• Pitcairn Mailwing Aircraft
• Pitcairn Autogyro History
• Pitcairn Aircraft

Xenon XLC2 Gyrocopter. First of all, the flight model of this add-on isn't exactly like the real thing; it's better. To date, the real Xenon gyro isn't able to do true VTOL, nor is it able to perform zero-airspeed hovering or jump-takeoffs. But this is expected to change in the near future, like already seen in e.g. The Carter Gyro Demonstrator. By Glenn Orlosky. FS2004 Pitcairn PCA-2 XOP-1 Fix, for use with PCA2.ZIP. These files correct two minor errors that crept into the release copy of the Pitcairn PCA-2 / XOP-1 autogyro. A new aircraft.cfg file will ma. Xenon XLC2 Gyrocopter. First of all, the flight model of this add-on isn't exactly like the real thing; it's better. To date, the real Xenon gyro isn't able to do true VTOL, nor is it able to perform zero-airspeed hovering or jump-takeoffs. But this is expected to change in the near future, like already seen in e.g. The Carter Gyro Demonstrator. By Glenn Orlosky.

Autogiros are aircraft that use a propeller to provide thrust and an unpowered rotor to provide lift through autorotation. As the aircraft moves forward, whether pushed or pulled by its propeller, the rotor above rotates from its interaction with the air. The rotor's moving airfoils then provide additional lift. Autogiros were invented in the 1920s by Juan de la Cierva, a Spanish engineer.

They are also called 'gyrocopters' and 'gyroplanes.' Dictionary.Com says 'autogyro' was originally a trademark, but it doesn't say who owned it. The original Spanish spelling is 'autogiro,' which is often used in reference to the Pitcairn autogiros. 'Autogyro' is a spelling commonly used in English.

The Pitcairn autogiros were manufactured in the United States during the 1920s and 1930s by Pitcairn Aircraft Company under license from Cierva. The Pitcairn models used the forward pulling propeller common in the 1920s and 1930s. Later autogiros by other manufacturers used pusher propellers mounted behind the cockpit.

These unique aircraft generally have limited applications because of their aerodynamics. They are generally small, carry only a few passengers, and have short ranges and endurances. For example, the stated range of the PCA-2 was 290 nautical miles, maximum speed was 120 knots, and ceiling was 15,000 feet. It held one pilot and two passengers in open cockpits. The Pitcairn models were used for promotional purposes by Beech-Nut Food Company and the Champion Spark Plug Company in the 1920s and 1930s because of the attention they drew.

World-famous aviator Amelia Earhart set an altitude record of 18,415 feet in a PCA-2 in April 1931. Her accomplishment was later surpassed by Lewis Yancey who climbed to 21,500 feet in a PCA-2. The Detroit News used a PCA-2 as a news aircraft in 1931 because of its unique abilities to fly well at low altitude, land and take off from small airstrips, and semi-hover for good camera shots. Today's news helicopters are rooted in this concept. An autogiro was used in the 1967 James Bond film, You Only Live Twice.

Golden Age Simulation's Pitcairn Autogiro

Two models are offered: The PA-18 and the PCA-2. The most obvious external differences between the two are: 1) the tail assemblies, 2) engines, 3) windscreens, 4) tail wheels , and 5) rotor assemblies, as can be seen in the screen shots. The PA-18 has three fins, one large in the center and two smaller to each side. The PCA-2 has one fin. The PA-18 engine has five cylinders; the PCA-2 has nine. The PA-18 has a wheel at the tail; the PCA-2 has a metal skid at the tail. Performance characteristics differ, also. The PA-18 is less powerful than the PCA-2. It is therefore slower, and it has a shorter range and a lower ceiling.

Golden Age Simulations says the Pitcairn PA-18 and PCA-2 were designed from the ground up as FSX-native aircraft. The PCA-2 is not an upgrade of its previously released model for FS2004. 'It was essentially taken apart and put back together to be fully compatible for FSX,' Golden Age says. They also say 'Golden Age Simulations is the only developer to attempt to simulate in any fashion an autogiro from the golden age.'

