Hill Helicopters HX50
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Age: 61
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helitrak has a STC'ed device which does that for Robinsons, simple and no FBW. Should be standard at least on R22s IMO.
https://www.helitrak.com/collective-pull-down
https://www.helitrak.com/collective-pull-down
Two problems with that pull down device:
1. Since it can be 'easily overcome by the pilot' if you are frozen in fear at the engine failure it probably won't overcome you.
2. If, as many seem to manage, you make an approach to a high hover and overpitch enough to droop the RRPM (not enough power available) - at the point where a gentle lowering of the lever might save you and allow a gentle descent regaining RRPM - the pull down device activates and you are fighting that too as it tries to get the lever on the floor.
The answer is to keep current on autos so the muscle memory kicks in - practice isn't just for the sorties leading up to your PPLH.
1. Since it can be 'easily overcome by the pilot' if you are frozen in fear at the engine failure it probably won't overcome you.
2. If, as many seem to manage, you make an approach to a high hover and overpitch enough to droop the RRPM (not enough power available) - at the point where a gentle lowering of the lever might save you and allow a gentle descent regaining RRPM - the pull down device activates and you are fighting that too as it tries to get the lever on the floor.
The answer is to keep current on autos so the muscle memory kicks in - practice isn't just for the sorties leading up to your PPLH.
Crab, the first is not a device problem, it's a simultaneous dual failure (engine and pilot) that no auto-gizmo could overcome. At least it should not aggravate things.
The second is more worrysome though... Maybe the device could be rigged to deactivate itself should it sense any human resistance, like autopilots do...
Of course it cannot replace practice.
The second is more worrysome though... Maybe the device could be rigged to deactivate itself should it sense any human resistance, like autopilots do...
Of course it cannot replace practice.
Crab, they must have thought of that situation. I would assume it is like autorelight systems, low rpm horns , where the engine rpm gets to a certain value then the igniters fire in case of auto relight. I would suggest if it is set at that sort of value you describe you have lost the plot already
Hughes 500 - pilots are taught to recover from overpitching as part of basic training - as you know you just need a slight lowering of collective and throttle opening to recover the NR, even from the low Nr horn state.
What you don't need is a device that pulls the lever all the way down when you are already in a critical stage of flight - ie landing in a confined area or approaching an OGE hover.
Petit-lion - the device doesn't automatically deactivate, there will be a clutch in the motor system which can be overridden by the pilot.
What you don't need is a device that pulls the lever all the way down when you are already in a critical stage of flight - ie landing in a confined area or approaching an OGE hover.
Petit-lion - the device doesn't automatically deactivate, there will be a clutch in the motor system which can be overridden by the pilot.
Crab
I realise that but what i was very badly saying is I am assuming that the pull down device is set at such a level that unless you entered autorotation you would never recover Nr. I cant see how else the system would work given your scenario and presumably they must have thought of that. Mind you a fine line of, where do you draw that line of when does it auto activate or not. As you said training the best way forward, but now we are not allowed to simulate an engine failure by chopping the throttle in most small pistons. Both Schweizer and Robinson prohibit throttle chops ( what is the definition of a chop I suppose ) in their FM's It is not quite the same as shutting / chopping the throttle to, practice engine failure 321 go ! If you left it that long in most piston machines Nr is already past the red line
I realise that but what i was very badly saying is I am assuming that the pull down device is set at such a level that unless you entered autorotation you would never recover Nr. I cant see how else the system would work given your scenario and presumably they must have thought of that. Mind you a fine line of, where do you draw that line of when does it auto activate or not. As you said training the best way forward, but now we are not allowed to simulate an engine failure by chopping the throttle in most small pistons. Both Schweizer and Robinson prohibit throttle chops ( what is the definition of a chop I suppose ) in their FM's It is not quite the same as shutting / chopping the throttle to, practice engine failure 321 go ! If you left it that long in most piston machines Nr is already past the red line
Hughes 500 - I think the only inputs to the device would be Nr itself, probably fed from wherever the tacho gen for that is on a Robbie.
