Hill Helicopters HX50 [Archive]

Nige321

14th Dec 2019, 19:18

Anyone know anything??

Hill Helicopters (https://app.dimensions.ai/details/grant/grant.8483424)

During this ambitious and innovative project, our consortium will develop a next-generation private helicopter that delivers reduced environmental impact, lower noise levels and unprecedented levels of safety, comfort and performance at a game-changing price point

Research reveals that there is high demand for this specification, which is not being met by existing manufacturers. This market segment is ready for rapid commercial exploitation and we will produce helicopters from our UK manufacturing base in Cornwall. The aircraft, the HX50 Revolution, will use a suite of next-generation technologies. Key innovations include a modern turbine engine capable of running on a variety of fuel types, including biofuels. It includes advanced inlet, outlet and engine bay silencers and it will increase the power to weight ratio of the aircraft, providing improved flight characteristics and load carrying capacity for passengers and luggage

krypton_john

14th Dec 2019, 23:08

All I know is many have tried. I hope they succeed.

nomorehelosforme

14th Dec 2019, 23:34

Here is their website, they certainly seem to be ahead of the game in many engineering areas. If I had millions would I invest in this project....

https://www.dynamiq-eng.co.uk/

Hopefully this will bring some interest from the major businesses in industry, 10 years ago who would have thought Tesla!

helipixman

15th Dec 2019, 14:45

No pictures of this new design, either of an actual prototype or technical drawings... what does it look like or is it that secret we will have to wait ?

Hughes500

15th Dec 2019, 14:58

helipixman

15th Dec 2019, 15:32

provided some help and advice on the heli, when people see pictures of it they will be blown away ! Jason has come up with some great ideas and it is a long way down the design stage . When it come to fruition no one will buy anything else, you will wave goodbye to Robison and all other 4 to 5 seat helicopter sbeing used for private use.
I am sorry I can't tell you more from a confidentiality point of view, which is a shame as the mock up pix etc etc are ...........

Thats a bold statement that we will be waving goodbye to Robinson. It will have to be some machine, which we wait eagerly to see ? It will be difficult to replace the Robinsons, Bruno Guimbal has done a terrific job and sold many Cabris but Robinsons still seem to be flying out of the factory.

Hughes500

15th Dec 2019, 21:30

Helipixman, you havent seen what I have seen !

601

15th Dec 2019, 23:28

10 years ago who would have thought Tesla

and in 10 years time Tesla is ......

Arm out the window

16th Dec 2019, 07:14

Limited engine power also means that the pilot must always be aware of flight limitations to maintain safe operation.

Hopefully there is some magic new transmission mechanism that will allow pilots who don't have to worry about power any more not have to worry about the drive line either!!

[email protected]

16th Dec 2019, 08:58

Unless they are designing their super new engine to run on Hydrogen fuel cells they are nowhere near being cutting edge.

Judging by their blurb they are re-writing the laws of physics to make a 5-seat helicopter quiet, efficient and cheap to run.......

Hot and Hi

16th Dec 2019, 16:41

Anyone know anything??

Hill Helicopters (https://app.dimensions.ai/details/grant/grant.8483424)

Quote:
During this ambitious and innovative project, our consortium will develop a next-generation private helicopter that delivers reduced environmental impact, lower noise levels and unprecedented levels of safety, comfort and performance at a game-changing price point

Quote:
Research reveals that there is high demand for this specification, which is not being met by existing manufacturers. This market segment is ready for rapid commercial exploitation and we will produce helicopters from our UK manufacturing base in Cornwall. The aircraft, the HX50 Revolution, will use a suite of next-generation technologies. Key innovations include a modern turbine engine capable of running on a variety of fuel types, including biofuels. It includes advanced inlet, outlet and engine bay silencers and it will increase the power to weight ratio of the aircraft, providing improved flight characteristics and load carrying capacity for passengers and luggage

I am also a bit disenchanted by seeing that a comapny that has what nobody has promotes its stuff by saying something that anybody could say: "Our extensive market research shows that people want bigger, better for cheaper."

Brilliant, I would have never thought that! I am tempted to say that this is just plain bad style and in disregard for the audience (if the intended audience was us). Then again, the blurb comes from a funding proposal, and maybe that's the kind of wishy-washy marketing talk needed there.

Let's wait for the facts. I am going on standby.

Hughes500

16th Dec 2019, 17:25

Crab

Just wait and see, I was gobsmacked when I saw what they have come up with. The designers have more aerodynamics qualifications etc etc than most of the rest us put together !

[email protected]

16th Dec 2019, 17:28

I'm sure they are very clever but Ray Prouty had a lot to say about how you don't get something for nothing with helicopter design.

helipixman

16th Dec 2019, 17:58

Helipixman, you havent seen what I have seen !
From what you are saying I can't wait to see it. When do you expect we will be able to see this mind blowing machine ?

Ascend Charlie

17th Dec 2019, 01:18

What is an unprecedented level of safety? One that will never crash? Or does it have a dozen airbags?

Every aircraft ever designed has an unprecedented level of safety, until it has its first crash, just like all the precedents.

And comfort? Reclining armchairs for the pilots? Aircon that works as well as a car's does?

Running on a variety of fuels... hmm...when they get it to run on water, then it will be one that commands attention. Should Rolls-Royce and other engine makers be worried?

Silencing usually comes with penalties in weight and in efficiency. The designs to muffle the scream of a compressor will be interesting to see, as will be the exhaust muffler which doesn't affect the back pressure on the turbine.

Hughes 500 is apparently quite excited, but if they want people to open their wallets, a bit more information is needed.

Hughes500

17th Dec 2019, 06:42

Guys I am excited about it but I have to respect being asked not to say ! I have known about the designs for around 18 months and have watched things evolve. The easiest thing i can say is, take the best of all the different types put them all together with some very fancy aerodynamics and latest technology whether that be materials, blades or engines.
Just to tease the owner lurks on this site !
Happy Xmas

[email protected]

17th Dec 2019, 06:52

The easiest thing i can say is, take the best of all the different types put them all together with some very fancy aerodynamics and latest technology whether that be materials, blades or engines Because that has never been tried before.....

I don't mean to sound too cynical Hughes, but it sounds like the Labour manifesto - too good to be true.

The only thing I can think of is that they are building a next generation autogyro rather than an actual helicopter.

Is that lurking owner you by any chance??

Nige321

17th Dec 2019, 10:06

I'm sure they are very clever but Ray Prouty had a lot to say about how you don't get something for nothing with helicopter design.
He was saying it 40 years ago. Things have moved on a bit...

Because that has never been tried before.....

I don't mean to sound too cynical Hughes, but it sounds like the Labour manifesto - too good to be true.

The only thing I can think of is that they are building a next generation autogyro rather than an actual helicopter.

Is that lurking owner you by any chance??

It's a good everybody doesn't get out of bed every morning with this attitude, you'd all still be flying around in one of these...

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1276x888/screenshot_2019_12_17_at_11_03_45_050daf2ed851c7ef331a575a54 e73e14d640f167.jpg

I've worked on a couple of Innovate UK projects.
The don't hand over that kind of money on a whim, there will have been some rigorous due diligence done.
I suspect H500 is right, there's something Innovate UK have got excited about...

Jettiejock

17th Dec 2019, 10:27

Anyone know anything??

Hill Helicopters (https://app.dimensions.ai/details/grant/grant.8483424)

Yes, I spoke with the entrepreneur behind it last year and he has some great ideas and an end price which doesn't seem possible. We shall see, I hope.

cattletruck

17th Dec 2019, 10:35

Their website https://www.dynamiq-eng.co.uk/ is nerd heaven. Seems like they've been at the bleeding edge of engineering consulting for over a decade and have provided quite a variety of customer solutions over that time.

Dig deeper in that website and there's an announcement that they're designing their own sub 500kw gas turbine engine. There's also an innovative centrifugal compressor fan design although I'm not sure if it's related.

As for the secret helicopter, I just hope it's sporty enough in its handling rather than something boring made to ferry golfers and their golf clubs.

Hughes500

17th Dec 2019, 10:42

Crab

Actually you probably have never owned or had to pay personally for owning a machine. Only when you do that, do you actually truly realise that the manufacturers view is, they are doing us a favour in letting them buy one of their machines.
The average manufacturer takes the Michael in what they charge for not only their product but also the parts that go with it
Here are a few examples
Tie bar for a Hu269, basically a steel tube 14 inches ling with 2 welded flat plates 2 inches across. I can have one fabricated out of the best steel for around £ 60, manufacturers price $1350 ...really
Auguta Westland pressure relief switch for AC system 14000 Euros.... for a switch ( no I have got the zero's correct)
A few years ago now SA341 clutch, from factory in Bosnia with no JAA paperwork £ 8k, from Airbus with JAA Form 1 £30k ( by the way Airbus got it from factory in Bosnia, so made £20k on a piece of paper )
MD last year put up the price for a main rotor gearbox from $ 85k to around $125, what other business would get away with it, unless of course it is selling to the military !
Remove the ridiculousness of what goes on in the industry and see what happens ! Too much resistance to change, which unfortunately stifles too many industries
So hopefully we will see a machine that is cheap to run goes like sh1t off a shovel and is made to a higher crash worthiness than any other current machine.
Crab you might even be able to afford one on your mil pension !

[email protected]

17th Dec 2019, 11:32

Hughes - I am quite aware of the costs of spares and how much the manufacturers profiteer on them but I'm not sure how that makes this innovative design (for which we can't see any pictures or have a description) the new sliced bread of the helicopter world.

Designing your own gas turbine would be expensive enough and the latest composite materials don't come cheap either - an old schoolmate has his own company that specialises in them.

I presume all the secrecy is because they don't have the patents approved yet.

However, if it is as good as you say and the price is right, I may well buy one:)

[email protected]

17th Dec 2019, 11:39

How much under 500Kw are they aiming for? The R66 with the RR300 puts out 167Kw continuous or 200Kw for 5 min take off and comes in at 91Kg so it will have to be a significant increase on that to meet the claims.

Are you sure RR would be so easily beaten?

rudestuff

17th Dec 2019, 16:43

Unless they're going hybrid I don't see what can be cutting edge. A couple of certified electric motors with a small battery and a cheap motor to charge it all. Once the battery technology catches up you can swap the motor out for a battery pack and go all electric. Obviously there are tradeoffs to be made weight Vs payload but a modern electric motor can generate 2-300hp for a 20kg weight so it's entirely plausible.

Hughes500

17th Dec 2019, 16:45

Crab, engine bits are way way cheaper to make than you think. My next door neighbour used to make compressor wheels for RR 250, they cost about the same as a good tyre for my Landrover discovery !!!! RR used to put them out at over 10 times that amount

500e

17th Dec 2019, 16:49

Another helicopter start up was in Devon till it moved a couple of times

Pegasus Helicopter Group PLC ::(

helipixman

17th Dec 2019, 17:29

This helicopter has actually been registered with the CAA....

G-DRJH Hill Helicopters HX50 to Dynamiq Engineering Ltd on 1.10.19
Only information given is it will have 1 engine with a MTOW of 1650kg

I have had an email from the owner and he has the right not to disclose any information at this time and maybe we should all respect that. Wait and see what is produced and then I am sure a huge debate will follow on here......

[email protected]

17th Dec 2019, 20:33

Hughes500 - I expect your neighbour didn't have to recoup the R and D costs for those compressor wheels, unlike RR. If Hill helicopters are actually designing and building an sub 500Kw gas turbine, that is where the costs will be, not just milling the components.

Hughes500

17th Dec 2019, 21:28

Crab
ER what R and D costs ? The US mil paid for all that in the 1960's The RR 300 and 500 engines are basically a c20B. Guess what a C20 B is a derivative of a C18 the original engine for the 206 and 500. Which came from the T63 the engine designed to go in the OH 6 and OH 58. Actually I am wrong not paid for by the US mil but the US taxpayer

What Traffic

18th Dec 2019, 03:17

Well there's not much point in disputing it either way since there's scant verifiable information either way. If it does indeed incorporate a bunch of novel and unseen technology, I am curious how the developer has integrated the research, testing, and certification costs into their projected MSRP... that is not purely a jab at them as there may be carryover applications to different industries which can mitigate that fraction.

[email protected]

18th Dec 2019, 10:26

Have it your way Hughes - I hope you are not disappointed if the mock-up fails to become a viable reality - when it first flys then maybe there will be something to get excited about.

