America's lost stealth helicopter - RAH 66 Comanche
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 03. 2021
- brilliant.org/CuriousDroid
It was going to be the next generation helicopter of the 21st century bringing stealth and the digital battlefield into rotary aircraft but it ended in cost overruns, delays and cancellation after just two prototypes, this is the story of Americas lost stealth helicopter, the Boeing Sikorski RAH-66 Comanche.
This video is sponsored by Brilliant.org :
brilliant.org/CuriousDroid
Written, Researched and Presented by Paul Shillito
Images and Footage : Boeing Sikorsky, Lockheed Martin, US Army, US DoD, USAF,
Bell Helicopters
A big thank you also goes to all our Patreons :-)
Eριχθόνιος JL
Abrakodabra Kobra / 25%
Alistair Brown
Andrew Gaess
Andrew SMITH
Brian Kelly
Cameron Elliot
Carl Soderstrom
Cash Garman
ChasingSol
Collin Copfer
Daniele Noacco
Etienne Dechamps
Florian Müller
George Bishop II
Henning Bitsch
Henri Saussure
inunotaisho
James T Early
Janne Kurikka
Jim Early
Johan Rombaut
john edwards
Jonathan Merage
Jonathan Travers
Kedar Deshpande
Ken Schwarz
László Antal
Lawrence Brennan
Lorne Diebel
MajorFluffy
Pyloric
SHAMIR
Stefan Hufenbach
Steve J - LakeCountySpacePort
Vincent - Věda a technologie
It was so stealthy, they lost it entirely.
Lol reminded me of when the entirety of US Army lost a whole T28 Super Heavy Tank bc someone parked it in the bushes
It's like opportunity went like "whoosh."
shipped it to BiBi and Xi
Absolute belter , 😆
I came here to say this...
"no one at the time figured this out" - At least no one whose voice mattered, but I'll bet the engineers knew.
Yep. 99 times out of 100: If there's a problem, look at the manager or management. That's what all those TV shows of mentors going to save a business, show. Bosses trying to run the staff, instead of managing the business and sticking to the goals and objectives.
I told my boss when he was on the phone, tell the freight company to take a B train to the customs bay, because the freight won't fit anything else and yet 'he knew better saying they will know that'. Guess what happened? Cost him an extra $400 to get it on time. No skin off my nose but $s from his profit margin. Even the engineers knew the Challenger Space Shuttle would explode, but senior management did not listen to them.
Engineers get treated like 2nd class citizens, yet are the back bone for modern development. Glad I am out of that environment now after 24 years.
Absolutely! You're increasing it's weight and cross-section. It's definitely going to be more sluggish. Especially since they went through all the initial trouble to have it's other weapons enclosed so not to affect airflow over the body.
Engineer goes to manager : We have problem bird is too heavy to fly
Manager goes to his manager: We have a small problem
That manager to his manager: We have a potential problem
etc. to the top of the line.
It was the managers percieved job to not have problems, naturally the person is going to downplay the problem. When in reality, its not thier fault, but its thier job to bring it to attention.
This happens all the way up the chain, untill nothing is done, and shit dosnt fly. Or does fly, in the case of challenger.
Nobody wants to risk their promotion by giving bad news so everybody lies a little bit and gets promoted. Everybody wins except the taxpayer and the user.
Didn't matter. It was a govt funded project. Just hire more people, so you can suck more tax dollars, from the DoD. As far as the DoD. Didn't care either. As long as they filled out the proper forms, their jobs and pensions are secure.
Not only did they waste a perfectly good helicopter, they also wasted a perfectly good helicopter name
they sometimes reuse the names, like the blackhawk for example, it was the name of a cancelled attack copter before the one we have now, its the company that develops them that chooses the name it seems, im sure the military can change it tho if they want to.
Maybe one day the successor to the Apache will finally bear the name.
@@Calvin_Coolage
A-36 apache, look it up
@@sam8742 Which is kinda funny that it was a prop plane. Gotta love it.
@@Calvin_Coolage
also "p-47 thunderbolt"
Pretty sure that one was made by fairchild as well
The “tail-ducted fan” is also called a fenestron, if I am spelling it right. The Comanche was an amazing technology demonstrator; a real work of art.
You spelled it right
@@titansboytc >> Yay, me!
"Fenestron" is trademarked by Airbus helicopters. Only Airbus/Eurocopter/Aerospatiale helicopters can use the name.
