Hi All:
Whirly is correct, they are fabulous machines if correctly designed and built and you are properly trained and use good flying judgement.
The Gyroplane is very different from a helicopter and the physics of gyro flight has some very real limits the most important of which is vertical thrust line and proper stabalizing devices such as an effective verticle fin and rudder. Also there "must" be an effective horizontal stabalizer.
The RAF 2000 in its stock configuration has a vertical thrust offset of approx. 10 inches above the vertical center of gravity. It also has no horizontal stabalizer. Therefore it is very unstable in pitch and moderately unstable in yaw.
A properly designed Gyroplane is much more able to contend with rough air than a light airplane due to the rotor vs. wing flight characteristics
For anyone wishing to learn more about Gyroplanes go to <a href="http://www.rotorcraft.com" target="_blank">www.rotorcraft.com</a> there you can find everything you need to learn about Gyroplanes.
Roger Savage is another excellent contact and he may have hit on Whirly but he didn't hit on me so there. <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> ( maybe she has something I don't ) <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
By the way I own a RAF 2000 and am redesigning it for safety reasons. I also hold a U.S.A. Commercial Gyroplane License among other trivia.. .................. .
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no.