Gen-H4 personal helecopter

by Marc

Gen-H4 Personal Helecopter
Does anyone read Japanese? I could really use a proper translation of the website for Gen Corp and their H-4 personal helecopter.

Odd things from Japan reckons it will fly at 56 MPH, although google translate reckoned about 6! I’d trust someone who reads the language over a machine translator any day, but reckon on the realistic speed being somewhere between those two.

I have no idea what the legal situation would be here in the UK- presumably you’d need a pilot’s license of some sort to operate it and I’d guess the machine would need to be certified airworthy? Regardless, it would be great fun and relatively cheap at about 17,500 UK pounds.

If I’m reading the autotranslated FAQ right there’s a max weight of 90 kilos too but I reckon I could lose some weight if it meant I’d get to commute via helecopter!

20 reviews or comments

Shwaza Says: October 24, 2005 at 4:31 pm

Amazing! That looks like a LOOOOOT of fun!

Keith Says: October 25, 2005 at 3:14 am

Oh my goodness, I would love to own one of those. However strangely, I wonder where is the tail rotor blade to stabilise the rototion of the helicopter flight?

Marc Says: October 25, 2005 at 5:17 am

No tail rotor – it uses a pair of contra-rotating blades to cancel out the torque generated by a single rotor.

mck Says: October 25, 2005 at 6:00 pm

That is indeed awesome. :D

hk Says: August 28, 2006 at 10:29 am

Evidently, no negative comments are allowed on this web site, even if the gadgets are life threatening, which seems to be paid for by the crap presented here so here goes:

WOW, this is the greatest thing I’ve ever seen. I can’t think of a better or more foolish way to die.

To the censor: I guess you don’t care if people are fooled into buying dangerous products that can kill them. No sir-eee, as long as you make some money doing this, you can sleep at night.

Al Says: August 28, 2006 at 11:28 am

Negative comments are welcome, we censor language and that’s about it. This does look cool, but you’re right hk it could be very dangerous in the wrong hands.

hk Says: August 28, 2006 at 1:07 pm

Thanks Al,

I have new found respect for this site. The Gen-H4 has some serious safety problem that should be addressed before it is sold to the public as I feel that any hands are the wrong hands at this time:

1. The rotor blades use fixed pitch which means that total power (or clutch/rotor) failure results in plummeting to earth (no autorotation is possible). Remember, if a clutch flies apart, it can jam the 3 others as well). Although it has four engines, (they will go through the 5 gallon tank in under an hour – the ads are deceptive about this as they give the rate of consumption of only one engine but it needs 4 to operate properly).

2. Fixed pitch means it cannot climb fast enough in an emergency (wind gust, downdraft, rain added weight, power line spotted at the last second along with a wind gust) since you must wait for the engine rpm to increase. Notice how only small framed skinny people demonstrate it. Heavy people will have no margin of safety for climbing out of trouble.

3. The parachute system is untested since there are safety laws in Japan that prohibit testing it. It is also not allowed to go into faster forward flight at all in Japan. Then they have the nerve to ask prospective customers/dealers to help test their parachute. Can you imagine getting life insurance as a parachute tester? Would you buy a product from a company that is so cavalier with your life?

4. It uses two stroke engines which have a habit of quitting unexpectedly. The likelihood of multiple engine failure (it has 4) is greater than you think, because when (not if) one quits, all the others run hotter making more failures likely. A temperature rise of 10 degrees is enough to warrant changing to bigger carburetor jets to avoid overheating and lockup. That alone could stop all four engines.

As a student helicopter pilot, I can truthfully tell you of many other dangers in flying a rotary craft that could take many hours. I cannot imagine flying one of these without dual instruction for many hours, yet it only carries one person. Not very many qualified pilots would strap this on. Please be safe and avoid this one until it has a proven safety record (won’t happen, I promise you).

Jim Says: September 18, 2006 at 11:29 am

Just a few quick comments concerning “hk”‘s comments.

The comments you used were verbatim what I read on another site. I’m sorry to see you’re frightened by something someone else said, and the fact you are a student pilot is scary in itself (no offense… I’ve been a student pilot myself and it CAN be scary).

I, for one, would LOVE to be the one to test the chutes and such here in America. As for insurance for something like that, I don’t even know if it is available, but that’s what test pilots do… they test things with no track or safety record. I think that is nearly every little boy’s dream, isn’t it?

Personally, I wish someone could put me in touch with the company for such tests. I would be delighted to do the testing. SOMEONE’S got to prove this safe, right?

hk Says: September 21, 2006 at 10:37 am


If my comments were verbatim on another site, then it must have been my posting that you read there for I am indeed the author of these points although no one can really own the truth. I am not frightened by something just because someone said something somewhere. I have done the research and have enough personal experience flying rotary craft to present what I have said as factual. Why is it scary that I am a student pilot? Any helicopter pilot will verify that each of the four main points I made is accurate. Are they all scary as well?

Point 1 is a matter of record, not opinion.

Point 2 is the same. Fixed pitch NEVER has good responsive climbing ability.

