Post anything that doesn't belong in any other forum, including gaming and topics unrelated to motorsport. Site specific discussions should go in the site feedback forum.
Last Sunday I was at a function with Wing Commander Ken Wallis MBE.
We had one of his light autogyros with us on display, 'Little Nelly' from the Bond film You only live twice.
For most of the afternoon we were in the company of Chris Barrie, 'Rimmer' from Red Dwarf. Chris has produced a number of TV series on interesting vehicles etc and was very interested in Kens machine.
The W116 is a fully proven aviation system with a huge range of cost effective military and civilian roles, all of which it has undertaken with complete success.
It could be in production today creating hundreds if not thousands of jobs in the UK and elsewhere. It is also far far cheaper than many current aviation systems in use.
We are convinced that a fully electric version of this aircraft can be produced in a short time period. Not only would this be a WORLD first, unlike any road electric project but it would result in a fully useable aircraft with over an hours endurance and a complete role capability.
Investment is needed in this project and I believe the justification far outways many of the road EV indulgencies currently gaining grants and private funds.
what stops you from producing it? (apart from the money),
There are autogyros produced,sold and flown all around the world.
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
My name is ---------- and I represent
Wing Commander Ken Wallis MBE and Wallis Aviation.
At our base at Reymerston Norfolk UK, we have 19 autogyro aircraft all of which are fully proven in a wide range of civilian and military roles and are ready for flight within ten minutes.
I have attached a pdf document giving the life and aircraft developed by Ken Wallis.
For many years the Wallis aircraft has been prevented from entering full certificated production by a lack of aircraft type definition and factual, workable regulation for autogyro aircraft, even though the aircraft did achieve a full certificate of airworthiness from the old Air Ministry subject to engine in the 1960s.
For over 30 years Wallis has received many thousands of provisional orders and we have also confirmed a £4 million grant at one stage, which was subject to matched private investment. All the many and keen private investors have decided not to invest, because the CAA have prevented us from achieving a current airworthiness certificate.
We will not construct our aircraft as a kit for private use and we disagree absolutely with current regulations of autogyro flight, believing that all light autogyros should be grounded until a satisfactory regulatory structure is established. Our policy has always been to only produce our aircraft using a responsible aviation company and only as a certificated machine.
The CAA has agreed with our demands in principle but no changes have as yet occurred. However, Ken Wallis is still called on officially, as an expert to compile reports on any autogyro crashes even though he is now 94 years old. This is an insult to one of our best-known WW2 heroes and proves the total lack of autogyro expertise and courtesy at the CAA.
I have contacted Lord Drayson and had invited him to visit Reymerston on the 5thMarch when Allyn Thomas ACC and Richard Watson visited our operation. Lord Drayson was otherwise engaged. I hope that a future visit might be arranged at his convenience.
The need to save the lives of our military personnel in the middle east is a matter for swift action now and our aircraft is well up to and proven for this task. Copy of Lord Drayson Email attached.
I have also attached some of the communications with the CAA and other official departments Jenny and I have tried to keep this email as short as possible with little technical jargon.
Our problem is not to prove the capabilities of our aircraft but to overcome the completely incorrect regulation that prevents manufacture and the creation of many jobs and wealth for our country.
Warm Regards
Please understand 747 heavy that there is over 40 years of development information.
Kenneth Wallis MBE was born at Ely Cambridge in 1916 and was educated at Kings School Ely. His interest in engineering and aviation was aroused at a very early age. His father and uncle had both raced their own motorcycles and by May 1910 had completed an aeroplane, the Wallbro Monoplane. This was very advanced for its time, with a primary structure of steel tubing and roll control by ailerons, rather than the wing warp of the day.
Upon leaving school Kenneth Wallis entered his fathers motor and cycle business.
In his spare time he built a number of high-speed boats, employing both air and under water propellers. His first racing success came at Denver Sluice Cambridgeshire in 1934 and his last was the fifty-six Missouri Marathon in the USA in 1957.
In 1937 he obtained his pilots A licence and joined the Civil Air Guard at its inauguration.
He enlisted as an RAF Volunteer at the outbreak of World War Two, serving as an operational pilot on Lysanders in 268 Squadron Army Co Operation, prior to transferring to Bomber Command in 1941, flying Wellingtons over Germany.
Exciting moments in 1941 were, a hurried parachute descent from low level at night and in fog returning from a raid, a crash landing successfully carried out after a wing had nearly been cut through by a balloon cable and a fire in the bomb load while over the target.
Upon completion of his tour of bombing operations in April 1942, Wallis commanded an aerial gunnery school at an Operational Training Unit.
In 1944 he flew a Wellington X to Italy, for further bombing operations.
Returning to the UK in 1945. He served as a Flight Commander at the Central Gunnery Training School prior to specialising in Air Armament and eventually received a Permanent Commission in the newly formed Technical Branch of the RAF.
Although in the Technical Branch, he remained in flying practise and held Green Instrument Ratings on jets.
From 1956 to 1958 he held a Technical Flying post in Strategic Air Command USA, flying the ten engine B-36 Intercontinental bombers in Europe and the Far East.
His technical posts have mostly been in the field of research and development, in the Armament Design Establishment (Small Arms), the Ammunition and Lethality Divisions of the Ordnance Board, Air Ministry and Fighter Command.
As OC Armament of the first Canberra jet bomber Station he was responsible for inventions improving the Canberra Strike Capability.
On leaving the RAF in the early 1960s, Wallis began construction of his first autogyro, although he had made extensive studies of the type over many years. Having flown almost every type of aircraft and developing armament systems at the highest level, all of which have proved successful and many of which are still in front line service, it may come as a surprise that Ken Wallis considers the autogyro to be the ideal aircraft for a tactical, front line attack and support role.
The simple construction and minimum cost of the Wallis Autogyro also make it suitable for many rolls in Civil Aviation, which are at present undertaken by much more expensive and complicated aircraft.
Since the 1960s, Wallis Aviation has undertaken a continual development program of the type and experimented with every conceivable Military and Civil application. No other constructor of autogyros has anywhere near the knowledge or practical experience of this type of aircraft. Wallis is the undisputed leader in the field.
Other autogyros at present in use, mainly for fun flying, do not have the performance of the Wallis Machines and cannot be compared.
Ken Wallis MBE now lives in Norfolk, where he continues with developments on autogyros. He has his own small airfield and experimental workshops. A hanger contains some 19 autogyros, all of which are operational and capable of fulfilling a wide range of tasks.
Wallis Type Development
The first prototype WA/116 was an open framed aircraft using a target drone engine. The type WA/116 has been continually modified and improved to successfully undertake all the operational demands placed on it and is now a fully proven aviation system with exceptional performance.
The later type WA/116 aircraft have weatherproof cockpit and all Weather capability. Various engines have been used, including the McCulloch, Rotax, Subaru and the Norton Wankel rotary.
A larger airframe was designed for the WA/117, to take a Rolls Royce 4 cylinder aero engine and this type proved equally as successful.
The WA/118/M is one in a line of high performance types using an Italian Meteor Alpha 4 cylinder supercharged radial 2-stroke engine.
WA/120/R-R is an enclosed cockpit aircraft using the R-R O-240 engine of 130hp awaiting record use.
There are a number of two seater versions, including a two seater WA/116/F-2 and the WA/122 R-R. All these aircraft have been used for demanding Military 2 seat requirements.
Wallis Autogyros Formal Testing
1961 to 63 Type WA/116
Photo recording of rotor and fuselage clearances over extreme manoeuvres and full flight spectrum.