@@nocalsteve >> Learn something new every day. It was the same device in the Comanche, essentially, making copyrighting the term a little silly, but I’m not a marketing person so what do I know?
Yeah but it's just a trademark name by Airbus for their Helicopters.
This is a fascinating episode; my wife worked for the Army as a civilian contractor at the time of the Comanche's cancellation. It was so sudden, her desk was inundated by servicemen and women who were slated to enter the training program and start flying that bird literally a month from that day, they had sold their homes, readied their families to move, etc. and suddenly had no idea what the next day would hold! It was madness.
Seven years prior, and for similar reasons (paying for an Endless War) the M8 Buford light tank was cancelled, and the fallout was the same.
To bad they didn't cancel the Bradley.
Wow discussing that they did that to our service men and families
It's crazy. My brother went to Embry Riddle in early 2000s and saw these on a few occasions. It seemed like these were going to the future of helicopters for the military.
@@jaytrock3217 what's wrong with the bradley
@@RidinDirtyRollinBurnouts I guess you've never seen the movie, "The Pentagon Wars"? You should give it a watch. Despite it being a comedy, MUCH of what it covers are real life events that took place during the Bradley's development. Needless to say, it was a circus show.
It's annoying that people complain about NASA's budget, when the army spends the same amount on a single project that wasn't even completed.
That's because it's all political. It's like complaining about PBS budget. Team A doesn't want it because Team B wants it. Friggin stupid.
NASA cancels things al the time.
NASA and the military both suffer from the same delusion, that they can create workhorse vehicles when they don't even have a working prototype. We had never done anything like the Space Shuttle, but NASA went ahead without even building an unmanned prototype to see if a aircraft covered in glued on tiles could survive reentry and reuse. The Pentagon went ahead with the F35 based on nothing but a mockup and a lot of promises. The promises certainly were not kept, and the F35 is nothing like the mockup that was proposed.
Cut the $4 trillion we spend a year on welfare.
@@donaldbadowski290 Wow, slow down there buddy. The Joint Striker programs for the Lightning 2 was serios business. They did make actual planes and had to prove their functionality. Lockheed won the contract because its plane completed more successful demonstrations than the others.In the days of social media is has become very fashionable to hate on the F35. Its a great plane. The Pentagon shouldn't have spent so much money, sure, but the plane is great, never mind russian trolling and YT experts on military aviation.
Shortly after termination of the program I ran into a former coworker who had been one of the Comanche executive program managers. He described the ride he took in that helicopter as one of the most amazing things he'd ever experienced.
The Comanche was an incredible aircraft, and what was learned from it has been applied to other frames to great effect.
Which ones? The next generation helicopters currently developed?
@@aleksanderolbrych9157 I think the one that crashed in Pakistan had a lot of the same DNA.
The one that crashed in Pakistan was a stealth hawk. Tech from the Comanche program has been added to a classified number of black h asks belonging to the 160th special operations aviation regiment for missions in heavily defended airspace.
I served with some mechanics who were sent to work on the technology demonstrator to show any private with about a dozen hand tools could do any repairs required. We gave them grief calling them the simplest mechanics the army could find. Lol
The Army changing the goalposts by deciding near the end that what they _really_ wanted was a medium attack helicopter instead of a light scout helicopter sounds like it made the program uncompletable.
The army has always been like that. just look at the M2 Bradley.
You didn't watch "Pentagon wars" , did you?
@@penzlic no, I served as a M2A3 Bradley crewmember/driver
Just to come full circle, back to light scout with the Bell Invictus. Though the Army has been anything but forthright on most of Bells programs except for the OH58.
Then it became bigger and heavier than an Apache.
I heard the military was dissatisfied with their performance versus the Hulk
No wonder it was cancelled. They need something more than able to get the hulk.
Lmao just watched the Hulk movie yesterday. Was wondering if it was same
"Target angry, target angry".
theoretically, the amount of 'armor' on the hulk would make his skin the most valuable mineral on earth, even more so than diamond.
and idk if he doesn't die from a nuclear bomb, then he's basically not even matter.
So they will remove the M1 Abrams out of service next?