Point 3 is from their own web site. They want any dealer or customer to help them try out their untested parachute system. To test it, you must turn off the engines at altitude. Once done, you are committed. A fixed pitch machine can NEVER be restarted in the air as the blades turn backwards almost as soon as the engine is stopped. Since there is no freewheel clutch in this machine, the stopped engines are also turning backwards. So you then deploy the parachute. Is the machine still upright in the air? Why should it be? Nothing is stabilizing it. The spinning blades can rip the chute to shreds. This is what you are wanting to do? Come on, be real. There’s a reason it’s illegal to test it in Japan. Their lawmakers are obviously smarter than ours.

Point 4 is so well documented it’s not even funny. Read about the people killed in the Mini 500 helicopter due to sudden engine failure of the two stroke engine. The manufacturer did not want its engine used in this machine in the first place, but had no say in the matter.

So which of my points do you (in your wisdom and all knowingness) find inaccurate? Come on tell me, I can take it. Could it be you just want this deathtrap to be safe because it looks so cool (yes it really does look like a blast to fly).

In a real helicopter, when an engine quits, you lower the collective pitch immediately and the downward motion spins the blades storing enough kinetic energy to execute a soft landing. That only works if you are not flying at speed and altitudes known as the dead man’s curve (no auto possible). That’s why you frequently see news helicopters orbiting a scene rather than hovering. They’re avoiding the dead man’s curve that way (and saving gas as well).


mf Says: November 14, 2006 at 7:40 pm

I too, have read hk’s comments on other sites. I do not think a person with less than 30 hours total time can be an authority on the flying characteristics of anything. I believe any component on any machine, land, sea or air, can fail. Why doesit seem to be your aim to tell everyone the obvious risks of this craft? Having never seen one in person, it looks very interesting to me. What has the mini500 got to do with this aircraft? Nothing is similar about either except they fly. Do you do this public service on other dangerous or poorly designed machines?

hk Says: December 7, 2006 at 6:35 am

It sure seems that some of my critical comments are either lost or commented out. I don’t even get an email explaining why. Makes me wonder who pays to keep this site going!!

No freedom of speech here.

hk Says: December 7, 2006 at 6:36 am

Hi mf,

It seems like it’s posting again so here is my comment I posted twice several days ago:

Thanks for your comments and I’ll try to answer each point. I agree that I am not an authority on rotary craft (I just logged hour number 53 in the Robinson Heli and hope to take my solo test within 4 months), don’t take my word but do the research yourself.

Jim’s point was that I read something somewhere and drew conclusions from what someone else said on another site when it was me that said it in the first place! I asked him which of my points were inaccurate and received no answer, so I pose the same questions to you. Which of my points do you disagree with? You attack me personally but ignore the facts that I have presented. That’s called an Ad Hominum attack and is just a trick used to divert people away from the real points.

I’ll say it once again – without attacking me please address the points that I have made.

I warn people about the risks of this craft because the risks are not obvious to everyone. Basically, I believe that you, the readers, are real people who deserve to hear all sides of the issue and make an informed decision. Market types hype dangerous experimental aircraft to people who want to believe that it’s safe because many of us have a dream of flying. This is cruel and irresponsible.

I used the Mini-500 as an example since the inventor (“in my opinion” – so I don’t get sued) always blamed the multitude of deaths and crashes on the pilot, even when the engine would quit suddenly. The engine manufacturer (Bombardier) stated that this engine should NOT be used in this application but could not enforce it. After all, the inventor purchased the engines just like anyone else and could do anything he wanted.

Again, do the research on the Mini-500 and see if you don’t really agree with me when you are done. You might even come to the conclusion that I don’t post anything without doing careful research and am worthy of your trust.

Do I do this for other dangerous or poorly designed machines? I would if I knew much about other types of machines but helicopters is what I know best. Don’t laugh, but I’ve been building radio controlled helicopters for 20 years. They really have many of the same mechanics as the real thing but I’m not asking you to believe me on that basis alone. I ask you to believe me only because you looked it up for yourself, or know an experienced Heli pilot that will verify that what I said is true.

The Airscooter corp. announced they are working on a safety chute AFTER I emailed them with my concerns. I do admire their responsiveness as they did answer me directly and agreed that my concerns were valid. Even their test pilot won’t take it above 25 feet at the present time until a chute can be fitted. I’m almost certain that’s what keeps postponing sales to the public (that and their lawyers – lol).

I hope I answered your questions. It boils down to speaking up when I think some company is trying to pull a fast one and putting people’s lives in danger for the almighty dollar.

hk Says: December 19, 2006 at 9:13 am

Quotes from their own web site (bad English and all) make it unlikely that they’ve sold a hundred (or ANY, for that matter). Even if they’ve sold some kits, that does not mean there are any of these roto tillers actually flying. No one outside their company has ever claimed to fly one of these death traps and lived. Their attitude as evidenced by their quotes indicates an intense hatred and disrespect for Americans.

“”Can you see someone controls GEN H-4?? Of cource, it is a radio controlled model. As you know, we can’t several tests of GEN H-4 by manned in Japan. Because of Japanese reguration isn’t suitable to develop new airplane. Therefore we developed the radio controlled model. The porpose pf this model is not only tests but also an aerial film and such.”