Will they have it ready in time for Santa to use for his Christmas deliveries?

Hughes500

18th Dec 2019, 11:03

Crab you are the most negative person on this forum !
What traffic ,remember I said for private use. Shortly flying schools will be allowed to train people on Permit to fly machines
I really do hope it comes to fruition, it is probably the first time some one has actually tried to make a helicopter that is more like a car in the sense of technology, space, performance, cost and reliability. I sense there is an ever increasing gap in the market which is not being filled by anyone in the private market. The only current machines out there harp back to the 1960's with their technology.
R66 an aluminium helicopter with its design going back to the 70's for the airframe and 60's for the engine
505 mostly 1960's tech
500 as above
480 as above
Cabri, as above in terms of an outdated engine but getting there with the airframe
EC120 well an overweight expensive machine

jimjim1

18th Dec 2019, 11:51

Unless they're going hybrid ... but a modern electric motor can generate 2-300hp for a 20kg weight so it's entirely plausible.

I do not have the capacity to do the numbers but I have been thinking for a while that a helicopter with an electric transmission may well be a viable option real soon now. The next question is, does it look like a helicopter or a say four (or more) fan drone?

If the latter, no more Jesus nut, no more single points of failure (close anyway).

Option to consider a smaller than otherwise cruise engine with battery boost for take off, landing and emergency use.

Or maybe it's too soon?

[email protected]

18th Dec 2019, 13:48

Crab you are the most negative person on this forum ! Why, just because I don't act as an echo chamber for your enthusiastic optimism? Seems a bit harsh when nothing you have said has been backed up by evidence. Cynical maybe but negative?

Dave B

19th Dec 2019, 16:22

When I worked at Redhill, over 20 years ago now, there was a small hanger next door, belonging to Cierva. They were working on a twin piston Helicopter called the Grasshopper, it had contra rotating main rotors, and large tail booms with no tail rotor.
I saw it flying once, and it looked very smooth. I assume they ran out of money, like a lot of projects, but I believe it did actually fly at Farnborough.

treadigraph

19th Dec 2019, 16:31

Hughes500

19th Dec 2019, 18:25

Crab

I am just not allowed to say anything sorry, what I do know is really exciting. I really hope it is a goer, it would seem so. Whats more it is British which would be really nice

What Traffic

19th Dec 2019, 21:54

I do not have the capacity to do the numbers but I have been thinking for a while that a helicopter with an electric transmission may well be a viable option real soon now. The next question is, does it look like a helicopter or a say four (or more) fan drone?

If the latter, no more Jesus nut, no more single points of failure (close anyway).

On the failure mode front, an electric quadcopter type design eliminates some but creates new ones. The potential for asymmetric lift conditions and very low inertia (or even inherently self-slowing if the motors are not clutched) are a few that come to mind immediately. That isn't to say they cannot be overcome and the extreme reliability and simplicity of a well-designed electric motor are huge benefits in that regard.

I would just like to say that while I have some doubts about this HX50 thing I do sincerely hope it lives up to the hype and is very successful.

WillyPete

19th Dec 2019, 22:34

On the failure mode front, an electric quadcopter type design eliminates some but creates new ones. The potential for asymmetric lift conditions and very low inertia (or even inherently self-slowing if the motors are not clutched) are a few that come to mind immediately. That isn't to say they cannot be overcome and the extreme reliability and simplicity of a well-designed electric motor are huge benefits in that regard.

I would just like to say that while I have some doubts about this HX50 thing I do sincerely hope it lives up to the hype and is very successful.

They're already aiming higher than quad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxBTzAbPSeY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OazFiIhwAEs

Tickle

20th Dec 2019, 00:44

He looks like he is holding onto his balls with his left hand in case of a mishap, not a collective or similar. Male helicopter pilots don't get do do that.

muffin

20th Dec 2019, 08:42

Knowing the owner and his experience, I too will be fascinated to see the end product.

muffin

8th Jul 2020, 07:37

https://www.hillhelicopters.com/

206 jock

8th Jul 2020, 07:59

https://www.hillhelicopters.com/
Odd marketing supposition. "Truly private"? As opposed to falsely private? Or truly corporate? And there has never been a truly private helicopter before? I can't help wondering why they chose that as a hook.

I am however prepared to be underwhelmed when the news hits. Hopefully I will be surprised.

DeltaNg

8th Jul 2020, 08:21

Means absolutely nothing to anybody ... An undefined helicopter operation will start in an undefined location, serving an undefined need. The start time is defined, but without the the other information, completely pointless waste of webspace. Even the https certificate has no location defined.

I'm starting a 'truly private' Coffee shop soon - location and further details as to whether you qualify to be a customner to be announced ...

Same again

8th Jul 2020, 08:30

They have certainly achieved their aim of getting noticed then.

Hughes500

8th Jul 2020, 13:25

DeltaNg

You will be gobsmacked when you see ! A truly private machine means just that. You cant and won't be able to use it for PT or Part SPO work. I believe this will come to fruition, as and when it does it will leave all other manufactures light years behind

[email protected]

8th Jul 2020, 14:55

Until the first one crashes........

helipixman

8th Jul 2020, 15:24

Until the first one crashes........

Did'nt that nearly happen with the R44 a few high profile accidents... but the R44 survived !

With all the cloak and dagger surrounding this new helicopter, it's going to have to be something special. Let's hope we will not be disappointed ?

Channel Flyer

8th Jul 2020, 15:48

Cornish made and it is an exciting prospect. You should have more faith.

helipixman

8th Jul 2020, 18:36

Cornish made and it is an exciting prospect. You should have more faith.

Eagerly awaiting a Pasty with some form of rotors then ?

Ascend Charlie

9th Jul 2020, 06:01

"Truly private" would mean it cannot be certified for anything useful, such as commercial ops. So, the only buyers will be the "Look at me!" generation. Pretty limited market.
Will it be able to land in places that regular rotorcraft cannot?
I hope the R&D funds weren't used on that website, what a waste of bandwidth.

And you will find a lot more "negative people" here on Proon than Crab, add me to the list as well.

DeltaNg

9th Jul 2020, 10:57

I'm sure I will fall off my chair when I see it.

I won't be buying one though, I find it hard keeping my 15 year old van roadworthy.

Nige321

9th Jul 2020, 11:15

I wonder who noticed the background picture... :D

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1660x1054/screenshot_2020_07_09_at_12_14_16_c49681ea8817efdeafd857b5b7 3fa4d2d8c202a9.jpg

Hughes500

9th Jul 2020, 11:38

AC
That is the point it won't be certified for commercial ops, hence a truly private machine. It will also get away from the current manufacturers competition on who can rip the owner off the most !
As for pretty limited market, just the opposite i think you will find, If you have £ 500k to spend what do you get ? 50 year old designed second hand 206 / 500. Have to spend at least that to buy an R66 or £ 1m plus on a 505, so if you are a private owner do you needed it commercially certified er NO.
It is really about time we as an industry stopped putting up with the overpriced crap that the current manufactures come up with. I guess at least Bell has tried to do something about it with the 505, but they wanted to certify it for commercial ops hence the price tag

[email protected]

9th Jul 2020, 11:43

Nige321 - yes, the top of a Sea King unless I am very much mistaken.:ok:

Hughes500 - is this going to be single seat or a 2-seater?

ShyTorque

9th Jul 2020, 11:57

Truly private? Surely a single seater with no windows.

Bell_ringer

9th Jul 2020, 12:48

Sounds about as appealing as a chocolate teapot.

Hughes500

9th Jul 2020, 14:04

way more than one

heli1

9th Jul 2020, 15:59

Cierva Grasshopper last flew sometime in the early 70s I think. I recall seeing three separate airframes in a hangar/shed just west of Bristow's main hangar when I visited in early 1978, pretty sure the project was moribund by then. The Cierva Grasshopper did indeed run out of money but there was only ever one complete airframe. They switched components between the first two and the third was only a ground testbed. All three ended up st the Helicopter Museum where the most complete one is on permanent display.....Anyway enough of the thread drift.....

etudiant

10th Jul 2020, 16:18

This is a big machine, 1650kg max gross is about a third more than the R66, so price will be well north of $1MM.
That limits the private buyer pool.

[email protected]

10th Jul 2020, 16:23

So if all the info here is correct, it will be just under Gazelle/As350/EC120 AUM and presumably size, with more than 2 seats in a very competitive market but aimed at private pilots with very deep pockets since it can't do any AT work???? You would think their number of sales might struggle to hit double figures?

Bell_ringer

10th Jul 2020, 17:46

How much certification can a 4 or 5 seater avoid to make it “cheap” for just part 91 ops, and who in their right mind would want such a lousy investment?
Perhaps the attraction is that it will also run on clotted cream? :E

[email protected]

11th Jul 2020, 11:34

They clearly haven't done their cream tea analysis with regards to build and finance - in Cornwall the cream goes on top of the jam on the scone so the quality comes after the profit. In Devon the jam goes on top of the cream so quality first followed by profit - great idea, they just built it in the wrong county:E

Rocchi

12th Jul 2020, 12:27

I don't know how useful or relevant this is.

https://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/G-DRJH.html

or this

ROTORSPOT - Current (Active) Civil Helicopter Register for United Kingdom (http://www.rotorspot.nl/current/g-c.php)

Ascend Charlie

12th Jul 2020, 19:16

Hughes 500 sounds a bit like Trump:
"It's a good helicopter. It's a really good helicopter. It's really a good helicopter. It's a very good helicopter. It's really a very good helicopter. But it's stealthy, so you can't see it."

Redland

18th Jul 2020, 06:38

So they have BC helicopters doing marketing and sales?

Michael Gee

18th Jul 2020, 07:28

so they say
'Official launch will happen on August 24th, 2020'.

helipixman

21st Aug 2020, 11:53

Monday 24th August is going to be an interesting day, will we at last be able to see what is so special and game changing regarding the Hill HX50 helicopter ?

Cannot wait !

heli1

22nd Aug 2020, 07:29

Expect a Gazelle like appearance with 5 seats and a fenestron plus turbine engine.photo and details in this month's Helicopter Internstional

HeliHenri

22nd Aug 2020, 18:42

I wish all the best to the HX50 and his father! :ok:
.

etudiant

23rd Aug 2020, 00:14

Expect a Gazelle like appearance with 5 seats and a fenestron plus turbine engine.photo and details in this month's Helicopter Internstional

So what is the game changing improvement? Gazelle sized turbine engined spells expensive, so there has to be some really dramatic step forward to attract purchasers.

Ascend Charlie

24th Aug 2020, 10:50

...still waiting.......

Nige321

24th Aug 2020, 10:58

...still waiting.......
If you care to look at the website you'd know that the reveal is at 13:00 BST... :rolleyes:

Nige321

24th Aug 2020, 11:41

Hmmmm..... (https://www.hillhelicopters.com/?fbclid=IwAR0IlHdLVFvSv5w4mbgDqK5ZyeNqRERGHNKWBCEeB1HLia5vf1 3EQLOi5Mk)

All CGI by the looks of it...

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/820x360/118370406_143658834072762_6826774858311099108_n_9c149044dec7 2b3abc6b9b96cd5fea05471bf107.jpg

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x699/screenshot_2020_08_24_at_12_42_43_6225d398e70d6a9805b5aa5c81 2383446c2b090e.jpg

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1111/screenshot_2020_08_24_at_12_48_11_edfed62f18401fb6b985d66bc4 9fabacfef72958.jpg

Nige321

24th Aug 2020, 12:42

From HeliHub (https://helihub.com/2020/08/24/new-5-seat-helicopter-will-turn-private-flying-on-its-head/?fbclid=IwAR13X445KqUs4tWm55vZYj80viT8mGHzy8w2lQxHCCMXQy5owk Up9s9OHiY)

Source: HeliHub.com (https://helihub.com/2020/08/24/new-5-seat-helicopter-will-turn-private-flying-on-its-head/?fbclid=IwAR13X445KqUs4tWm55vZYj80viT8mGHzy8w2lQxHCCMXQy5owk Up9s9OHiY) British engineer Jason Hill has been flying helicopters for nearly 20 years, and has more recently been developing a five-seat three-blade turbine helicopter that will not be “just another new helicopter”. Instead, he is aiming to disrupt the helicopter industry at least as much as Elon Musk has disrupted the car industry with his Tesla vehicles. The HX50 helicopter will be produced in the UK by his eponymous company Hill Helicopters.

