Belvedere MK II
Heli One, you had written that the MK II would have 3-4 engines. It sounds as if the design was conceptual in nature. To exceed the performance of the CH-47A, which had 2 X T55-L7's at 2650shp each ( or to address beating the CH-53A which was on the scene as well with 2 X GE T-64-6B at 2650shp each ), it would have needed the four engines I suspect.
I certainly concur with your remark re the talent available. Sikorsky as well as Boeing were very lucky to sign up UK engineers, who were hard working, extremely talented and an asset of immense importance. And they certainly added a note of civility to our often loud and noisy design decision meetings.
As I believe SAS was getting at, however, the task facing Bristol in starting with the model 192 and coming up with a product that exceeded the built in capabilities of the 47A and 53A, was funding an an investment that probably wasn't justified by the total expected sales revenue ( whether the money came from Bristols or UK Gov't funds ).
Thanks,
John Dixson