“We have several tests remaining that could hardly be performed in Japan due to legal restraints ( e.g. ballistic parachutes, highspeed cruising, etc.) .”

“Therefore we are looking for customers and companies in the US who are willing to perform such tests with us. For the present we will be marketing the GEN H-4 only in the US. Because, we are not familiar with rules for each and every country.”

“We are ready to sell the GEN H-4 as long as the buyer is responsible for all legal, regulational and certificational matters concerning the flight and import of the GEN H-4 in buyer’s country.”

Moe Says: May 7, 2007 at 12:40 pm

I just wnt to warn people off from Trend Times… My husband purchaced a Walkera Helicopter R/C4.. He recieved no instruction with the helicopter, asked via lanline, for help, they were rude, and verbably shamed him..We finally recieved internet instruction, Ha!!! Very vague and confusing. The helicopter is now disabled after five hours of semi touch and go practice…. The instructional disc,(which they said was a gift)was for a remote airplane not helicopter… Beware, we just lost $200.00…..

hk Says: May 15, 2007 at 10:22 am


Sorry about your bad experience. I’ve been flying RC model helicopters for about 20 years and understand how you would feel the way you do. It’s an expensive and difficult hobby even if one is talented in all the correct disciplines. A good way to approach this is to join an RC club, observe and talk to the members out at a flying field. Since the helicopter is the most difficult RC model to fly, it would make sense to start out with a lower cost ready to fly electric “Park” flyer (airplane) with at least a three channel radio (throttle, rudder, and elevator). Many good radios have a “buddy” connection that lets an experienced pilot take over with his control box before you crash!! A lot cheaper in the long run.

The cheaper ones only have 1 or two channels and are MUCH harder to fly. Once mastered, more difficult models can be attempted. Once these are mastered, one would learn more about model helicopters before making a purchase. I have several model planes and helicopters, and the hardest one to fly (heli) is the one I saw advertised on TV for $34.95. It’s marketed as a toy, but few will ever master flying it!!

The helicopter you purchased is called a “fixed pitch” helicopter and is more difficult to fly (and cheaper) than the more responsive and precise “variable pitch” technology.
The models must by nature be very light, but are still very expensive to fix!! The very thing that makes the hobby so difficult, is what makes it so rewarding to master.

Good Luck!!

WiredEarp Says: August 30, 2007 at 4:35 pm

The Walkera RC4 is actually a good helicopter to learn on. Fixed pitch is much better to learn on than collective pitch, as long as you have a decent indoor area to fly in. Fixed pitch machines are better with no wind/indoors! The simplicitity of the fixed pitch construction makes it much less likely to break when you crash it. If your interested in helis, I wouldn’t bother going out and getting into planes, as they bear much similarity to helis. Better to spend time on a heli sim…

As to the H4 and engines quitting, that is always a safety aspect to consider. However, hk’s argument that if an engine quits, that the others will quit due to overheating doesn’t hold water as i’d imagine that the moment you had ANY type of engine trouble in a craft like this, that you’d want to land ASAP. I think the 3 remaining engines would be sufficient if you descend immediately… I’d like to see the parachute system fully operational and tested before I flew in one tho :)

hk Says: September 7, 2007 at 9:30 am

With fixed pitch, you’ll really need an indoor area to learn on because these models have almost no ability to resist the slightest breeze. Putting a small electric fixed pitch into forward flight will have it doing starnge things as it approaches translational lift. True forward flight with reduced throttle is very difficult, if possable at all. I have several small fixed, one small variable pitch (the “Blade”), and a .32 engine Raptor. Since fixed pitch is not capable of 3d manouvers, inverted flight, nor autorotation, it doesn’t make sense to me to learn on something you’ll not be sticking with as your skill level increases. The climb response on fixed pitch as a lag built in where as variable has instant response.

As for that H4 flying buzz saw/death trap, the manufacturer cannot test the parachute because it’s illegal to do so in Japan. The procedure to test it would be to turn all the engins off and hope it works perfectly the first time. What are the chances that ANYTHInG works perfectly the first time? Fixed pitch is not suitable for human transport. As for landing on 3 engines, check how small and light the test pilot is – I doubt if 3 engines would keep a normal size person safely airborn or even land without incident.

I’m sorry, WiredEarp, but your ill researched opinions could get someone killed.

arnoldo luis Says: July 10, 2009 at 5:11 am

me parece algo sorprendente, que este bello invento pueda llevarnos por los aires, el que tiene miedo de esto, que se quede en tierra, y deje de opinar de cosas, que por lo leido lo unico que saben de aeronautica es que una cosa va por el aire,por favor, sean un poco mas tolerantes con los demas,y que hagan lo que les gusta, y que en vez de opinar se queden sentaditos en una silla en la tierra mirando como los demas difrutan de esta belleza de volar..

excited gen guy Says: September 14, 2010 at 1:17 am

all of you need to realize that this is THE REALIZATION OF THE GREATEST DREAM OF ALL MANKIND! His ability to single handedly fly around the world !

Write a review or comment

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Top Categories
Latest Posts
Subscribe to Newsletter