Announced today, this five seat single-turbine has its first flight scheduled for 2022, with deliveries from 2023. This retractable gear aircraft will bring a significant step-up in style to the market and a cabin size that will seat 5 people in as much style, comfort and refinement as a high end automobile.

The standard package is a much higher specification too. The standard package will include leather interior, foam-filled bladder fuel tank, key-less entry, removable duals, covers, Bose Bluetooth headsets, start/stop button linked to the dual FADEC, 2-axis autopilot, blade fold, hydraulic controls, air conditioning, USB ports, flight data recorder, rotor brake, belly hard points, adjustable pedals, 4-point harnesses, and retractable undercarriage. While that doesn’t leave much, there will be further options including a 4-axis autopilot, and a “Heli-Move Kit” whereby the wheels are powered so you can use an app on your phone to control the helicopter on its own wheels into the hangar.

Gross weight will be 3630lb (1650kg), Empty weight 1870lb (850kg) and thus payload of 1760lb (800kg). Cruise speed will be high at 140 knots and maximum endurance of 5 hours, plenty enough until the pilot needs a comfort break.

Hill started his career at Leonardo Helicopters in the GKN Westland days and later went on to complete his Ph.D. in helicopter aerodynamics on their behalf. He later formed Dynamiq Engineering – specialising in rapid development of new products & technology by injecting new technology into stagnant industries. Hill has now focused his team of field-proven specialists on exploiting the opportunity afforded by the significant lack of innovation in the light helicopter industry. Combining this level of expertise with cutting edge engineering design, analysis and development approaches dramatically reduces the product development and testing period.

The airframe will be fully composite, meeting the latest international crashworthiness requirements and featuring an integrated high-authority shrouded tail rotor. The main rotor is of three-bladed, high-inertia and hingeless design, with composite blades employing modern evolving profile planform and three-dimensional tips delivering very high performance and reduced noise. The entire main rotor head is contained within a low-drag aerodynamic fairing that optimises the aircraft for efficient high-speed cruise. The HX50 will use a 500 shp turbine with ample power to deliver the high cruise speed of 140 knots.

The company has an excellent working relationship with the UK CAA and is actively working on the aircraft approvals both domestically and internationally, to minimise the time-to-market. The aircraft is being developed to fully comply with the latest EASA CS-27 in the UK and Europe, FAR-27 in the US and AWM527 in Canada.

Operating costs will also be very advantageous and will be announced in a few weeks and will benefit substantially from Hill-backed by-the-hour maintenance programs in addition to manufacturer backed insurance.

For more information see www.HillHelicopters.com (https://www.HillHelicopters.com)

Jeremy Parkin – HeliHub.com

aa777888

24th Aug 2020, 14:05

So a smaller, more modern 109 then? Say $5M USD?

CTR

24th Aug 2020, 14:11

To paraphrase racing legend Roger Penske.....

How do you make a small fortune in manufacturing commercial helicopters?

Start with a large fortune.

Michael Gee

24th Aug 2020, 14:35

Launching of Ships and other Transportation vehicles is normally done with a fanfare and much bunting - why not a new helicopter ? Where's the real thing to gaze at ?

Thracian

24th Aug 2020, 15:56

For a possible private owner, the specs look promising (wait, the Kopter SH09 figures...), but what about
- price tag
- maintenance cost (component lifetime, ...)
- maintenance facilities (would I have to visit UK annually with this thing to be maintained)
- fuel consumption
- cost for initial and annual type rating
- ...
- and I guess, that EASA and friends will find some more "valuable" things to be taken into account (or better: taken off from the owner's account)

Eh, by the way, just a last question:
When will certification start (for the SH09 it started like what, 2.5 years ago?)?

And while you're at it, Hill Helicopters, a picture of the prototype would be nice...

Well, we'll see

[email protected]

24th Aug 2020, 16:10

And how many pretty designs never made it to production or even a prototype? I hope his backers believe in his confidence - apart from the sexy styling it seems like hype.

evil7

24th Aug 2020, 16:39

First of all - the drawing looks quite sexy. But what of the looks will make it into production?

I also highly doubt that they can meet their predicted weights when they put all that fancy stuff in (The standard package will include leather interior, foam-filled bladder fuel tank, key-less entry, removable duals, covers, Bose Bluetooth headsets, start/stop button linked to the dual FADEC, 2-axis autopilot, blade fold, hydraulic controls, air conditioning, USB ports, flight data recorder, rotor brake, belly hard points, adjustable pedals, 4-point harnesses, and retractable undercarriage and the ground moving motors!)

By the way - which helicopter hasn‘t got key-less entry🥴😉

wish them good luck and look forward to see it „life“ for an affordable price for private people😳

206 jock

24th Aug 2020, 20:45

All seems a bit sugar-coated for me. I mean, Jason says you don't want to buy an old machine because you might have a big maintenance bill, nor a new one because they depreciate, so buy his new one!. I was hoping for a bit more detail (like cost objective) and some actual pics. And just how many 'private owners' are there out there?

Ascend Charlie

25th Aug 2020, 02:24

Anybody see a pitot tube? Radio antenna? Space to put 5 hrs of fuel if those sponsons are full of retractable wheels?

No opening windows or fresh air vents, so the aircon will be an absolute must to be operating - no aircon, no fly. Put it on the MEL.

Hingeless rotors, enclosed in a flash fairing - but the blades can fold? Take the fairing off first? Engineer required?

And the bit I really like, somehow the wheels can be driven, so the owner can sit in his easy chair in the hangar and use his phone to drive the thing out to the pad remotely. Or is the "Heli-Move Kit" just a little tug? Or is the writer having a little tug?

Bell_ringer

25th Aug 2020, 05:27

Is it April again already?
Good luck to them, but if anything like the artist's impression actually arrives and gets near the specs wish-list, many will be amazed.

Agile

25th Aug 2020, 06:07

While we are it... the cyclic plate will fit where? ... or is it an "Enstron like" system of blade pitch control.

HeliHenri

25th Aug 2020, 10:09

.
I Don't have any skills in the field of helicopter design unlike the leader of this project who is pasionate and highly qualified.

I can just note that the comments on this topic remind me the comments regarding the Cabri G2 at the beginning.

My purely personal opinion (not argued except that I love helicopters) is that the leader of this project is right to go for it ! :ok:
.

cattletruck

25th Aug 2020, 12:43

Agree with HH but they didn't do their case any favours by producing a fluff piece graphic that are all too common nowadays. We need to some real metal (or plastic) in action like the Swiss Marenco and Kiwi Adventourer.

[email protected]

25th Aug 2020, 14:25

You wouldn't want a birdstrike in it - I bet that huge sweeping canopy would be V expensive to replace - think Gazelle!

Oh - and where are the wipers to cope with the British weather?

Hughes500

25th Aug 2020, 18:37

domperry76

25th Aug 2020, 20:38

A wee bit of digging today:
- HX50 will be aimed initially at the private flyer market, but a commercial version will follow soon after "when, not if".
- No details yet on the engine, but expect an announcement within a few weeks.
- The helicopter is likely to be built in Tatenhill, Staffs, rather than Cornwall as previously thought.
- While there are some interesting links to venture capital, the programme is apparently self-funded (save for the £1.4m in Innovate UK grants).
- First deliveries are scheduled to take place about a year after first flight; all three prototypes will be flown concurrently.
- Hill Helis apparently has the backing of the CAA with its certification plans and feels it is benefiting from the post-Brexit environment.
There's probably something I've missed, but that was the gist of it.

ShyTorque

25th Aug 2020, 23:26

I note that this is the self declared “vision“ of one man, an engineer.

I wish him luck. However from past experience, I know that engineer/designers don’t often make the best businessmen.

I can immediately recall two others with a vision, albeit in the motoring world. Most people have heard of John DeLorean. Many in the USA have much more recently heard of Paul Elio, whose vision of an inexpensive niche vehicle has suffered a similar fate. His crowdfunding did little other than pay his salary in real terms. A lot of his hopeful customers paid $1000 for a tee shirt and a bumper sticker.

Then in the aviation world there is Richard Noble....

But whatever happens, I won’t be buying one of these new helicopters. I’m still waiting for my Moller Skycar to be delivered. ;)

roscoe1

26th Aug 2020, 00:22

Say what you will about Frank Robinson, there are successful engineers who build successful helicopter companies. Oh yes, also, Sikorsky, Enstrom, Hiller, Piaseki, Kaman and Bell ( although he wasn't so much a fan of his helicopter program in the begining). The founders of Airbus, of course there were several and several companies conglomerated, were essentially all engineers. This helicopter may turn out to be fluff or may be what you will be flying in 6 years but only time will tell if they are successful. The old saying that at some point you have to shoot the engineers and go fly the aircraft isn't really realistic.

krypton_john

26th Aug 2020, 00:24

krypton_john

26th Aug 2020, 00:25

Yep I'd back a technology company started by an engineer over one started by a salesman any day of the week.

Bell_ringer

26th Aug 2020, 06:00

Yep I'd back a technology company started by an engineer over one started by a salesman any day of the week.

This engineer seems a very capable salesman, one who's happy to compare themselves to Musk.
Hopefully there is less self-medication involved :}

The electric car market was growing for Tesla, they were in the right place at the right time and produced an appealing product, not for the mass market, to establish their brand.
In that respect there a similarities, however they knew that they could only really be successful with consumer products made at scale.

How successful Hill will be depends on the depths of their pockets.
Making a car is a whole lot easier than certifying an aircraft, regulators aren't easy to convince that "from the ground up" tech should be let loose.
Throw in the claims, market conditions (I'd love to know what engine they plan on using and where 5 hours of 500SHP go-juice will be stored) and you can appreciate the skepticism.
It would be amazing to see someone mix up the sector but fluffy, hyperbole laden press releases isn't going to convince a lot of people, not that the average pruner is the target customer.
Good luck to him and his team.

[email protected]

26th Aug 2020, 06:33

[email protected]

26th Aug 2020, 06:37

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/964x635/homemadehelo_502a74092190258a96d574c4e6b944e1e8c320e0.jpg
Oh no, someone has beaten him to it

Nige321

26th Aug 2020, 11:59

Hughes 500 - I suspect it has to do with visual clarity and the ability to polish marks and scratches out of the acrylic and possibly strength vs thickness.

I remember the makralon shields well but they were designed for a very different purpose and only had one simple curve instead of many complex ones.
Makrolon is a very old product, it has a slightly 'milky' haze to it.
Optically clear polycarbonates are now common, such as Sustanat.

Hughes500

26th Aug 2020, 13:43

Crab

They were designed not to shatter into sharp bits and protect the person behind, which helicopter windshields blatantly don't !

[email protected]

26th Aug 2020, 14:31

According to the manufacturers website, Sustanat doesn't have aerospace or aviation listed as one of its normal applications - could there be a reason for that?

Hughes, with a birdstrike in a Gazelle you are far more likely to suffer injury from the bird than the bits of canopy and it doesn't shatter the whole thing, it just makes a bird-sized hole..

Bell_ringer

26th Aug 2020, 14:40

I doubt helicopter manufacturers, in their infinite wisdom, have decided to ignore superior materials for aircraft safety for no reason.
An airliner window and a helicopter cockpit are somewhat different in requirement.

Hot and Hi

26th Aug 2020, 16:09

Crab

If you made the canopy out of polycarbonate you wouldn't have a problem but the helicopter world makes its " glass" out of acrylic ( an illegal material for use in machines that require operator protection ) which shatters into knife like shards. If you were on the streets of Belfast we had Makrelon shields similar to polycarbonate, you could fire a baton round at it and it wouldnt break ! So why an earth does the aviation world put up with the wrong product ??????

Robinson is exactly doing that: Polycarbonate impact-resistant windshields

https://youtu.be/gEvehu3ESZY

Optional impact-resistant windshields for R22, R44, and R66 helicopters provide protection from bird strikes. The new windshields are constructed of tough, energy-absorbing polycarbonate (standard windshields are made of acrylic) and installed with distinctive retention hardware. A special hard coating provides protection from scratching and weather degradation.

Tests demonstrate the R22’s windshield provides protection at impact speeds up to 90 knots, while the R44 and R66 windshields provide protection at impact speeds up to 100 knots. Impact-resistant windshields increase the R22’s empty weight by 1 lb and by 1.2. lb for the R44 and R66. No special maintenance or inspections are required, although a cabin cover is recommended for prolonged outdoor exposure.