I worked for Boeing on the Apache Longbow crew trainer flight simulators across the street from the Comanche Flight Training facility as it was being built. I was shown the plans, where the high bays and maintenance offices were to be and I was selected to transfer from the Longbow project to the Comanche project. I was very excited and looking forward to the whole thing. As I watched the new Comanche facility nearing completion, I had no idea the Army already made up it's mind to perpetrate the costliest Army project cancellation in history. They finished the building, erected a sign designating it the RAH Comanche Training Facility and immediately announced the cancellation of the entire project. I blame "scope creep" as the main reason.
The US military pioneered "moving goalposts" and has been successfully using it for over 3 decades to bork up all sorts of great programs. While it's unfortunate that the RH66 isn't a thing today, its development wasn't wasted entirely. Drone control now resides in apaches, IR exhaust reduction lives on in the S97 and defiant, though the tail rotors have been ditched for pushers.
@@mhamma6560 Yeah, there were a lot of advancements in tech that were utilized on other platforms, but to me the most egregious example of stupidity was the fact that landing gear and weapons could never be retracted at the same time which eliminated stealth as an attribute. In addition, if the missiles were ever to be retracted, once you opened the weapon doors, the missiles couldn't be fired until they re-initialized and re-oriented their guidance systems and re-acquired their targets. I still have color posters of the RAH-66 the way it was supposed to be. It just never got there.
@@mhamma6560 Enclosed tail rotors have been in use in helicopters for decades - Aerospatiale (FR) used it in the 70's already. Based on the Vietnam-experience, I wonder why it was not adapted by the US (it would have saved at least one soldier who was chopped up when the chopper he disembarked from, turned its tail into him at night).
Army: we want a sexy, stealthy, superfast scout heli
Sikorsky: here! The comanche!
Army: oh fred says he wants more missiles and sam wants better mileage, mom wants it cheap too
Sikorsky: wtf man...
russians: drone better comrade
I remember playing a game of Comanche back in the late 90s. I really wish the Comanche project wasn't cancelled. Such a great helicopter that wasn't given a fair chance.
Why can't we stick to a plan and see it through? Another masterpiece relegated to a museum exhibit.
The Army is wonderful at this, look up the Cheyanne, I drive by one on my way to work every day and drown.
b/c the political and military situation is constantly being shifted, therefore, shifting requirements
Welcome to America
a mix of idividual interest, corporate interest,changes in political situation, changes in global situation.
Right now they are doing the same with tanks, they have an open competition for the next gen tank again, but they are also unsure if the tank how we know it today will be still relevant .
is very complex
Ultimately, its a problem that the program takes a decade, but the world doesn't stay still.
Army: I know I said I wanted a small sports car, but I changed my mind and want a Winnebago with lots of guns instead.
But it still needs to be as fast and maneuverable
@@nautdead3197 You mean the Urban Assault Vehicle from "Stripes."
i also wanna either go to europe for my holydays by myself, or in the back of cargo plane, pretty please can you do it ?
Yes. Super annoying reasoning for decision makers, shifting goals, and expanding the scope, beyond what the original design or physics allow. Just use two different helicopters completely, maybe share some parts, which is helpful.
@@movax20h That is a textbook example of how the (so called...) decision makers (politicians and military alike...) don't know history...!!! Just one example which happened to come in my mind : a WW2 fine design jet fighter, the Messerschmitt Me-262 "Schwalbe" have had its production and, subsequently, its introduction to operational squadrons, delayed for years, just because Hitler wanted its design to be changed on to a bomber, thus coming with dire consequences for the entire run of the air war for German side, as its introduction in the very critical late phase of the war did too little, too late...!!! As with the Comanche helicopter : what a waste of a fine design, what a (subsequent) waste of money...!!!
''We want it all.''
-''But it doesn't work like that''
''But if it did it would be brilliant''
I'll never forget these formidable beasts in Mercenaries POD.
SKs were savage
Typical program with moving goals. Keep adding features not originally envisioned until the project is untenable. I've seen this so many times. Great video Paul.
My question is why does it seem like nobody knows how to say "No!" to these new features? That seems like the simple answer.
Step 1. Stick to the plan.
Step 1a. If the plan changes, you didn't stick to the plan.
Step 2. Since the plan changed, go make a new plan, but make it have as little in common with the first plan so that it's REALLY OBVIOUS that somewhere along the line the rug got pulled out from under you against your will and advice.
EDIT: In other words, if the plan gets changed on you, figure out where that plan change came from and figure out a way to ruin that person and/or committe's career advancement prospects.