Clever interpretation might allow you to modify that with a calculated rate of Nr decay - using the same source - but I can only see a specific Nr being used to trigger the action and can only imagine it is at or slightly below the Nr that sets off the low RPM horn.
Clever interpretation might allow you to modify that with a calculated rate of Nr decay - using the same source - but I can only see a specific Nr being used to trigger the action and can only imagine it is at or slightly below the Nr that sets off the low RPM horn.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: South East Asia
Age: 53
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
a room nicely staged. with some newly leased CNCs
machining in process on some centrifugal compressor (which is not nearly as hard as the hot section turbine blade)
a mockup of a tail section that looks so heavy its probalby made of wooden/fiber glass molding (not real areospace grade structure)
Real work is done in machining center that are dirty and smelly, feel like being taken for an idiot by being shown such a sanitized and conspicuous rendering
No, I think you are not familiar with aircraft factories. I have toured the Robinson helicopter factory and it is very clean, and they make more helicopters than anyone else in the world. That said, while the video proves it's not an actual scam, it's still does not prove that they're anywhere near having a functional prototype, since a little fenestron unit is a ridiculously tiny part of the helicopter. They did not even show an engine.
On contrary, no, the fenestron is a big part and the detail on the mechanism seem to indicate they acquired the patent and capable of putting it in use shows real engineering. But still not convince they can pull off the certification with that claimed budget. Still curious to also see if CAA actually accepts kit for 5 seats. No where seen in their rule nor any request for comment.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Brum
Posts: 852
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually quite the opposite, all I see is:
a room nicely staged. with some newly leased CNCs
machining in process on some centrifugal compressor (which is not nearly as hard as the hot section turbine blade)
a mockup of a tail section that looks so heavy its probalby made of wooden/fiber glass molding (not real areospace grade structure)
Real work is done in machining center that are dirty and smelly, feel like being taken for an idiot by being shown such a sanitized and conspicuous rendering
a room nicely staged. with some newly leased CNCs
machining in process on some centrifugal compressor (which is not nearly as hard as the hot section turbine blade)
a mockup of a tail section that looks so heavy its probalby made of wooden/fiber glass molding (not real areospace grade structure)
Real work is done in machining center that are dirty and smelly, feel like being taken for an idiot by being shown such a sanitized and conspicuous rendering
some newly leased CNCs
https://helihub.com/2021/12/17/hill-helicopters-opens-sales-for-certified-version-hc50/
“Hill Helicopters yesterday held their first Global Meetup & Discover Event at their Development Centre in the UK. Hosted by Dr Jason Hill, the event brought together around 100 people in person – mostly existing owners/customers – and over 1000 online.
Jason Hill announced that the company’s current order book for their HX50 model – being developed in the experimental rule category for private pilots – now stands at 342 from 38 countries around the world. He also announced that sales of the certified version – to be known as HC50 – have now been opened and the headline price will be £725,000 (US$963,000 at today’s exchange rate). The HC50 will thus be the variant that can be operated commercially.
Orders for the HC50 can currently only be booked by people in UK, US, Canada, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand. These geographical limitations are due to initial plans for certification of the HC50 – which notably do not include EASA in Europe or ANAC in Brazil. HeliHub.com understands these will follow in due course and have not been included in the initial list to ensure the program team are not stretched with too much to do and/or too little time. That said, the experience in recent years of other manufacturers may have raised a note of caution. The HeliHub.com article R66 European certification delayed by huge EASA charges from January 2014 may be part of that.
There is also a six week window where HC50 orders are only being taken from people who have already placed an order for an HX50 model – up to 30th January 2022. From 1st February anyone in the listed countries will be able to place a deposit of £50,000 for an HC50.
Deposits on around 20 HC50s were placed during the event yesterday evening.”
“Hill Helicopters yesterday held their first Global Meetup & Discover Event at their Development Centre in the UK. Hosted by Dr Jason Hill, the event brought together around 100 people in person – mostly existing owners/customers – and over 1000 online.
