Boeing/Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche

[F-14D]

The point isn't hold off for the next thing to come. As f-14D pointed out, the comanche didn't offer enough advancement from the start, so it quickly became outpaced during its development phrase by other hypothetical platforms that we could have built with comanche's money. Of course, that can apply for anything, but much more so for comanche. And as I said, it certainly isn't the equivalance of the f-22.
As for UCAR, I don't know if you read my earlier post, but it was never intended to be fully autonomous. For a team of 4 to 6 UCAR, there will be a manned helicopter such as the apache to act as the moderator.

It wouldn't be fully autonomous, but was designed that human intervention would be an exception. Of course, they said that about Skynet and Colossus (movie version: The Forbin Project) as well. What I thought was so neat was that in addition to airborne command was the concept that ground soldiers could nominally control it, setting the goals and letting it handle the mechanics. But, it was also conceived of being able to operte on its own at times. That's the part I thought was is premature.

 

[donnage99]

Remember that prior to comanche's cancellation, its restructuring plan sacrifice sensors on board the platform itself and direct money toward linking it with a uav as future block upgrade. So capabilities were taken off from the comanche and instead directed into a uav platform that work along with the comanche. This was a big sign that the Army was shifting from comanche to uav, and forshadowing its cancelation.

 

[SOC]

Not to mention there are already petitions and agendas calling for an end to using "drones" to kill people.

If you want to get technical about it, we do that all the time. We just call them missiles.

 

[yasotay]

Not to mention there are already petitions and agendas calling for an end to using "drones" to kill people.

If you want to get technical about it, we do that all the time. We just call them missiles.

Yes but those are missiles! No "kill vision" to leak to the 4th Estate.

I suspect the arguement will be around for a while, but doubt it will overcome the euphoria that is UAS.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

I suspect the arguement will be around for a while, but doubt it will overcome the euphoria that is UAS.

Euphoria? Frankly you guys have far more faith in unmanned systems than I do. Even once we are flying 6th generation fighters I imagine they will be supplementing and not replacing a manned "hi" fighter in the "hi-lo" mix.

 

[SOC]

Yes but those are missiles! No "kill vision" to leak to the 4th Estate.

No kill vision? What about TV-guided missile? I've seen tons of footage from the seeker heads of AGM-130s, AGM-65s, etc.

 

[sferrin]

Yes but those are missiles! No "kill vision" to leak to the 4th Estate.

No kill vision? What about TV-guided missile? I've seen tons of footage from the seeker heads of AGM-130s, AGM-65s, etc.

They're even better than Predators for watching "insurgents" run. ;D

 

[Triton]

^I don't quite understand the objection to Predator and other UAVs? Isn't this generation of UAVs, UCAVs, and UCARs esentially RPVs (remotely piloted vehicles) that are tele-operated by a human pilot from a remote location? Do the objectors have visions of The Terminator or other science fiction autonomous killing machines?

 

[yasotay]

I DON'T want to start a political discussion but I suspect the objectors are those who would object regardless of how you do the job.

I also don't see a wholesale end to manned aircraft in the near future as there are a number of ways to make UAS (or UGV for that matter) less viable especially at the tactical level. Conversely having seen what a young person can do when let loose with the UAV and a little training I think there are a number of areas that UAS will continue to improve the warfighting capabilities of nations. Unfortunately you don't have to be a wealthy nation to operate UAS (witness Hezbollah 2006). This is becoming a concern for those responsible for securing the air over friendly troops.

Interestingly enough that was one of the reasons that Stinger was kept in the weapons inventory of the RAH-66. Of course no one in the Army talked about it because a discussion of low altitude air superiority would have caused the ever vigilant US Air Force to put a strike package in on the Army Aviation Center. :-X

 

[Stuka]

First EMD phase tail assembly at Phantom Works a week after program termination. Source: http://jobshopperblog.blogspot.com/2009/03/comanche-rah-66-tool-design-team.html

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Must be crushing to work on a project like that that comes so close to production. A family member of mine worked at Sikorsky during the period.

 

[yasotay]

Some people made careers out of it. Some people lost families over it. Some poeple spent part of their careers expousing the virtue of RAH-66. All for naught.

 

[Matej]

At least a lot of developed new technologies are now ready to use thanks to the Comanche. Or not?

 

[yasotay]

At least a lot of developed new technologies are now ready to use thanks to the Comanche. Or not?

mostly "or not"

 

[Stuka]

I think X2 uses the engine and digital flight control system and actuators from Comanche.

 

[Triton]

RAH-66 Comanche cut-away painting by Duncan Smith.

Source:
http://www.elance.com/samples/commanche-cutaway/24395061/

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Apparently some USMC officer thought that going with the RAH-66 to replace the AH-1 would be a good idea. Some interesting discussion about keeping up with the MV-22 as well.

Cobra or Comanche? Supporting Operational Maneuver From The Sea

www.globalsecurity.org

 

[Stuka]

Great video footage I've never seen before, both in-flight and ground maintenance.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDR-RJs2kQM

 

[Stargazer]

RAH-66 Comanche cut-away painting by Duncan Smith.

Interesting how they first meant to have the T-tail swept forward instead of backward on these initial drawings.

 

[yasotay]

Cleaning out ancient files I found a few pictures from a life a long time ago and far, far away. Thought I would share.

 

[thedewline]

Gorgeous. Thank you!

 

[flateric]

Al, thanks. Chances for any aditional rediscovered stuff?
at third photo it looks like an angry bug with opened forewings

 

[yasotay]

Al, thanks. Chances for any aditional rediscovered stuff?
at third photo it looks like an angry bug with opened forewings

The frustrating part is most of the interesting stuff has all sorts of markings that would make people unhappy with me.