Hughes500

26th Aug 2020, 21:02

Crab

I have seen the result on two pilots ( customers ) of acrylic windshields splintering. One in a coma for 2 weeks due to piece of acrylic puncturing skull. The other 25 stitches to head. However if either had been wearing a helmet then no problem
Manufacturers are only interested in profit so using cheap inferior materials means more profit. They only change when the pressure is on. EG Robinson fuel tanks,

[email protected]

26th Aug 2020, 21:10

Hughes 500 - it would seem from the post about the Robinson windshield that it just requires the technology to advance sufficiently to allow the manufacture ( at reasonable cost) using superior materials.

Will be interesting to see if the Hill uses polycarbonate for the new helicopter.

Shame about your customers, were they both in Gazelles? I wouldn't fly low level without a helmet with a visor down.

Hughes500

27th Aug 2020, 07:25

Both in a 500,
Not birdstrikes a bit more severe
One tail rotor blade pitch horn snapped, ac forced landing, rolled over shattering plexiglass with shard entering skull
second customer on finals flew through a set of power lines rolled machine end over end 3 times, again shard of plexiglass into skull.
Both would have been ok with a helmet or polycarbonate windshield, I still get funny looks as I wont get in a helicopter without wearing my lid

Robbo Jock

27th Aug 2020, 11:55

As an aside, I wonder why Robinson 'fuzzed out' bits of the chickens post-impact in that video?

Evil Twin

27th Aug 2020, 12:37

Anybody else get a strange satisfaction watching someone belt a robby with a sledge hammer?

[email protected]

27th Aug 2020, 13:24

Anybody else get a strange satisfaction watching someone belt a robby with a sledge hammer? I know exactly what you mean.

Judging by the deformation that happens, the windscreen will still need to be replaced post bird impact (north of $6000) though.

500e

27th Aug 2020, 15:02

Think $6000 better than a buzzard in the head or chest, say average weight 1.1 Kg @ 80 kts + single pilot not a good bet.
Always wondered about canopy material

PhlyingGuy

27th Aug 2020, 16:46

Robinson is exactly doing that: Polycarbonate impact-resistant windshields

https://youtu.be/gEvehu3ESZY

Aeronautical Accessories has been selling these types of windows for years for Bell 206s and 407s and have saved a lot of lives already because of it: 407 Polycarbonate Windows (https://www.aero-access.com/products/Bell-407-Polycarbonate-Windshield-Replacement-Kit.html) 206 Polycarb (https://www.aero-access.com/products/bell-206-series-polycarbonate-windshield-replacement-kit.html) Brochure (https://aeroaccess.ebizcdn.com/media/D41D8CPolycarbonate_Windshield.pdf) The video that their sales reps can show you are just as powerful as the Robinson one.

CGameProgrammerr

27th Aug 2020, 17:11

Nige321

27th Aug 2020, 18:27

Back to the original subject, I would be shocked if they ever even get so far as building a prototype of this helicopter and the proposed timeline is so laughable it sounds like a scam or something. The Kopter SH09 created a flying prototype 6 years ago and it's still not out. Of course that's supposed to be single-pilot IFR whereas this will definitely be VFR. And powered wheels? Who asked for that?

I would be shocked if they ever even get so far as building a prototype of this helicopter
They're building three, the first is registered G-DRJH.

The Kopter SH09 created a flying prototype 6 years ago and it's still not out.
So? Hill have been working on this for 12 years.

Bravo73

27th Aug 2020, 20:15

Out of interest, Nige321, what is your connection to Hill Helicopters?

Nige321

27th Aug 2020, 21:26

Out of interest, Nige321, what is your connection to Hill Helicopters?
Who says there's a connection...??

Bravo73

28th Aug 2020, 06:10

You seem to know (or care) a lot about Hill Helicopters which doesn’t seem to be readily available to Joe Public. Just wondering how/why...

Nige321

28th Aug 2020, 07:30

You seem to know (or care) a lot about Hill Helicopters which doesn’t seem to be readily available to Joe Public. Just wondering how/why...

Not sure why i have to justify anything to you, but no, I have zero connection to HH, other than a desire to see an already successful British company succeed in the face of the usual doom-laden luddites on here.
I have posted nothing which isn't in the public domain from Hill.
I can use Google, try it sometime...

Bell_ringer

28th Aug 2020, 07:54

..in the face of the usual doom-laden luddites on here.

Does that make you an over-optimistic half-wit then? :E
You're being a bit harsh when people are legitimately skeptical about rather broad claims.
I think most of the luddites here know a little something about helicopters and the chequered history thereof (and British manufacturing in general).

I really hope they prove everyone wrong, that is a pretty machine and investment in the industry is never a bad thing.

Bravo73

28th Aug 2020, 07:59

Not sure why i have to justify anything to you

Nope, you don’t have to justify anything to me and I wasn’t trying to pick a fight. I was just intrigued because you seem to be remarkably well informed about HH.

[email protected]

28th Aug 2020, 08:03

Nige321

28th Aug 2020, 08:09

If you want to avoid skepticism from the 'doom-laden Luddites' publish some actual information rather than a wish list of performance characteristics.

Perhaps some photos of the prototypes being built, an indication of which engine it will have.

Obviously Hill have their reasons for not doing so at the moment.

Hill have had a grant from Innovate UK.
I've worked on a couple of UAV projects they've backed, I can assure you that they don't back wild dreamers or scammers.
They need hard evidence of past and future progress before handing over a penny...

Hughes500

28th Aug 2020, 09:46

I do have some inside knowledge, all I can say things are very advanced when it comes to engines etc etc. I really would love to tel you more but I can't. I really really hope it gets there ( i can see no reason why it wouldnt ) as it will be a game changer for a personal transport helicopter

aa777888

28th Aug 2020, 14:47

...as it will be a game changer for a personal transport helicopter
I keep reading that term about this helicopter in various places around the interweb. How is it going to be a "game changer"?

They are claiming A109 level performance numbers. If one could acquire and operate that level of performance at R66 price points I could see that as a game changer. Other than that it's just a clean sheet of paper with best of the best features (thinking optimistically) in which case the operating costs will remain where you might expect them to (quite high).

CGameProgrammerr

28th Aug 2020, 16:50

They seem to be targeting the ultra-rich private owner market, in which case operating costs are not very relevant. The R66 and 505 are roughly $1 million but this will probably be $3 million or more, like the AW119. And I hope they create a nice luxury VFR aircraft not overly focused on "the mission". Like how the Cabri G2 feels so luxurious compared to any Robinson (or any other cheaper helicopter).

md 600 driver

28th Aug 2020, 17:04

There seems to be many gloomy despondent posters

but I wish the HH the very best ,what’s there seems to fill the void it’s going to be a uphill struggle but lots of startups are like than

looks a nice heli it’s got a fenestrom

good luck

Bell_ringer

28th Aug 2020, 17:07

[email protected]

28th Aug 2020, 17:14

If it's a 'personal transport helicopter' why does it need 5 seats?

Hughes500

28th Aug 2020, 17:24

because people have families
maybe you dont Crab !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bravo73

28th Aug 2020, 18:56

They seem to be targeting the ultra-rich private owner market

But how big is that market? How many ‘ultra-rich’ want to fly themselves?

If I was ‘ultra-rich’, I would want to start off with 2 engines and 2 pilots.*

*Then make sure that they were working and/or trained properly.

ShyTorque

28th Aug 2020, 19:52

But how big is that market? How many ‘ultra-rich’ want to fly themselves?

If I was ‘ultra-rich’, I would want to start off with 2 engines and 2 pilots.*

*Then make sure that they were working and/or trained properly.

Many ‘ultra rich’ tend not to fly the helicopter themselves and expect an “all weather” aircraft rather than a VFR only plaything. It will be interesting to see how this aircraft is marketed.

krypton_john

28th Aug 2020, 22:58

ShyTorque

28th Aug 2020, 23:40

We often fly under IFR (and in IMC). Here in the UK it’s by no means unusual. This new helicopter is a UK project.

krypton_john

29th Aug 2020, 00:09

We often fly under IFR (and in IMC). Here in the UK it’s by no means unusual. This new helicopter is a UK project.

Makes sense for some activities such as offshore work.

Most helicopter work down here consists of ag, utility, tourism (those were the days) and transport to off-airport locations... so IFR not really applicable in those cases.

Bell_ringer

29th Aug 2020, 05:45

Unless you live around mountains a VFR restriction is not such a big limitation for helicopters. Many places around the world don't get many VFR no-fly helicopter days... Unlike fixed wing.

Of all helicopter hours flown every year what percentage is under IFR? Down this way it would be about 1% at a wild guess.

There are many owner pilots around, and this market is mainly single-engine VFR. Outside of the UK most of the world has pretty decent weather so around here even 1% would be high.
The market is heavily biased to piston aircraft then single turbines like the gazelle, 206 with the 407 being a popular choice as well.
If a modern 5-seater can be made that is in the legacy 206 money range, then they may well have a global market, presuming that they are able to properly certify it to satisfy global authorities.
Some owners do like their aircraft to work a bit so not being certified for commercial operations could limit its appeal.

ShyTorque

29th Aug 2020, 08:12

Makes sense for some activities such as offshore work.

Most helicopter work down here consists of ag, utility, tourism (those were the days) and transport to off-airport locations... so IFR not really applicable in those cases.

Not only offshore. I have flown in the UK corporate sector for almost twenty years and I’d soon be out of a job if I couldn’t fly under IFR. It’s by no means unknown to plan a fully IFR route and by no means out of the ordinary to be prepared to change from VFR to IFR where necessary once en route.

206 jock

29th Aug 2020, 08:24

The trouble is, the marketing message of this proposed new machine is naively directed to this utopian vision that you wake up on a Friday morning, kiss your gorgeous wife goodbye for the day, gather a few minions around you and waft off to some 'meetings' around the country. You return later in the afternoon (another million richer, of course), dismiss your team, kiss your wife again and thank her for the lovely supper she has prepared for you. The next morning, you wake up, think 'A trip to somewhere delightful for lunch, methinks'. So you fire up the machine and off you go again.

Reality is somewhat different. On Friday you wake up and even though you've planned the trip for about a week beforehand, the promised blue skies have disappeared and it's low scud and a 40mph wind. And it's raining. Even though it's August So now you have to either delay your departure (you already told your team to make their own way, in case this happened) or drive. And on Saturday, the delightful restaurant is already full. And the bloke next door has put his horses in the field on your boundary and you know will moan, the dog needs taking to the vet, or there's a delivery by Amazon due or whatever.

I do about 25 hours a year myself and my son another 15 - a local flying school will do 60ish, which helps with the running costs. I believe that I am fairly typical, if not on the high side of utilisation of 'truly private owners', in the UK at least.

So while the HX50 is an interesting proposition, I'm not sure it would tempt me out of a legacy 206. Maybe I'm not the target market but in 25 years of flying helicopters, I'm not sure I've met many others that would be either...

Bell_ringer

29th Aug 2020, 08:34

..if I couldn’t fly under IFR. It’s by no means unknown to plan a fully IFR route and by no means out of the ordinary to be prepared to change from VFR to IFR where necessary once en route.

Thing is, there is a great big world outside of the UK (and US for that matter), where authorities take very different views of instrument flying.
For example, around here, you can only fly IF between licensed and equipped airfields, off field is VFR only.
You may also not legally change from VFR flight to IFR - Their view is it encourages pushing the limits, instead of planning the flight properly from the start.
So, when all you can do is fly airport to airport, a helicopter is not the best tool for that job, so next to no one flying rotorwing will bother with IF certification.

[email protected]

29th Aug 2020, 09:23

206jock - well done for injecting a much needed dose of reality:ok:

If you buy a VFR only helicopter for use in the UK, you won't get a huge use out of it, especially if you are limited on when you can actually get away from work/home to fly it. When the skies are clear in the SW, there is GA everywhere but as soon as the weather comes in a bit it is only GA with IMC capability you see and hear.

ShyTorque

29th Aug 2020, 10:16

Thing is, there is a great big world outside of the UK (and US for that matter), where authorities take very different views of instrument flying.
For example, around here, you can only fly IF between licensed and equipped airfields, off field is VFR only.
You may also not legally change from VFR flight to IFR - Their view is it encourages pushing the limits, instead of planning the flight properly from the start.
So, when all you can do is fly airport to airport, a helicopter is not the best tool for that job, so next to no one flying rotorwing will bother with IF certification.

