Geoff Russell, a spokesman for AgustaWestland, a Sikorsky competitor in Europe, also said the X2 does not qualify as a "pure helicopter" because it generates power from a device other than the main rotor atop the aircraft.
That device being the Gas Generator, eh Geoff.
On the subject of [other] power (lift/thrust), many conventional helicopters with in-line gas turbine engines (including Lynx) derive some of their forward thrust from the ejection of the engine exhaust gas stream in a rearwards direction, so that’s Lynx discounted is it not Geoff?
And what about lift/thrust derived from a canted tail rotor assembly (BlackHawk/CH-53 etc). With application of forward cyclic, does not the resultant lift/thrust moment generated by the tail rotor assembly - now angled slightly forward – contribute to overall forward thrust, thereby producing some additional force from a device [other] than the main rotor atop the aircraft?
Does this mean that any helicopter with an canted tail rotor does not qualify as a “pure helicopter?”
And so the debate goes on..........