Vaperware weekend contest did not limit the category of aircraft. My proposal of post #3 did eliminate paragliders as a component of the specifications for a particular proposal. That may have been confusing. The intent was to imply that the structure needed to be self supporting when not being flown. No lay the wing on the ground then go fly.
You may notice that I "liked" the gyro improvements proposed above. I am a sport pilot gyro CFI with experience going back to the Bensen days of 1972. Although I am a member of the Scapoose OR gyro EAA club, gyros are not my primary area of interest at the moment.
My primary area of interest is roadable FAR 103 with combined fixed wing and flex wing technology/characteristics . It is somewhat akin to Mark Stall's project but much much different in concept.
In response to the comment in post #50 above: "Agree, it does kind of violate the intent of the thread." No, that is not true.
The Hotwings gyro was well within the intent of the "Vaporware" thread. Just not in tune with other fixed wing proposals.
That said, mission specifications do not dictate, per se, the type of craft. Example: VTOL could be helicopter, Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey, Hiller flying platform, jet pack, or shuttle resupply booster rocket.
What is in your mission specifications that drives the solution to a gyrocopter?