Nonsense -- visual appeal is part of the human interaction with technology.

Also - I note you didn't use the word "intuitive" in your description of that box. That is the worst, most unintuitive screen I've ever seen. Secret menu's and combinations of button pushes to get menu's. Oh and don't turn off both channels accidentally trying to access a menu; your FADEC might need that box. Absolutely pathetic they haven't improved on this in 25 years.

Hello Shagpile

A couple of points on your VEMD comments above:

You are correct, it has been around for over 25 years. The improvement/growth you are missing would be the Helionix system (in the larger aircraft)

Looking at one indicator for engine parameters seems pretty intuitive (FLI)

The “secret menus” are not secret, they are easily accessed. The ones you need in flight are accessed with one button (scroll), and
the other screens are to get to Overlimits, previous power checks, failure diagnostics etc. There is no need to access these in flight, though they have proved to be very useful for their intended purpose.
The Fadec would operate just fine with a total VEMD failure.

All the best

Rigidhead

I suspect what he refers to is the autopilot power limiting, with coupled collective - that does get affected, and if the IAS is set too high, can result in a big overtorque. But, I disagree with his sentiments in general

Shagpile,

I suggest you Google “Helionix”.

FNW

I was one of the more fortunate ones who was able to attend the latest gala Jason Hill held at Duxford. Aside from the 3 fantastic days I had checking out Cambridge, we also had the opportunity to mix and mingle and ask legitimate questions instead of throwing around additional speculation ;-). I for one am still impressed with the progress I saw on the two airframes that Hill had on display. Do they have more work to do? Absolutely, self admittedly Jason tells you this. Do you know why a common product is called WD40? It took 40 cracks at it to get it right......bet you all have a can of it in your garage. There are still many more hurdles to jump over, but I think they are on the right track. I am confident enough to say that because I ordered two more HC's when I returned home. That in itself doesn't make me the smartest guy in the room, but it just goes to show that an intelligent person (I'm assuming that's me) who has an Aviation mechanical background as well as a commercial pilot's license can ask the questions to the appropriate parties to make a well informed decision. All this chat about the "horrid" panel or "those rotor blades don't look real" kind of questions are completely irrelevant. He wasn't trying to sell us an airworthy helicopter at this event. I'm 6'4" and when you can sit in a seat comfortably (try that in a Bell) or visualize first hand the luggage capacity that this helicopter has, that was quite an accomplishment (as well as all the other neat bits). No one there expected to be taken for a spin in an HX50, and no one there expected that what we saw was ready the end user. All this talk about the chances of the digital screen failing or how your alligator arms won't be able to reach the collective are all CNN news worthy, but like CNN news, they are just distractions to many who won'y ever get a chance to sit inside one of beauties. I urge you again to throw some positivity in your minds and wait the end result. I bet you'll be asking to go for a spin in one one day soon! Play your cards right and you may get the chance, but try not to spill the "half empty" glass of water in mine.

Hello to all, I’m new to posting in the forum here, but would like to introduce myself. I chose this subtopic for reasons that will be more obvious as you read my introduction.

My name is David Smith and I was the original chief engineer for the Bell 505 program and joined Robinson Helicopters about 9 months ago. I feel I am in a reasonable position (although admittedly biased) to comment on the challenges of certifying and manufacturing Part 27 rotorcraft. I am appreciative of the work Hill Helicopters is doing to change the industry narratives around 1) making aviation fun/cool/engaging and 2)vertical integration of manufacturing to control costs and quality. Indeed these two reasons are a large part of why I made the jump to RHC earlier this year! I applaud Dr Hill for his work and wish him safe progress on the development. Product unveilings are amazing and fun, but they pale in comparison to first flights and first engine starts, so I know their team is focused on the next milestones.

I also want to make myself available to anyone on the forum who might be interested in learning more about the challenges of certification or cost management in aerospace. Some of the opinions expressed above regarding spare part costs and lack innovation in the industry are passions of mine and I would love to chat with anyone here. Robinson Helicopters over the next decade will improve and innovate in a whole host of news ways. Please stay tuned and reach out if you want to connect.

