Skyryse Luna: Retrofitted autopilot to any helicopter? (R44 in video)
 

So Skyryse are also pitching to the greedy money to be the next aviation Uber.
The video doesn't say much about how the system works, where they are in development etc, but is interesting seeing it operating on the 44.

How is this different or better than any existing, fully coupled, 4-axis helicopter autopilot system?

it's autonomous ie flies itself, pilot optional.
This will be a relief to many Robbie pilots, they can just send it on its way without them :}

And when the idiot passenger tells the autopilot to do something that the pilot doesn't expect, it gets turned off. Back to basics.

I would never trust an autopilot that is waiting for a voice command.

"F#%K ME!"
"I don't think I can do that, Dave..."

I can read the nervousness of the pilot. His hands are closer to the controls than flying with a fresh student

Good use of the HAL9000 reference AC :ok: made me smile.

So how much weight will those linear and parallel actuators add to the aircraft, along with the AFCS computer to run them? Plus the FMS to enable nav route planning and activation.

Then how do you stop people in the aircraft accidentally making control inputs (remove the controls entirely perhaps) that will override the AP?

No different to other APs - hardly cutting edge.

Still not seeing a difference from a fully coupled, 4 axis autopilot. Does not the latter also autonomously follow a flight plan programmed into the navigator? Won't it also automatically fly an ILS? On the really expensive helicopters do they not terminate in a hover automatically?

P.S. for Crab's reference an R44 HeliSAS installation is 12 lbs. If they ever add another axis maybe it would go up to 16lbs. That ain't bad. Just don't spec air conditioning, too 😉

But is HeliSas a 4 axis AP? Or is it just as the title implies - linear actuators in the control runs providing rate damping?

A proper AP will need parallel actuators for open loop/autotrim and inputs to an AP computer for the nav kit to steer it.

And no, aa777888 - I don't think they are offering anything new that a number of 4-axis autopilots already provide.

It's a legit 2-axis autopilot, not just a SAS.

Genesys has recently started to advertise a 3-axis, SPIFR certifiable, version that is 35lbs.

Here's the video on the lightweight, 12lb, 2-axis version that people are putting into R44's and R66's at a rapid clip. Not sure if we are going to see this in the 505, or if Garmin will beat Genesys to it with their GFC600H.

A bit different from the advertised model, though, which claims 4-axis control. Probably somewhat heavier again.

Do the voice commands go through the intercom, or to a cockpit mike (need some noise attenuation filters!)

No, it is stability ie rate damping in the VFR one with some very limited upper modes (which don't include yaw) in pitch and roll.

It's a SAS plus but not a real autopilot.

Don't get me wrong - it will add a huge amount to the handling qualities of a light single but at cost $100K according to the reports - what proportion is that of the aircraft cost?

Your definition of an autopilot and mine are quite different. If I turn on a piece of equipment, and it follows all of the directional guidance coming from my GPS, including turns, holds, and approaches, and I never have to touch the controls while it's doing all of that, then in my book it's an autopilot. A 2-axis autopilot, but an autopilot nonetheless. Yes, more axis are better but, as you point out, how much do you really need/want to spend in a VFR light single?

On the current Robinson R44 pricesheet, a base R44 Raven II with no options is $489K and the HeliSAS is $47K.

I have to say that I would love one in my Clipper II. It sure would take the tedium out of even the shortest cross countries. I suspect I'm over-appreciating its autopilot functionality and under-appreciating its SAS functionality. I'd like to try flying a HeliSAS equipped ship in order to more fully appreciate it, but I'm not buying one myself!

7's and 8's, an AP isn't autonomous, in other words it can't control the aircraft through all phases of flight, while dealing with exceptions within its operating envelope without human intervention or presence.
They may both have a lot in common, such as actuators etc, the difference is in the additional software, logic and telemetry needed to dispense with the human.

aa777888 - how are you going to keep it in balance if you don't touch the controls - 2-axis is pitch and roll only.

It also means that although the pitch channel will hold your height in Alt mode, power will decide your speed so if you want to change it you will have to make a collective input.

Equally, trying to use it on an approach will mean constantly adjusting the collective as the AP only has the ability to use pitch changes to fly a vertical profile.

I think the SAS element is very attractive for a robbie but don't get too excited by the upper modes promised, it won't be a full hands-off experience.

Oh and I wouldn't rely on that IIMC wings level facility, especially if the speed gets low.

Well, you can cheap out with the Aspen stuff, which would only be half again, but anyone blowing money on an autopilot is probably going to first spec. full Garmin glass for the panel anyway. The panels with the big TXi and GTN750 sure do look pretty. I heard a single rumor that Robinson was working on the development of electronic engine instrumentation as well. All glass Robinsons may not be too far in the future.

Crab: yes, yes, you have to accept airspeed variations if you want to go completely hands-off with 2-axis autopilot. Set your power, set your heading/altitude and/or nav. mode, eat your sandwich and watch the airspeed wander a bit. Welcome to the wonderful world of inexpensive, 2-axis autopilots. Probably something you are not familiar with, but to those of us who dwell at the low end of the aircraft cost and performance envelope they are bread and butter.

I've experienced them in fixed wing settings, but have yet to experience it in a rotary wing setting. I suppose I may have to rest a foot on a pedal since there is no yaw trim in a 44 or 66, depending on the rigging, or just accept flying a bit sideways, too. A small price to pay for being able to eat my sandwich with two hands so to speak, which, along with the ability to get the aircraft to a defined 3-dimensional point in space, regardless of airspeed variations, is a good enough definition of an autopilot for me :ok:

And, yes, I 100% agree that the HeliSAS devolves to essentially SAS-only at low airspeed regimes, and should be managed appropriately.