RJSquirrel,
"...the failed gyro system from an experimental helicopter that killed its crew"
The gyro system was extremely well proven on CL475 and 186 before AH56. The AH56 problems came when DOD insisted on spec that pushed disk loading to the point of cambered aerofoil divergence (thanks Lu). As far as i know both 186s and CL475 were finally destroyed in a hangar fire, but had no serious flight incidents. Please correct if wrong.
Don't forget light helis don't currently have ANY cyclic augmentation. I have only ever hovered a teetering machine, so couldn't say how much easier an articulated head is (open to offers
), but I'll bet the S300 still won't hover hands off like the CL475 did (even with an offset CG!).
"added an unbuilt and unproven system to bottom the collective and create a hazard all of its own"
Well that's engineering, and is why we do system FMECAs. The proposed system does strike me as the most fail safe method to reduce autorotation incidents, but would naturally take development. As a final say the pilot (or instructor) can just switch it off, like the auto-throttle.
"and finished with a direction of spin for the tail rotor that COSTS rotor control!"
The XH-40 (prototype UH-1) and the AH56 (amongst many others) had the prototype tail rotor rotating top forwards, but later changed to top rearwards for improved controlability. As i understand it the rotor is always countering main rotor wake, so suffers less from vortex ring state. I'll eat crow if i need to here.
Out of interest which way does it turn on AS350?
Mart