I can't see any point in a huge redesign of the whole aircraft configuration to have an IAS of greater than 250 kts because that's the maximum allowed outside controlled airspace. I think you know what I'm saying, Nick.
I want a lot of power but going through a gearbox that can't be overstressed by the power available, either total or OEI. In other words, I want to be able to pull collective and not worry about limits. Give me an audio warner of Nr droop and a decent (round) Nr gauge placed right where I can see it, not hidden amongst four or five other similar looking strip gauges - after all, it is the most important gauge in the aircraft! Now we've got noise cancelling headsets the natural rotor noise is masked to some extent. I want some sort of feel on the collective - a feel spring at the limit, like the Gazelle had would be ideal. Surely it must be possible for a monitoring computer to give a "kick" or vibration to the collective as a limit is neared. I can then keep my eyes outside at the most crtical times, not looking in at the gauges to see which limit I'm likely to bust first.
These days many of us are required to fly single pilot IFR onshore in Class G airspace, often going under and around increasingly more controlled airspace. So we need an excellent moving map system to ensure we retain sufficient spatial awareness. The charts ideally need to show terrain (GPWS).TCAS overlay is a must (roll on mandatory transponders for all
).
An icing clearance is becoming a priority, please. A 4 axis autopilot is also a must.
I can't agree with the comment about not reproducing round gauges on the flat screens (surely we don't want 'CRT's though - they're old hat and heavy). Round gauges give 'pie chart' trend info as well as a total. I think that's why Sikorsky went back to them on the S-92, after those awful 'trend bars' on the C+.
Sometimes I think helicopters are 30 years behind cars, long lead times being the problem. I have to say that Agusta have dragged medium helicopters into the end of the last century with the 109 / 139 series; they now certainly set the standard in many areas. They need to improve the autopilot response on the 109; it presently doesn't match the ability of that of the last generation of Sikorskys.
Sikorsky have got left behind for the time being. I think they over-concentrated on the Commanche to the detriment of their corporate line of aircraft. Its cancellation was surely a huge blow and wake up call for them, hence the delay in getting a D model. We are now on the D-