probably meant Igor Bensen, not Sikorsky…. anyway, the patent infringement wasn’t directly Sikorsky’s fault, it was the us military / government that promised to compensate Pitcairn for the use of his patents, but later after the war, taking advantage of his patriotism to get him agree urgently…. they allowed not only Sikorsky but other manufacturers to use these patents for free…. and when the time came after the war the government shafted him and refused to honor the agreement…

I am going to make one... it's exactly what I need for business travel to the next state.. and I can land on a dirt road.. I am working on a fiber technology with bio plastic and a harder sealant than C fiber.. low cost, low infrastructure technology that can be done by anyone. .. and alternative fuel StarFire Family Industries Peace ✌☮ I used to do database/application development for factory floor automation for a subsidiary of Boeing.. they make the high tech fibers used in modern aircraft.. 25 years ago.. my technology is even older than that.. the Chinese have been using the various constituents for thousands of years... no worries mate Starfirediamondmines@gmail.com

For some reason KZfaq is censoring the reply.. did you get a number?

Where are you at. Is training available?

@@cameronlapworth2284 at work

2:15 taking off.

yes

Turkish military just bought a bunch. There exist also medic versions. Much cheaper than SAR helicops.

Nice documentary too. Informative.

Yes That's Harrison Ford 🤣

Those who can. I've taken off and landed across the airstrip in winds that had everyone else grounded.

That's Scappoose Industrial Airpark in Oregon. Standard procedure there for years has been fixed-wing on the runway, gyros on the west taxiway, helicopters on the east taxiway. FAA regs require rotorcraft to avoid the flow of fixed-wing traffic. Given a gyro kit manufacturer and training based on the airport and helicopter schools nearby, things get pretty busy there, and the system works pretty well.

The main rotor bearing can with stand 60,000 pounds of force. Rotor blades bend and twist to off load excess of G's and pilot induced oscillation is only a problem for untrained beginner pilots. My 2 cents...

@@alanlaero Agreed PIO is just pilot can't fly. Get training. Gyros are significantly easier to fly that helicopters but you don't hear helicopters blamed for PIO not because it can't happen but because pilots are generally not trying to teach themselves or learn with cruddy instructors. Get proper training and PIO is not an issue. If people really wanted to make a real difference to stability then slightly over balance the rotors. I used to instruct in a gyroglider. One of the students made a set of wooden rotors which I tested (I build and helped build and balance and track a number of rotors). Anyway this guy over balanced the blades Chordwise. The blades had other issues, he hadn't done the profile very well and they were buggers to wind up but once in flight they were rock solid, boring even the easiest gyro I ever flew, boring but immune to gusts. We got hit by a massive thermal on one flight that would have normally seen me tugging at the top of the rope the ASI hall gauge topped off at 80mph, the blade took ages to build to lift and they did so gradually it was shocking how well they handled it. Sluggish though. We stopped flying them after about 2 feet of the training edge de-laminated. He'd run out of glue and just thinned it out rather than mix more or pull it apart and wipe it off you could see where the paint had seeped in. Ugh!

@@cameronlapworth2284I Don't much about gyros. What assures the rotor stays on?

@@gordonrogers4616 the main bearing has a load about 10x the maximum possible load the blades can pull. Gyro blades are always in auto rotation meaning their speed and therefore lift is governed by the forward lift and the drag of the rotor in flight. Pull up hard and the rotors will have greater angle of attack meaning more drag and they'll slow slightly this means it just mushed after about 2g. Once its lost energy mushing they speed up again automatically. So you can in theory dive and sharply pull up and not rip the rotors off. Constant parachute over your head

Max loading any gyro can achieve is 3G or less. The rotor system has margin well above that. The pilot is Jim Vanek, who also designed the Vortex and founded the company. Other questions: (503) 543-7000.

Yep, Negative G's and within a second the rotors stop mid air and the gyro usually moving forward still flys right through its own rotor disk. In any case you loose all control (you can only control the machine with the rotor - rudder won't help here) so you dead, no recovery possible just dead. Same problem in hang gliders to some extent and helicopters although they do have positive power to the rotors they can still go too far and punch through their own rotors.

Cameron Lapworth - your talking crap mate..

@@chopperman10 So how are positive G's not wanted when flying gyroplane? Getting light in the seat should make you pucker, I would think.

Bill Crawford - Correct Bill, The rotor disk requires positive G during all manoeuvres. My comment relates to Cameron’s comment that the aircraft flys through it’s own rotor disk. Lol no such phenomena. It’s simply a matter that if the aircraft disk unloads and encounters negative G then the blades will flap down and cut away the tail. I’ve also see first hand footage of a machine going through a rotor stall with the result being both blades went vertical and of course the aircraft crashed. I fail to see how an aircraft attached to its rotor system flys through itself.. lol 😂

@@chopperman10 Not a problem. I understand the debate. I expect more or less in that negative G situation that the positive cone would then be offset by perhaps a negative cone not necessarily a flap created by the loss of lift and or blade stall. There will be some residual blade rotation simply due to the mass of the rotor itself. I cant see the blade stopping in the amount of time stated unless it does strike the tail.

Actually the rotor can't be over stressed this way over about 2G the angle of attack of the blades (relative to the wind) gets so high the rotors won't accelerate further limiting the rpm and therefore lift so the machine just mushes. So you can dive jank back as hard as you like and no probs. The real danger with these maneuvers is the risk of Negative G. This guy is an amazing pilot. It was done in the 1930's but I take my hat off too him he's a brilliant pilot. Screw it up though and you're dead. Does show what his machine is capable of though. Colour me impressed.

Never mind the blade breaking. I will be so scared I will snap the stick in half... Then what?