 

[F-14D]

Apparently some USMC officer thought that going with the RAH-66 to replace the AH-1 would be a good idea. Some interesting discussion about keeping up with the MV-22 as well.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1997/Danel.htm

Belated comment:

That USMC officer appears to be basing his analysis on some faulty assumptions. For one thing, he kept referring to the "4BW". The 4BW was a concept of taking the 680 rotor and adapting it to a minimum change AH-1W (hence the very low cost he mentions). Where the Marines actually went was with the AH-1Z, which is a much more capable vehicle. He credits the Comanche with a 210 knot cruise speed which is about 55 knots too fast. In reality, the Comanche's cruise speed clean was only about 5 knots faster than a Zulu and I believe the latter has some ordnance under the wing when that's measured. The dash speed of the latter is also faster. RAH-66 has a 25nm greater radius of action than a AH-1Z carrying 2,500 lb. ordnance (I don't know what the Comanche is carrying when they came up with the radius figure), but less range. And the Zulu climbs a lot faster and is better armed.

Also, the avionics and systems in the AH-1Z are well beyond what is in the -1W or 4BW, and its sensors probably see farther than Comamche's. The RAH-66 is unquestionably stealthier, which is of great benefit when you're at 200 feet and someone's shooting RPGs at you. Regarding the V-22, he acknowledges that it'll outrun Comanche, but not as much as it would the Cobra, but again, he's calculating from an assumed cruise speed that's way too high.

To be fair, though, this article was written when the AH-1Z program was just starting and not that much had been finalized, and it does show "out of the box" thinking that too often is becoming absent in our military bureaucracies. (Hindsight always allows us to sound like pundits).

 

[flateric]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDR-RJs2kQM

 

[flateric]

ah, nice!

 

[blackstar]

Ugh. That Comanche Flight Demo video demonstrates the video editing style popular a few years ago--now fortunately MUCH less so--where the editors got carried away with quick cuts and jumps.

Notice how the editor pulses the camera moves to the drum beats? Notice how watching it makes your eyes hurt and your stomach turn over? I bought myself a nice plasma screen TV a few years ago and nearly got sick trying to watch some program where the editor thought the viewers needed 20 jump cuts per minute.

Just point the camera at the subject and roll tape and forget trying to be fancy.

 

[flateric]

Ugh. That Comanche Flight Demo video demonstrates the video editing style popular a few years ago--now fortunately MUCH less so--where the editors got carried away with quick cuts and jumps.

BTW, this video uploaded to Tube by its very own editor

 

[flateric]

Gary 'Flyboy' Wright maintains nice little (so far) Comanche site with some cool stuff gathered in Documents section
http://digitality.comyr.com/Comanche

 

[dannydale]

Ugh. That Comanche Flight Demo video demonstrates the video editing style popular a few years ago--now fortunately MUCH less so--where the editors got carried away with quick cuts and jumps.

Notice how the editor pulses the camera moves to the drum beats? Notice how watching it makes your eyes hurt and your stomach turn over? I bought myself a nice plasma screen TV a few years ago and nearly got sick trying to watch some program where the editor thought the viewers needed 20 jump cuts per minute.

Just point the camera at the subject and roll tape and forget trying to be fancy.

Agreed. I hate fast cut-n-jump editing with a multicolored passion. I think the eyeburn and the gustatory aerobatics are just manifestations of sensory overload, and it makes the video downright painful and frustrating to watch. I say 'multicolored' because that's what lunch looks like if you're unfortunate to end up seeing it again after eating ???

 

[yasotay]

Sigh... glad to see somebody got something worthwhile out of Army Aviations first and last original program...

 

[flanker]

Some great RAH-66 pictures here, don't think they were posted before:

https://picasaweb.google.com/BellXH40/RAH66?authuser=0&feat=directlink

Originals by Mr Rotorwash, from ARC forum. He might be a member here.

 

[yasotay]

I found another picture of the second prototype with all the kit on board prior to one of the few flights it made before becoming one of the most expensive museum pieces in the world.

 

[Triton]

I found another picture of the second prototype with all the kit on board prior to one of the few flights it made before becoming one of the most expensive museum pieces in the world.

Would that have been the RAH-66B Comanche Longbow? Or just a different rotorhead-mounted housing for the AN/APG-78 Longbow fire-control radar?

 

[Triton]

Source:
http://www.primeportal.net/aircraft2/commanche.htm

 

[Triton]

Source:
http://thebrigade.thechive.com/2012/12/10/i-contend-the-rah-66-comanche-is-still-cooler-than-the-modern-z-19-ah-61-photos/rah-66-comanche-heli-920-14/#comments

 

[yasotay]

I found another picture of the second prototype with all the kit on board prior to one of the few flights it made before becoming one of the most expensive museum pieces in the world.

Would that have been the RAH-66B Comanche Longbow? Or just a different rotorhead-mounted housing for the AN/APG-78 Longbow fire-control radar?

I think that it was still the RAH-66A version with all the field gear representation articles.

 

[Triton]

I think that it was still the RAH-66A version with all the field gear representation articles.

So the photo is an accurate representation of what the production RAH-66A Comanche would look like in United States Army service? Looking at the photos of the RAH-66 prototypes, there appear to be numerous differences among them.

 

[yasotay]

Many of the aerodynamic changes like the end plates on the tail came about as part of the flight test program. The radar came about due to the development of the technology during the RAH development. Since the scout aircraft was to work in conjunction with the attack aircraft, both had the radar so they could share the data between them.

 

[Triton]

Reposting information shared by rotorwash from Stingray's Rotorcraft Forum scanned from the United States Army Aviation Museum archives.

Source:
http://stingraysrotorforum.activeboard.com/t41781177/boeing-sikorsky-rah-66-comanche/?page=1&r=528307