Its an experimental/amateur built aircraft. Keep in mind quite a few of the slot holders are private individuals who look at this from strictly a recreational use vs a commercial use. They have time and money on their side. Regardless, E/AB’rs tend to march to a different drum beat than conventional aviators if that makes sense.
Do you have any E/AB experience?
Except you can’t compare it to the Kopter or Guimbal as they are certified aircraft. Apples and oranges. And E/AB aircraft come in different flavors so they’re not all considered “kits.” And what Hill is attempting on the E/AB side has never been done at this level.

As to the timeframe, I think more of the slot holders are along for the ride vs a customer waiting at the end. They know the drill. As I mentioned, people who follow E/AB are right there with Hill during this build process which they themselves will be personally involved in as their aircraft goes down the production line. Hardly the same as with any certified aircraft production buyer.

But if you want a comparison, look to the KX50s current competition in the E/AB world at around $100,000 USD out the door depending on method of build...
No. That’s why its ground breaking and innovative in the E/AB world vs just another helicopter in the certified world. A lot of people don’t realize its this difference that is behind the support and money.

Considering wealth requirement which ties in age, I don't think they have too much time on their side? :E

Funny you talk about the "wealth" requirement when this would be the cheapest new turbine helicopter on the market, if it succeeds. And the best-selling airplane in the world is the Cirrus SR22 which costs $1 million.

Pretty sure it’s not the SR22! C172 maybe?

I was talking specifically about new factory-built aircraft. Obviously there are tons of 50-year-old airplanes flying around.

https://generalaviationnews.com/2024...lanes-in-2023/

In 2023 there were 355 SR22T sales and 142 SR22 sales, compared to 180 Cessna 172s.

then refine your definition

In case you forgot, the HX50 is a brand new helicopter. There are obviously a huge number of people that can afford it because over 350 people paid $1 million or more for a new SR22T in 2023 alone. Why are you talking about the number of people buying 50-year-old Cessnas? That has nothing to do with anything. My point is there are a lot of private owner-operators that can afford it and that, yes, are young enough to still be fit to fly.

It's not a brand new helicopter because it still doesn't exist.

Ponzi scheme!

Let’s hope it doesn’t turn out to be an “Eliocopter”…

I hear you and of course some guys just like to build aircraft for its own sake - and all of that is great. E/AB experience for myself not as as a builder but as an owner. I am from the UK and have owned what would be known as E/AB aerobatic fixed wing aircraft but my helicopter experience both piston and turbine is with certified aircraft but that is more a nature of the UK. Here E/AB aircraft are more commonly microlights dealt with by the BMAA [British microlight assoc] or the LAA [Light aircraft assoc.]. Now whilst the LAA could look after rotary, the CAA took over the oversight of gyroplanes after a lot left smoking holes at the end of the last century and the Rotorway kit has been the only option here for some time - so helicopter wise in the UK its not a well trodden path and I'm not sure where the experience is if we talk authority, certainly I think the BMAA or LAA might struggle currently to adopt the HX50.

And in a way that likely raises its own yellow flag [if not red]. Of course in the US will be the market of interest but as a first step I am very surprised they didn't merely adopt a motor that existed - even if it was to prove the other elements of the aircraft, be that dynamics, system or operation.

And that is great and is as you highlight obviously one element of the attraction for some. Indeed I fully expect some "owners" are more expert in the HX50 than the company and those guys almost love the struggle more than the solution. Personally I just like flying and whilst enjoy the engineering I'm not an engineer. I prefer steam gauges and looking out of the window than a glass panel and pretending to be in a 747 [might need to update my airline reference] and not for a moment suggesting you are in the category described here. I guess the thing is I'd just want an aircraft I can fly sooner than later rather than a technology demonstrator that I bring to life.

Its my understanding Hill has received initial okay from the FAA, TCCA, UKCAA, and CASA the HX50 build process will meet the definition of an amateur-built aircraft. Since the FAA, TCCA, and CASA already have an established E/AB regulatory system it should be seamless for the HX50. No clue on the UKCAA.

Cost. Off the shelf engines are priced at the certified levels. I think one of the reasons Kopter ended up a Leonardo product was they sourced too many OTC components to include the engine vs in-house design/procurement. Its no different in the fixed-wing E/AB side when it comes to engines/powerplants and cost.

However, I wouldn’t exactly consider the GT50 to be a completely “new” design. Its core design is more a copy of a proven engine with many hours of service but incorporating a number of modern improvements. Its also my understanding he has some of the original engine design’s support people on his team. Same method also used toward the other major components in copying proven designs with modern upgrades.

Sure it’s a big undertaking, but considering the maintenance cycle he is projecting, I think it’s a more prudent way forward in the big picture. Having worked on most of the existing helicopter turbines out there, and their variants, I think if he stays the course the engine will be one of the least issues in the long run.