@@44R0Ndin The typical vested interest that politicians have in maintaining jobs in their district is one, but I believe programs are sold on incomplete prognosis (request the minimum to get it kicked off) and rapidly advancing technologies that aren't always understood. At least that's been my experience in defense avionics.
@@judih.8754 Well the vested interest thing would be better served by NOT having the project get saddled with new requirements, go over budget, and then get cancelled, no?
@@44R0Ndin Agreed!
The best helicopter that never was followed by the Cheyenne.
That thing would have been a beast. Can't wait to see the Raider X and 360 Invictus.
@@jaytrock3217 too bad the Cheyenne was scalped
They have one on Fort Rucker.
Yes...but that was fifty years ago. The alternatives were the A-10 and the AH-1.
@@Idahoguy10157 A-10 is great saved my ass many times. As the AH-1. Many think the Cheyenne would have been better. All of those developed in the 70s. I say if the Air Force doesn't want to fly the A-10 let the Army fly fix wings again. F-35 is a POS and I wouldn't want that to do CAS.
I used them in Command and Conquer: Generals!
same. And the enemy ai always used to horde like 8 of them over the command center and youd need a ton of quad cannons or raptors to take them down before the rocket barrage destroyed everyone
@@ianhenderson3491 I always played as the United States army, so never experienced a helicopter attack from the enemy. And I played this only in single player mode. I had a blast!
The Zero Hour’s Airforce Commanches werre nightmare to deal with...that and the Airforce Raptor...
Still playing that Gem of a Game. “Can I have some shoes?”
@@cappuccinogoodfinger You didn't see those Comanches.
I was really bummed when the project was cancelled. It was hyped up with such promising reviews.
This helicopter was such a big part of my infancy because of the Comanche 3 Game
Comanche vs Hokum filled a lot of my afternoons back in the day.
Comanche Gold fucked harrrrrd boy
Same here!
Command and Conquer Zero Hour as well.
you youngster! we grew on LHX and Abraams ;)
The Comanche looked like a sure thing back in the day, no way we wouldn't have a fleet of them. Fast forward to today, its basically forgotten about.
by the U.S yes, but I think that Japan and South Korea would have loved them as their neighbors aren't exactly nice
@@midgetman4206 It certainly had a lot of potential. I would not be surprised if its ginetics resurface someday down the road though. As typical of military contracts, the goals are fixed at first and come to find out the goalposts have wheels on them because the military can't help but move it around.
Our military: We want a small, light weight, fast, nimble jet fighter for air superiority and ground support.
And 2-3 years later: we still want the original design criteria met but also can it do long-range bombing, high altitude recon, buddy fueling, ground attack, carrier op's, awacs, ASW, and it needs to be able to accept palletized cargo and air drop capability.
Then: what's taking so long? Why is it so expensive? It costs too much, never mind we something else.
I never forgot its unique flight characteristics. It was the most maneuverable helicopter ever made. It was so ahead of the game that it had no real opponent. Maybe they were too successful. It was a definite 5th gen system and it took twenty years for other battlespace integration projects to roll out. Like Stryker Land Warrior and the F-35.
@@mikecimerian6913 It really had today's technology a couple decades ago. It was cutting edge but that technology was extremely difficult to deal with in its day. Hard to make that level of technology work reliably when everything around it is 15-20yrs behind. The power curve is so steep its hard to hit the approach and climb without face planting into it. I've worked in experimental aviation and now working on what was cutting edge now legacy aircraft that had the same challenges in their day and continued difficulty after.
@@midgetman4206 not really. Stealth helicopters are a pointless endeavor as proven after the gulf war Apache raid when they all got shot up because people can see them with their eyes, no radar needed it.
How refreshing to see a real presenter providing pertinent information.
damn, this channel is really underrated, keep up the good work
The Ole' American Two Step. This cost too much, make it do more. Now it really costs too much, let's start over and make a cheaper, specialized product.
they never learn
Unless of course you have the mainline fighter that has to do 3 different roles, be stealthy, and inexpensive..oops scratch that last one the contract went to Lockheed.....
@@grndzro777 well you can't deny that the F-35 B isn't cool and does what it was asked to do
@@midgetman4206 Yea that IMO is the most useful one in the bunch. Give it a super stealthy conformal fuel tanks and axe the other 2. Wipe out the immediate threats and let the super eagles mop up.
The entire project was supposed to be for one VTOL plane that could fill all the roles needed. Not 3 separate platforms. All it needs is a few air 2 air, and AGM88 missiles.
