BH9, wait a second: you’ll be having me doing the marketing ploy! In that errant landing I referred to, the tail wheel hit at 42 ft/sec, but not the main, which was substantially less. Ship 3 was the one used for engine/airframe interface test/systems test/pitot-static system test/fuel system incl hot fuel test etc. On that day, someone decided they needed another power off landing for some piece of data. Ch. Pilot was one of the pilots and said ok ( Dick had done the first power off touchdowns ). But the wind was 0-15 and they had to use the approach over the river, which has a bluff on the far side, accentuating the updraft. Point is, when they flared they didn’t have 80, where the rotor bites cleanly and the vertical rate goes to zero, but they had 65, where the flare creates a change in pitch attitude, and that’s all. We looked at the data traces afterwards and this auto looked, flying-wise, like all the rest.