Photo recording of control movements, fuselage response, airspeed, attitude and rotor rpm.
Electrical strain gauging of critical area of pylon tube, at that time it did not have any bracing struts, control rods, undercarriage and keel tube, over the full flight spectrum and including heavy landings, rough ground operation, etc.
Recording of altitude achieved at 100 yards from brakes off.
Climb to 7500 feet with 100 LB load.
Handling tests to fixed wing light aeroplane standards i.e. hands off recovery from unusual positions. Many landings with engine switched off from various heights.
After demonstrations to the Air Registration Board a Certificate of Airworthiness was granted in August 1962, allowing Army trials
under OR 353 to proceed.
1964 Type WA/116
Photo recording of rotor dynamics employing a high speed cine camera turning with the rotors to record blade flexing in vertical, horizontal and torsional modes.
Using wool tufts to record airflow over the blades covering a range of speeds and manoeuvres. Dynamic teeter movement checks, over the full flight spectrum, in relation to the teeter limits and the position of the rotor relative to fuselage datum was also included in all the recordings.
1970 to 74 Type WA/116 and 117
In collaboration with British Aircraft Corporation Guided Weapons Division, fuselage vibration analysis was undertaken, with a view to carriage of remote sensing equipment in an RPV version, by open shutter photography of a strobed light source on the ground at night.
With control input transducers, rate gyros in 3 axes and voice recorder, recording on an Admiralty Recorder, fuselage response to control movements and attitude. Recorded from level flight over speed range of 40 to 120 knots IAS.
Analysis was undertaken of the radar echo.
Recordings taken by kine theodolite of take offs and landings at varying all up weights.
Sound recording, measurement and analysis made, using Concorde test Laboratory.
Measurements were taken of propeller thrust over complete flight spectrum.
In collaboration with the RAE Bedford, using the BAC control response recording equipment. Further tests taken of control response of WA/117 with and without a horizontal stabiliser, control column fixed and free.
Using kine theodolites recording taken of altitude and attitude control in low level flight about 3 feet above runway accelerating 10 to 90 kts, then suddenly closing the throttle.
Flights undertaken at all up and tare weight ratio of 3.14 to 1, recording control inputs and fuselage response to throttle changes, centre of gravity changes, trim and climbs, step pulse control inputs, both with and without horizontal stabiliser.
The above tests and others were undertaken during the Vinten Licence Agreement and are recorded in the test reports, by Beagle, BAC, RAE and Wallis.
Wallis Autogyros in Working Roles
Cine
16mm and 35mm Panavision cameras rigidly mounted have been carried for cine photography for feature films such as the Eon Productions James Bond 007 film You Only Live Twice and Charles Fries Production The Martian Chronicles.
Three 16mm cameras are normally carried viewing forward and on the beam for TV Documentaries, such as Portrait of a River and the Thames Barge Race in Under Sale for the BBC.
Still Photography
Fixed aerial reconnaissance cameras in vertical and oblique modes, together with intervalometers for vertical line overlaps in formats from 70mm to 9 inch. Photography in shallow beam oblique mode, using a large format F-52 camera, with 36inch lens, has been undertaken at ranges of up to 10 kilometres, for special purposes.
F-24 cameras have been modified to produce continuous recording, to simulate infrared linescan imagery.
Hand held cameras of all sorts are also used.
Panoramic Photography
In 1978, in a flight over central London the new Vinten Type 751 Panoramic Aerial Reconnaissance camera was used for dramatic shots of the city for the SBAC show program. The camera is used in cross track and beam oblique modes.
Multi Band Photography
Multi band photographic techniques have been explored and operational roles undertaken. The system employs four F-95 70mm aerial reconnaissance cameras, with narrow cut filters, operating simultaneously. A radar altimeter is employed, for precise height control at low altitude over undulating terrain.
The System has been used for coastal ecology research, detection of buried cadavers, in experiments and operations for the Police Scientific Development Establishment.
It has also been used for the detection of crop disease and the detection of coastal pollution using the Type WA/120, fitted with a multi band camera pack.
The WA/120 was in the Science Museum Exploration Exhibition from 1976 to 1985.
Stereo Photography
Stereo Photography, using F-95 and F-24 cameras, has been undertaken for the Institute of Terrestrial Ecology and other agencies.
Tracking of Suspect Vehicles
Fitted with a special antenna array, which can be lowered beneath the aircraft in flight and a cockpit VDU, trials have been undertaken on behalf of the Police Scientific Development Establishment.
Video Recording
Video recording has been undertaken from 1970 to date.
Low light recording is undertaken in very low light conditions and at night, with a light source on the aircraft.
Video is employed as a crosscheck of visual searches, for the Police and other agencies. The use of the latest digital video systems, including Fovean sensors is being explored.
Steady Scope Visual Aid
British Aerospace Steady Scope binoculars can be used, the natural hands off stability of the aircraft allowing efficient use of the equipment.
Infra Red Linescan
First flown by day and night in 1970 on military trials, the various developments of IRLS have been carried out very successfully.
Following trials at RAE Farnborough in 1987. Miniature infrared Line Scan with real time transmission of imagery to a ground station has been employed on post strike airfield damage reconnaissance under MOD Contract.
This is the system used by the Tornado GR1 and the Euro Fighter.
Other uses are detection of leaks in water pipelines up to eight feet below the surface, detection of animals and vehicles, heat losses in buildings, hot water plumes from industrial discharges, etc.
Crop-Spraying
Using ultra low volume spray gear, which can be lowered beneath the aircraft in flight, electro statically charged droplets have been successfully discharged in experiments for the Rotherhamstead Experimental Station Ministry of Agriculture.
Other work has been undertaken for ICI, using their Electrodyn system carrying a trailing conducting lead to measure the potential difference between the earth’s surface and the discharge nozzles.
Stereo Radar
Trials have been undertaken employing a stereo radar system capable of deep penetration of land or water, for the detection of land mines or other objects.
Military and Naval Trials and Exercises
The type WA/116 aircraft built under licence by Beagle Aircraft ltd, under Operational Requirement No 353, were on trial by the Army Air Corps in 1962 to 64. The requirement was hardly realistic, calling, among other things for the installation of a very old technology A-41 radio normally used in a tank. Coupled with the noise of the then very unreliable converted McCulloch target plane engine, the weight of the radio and the discomfort of the open frame aircraft in the very cold 1962 to 63 winter, it is not surprising that the trials next involved a two-seat cabin helicopter.
The AAC finally settled for the three seat Augusta Bell 47, the Sioux.
The military XR/942 was flown by its designer in the 1962 SBAC show at Farnborough and is still in operation.
XR/943, fitted with a cockpit nacelle, as are XR/942 and 944, is well known as James Bonds Little Nellie used in the James Bond film, You Only Live Twice, shot in Japan and Spain in 1966. She has now undertaken over 700 major air displays.
Exercise Green Lanyard
In 1981 Wallis was asked to provide an aircraft for the February 1982 Aerial Quick Deployment Exercise Green Lanyard. The aircraft was transported with 42 armed troops and two road vehicles in a C/130 Hercules aircraft.
The 1962 ex military trials aircraft XR/944 was up dated by exchange of the McCulloch engine by a Certified Franklin aero engine, returned to military camouflage and in later form was fitted with two Oerlikon 81mm Sura D anti tank rockets. A fully successful anti tank role was confirmed.
Flown into the Battle Training Area in the Hercules, as soon as the aircraft was run down the ramp, it was ready for flight.