@@grndzro777 this time, it's the navy that screw thing up, lol
I'm of the opinion that when the company/agency you're contracted with keeps adding feature requests beyond what was agreed upon, they want to cancel your contract but not be the ones to initiate it.
Fair point, but this was a result of the Soviet collapse. It was supposed to light tanks in the Fulda Gap for Apaches to kill. Then- it was supposed to be fighting semi-literate Afghan villagers. Tough to repurpose anything from high tech to no-tech foes.
Sometimes the military is just funding the research to push the limits and see what else we might be able to do without having any particularly large interests in buying the product. These companies still are making millions just off of getting their research and prototypes funded and it usually transfers into their civilian productions.
If anything really good happens to come from it, then the military will buy it. For instance, the army's competition in the 80's - 90's for a replacement for the M16. The army never replaced it but Colt released a good optic alongside their rifle and the Army still uses it today.
My past bosses in a nutshell
Thanks Paul, I was waiting on a video about the Comanche. Your presentations, narrative structure, and voice are great. Really appreciate this channel.
And there it is, the 23mm shell resistance. Thank you ZSU-23 Shilka, you TRULY left a mark on modern military aviation.
A stealth helicopter that can fire it's weapons facing any direction while moving... And it's stealth.
Sounds Comanche to me, our stealth and horsemanship was legendary.
Our symbol was a snake moving backwards, you only knew we were there after we left.
I don't think it's a coincidence that the US keeps naming military helicopters after First People tribes!
It is not at all a coincidence. Matter of fact it's completely on purpose.
That’s why the military honors native Americans with their naming
even the apache openly respected and admired the tenacity of commanche war fighters.
@@googiegress7459 it’s literally part of the naming program. After the UH-1 was officially designated the Iroquois it was set in stone that military helicopters would have Native American tribe and even influential people named.
I remember having this helicopter available for Command & Conquer Generals and its expansion, Zero Hour. My favorite was the Stealth version that the US Air Force General Malcolm 'Ace' Granger used.
really good game! one of my top 5 of all times.
I was looking for this comment
Paul, just want to say your videos are amazing. You do a fantastic job researching, writing and presenting these interesting bits of hardware. Love your work.
Bell 360 Invictus is a modern version of the RAH-66. Very similar in appearance. Of course it is still needs to have a flying prototype built and not just a mock up.
Does look similar. But not quite as sexy. The body is more smooth and not quite there, especially with the wings. But if it gets built that would be great.
Look at Bell and McDonnell-Douglas' LHX proposal.
@@Power5 fax it’s like a Apache and 369 had a kid
Rotorcraft are under appreciated, glad to see some representation here!
See and hear them everyday. In fact as it type this there is a UH-60 flying over.
played the Comanche 3 game- can still remember the music and utterly intense missions. One of the best.
My favourite helicopter in the world, its unique and looks cool
I grew up in Ft Rucker, Al. We were there from 1990-1999. I seen one of these flying during that time. I used to go to that museum, in Ft. Rucker, to get out of the Al heat. I am grateful for this video. I always wondered what happened to the amazing helicopter I seen that day. It ended up in that museum! Thank you, god bless!
Damned shame the RAH-66 never went into production...
Those damn retards and politicians never can make up their damn minds, always trying to fill their pockets instead of providing the warfighter better equipment.
Eh, the age of manned military Airfcraft is rapidly coming to an end anyway. It's a cool looking mchine, But I don't think the need for it is really there anymore.
It's being resurrected apparently the need for a Kiowa replacement is still there. Can't remember where I read the article but the RAH-66 is coming back in a bigger, better form.
@@chrishoesel you mean the Bell 360 Invictus? Definitely Comanche-esque, but lighter, single-engined, and not as stealthy.
@@doncalypso it's such a shame really, the Comanche was golden.
No matter how many jet or helicopter videos you make , nothing will ever be as fly as you and those shirts
I was dazzled
You're not the only one who took notice and realized that!
🤣🤣🤣🤣
He do rock that orange!
Seriously, tho, I do like this guy's content lots better than *"Mr Breathless"* of the Dark Footage channel, via which CZcams baited me here.
word
My favorite hicopter. It's so beautiful =) So sad it didn't come to service. I loved it when I played Comanche 3 and Comanche 4 =)
I just gotta say... I love every episode you guys do, and the presenter himself,Paul Shillito, speaks in a way that makes you become more and more curious. A very pleasant voice to listen to.
