Sounds like this thread on BERP has lost the reason the blade was designed. Remember your basic theory of flight? What factors limited forward speed in a conventional helicopter;
1 Limit of fwd cyclic due to flapback
2 Compressibility on advancing blade
3 Airflow reversal - retreating blade
4 Retreating blade stall
BERP blades were designed to compensate for 2-4, focused on forward speed not hover efficiency due to the fact that the 101 role as envisaged was to be a passive sonics helicopter spending most of its time in forward flight. Composite material allowed for exotic shape to the whole length of the blade and the tip has gone through several iterations.
Move forward and the wall comes down, the role changes and you end up with a helicopter that hovers with quite an element of nose up and less efficient in the hover than others. No surprise.
The AW press release cited talks about improved hover, well from a poor base! As for other benefits, it has to be the most quiet helicopter in its class in the hover....