Various reconnaissance flights were undertaken operating from unprepared sites. The aircraft had the ability to taxy up to various Critical Points, which would have been inaccessible to any other aircraft.
Army Air Trials of Micro light Aircraft, Netheravon May 1983
Three Wallis aircraft, including the Rolls Royce engined WA/122, were demonstrated. Many officers, including General Sir Richard Vickers were given flight experience on the W/122. A Franklin engined WA/116 gave solo experience to AAC instructors.
Exercise Gryphons Gold
Gryphons Gold was a behind the lines exercise conducted in the STANTA training area in November 1983.
The type WA/122 and the single seat WA/116, XR/944 and a Vinten built 116 were all employed. Again the WA/122 was used to provide transport to senior officers and to provide specialists with an aerial view of progress, such as bridge building.
The ground capability of the WA/122 was appreciated by the Brigadier passenger, after landing in unprepared sites, it was possible to traverse very rough paths, under trees, to the various KPs.
Hand held video recording was undertaken with XR/944.
Demonstration and Trials at Altenstadt, Air and Land (BWB) Transport School Bavaria December 1983
Two Wallis WA/116 aircraft Franklin powered and the two seater WA/122, took part in demonstrations and provided air experience for German Military personnel, operating from the perimeter of the snow covered grass airfield.
Several officers later had solo experience, flying a WA/116 from the airfield perimeter cleared of snow at Kaufbeuren.
TLRRPS Symposium, 14 NATO Nations, Konstanz Training Area West Germany June 1984
Two Wallis WA/116s and the WA/122 two seater, were demonstrated, taking off and landing in unprepared sites.
These trials and previous demonstrations at Altenstadt, Kaufbeuren and other sites including the Wallis airfield, resulted in a military order being placed with Wallis licensees.
A German helicopter instructor was converted to PPL(G) Standards on the WA/116, in the UK, with a view to instructing on the V/122.
Roles later undertaken in Germany and in the Middle East remain confidential.
Exercise Keswick
Following Paper Study by Wallis autogyros and MOD/R&D Contracts, Wallis was contracted to prepare aircraft to take part in the Post Strike Airfield Damage Reconnaissance Exercise Keswick, at R.A.F North Luffenham in April 1987.
The WA/117 was fitted with miniature infra Red linescan and real time imagery transmission, together with an F-95 camera and controls, 720 channel radio and equipped for night flying. This aircraft was tested at RAE Farnborough prior to the exercise.
Also prepared were a Limbach powered WA/116, equipped for video recording and another WA/116 which had served as a flying test bed for several engines, including the Norton Wankel and Rotax 532.
Operations were conducted under all weather conditions by day and night. Take offs and landings at night were from a short piece of perimeter track marked by four small battery powered lanterns.
The aircraft performed exactly to the trials schedule under realistic conditions.
Naval Trials Operating from Small Fast Patrol Craft
Vosper Thornycroft (UK) ltd had expressed an interest in the possibility of the Wallis aircraft being operated from their small fast patrol vessels, which were far to small to carry a helicopter.
Take off and landing would necessitate the vessel proceeding fast enough to provide airspeed for VTOL performance from a very small platform.
Roles envisaged were over ships horizon surveillance, target identification and guidance of ships weapons to the target.
Trials started with the autogyro keeping station with a fast patrol craft on trials in the Channel. This was followed on the 9th of March 1982 by some 25 take offs and landings on the rear half deck of a flatbed lorry, at 30 and 35 mph on the runway at RAF Watton.
On the 9th of June 1982, the two seat WA/116-T was landed solo, on the cabin roof of a small pleasure vessel adapted for the trial, moving into the wind at 8 knots.
On the 10th of November 1982, the WA/116-T was out of sight of land, over a heavy North Sea swell, before finding and landing on HMS Dumbarton Castle, a fishery protection frigate having unserviceable stabilisers. The very high superstructure immediately forward of the helicopter platform caused airflow reversal but the autogyro was flown off for its return to Lowestoft.
Tests a year later were conducted with a Franklin powered WA/116, from a Vosper Thorneycroft fast patrol vessel. The clear airflow and airspeed that the vessel could provide made VTOL operation easy. Naval operation was fully proven.
SPECIAL PHOTOGRAPHY, SAUDI PORTS AUTHORITY
In October 1983 the WA/117, equipped with the Vinten Type 751 Panoramic camera and hand held aerial cameras, was transported to Saudi Arabia by an Air Saudi transport plane.
Special photography of the ports at Jeddah and Damman was undertaken, the aircraft operating from the port area, in temperatures up to 40dg Centigrade.
Very many thousands of good photographs were obtained, the aircraft often operating very close to harbour crane jibs etc, to obtain special views, in addition to conventional low and medium altitude photography.
RECORD PERFORMANCE AIRCRAFT PREVIOUS RECORD
28/9/75 Non-stop distanceIn a straight line 874.3 km(543 miles) Wallis WA-116/FG-ATHM 60 hp 133.3 kms Igor Benson USAB-8 90 hp
28/9/75 Duration 6hrs 25 mins Ditto No previous record
20/7/82 * Altitude 5644 metres(18,517 feet) Wallis WA-121/McG-BAHH 90 hp 4639 metres K WallisWA-116/McG-ARRT 90 hp
14/10/84 Speed over 15kms(9.3 miles) 189.6 km/hr(117.7 mph) Wallis WA-116/F/SG-BLIK 60 hp 174.9 km/hr D FarringtonAir & Space 18A 180 hp
17/4/85 Speed over 100kmClosed circuit 190.4 km/hr(118 mph) Ditto 164.4 km/hr D FarringtonAir & Space 18A 180 hp
18/9/86 Speed over 3 km(1.9 miles) 193.6 kms(120 mph) Ditto 179 km/hr K WallisWA 116/Mc G-ARRT 90 hp
5/8/88 Non-stop distanceIn a closed circuit 1002.8 km(623 miles) Ditto 630.3 km K WallisWA-116/FG-ATHM 60 hp
5/8/88 Speed over 1000kmClosed circuit 130.8 km/hr(81 mph) Ditto No previous record
5/8/88 Speed over 500km 134.8 km/hr(83 mph) Ditto 126 km/hr K WallisWA-116/FG-ATHM 60 hp
19/3/98 Time to climb to 3000 metres 7 mins 20 secs Wallis WA121/McG-BAHH 90hp 8 mins 8 secs K WallisWA-121?mcG-BAHH 90 hp
The Federation Aeronautique Internationale has officially ratified the above world records.
Last edited by autogyro on 18 Nov 2010, 01:15, edited 1 time in total.
Wallis Autogyros Pilot Conversion Training
Overview
Provisional Draft:
Wing Commander Ken Wallis MBE was the first Instructor on this type of aircraft in the UK post-war. He taught others to fly the Wallis WA-116 autogyros at the request of the then Ministry of Aviation.
He became the first Examiner, being required to observe a demonstration of competence before recommending the issue of a Private Pilot’s Gyroplane Licence. He devised a set of ‘Gyroplane Pilots Flight Tests’, a copy of which pilots would be required to learn and carry with them, when demonstrating their competence (or otherwise).
The requirement for three landings with increasing difficulty, with the engine actually switched off, rather than idling, was harder than required by the Ministry of Aviation but was felt appropriate. More than one pilot has said how pleased he was that he knew how to cope when the engine went silent at some later stage.
In the last checks undertaken, such as when converting Vinten pilots, the third switched-off engine landing had to be made just after take-off. This brought home the possible hazard of climbing out at too low a speed, rather than having some speed in hand for a satisfactory approach and flare.
