Here's one for you...an acquaintance of mine bought a used - home built helicopter froma guy in Florida.....quite small but NOT a gyrocopter....one seat in the cockpit. No reg numbers or anything. He says he can fly it without any license and it doesn't need to be registered since it only has space for one person (the "pilot").....I wouldn't go up ten feet in it....and he plans to "fly" it....without any real rotorcraft training.....I'll get photos posted on this when I get some.
I think instead of a flight plan he should just call 911 BEFORE he takes off.......any thoughts??

natural selection???

That seems like a really bad idea, I hope it goes well for him.

If it qualifies as a Part 103 ultralight, he's correct. He can fly it with no pilot certificate and kill himself in the process if he so wishes.

I'd put him out of his misery though before he damages someone else's property without liability insurance.

Well I could be a brain surgeon because I seen it once on a tv show.

Not a good idea. Try and talk him out of it, even if he is just and aquaintance. If he does try, go take a video camera, youtube needs more material.

Fly safe, fly smart, don't be that guy.

Bub

The one you are talking about is a part 103 ultralight. The people in Fla. that build it heavily recommend flight instruction and I believe will discount the price of the instruction from the helicopter. I believe the company is based out of Canada. I would love to have / fly one, but I have about 3,500 hours rotorcraft time and wouldn't fly it until after someone familiar with the design had flown it and pronounced it airworthy.
I think this is a link to an article about it. I believe it's called a mosquito helicopter http://www.ultralightflyer.com/airventu ... opter.html

I have a cousin who's always been interested in aviation, but he always has an excuse about why he can't pursue his ticket. He made a comment to me once about getting an ultralight cuz "you don't need to take any lessons". I told him no, with ultralights you didn't need a license-- big difference. Don't know if he believes me or not. Lotsa people been killed teaching themselves how to fly. I would think it's about 100X worse if it's a helo.

Eric

The video link John posted has been around for some time and I laugh every time I hear someone tell hog to get away from it. The helicopter was a Hughes 269 or 300 bought from the Army when they got rid of them as a primary trainer. It is the same type I learned to fly in the Army. I had quite a bit of flying time before that and even though not licensed, I could fly a 182, 210 or M20 quite well because my father owned them when I was growing up.
Anyway when it came time to hover the helicopter, the instructor would give me the controls with it in a stabilized hover. Immedately upon him releasing the controls it would start an oscillation that would get worse until he would take the controls back. I could handle any two of the controls, but all three would put me way over my head. I know that some people have taught themselves to fly a helicopter, but I can tell you that I would have had no chance at all.

so I got a much better look at it in the mill parking lot and will post a couple pics later. Its a Scorpion 133, which I find online has a GW of about 1300# empty...which I'm pretty sure makes it a non-ultralight.....maybe an "experimental" certification?
has a supposed ceiling of 10,000 feet and a cruise speed of 75 knots...

owner says he'll just take the second seat out and only fly alone....I believe a Scorpion does need to be registered and the pilot licensed...comments???

Yes they need to be registered, yes he needs a license, yes he's most likely going to get hurt or killed if he tries to do it on his own...
JH

My mom used to wear a t-shirt that said "stupid people shouldn't breed". Evidently this guy falls in this category. How do people use a brain to form these thoughts together as an idea that is good?

Make sure somebody has a video camera. As long as he doesn't kill himsef, it coud be funny.

And this year's nominees for the Darwin Award are....

But seriously, do get a video of this and post ASAP. Despite my strong desires to see this on video, I do hope better sense does prevail.

The Scorpion 133 is NOT in the ultralight catagory and he is WAY off-base thinking he doesn't need a license to fly this thing. It is a very old design from the company that is now Rotoway. Originally these copters used an Evinrude outboard motor.
I would consider giving him a good talking to and tell him you may contact the authorities if he tries to fly it without instruction. I'm not the type that would do that but maybe try and scare him a bit. It is his life and he can end it if he wants but what about an innocent bystander!
Hopefully this helicopter has some repairs that need to be done and he will never get around to getting it flying.

I had the unique pleasure of attending the autopsy of a man who crashed a similar helicopter. He knew how to fly it, but he did his own maintainance and apparently he didn't own a torque wrench. I've seen a lot of dead people, but I've never seen anyone as dead as this guy. His head was completely gone, and EVERY major organ in his body was ruptured from the impact. His legs and pelvis were broken in a dozen places, and he was burnt.

To top it off, he crashed on a mans' house, and while the homeowner got out, the house burned to the foundation. If someone is dumb enough to teach themselves to fly, they need to trailer the 'copter out to a very empty part of the world so they can just kill themselves, not a bunch of other people too.

Is the scorpion the one that used 4 or 5 fan belts to drive the tail rotor?

All the helicopters made by those folks until recently have used three VERY long v-belts to drive the tail rotor. That has always looked to me to be the weak link on these otherwise pretty well designed aircraft.

As a side note, their newest offering has a tail rotor driven by a shaft, so apparently I'm not the only one who was a little taken aback by the multiple v-belts driving the tail rotor gearbox.

