|
Originally Posted by Hughes500
(Post 11352944)
I remember very well taking a tour at Westland's and asking a fitter about cable tying a wiring loom in an EH101, over the space of half a day it had taken one guy to cable tie 2 m of loom to a frame !!!!!
|
Originally Posted by Hughes500
(Post 11352944)
I remember very well taking a tour at Westland's and asking a fitter about cable tying a wiring loom in an EH101, over the space of half a day it had taken one guy to cable tie 2 m of loom to a frame !!!!!
In all seriousness the loom is something like 500 kg. https://helihub.com/2016/08/17/unive...w101-upgrades/ |
Originally Posted by Hughes500
(Post 11352742)
What I find interesting is how the majority want to slag off someone who may well be the saviour of our industry. No one seems to want to slag off what currently happens in our industry. Here is one example for you ( as an owner operator for 35 years of 300's,500's 206's 341's and 350's I could give you lots more ) MD main rotor blades the bonding between the grip and blade has been known to come apart. Now if you were in the automotive industry ,as my quality assurance manger used to be, this would have been addressed as he said by a redesign of the process etc etc . But no, aviation turns round just looks at it every 200 torque events and that will be safe enough ! Really ?????? You guys say he cant design stuff, well I am sorry neither can the OEM's the only difference he is trying to bring known technologies and process akin to the automotive industry which is way more into Health and safety and cost than aviation will ever be.
Why not support someone who is trying to make a British helicopter and bring back some engineering back to these shores ,dont see anyone of you out there who would have the drive, the patience, technical ability or knowledge thatJason has. Personally I really hope it gets there so he can wave 2 fingers at all you negativity, but i guess that is always the case in UK where we seem to go overboard to rubbish people rather than supporting them.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
(Post 11352763)
Wow, you must be at the very top of Jason's Christmas card list Hughes 500.......
Crab, I'm curious if you have sat in on any of the Hill updates. If you haven't, give it a go. Like Hughes500, I have a lot of optimism on the HX50. I bought # 24 and I am on the cusp of putting orders in on a couple of the commercial models. If a guy like Elon Musk can surpass the efforts of NASA in a short period, why is developing a new helicopter so surreal? As others have mentioned, even the biggest helicopter manufacturers have had flaws. I don't suspect Hill's concept will be perfect coming out of the gate, but developing an engine/helicopter isn't as genius as one would think (no disrespect here Jason). It takes a large set of nads, a bunch of money and some smart individuals. I think Jason checks all these boxes. The engine in my 407 is maybe 70's technology, developed with a slide ruler. I think developing something with computers and spitting out parts with modern CNC machines is cutting edge. I've owned a Robinson as well, and even an old school pioneer like Frank (on a tighter budget and less technology) manufactured some great products. I hear a lot of folks slagging their products too. A friend once told me "there are a lot of perfect ball players, but very few of them will set down their popcorn and come on to the field an pick up a bat". Thanks to guys like Jason for picking up a bat instead of eating popcorn. |
SpaceX almost went out of business on a few occasions, had tons of funding, wrote off many rockets in the process and eventually, after 12 years had a commercial product.
No one has said what Hill wants to do is impossible. His timelimes are impractical, his funding is limited and DARPA/NASA won't be bailing him out if it doesn't go to plan. There is no pixie dust that will just make the challenges disappear, but I continue to wish him well, it would be marvellous to have fewer of those Robbie Helicrapters creating noise pollution and see something much prettier in the skies. I just don't see it happening anytime soon. |
Originally Posted by Jetexec
(Post 11353670)
Crab, I'm curious if you have sat in on any of the Hill updates. If you haven't, give it a go. Like Hughes500, I have a lot of optimism on the HX50. I bought # 24 and I am on the cusp of putting orders in on a couple of the commercial models. If a guy like Elon Musk can surpass the efforts of NASA in a short period, why is developing a new helicopter so surreal? As others have mentioned, even the biggest helicopter manufacturers have had flaws. I don't suspect Hill's concept will be perfect coming out of the gate, but developing an engine/helicopter isn't as genius as one would think (no disrespect here Jason). It takes a large set of nads, a bunch of money and some smart individuals. I think Jason checks all these boxes. The engine in my 407 is maybe 70's technology, developed with a slide ruler. I think developing something with computers and spitting out parts with modern CNC machines is cutting edge. I've owned a Robinson as well, and even an old school pioneer like Frank (on a tighter budget and less technology) manufactured some great products. I hear a lot of folks slagging their products too. A friend once told me "there are a lot of perfect ball players, but very few of them will set down their popcorn and come on to the field an pick up a bat". Thanks to guys like Jason for picking up a bat instead of eating popcorn.
If it's so easy, as you claim, to spew new parts, why we already have timeline slippage? Price increases? Yeah, cost of everything went up, but that it is easy to calculate and incorporate into your new pricing. Yet we have sliding pricing now. Setting future business model? I totaly agree with your stance of thanking Jason for stepping up, but that doesn't mean we can't call him out on things that don't really make sense. |
As far as I can tell, no one is doubting that the Hill helicopter represents a great prospect.