Great work!
Never knew there were only 2 prototypes. The games in the ninetees made it seem they were put into action.
Though.. I also couldn't help but to hum the tune to Airwolf when looking at the test flight footage with its aerobatics and retractable weapon mounts and landing gear. It looks so fun (and terrifying) to fly such a nimble machine.
Rumor has it the prototype was actually stolen, and is hidden in a mountain cave where the pilot flies covert missions for the agency
Remember when the ‘Hulk’ knocked two of these out of skies in the 2004 movie.
N, it was becuase them aliens kept shooting it down. Why US abandoned it. It was too outdated.
You have a natural and relaxed, non-waffle approach. Much appreciated pal :)
Thanks Paul it's good to see your video's....!
What a beautiful looking craft!
Friendly baldy man gives me what I want. And I am happy.
I live near a place where they used to test radar on aircraft. It's called the upside down airforce base. I saw this when I was a kid and I thought it was a space ship. They would wrap them up and griffis afb and sneak them through the roads at night. They still have a bunch of old aircraft there in pieces just sitting there. If you're creative on Google earth you can see it. Between Schuyler and Newport NY.
Wow. Beautiful and Lethal. Fatal Attraction. Worth every penny.
"We've become accustomed to SEEING stealthed aircraft" :) I see what you did here
Hah, remember building a model of this as a kid, thought it was one of the coolest designs for helis, still is to my mind.
The only reason I brought this up is that the thumbnail uses the Italeri model kit box art, instantly recognisable!
I found my helicopter passion addressed with the same enthusiasm here! Your content is just what I needed!
Seriously amazing aircraft years ahead of its time thanks for an another outstanding upload
The Comanche was super cool, I remember playing a flight simulator in 1998 that had the Comanche in it, equipped with hellfire and stinger missiles.
I spent many hours playing the game.
I had 1500 hrs on that game
Probably Comanche 3 or Comanche Gold.
When you said Boeing was involved, I knew there'd be lots of little, expensive, problems.
You could insert literally any defense contractor world wide and make that sentence true.
@D Hill the Comanche was a joint venture between Boeing and Sikorsky, which at the time was owned by United Technologies. Sikorsky was sold to Lockheed Martin in 2015.
Boeing is where government programs go to die.
Boeing wasn't half bad untill in recent years...
@Esperantrul Tristam which now the pentagon is regretting dearly
I used to watch this awesome helo being tested by Sikorsky when I used to drive 🚗 back and forth from work.
Flying upside down and backwards under a highway bridge was the best one.
Another great video, Paul!
CD: I never get enough of these episodes. I sure enjoy them.
Plot twist: These helicopters are widely in use....
You just can't see them
Isn’t that trumps idea of an stealth aircraft
Black Helicopters in the skies!
I love your channel Paul. I’ve watched every video you have put out multiple times. Keep it up brother.
I've literally been waiting this whole time. Thanks for letting me down gently.
I saw it at Ft. Benning in 1998. Pretty cool, because know of us knew it was there.
@D Hill In 1991 or 92 I was camping with my dad in Joshua Tree to stargaze with a telescope. Moonless night, but since it was out in the desert it was pretty bright from the stars. We saw the B-2. We had no idea what it was at the time. We both thought it was a F-117 at first, but realized it was shape different and much bigger. It did a couple of low passes over in hour and disappeared. Curious if they were using our fire to test their targeting system.
Know of us
Must have forgot to turn the stealth off.
@@jaytrock3217 here around Fort Rucker you some times get painted by lasers from the Apaches. You can tell if you have radar detector's that pick up lasers. I always had to turn mine off going down Hyw 27 though the ranges on Rucker.
To be honest I never knew this was cancelled. I thought it had just quietly gone into service with a whimper because of all the cost overruns and drawn out development time, like the Osprey!
The bin Laden bird is called a stealth hawk. It's exactly what it sounds like and it's part of a fleet of them operated by the 160th special operations aviation regiment
Absolutely love the old military tech and your videos how much research you put into them like the corona satellites and the Cheyenne. Keep up the great work !
Top-notch and professional presentation. Very informative and clear.
I can imagine Boeing and Sikorsky tearing their hair out after hearing the army want it to be able to ferry across the Atlantic. Apart from the absurdity of pegging that on a machine whose dimensions were already set around being able to be airlifted into theatre, it illustrates the all too common phenomena of officers steeped in tactical and strategic thought but having no grasp of the state of their technology and asking for stupid things.