Although not up to date with the latest thinking of the C.A.A. on pilot training for Gyroplanes, we believe the tendency is now towards the use of dual control two-seaters. They would probably accept ‘ab initio’ training on the gyroplane. In which case a dual control two-seater is a necessity.
A version of the 130 hp Wallis WA-122 could be provided with full dual controls if required.
To date, Wing Commander Wallis in his role as Instructor/Examiner has converted many fixed wing pilots with widely varied experience. We are certain that this approach can be extended to cover the current three-axis controlled microlight aeroplanes.
Experience gained; such as the conversion of pilots employed by a company in connection with their Licence to build the Wallis designs for working roles quickly illustrated the need to take a pilot way beyond the stage of qualifying for a PPL on Gyroplanes.
After gaining a PPL under instruction from Wing Commander Wallis, the pilot would then be kept busy on other matters. This gave little chance to increase his experience on type. The company would suddenly ask these pilots to take part in an Exercise in the Battle Training Area, or undertake some other difficult task at a moments notice.
This can be compared to a man who has just passed his driving test, discarded his L plates and had little driving experience for several months, being asked to compete in a GP.
The Wallis Autogyro is comparable in its control ‘feel’ to a motorcycle. Some people will take naturally to the machine and increase their skills without particular outside instruction.
Others will never have quite ‘the feel’ for it and this should be apparent in the early stages of training.
The Wallis Autogyro is unique in its low speed, low altitude performance and manoeuvrability and is probably safer to operate than any other aircraft type as long as the pilot has the relevant skills and experience. Ken Wallis has safely trained hundreds of Gyroplane pilots. It is essential that his training experience be used as a basis for a Gyroplane Training Syllabus.
Technical Notes, Pilots Notes etc have all been done formally. They date back to the original military trials of 1962/3 and would obviously need up dating. However they do form the basis for such documentation.
The pilots training syllabus must include.
‘ Initial Conversion from fixed-wing flying’
Followed by the necessary
‘Advanced and Operational Training’
We have compiled an initial draft based on extensive experience over many Years. However the detailed professional work needed to formalise the syllabus will only be completed when commercial intent is established.
DRAFT
Pilot Conversion Training to the Wallis Autogyro
Plus Advanced and Operational Training
Note: Pilots should have reached good standards in Flying, Navigation, Meteorology, Air Law etc., on light aeroplanes or three-axis controlled microlights prior to conversion.
Facilities Required
A suitably licensed airfield, preferably grass, with at least 500metres for take-off and with clear approaches.
Since the Autogyro is suited to flying on very small circuits of the airfield, this can be very annoying to persons living nearby. This should be borne in mind in selection of an airfield, or the nature of the training will need to be adjusted.
Additionally a small lecture room will be required, equipped with:-
a. A blackboard and chalk.
b. Some sycamore seeds and model autogyro rotor blades.
c. Technical parts of the Wallis autogyro, such as the rotor head.
d. A complete airframe, possibly with shortened rotor blades.
e. Video playback facility and camcorder.
f. 35mm slide projector.
g. 16mm cine-projector.
h. Screen for ‘f’ and ‘g’. A full computer based digital system could also be integrated and may include flight simulation.
i. Pilots Notes for Wallis Type WA-116 autogyro, ‘et sequa’.
j. Maintenance Notes for Wallis Type WA-116 autogyro.
k. An open-framed two-seater on the lines of the WA-116-T/Mc and or the
WA-122/RR, of similar handling characteristics to the single-seaters.
To include (at least) an extension to the control column to allow flight
experience for the person under conversion.
Ideally, full dual control could be provided but the aircraft must be kept to
little more than the scale of the working single-seater.
l. Single-seat trainers, essentially WA-116 configuration, with nacelle and developed windscreen, powered by a suitably reliable and quiet engine.
For the Advanced Flying Training Course
a. A selection of small airfields and possible operating sites.
(some unsuitable for use), for pilot assessment as take-off and landing sites.
b. A well-surfaced and checked low flying area.
c. A video-recording facility, ground to air and on the aircraft. To include the latest lightweight digital equipment.
Initial Pilot Conversion Training
Introduction
Prior to the course, the student should have attained a normal standard of competence as a pilot of light aeroplanes or very light aeroplanes (microlights) equipped with three axis controls.
A pure helicopter pilot will need some experience on light aeroplanes prior to solo autogyro flight, since the autogyro makes running take-offs and landings and behaves more like an aeroplane. Although it will not stall, if a helicopter pilot reverts to helicopter handling and attempts to ‘hover’, a very high rate of descent will occur with the autogyro.
This requirement for an autogyro conversion student to have first trained on light aeroplanes, is regarded as virtually essential. He will have mastered the elements of the Principles of Flight, Map Reading, Navigation, Meteorology, Airmanship and Airfield Discipline.
Ideally, the aeroplane training should be on aircraft having some S.T.O.L., characteristics, leading naturally to the even more S.T.O.L., behaviour of the autogyro.
While ab-initio training on a dual-control autogyro is possible, it is felt that the route via fixed-wing training is best. Even before a basic two-seater was available, some 150-aeroplane pilots made their first rotary-wing flight solo and after only a verbal briefing. The introduction of the minimal WA-116 two-seater in 1969 was useful in providing a first ‘autogyro experience’ flight before that first solo. It did much to show that the tiny autogyro was naturally stable and to quell understandable fears before a first solo.
The Conversion Course
1. A lecture on the history of the autogyro. To cover the sycamore and other auto-rotating seeds, the Cievr series and derivatives through to the current generation of ultra-light working autogyros. Illustrated by slides and film or video.
2. The principles of flight and the mechanics of the two-bladed teetering rotor. The hazards of negative or zero ‘g’.
3. Achievements of control by ‘aerodynamic servo system’, hence rotor blades must be approaching flight R.P.M, to be controllable and centrifugally stiffened. The need for a good mechanical spin-up, combined with centrifugal teeter stops, as on the practical Wallis autogyro.
4. Explanation of the Wallis offset gymball rotor head, spin-up system, free-wheel and auto-disengage. Introduction to the complete single-seat aircraft.
5. Demonstration of auto-rotation and teetering of model rotors (if sufficient wind).
6. Demonstration by Instructor of full-scale aerodynamic rotor spin-up and flight. If necessary by prolonged taxiing to gain aerodynamic spin-up (if sufficient wind).
7. Demonstration using mechanical spin-up.
8. Demonstration of safety features, such as the ‘Dead Man’s Switch’ for engine starting, action of the three-wheeled braking system, etc.
9. Advice on manual disconnection of spin-up drive immediately prior to ‘Brakes Off’ on first solos.
10. When using the auto-disengage of the rotor spin-up after ‘Brakes Off’, advice on the need to counter the tendency to turn to starboard due to the torque reaction by some prior application of port rudder.
11. Advice to be given on the torque reaction in the rolling plane as the rotors are tilted fully aft while in late stages of rotor spin-up. In a wind this may result in the nose wheel lifting, followed by the port wheel. The natural reaction to counter the roll to starboard, is to move the control column to the left but with the starboard wheel still on the ground this is likely only to increase the roll to starboard. Hence, it is advisable in the late stages of spin-up to hold the stick slightly to port.
12. Further flight demonstrations, following full pre-flight inspection. To include slow and fast flight and ending with an ‘engine-off’ landing. A post-flight check with a manual ‘feel’ of the main bearing housing temperatures, etc.
First Autogyro Experience Flights
13. Over 150 aeroplane pilots have achieved their first rotorcraft flight solo on a Wallis WA-116 after only a verbal briefing. The pilots had a very mixed background of previous flying experience.
