Comanche 400 on its way

[einherz]

"The 250 IMO is just a perfect Comanche (much better than a Comanche 180)."
nah. rah-66. this is the comanche

[Scott - A2A]

"The 250 IMO is just a perfect Comanche (much better than a Comanche 180)."
nah. rah-66. this is the comanche

I should be careful saying that as a Comanche 180 is still a Comanche and there are a lot of Comanche 180s flying today (just realized rah-66 is the Comanche helicopter... what ever happened to that thing?". Regarding the 180-250 comparison, I'm only speaking of the engine. As for a Lycoming 180, it is an awesome engine. There is zero reason to ever use a 320 over a 360. Some will say "I like the economy of the 320" but many don't know the 360 has both more power and efficiency over a 320. We learned this when testing the Cherokees for Accu-Sim.

The Seminole was the first twin I flew and it was instant love after the takeoff roll. It had so much pull. I suspect it had something to do with the prop minimum angle because, unlike the Aerostar and so many other airplanes, those blades were biting the moment full power was applied. The Aerostar was a disappointment from this point of view, however, it started to pull harder when about 1/2 way down the runway and that was always nice.

The Seminole also had a wonderful climb. When once we reached cruise altitude the speed increased so rapidly my thinking was "this is going to be faster than my Comanche" but it rapidly reached it's terminal cruise velocity which was about the same. Which is characteristic of flying with both high power and drag. The Comanche otoh will continue to inch forward with speed for longer. The other aspect of the Seminole I liked over the Aerostar was having the engines in front. They gave a sense of greater security (which would be true if you ever had to crash land). But perhaps the best thing about the Seminole was it was ridiculously quiet. I could take my headset off and have a normal conversation without yelling. For me, this is huge in an airplane. Again to the contrary, the Aerostar was so loud. So you can immediately see stark differences between these three airplanes. And perhaps the one that "does it all best" remains to be the Comanche

Scott

[real]

Would you be developping a Seminole?

Good day

Real

[ImpendingJoker]

"The 250 IMO is just a perfect Comanche (much better than a Comanche 180)."
nah. rah-66. this is the comanche

(just realized rah-66 is the Comanche helicopter... what ever happened to that thing?".

This went the way of the red tape. Skyrocketing costs, and the lack of need for that type of helicopter(because we were fighting a lesser force in the desert with total air superiority), put it firmly in Donald Rumsfeld's sights. He axed it when he was SECDEF. When I worked at the main Sikorsky plant in Stratford, CT, a number of the veteran guys had a hand in building the prototypes. One told me that because of the nature of the carbon composite used for the structure, they were going through literally HUNDREDS of drill bits to put in the threaded inserts needed to mount and run the wiring harnesses, and every flight showed something that needed to be changed, replaced, or moved to a new location, and that was just on the 2 prototypes, now imagine building a fleet of those things, but it wasn't a total loss as some of the technology went into what has been called the UH-60X Shadowhawk(the one from the Bin Laden raid) but, I do not know what the official name or nomenclature of that aircraft or how many have been produced, and that technology is also being seen in the Future Vertical Lift program.

[AKar]

RAH-66 is indeed an interesting tech concept. Helicopters are inherently non-stealthy in terms of radar due to the wide spectrum of Doppler components produced by the rotor blades that naturally have velocity components both towards to and away from the radar. In fixed wing stealth aircraft, very aerodynamically non-optimal shapes are used to direct some of the radar energy away, but rotor blades can't really be made that way too easily. It would be interesting to know how RAH-66's rotor blades were manufactured: I'd suspect somewhat stealthy-shaped, faceted internal spar structure made of load bearing materials (maybe carbon fiber), and an aerodynamic shaping "pasted" on top of it, made of electrically insulating material (perhaps glass-fiber reinforced resin stuff or something).

-Esa

[CAPFlyer]

First - we need to see updates on the Comanche 400 after it gets the turbine treatment. I'm not aware of any other Turbine Comanches out there.

Second - sad to see the 400 move on. I was hoping to see more on it, but with all the problems it created once you started really tearing into it, there's no disagreement that it was well beyond what you were intending to do with it and the right choice to let it move along. Still hoping we see a 400 in the fleet one day. Maybe now we get the Turbine too.

I see N550JL sharing the hangar. I'm going to assume the "JL" is "Jake's Lancair". That kid must've outgrown the Comanche a long time ago.