Because Microsoft Flight Simulator® (MSFS) does not support a propeller-driven aircraft combined with a rotor-driven aircraft, Golden Age Simulations tinkered with the flight modeling and instruments to enable the rotor to work simultaneously with the propeller. Details are explained in the manual accompanying this product.

Visual Features

The Pitcairn Autogiros by GAS are realistic compared with real-world photos I found on the Internet. All dimensions and details appear true to the photos. The developer says all its liveries are based on real-world aircraft and photos. Their renditions of Beech-Nut, Champion Spark Plugs, Detroit News, and Pitcairn liveries are realistic compared with real-world photos I found. The Hughes Rocketeer model is based on the autogiro flown by the Howard Hughes character in the 1991 Disney movie 'The Rocketeer.' The Pennzoil model is based on an aircraft flown by Johnny Miller, a famed aviator of the day who is described as a 'gyroplane icon' (not to be confused with a professional golfer of the same name). There are many other liveries of this old aircraft, so we need not expect to match all real-world photos to GAS's renditions.

Pitcairn Autogiro's Interiors

Two cockpits are used, one for the PA-18 and another for the PCA-2. The most obvious differences are the colors and types of controls, as seen in the screen shots. The PA-18 is gray, and the PCA-2 is green. The instrument panels differ slightly as well. Golden Age Simulations referred me to websites with photos of the cockpits for comparison, and they appear accurate.

Pitcairn Autogiro Instruments

This aircraft has two 2D standard instrument panels and two 3D virtual panels, one for the PA-18 and another for the PCA-2.

The instrument panels have most of the instruments and gauges that today's aviators and flight simmers are familiar with. As with airspeed indicators of the period, this ASI reports in miles per hour instead of knots.

The PA-18 has no compass, and neither model has an attitude indicator. Lack of these instruments would preclude flying at night away from urban lights needed for horizon and directional reference. The only avionics are a communication radio and a Garmin 295 hand-held GPS device. There are no navigation radios and no navigation instruments. This would eliminate any flights in instrument meteorological conditions, i.e. instrument flight rules. The GPS is not period, of course, as there was no such system in the 1920s and 1930s.

Both instrument panels appear realistic compared with photos found on the Internet. 'The PA-18 is extensively documented,' the developer said, 'but in our case additional instruments are added to enhance the sim pilots experience.'

Popup windows display the radio stack: (which contains only a communication radio), the GPS device, and a hand-held watch.

Clarity of the instruments is very good, but labels on some switches and controls are difficult to read.

The 2D panel did not display all the instruments. In response to my question, the developer said 'The 2D panel is a hold over from the FS2004 version and should have been deleted. That said, the owner could easily make a 2D panel if provided.' Some flight simmers like 2D panels, and others don't use them.

Performance Specifications

The two models have very different performance characteristics, as seen in the following table.

The Documents

Golden Age Simulations provides two documents for using this product and simulating flight in this autogiro.

• Checklists: A checklist explains the startup procedure, taxi and ground operations, and take-off and landing procedures. Some of it is in narrative format, and some is in tabular format.


• Manual: An eight-page manual with annotated screen shots explains how to install and use the product, and it provides historical background about the aircraft. The manual also explains special modeling methods that enable the aircraft to simulate flight with a propeller and rotor, which FSX was not designed to handle.


• Videos: Additionally, Golden Age provides links for two videos on YouTube that explain flying the Pitcairn autogiros.

Pitcairn Autogiro Performance

Golden Age Simulations says flight modeling for both of its Pitcairn autogiros is based on 'the book the Windmill airplane and for the PA-18 the interview done by EAA with the pilot that flew it.'

Guidance from GAS for flying this aircraft is adequate but not detailed. As a result, some trial and error is involved. My flight tests are novel for this reason and because autogiros are so unusual in the real world and MSFS.

