Hill Helicopters HX50
Mee3
What utter bollocks. The US military paid for the development of both machines. Are you really telling me that a piece of garden mesh on a plastic frame is $ 15k. I get a blade on the same machine is the same price ! My neighbour used to make compressor wheels for RR 250. They cost a fraction and i mean a fraction of what RR charged them out . So it is possible to make a machine that doesnt cost the earth
What utter bollocks. The US military paid for the development of both machines. Are you really telling me that a piece of garden mesh on a plastic frame is $ 15k. I get a blade on the same machine is the same price ! My neighbour used to make compressor wheels for RR 250. They cost a fraction and i mean a fraction of what RR charged them out . So it is possible to make a machine that doesnt cost the earth
An iphone costs $100 to make, if that.
It costs a truckload of cash to develop a safe machine which doesn’t cost much to make.
Quality is exactly what they choose it to be (i.e. what they think they need to do to produce something to a price point where it makes money).
Whilst I'm not 100% sold on Hill, don't underestimate the value of vertical integration, particularly in Aerospace - above example, see how much per kg the cost of an orbital launch has come down since SpaceX entered the market. A lot of that is due to vertical integration, only some of it is due to reusability.
Bell Ringer
No it doesnt, one is dealing with technology that is in most cases 50 years old plus. Now if one is building a new concept then I would agree with you. So how can for instance the PMA boys design and manufacture items for ones aircraft that are better quality, cost less and last longer than anything an OEM can make. To use the example of the MD inlet barrier mesh, it its cheaper to go to AFS filters and but a new dog house, 2 replaceable filter elements an emergency air door and a differential pressure switch cheaper than a mesh screen. Another example for you 2 of my customers a few years ago needed a new clutch in their 341's. one was on The Bosnian reg the other on the UK reg. Clutch for the Bosnian one £ 8k couldnt fit one overhauled in Bosnia to the UK one as no EASA Form 1. The clutch had to come from Airbus with a Form 1. Opened the box to find it had been overhauled in Bosnia, so all Airbus had done is put a piece of paper on it and charged almost £ 20k for the piece of paper. Now if Jason can bring sensible engineering practice to his machine you can see where the cost savings will be. Lets be honest all a helicopter is, is a blow torch turning a gearbox with some blades on it, it isnt rocket science
No it doesnt, one is dealing with technology that is in most cases 50 years old plus. Now if one is building a new concept then I would agree with you. So how can for instance the PMA boys design and manufacture items for ones aircraft that are better quality, cost less and last longer than anything an OEM can make. To use the example of the MD inlet barrier mesh, it its cheaper to go to AFS filters and but a new dog house, 2 replaceable filter elements an emergency air door and a differential pressure switch cheaper than a mesh screen. Another example for you 2 of my customers a few years ago needed a new clutch in their 341's. one was on The Bosnian reg the other on the UK reg. Clutch for the Bosnian one £ 8k couldnt fit one overhauled in Bosnia to the UK one as no EASA Form 1. The clutch had to come from Airbus with a Form 1. Opened the box to find it had been overhauled in Bosnia, so all Airbus had done is put a piece of paper on it and charged almost £ 20k for the piece of paper. Now if Jason can bring sensible engineering practice to his machine you can see where the cost savings will be. Lets be honest all a helicopter is, is a blow torch turning a gearbox with some blades on it, it isnt rocket science
Lets be honest all a helicopter is, is a blow torch turning a gearbox with some blades on it, it isnt rocket science
If anyone thinks designing a helicopter from the ground up is straightforward; look no further than the numerous iterations and design revisions that the Kopter SH09 (recently re-branded AW009) has gone through - sure, it is being designed with CS-27 certification in mind, but the funding and work that has been piled into it shows that what works in theory for a helicopter usually needs more money and time than originally budgeted for, to work in practice. Best of luck to the Hill team and I hope that we see a flying prototype soon
Last edited by ApolloHeli; 3rd May 2022 at 21:43. Reason: typo
Crab
Having had a reasonable insight and lent him a hand all he is doing is taking best practice from loads of different industries and putting them together with an eye to making the machine as light, slippery and practicable as one can get.