While that'd be appropriate, N550JL isn't for Jake's Lancair. It's for Jabe Luttrell, the builder of the plane. Current owner is not Scott or Jake.

Would be cool to see a Lancair join the fleet though.

[einherz]

"The 250 IMO is just a perfect Comanche (much better than a Comanche 180)."
nah. rah-66. this is the comanche

I should be careful saying that as a Comanche 180 is still a Comanche and there are a lot of Comanche 180s flying today (just realized rah-66 is the Comanche helicopter... what ever happened to that thing?". Regarding the 180-250 comparison, I'm only speaking of the engine. As for a Lycoming 180, it is an awesome engine. There is zero reason to ever use a 320 over a 360. Some will say "I like the economy of the 320" but many don't know the 360 has both more power and efficiency over a 320. We learned this when testing the Cherokees for Accu-Sim.

The Seminole was the first twin I flew and it was instant love after the takeoff roll. It had so much pull. I suspect it had something to do with the prop minimum angle because, unlike the Aerostar and so many other airplanes, those blades were biting the moment full power was applied. The Aerostar was a disappointment from this point of view, however, it started to pull harder when about 1/2 way down the runway and that was always nice.

The Seminole also had a wonderful climb. When once we reached cruise altitude the speed increased so rapidly my thinking was "this is going to be faster than my Comanche" but it rapidly reached it's terminal cruise velocity which was about the same. Which is characteristic of flying with both high power and drag. The Comanche otoh will continue to inch forward with speed for longer. The other aspect of the Seminole I liked over the Aerostar was having the engines in front. They gave a sense of greater security (which would be true if you ever had to crash land). But perhaps the best thing about the Seminole was it was ridiculously quiet. I could take my headset off and have a normal conversation without yelling. For me, this is huge in an airplane. Again to the contrary, the Aerostar was so loud. So you can immediately see stark differences between these three airplanes. And perhaps the one that "does it all best" remains to be the Comanche

Scott

well, but rah-66 have more power from start, more speed(? 173knts afaik, or it's a limit, don't remember) more lifting rate, and more quiet(? don't sure, but remember as have subsonic wingtip(bladetip) at max rpm, any way stay cool ) than all ga comanche, and i played almost all comanche(rah-66) games, and every generation of comanche game was super fun, yes this heli not in developing any more, but stay cool and as ah-64 must have for all flight simulators not for just fun, but for super fun

[einherz]

RAH-66 is indeed an interesting tech concept. Helicopters are inherently non-stealthy in terms of radar due to the wide spectrum of Doppler components produced by the rotor blades that naturally have velocity components both towards to and away from the radar. In fixed wing stealth aircraft, very aerodynamically non-optimal shapes are used to direct some of the radar energy away, but rotor blades can't really be made that way too easily. It would be interesting to know how RAH-66's rotor blades were manufactured: I'd suspect somewhat stealthy-shaped, faceted internal spar structure made of load bearing materials (maybe carbon fiber), and an aerodynamic shaping "pasted" on top of it, made of electrically insulating material (perhaps glass-fiber reinforced resin stuff or something).

-Esa

as remember in e(aw) 101 augusto, apache, and i guess every modern combat nato heli today include all modern models of ah-1, blades makes from composite(carbon polimeres, kevlar layers and inside used something like honeycomb's cardboard) so no metal at all, i watched the national geografic about this very very very long time ago

[AKar]

RAH-66 is indeed an interesting tech concept. Helicopters are inherently non-stealthy in terms of radar due to the wide spectrum of Doppler components produced by the rotor blades that naturally have velocity components both towards to and away from the radar. In fixed wing stealth aircraft, very aerodynamically non-optimal shapes are used to direct some of the radar energy away, but rotor blades can't really be made that way too easily. It would be interesting to know how RAH-66's rotor blades were manufactured: I'd suspect somewhat stealthy-shaped, faceted internal spar structure made of load bearing materials (maybe carbon fiber), and an aerodynamic shaping "pasted" on top of it, made of electrically insulating material (perhaps glass-fiber reinforced resin stuff or something).