A rather different discussion, seeing that most single engined helicopters are not allowed to fly IMC in UK.

Thankfully, we are allowed to do more here in UK. But anyway, all of the points you raise limit the likely usage rate of a helicopter.

Hughes500

29th Aug 2020, 10:20

Think you are missing the point. If it is aimed at the brigade that would buy a Ferrari and fly it as often as a Ferrari goes out. Look at the number of A109's that are owned by wealthy people that are 20 years plus and have less than 2000 hours on them ! If these helicopters are so bad why are there more R44's and R66's than almost any other type, none of which are VFR machines !
A helicopter in lieu of / plus a supercar doesn't get flown every day and doesn't need to be it is there because someone wants it on the odd occasion

ShyTorque

29th Aug 2020, 10:54

Think you are missing the point. If it is aimed at the brigade that would buy a Ferrari and fly it as often as a Ferrari goes out.

Is it? That's not the impression I got from the present advertising, which makes me think it's meant to be a low cost machine.

Look at the number of A109's that are owned by wealthy people that are 20 years plus and have less than 2000 hours on them ! If these helicopters are so bad why are there more R44's and R66's than almost any other type, none of which are VFR machines !

Do you mean IFR machines?

[email protected]

29th Aug 2020, 11:23

If it is another expensive machine, it's not a game-changer is it?

Bell_ringer

29th Aug 2020, 11:39

If it is another expensive machine, it's not a game-changer is it?

Exactly.
There aren't many options when it comes to 500SHP turbine engines, none of them are low-cost.

If you look at a Robbie, it is an aircraft which screams that it was designed to meet a price point.
This pretty thing just shouts $$$, and there's more than enough choice in that area for a privateer, used and new.
We will have to wait until more detail is released, which presumably will be when their pre-order book opens.

[email protected]

29th Aug 2020, 12:25

Hughes500 - if details aren't available and shrouded in secrecy, how are they going to get any orders?

Buying a helicopter 'off-plan' sounds a very risky investment.

ShyTorque

29th Aug 2020, 13:10

Hughes500 - if details aren't available and shrouded in secrecy, how are they going to get any orders?

Buying a helicopter 'off-plan' sounds a very risky investment.

Indeed, my previous reference to the "Elio" car was one recent example of such a venture. Paul Elio, undoubtedly an engineer with a vision, persuaded thousands of Americans that his low cost, highly economical, three wheeled car would revolutionise private transport. It was advertised to cost just $6800 and do 84 miles per US gallon. It obviously appealed to retired folk and others on lower incomes. Many put money up front as non-refundable deposits ($1000 dollars in many cases). The company was subsequently floated and many other hopefuls bought shares. All that they saw were prototypes that were constantly being radically changed in design while the price kept going up and the production date rolled further away into the future. I believe the original, panelled space frame would be too costly to mass produce and probably not comply with vehicle regulations. No vehicles ever went into production (they didn't even have a factory in the end) and all those paying for a deposit received was a T shirt, a bumper sticker and empty promises.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elio_Motors

As a petrol head I became quite enthusiastic about the concept to begin with (must be over ten years ago now) but my engineering background made me quickly realise that advertising claims being made were unrealistic. Major investors obviously felt the same way. The designer seems to have quietly disappeared.

I sincerely hope that Hill Helicopters will fare better than this.

aa777888

29th Aug 2020, 15:48

OK, so let's just say it'll be in the $3M price range (I believe it'll be higher). Who here is familiar enough with the development and production costs of a new type to know how many units they need to sell to amortize the start-up and development costs and become profitable? Don't forget they are starting from scratch, i.e. there is no developmental or manufacturing infrastructure already bought and paid for like there is at Bell or Airbus. And then does anyone believe they'll actually sell that many? I.e. does the business plan make sense?

Mind you I'm not knocking the design approach or the vision. I have no doubt it'll be a great machine. I'd love to see them go for a SPIFR certification for it in the US with it (probably the only place in the world where that would be possible), especially since they can follow in the footsteps (rotor vortices?) of the relatively recent 407 and 119 certifications.

Ascend Charlie

30th Aug 2020, 07:07

SPIFR certification for it in the US with it (probably the only place in the world where that would be possible),

In Oz there are plenty of certified SPIFR B206.

Hughes500

30th Aug 2020, 07:16

Guys why are you assuming the engine is going to come from the likes of RR or Safran ? A gas turbine isn't difficult to make cheaply. I should know as my next door neighbour used to make the compressor wheels for RR if you knew what they cost to make and the mark up Rolls put on them ( way over a factor of 10 ) you would understand the complete laugh the manufacturers are having. Please don't go down the R and R costs t the manufacturer,the Allison 250 was paid for by the US mil in the 1960's the current RR350 and 500 are basically the same engine !

rudestuff

30th Aug 2020, 07:56

Well it looks pretty, but I don't see anything game changing. Unless they're going to manufacture and certify their own engine and major components and sell them at cost (2k for a gearbox instead of 40k) - then all I see is another expensive gas turbine helicopter. To be "game-changing" they'd have to reduce maintenance costs by half, but why would they do that when all they need to do is charge slightly less than the other guys? Starbucks could cut their coffee prices in half and still make money (it's just coffee and water) but they don't.

Bell_ringer

30th Aug 2020, 08:18

It’s RR300 and the 500 was killed as a project years ago, lack of interest, or something like that.
So they’re also going to knock together an engine and certify it, as well as a new aircraft?
Someone is smoking something..
This aircraft and engine building malarkey must be easy, who could believe all the big guys have got it so wrong for so long :E

I am looking forward to ordering mine for $200k :}

Hot and Hi

30th Aug 2020, 12:25

The only way I can interpret it being a "personal" or "private use" helicopter is that it *won't* be certified. That would practrically make it an "experimental" (or "kit") helicopter. Which puts it at par with the Gazelle, i.e., same weight/performance class with nil or very limited commercial utility.

Not certifying it would also go a long way towards

- achieving early market launch
- reducing purchase price
- bring down annual maintenance cost (GBP 15k per annum was mentioned here)

Mostly I have stayed away from "kit" helicopters as they don't seem to have the reliability and safety of their certified brothers. In that sense, the "ultra-rich" private Leonardo clients may indeed not be Hill's target market as they definitely want to rely on their certified aircraft and their IF-rated multi-crew to take them anywhere, anytime they want to (OK, let's not do there ...)

rudestuff

30th Aug 2020, 15:08

Now granted, I know nothing about building or certifying helicopters, but surely in this day and age the obvious solution is a couple of Tesla-style motors driving the rotor? Redundancy in lieu of certification. Powered by a cheap and efficient motor/generator through a small battery to provide 5 minutes of extra T/O power and to negate the need to autorotate.. or have the option to strap on an extra motor/generator and turn it into a twin..

muffin

30th Aug 2020, 15:12

https://www.pilotweb.aero/news/hill-hx50-developments-revealed-1-6811714

Hughes500

30th Aug 2020, 15:23

Bell ringer, you obviously dont pay the bills on a machine. Here are a few examples of how the big boys rip you off

Compressor wheels cost to make under £ 200 sold at over £ 2000
MD bearings, cost to make under $ 50 sold for $ 1400. Mesh filter infront of compressor $ 12500 ( for a fibreglass frame with some garden mesh over it !)
S300 strut, cost to make $ 55 sold for $ 1600
AW pressure switch made for Euros 2k sold for Euros 32K
Sa 341 clutch o/h cost for YU reg £ 7500 for an EASA ac £ £ 32k
That is why your maintenance bills are so frigging high

Thracian

30th Aug 2020, 15:53

The only way I can interpret it being a "personal" or "private use" helicopter is that it *won't* be certified.
As their press statement goes:
The aircraft is being developed to fully comply with the latest EASA CS-27 in the UK and Europe, FAR-27 in the US and AWM527 in Canada.
So there will be a certification (CS-27 is for small rotorcraft).
Unfortunately, we don't know yet if it would be certified for IFR (appendix B of CS-27), and CS-27 alone doesn't tell anything about commercial or private ops.

I'd love to see that machine flying. And if it sells below the R66 - well, I know which design I'd prefer...

Thracian

Bell_ringer

30th Aug 2020, 16:13

Hughes, well aware of the costs. Had my C47 in for overhaul a couple of years back with too many components not making their hours.
Unfortunately your argument is like someone giving a restaurant a bad review because they’ve worked out what they could buy the veges for but ignore the rest of the equation.

Bell_ringer

30th Aug 2020, 17:05

Sa 341 clutch o/h cost for YU reg £ 7500 for an EASA ac £ £ 32k
That is why your maintenance bills are so frigging high

Just to add. I have read the accident reports for some of those UK-flown gazelles on the YU register and the quality parts and maintenance that some of them received.
You don't spend $2M+ on an aircraft and then moan about an extra $100k every 2000 hours or so.

I seriously doubt the aircraft pictured above is vaguely in the price range of an ageing 341 or indeed the budget of someone who would rather fly on a YU reg, but I will be happy if it is, and once it's logged enough hours to buff out the quirks.

etudiant

30th Aug 2020, 23:31

The writing on the tin said:
'our consortium will develop a next-generation private helicopter that delivers reduced environmental impact, lower noise levels and unprecedented levels of safety, comfort and performance at a game-changing price point'
The illustration of the prototype do not give much indication of the first four parameters, so the price point becomes critical. I'll stay tuned for the suggested launch price, but am doubtful.

Ascend Charlie

31st Aug 2020, 05:07

unprecedented levels of safety

Options list:
5-point harness
energy-absorbing-stroke seats (Recaro, for the unprecedented comfort)
airbags all around
steerable ballistic parachute, with optional gas-fired blower to stay up there a bit longer like a balloon
and if all else fails, 5 x Martin-Baker Mk 10 departure lounges.

Now THAT is unprecedented safety. Wonder what these dudes will have?

CGameProgrammerr

31st Aug 2020, 23:28

The idea that this will undercut the R66 in price is simply absurd. The R66 is the cheapest 5-seat turbine there is, even cheaper than the 40-year-old Enstrom 480B. The Bell 505 is a bit more but not by much, as far as I know. There is no way this ultra-luxury high-performance helicopter from a start-up, with retractable and allegedly *powered* wheels, will be cheaper. If it actually gets built, certified, and sold for $2 million, I'd call that impressive. But I suspect it'll be more (if they ever finish it at all), or start at a lower price then increase dramatically after the first year.

But I hope they succeed. There is far too little innovation in helicopters.

Agile

1st Sep 2020, 02:14

Guimbal was saying it best, helicopters production is a business of trust. On a purchase of 1 million dollar plus you need garanty of continuity of service, spare parts and other procedural support.
that is why Kopter would never make it by themselves
that is why Guimbal is not doing a G4
that is why Hills helicopters is a non starter no matter how good and innovative the new machine is.

its easy to get excited about innovations but this type of thinking leads you to overshoot the demand and miss delivering on the key factor of importance which in this industry are still fairly basic.

cattletruck

1st Sep 2020, 11:10

If Mr Hills owns some really good patented innovations then he may be able to make more money licensing them than actually building and selling whole helicopters. Under this model the helicopters are just sales/proving platforms for his innovations.

kiwi_andy

2nd Sep 2020, 02:25

that is why Guimbal is not doing a G4

SO how do you KNOW Bruno is not doing a G4??

Agile

2nd Sep 2020, 03:25

SO how do you KNOW Bruno is not doing a G4??

Don't want to risk the thread drift, but that was Guimbal's answer in an interview a while back.
That building trust and support around the G2 was the only focus that made sense.

The point i was trying to make is: there must be a relation between the price of the machine and the likelihood of the company to be around in 10 years.
I don't see an unproven manufacturer directly entering in the 1 million dollar range helicopter just because of innovative factors.

But they could like Kopter change the way people think about their helicopter (their concept of EC135 performance/space for simplicity of a single engine)
that is good for the industry as a whole because it pushes the more establish players to try harder.

Evil Twin

2nd Sep 2020, 03:54

Agile

2nd Sep 2020, 06:47

Perhaps we're looking at this wrong. Possibly the plan is, a little like Kopter, to get it far enough along in development that one of the big players comes along and buys it all up for a pot of cash.

Except the big player want to play the higher end of the market, Thus Airbus giving up the H120, saying the segment is not the best use of their capabilities.

ApolloHeli

2nd Sep 2020, 06:57

Except the big player want to play the higher end of the market, Thus Airbus giving up the H120, saying the segment is not the best use of their capabilities.

