Cabri G5
 

From "Aviation Leak"

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....80890e31cd.png

Yes, just read about this. Huge news for some of us; the G2 has a luxurious-feeling modern cockpit with very efficient use of space and great visibility. The G5 seems to use a similar engine as the 120, but is supposed to be lighter and smaller. (5 seats is the "high-density" configuration, so sounds/looks closer to 66 in size, where 3 seats in back is cramped and 2 is better.) Excited to see how this develops; it's clearly years away from prototype stage but it's great they're working on it.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....68b7898ba.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....17de2e7d7.jpeg

I wonder what Jason Hill makes of this

Perhaps he can make an engine for them. :}

Hat, coat, exit...

I would rather put a deposit on that, and the effective wait time will likely be lower.

Interesting to see the Marignane connection in the background. Given Bruno’s involvement with the EC120 program back in the 90s, there’s clearly some pedigree behind the project. Let’s hope the MGB lives up to the expectations!

The Cabri will be priced realistically.....or a 'complete rip off by another legacy manufacturer ' in Hill-speak.

Between this and the Robinson unmanned programme, his 'innovation' is looking more and more like yesterday's news.

We can see plenty of fast tracking to certification with this judicious scaling up of a proven design (as in the R44 to R66)

• Same Fenestron tail rotor seamlessly scaled up
• 3 to 4 blades, so technically the blades do not have to be to be much bigger than the G2 blades, but they are different with an added rounded tip (noise concern expressed)
• Proven engine, that will probably seat and an angle down similar to R66 or H500 (and HX50)
• Full carbon composite fuselage as developed in the G2 (low empty weight expressed)

I like the sliding doors, it makes the back cockpit seemingly larger than its class

The G2 really lends itself well to upscaling as it was already designed as a stepping stone trainer that is supposed to feel like a larger H120-H125.
the H120 never lived to its hype, that could be what the H120 never could achieve in overwhole utility: price, range, performance ...

That is when you enter the danger zone: that is the problem with large programs falling behind, the market place is changing and the competition is catching up.
it does not matter that you started in pole position with a great idea, "HX50 full verticalization of the industry to your design", that idea is too heavy, you will not finish in first place.

I paid the price too many time, a great idea does not buy you time, it just buys a chance in the race.

That's why I would have preferred 3 blades with a wider chord, in the scale of 350 B original ones (blue) and not something like the120: remember those blades were too narrow in design, then ETL was a real challenge depending on actual load, temps and DA. In fact, almost everyone at the R&D knew and agree the solution to get a B2 version of the 120 using proven dynamic elements from the 350 series, similarly as they did decades ago for the Lama. Anyway, curious to get the first expected performance data, hoping that time BG has listened to the real world feedback.

Strange to say so when EC funded it from the very beginning when Burno still holds an employment contract with them.

I wonder if Mr. Gelb and company will be looking at this. They fly some G2's for training as well as having been/are a large promoter of the Hill machine.

I think this will be certified well before the HC50, even though it's clearly much earlier in development, because it's using off-the-shelf avionics and engine. But the HX50 (experimental) *should* hopefully be flying well before this does.

I'll have a bet with you on that one.....

It'll do to the R66 what the G2 did to the R22.

The G2 didn't really affect the R22 sales/usage in Europe.

Hardly anyone in the UK uses the G2 as it's almost the same price as an R44! And they break all the time

this year we are expecting to deliver at least 40 R22’s. Last year only 20 G2’s were delivered.

Exactly, lol.

Yes, because more time was given (and still is, I believe) to the Airbus-funded VSR700 program. I assume that the surpluses from that program prompted Bruno to finally launch a big brother to the G2

Let’s wait and see how competitively priced the G5 is. At least it won’t have to suffer the chaos the R66 had with European certification

Strange to compare facts (last year G2 production) with estimation (this year estimated R22 production).

And funny to say that Guimbal produced only 20 G2 last year when Robinson produced less R22 than that figure ...
.

Strange to compare it to the r66 when the price/performance will be closer to the b505.

Dear Mr. Smith,
It isn't very gentlemanlike to gloat. There is no real other competition for Robinson than the Cabri G2. It is more recent, uses newer technologies and is better locking. It does not have the same success than Robinson, but that does not mean you should make fun of it. And for the record, your numbers are far below the numbers they once were, too. I still admire the success of Robinson and have flown them many hours, but please refrain from bulling the competition, it does not suit you.

Cabri is expensive to buy and run, they often have "niggly" issues, it porpoises in straight and level flight, and it is not powerful enough

Other than that, they are fine.

Well I guess you completely misread my post. I was simply providing some facts of relevance to the thread. There’s no gloating or bullying. There’s room in the market for all of us.

In this market, which is Robinson heavy, the Cabri hasn’t put a dent in the 22 market share. It is too underpowered to be used nationally and statistically they have written off more G2’s in training accidents as a percentage of total units shipped.
The number of 22’s has inherently declined due to insurance costs which contributes to making the delta of renting a 44 or cadet marginal, and provides an operator with a more versatile platform for generating revenue.

They should have made the Cabri with a normal tail rotor. No need for a fenestrom on a training machine

Noted. But I think you missed Robbie’s point :E

Geeze, everybody play nice!
Joke
Can’t we just start making these again? Simple, easy to fly and maintain, autos great, Extremely good visibility. Lands anywhere! . Joke over.https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....1f448d70b.jpeg

If you plan to move up to other Fenestron EC helicopters it makes perfect sense. (That's what I did and it worked nicely; G2 -> EC135).

The G2 was basically created to train EC pilots so it's a baby EC. The G5 is not a trainer so it'll be interesting to see what they do with it.