- programmable helmet HUD's. Each pilot should be able to program his helmet to see what he/she wants

- airframe overlimit sensors and recorders, including a weight scale on the rotor mast

- airbags

Most of the wishlist will eventually materialise into optional extras, that operators simply won't buy anyway, so whats the use... :{

Garmin 530/430
 

I may be wrong but I cannot find a way to upload user (preferably protected) waypoints each time a new aircraft arrives, or unit is replaced ..... tiresomely boring

Could manufacturers not think of such a simple requirement?

My Wish list:

More crashworthiness - airbags maybe? and better fire protection/surpression devices.

Transmission/drivetrain/gearboxes that can handle the power

Better visibility

Proper gauges, no glass cockpit stuff.

In my opinion, the "newer generation" helicopters perform very well in most conditions. Most of the tragic accidents happen to helicopters
that are running just fine before they hit the ground (or something else) . I think a well
designed, easy to use AND affordable TCAS system would be a big step in
the right direction. I guess well designed would cover everything.

It is interesting that Russian Helicopters are equipped to fly in icing conditions, carry a big payload and have surplus power but are lacking in system redundancy.

Western countries have (mainly) helicopters that can't fly in ice and have limited power but have system redundancy.

To bad we can’t mix the best of both philosophies.


My wish list:

1:ALL IFR Helicopters should all be equipped with de-ice/anti ice capability.

2: Better range and efficiency.

3: Seeing as we are “thinking outside the box” a nuclear propulsion system; it is being worked on for drones.
Here:
http://http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3406

Fenestron tail rotor standard.
A parachute system good enough to make tail boom or main rotor separation survivable.
External airbags to cushion the hull on impact.

And a heater that keeps the PILOT hot enough on those -40 days we have so many of here in northern Canada and also ofcourse elsewhere.

An aircraft that can use all its available power

reliable instruments that don't break constantly, particularily gyro ones.

cupholders?

Cost, space and weight effective technology, and spare parts
 

Nick,

I would like to reiterate the themes from previous posts:
1. Lightweight and small
2. Cheap
3. Simple
4. Time to Market

Lightweight and small, so we can put all the avionics and accessories from an S92 into a 44/206.

Advances in electronics and materials science means we should have a lot more functionality with less space and weight.

Cost effective, so we can _afford_ to put all the avionics and accessories from an S92 into a 44/206 ;)

Focus on technologies and materials cheaper to produce, with lower defect rates and production costs.

Simple, so pilots can self diagnose and repair most issues, e.g. an alert screen tells pilot fadec faulty, pilot goes into trunk, pulls out a spare (like a fuse in a car), replaces in the field, carries on flying and when he gets back to base he can send of/swap out the faulty spare.

There are a lot of cases where redundancy does not need to be in-line, and you can land to replace a part. Not everyone flies over the north sea in the fog and ice and needs to pay the weight / cost penalty.

Time to market for new technology
By technology I mean any material or device going into a helicopter. We need to improve the pipeline for developing and implementing new technology and materials so we don't have 30-50 year upgrade cycles, and that new technology can easily and cost effectively be retrofitted.

And when looking for technology advances, it should not just be in functionality, there is enough on the market today for most our needs, it needs to be to make existing functionality cheaper, lighter, smaller and quicker to market.

As an Aside
Having a light utility helicopter that can compete against a Cessna 182 would be a big boon for the industry.

Why does a helicopter need to cost 5-10 more than an equivalent airplane with half the performance?

The certification and insurance liability overhead has to come down so we can get newer technology out to the market faster, more reliably so everyone can benefit from the cost, safety and weight benefits.

Oh, and we always want more power and range :ok:

Thanks for taking the time to wade through our suggestions.

Nick,

Great idea, I hope that you are able to use some of the input :ok:

things that are needed:

Fly by wire for light/medium civilian helicopters, leading to....
Carefree handling as with RPT big jets
Power limits that don't inhibit the aircraft's potential, both engine and gearbox
Proper seats and control positioning to allow the crew to survive a full day's operation: day after day after day.

fixes to existing shortfalls:

Nail DoC's to a 10% variation, and simplify the Parts List :)
Keep on providing the level of support that Bell are famous for (don't let the beancounters cut it back) :ok:
Get rid of the 2 year life on the 206 TT Straps (please, please, please) :ugh:


Loads more, but I'm off to dinner with Tudor :p

Nick,

How about a "get out of jail free" button that will right the aircraft to wings level, adjust to best rate of climb speed, and command max power. Kind of a super Go Around button that will work in any flight regime from climb to descent, from hover/sideward/rearward flight up to Vne. Basically, something that would command the aircraft to do what the pilot would do if he/she were oriented and able to see. If you could work in terrain and obstacle avoidance, so much the better. Then make this system standard equipment in every aircraft you build - IFR or VFR.

-Stan-

Just a few requests to add to the list.

- Windshield wipers that clean the whole windscreen. During approach and while hovering I find myself looking beside the clean area.

- Rotorcraft flight manuals and supplements free and online for downloading.

- A button on the collective that I can press when I'm at the bottom of the yellow arc in a hover that will bring on full take-off power (without busting any limitations) and hold it until I release the button.

- Better approach plate holders.

- More storage areas for ops manuals, maps, gps manuals etc....

- If you design an aircraft and it has a problem that contributes to an accident please just bite the bullet and fix the problem instead of avoiding the issue so you can avoid liability. Most aircraft I have flown has a weak link (that will continue to contribute to accidents) that everyone knows about but is never fully addressed by the manufacturers.

- Clean up older RFMs every few years and do a complete re-issue as it tends to get ridiculous with all kinds of supplements and out of date information/systems etc..

I'm looking forward to flying an outstanding Bell product sometime in the future after many years in your competitors aircraft.

Cheers,
bb

Some have done so. The Chelton Flight Logic system (which is STC'd for Bell, EC, Enstrom, and MD light turbines in the U.S.) provides for transferring both user waypoints and flight plans from one acft to another.

Bugdevheli,

In reference to your post #54 on this thread, this patent may be of interest to you, if you don't already know of it.

US 7,204,453
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...S=PN/7,204,453

Dave

Surely there are 3 things that come to the fore, 1. Reliability, 2. sensible price for Quality components\ spares with availability of same, 3. components to reach life, this will keep both operators, owners, & bean counters happyish.
What good the gismos if the machine is AOG
All 3 seem to be a world away from any manufacturers understanding.