For my flight tests, I used Willow Grove Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base (KNXX) in Willow Grove, Pennsylvania, U.S.A. This is the descendant of Pitcairn Field, where Pitcairn Aircraft Company manufactured and tested its aircraft until selling the field to the United States Navy in 1942. Field elevation is 335 feet. The Navy vacated the airfield in the spring of 2011, and it is now operated by the Pennsylvania Air National Guard under the name 'Willow Grove Air National Guard Base.' The name of this airfield in FSX is 'Willow Grove NAS JRB.' I also used standard atmosphere and GAS's default weights, which are slightly less than maximum in both models. Most of that weight is fuel because the pilot weighs only 170 pounds.

Starting: I began the simulation with the engine off and initiated the startup sequence with CTRL/E. If the engine is running when this aircraft loads, it will move forward until brakes are applied. After starting the engines, I engaged the parking brake to keep the aircraft stable while I examined the cockpit and instruments. Idle-engine RPMs were 600 in the PA-18 and 700 in the PCA-2. The rotor spins while the aircraft is stationary even though it is supposedly powered by wind from forward motion. Golden Age Simulations says the propwash moves the rotor. Indeed, the rotor stops when the engine is stopped.

Taxiing: The checklist advises taxiing no faster than 10 MPH to keep the rotor from providing unwanted lift. About 700 RPMs will enable such taxiing in the PA-18 and about 1,000 in the PCA-2. Taxiing to a runway at 10 MPH can be a long procedure. The checklist also recommends engaging the rotor clutch to keep it from spinning during taxiing, which would enable a faster pace. The rotor continues spinning visually even when the brake and/or clutch are engaged and the effects are nullified due to the adaptation of FSX for autogiro aircraft.

Pitcairn Mailwing Aircraft

Taking Off: No power levels are specified for taking off, but the checklist says the aircraft will lift off at about 50 MPH. Full throttle produces 1,800 RPMs in the PA-18 and the PCA-2. Under the default weights, at this airport, and under these weather conditions, the PA-18 lifted off at 50 MPH, and the PCA-2 lifted off at 40 MPH. Neither model uses much distance for its take-off roll because of the rotor's added lift. The checklist says they require 100 feet for take-off distance, and both models lifted off after rolling just a few aircraft lengths.

Climbing: With a few elevator adjustments, I was able to make the PA-18 climb comfortably at 75 miles per hour and 950 feet per minute. At this rate, it would take 12 to 13 minutes to reach its specified ceiling of 12,000 feet from Willow Grove's 335-foot elevation. But its vertical speed diminished with altitude &#8212 to 800 FPM at 5,000 feet, 600 FPM at 8,000 feet, and 400 FPM at 10,000 &#8212 while maintaining its 75-mph indicated airspeed. Consequently, reaching maximum altitude took closer to 20 minutes.

Flying the PCA-2 requires the additional step of moving the rotor brake handle to the 9 o'clock position. Otherwise, the aircraft will not fly normally. The PCA-2 is configured with 'hidden flaps' that simulate drag from the unpowered rotor. Consequently, it will fly as though flaps were deflected, resulting in very slow flight and little altitude gain, unless this step is performed. This required procedure is documented in the manual.

The PCA-2 model is also different because of its greater power. With maximum throttle and 1,800 RPMs, it climbed 500 FPM at 90 MPH, 1,000 FPM at 85 MPH, and 1,500 FPM at 75 MPH. Thus, it can climb at various speeds at the pilot's discretion. As with the PA-18, these speeds diminished with altitude, resulting in a vertical speed of 700 FPM and airspeed of 80 MPH indicated at 10,000 feet. For the remainder of my climb above 10,000 feet, I set pitch to maintain 80 MPH airspeed. While airspeed held steady, vertical speed diminished to 500 FPM at 12,000 and 200 FPM at 15,000 (the specified ceiling). Then I pitched up slightly and continued climbing slowly at 80 mph indicated until leveling off at 17,000 FT. True airspeed computes to 114 MPH.