They now make pretty nice looking machines, and I know at least two fairly high time helicopter pilots who've flown the newest ones and spoke pretty highly of them, compared to a Robinson R22.

The Scorpion was the beginning, though.

As a French experimental test pilot once told me about a kit built turboprop seaplane: "How can I say zees? Eef theese aircraft was in flight, I would not stand under eet."

MTV

well I have the photos, can't seem to get them to download to this site....I can send them to someone via yahoo email and maybe someone else can post them for us????? thanks ( [email protected])

jmtgt wrote:Here is what happens when you try to fly a helicopter with out instruction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo82pnyMR44

John

I think the following is the accident report for this

NTSB Identification: LAX87LA190 .
The docket is stored on NTSB microfiche number 35617.
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Sunday, April 26, 1987 in RUBIDOUX, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 2/17/1989
Aircraft: HUGHES 269B, registration: N101DN
Injuries: 1 Minor.

A HUGHES 269B WENT OUT OF CONTROL AND COLLIDED WITH THE GROUND DURING A T/O TO A HOVER. THE PILOT HAD PURCHASED THE AIRCRAFT RECENTLY AND WAS LEARNING TO FLY IT. HE WAS SCHEDULED FOR HIS FIRST FLIGHT LESSON ON THE DAY OF THE ACCIDENT. THE CFI REPORTED THAT HE HAD TOLD THE STUDENT PILOT TO WAIT FOR HIM AND NOT TO TOUCH ANYTHING. WHILE WAITING FOR THE FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR, THE NON ROTORCRAFT RATED STUDENT PILOT STARTED THE AIRCRAFT, RAN IT UP TO FULL RPM, AND THEN BEGAN TO INCREASE THE COLLECTIVE PITCH CONTROL. THE HELICOPTER CLIMBED VERTICALLY TO A HIGH HOVER AND THE PILOT LOST CONTROL. THE PILOT STATED THAT HE HAD NOT RELEASED THE CYCLIC FRICTION BEFORE BECOMING AIRBORNE. THE PILOT INDICATED HE HAD ABOUT500 HOURS OF FLIGHT TIME BUT DID NOT SPECIFY THE TYPE AND NO SUBSTANTIATION OF THE TIME COULD BE MADE.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
DIRECTIONAL CONTROL..NOT MAINTAINED..DUAL STUDENT
JUDGMENT..POOR..DUAL STUDENT
VERTICAL TAKEOFF..UNCONTROLLED..DUAL STUDENT
INSTRUCTIONS,WRITTEN/VERBAL..DISREGARDED..DUAL STUDENT

[quote="mtv"]All the helicopters made by those folks until recently have used three VERY long v-belts to drive the tail rotor. That has always looked to me to be the weak link on these otherwise pretty well designed aircraft
MTV[/quote]

Actually, there is nothing inherently wrong with using v-belts to drive. Ag machines have been using them for decades and that is a very tough environment to design for. Also, as AH64 can tell you, the Hughes 269 drove the tail rotor with several "V" belts. Not ones you can buy at your John Deere dealer, to be sure, but still V belts. It was designed to run with a good percentage of them broken.

I was also in a Hughes 530 (actually still a 500 with an experimental ticket) in a big open field and the pilot had it in a stable hover and let me have it. All I can say is it's a good thing it was a big field and I already had a number of hours in fixed wing stuff. I can't imagine anybody being able to learn to hover a helicopter by themselves without some very exciting times.

Wayne

Wayne

Wayne,
The little Hughes, now Schwitzer had I believe 5 V belts that drove the main transmission, which meant that V belts drove the whole thing. The tailrotor was shaft driven off of the main transmission. All 5 belts went around two drive pulleys and one idler pulley tightned them to engage the engine to the transmission just like a riding mower engages the mower deck. It would I beleve operate with three belts broken.
The Scorpion differs in that the belts are driven one after the other on idler shafts. If one breaks then the drive to the tailrotor is severed. After a while any helicopter pilot always knows exactly where his tail is. You see that little tailrotor is fragile and vital. It's not like an engine failure in a fixed wing, you don't loose power, you lose control. At low speeds about the only option a helicopter pilot has is to decouple the engine "autorotate" in the event of a tailrotor failure. I don't want to have to rely on multiple V belts to drive my tailrotor. Maybe they are reliable, but I'm old fashioned, if V belts are what's holding me up, I want some redundancy.


LOW FLIGHT

Oh, I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth
And hovered out of ground effect on semi-rigid blades;
Earthward I've auto'ed,
and met the rising brush
Of non-paved terrain - and done a thousand things
You would never care to -
skidded and drooped and flared
Low in the heat-soaked roar.
Confined there,
I've chased the earthbound traffic, and lost
The race to insignificant headwinds.
Forward, and a little up, in ground effect
I've topped the General's hedge with drooping turns
Where never Skyhawk, or even Phantom flew.
And, shaking and pulling collective, I've lumbered
The low trespassed halls of Victor Airways,
Put out my hand, and touched a tree.

I think it's normal for helicopter pilots to gravitate to ag aviation and the type of flying we BCP types love. If I could afford it I would still be flying rotary wing. You guy's have a lot in common with "rotorheads".