That was a real shame I believe. The EC120 is a great machine. What the HX50 sounds like on paper is an EC120 with wheels, and supposedly cheaper. If it flies and performs anything like an EC120 then I'm hoping it will be successful and reliable.

Nige321

4th Sep 2020, 13:10

Looks like they're doing their own engine and avionics...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoi95c63d0I

Hughes500

4th Sep 2020, 13:59

Apollo

The 120 was a crap helicopter, the 341 which it really replaced was quicker,
greater payload and didnt suffer from the C of G issues. as Bruno who was one of the chief designers said it was too fat courtesy of the marketing boys at Airbus

Bell_ringer

4th Sep 2020, 14:41

They really are obsessed with the supercar comparison and taking off from your garden or local parking lot.
Their target customer doesn't seem to be your typical private helicopter bloke.

Interesting ideas from a design perspective.
They have a lot to do. Aircraft, engine, automation, avionics etc.
Best get cracking boys.

PPRuNeUser0211

4th Sep 2020, 14:56

A push/pull collective seems like a bit of a risk - trickier for transition with some serious muscle memory issues unless they get it right.

Fundamentally I push to go down and pull to go up in a helicopter. Be interesting to see how they resolve that Vs a traditional fixed wing throttle.

jeepys

4th Sep 2020, 17:03

Forward and back collective! 214 did that years ago.

Good luck to them. The industry needs some modern thinking for a change. Even the latest cabs are old tech.

PhlyingGuy

5th Sep 2020, 00:24

designing their own airframe, engine, drivetrain... that's going to be quite an accomplishment if they can do all of that. Especially in the timeline that they're suggesting!

Ascend Charlie

5th Sep 2020, 03:14

All that glass but no opening windows or fresh air scoops designed yet. As soon as the doors are shut, they need aircon running or the occupants melt in the sun. An APU to run aircon might be needed, or else a dose of reality in the designer's Drambuie.

Inventing a new flight control system to go with their new engine and airframe, glad to see they aren't bothering to progress from known steps to unknown, they are just making the Quantum Leap. Oh, boy...

muffin

25th Sep 2020, 11:57

The interior looks a lot better than my car.

https://www.hillhelicopters.com/interior-concept

Bell_ringer

25th Sep 2020, 13:15

Hope the aircon is good. In warm climates an ipad goes thermal in no time.

206 jock

25th Sep 2020, 13:22

Hope the aircon is good. In warm climates an ipad goes thermal in no time.
Indeed..mine overtemped in Northamptonshire last week!

CGameProgrammerr

25th Sep 2020, 16:55

The iPad integration is a bit weird but using it instead of Garmin would lower the price. I do like the innovation used through the interior, though not a fan of displays directly in front of the pilot on a helicopter, but maybe they're low and non-obstructive. I hope they successfully make this and it becomes more than CGI.

Ascend Charlie

25th Sep 2020, 23:45

Hmmm. That cyclic must have some interesting linkages behind the instrument panel, they would need to be linked to the left side for dual instruction as well. But how to do the collective on the left side in an armrest? Ergo, no dual controls possible.

They brag of having 5 seats full, full-size baggage, and "vast" amounts of fuel for long trips. How many small helos in existence can carry full pax and full fuel and a stash of bags? And where the heck does the fuel go, if the under-floor space has a bunch of folding wheels and the behind-cabin space is full of golf clubs?

A VFR machine doesn't need a panel in front of the left seat (no dual controls), and doesn't need such a high "eyebrow" over the panel, apart from shading the iPads.

Yes, it looks spoofy. I wonder how many design dreams will have to be left on the drawing board when the reality of building this thing happens.

cattletruck

26th Sep 2020, 11:56

He should'av gone for one of these cyclics.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/372x313/image_9f7869721518560ca3a1ab9e982601dba8fa3b73.png

Evil Twin

27th Sep 2020, 09:03

Ascend Charlie

27th Sep 2020, 10:18

Maybe so, Evil, but the left seat would need an armrest on the left side for the collective, and that would make it a little difficult to heave the body over it for entry. And would still require the fittings for the cyclic on the left side. A long-armed cyclic stick will need some springs and counterbalances under that panel to work, be it FBW or manual.

Kelly Hopper

27th Sep 2020, 15:27

All are saying "haighth"
What the hell?
IT IS AIGHTH.
So......... I wont be buying!

Bell_ringer

27th Sep 2020, 16:00

Could be fly-by-wire Charles, the tech is mature enough.

in a “private” helicopter that promises incredible economics?
They are building avionics, a turbine and all the other “ground up” stuff from scratch.
Why not throw in FBW as well?
It becomes more of a designers wet dream by the minute.
Looking forward to it being solar powered and fashioned from a new element on the periodic table next. :}

Hot and Hi

27th Sep 2020, 19:15

Could be fly-by-wire Charles, the tech is mature enough.
Cable linkages, you mean?

Nige321

3rd Nov 2020, 10:38

Details of the HX-50 engine... (https://helihub.com/2020/11/03/hill-helicopters-names-engine-for-the-hx50/?fbclid=IwAR1waAaOZ0i1U0w5DnHgOgWOres54UsOK-9JoyoyCZNur6gEKSBcvLhmyvs)

In another step away from long-entrenched industry norms, British manufacturer Hill Helicopters is today announcing that the power for its new HX50 luxury personal helicopter will be their own Hill GT50 light turbine engine with a continuous power output of 400hp. This newly designed powerplant eliminates the need for a compressor turbine gearbox to save weight and complexity, while manufacturing methodologies have enabled a much shorter development lifecycle. An in-house FADEC brings further simplicity to the complete package.

In an exclusive interview with CEO Jason Hill, HeliHub.com particularly noted that the creation of its own powerplant has allowed Hill Helicopters to move away from the constraints of existing engine suppliers and designs, many of which trace their origins back to the 1950s or 1960s. The benefit of being able to match engine with airframe from the ground up means that the design will be optimised for the refinement demanded by the HX50 helicopter. The combination of time-tested, proven engine technologies and today’s turbine engine advancements makes the GT50 a compact, light, and innovative solution that defines the future of the light turbine helicopter.

“The GT50 has been designed and developed by a team of industry veterans using methods, tools, and techniques pioneered over decades,” says Jason Hill. “It is an intelligent ensemble of proven ideas and architecture, embodied into a new engine that fully exploits modern advancements, manufacturing methods, and supply chain opportunities to fulfill a specific market need.”

The Hill GT50 employs state-of-art component and gas-path design delivering unmatched efficiencies for an entry-level turbine. The performance and operating range for the compressor and turbines is coupled with an efficient and robust three-can combustor system, offering a low-risk development route, flameout redundancy, and fuel flexibility.

The historically expensive and heavy compressor turbine gearbox of current helicopter engines has been eliminated and replaced by a direct-drive starter-generator to dramatically reduce the cost and mechanical complexity of the engine. Extensive use of redundant electrical engine ancillaries further simplifies the engine package and a modular design makes for easy maintenance of the unit’s core components.

The engine is also fully electronically controlled and features the Hill FADEC System, providing trouble-free, rapid startup and shutdown, tight RPM management, and optimal engine monitoring and control.

Additionally, the Hill team took advantage of today’s economies of scale in manufacturing turbine components. On-demand advanced manufacturing processes and improved supply chains for the specialized materials used in turbine engines allowed for significant cost and time savings in developing, manufacturing, and delivering an affordable new engine.

“The availability of reliable, powerful, and affordable engines is what limits light helicopter design today,” Hill adds. “When considering the overall mix of requirements necessary to power a truly ground-breaking aircraft, we saw the opportunity to design a simple turbine engine with unmatched efficiency, power, and cost. In simple terms, by developing the advanced GT50 engine, Hill has completely unlocked the potential of the helicopter in terms of both performance and cost, providing the enchanting opportunity to relaunch general aviation.”

Hill GT50 Turbine Specifications:

Maximum Continuous Power: 400 hp
Take-off Power (5 mins): 440 hp (Up to 10,000 ft, ISA +15°C)
Emergency Power (30s): 500 hp
Fuel Consumption (MCP): 35 U.S. gallons per hour
Fuel Type: Jet A1 (Alternatives to be announced soon)
TBO: 5,000 hours or 20,000 cycles, on condition.
Control: Hill FADEC (Dual channel, with manual reversion)
Management: Fully integrated with Hill Digital Cockpit
Weight: 100 kg / 220 lbs

Hill GT50 Turbine Engine Features:

Two-spool turboshaft engine
Single stage centrifugal compressor with two-stage axial gas generator turbine
Single stage axial free power turbine
Direct-drive starter generator replaces the traditional expensive and heavy compressor turbine gearbox
Hill FADEC system
Inlet barrier filter and silencer as standard, minimizing compressor noise, maximizing protection, and extending the life of the engine components
Light, low-profile, compact design

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x400/hill_gt50_cross_section1_06bffec9f472641f9daac91045b999c0203 7d3bf.jpg

cattletruck

3rd Nov 2020, 11:56

Finally, something of substance.

"replaced by a direct-drive starter-generator" - this is an excellent move considering recent developments in electric motors.

"Extensive use of redundant electrical engine ancillaries" implies to me that the fuel pump(s), hydraulic pump(s) are now all electric, much like the fuel delivery and power steering in modern cars. I guess that was inevitable.

If he's actually pulled this off then it may be worth paying closer attention to their announcements.

ApolloHeli

3rd Nov 2020, 12:16

Has an engine actually been built and achieved these specifications and thus might likely be certified as such, or are these simply on-paper design dreams with a working prototype not yet built?

aa777888

3rd Nov 2020, 12:58

Mischa Gelb ("Pilot Yellow" on Youtube) has entered into some sort of PR agreement with Hill. He's got a few videos up and today an interview with Hill himself on the engine (so much for the "exclusive interview" HeliHub!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUdkmH_sV14

Hill has also been banging out some videos in the past couple of weeks:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkoKuEPRonFWs5Ca0utRl2w

Bell_ringer

3rd Nov 2020, 14:02

Why would you get an airpod wearing millennial to punt your aircraft on youtube? that was the most annoying part of the video.
There just seems to be a constant whiff of used car salesman in these marketing videos.

So they still have to mill the first part and then get round to testing if the theory holds up in practice, then convince a regulator and a buying public to put their faith in an engine with no history. Bold move.
Hopefully they aren't leaning on any patents.

I don't buy the "we couldn't find an engine which met our performance needs" story. Sure, from a cost and integration perspective it would have hurt a bit but let's not pretend that out of the wide range of engines available none would work.

In this instance, ground up, seems to mean using older tech (electrics aside) and borrowing from non-aviation industries.
Did he really say it has a single shaft? Didn't that go out in the 60's?

I can see the benefits of being able to purpose build the engine, especially if they can deliver on the specs, reliably.
It still seems they have bitten off a lot to chew.

Look forward to seeing the prototype in action.

ETOPS

3rd Nov 2020, 14:56

Did he really say it has a single shaft?

Pretty sure the spec sheet says “ two spool”

aa777888

3rd Nov 2020, 15:35

Why would you get an airpod wearing millennial to punt your aircraft on youtube? that was the most annoying part of the video.
There just seems to be a constant whiff of used car salesman in these marketing videos.I'd be willing to bet a beer or two that Gelb, seeking another adventure, approached Hill and said something like "Hey, I very successfully flew an R66 around the world. How about I do the same as a publicity stunt for the HX50 when it's ready?" and Hill bought into it.

domperry76

3rd Nov 2020, 15:57

I'd be willing to bet a beer or two that Gelb, seeking another adventure, approached Hill and said something like "Hey, I very successfully flew an R66 around the world. How about I do the same as a publicity stunt for the HX50 when it's ready?" and Hill bought into it.

From a previous story:
"Gelb is a co-owner of Canadian firm BC Helicopters, based in Abbotsford, British Columbia. Alongside serial venture capital entrepreneur Ruben Dias, whose FastTrack Ventures business is located in nearby Whistler, Gelb has created a separate company to handle the sales and marketing effort for Hill Helicopters."
Dias was Gelb's co-conspirator in the round-the-world flight; as far as I remember he was looking to invest in Hill, but it proved unnecessary for whatever reason. That sales and marketing company gets a commission on every sale of an HX50 they make.

And on the engine development - first engine to run on a test bench next year. Three engines to be ground tested ahead of the first flight in 2022.

