Mosquito Helicopter thoughts?

marcoseddi

marcoseddi

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
1,375
Location
Long Branch NJ
Display Name
Display name:
marc
Hi Guys,

Watching Wealth tv Boys Toys and they were showing the Mosquito Helicopter, anybody seen one of these in persons, flown in one? Any thoughts I wanted to get my heli license although at 350 an hour in NJ its hard to pull off.. This is possibly an option. Although dont know if they have 2 seaters or not. And when you search online their website hasnt been updated since 06" kind of odd.
 
marcoseddi said:
Hi Guys,

Watching Wealth tv Boys Toys and they were showing the Mosquito Helicopter, anybody seen one of these in persons, flown in one? Any thoughts I wanted to get my heli license although at 350 an hour in NJ its hard to pull off.. This is possibly an option. Although dont know if they have 2 seaters or not. And when you search online their website hasnt been updated since 06" kind of odd.
Click to expand...

Run away. Quickly.
 
There is no cheap way to own a helicopter. You are better off spending energy on making more money rather then figuring out a cheap helo option.
Doesnt have the ego factor but as a former helo cfi my ride in a powered parachute was a similar visual experience, low, slow, and outstanding visibility.
Make mpre and buy a real one or settle with an airplane.
 
No 2 place Mosquito. As the man said No cheap helicopters ,$30.000 to $160,000 you can get a Brantley or other small helicopter for the money, Rotorway,Jet Exec,Safari, Helicycle,Mosquito, Rotormouse,and others . Fun to tinker with but costs $$$ Go to the Rotorywing forum, thats where you will find the information.
 
A friend of mine spends about six months a year at the mosquito factory. He started building the helicopter but has stayed on to help rewrite their assembly manual and play with their CNC machine.

They're single seaters and pretty reasonable from all I can see. My buddy is still casting around what engine he wants to use (he's ruled out the turbines which some people ARE using).
 
I think it looks like a hoot to fly. But I also enjoy watching those who have no business in them, try and fly it on you tube.
 
Low mass rotor + belt drive + 2 stroke engine, is a bit beyond my pucker factor. I've seen them fly around the pattern at OSH, but AFAIK, every one of them came in and went out on a trailer. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
 
I have anti-helicopter and anti-two stroke biases.

Combine the two and I'm terrified.

Honestly, my experience as an observer of significant 2 stroke ultralight activity at my home field is that all of the guys with more than a couple hundred hours have suffered engine failures. One guy has about 1,500 hours and averages an engine failure about every 300 hours.

My other experience is watching Rotorway Exec owners turn wrenches for 10 hours for every flight hour and trailer their helicopters to fly-in's under a hundred miles away.

No way I'd do a 2 stroke, homebuilt helicopter. You're stacking too many things against yourself.
 
Actually I'm not much of two stroke fan but I will say that the mosquito performs hovering autorotations better than a UH-1H Huey. Insofar as two place machines go I'd have absolutely no problem with a Safari. The problem with buying a used factory built machine is the time limited components and the maintenance will eat you alive. If you go EAB YOU are now the maintenance side of the equation and suddenly things become more affordable.
 
Art VanDelay said:
Actually I'm not much of two stroke fan but I will say that the mosquito performs hovering autorotations better than a UH-1H Huey.
Click to expand...

But the Huey has a turbine engine (or two) and a gearbox that had a heck of a lot of engineering effort and maturation in the field behind it.

The MTBF between the two powertrains is <probably> orders of magnitude different.
 
Two strokes are so simple, they should be more reliable than a four stroke
 
Art VanDelay said:
Actually I'm not much of two stroke fan but I will say that the mosquito performs hovering autorotations better than a UH-1H Huey..
Click to expand...

