I hadn’t realized how distracting the shadow of the blades would be in a gyrocopter on a sunny day. I guess in a helicopter, the blades spin fast enough so that’s not an issue, but there was a lot of flicker from the blades in this aircraft. I bet that’s really annoying during a long flight.
It might be the frame rate of the camera that is making it seem worse than it is.
Thinking about it for a moment I bet that is what is causing that.
The rotor RPM for a gyro is nearly that of a helicopter.
I think the problem is exaggerated by the frame rate of the camera and you get an interference pattern that looks slower than the blade is actually turning. Kind of like when you’re driving at night on the highway and the overhead lights make the car wheel spokes look like they’re turning slowly or even standing still.
You can get even weirder interference effects using an iphone camera.
Here is something to get you thinking.
Do a google search for “gyrobee”. Take a look at a few of those.
Now do a search for “RAF gyrocopter”. Take some more looks.
Guess which one has (or at least as of a few years ago…haven’t looked recently) a perfect safety record? And which one is a freaking death trap.
If you’d watched the video all the way through, you would have discovered that this “Gyrocopter Girl” is in fact a total pervert. It’s even more obvious in some of her other YouTube videos. She is very skilled at almost but not quite exposing herself for the camera.
Dang you are right. I almost missed that “Fatal Aviation” moment at the end.
As God as my witness I never knew beavers could fly.
The second destination was “Titisee”, which seems appropriate. Also, I like the way she holds a joystick.
Chuck Yeager does it better.
Just saying.
- Deplorable safety record
- Lack of qualified instructors
- Most rotorheads seem to prefer helicopters
Note - #1 probably is affected by #2, as well problems with various designs. In other words, the safety problems aren’t inherent to the mode of flight. Gyros were much more popular in pre-helicopter days.
Well… sort of. However, if the rotor gets too slow you’re going to come out of the sky like a dropped rock regardless of whether or not your condition meets a strict definition of “stall”.
You need a license appropriate to the classification your gyro falls into. If it meets Part 103 requirements no license is needed. If it meets Sport Pilot requirements that the the license you need. And so forth up the ladder.
What you also need is a rotorcraft rating, as opposed to, say, an airplane rating or a powered parachute rating or an airship rating. So… if your gyro weighs 3 tons and you plan to fly it at night you’ll need a Private Pilot certificate with a rotorcraft rating (there may be a further refinement on that for “gyroplane” vs. “helicopter” but I’m not certain - I’m not a rotor pilot myself. ** Johnny LA **might know, though).
In properly skilled hands, yes, the landing is soft.
Based on what little I’ve picked up from gyro pilots (I’ve met a few and seen 'em in action) they normally tolerate winds better than fixed wing aircraft in a similar weight range. However, a freak occurrence could possibly spell doom. Heck, a freak gust can stall the wing of a fixed wing aircraft, but it would be extremely unusual circumstances.
Reading rotorcraft manuals can be alarming at times - not just gyros but full helicopters can come with warnings about the hazards of “unloading” the rotors, often with wording like IF YOU DO THIS YOU WILL DIE. (No joke - I read a Robinson manual once that really did have such warnings in bold, red print). This is one of the reasons why ultralight rotorcraft have such deplorable safety records: because flight under Part 103 has ZERO instructional requirement it can happen that you have a person get into a rotorcraft ignorant of the Forbidden Things who winds up doing them and proving that, yep, doing that is fatal. Every time.
I’m really hoping the requirements under Sport Pilot lead to a better record for small rotors, they really are neat machines.
I will throw this out.
The FAA. Let me repeat that. The FAA.
Has a test they use if you are getting certified as gyrocopter INSTRUCTOR.
There are people in the gyrocopter community that think that what the FAA considers the right questions to some of those answers are WRONG.
That tells you both what a niche this is and how much some basic misunderstanding of how these things actually work has permeated the community.
PS. In this case its mostly NOT the gyro idiots. Its the FAA.
For those interested:
Google “bensen gyrocopter”
Mr. Bensen trademarked the name “Gyrocopter”. The FAA calls such craft “gyroplane” (also worth a Google).
He developed these in the 50’s, just as surplus target drones (McCallaugh (sp) aircraft engines) and GPU (with Lycoming O290 engines) were available dirt cheap.
This is when they developed their reputation for killing idiots.
Detailed plans are readily available for those who want to put together a cheap “flying machine”. Vendors do not require proof of competence before providing all the required bits.
If someone is using a nude woman to attract attention to their “Flying Machine”, that just may tell you the value of the device to knowledgeable pilots.
Gyrocopter girl establishes some fixed wing cred. Come for the cool little plane. Stay for the cleavage.