14. Understandably, some were somewhat apprehensive before a first solo in such an unusual little aircraft. So, in 1969 the first absolutely minimal version of a two-seater WA-116 was flown. It was not provided with dual controls or even an intercom system. It was intended purely as a first autogyro flight experience for an aeroplane pilot prior to solo flight.
15. Having served very usefully in the above role, the aircraft was then fitted with a detachable extension to the control column. The student on the rear seat is now able to, get a ‘feel’ of the controls in flight. This is undertaken after the Instructor has demonstrated the complete ‘hands and feet off’ stability of the aircraft and its ability to perform ‘figure of eights’, by use of the control column or rudder pedals alone.
16. A first autogyro experience flight will thus follow a pre-flight briefing, followed by a pre-flight inspection, start-up with the student already seated, taxiing and a rotor spin-up. Once airborne the Instructor can check by sign language, whether the student feels secure and happy. They normally do!
17. Trimmed at cruise speed the Instructor will then indicate to the student the ‘finger-tip’ control of the aircraft by the control column and its ability to turn steeply and correctly without any foot contact with the rudder pedals. The ability to make gentle correctly banked turns
‘hands off’, by using only the rudder pedals can then be demonstrated.
18. After a few circuits, ‘touch and go’ landings and level flight at low altitude to give the student an impression of the pitch angle and a ‘feel’ of the control movements by use of the extended control column, the first flight should be terminated.
19. After shut-down, post-flight inspection and a discussion of the experience, it can be decided whether or not there is need for a further two-seater flight, before the student makes his first autogyro solo.
20. The first ‘Autogyro Experience’ flight is likely to last only about 20 minutes. Ideally, it will be video recorded from the ground, so that the performance can later be watched by the student and any particular aspects discussed.
21. A second flight on the two-seater may then be advisable, with more emphasis on taxiing, use of wheel brakes, control movements and the rotor R.P.M achieved prior to ‘brakes off’ and during take-off and flight. Low-speed level flight should be demonstrated, with emphasis on the possible increase in engine temperature and consequent loss of height. At a safe height, very low airspeed and high rate of sink, a vertical wool-tuft will show the stall-free nature of the aircraft, with no loss of control.
22. Handling up to the clearly indicated Vne should be demonstrated, with the student feeling the controls. More ‘touch and go’ landings should be undertaken, with the aircraft brought to a brief stop before take-off again without resort to the mechanical rotor spin-up.
23. Avoidance of sudden forward control movement at speed, such as might seriously reduce positive ‘g’, or even induce negative ‘g’ to be emphasised, although with sensitive handling within the green zone of the speed range this is unlikely.
24. The loss of airspeed and possible serious loss of altitude during a sudden downwind turn can be demonstrated at a safe height, from low speed flight into wind.
25. De-briefing and discussion, plus viewing of any T.V coverage of the flight.
First Solo
(If good radio communication between the ground instructor and the student can be provided it will assist).
1. Prior to first solo, on an opportunity basis and with a dead engine, students to practise spinning up rotors in a wind. Aircraft should have a short nose rope attached if attempted in a strong wind, to allow tethered flight as a kite but only at low altitude to prevent risk to aircraft. Instructor can give verbal instructions from a safe distance. This training exercise to be carried out on the airfield on an opportunity basis subject to available wind speed.
2. Students to familiarise themselves with all controls and to be able to reach, wheel brake lever, spin-up lever, trim levers etc, without the need to look. Checks on this ability to be undertaken in the classroom and on the airfield.
3. Short briefing before first solo. Depending on solo aircraft type, students should be warned of increased performance compared with dual-seat version. Student should also be advised to manually disengage the rotor drive immediately prior to ‘brakes off’ to reduce the tendency to swing to starboard resulting from rotor spin-up torque reaction. Pre-flight inspection, followed by ‘engine start’ with student already seated and aircraft lined-up for take off. Instructor to stand to port of aircraft and to give radio or visual signals on spin-up, stick position, spin-up disengage, brakes off etc. After take-off student to make a series off low passes along landing strip, to familiarise himself with the aircrafts attitude, power settings etc. After landing, student to apply stick lock and rotor brake. Engine can then be switched off. After first solo, de-briefing in classroom to include analysis of video recording. Full video recording of first solo to be made.
Solo ‘Touch and Goes’
Since more ‘feel’ of the aircraft will be gained from, take-offs, acceleration, climb-outs, circuits and landings. After the first solo, students should practise ‘touch and go’ landings.
Initially the ‘touch and go’ should be literally that but at later stages of instruction, the aircraft should be momentarily stopped before commencing the take-off run.
It must be emphasised that the initial loss of rotor RPM is very high, hence the aircraft must be quickly stopped and immediate take-off initiated to avoid the need for mechanical spin-up and the extra wear on the system. At this stage there should be no need for mechanical spin-up but the student should be advised, that if rotor RPM reads less than, say, 275 RPM prior to ‘brakes off’, then rotor RPM should be restored.
Video analysis.
Aerodynamic ‘Spin-up’ of Rotors
Pilots Notes for a given Wallis Autogyro Variant, should reflect the appropriate IAS and rotor RPM, together with the techniques relative to take-off without the aid of the mechanical ‘spin-up’ system.
While this should not normally be necessary, there may be an occasion when the lightweight mechanical system is unserviceable.
The practise of aerodynamic ‘spin-up’ gives more ‘feel’ for the auto rotational principle than a thousand words.
Aerodynamic spin-up for students should be exercised only when wind and airfield conditions provide a safe margin.
From the outset, students should be advised to select the ‘Abort take-off’ position and be made to adhere strictly to it.
Reduction of Airspeed to Onset of Sink.
With power and to approach of zero I.A.S.
At the stage at which the student shows appropriate confidence and skill in circuits, landings and general handling and at a suitably safe height, the student should practise reduction of airspeed, at various power settings.
This should be continued until the aircraft starts to sink.
The student must then practise recovery of normal flight, by ‘giving the aircraft its head’ and allowing it to regain appropriate forward flight speed.
After video analysis of the initial practise, in which special note should be made of any tendency to use rapid forward stick movement for recovery, the student should proceed with further practise, to an I.A.S approaching zero.
The student should note the marked aft stick pull required, the buffeting, the great reduction of directional stability and rudder control, the very high rate of descent, even at full power, the position of the wool tuft and the considerable height needed for recovery.
Video Analysis.
Effects of Upwind and Downwind Turns and Climbs
At Low Level
On a windy day, the student should practise flight at cruising and lower airspeeds, including upwind and downwind turns using the ground as a reference.
Special note should be made of the loss of airspeed following a sudden turn downwind coupled with the apparent effect relative to the ground, of adequate flight airspeed.
The risk of dangerous loss of height following a quick turn downwind, from an adequate airspeed but low ground speed must be particularly noted.
The student must be warned not to ‘trust his senses’ and assume that, for a given high ground speed, the aircraft can be climbed by application of ‘back stick’.
Video Analysis.
The student to note, the effect on I.A.S while climbing and descending, up and downwind and close to the ground consequent upon wind shear.
The benefits of an earlier climb making use of the effective airspeed increase and the hazards of wind shear in descent to be noted in practise.
The Effect of ‘g’ on rotor RPM
The transfer of airspeed to the rotors
The temporary storage of energy in the rotor system
The student is to note the increase of rotor RPM in turns and in pullouts, following the application of increased ‘g’, coupled with the reduction of forward airspeed.