Hmmm, having done a few in UH-1s and none in the Mosquito this is rather interesting. I"m guessing that the rotor freewheels above the belt drive in case of engine failure? I can't see any way to de-clutch the drive system and auto without that.
 
docmirror said:
Hmmm, having done a few in UH-1s and none in the Mosquito this is rather interesting. I"m guessing that the rotor freewheels above the belt drive in case of engine failure? I can't see any way to de-clutch the drive system and auto without that.
Click to expand...

Hey, I'm one of Mother Rucker's children too ! 8708 Red Flight. Look, I wanted to hate this little goofy helicopter just as much as the next guy but I tell you - if it can do auto's like this how bad can it be ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_W_5lo_trDI
 
Sorry, but he gooses it at about 2-3 feet. Still, that looks pretty good. It wasn't as exciting as I thought it would be.

Here's another one. It looks rather stable. Maybe I take back what I said about my concerns of the low mass rotor. Maybe it's got weights out at the end of the blades. I guess I could do that pretty well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQrrNR-3aYc

BTW, he does mention the freewheeling clutch before takeoff. Its one of the pre-take off checks to roll off the throttle and insure the rotor maintains it's RPM.
 
I was on enough helo flights in the Air Force to cure me. A helicopter is made of thousands of parts all trying to disconnect from each other all the time.
 
tmyers said:
I was on enough helo flights in the Air Force to cure me. A helicopter is made of thousands of parts all trying to disconnect from each other all the time.
Click to expand...

"Ga-yuck, ga-yuck, ga-yuck" Gee, I NEVER heard that one before.
 
docmirror said:
Low mass rotor + belt drive + 2 stroke engine, is a bit beyond my pucker factor. I've seen them fly around the pattern at OSH, but AFAIK, every one of them came in and went out on a trailer. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
Click to expand...

They've shoved a bunch of different engines in the thing. You are not stuck with a two stroke.

The thing is legitimately an ultralight in it's minimal configuration. Seeing how it is 900 NM from Trenton, FL to Oshkosh, you're talking about 16 hours flying in a plane with an endurance of about 2 hours + reserve.
Darn few rotorcraft or ultralights arrive at Oshkosh any other way than being trucked in.
 
flyingron said:
They've shoved a bunch of different engines in the thing. You are not stuck with a two stroke.

The thing is legitimately an ultralight in it's minimal configuration. Seeing how it is 900 NM from Trenton, FL to Oshkosh, you're talking about 16 hours flying in a plane with an endurance of about 2 hours + reserve.
Darn few rotorcraft or ultralights arrive at Oshkosh any other way than being trucked in.
Click to expand...

Not sure you're make a case for, or against one. After looking at a few autos online, it's not as bad a craft as I first thought. Still beyond my limits of acceptable risk, but it's interesting. And yeah - 18 hours of that high pitched 'gheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheegheeghee' is reason to trailer it in.
 
I filed it in the "Nice to have if I ever had a big Ranch or Farm" category. Pretty impractical for me otherwise - it's not like you could go airport to airport and get two cycle gas.
 
dell30rb said:
Two strokes are so simple, they should be more reliable than a four stroke
Click to expand...

Simple does not necessarily mean more reliable. They generate more hp per pound, which means more heat, which means more stress from both heat and various pressures and higher RPM, so they tend to fail more often.

Dan
 
marcoseddi said:
Why do you say that?
Click to expand...

Simple rule on non certified helicopters: Never hover any higher than you are willing to fall.

Helicopters are not like airplanes. There are many forces acting upon each and every component that requires exacting specification and tolerances. The certified ships have had thousands of hours of engineering, structural DT and NDT to a proven reliability.

After spending years flying and working on helos I have seen enough that makes me avoid some of the contraptions called "helicopters" the home-builders have tried to put out.

With that being said, the Safari and the Rotorway are the only two EAB's that come close, and even those ships given a skilled craftsman and a few mods will make an descent helicopter. But even those two, properly built and maintained are not cheap to operate.
 
What about the Helicycle? I've heard nothing but good things about it.
 