Bell_ringer

3rd Nov 2020, 16:36

Pretty sure the spec sheet says “ two spool”

might have misheard him on the video.
he seemed pleased there was no shaft within a shaft and the related complexity.

[email protected]

3rd Nov 2020, 19:54

Yes, I think they mean two stage not two spool.

CRAN

3rd Nov 2020, 20:11

No, it's two spool, but not concentric shafts, he says it in the video. Power turbine is a rear power take off, like the PT6 and Arriel. So two shafts arranged axially behind one another. They are just avoiding the complexities of concentric shafts.

Agile

4th Nov 2020, 01:10

beautiful engine rendering exercise for sure

in the video
Q: do you have the expertise to design engines?
A: ... you know ...you go out and get the expertise you need ....

That is the cheap business manager rational, that you can buy your way into making extremely complex technology task.
I admire the positive thinking but it is lacking the credibility that he can catch up 70 years of knowhow (turbomeca and others)

cattletruck

4th Nov 2020, 04:44

Is the engine oil pressure pump an "ancillary"? If it's electrically driven you'd really hate to have your engine turn into burnt toast because a wire fell off or the service man got his wires crossed.

[email protected]

4th Nov 2020, 05:31

Ascend Charlie

4th Nov 2020, 05:37

Somebody mentioned an electric hydraulic pump?

I would prefer one driven off the main txmsn. Works better after an engine / electrics failure, you don't want to be like the old B47s where an engine failure also meant hydraulics off.

With the fore/aft collective, which way is power? Pulling back, sort of like pulling up, or pushing forward like a throttle in a jet? Some muscle retraining needed I reckon. The video refers to the target buyer as somebody with a lot of money but unlikely to fly more than 50 hours a year. Does anybody think that a private pilot in a performance machine like this, flying an hour a week, will not join the statistics in a shortish time?

Bell_ringer

4th Nov 2020, 05:59

Does anybody think that a private pilot in a performance machine like this, flying an hour a week, will not join the statistics in a shortish time?

That philosophy has worked wonders for Robinson’s sales numbers :E

[email protected]

4th Nov 2020, 10:11

ApolloHeli

4th Nov 2020, 22:01

Presumably that angled drive at the front goes into the MRGB but he talked in the video about taking the power from the rear of the engine.

Does that mean they still have a shaft running forward from the rear and underneath the engine and if so, where is the TR drive coming from?

I can't remember if there was any talk of an electric TR on this but if you take the TR drive from the engine instead of the MRGB you have no TR drive in the event of the engine failing.

I assumed the mounting on the front to be the direct drive electric starter motor mentioned. I believe the power turbine running through the rear of the engine will be rigged to drive a common MR/TR driveshaft as is the setup in a single Squirrel (through some reduction gears, the power turbine output is translated downwards to the driveshaft below the engine, and the output RPM is also reduced).

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1304x992/screenshot_2020_11_04_at_23_00_21_1d22663abae4299fc773a1b119 95aec36fead779.jpg

tartare

5th Nov 2020, 00:52

MLHeliwrench

5th Nov 2020, 02:53

Plank driver here.
In picture above - assume power then travels to rotorhead by a right angle gear out of picture to the left?
So - does gas coming in actually flow around the lower section of the rotor mast to the face of the axial compressor?

there is a vertical air intake with a screen or inlet barrier filter fitted to the top of the engine cowl. See pic at this link where the engine cowl is open - https://www.corporatehelicopters.com/helicopter-services/helicopter-sales/helicopters-for-sale/2011-eurocopter-as350-b2-for-sale/

[email protected]

5th Nov 2020, 05:41

I assumed the mounting on the front to be the direct drive electric starter motor mentioned. I believe the power turbine running through the rear of the engine will be rigged to drive a common MR/TR driveshaft as is the setup in a single Squirrel (through some reduction gears, the power turbine output is translated downwards to the driveshaft below the engine, and the output RPM is also reduced). Thanks apolloheli, I'm very familiar with the set up in the 365 with the Arriel engine but that angled projection at the front of the Hill engine looks like a very strange way to mount a direct drive starter.

If they have gone down the Arriel style route then they have only reduced complexity a little since you need a reduction gearbox at the back of the engine, something they didn't refer to or glossed over.

Arnie Madsen

5th Nov 2020, 07:28

Thanks apolloheli, I'm very familiar with the set up in the 365 with the Arriel engine but that angled projection at the front of the Hill engine looks like a very strange way to mount a direct drive starter.

If they have gone down the Arriel style route then they have only reduced complexity a little since you need a reduction gearbox at the back of the engine, something they didn't refer to or glossed over.
That is the first impression I got also .... sounded like they were saying they had eliminated the gearbox ... wow ..... I went back and listened again and it is just the accessory gears for starter - pumps etc.

It is around the 10 minute mark of the video.

cattletruck

5th Nov 2020, 09:53

To me the direct drive starter/generator looks like that gaffer tape roll thing just behind the 45 degree angled engine output drive shaft. Perhaps angling the drive shaft as illustrated allows the engine to be installed lower down in the aircraft making it less top heavy.

ShyTorque

5th Nov 2020, 10:43

Plank driver here.
In picture above - assume power then travels to rotorhead by a right angle gear out of picture to the left?
So - does gas coming in actually flow around the lower section of the rotor mast to the face of the axial compressor?

That output shaft speed is labelled @ 6,000 rpm. Main rotor rpm is normally no more than 300 and they have to be mounted on a substantial shaft. It certainly needs more than a right angled gearbox.

tartare

5th Nov 2020, 22:42

Good point!
Another reduction gearbox or two no doubt...

Agile

6th Nov 2020, 02:21

Arriel 2B has an

N1 = 52,110 RPM
N2 = 39,095 RPM
and an output speed: 5990 RPM

There is no way to transmit 39K RPM in the main gear box as might have been suggested
this requires much different technologies on: the gears, the bearings, the oiling, the assembly rigidity...
much different than handling 6K RPM

note the power is generally distributed as follow

82 % main rotor
10% tail rotor
8 % efficiency losses in gear box + accessories

cattletruck

6th Nov 2020, 09:27

EC130 tail rotor drive shaft spins at 6000 rpm, perhaps its Fenestron likes that input speed as it itself turns at 3584 rpm.

Going the other way, the MGB uses epicyclic gears which are very good at converting all that rotational energy into mast torque.

tartare

7th Nov 2020, 01:35

Ahhhh - planetary gear system... I see.
Helicopters really are remarkable machines...

Bell_ringer

8th Dec 2020, 14:11

https://verticalmag.com/news/hill-helicopters-hx50-experimental-approval-strategy/

Rather interesting approach.
I doubt many supercar owners, who seem to be the target market, will want to build it themselves.
Sell some kits, then try certify it.

All a bit convoluted.
Sounds more and more like vapourware.

Thracian

8th Dec 2020, 14:16

Whoa: https://youtu.be/iSFRBU5t8eI
Wait!
495k GBP (well, maybe + VAT + 2 weeks of owner operator factory work at Hill Helicopter's)?
That's about 545k Euros or 660k US Dollars.
And 5000 hours on condition maintenance schedule come as the icing on this cake? Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not a native english speaker and might have missed some "details".

For a brand new single turbine 5 seater this sound very attractive - if you can live with the "private use only" stamp and if you can wait until 2023.
They say that the "commercial" version of this machine will be available about 3 years later and for about double the price point.

Of course, we'll have to se the flying prototypes in action, but man, this sounds (and only sounds until now) amazing.

Thracian

Bell_ringer

8th Dec 2020, 14:55

I guess it depends how your local regulator treats amateur builds, both from owner effort required, resale and flight restrictions.
Helicopters don't have the best track record in this category and were fundamentally aimed at a different market.

An aircraft that has been presented with super-car styling, design and build quality seems quite at odds with amateur building.
$660k buys you a fair amount of already assembled aircraft, though nothing as swish as Hill proposes.

I just find their messaging and sales strategy confused and conflicting.

At $1.3M certified, they are putting themselves into an interesting market but it's not exactly making flying accessible to the masses.
It's also a fair amount of money to invest in something where the reputation needs to survive the problems usually associated with amateur builds.

Nige321

8th Dec 2020, 15:32

https://verticalmag.com/news/hill-he...oval-strategy/ (https://verticalmag.com/news/hill-helicopters-hx50-experimental-approval-strategy/)

Rather interesting approach.
I doubt many supercar owners, who seem to be the target market, will want to build it themselves.
Sell some kits, then try certify it.

All a bit convoluted.
Sounds more and more like vapourware.

I suspect that it wil be billed as an 'experience'.
The only person I know who buys Ferraris just loves his factory visits to see and touch his car being built.
Same with Bentley...

Bell_ringer

8th Dec 2020, 16:18

I suspect that it wil be billed as an 'experience'.
The only person I know who buys Ferraris just loves his factory visits to see and touch his car being built.
Same with Bentley...

if its built in a factory it is production built, not amateur built.
most regulators require an experimental aircraft to have been part constructed by the owner.

there isn’t a Super car owner alive who would put in their own spark plugs.

CGameProgrammerr

8th Dec 2020, 17:44

Actually that's not true; factory assist (aka build assist) is a real thing. Yes it can feel like cheating but it's legitimate. The biggest caveats for a helicopter that's technically E-AB is it will be more difficult to insure (though the much lower purchase price should counteract that) and it can't be used for commercial purposes. (You can train in it if you're the owner and are the one receiving training because it's your own aircraft.)

I still feel like this thing is a pipe dream, but if they somehow make it a reality than the E-AB version would be a serious competitor to even the R44. But until they have a flying prototype I'll remain a bit skeptical.

Robbo Jock

8th Dec 2020, 18:10

it becomes very difficult for a certification body to argue that ‘Oh, it’s a terrible idea, it’s very dangerous, it’s too risky,’ if we’ve got 1,000 or 2,000 of them out there already with an exemplary safety record.”

customers will be required to assemble their aircraft in a “carefully choreographed” two-week factory course

At one every two weeks, how long is it going to be before they approach certification bodies for the HC50? How many 'production' lines are they going to have to ensure they've got the flight hours to say an exemplary safety record

Nige321

8th Dec 2020, 22:32

if its built in a factory it is production built, not amateur built.
most regulators require an experimental aircraft to have been part constructed by the owner.

there isn’t a Super car owner alive who would put in their own spark plugs.

Really? Pop along to the next Goodwood or Salon Prive, plenty of owners willing to get their hands dirty.

etudiant

8th Dec 2020, 22:37

Tickle

9th Dec 2020, 00:58

Sounds like Hughes with the 369, selling all those under-priced OH-6s with the hope of turning profit on the commercial 500 version.

Bell_ringer

9th Dec 2020, 04:09

Actually that's not true; factory assist (aka build assist) is a real thing.

It sure is, but it depends on what authorities permit and that does vary, it still requires a fair amount of work from the builder.
The business needs a sales strategy that works globally but perhaps a US/UK-centric focus is sufficient.
It all depends who the target customer is supposed to be. Amateur builders are traditionally very cost-sensitive.
We're also not talking about building a Vans RV - this is still a $600k+ aircraft.

Really? Pop along to the next Goodwood or Salon Prive, plenty of owners willing to get their hands dirty.

I've never understood Hill's desire to keep using super-car owners as a target market.
In these parts at your typical Ferrari, Lambo day, custom shops do the mods and servicing. The few that have an interest in aviation would sooner fly a Gazelle, Robbie or Jetbanger than have the schlep of doing it themselves. Time is money and they wouldn't waste it banging around in a shed or factory.

Kit helicopters have never taken off (ok, they have regularly taken off, just not always landed again) and it's not just because they'd try kill you without a moments notice.

aa777888

9th Dec 2020, 18:57

Really? Pop along to the next Goodwood or Salon Prive, plenty of owners willing to get their hands dirty.
The real question is (for potential U.S. owners): are these owners willing to get their hands dirty doing the compulsory inspections, flight testing and paperwork associated with getting their special airworthiness certificate for experimental aircraft and special operating limitations in accordance with 14CFR91.319 and FAA Order 8130.2J? That is a sh*t ton of work. Lots of flying around a dinky airport before you can go anywhere, more inspections and flying before you can fly over congested areas. I suppose it's an opportunity for starving pilots to get some HX50 hours, flying off the required test hours for the wealthy owner/operator! But more likely this is going to fall flat with most well-heeled potential owners. They might enjoy their two week vacation getting their hands dirty, but they are going to hate that they can't just uncrate their new toy on this side of the pond and fly it wherever they want immediately. Perhaps the ten or so experimental versions that Hill might sell over hear are enough to pay for the actual certification process. Or maybe I'm just flat wrong about this.