Cruising: I leveled off the PA-18 at 12,000 feet, where it accelerated to 85 mph. A quick calculation shows the true airspeed at 12,000 feet to be about 109 miles per hour. The rotor speed increased from 1,000 RPMs to 1,200 RPMs. When I leveled off the PCA-2 at the specified ceiling of 15,000 FT, airspeed increased to 85 MPH indicated, which quickly calculates to 115 MPH true airspeed.

Turning: Turning at any altitude in either model is much like turning in a biplane of the era, presumably because of their 1920s aerodynamics. The rotor and its assembly didn't seem to affect its turning ability as much as I expected.

Descending: This phase was easy. I simply reduced throttle to the zero position (i.e. pulled all the way out or F1). RPMs in the PA-18 decreased to 900, airspeed decreased to 60 MPH, and vertical speed was 600 FPM. It descended faster when I pushed the nose down about 20 degrees (can't tell for sure without a AI). RPMs increased to 1,100, airspeed increased to 90 MPH. and vertical speed went to -2,000. The PCA-2 descends much more readily, presumably because of its weight. The PCA-2 descended at 80 MPH and 700 FPM with zero throttle. Faster airspeeds and/or vertical speeds are possible with pitch and throttle adjustments.

Approaching: Because autogiros cannot land vertically like helicopters, they must approach and land like fixed-wing airplanes, which is what they are after all. Approaching is definitely unique, but not difficult. It approaches smoothly at 35 to 40 MPH as recommended in the checklist. This low-speed approach seemed to take forever. A steeper glide would surely produce a faster approach, but that would adversely affect the landing.

The pilot's view for landing in either aircraft isn't good. He sits in the back seat, presumably for optimum balance. The engine, front-seat windscreen, and rotor post are in his way. These visual obstacles are more so in the PA-18 than in the PCA-2. Real-world pilots probably move their heads to see around them. Simulation pilots can move their virtual-cockpit positions or use the 2D 'landing' view.

Landing: With the added lift from the rotor, the autogiro can float above the runway for quite a distance before touching down if the approach is too fast. That's why approaching within the specified range is so important. No stall speed is specified for the aircraft, but the checklist says the rotor stalls at 20 MPH. The PA-18 approached at 40 MPH with zero throttle and descended at 300 to 400 FPM. It decelerated below 30 MPH with I flared above the runway, and it touched down at 25 MPH. The PCA-2 approached at 50 MPH with zero throttle and descended at 300 to 400 FPM. It decelerated below 40 MPH when I flared above the runway, and it touched down at 35 MPH. Despite landing at such low speeds, and despite my having their throttles at zero (pulled all the way out), both models continued rolling down the runway at very slow speed without stopping by themselves. I had to apply the wheel brakes to stop and the parking brake to keep them stopped after taxiing off the runway.

Overall: The Pitcairn PA-18 and PCA-2 generally seem to handle like biplanes of the 1910s and 1920s with superior lift, slow-speed capabilities, and no torque &#8212 all as a result of the rotor. When guidance in the checklist and manual are followed, they perform as specified.

The need for releasing the rotor brake in the PCA-2 begs other questions in my mind: Doesn't the rotor provide similar drag whether it's rotating or not? If so, why the hidden flaps simulating drag and the need for engaging or disengaging the brake? Doesn't the PA-18's rotor provide similar drag as the PCA-2's rotor? If so, why this feature in only the PCA-2? Why give sim pilots something extra to do that the real pilots would not be required to do? In response to my questions, the developer explained that the hidden flaps 'penalize' the pilot for trying to fly with the rotor not engaged. 'Prior to doing that,' he said, 'one could fly without the rotor turning. Not good.' He further explained that such measures were taken to enable MSFS to model an aircraft it was not originally intended to model. All right, the hidden flaps use drag to simulate the lack of lift from the pilot's not using the rotor. That makes sense, but I don't understand why this technique was applied to the PCA-2 but not the PA-18, which ought to share the same condition.

