Both, no doubt, plus they attract a particular type of pilot 
My recollection is that the thrustlines of many older autogyros were such that they would pitch down in the event of an engine failure. This unloaded the rotor and stopped it spinning, which is a bad thing. They were also quite short-coupled.
The newer autogyros have apparently fixed this, and also include 2 seaters which means that pilots can get instruction rather than having to teach themselves to fly. I’m sure this will make them substantially safer, but in my view they still have a lot to prove.
I really like the look of some of the modern ones like the Cavalon and the JB. They are enclosed 2 seaters. Two Cavalons were parked at LFFK for a couple of days.
I didn’t get to talk to the pilots, but I understand the Cavalon has a MTOM of 560kg.
Germany has a PPL (G) licence for gyrocopters, so does the UK. AIUI the UK one is only valid for G reg in UK. I don’t know about the German one. In France the gyrocopter is considered a ULM and therefore carries a MTOM limit of 500kg (I think this is the new limit.)
It all seems a bit strange to me, that here we have an innovative GA industry which might be killed off by lack of joined up regulation on behalf of the EU.
I believe is was first killed off in the 1920’s by the helicopter until James Bond 007 revived it.
As for safety I can find very little against them other than anecdotal. In fact many (proponents of the gyrocopter) of course claim it to be the safest form of aircraft.
CAP800 (an UK CAA publication) gives a fatality rate of 400 fatalities per million flying hours. It was published in 2011 and based on data collected in previous decades, so predates the latest generation of autogyros. It was based on small numbers, but this is still bad. I do not know where I remembered my 1/1000 statistic from. I may be mistaken or perhaps I simply can’t find the source.
That they were often described as the ‘safest form of aircraft’ even back when their accident statistics were nearly 2 orders of magnitude worse than a C172 and 4 orders of magnitude worse than the airline industry says a lot about the ethics of some in the aviation industry.
Before reading the statistics, I always liked the idea of an autogyro, so must be one of whatever type of pilots Peter is talking about!
gallois wrote:
Germany has a PPL (G) licence for gyrocopters, so does the UK. AIUI the UK one is only valid for G reg in UK. I don’t know about the German one.
Gyrocopters are ULs in Germany so no PPL but UL-License and only national regulation – I guess very similar to France although I don’t know the French situation very well.
On the safety question: I guess these days it’s a mix of “type of pilots attracted to such devices”, training requirements and underestimation of how different gyrocopters are compared to airplanes that harm safety. Built quality used to be an issue but if you buy something from one of the major manufacturers these days it should no longer be an issue – despite the small effect of a gyro to some degree combining the technical challenges of an airplane and a helicopter…
btw: I don’t think there is robust data on the question if safety for gyrocopters is really lower than for other parts of Annex I market
There was a very well respected and proficient CPL jet pilot last year who crashed and died with his passenger, also a pilot.
They were feeling the freedom to venture low and got caught up in an electric wire.
I wouldn’t fly them for the same reason I wouldn’t fly a paraglider.
EuroFlyer wrote:
I wouldn’t fly them for the same reason I wouldn’t fly a paraglider.
And what is wrong with the paraglider?
gallois wrote:
In fact many (proponents of the gyrocopter) of course claim it to be the safest form of aircraft.
I guess the reasoning is that they can land essentially vertically like helicopters but unlike helicopters they are always in autorotation so in case of an engine failure you don’t need any split second decision to lower the collective. Just maintain airspeed.
But that’s only a tiny part of the story as most accidents are not caused by engine failure.
„Gyrcopter crash“ yields lots of results on youtube. They look very unstable.
There was an article in a German magazine on Rescue services (“Rettungsdienst”) a few years ago which debated the merits of having “medical rescue gyrocopters” supplementing the rescue helicopters we already have. The chief argument in favour was that rescue gyrocopters would be able to attend a medical emergency in remote areas nearly as fast as helicopters, while costing significantly less (IIRC the author wrote that you could operate 100 gyrocopters for the same cost as a single helicopter).
I found it pretty intriguing at the time, but AFAIK no such projects have come forth yet. For me as an emergency physician and pilot, this topic is very interesting. Germany has a medical rescue system where a qualified physician is brought to the patient, rather than the patient being brought to the physician, as is the case in Anglo-Saxon countries. So a gyro which brings the doctor to a (remote) patient would actually make sense in our system, as the patient would not need to be transported to the hospital with the gyrocopter (which the current designs could hardly do, from my understanding). The patient, together with the rescue team, would be transported via rescue vehicles or the good old helicopter. The main advantage would be the doctor getting to a remote location faster.
EDIT: Found a link to the article (in German), from 2015:
Rettungsdienst, May 2015 issue
EDIT2:
The article actually says 50 rescue gyrocopters could be bought for the cost of a single rescue helicopter. The cost of a rescue gyrocopter would be similar to that of a well-equipped Notarzteinsatzfahrzeug (emergency physician vehicle). The realistic range to reach a patient within 15 minutes, a number regulated in German rescue services law, would be 45 km with a gyro, compared to 15 to 20 km with the ground based transport and 50 km with a helicopter.
A two seater rescue gyrocopter would be able to carry two 90 kg heavy personnell plus 90 kg of medical equipment.
It is argued that the performance of most gyrocopters allows them to take off from conventional heliports, which have to at least be 35 × 35 m in German regulations.