Sincerely,

David Smith
Robinson Helicopter Company

Helionix suite picture attached for reference, note how they still use a lot of white against black contrasts, Hill HX50 panels, all unsegregated antitalised Blueish tones just blurs out the information.
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....5ae8d182d9.jpg

So 1650kg MAUM, minus 5 x 90 kg adults is 1200kg minus say 200 kg fuel is 1000kg - how much of that wonderful luggage space will be available to be filled? Or is the airframe made from pixie dust?

You could go and buy an ex-mil Gazelle which already does 140kts has a MAUM of 1900kg, seats five adults and has a good luggage space. However it isn’t experimental, has an excellent track record for reliability and is easy to fly VMC or IMC. oh and it was built and first flew in the late 60s. Where is the innovation to improve on that?

R66 empty weight = 585 kg
EC120 empty weight = 895 kg
SA341 empty weight = 917 kg
so the math could work if you can do EC120 weight or better

I'm not sure if this is representative of all Gazelle's, but I went for a spin in an ex-warbird one, and it was very agricultural; built for hauling troops, not for comfort or style. The one I went in couldn't even take a noise cancelling headset. But in general I do like the Gazelle. We just need somebody to make a modern version of one, with a smaller engine, lightweight fully composite fuselage, modern aerodynamics and retractable undercarriage. Oh wait.

Looks nice, yet they are still installing the venerable VEMD pixel art museum pieces in brand new $6m 2023 Airbus Corporate Helicopter machines.

Am I missing something here...
What country allows VFR flights in IMC ?
wtf? :ugh:

Agreed but I was being generous with both the pax weight and limiting the fuel the Gaz can do 450 kg fuel with 5 pob

Yes, IMC without an IR?

As I understand it most Gazelle's in the UK are also "permit to fly", as will be the HX50. As much as Gazelle's are nice to look at and fast, I imagine they are a little "old tech" (analogue dials, no air con, no AP etc) and I hear they cost an arm and a leg to run.

also ex mil can only have 4 in them and those sitting in the back, unless 5 ft nothing have the most uncomfortable seating position ( must have been designed by a medieval torturer or a Bell seat specialist ) Otherwise a great pilots machine and pretty cheap if you have an ex mil one

I'm curious to know more about the "Anti Ice" switch shown above. Did anyone attending the event ask about this?

Thanks

Putting Helionix in the Airbus Light Helicopter fleet was carried out a few years ago. An EC130 flew with a full Helionix cockpit including Autopilot but industry said they were happy with the current configuration so as it wasn’t commercially viable to proceed further, the project was put on the shelf.

Jetexec: I certainly understand your message. I visit this thread frequently as it is interesting to track progress being made, but also to read the spectrum of view being expressed, both positive and negative. I would like to think that Jason Hill and others at Hill Helicopters selectively read the thread too and don't take any of it personally, as even some of the critical comments should be food for thought for product development.

Since you had a dig at chat about "those rotor blades don't look real", it is worth adding some context: In post #1267 VM325 posted photos of rotors and main gearbox in response to CGameProgrammerr with the line "Nope, definately no gearbox or rotors..." as if to say there was more progress than CGameProgrammerr was expecting. In post #1296, SansAnhedral speculated the rotors in those photos were mock-ups and in #1314 I expressed the same. That was no criticism. The mock-up blades were subsequently confirmed. So VM325 had a point about progress but then so did CGameProgrammerr. Hill's earlier expectations for a first flight this year have triggered many posts here. Discussing progress on development can hardly be irrelevant to this thread? As for the humble pie though, lets just defrost it and all have a slice in celebration of the progress that Hill HAS made this year.

PS: I have been tempted to create a new thread with links to the countless EVTOL projects around the world. Some seem like smoke and mirrors to me, complete with what looks to be fake video that misrepresent progress. The Hill project has infinitely more substance and credibility than some of those projects.

hi David, welcome to the forum! Great to have someone of your calibre providing input.

I think we’d all agree that Robinson has fallen a bit behind to date on innovation and would love to know what might now be in the pipeline if you are able to share any teasers with us.

If I am reading your question correctly, the anti-ice switch is for 'engine anti ice' I believe (bleed air).