He spent ages going through and looking at the design of a 500 main rotor head as it is relatively simple with a strap pack enormously strong as has been proved over 50 years. Has decided, having seen the 342's fenestron to go down that avenue as it makes the aircraft quicker ). As for the body shell look what Bruno has done with the Cabri, he is passionate about making the aircraft as clean as possible to reduce drag and increase the speed as this obviously reduces the need to carry so much fuel and hence reduces power required.
Will he get there ? having seen behind the scenes and a few long chats with him i think he will. Yes there will be some problems, but he has taken the best part of 400 orders, bear in mind Airbus sold just over 500 EC120's ( rubbish machine ) in 25 years !!!
Having had a reasonable insight and lent him a hand all he is doing is taking best practice from loads of different industries and putting them together with an eye to making the machine as light, slippery and practicable as one can get.
He spent ages going through and looking at the design of a 500 main rotor head as it is relatively simple with a strap pack enormously strong as has been proved over 50 years. Has decided, having seen the 342's fenestron to go down that avenue as it makes the aircraft quicker ). As for the body shell look what Bruno has done with the Cabri, he is passionate about making the aircraft as clean as possible to reduce drag and increase the speed as this obviously reduces the need to carry so much fuel and hence reduces power required.
Will he get there ? having seen behind the scenes and a few long chats with him i think he will. Yes there will be some problems, but he has taken the best part of 400 orders, bear in mind Airbus sold just over 500 EC120's ( rubbish machine ) in 25 years !!!
If anyone thinks designing a helicopter from the ground up is straightforward; look no further than the numerous iterations and design revisions that the Kopter SH09 (recently re-branded AW009) has gone through - sure, it is being designed with CS-25 certification in mind, but the funding and work that has been piled into it shows that what works in theory for a helicopter usually needs more money and time than originally budgeted for, to work in practice. Best of luck to the Hill team and I hope that we see a flying prototype soon
Deposits are non-refundable because they are really investments and you cannot refund investments. The company needs those for funding; they'll go bankrupt if people withdraw their deposits. I'm sure this is made clear to all investors.
Deposits for funding project development is fully understandable. Only reason why people would withdraw deposits is if Hill does not deliver on claimed performance/price. Since supporters are so adamant that he will and he promises that he will, why non-refundable?
Because that's not how people work - if they were refundable then he would get many more deposits and may spend that money, but then the flaky people will want to refund those deposits and he might not have the cash reserves to pay them, thus having to declare bankruptcy and liquidate the company. And people might refund deposits for any reason - they decide they want the money for themselves at that point, or a spouse dissuades them from buying a helicopter now, or they just get impatient and decide to buy another helicopter or retain their current one instead.
He is essentially crowdfunding his R and D
Because that's not how people work - if they were refundable then he would get many more deposits and may spend that money, but then the flaky people will want to refund those deposits and he might not have the cash reserves to pay them, thus having to declare bankruptcy and liquidate the company. And people might refund deposits for any reason - they decide they want the money for themselves at that point, or a spouse dissuades them from buying a helicopter now, or they just get impatient and decide to buy another helicopter or retain their current one instead.
Crab is 100% correct. Jason is using deposits to fund the development, together with an Innovate UK grant that he obtained.. If that's ok with potential buyers that's great, but it doesn't sit right with me so I will sit on the sidelines chewing popcorn. Watching with interest!
The big question is - what will the 'investors' do when Jason comes back to them to ask for more money?
Originally Posted by [email protected]
The big question is - what will the 'investors' do when Jason comes back to them to ask for more money?
"This project will create growth and new jobs in the South-West". Interesting - I thought Rugeley was in the Midlands........still, what's a little white lie among friends, eh?
Anyway, good to know that the Allison 250 engine had an original (not achieved ) development budget of $6.4m. In the 1950s. https://verticalmag.com/features/the...enginethatdid/. Given inflation that's $63.2m in today's money. Just for the engine, that didn't work as originally designed. However, St Jason didn't sprinkle his magic pixie dust over it.
Still, we're all just being whingeing primadonnas,
Still, we're all just being whingeing primadonnas,
Anyway, good to know that the Allison 250 engine had an original (not achieved ) development budget of $6.4m. In the 1950s. https://verticalmag.com/features/the...enginethatdid/. Given inflation that's $63.2m in today's money. Just for the engine, that didn't work as originally designed.
Has anyone talked to insurance companies regarding the underwriting of an uncertified helicopter that carries 5 people?