-Esa

as remember in e(aw) 101 augusto, apache, and i guess every modern combat nato heli today include all modern models of ah-1, blades makes from composite(carbon polimeres, kevlar layers and inside used something like honeycomb's cardboard) so no metal at all, i watched the national geografic about this very very very long time ago

Yeh, but the problem with carbon composites is that they are conductive enough to give a radar return.

-Esa

[einherz]

well, i watch it many years ago, may be carbon there not general, or even long way to be general component

[AerialShorts]

Yeh, but the problem with carbon composites is that they are conductive enough to give a radar return.

-Esa

I had a professor in college who built a fiberglass roadster he competed with at Bonneville. Twin monster turbos and he was setting records in his class. The car was really beautiful and looked something like a Shelby Cobra though it wasn’t. He wanted to build a street legal version and was going to have carbon fiber chopped to a centimeter or two blown in below the gel coat. The short fibers would be cut to the wavelength of police radar. The plan was to have them absorb the radar without reflecting it back. Short fibers, though, and not the long fibers you’d get in carbon fiber matting that could give a return. No idea if he ever did but your comment reminded me of his plan.

[jclay13]

This Comanche 400 sat for 18 years prior to A2A purchasing it.

Here’s a channel that might interest you or anyone else…

https://youtube.com/c/JimmysWorld1

He does videos on airplanes that have been sitting for years and either gets them flying again or parts them out. Quite interesting and entertaining at times.

In this video he purchased a Cessna 310, Piper Aztec, and a V-Tail Bonanza that all had been sitting for years at what once was an airport but abandoned because the airport was moved.

https://youtu.be/RzS9YzaAROc

[GaryRR]

This Comanche 400 sat for 18 years prior to A2A purchasing it. It was in a dry space for that entire time but it needed all soft things replaced, probably even the fuel bladders. However when we removed the prop for inspection one of the blades had a crack, which added a lot of cost and headache to the project. So it sat for 4 more years in our hangar. Selling it to someone who would bring it fully back properly was a breath of fresh air. This airplane will be gone through from top to bottom.

This and the Aerostar experience made the attractiveness of buying an old "fix-r-upper" less so. With the Aerostar I was always behind the 8 ball. If I were to to ever buy an old neglected airplane again I would only do it knowing it was to be torn down completely, then re-built. This IMO is the only way.

However we do intend on making the Aerostar someday, but we want to get two or maybe three single engine airplanes out first. The Aerostar is considered to be not just the finest handling twin ever made, but maybe even one of the finest handing aircraft ever made. It is a marvel of pureness in the air. It rolls like a missile. Very different to a Comanche 400 for example.

And regarding the operation of a Comanche 400 in general, the one thing I did not like about it was how crammed and hot that engine ran. I knew I would have had to make some serious mods as I just do not like running hot engines. Heat just destroyed everything in its path. And then, being a certified airplane I'd be up against all kinds of regulations that would add cost and headache. I'm not opposed to doing an Accu-Sim Comanche 400 someday but I think I'd rather make one with a PT-6 in it or a large Warbird.

The 250 IMO is just a perfect Comanche (much better than a Comanche 180). It does everything right without any vices. When my wife said years ago "you are not selling that Comanche 250!" I realized then the 400 was on the chopping block.

Scott

You mention a large warlord. I will reiterate an idea I once suggested.
B-25 Mitchell
MAAM has not done an update of their great Briefing Time model and it was very popular in it's time. While you may not be able to do that specific plane there were a lot of B-25s manufactured and a good number still operable. The B-25 would be both a perfect large warlord and first twin for A2A especially with Accusime engine modeling. Please put it up to a vote or pole. That was one great plane.

[Bones]

You mention a large warlord. I will reiterate an idea I once suggested.
B-25 Mitchell
MAAM has not done an update of their great Briefing Time model and it was very popular in it's time. While you may not be able to do that specific plane there were a lot of B-25s manufactured and a good number still operable. The B-25 would be both a perfect large warlord and first twin for A2A especially with Accusime engine modeling. Please put it up to a vote or pole. That was one great plane.

I've always said the only twin I would ever buy is the B-25. I'm still hoping for that someday.

[ImpendingJoker]

As far as twins go, I would love a B-25, or A-20. Though I know the A-20 would be a tall order because there are not very many out there, and most are fire fighters that have been heavily modified from the originals, and one is was converted to a luxury private plane with a nice passenger cabin. So it could be possible to do that like they did the P-51 with a combat and a civil version.