CGameProgrammerr

9th Dec 2020, 19:16

md 600 driver

9th Dec 2020, 19:38

Where dies it say that this is a experimental/permit to fly helicopter. I thought it was a production helicopter which would stop it from becoming a experimental/permit to fly

CGameProgrammerr

9th Dec 2020, 20:00

They announced the HX50 will be classified as experimental-amateur built (E-AB) but built at the factory with assistance and would allegedly take only two weeks to do. By not certifying it, that allows them to dramatically reduce costs and build up revenue from being able to sell it much earlier. If/when they're eventually able to offer a certified one (like originally intended), they're going to call it the HC50.

aa777888

9th Dec 2020, 21:12

Airworthiness is not a big deal; you get a DAR to examine it and certify it, which he does by filling out a form online that also generates the special operating limitations. Of course unfamiliarity with this helicopter will make that take a bit longer. The special operating limitations define the center point of the 25-mile radius for phase 1 (radius varies but is usually 25 miles), and after 40 flight-hours you're automatically and implicitly transitioned into phase 2, with no additional paperwork or inspections needed typically. Flight over congested areas is allowed implicitly when phase 1 is complete, unless the DAR for some reason issues restrictive operating limitations.
Thanks for the clarification. I had not realized that these transitions were automatic and implicit. That seems to fly in the face of the regulations, but, hey, it's the FAA! Still, to be limited to 25 miles for 40 hours is going to sit poorly with the likely demographic, I think. It'll be interesting to see how this all develops. How many will be brought to the US, and how many will get caught outside their 25NM limit early.

CGameProgrammerr

9th Dec 2020, 21:34

40 hours is a small price to pay for saving $600k, and technically the only way to get caught is if you actually land > 25 nm away and get ramp-checked. But it would be foolish to skirt the rules, especially with an expensive aircraft. The bigger deal is that phase 1 can't be flown over congested areas, which can severely limit the airports available to be based at and also severely limit where you can fly, for those of us who live in big cities. But still it's a small price to pay.

Agile

10th Dec 2020, 06:17

This is getting more and more confusing, So it's a kit aircraft like the CHI KC 518 Adventourer, yes 5-6 places, yes turbine, yes value priced. is it successful? no!

Build at the factory in two weeks, well ask any AME, doing an annual with the owner helping is more work than doing it by yourself. So I don't see the plus there.

Finally, did I understand he is targeting the rich crowd? (supercar owner of sorts). How is that going to go when the rich owner ask his rich buddies to go golfing in an "experimental" helicopter?.
I know some rich business people, they became savvy at managing risk, most of them are smart enough, I know better than to venture offering a ride in an R44 much less an experimental aircraft.

My last comment could be misplaced, I must be missing something

aa777888

10th Dec 2020, 11:31

All of the wealthy pilot-owner types around my neck of the woods are flying R44s or R66s. They see the value of the design. None of them predate SFAR 73 and they don't live in a country that crashes then at high rate. Thus they don't have that crusty attitude towards them that you get here.

The real question remains: will the value of the design outweigh the 40 hour fly-off requirement? Thinking about it some more, I think it will. These guys will hire some local starving pilots to fly it off for them. Sure, they'll fly some of it. But for most of them 40 hours is an entire year's worth of hours. They just don't have the time. And I think they'll see the 2 week build trip as an adventure vacation they can dine off of at cocktail parties and whenever they've got new folks in the helicopter. "Built it myself, I did!" Which is bull****. Hill says the plan meets the letter and the spirit of the law. No way is it going to meet the spirit.

PEASACAKE

10th Dec 2020, 11:33

Build at the factory in two weeks, well ask any AME, doing an annual with the owner helping is more work than doing it by yourself.

Doing anything with the owner helping is more than I could ever cope with.

Invoicing the owner after they have "helped" and getting paid is another story, no matter how wealthy they are.

CGameProgrammerr

10th Dec 2020, 16:45

The owner of an experimental does not usually help an A&P with the annual. Either the A&P does it by themselves or, in some cases, the owner does it by themselves. But it's true it will need to say "experimental" somewhere that all passengers can see it (headrests are a good option) and have a somewhat scary-looking warning placard about it not being certified. But this is true of all experimentals and yet there are tons of them.

It's illegal to hire a pilot to fly off the 40 hours because it's illegal to hire a pilot to fly any experimental for any reason; it cannot be flown commercially. CFIs are the one exception (so they can instruct in experimentals) but they need to file for certain paperwork allowing them to do that.

Maoraigh1

10th Dec 2020, 20:04

"It's illegal to hire a pilot to fly off the 40 hours because it's illegal to hire a pilot to fly any experimental for any reason; it cannot be flown commercially."
Are you sure this counts as commercial flying?
In the UK the LAA specifies the pilot for the initial flights. Only if the builder has suitable experience will it be them.

CGameProgrammerr

10th Dec 2020, 22:25

Actually I may have been wrong. Maybe it doesn't count since you own the aircraft and are just paying someone to fly it, as opposed to renting the aircraft. Otherwise it would not be possible to hire a ferry pilot to ferry an experimental but I'm pretty sure it is.

Arnie Madsen

11th Dec 2020, 16:57

The "homebuilt experimental" category has many advantages. Plenty of sport pilots and homebuilders use it.

A person can build something in his garage and be flying it next week if he wants to.

Certification , on the other hand requires millions of dollars with millions of rules administered by millions of bureaucrats . Ever wonder why there are very few new aircraft developed today ? That is why.

I am sure Hill Helicopters intend on gaining certification some day , but in my opinion their entry level experimental category is a clever tactic to get some actual machines built , sold , and flying while the agonizing certification process drags out.

I acknowledge there are not a lot of "wealthy" people who wish to assemble their own Hill Helicopter under factory assist rules .... and then not be able to use the machine for commercial purposes , but we may be surprised how many jump at the chance.

Even the autogyro industry has moved forward by leaps and bounds and many "executive types" have bought them (over $100k) and fly them under experimental rules. One model has a titanium frame and mast and state of the art composite blades. The titanium comes from the same factory that produces Boeing parts , blades come from an established manufacturer.

There is an "experimental" gyroplane and an experimental helicopter that have flown around the world. Single engine (Rotax) , added fuel tanks , and 12 hours over open water.

In my opinion Hill Helicopters are wisely taking advantage of this category .... if they can get enough committed customers they are well on their way .

Bell_ringer

11th Dec 2020, 17:19

How many home builders spend more than $600k on a kit?

CGameProgrammerr

11th Dec 2020, 17:21

Bell_ringer

11th Dec 2020, 18:04

Agreed. Companies have gone bankrupt waiting for certification, or even trying to get existing experimental models certified. For example the Seawind 300C, derived from the experimental 300, had undergone certification testing/development for 13 years before the company gave up and folded. Hill can very easily go bankrupt if they have no income at all and selling experimental versions is a great way to provide people with a ridiculously well-priced helicopter, as well as the enormous PR boost from actually getting them to customers, while getting enough money to survive (or to attract more investment).

I hope this is not all BS. So far though it's just CGI and promises.

Bell: this is not a homebuilt. It's classified as experimental but is not actually offered as a kit; it's built in the factory. But as for your question, kits only appear cheap because they typically exclude the engine, avionics, etc. You're really getting a fully built helicopter for allegedly ~$600k plus two weeks of your time.

most regulators won’t allow you to factory build an aircraft and call it experimental.
its a short cut around certification.
Our regulator permits production built kit aircraft, the factory is expected to meet certified manufacturing processes and the aircraft is then expected to be maintained to certified standards.
most regulators aren’t that flexible.
the idea you can co-build an aircraft in a factory in 2 weeks, while meeting all existing amateur/experimental regulations is laughable.

CRAN

11th Dec 2020, 18:30

Glassair, US manufacturer have been doing just this successfully for 15 years with their two weeks to taxi programme.

https://glasairaviation.com/sportsman/

Bell_ringer

11th Dec 2020, 18:55

Glassair, US manufacturer have been doing just this successfully for 15 years with their two weeks to taxi programme.

https://glasairaviation.com/sportsman/

not quite an apples for apples comparison.
$50k fixed wing, rarely seen globally.
The US is also only a small part of a big, big market

CGameProgrammerr

11th Dec 2020, 20:34

No, you're way off. No idea where you're getting this imaginary $50k figure from but the BASE price of the Sportsman, with the two-week build option, is $245k. Options, especially avionics, can move that close to $300k.

Hot and Hi

12th Dec 2020, 04:22

most regulators won’t allow you to factory build an aircraft and call it experimental.
Well, some do. So let's agree that regs differ around the world.

In any case, the concept of owner-built (and with it, the 51% rule) is not to improve the quality of the aircraft. Most owners rightfully are wary about their ability to do a good job (follow MojoGrip on youTube if in any doubt). Here we speak about the market of non type-certified aircraft (NTCA), often referred to and labelled as "experimental". In this segment, the "factory-built" option attracts a premium over kit aircraft, as they are deemed to be the safer option.

The 51% rule only has to do with transfer of product liability from the airframe manufacturer to the client who - as nominal builder - now carries this liability. It is the high risk of litigation in some countries that has driven the cost of manufacturer's liability insurance to astronomical heights. By transferring this liability to the end client, NTCA manufacturers save on insurance premiums and can keep prices for their aircraft low.

Now, we always "want to have our cake, and eat it". I agree that some of these factory-assist plans are obvious schemes trying to reap the benefits of (almost 100%) factory-built while at the same time allowing to claim that the aircraft was majority-built by the owner.

FlimsyFan

23rd Jan 2021, 12:27

How many home builders spend more than $600k on a kit?

I imagine there aren’t many out there at that price.

Seems like a clever way to get a new machine to market in a commercially viable way to me, especially if certification likely to follow in due course, funded by sales of the ‘private’ version.

We’re currently building a kit car that will cost around GBP150k, but that’s a choice based around the experience of doing the build ourselves.

Surely most people, if they have the passion and desire to go flying can find 2 weeks to a) fulfill their dream of building a machine, or b) more likely fulfill the regulatory requirements to substantially build the machine (at least on paper).

It’s my understanding that a significant number of orders have been taken for this machine, and as an owner of a 2017 R66 flying about 60hrs a year I imagine I’m right in the cross hairs of the target market.

I shall watch the development of this helicopter with great interest, and will
most likely put down a deposit this year.

What the HX50 will do to residual values of mainstream single engine turbines remains to be seen, and that’s a concern to me as a decision well in advance of the vaunted Robinson 12 year overhaul period is going to be necessary.

Either way, Jason Hill seems credible to me, and whether successful or not he deserves huge credit for attempting to disrupt the profiteering norm in this uninnovative and completely non customer centric industry.

if he becomes a thorn in the side of mainstream manufacturers, they have only themselves to blame. A very complacent bunch.

Jetexec

23rd Jan 2021, 12:53

I imagine there aren’t many out there at that price.

Seems like a clever way to get a new machine to market in a commercially viable way to me, especially if certification likely to follow in due course, funded by sales of the ‘private’ version.

We’re currently building a kit car that will cost around GBP150k, but that’s a choice based around the experience of doing the build ourselves.

Surely most people, if they have the passion and desire to go flying can find 2 weeks to a) fulfill their dream of building a machine, or b) more likely fulfill the regulatory requirements to substantially build the machine (at least on paper).

It’s my understanding that a significant number of orders have been taken for this machine, and as an owner of a 2017 R66 flying about 60hrs a year I imagine I’m right in the cross hairs of the target market.

I shall watch the development of this helicopter with great interest, and will
most likely put down a deposit this year.

What the HX50 will do to residual values of mainstream single engine turbines remains to be seen, and that’s a concern to me as a decision well in advance of the vaunted Robinson 12 year overhaul period is going to be necessary.

Either way, Jason Hill seems credible to me, and whether successful or not he deserves huge credit for attempting to disrupt the profiteering norm in this uninnovative and completely non customer centric industry.

if he becomes a thorn in the side of mainstream manufacturers, they have only themselves to blame. A very complacent bunch.

They received their 100th order just this past week. I was number 24 in mid-december. Not a bad sales record by any stretch of the imagination. As you stated, Jason Hill seems very credible to many. I think he pulled together a great marketing team combined with his knowledge and desire. Now we sit back and wait for the finished product.