Nigel, oh Nigel, why must you always make it personal? Why be so petty and childish? It makes you look so...well...petty and childish.
Why do you say I'll never own, much less fly a 505? You don't know that. Why do you say I'm a failed helicopter designer? I never said I've designed anything. The FH1100 was already fully designed when I worked there. All we were trying to do was put it back in production with some modern improvements.
All I've ever said is that I've spent my life flying helicopters, mostly two-blade systems, and mostly Bells. And no, Bell never rejected me; they never had the chance to.
I do spend time, but I most assuredly do not spend effort criticizing the 505. The time is mine to use as I please, as I'm semi-retired, so don't concern yourself with my personal, free-time activities.
I've always been skeptical of manufacturers' claims. And Bell really stretched the envelope with the 505. Claiming a "125+ knot" cruise is simply ludicrous. A two-blade that's as fast as a 407? Yeah, right. Now hear this: IT'S NOT GOING TO CRUISE AT 125 KNOTS. If the main rotor "two-per" doesn't prevent that, then the cabin pitch attitude and fuel burn will. But it's fun for Bell to make such a ridiculous claim. Because some nitwits believe it. Other nitwits repeat it like it's true. No pilot-report that I have read has stated, "We set the power, and the 505 settled into a nice, comfortable 125-knot cruise, with plenty of forward cyclic travel left." One does not have to be a helicopter designer to know that won't happen; one has only had to have flown a 206L. It sure would be nice to have an actual test pilot fly and evaluate the 505, not the giggling fangirls that have flown it so far.
And, dear Nigel, the expression, "I'll eat my hat," is what we call a colloquialism. It's not to be taken literally. Only a child would. It is true that I thought that Bell would never produce the 505. So I was wrong there. But...typical Bell...they claim a low price-point ("Around $1million") and to do that they give you an El Strippo version with EVERYTHING being an optional extra...optional extras that are standard on the Robinson and Airbus competitors. Bell Salesman: "I see you've chosen the red one - great choice, sir! Now...would you like your landing gear also painted red? It's only $4,500 more! And come on...what's $4,500 when you're buying million-dollar helicopter?"
It is also true that I've said it will sprout endplates on the afterthought horizontal stab. I still think it eventually will, especially if people force it to cruise along at max power.
I find it odd that people gloss over the exposed tail rotor gearbox, and the placard that allows up to, what, FORTY POUNDS of extra ballast?? Jiminy Christmas! Bell must have really thought that the horizontal was going back there. Oopsie!
I suppose that Bell left the gearbox exposed because the weight back there is pilot-adjustable depending on the mission? Great...now we're back to the days of moving the 47 battery back and forth to keep the ship in c.g.? Or is the weight non-adjustable and Bell was just too cheap to design a fairing to cover basically an automobile battery back there?
I'll stop there. I have fun stuff to do today, and I don't want Nigel getting upset that I'm wasting any more time or effort degrading his new wunderkopter.