Having never flown any real-world autogiro much less Pitcairn's autogiro, I cannot personally attest to how closely Golden Age's modeling resembles the real-world aircraft's performance. Neither can I say how it compares to other autogiros that might be available for home flight simulation. My guess is that Golden Age's flight modeling is close enough although not perfect because MSFS isn't designed for autogiros. The rotor stalling at 20 MPH is one example because the real rotor never stalls. Purists will have to settle for the best that can be done, and others can enjoy what the developers were able to replicate.

Simulating Autogiro Flight

Without autopilots, both Pitcairn autogiros are hands-on aircraft throughout all flight phases. This can be tiresome sometimes, but that's how aircraft of the day were flown. Without required navigation instruments, they are strictly visual aircraft. They cannot be flown in instrument-meteorological conditions under any aviation regulations. That means clear skies or altitudes below clouds. With their open cockpits, they would be more comfortably flown during warm weather in spring, summer, or autumn. Winter flights would seem very uncomfortable. This limit would also apply to weather in which high altitude flights would be near or below freezing temperatures. Even though they can reach higher than 10,000 feet, such flights would be very cold in their open cockpits during winter. A quick formula shows that temperature at 10,000 feet would be 5F if it were 50F at Willow Grove's field elevation. Such cold might be unbearable in an open cockpit moving at 100 MPH true airspeed. For these reasons, realistic simulation would probably require milder weather and/or lower altitudes.

Technical Matters

This product is for FSX. It does not require SP2 or Acceleration. An earlier model of the PCA-2 for FS2004 is not compatible with FSX, and these FSX models are not compatible with any earlier version of MSFS.

Both models are listed in the Aircraft Selection menu under the manufacturer, Pitcairn Aircraft.

Frame rates are good. I found nothing about this aircraft to diminish frame rates.

Pitcairn Autogyro History

The Sounds folder contains 21 distinct sound files that seem realistic for this type of aircraft. 'The Kinner soundfile was developed by Jim Douglass and the Wright by Aaron Swindal of Skysong Soundworks as a commissioned project 2007,' the developer said.

Technical support is through an email address available from the Pilot Shop and in the product manual. Response to my questions was within a day and very helpful.

Readers with technical questions not answered in this review should ask the developer, who is in the best position to answer such questions. Using the links below, go to the Pilot Shop page where the product is listed and described, then click on 'Manufacturer Tech Support' in the right column.

More Information

More information about the real-world Pitcairn autogiros is available from Wikipedia, Air Venture Museum, and the Centennial of Flight.

Pitcairn Aircraft

The Developer

Golden Age Simulations makes vintage add-on aircraft for Microsoft Flight Simulator® Versions 9 and 10 (FS2004 and FSX), focusing on the period between World Wars I and II. Its many other products include the Boeing Model 40X, the Stearman Model 4, and the Douglas Dolphin. I reviewed their Lockheed L-12A and C-40 Electra Junior earlier this year.

'Our interest in the autogiro as a project was generated by the upcoming 100th birthday of a member of our community, Captain Johnny Miller who flew the PCA-2 cross country in May of 1931,' GAS says.

Overall

This is definitely a different type of aircraft for three reasons: Autogiros combine features of airplanes and helicopters, they are rare, and MSFS has to be manipulated to simulate them. As unusual as they are, they are not difficult to fly, and they can do things other aircraft cannot do. These attributes make them fun to simulate. Golden Age Simulation's visual renditions are realistic, and their flight modeling is acceptable within the limits of MSFS.

Bill Stack
[email protected]
Learn more about the Pitcairn Autogiro for FSX by Golden Age Simulations.

Bill Stack is author of several books about flight simulation, a regular author in flight-sim magazines, and a contributor to Flight Sim Com. His website is www.topskills.com