The student should note that, while the increased rotor RPM remains, the aircraft will maintain height at a slower airspeed than would be possible after sustained ‘g’ flight.
The difference between typical ‘stored rotor energy’ during level flight airspeed and the energy available during continued ‘g’ to be noted.
The student to be warned of the ‘fools paradise’ resulting immediately following an increase of ‘g’ and the price to be paid as the rotor RPM rapidly decays, if the airspeed pertaining before the manoeuvre is not restored.
The student should also be advised of the benefits that can be obtained from stored rotor energy, during short landings and momentarily near hover flight etc. This to be practised at a more advanced stage.
Engine Off Landing Practise
Engine off landings should be demonstrated by Instructors and simulated by students, at all but the initial solo flight stage.
As confidence and competence in the circuit is built up, the student should practise increasingly steep approaches, commensurate with engine type, idling speed etc, for landings without further application of power.
The student must be constantly alert to arrest any serious loss of speed and high rate of sink, following a too high or too sudden flare-out, by rapid application of power.
Video Analysis.
Crosswind Techniques
(To be undertaken when conditions allow).
In practise, the only suitable take-off and landing site may well be a narrow strip of path or road, with hazards on either side and subject to a strong crosswind. Attempting a take-off and landing into the wind would be out of the question. The available length, even crosswind must be used.
The student must learn to take-off and land along a precise line, in a strong crosswind (say 20 knots).
Wallis Autogyros are fitted with a strongly centralising and separate steering nose wheel. This design allows safe operation in conditions too severe for aircraft fitted with interconnected to rudder nose wheels.
Video Analysis.
EXAMINERS LISCENCE NO: 12094/G
GYROPLANE PILOTS FLIGHT TESTS
EXAMINEE IS TO UNDERTAKE NO TEST FOR WHICH HE DOES NOT
FEEL COMPETENT OR FOR WHICH HE FEELS HIS AIRCRAFT IS NOT
FITTED.
TEST IS TO BE IMMEDIATELY CONCLUDED IF THE EXAMINER
SIGNALS BY ARMS OUTSTRETCHED.
1. Pre-flight inspection, start, Run-up, Taxying.
2. T.O & Land into wind.
3. T.O & in climb, at 50’ snap throttle back and land.
7. 3 “figures of eight”, height less than 10’, around
markers, turns as tight as possible.
8. Recovery at safe altitude, from zero airspeed;-
With Power,
Without Power.
9. Landing & Takeoff from restricted area.
10. From level flight, a Switched-off engine Landing as
near as possible to the Examiner from:-
250’ 150’ 100’
The General Flying Test
Upon satisfactory completion of the GFT, the student will have qualified for an Autogyro Licence, Private Pilots Licence (Gyroplane).
The student may then be regarded a ‘having disposed of his or her ‘L’ plates’ and is ready to start learning to fly, via the Advanced Training Course!
Wallis Autogyro Variants
Advanced Flying Training
Course: Estimated Minimum of 75 hours.
Lecture
1. The Autogyro as a working vehicle.
2. The need to assess the suitability of sites and roles.
3. Methods of obtaining best performance, by knowledge of characteristics.
4. Because of the STOL capability of the aircraft, it will often be called upon to operate from marginal sites, where the difference between successful operation and an accident will be dependent upon a combination of factors.
Factors:
(a) Length of take-off run relative to wind.
(b) Nature of surface.
(c) Slope.
(d) Upwind obstructions.
(e) Pressure altitude.
(f) Temperature.
(g) Aircraft Type, A.U.W.
(h) Wind strength.
(i) Wind stability.
(j) Position of take-off run with terrain, likely to effect local air velocities.
(k) Availability of suitably placed, small depressions in the ground, to provide more effective braking during spin-up.
Wallis Autogyro Variants
Advanced Flying Training
Practical
Students to practise short take-offs and landings at safe sites.
Position of ‘Abort take-off’, to be decided by student relative to a given task and to be adhered to.
Video Analysis. With emphasis on ‘unstick’ position and simulated obstacle clearance.
Students to be taken by road to known and varied sites.
Students to discuss suitability of sites and solutions for the difficulties foreseen.
Students to state whether or not they would attempt to operate from the site.
Where appropriate, Instructor to demonstrate the correct solution.
Students also to practise flying from suitable but more ‘marginal’ sites.
Video Analysis.
Operation in High Winds
Lecture
The aircraft has a unique capability for operation in high winds and turbulent conditions and can operate in conditions unsuitable for any other aircraft type.
High wind can sometimes be turned to benefit, as for short field operation and for maintaining a fixed position above the ground, in an apparent ‘hover’.
Practical
Students to practise take-offs, landings, ‘hovering’ and general flying, when high wind conditions prevail, using appropriate ‘rough air airspeeds’.
Special emphasis will be placed on airmanship and the need to always mentally assess the effects of upwind and downwind obstructions, hills trees etc.
Students to practise flying in hilly country, upwind and downwind of trees etc.
N.B: Although the maximum surface wind quoted in ‘Pilots Notes’ is the original 43 knots, operation in much higher winds is possible.
Students should gradually extend their flying practise to include flights in such high winds.
In high winds, students should be made aware of the backward ‘roll-over’ hazards during rotor ‘spin-up’ and after landing until rotor is levelled.
Optimum airspeed for riding out extreme gusts should be noted.
Video Analysis.
Operation at High All-up Weight
Lecture
The different techniques to be used when operating at high all-up weights, during long range flying and the carriage of special equipment etc.
Practical
Students to practise on suitable sites, ballasted take-offs, acceleration, climb out, circuits and landings. Noting the effects on, trim, minimum flight speeds, maximum power speed etc.
Video Analysis.
Further flights at increasing weight up to limits.
Advanced Navigational Training
Lecture
Students to be instructed on the best methods to adopt for long cross-country flights.
Advice to be given on suitable heights, speeds, overload tanks, dead reckoning, practical dead reckoning, map reading etc.
Practical
Students to undertake suitable cross-country flights.
Operational Low Flying Practise
The aircraft is particularly suited to very low flying, being capable of taking full advantage of ground cover for surprise reconnaissance or attack.
Low flying must first be practised over an area known to be free from telephone or electricity cables, narrow radio masts etc, however, the chosen area should still be checked by the student before flight.
Video recording from aircraft and ground.
Video Analysis.
Low Level Navigation
Lecture
Map reading at low level.
Practical
Students to develop the ability to visually navigate at low level using 6 figure map references
During training flights the students must learn to recognise landmarks and obstructions.
On completion of flights, the students will describe the objects and features seen at the flight reference points.
Cloud Flying Training
Although it is hardly suitable for long-range navigation in cloud, the exceptional stability of the aircraft renders it suitable for climbs and descents through cloud.
Students should practise precise trimmed flight at about the minimum power speed.
Students should practise keeping the wool tuft along the aircrafts azimuth datum by use of the rudder. The course to be flown achieved by use of roll control alone, ideally using the trimmers.
Aircraft should then be made to climb and descend ‘hands-off’, apart from torque correcting pressure on the stick, such as to maintain the given compass course.
If the position of the wool tuft is in doubt, student is to let go of stick and allow aircraft to stabilise.
When sufficient practise and confidence has been acquired, student is to make short climbs and descents through cloud, in suitable airspace.
A particularly important feature to practise is a 180-degree turn, without loss of height and back into the ‘clear’, after entering cloud. This can be vital at low altitude during operations in bad weather.
Night Flying Training
The student’s experience of limited cloud flying will have prepared the way for night flying.