Excellent subject matter!
I was in this project for its last few years. I can attest that there were management problems. There were also some amazing technologies, some of which began to show up in Boeing's and Sikorsky's other, more successful, products. In particular, the rotor hub was highly innovative and was reaching design maturity at about the time the project was canceled. The Apache adopted a similar design, taking advantage of lessons learned on the Comanche
My all time favorite helicopter. Thank you for the vid.
Damn I remember these in C&C Generals! Always wondered what happened with the real life versions, they seemed so cool in the game and seeing all their real life details and stealth features is so much better.
It is long ago but i can still hear the voice it in my ears like it was Yesteray:
Bay doors open
Bay doors closed
Bay doors open
Bay doors closed
Ah the memories!
Awesome game!
very interesting video, thank you very much to the Curious Droid team for this great content
The Comanche is one of the models featured in the Gunship 2000 PC game in the early 90's. Love this game!
They need to bring this back as an updated platform. With technology now a day, this could be an amazing new helicopter.
I found it quite useful in C&C!
i found it to be a pain in renegade
yeah haha damn I miss my childhood times
Great video... Brings back memories during the design phase. They had teams of engineers trying to incorporate all the requirements the Army wanted. Which sad to say added monthly. One of the favorite things I remember was the ability to tour Ivan Sikorsky’s office at the Stanford Plant, where we had our meetings. They kept his office the same as he left it, the day he died. Exciting times in Army Aviation 30 years ago.
Amazing looking helicopter.
Shout out to any military helo fans like me who were (or still are) also aero modellers.. the thumbnail art on the video is from an Italeri 1:72 scale model kit which I made twice back in the day, one of my favourites.
So glad feature creep doesn't only affect my personal projects!
At least its not like the Bradley development cycle.
I hope you've won some sort of award for quality video production.
You earned it here and in other videos.
Excellent doco.
Great video again! You quickly showed a picture of the Ka-58, so it made me think of the existing Ka-50 and Ka-52. Could you consider making a video of those or some other Russian or possibly old Soviet helicopter, such as the Mi-24?
"Cost overruns which ended up tripling the development cost."
Literally just found this channel earlier today. Freakin awesome
Great mini documentary about the Comanche.
Always wondered about what happened to this.
I remember learning about RAH-66 when I was younger. I thought it was so cool, but I get the fact it isn't needed. Maybe the technology used could be transferred to use in drones?
They could, but it's more profitable to start again from scratch.
It already has been implemented in drones
It was needed, but the army managed to micromanage the project right out of existence.
@@Transilvanian90 I was saying it is not needed right now. I get it was needed in the past.
@@LeReVaQ Really? Interesting!
I worked on the competing team (Bell/MacDonald Douglas) on the electronics for the LHX with Hughes Aircraft. We lost the competition and just trashed years of work, but I wondered what (if anything) became of the LHX project. This was a very interesting story on what happened after we were out of the picture. Thanks for producing it.
Love your channel!
Quite a tame shirt today there Paul.....running low on stock? Another awesome video!
"How 'bout those rocket pods?"
"Rocket pods are now available, sir"
Interesting despite some inaccuracies about helicopters. As a former helicopter experimental test pilot, I was a little surprised by some statements:
1. "The Apache lacked the light manoeuvrability of the Cobra". I don't think so, it's even the opposite. The Cobra, in the version deployed in Vietnam, was based on the Huey: same engine, same rotors. For cost-effectiveness reasons Bell had chosen a two-blade rotor: it's cheap to build and to maintain but ... regarding manoeuvrability it's desastrous and this is linked to the principle of a two-blade rotor. Moreover two-blade rotors are subject to a dangerous phenomenon called "mast-bumping" which can end in a catastrophic situation and consequently minimize even more the manoeuvrability through flying limitations. Two-blade helicopters are precisely the worst that can be made in terms of manoeuvrability. The Apache is definitely more manoeuvrable and agile than the Cobra.
2. The chop, chop, chop sound from the rotor has nothing to do with the interaction between the main rotor and the tail rotor, it has to do with the rotor speed and the number of blades, among other things. Should it be true, Kamov helicopters (using contra-rotating rotors) or the NOTAR helicopters from McDonnell Douglas would be "silent" since they don't have a tail rotor.