Some have placed deposits. They will be the ones laughing if the machine appears, even if it's a couple of years late. Others are more doubtful that it will ever be delivered. This group will say 'I tried to warn you....'. I have sat in on a couple of the Hill presentations. The self-belief is palpable. And the enthusiasm for depositors to hear what they want to hear is clear. I believe that people said similar about Dr Ruja Ignatova and OneCoin. Until she was 'disappeared'. For the next Hill presentation, I have a question for someone to ask in the AMA part. That question is to Dr. Hill and it's this: "Do you go under the name of CRAN on Pprune?' And if the answer is yes, the next question is "So why do you pretend to be someone else on there?". It's not like anything that CRAN has posted on this thread is particularly contentious but I feel uncomfortable about someone who posts under a nom de plume. |
Originally Posted by Jetexec
(Post 11353670)
Crab, I'm curious if you have sat in on any of the Hill updates. If you haven't, give it a go. Like Hughes500, I have a lot of optimism on the HX50. I bought # 24 and I am on the cusp of putting orders in on a couple of the commercial models. If a guy like Elon Musk can surpass the efforts of NASA in a short period, why is developing a new helicopter so surreal? As others have mentioned, even the biggest helicopter manufacturers have had flaws. I don't suspect Hill's concept will be perfect coming out of the gate, but developing an engine/helicopter isn't as genius as one would think (no disrespect here Jason). It takes a large set of nads, a bunch of money and some smart individuals. I think Jason checks all these boxes. The engine in my 407 is maybe 70's technology, developed with a slide ruler. I think developing something with computers and spitting out parts with modern CNC machines is cutting edge. I've owned a Robinson as well, and even an old school pioneer like Frank (on a tighter budget and less technology) manufactured some great products. I hear a lot of folks slagging their products too. A friend once told me "there are a lot of perfect ball players, but very few of them will set down their popcorn and come on to the field an pick up a bat". Thanks to guys like Jason for picking up a bat instead of eating popcorn.
If he succeeds then great but there have been problems already and he was trying something difficult to achieve even before Covid, war in Ukraine and Trussenomics made things trickier. If he does succeed in making a functioning helicopter and it has the same spec he promised for the same cost he promised then the believers will be vindicated - I'm just not one of them. |
Originally Posted by [email protected]
(Post 11353845)
Yes, I've sat through one or two but I wouldn't expect anything else but unbounded positivity from the people making the aircraft - doesn't mean it will happen or be on time or on cost.
If he succeeds then great but there have been problems already and he was trying something difficult to achieve even before Covid, war in Ukraine and Trussenomics made things trickier. If he does succeed in making a functioning helicopter and it has the same spec he promised for the same cost he promised then the believers will be vindicated - I'm just not one of them. https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....4373d7af4.jpeg |
Jetexec - you are fortunate, I don't have the money to take a gamble on something like this project and even if I did and could stand the loss without problems, I'd still be reluctant.
|
To be, or not to be
If you want to believe in this product then you will generally see all the video presentations, arty pics and hype as positive. If you are not quite there yet but are on the fence, then you could go either way and positive steps forward (like a working engine) will help. Those that don't believe will never be swayed until the product is flying.
I guess I am on the fence and unfortunately not in the position to buy one. Whilst I accept all that has been shown so far, and feel the project is do-able, I cannot become too positive until I see a real engine, gearbox, blades etc. Everything so far has shown just a process and Mr Hill has been the only informative speaker about everything, whether it's composite, metalology, avionics, airframes etc. I don't see the mock fuselage that was on display recently as something to get excited about. Have the investors been offered anything in return for their investment if the helicopter doesn't materialise, like a share in the value of the large facility that will hopefully gain planning permission and further build? I appreciate the value wouldn't cover all the deposits but it's the thought that counts! Mr Hill, please push me onto the other side of the fence. |
Latest news is that the HX 50 is supposed to be flying "by the end of 2023"
From Aug 2020: "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" |
"Do you go under the name of CRAN on PPRuNe?' And if the answer is yes, the next question is "So why do you pretend to be someone else on there?". It's not like anything that CRAN has posted on this thread is particularly contentious but I feel uncomfortable about someone who posts under a nom de plume. |
Originally Posted by 212man
(Post 11356108)
Looking at his posts I can see why you ask, although the fact he once asked how hard a Bo105 would be to fly without hydraulics doesn't fill me with confidence!
"I confirm that there is an advanced new helicopter under development in the UK that will offer a quantum leap in technology, performance and cost. Unfortunately, I cannot release any more details at this time other than it will be just as significant as the introduction of the R22 in terms of the commercial and recreational use of helicopters globally." |
Originally Posted by 206 jock
(Post 11356564)
This was posted on Pprune.......... in 2003.
Originally Posted by CRAN
(Post 456033)
Hi Steve
Why an ENSTROM? Why not an R44? Jase:confused: |
I still don't get why they need such a complicated organisational structure - they have 7 registered business entities.
|
It did take CRAN 11 months to weigh in on this thread but his subsequent posts imply intimate knowledge of the project.
|
HILL HELICOPTERS LIMITED (12714143)
HILL GROUP FACILITIES LIMITED (12714178) HILL GROUP COMMERCIAL SERVICES LIMITED (12714205) HILL GROUP MANUFACTURING LIMITED (12714173) HILL GROUP TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED (12714183) HILL HELICOPTERS SUPPORT LIMITED (12714177) HILL GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED (12711148) Cabair used to do this back in the day. Multiple different companies. |
Nothing unusual about multiple companies under the same banner.
Try tracing the Bristow family tree of business units....back during the days it was UK based and owned for an example. |
Originally Posted by SASless
(Post 11356683)
Nothing unusual about multiple companies under the same banner.
Try tracing the Bristow family tree of business units....back during the days it was UK based and owned for an example. However I also have employees and my company makes profits. Hill doesn't. so the depositors will end up funding. Not a smoking gun but another oddity |
I'm not an accountant but I think one advantage is that the different companies can "invoice" each other for "services" thus decreasing their tax liability.
Of course it also makes it easier when the companies have financial trouble as all the debt can be loaded onto one company, so people think XYZ Ltd owes them money, and then get told, "ah sorry, that company has folded" yet the business seems to continue trading as "XYZ Maintenance, XYZ Services, XYZ Technologies" etc. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:09. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.