The student should be aware that the aircraft is essentially stable. Night and cloud flight is possible with little more than an illuminated compass and wool-tuft.
Night flying may be started at dusk, on a suitably large airstrip and extended until darkness prevails.
The normal facility of airfield lighting would not normally be provided, although this may be an advantage if normal airfield night operations are to be undertaken.
Training should lead to take-offs towards and over ‘cars’ taillights, along headlight beams etc. This may be extended to include the use of a landing light on the aircraft.
The use of a simple, low power beacon for landing strip location and an approach and angle of descent indicator, should suffice for operations, without the need for image intensifying night goggles.
Operational Training
Operational training will be concerned with the practical use of the aircraft in the roles to which it is particularly suited.
Since transportation of the aircraft, together with role equipment and fuel is usually by road trailer, in a ready to use condition. Students will be taken to a range of potential operating sites.
Students will be asked to assess the sites and suggest directions for take-off and landing etc. Where suitable they will undertake some flights.
Some of the sites will be chosen as unsuitable for any use by the autogyro. Those pilots who consider otherwise will lose marks!
The operational training will include carriage of various remote sensing and other working role equipment, video recording, infrared, low-light etc. This equipment will be used, together with conventional hand-held and vertical line overlap photography.
Training for possible military roles will include detailed reconnaissance operations, possibly using ‘steady scope’ binoculars and other equipment.
Very low level flying will need to be practised with caution, being aware at all times of potential hazards such as, telephone lines and cables.
Students will develop the use of ground cover, for the attack role, together with simulated weapons firing, using a video camera. This would precede any actual weapons firing.
Wallis aircraft have completed operational weapons firing and are more manoeuvrable than current attack helicopters; they also have a very low heat signature.
Night and cloud flying will need to be practised, together with operations from minimal areas, largely using little more than the landing light on the autogyro.
If ship-born operations are to be undertaken, then a number of take-offs and landings can be made from a flatbed lorry, moving at different speeds, prior to the first flights from small ships. This practise gives airflow over the deck and allows for VTOL operation.
The Wallis aircraft have some three times the operational range of a helicopter and are ideally suited to naval use.
Last edited by autogyro on 18 Nov 2010, 01:22, edited 1 time in total.
Originally designed by Ken Wallis MBE in the early 1960s, The Wallis Autogyro Rotor and Rotor Head have been continually developed and improved to the present day.
The effective and safe operation of any autogyro relies to a major extent on balancing the aerodynamic operation of both these components. They must be designed as an assembly and not in isolation.
Almost the entire concept of autogyro flight is contained within this design requirement. The fuselage, fin, horizontal stabilizers and power unit are suspended beneath the rotor assembly and rely fully on its capability to maintain sustained lift and controlled manoeuvrability.
To allow the rotor to rotate smoothly through a full range of rpm in any flight condition, it has to be flexible to allow the angle of incidence to change to match all lift and drag requirements. This flexibility must not exceed the structural load and clearance built into the design. To achieve this, the rotor must be constructed of very specific materials.
It cannot be designed in isolation; the rotor head geometry must also be designed as part of the assembly.
The primary components of the rotor head are the teeter bearings and their precise positioning in the housing. They allow the rotor to attack the airflow at a variable angle of incidence depending on where they are in relation to the rotor arc. Coupled to the rotor flexibility this results in an aerodynamic system that will maintain controlled lift over the full operational envelope of the machine and includes a wide safety margin, including an inability of the rotor to stop rotating in flight or stall.
The Wallis aircraft and its rotor design, is the only autogyro since the Second World War that has been awarded full certification to fly by the British Government. A full official evaluation was completed to achieve this, making full use of the highest technical expertise available.
Wallis aircraft have used this system from its original patent in the 1960s and there have been no accidents or flight problems resulting from the design. The aircraft have completed thousands of hours of operational flying, often in weather and wind speeds that prevented any other aircraft from flying.
Although other autogyro manufacturers have tried to copy the Wallis rotor head, none have designed a balanced rotor/rotor head assembly that matches the aerodynamic efficiency of the Wallis design.
The current official UK aviation regulatory body the CAA, does not have a technical specification for autogyro rotor/rotor head design and they have recently asked Wallis Aviation to help them to draft one.
Since the 1960s it has been Wallis policy not to release details of the aircrafts design or to become involved in kit aircraft manufacture or private fun flying. We believe that the aircraft should be used for properly controlled operations and a regulated flight training school established.
Accidents involving autogyros (never Wallis designs), investigated by the air accident authorities have almost always resulted in a request for Ken Wallis to compile a report. All the aircraft involved were flying on a permit to fly based on very little aerodynamic data or flight training and none were using the Wallis rotor/rotor head.
We conclude that the current safety regulations in regard to autogyro flight in the UK are not acceptable.
Our continued attempt to gain investment for Wallis production has so far failed due to the non-existence of any current official regulations for autogyro flight. We have contacted the CAA on many occasions, the latest time one Month ago. We are fully prepared to meet their requirements and have asked politely for the relevant documentation etc to be sent. They have not as yet replied.
We have a second request from the Chinese Government for the purchase of a provisional 10 Wallis aircraft for police and anti-terrorist operations.
The latest and proven role for the aircraft could be for locating and neutralising buried exploding devices in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We would much prefer to manufacture the aircraft here in Norfolk, with help from the UK Government. This would save a great deal of expense for the MOD. However I am preparing for a visit to China.
I think you will find that the web site you gave reference to 747 is simply another virtual idea.
Hardly compares with over 40 years of actual flying development and operations in actual flying tasking does it.
The Wallis rotor and head design cannot be compared to the kit aircraft described. These do not come close in aerodynamic efficiency.
The bottom line is that the British government is tied to buying American Helicopters at the expense of any UK national incentive and will do everything possible to prevent production.
The word corrupt does not even begin to cover the issue.
Here you are Caito the superior rotary winged autogyro.
We could have short and medium haul ag airliners with no need for runways, if the Americans had not made our government scrap all the developments.
Thanks for the reply autogyro,
even if it does not give a straight answer to a simple question.
So, it seems that the "my way or no deal" approach is at the root of the problem,
as of why the idea get´s not futher pursued.
If the mountain (in this case the CAA and BG) does not come to the prophet, the
prophet keeps sitting on the fence (or whereever) and the whole thing goes nowhere.
That´s fair enough, everybody is entitled to go over his business in the way he sees fit - no problem.
But it does not stop others to keep moving forward, and promote the concept.
As we see by the fact that there are others who produce, sell and fly autogyros around the world. (Xenon,SportCopter, AutoGyro Europe just to name a few).
It´s not up to me to judge, if they are technical inferior in concept, then the Wallis machine, that maybe the case, may not. But if you do something for long enough, you will learn a few lessons along the way.
I don´t question, that your friend has extensive expertise in this field, far frrom, and I have the upmost respect for him and his achievements.
But I don´t thing he is the only one, and as "time and tide waits for no one", I would not be too surprised if someone would built and fly an electric autogyro before him/you.
The link and article was just to illustrate that others look at this consept as well. Electric (assisted)flight after all, is out there and happening, to the technology as far as motors, controllers and most importantly accus/batteries go is developing.
I think, it´s everyones own choice to be part of it or not.
Some will just go out and do what is possible for them, others will wait unless somebody will come along and give them some funds or warm to/agree with there way of thinking.
It may be a problem in the U.K. atm, but after all it´s just a small part of the world/market, so should not prevent one, from any major and revolutionary technical breakthroughts.
It´s and nice and interesting concept after all.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge about some of the historical facts.