Jason Hill announced that the company’s current order book for their HX50 model – being developed in the experimental rule category for private pilots – now stands at 342 from 38 countries around the world. He also announced that sales of the certified version – to be known as HC50 – have now been opened and the headline price will be £725,000 (US$963,000 at today’s exchange rate). The HC50 will thus be the variant that can be operated commercially.
Orders for the HC50 can currently only be booked by people in UK, US, Canada, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand. These geographical limitations are due to initial plans for certification of the HC50 – which notably do not include EASA in Europe or ANAC in Brazil. HeliHub.com understands these will follow in due course and have not been included in the initial list to ensure the program team are not stretched with too much to do and/or too little time. That said, the experience in recent years of other manufacturers may have raised a note of caution. The HeliHub.com article R66 European certification delayed by huge EASA charges from January 2014 may be part of that.
There is also a six week window where HC50 orders are only being taken from people who have already placed an order for an HX50 model – up to 30th January 2022. From 1st February anyone in the listed countries will be able to place a deposit of £50,000 for an HC50.
Deposits on around 20 HC50s were placed during the event yesterday evening.”
I'm sure many of them would have gone to nothing. My suspicion is most buyers may already own a helicopter but are interested in replacing it with this one. This is partly because only people involved with helicopters would likely be aware of this company's existence, and people who want to buy a helicopter, and can afford to, are not likely to wait years when they could be flying now.
They seem to be targeting Robinson’s main sales regions, given the price point it looks like they are after the upper end of that market or countries where warbirds (ala gazelle) are popular.
They have some interesting regulatory hurdles to cross, particularly the complicated experimental sector. Hill has always had the whiff of trying to hide a (semi) production built aircraft behind self-build rules.
20 deposits make the splurge on showy marketing and free booze a no-brainer.
Making a machine fly, safely and certificated, is a bit more complicated.
Good luck to them.
The flock of CNC machines no doubt got many oohs and aahs.
They have some interesting regulatory hurdles to cross, particularly the complicated experimental sector. Hill has always had the whiff of trying to hide a (semi) production built aircraft behind self-build rules.
20 deposits make the splurge on showy marketing and free booze a no-brainer.
Making a machine fly, safely and certificated, is a bit more complicated.
Good luck to them.
The flock of CNC machines no doubt got many oohs and aahs.
To end up with a certificated, viable, helicopter you need to go from 'bright idea' to 'finished product'. That journey will involve building a team, establishing a design and development facility, purchasing machinery and equipment, proving production processes, making prototypes and test pieces, carrying out certification testing, building a prototype, flying it and completing certification.
When I first heard about this programme my first impression was 'crikey, that is a bit too ambitious to have much of a chance'. However, having had some small involvement with the Hill team, and seeing the current state of affairs, and realising how much funding (non-refundable) has been raised through deposits on three hundred-odd aircraft, my view quickly changed.
I've been involved in the aircraft design and certification world for several decades and, to me, this programme is very real and viable. There are no certainties in this world but this programme is moving very sensibly along that path from 'bright idea' to 'finished product'. The team is comprised of more PhDs than I've seen in a long while, the facilities are real and high quality, things are being done logically and at pace. Most importantly Jason has a vision and the drive to achieve it.
Do not count this one out.
When I first heard about this programme my first impression was 'crikey, that is a bit too ambitious to have much of a chance'. However, having had some small involvement with the Hill team, and seeing the current state of affairs, and realising how much funding (non-refundable) has been raised through deposits on three hundred-odd aircraft, my view quickly changed.
I've been involved in the aircraft design and certification world for several decades and, to me, this programme is very real and viable. There are no certainties in this world but this programme is moving very sensibly along that path from 'bright idea' to 'finished product'. The team is comprised of more PhDs than I've seen in a long while, the facilities are real and high quality, things are being done logically and at pace. Most importantly Jason has a vision and the drive to achieve it.
Do not count this one out.