RotorAndWing said:
OK. Let's ask the designer.......Oh wait, he died flying his........:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

BJ died because he impacted the water. It was never determined if he was at fault or a structural failure. To say there is a flaw in the design without proof would be pure speculation. Everything written about the man suggests he was a brilliant aircraft designer.
 
Velocity173 said:
BJ died because he impacted the water. It was never determined if he was at fault or a structural failure. To say there is a flaw in the design without proof would be pure speculation.
Click to expand...

And vice versa. We'll never know. :dunno:

Velocity173 said:
Everything written about the man suggests he was a brilliant aircraft designer.
Click to expand...

Hehehe......Like the belt driven tail rotor design? And the moveable weight from the front skid to the tail? And lets not forget that fine engine the "brilliant" engineer designed for the Rotorway.......:rofl:
 
From Frank Robinson:
"BJ was one of the most creative and effective designers I've known, across the field."

"He was a genius in his field-extraodinary for someone who didn't have formal academic engineering training."

But hey, what does Frank know about aircraft design.
 
Velocity173 said:
From Frank Robinson:
"BJ was one of the most creative and effective designers I've known, across the field."

"He was a genius in his field-extraodinary for someone who didn't have formal academic engineering training."

But hey, what does Frank know about aircraft design.
Click to expand...

Like I said, just look at the belt driven tail rotor. Wonder why Frank Robinson didn't use that concept in the R-22/44/66? How about that marvel of an engine? Again, why didn't Frank adapt one to his helicopters?

BJ had some good ideas, but he also had some that were sub par (and implemented into his design).
 
dell30rb said:
Two strokes are so simple, they should be more reliable than a four stroke
Click to expand...
The expert opinion on the topic that I received in the local ultralight club is that the high failure rate was true, but mostly related to ignition, and there was a marked progress in recent decades. Rotax started making nice 2-strokes and then got rid of the whole line. Maybe they became too good and people weren't buying as many :)
 
I had a chance to look at one of these "helicopters", at an airshow. As a guy who has witnessed almost every trick a hello can pull on you I can only say these are the perfect machine to equip the Iranian Air Force. I wouldn't touch one. :nono:
 
zaitcev said:
The expert opinion on the topic that I received in the local ultralight club is that the high failure rate was true, but mostly related to ignition, and there was a marked progress in recent decades. Rotax started making nice 2-strokes and then got rid of the whole line. Maybe they became too good and people weren't buying as many :)
Click to expand...

Piston seizures are the problem I always hear about. That is an engine mismanagement issue - a failure to adequately warm up the engine, as I understand. Operatior error or not, it points out that these engines are more difficult to keep happy.
 
kyleb said:
Piston seizures are the problem I always hear about.
Click to expand...
Strange, I haven't heard of such. Our 2nd more common cause after ignition is fuel supply failure by not having electic pump.
 
Velocity173 said:
What about the Helicycle? I've heard nothing but good things about it.
Click to expand...

My neighbor had a turbine helicycle. He used to fly it around for fun. Problem for him (ex-Viet Nam helicopter pilot): one seat, no range. It was fun to tool around the airpark, but now he's building an AIRPLANE that he and his wife can actually go somewhere in.
 
zaitcev said:
Strange, I haven't heard of such. Our 2nd more common cause after ignition is fuel supply failure by not having electic pump.
Click to expand...

The Mini500's had a bunch of them sieze because they ran the Rotax 582's in the thing way over spec.

Two strokes are less forgiving of crappy maintenance that these uncertified aircraft are usually subject to. Even in the non-aviation community two stroke siezures are common. Improper oil addition, air leaks allowing the thing to run too lean, bad cylinder maintenance all pile up to kill them. Although good maintenance they can run for a long time. We have 2 stroke scooters that get run the hell out of during Airventure for two weeks, are serviced, and put away for the other 50 months of the year and I've yet to see one of those fail.

You might want to ask Barnaby Wainfan what he thinks about 2 strokes :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top