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
It will probably be this Sikorsky helicopter 747, it has already been built.
Unfortunately it will only have a maximum of 15 minutes endurance and no payload.
The Aviation Industry allows permit to fly autogyros for fun flying, keeps the peace.
I thought I had more than covered the reasons why they will continue to prevent 'proper' certificated manufacture of any proven autogyro aviation system.
autogyro wrote:
It will probably be this Sikorsky helicopter 747, it has already been built.
Unfortunately it will only have a maximum of 15 minutes endurance and no payload.
Thanks for the link,
I guess you have to start somewhere, nothing ventured - nothing gained
autogyro wrote:
The Aviation Industry allows permit to fly autogyros for fun flying, keeps the peace.
I thought I had more than covered the reasons why they will continue to prevent 'proper' certificated manufacture of any proven autogyro aviation system
I guess you refer to this assessment/opinion of your.
autogyro wrote:
We could have short and medium haul ag airliners with no need for runways, if the Americans had not made our government scrap all the developments.
As, I said, this may (may not) holds true for the U.K. - dunno
But it´s hard to see why others would not pursue it.
It´s a bit hard to see that the Chinese or Russian governments, would be too concerned with waht the Americans may wish.
Or is this an "global helicopter industry" conspiracy?
That´s a bit hard to believe - but maybe you are right. I think, as with any other technical concept it has it´s advantages and it´s disadventages - it´s horses for courses. Don´t you think?
On a more technical level.
What´s the limitation for max. velocity of the autogyros? Rotor integrity?
As I see it, there is a limit to max. speeds with this type of aircraft, similar to helicopters.
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
Major General
Miao Pengsheng
25 Lyndhurst Road
London NW3 5PA
Dear Sir:
I represent Wallis Autogyros, based in the East of England.
In December 2002, we were asked by Woecheong Holdings Ltd, in Hong Kong, to supply details of our aircraft to meet an order of 10 machines from the Chinese Public (Police) Bureau, for anti-terrorist tasking. At that time we were unable to reply because of certain restrictions placed on us by our confidential activities. We also have a policy not to deal with such matters through commercial intermediaries, preferring to deal with your government offices direct.
Sir, we have available a fully proven aviation system using an aircraft that is far superior to others of similar type. It has been developed over more than 40 years and is the only autogyro in existence to have been awarded a UK Certificate of Airworthiness. The aircraft has successfully completed all the roles for which it was designed (including ant-tank) and can out fly all current helicopter gun ships. It is extremely inexpensive to manufacture and the pilot training and tasking we have developed, makes it ideal for the new post cold war theatres of operation. I have enclosed details of the extensive tasking in which it excels and I hope this will prove to you that it can out perform other aircraft in such roles.
The Republic of China is a very large land mass and I firmly believe that this aviation system would give a new dimension to your governments operational requirements
We have never sold the aircraft for private fun flying and certain aerodynamic features remain exclusively with Wallis Aviation. We are as yet unsure as to how we wish to proceed with the release of our aircraft for use outside the UK. We do not offer for sale aircraft units but I am prepared to negotiate in confidence, to establish the full system including, manufacture, training and ongoing development.
This communication and any future communication, to be undertaken respectfully.
Under full confidentiality.
Mr M Bell
Head of Design and Production Standards Division
Safety Regulation Group
Civil Aviation Authority
Aviation House
Gatwick Airport South
West Sussex
RH6 0YR
26 May 2003
Dear Sir
WALLIS AUTOGYROS – CERTIFICATE OF AIRWORTHINESS
I am writing to you on behalf of Wing Commander Ken Wallis who, as I am sure you appreciate, has been building his own autogyros since the early 1960s. Since our aim is to put the WA 116 autogyro into production as soon as possible, we are seeking to obtain a Certificate of Airworthiness for the aircraft. I am writing to seek your help in that process.
Over the last few months we have been having talks with Lotus, the Norfolk car manufacturer, who have shown an interest in becoming involved. Until Lotus make a decision, they are anxious that their interest should not become common knowledge. However, I am sure that they will not object to my writing since Alastair Maxwell has already received a letter from Jonathan Bright of Lotus. If Lotus did decide to go ahead, it would initially be for two autogyros to use for marketing purposes. Further production would follow if a potentially sound market were identified. Keith Simpson MP, Shadow Minister for Defence, and Richard Bacon, MP for South Norfolk, have both shown an interest.
On 9 May 2003 I discussed the project at the CAA with Alastair Maxwell. Taking what he described as a realistic stance, Alastair explained that a specification for a C of A for the autogyro does not exist at present and that it could take years to produce one. He referred to a number of publications and we discussed the possibility of combining elements from them. However, he thought there might be slightly more rapid progress if Ken Wallis and I wrote a draft specification. He also explained that, in view of the roles we anticipate the WA 116 will undertake, a Permit to Fly would be inadequate. I have attached a brief synopsis of the Wallis autogyros.
Having discussed the project with Alstair, I left feeling rather despondent although no less determined to continue with our efforts. I reported back briefly to Richard Bacon, who has asked to be kept informed of progress, and then discussed the matter with Ken. I am writing to you at this point to seek a second opinion on how we might pursue the issue and because Ken has now provided me with further information.
In the past Ken has twice come close to getting the aircraft into production: once with Beagle and later with Vinten. On both occasions the aircraft was subject to considerable engineering and flight-testing and all the documentary evidence of the testing programmes and the success of the aircraft is retained by Ken Wallis. These documents, which can be inspected at any time, clearly demonstrate the integrity of the design and of the performance characteristics of the aircraft.
This is probably not the right point for me to detail all the tests and their results but we would welcome the opportunity to do so as soon as possible. It is difficult to think of any aspect of the aircraft that has not been examined including strain-gauging tests, rotor tests, innumerable flight tests and a servicing investigation test by Swanton Morley. The flight test reports, apart from a few recommendations that have long been addressed, commend the aircraft for its ease of handling and for its ability to operate under conditions that would prohibit the operation of any other light aircraft. When Beagle were planning to put the aircraft into production, the Air Registration Board (ARB) issued the aircraft with a special category Certificate of Airworthiness, only the engine not receiving any form of approval. The last point is now irrelevant since we are considering using either the Limbach 2400 or a Jabiru.
I cannot pretend to have much knowledge of aircraft design and production specifications but I find it strange that the ARB clearly had a specification when it issued the Certificate but that the CAA does not have one. The current WA 116 is almost identical to the one certified, with the exception of one or two improvements.
In conclusion, I seek your advice in resolving our current predicament. We appear to have most of the answers but we do not know what the questions are. Is it really the best approach for us to draft the specification or would it not be better to use the original ARB specification as a draft to be updated?
747heavy said: On a more technical level.
What´s the limitation for max. velocity of the autogyros? Rotor integrity?
As I see it, there is a limit to max. speeds with this type of aircraft, similar to helicopters.
Maximum velocity is far higher than a helicopter.
A helicopter has a powered unstable rotor that is angled forward in level flight.
An autogyro has an unpowered stable rotor that is angled backward in level flight.
The autogyro has similar aerodynamic limits to airspeed as a fixed wing aircraft.
In theory it should be possible to construct a supersonic unpowered rotor.
Of course rotor rpm and rotor tip speed has a direct effect on drag and integrity.
so whats the speed record for an autogyro then? - just out of curiousity, not to start another argument.
I would think, that rotor/propeller tips approaching supersonic speed beeing a problem.
What´s the relation/ratio between forward velocity (of the AG) and rotor rpm?
Thx
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
