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😳

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?

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?

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.

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

.
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:
.

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.

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?

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 ??????

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.

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. ;)

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.

And then there's Henry Ford, or Elon Musk. If nobody was prepared to stick their neck out and get criticised by naysayers, we wouldn't even have a horse and cart, let alone something as indescribably unlikely as helicopters.

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.

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.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e1e8c320e0.jpg
Oh no, someone has beaten him to it

Makrolon is a very old product, it has a slightly 'milky' haze to it.
Optically clear polycarbonates are now common, such as Sustanat.

Crab

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

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..