3. The idea of an "enclosed ducted fan to reduce the airflow interaction with the main rotor" is completely wrong. This kind of fan is a French technology developed by Aérospatiale (at the time, now Airbus H/C) and implemented on the SA341 Gazelle in the early 70s. The aim was to increase the cruise speed since the fan (called now internationally "fenestron") being smaller than a tail rotor, it allows to have a horizontal stabiliser (like fixed wing aircrafts) on top of it. Implemented with an appropiate angle, this stabiliser takes over a substantial part of the anti-torque function in cruise speed so that more power is available for the main rotor.
Moreover it has obvious advantages in safety. This technology was protected by a patent but this was valid only for a certain period of time (10 years or so) so that it was legally usable for the Commanche and that's why they did it. Nothing to do with the H/C noise reduction.
4. The "fan" tail rotor "tilted over to be less reflective": that's also wrong. Nothing to do with reflectiveness: classical tail rotors are also tilted sometimes. The aim is to allow the H/C to stay horizontal in hover (and also in cruise speed) by deflecting the force produced by the tail rotor (UH60, MH53, ...). Otherwise there is a momentum which is compensated by a bank of the H/C, right or left depending on the rotation direction of the main rotor. The lowest is the tail rotor relative to the rotor plane, the biggest is the bank. The fan being "small" and low, they tilted it, that's it.
5. "Sophisticated control systems allowed the H/C to change direction whilst travelling in a straight line ... it could fly sideways ...". This is only related to the power produced by the fan or the tail rotor, not to magic control systems.
6. "5 composite blades downward-canted to reduce the noise". Well, there is no silent H/C and this looks a little like a fantasy: downward-canted will not have a significant effect on noise since the rotor noise is due to many other factors.
Sorry to ruin your video : I'm not criticizing you, just providing some clarifications on some technical aspects which are really wrong. You explain very well the main points: why the program was eventually cancelled (poor management on many sides, development of too many new technologies in the same time, delays and budget overruns).
Don't worry, you are not the first one to make mistakes about helicopters, the operating principles of which being less "intuitive" than airplanes so that it's very easy to say untruths in all good faith.
No hard feelings.
Comanche Maximum Overkill was one of the first Dos games I played as a kid. Great vid mate! Alot of interesting info here
When will you do my fav helicopter? The truck, sports car and dragster of the helicopters, the chinook
I used to work with a man who's father was on the design team. The Chinook version that we have now is the small version. There were original two larger concept Chinooks planned. The largest one was twice the size of the one that we have. In theory, all you had to do was just make the parts bigger. In the end, it didn't work that way.
LOL the flying school bus!!! I almost got blown off the road by there air field on Fort Rucker as on took off over my car!
@@tyms13 Try standing in line behind them, waiting to board, and getting burned by their exhaust.
yeah anyone that's ever been in a Chinook would not ever call those stinky beasts dragster lol. Great birds but yeah
NASA needs to be given a much larger budget than it currently has.. there’s no reason why the military has such an enormous budget.
NASA needs to be made into an independent agency. The Oval Office have no business setting their goals.
"there’s no reason why the military has such an enormous budget."
R&D takes money. And there's a lot of things you enjoy and utilize today that were in some part funded in development by the Department of Defense at some time. When you throw all of that out and stop using them in your life, then you can make ignorant comments about the cost of things and be taken seriously. Not until then, however.
You could give NASA a budget of a trillion dollars and they'd still pump out projects at the same rate. There's no escaping bureaucracy.
@@matchesburn - it’s not an ignorant comment you fool. I’m well aware of what comes from the technology derived from them, but all of this 20X the budget of other organizations is ridiculous! Next time you want to pop your mouth off you should know that you may be saying something as a point of fact when you haven’t a clue if what you’re saying is valid. You then become the ignorant one. Willfully ignorant at that.
I worked in a carbon fiber facility,
I worked on the Comanche landing gear doors, missile doors, front radar housing, and the tailrotar section, both the tooling and prototype parts,
This was the AIRWOLF of America 🇺🇸
It's sad that it was lost to drones,
The real truth hurts
Amazing looking machine!
"Gunship reporting in"
-RAH 66 Comanche
That thing is so cool. I remember an episode of American Chopper in the mid 2000's where they made a bike that looked like this helicopter.
very interesting, thanks!
I love it when I think "wellll, this doesn't seem that interesting, I'll just watch the first minute" and then watch the entire video :D.