If anything it’s probably still underperforming
The COMANCHE exploits stealth technology and design in its airframe to reduce its signature on the battlefield. Constructed of low observables, the RAH-66 scout configuration has a radar signature 663 times less than that of the AH-64A and several hundred times smaller than the OH-58D KIOWA WARRIOR.
Lol if you actually think US top tier helis are preforming well you obviously have no idea what you’re talking about. And the Rh66 was design to be to be very stealthy backed up with documentation so it’s not over preforming.
every heli is performing poorly because planes can do their job but better
I’m never spending money on a dev server pre-sale ever again. I’ve never seen a bait and switch done so obnoxiously. Two runs of the dev server and the armor was left alone until live. No mention of this in the change log. Bla bla people can say dev stuff is subject to change, but they did presale guys DIRTY.
true i put all it of info here
The basic configuration advantage of the Comanche was it ability to “see without being seen”. With low observables to make it difficult to detect, the latest technology in sighting and targeting systems to extend their operating range and their speed of operation, and the ability to communicate this data to all on the battlefield, Comanche was the first helicopter that could detect targets without being detected itself. This was a long way from the Vietnam-era helicopters where the enemy knew a helicopter was approaching long before it got there, simply from its acoustic signature.
oth the radar and IR signatures were well below the Army specifications. Although the actual detectability signatures are classified, general levels of signatures were released, comparing the Comanche to the existing technology:
| Radar | 100 times better |
|---|---|
| Infra Red (IR) | 15 times better |
| Acoustics | 6 times better |
| Visual | 10% smaller |
| Comanche achieved its low radar signature by fuselage shaping, the use of radar absorbing materials and locating the mission armament and landing gear within the fuselage. It did not require any RF jammers. |
Low IR signature was achieved by using a unique engine exhaust system which ducted the exhaust into the tailcone where it was mixed with cool ambient air before it exited the aircraft. No IR jamming equipment was required.
Acoustic signature reduction was achieved by using a variable-speed five bladed main rotor with thin blades and a low tip speed. The Fantail antitorque system was specifically designed to eliminate the “siren” effects of existing tail fans, and again by using geometries specifically designed to reduce noise.
To reduce the visual signature the aircraft was kept small and specific considerations were applied to reduce canopy glint. The five blades also reduced the “flicker” effect.
On sighting and target acquisition, the Comanche systems had a usable range 40% further than systems then currently in use. The second-generation FLIR (Forward Looking Infra Red) could detect temperature differences smaller than the systems then in use. Again, the actual values are classified. The helmet mounted displays included image intensifiers which were designed with fully operational, separate displays for the pilot and copilot. They had a 31% larger field-of-view than existing systems. A digital map was provided using Defense Mapping Agency (DMA) digital terrain on optical discs.
The aircraft was capable of single-pilot operation from either seat.
For protection against nuclear, biological, and chemical threats Comanche used pressurized cockpits and electronics compartments. A unique maintenance-free pressure swing adsorber cleaned the incoming air without the use of replaceable filters. The smooth composite fuselage exterior was designed to not deteriorate when decontamination cleaners were used.
Electromagnetic pulse tolerance was 20 times better than existing aircraft.
Ballistic tolerance was projected to be 50 times better than existing helicopters. Multilevel redundancy and self-healing provided virtual invulnerable electronics. The airframe and rotors were ballistically tolerant and field-repairable.
High levels of crashworthiness were a design requirement for the landing gear, airframe structure, crew seats, and fuel system.
For the basic armed reconnaissance mission Comanche carried four Hellfire and two Stinger missiles in internal compartments, and 320 rounds for the nose-mounted gun. For the air combat mission two Hellfires, four Stingers and 500 rounds were employed.
Infrared Suppressor System
The IR signature was reduced by using a unique engine exhaust system which ducted the exhaust into the tailcone where it was mixed with cool ambient air before it exited the aircraft. This system demonstrated an IR signature one-half of the Army specification level. No IR jamming equipment was required.
The infrared exhaust system
The Army had a strong interest in improving the supportability of its aircraft due to a history of high operational and support costs and poor aircraft availability. It wrote into the LH specification specific requirements to meet this goal. The Boeing Sikorsky team responded by putting supportability engineers with the design engineers as the design was created and throughout the DEM/VAL program.
Many of the initial design decisions were the result of supportability considerations. Technology allowed simpler designs which inherently improved supportability, but other decisions were made in the favor of supportability even if they had an adverse impact on other aircraft attributes like weight.
Nose-Mounted 20-mm Gatling Gun
A 20-mm Gatling gun was mounted below the cockpit. It swiveled in a 240º arc for firing at passing targets. It could fire up at 15º and down to -46º. It could rotate 180º for stowing in a low observable position. The ammunition path was carefully designed to avoid jams and for easy loading. Two rates of fire were available: 750 or 1,500 shots per minute. Dynamic boresighting could be done in flight.
part 2
The external rack was also used for two range extension tanks for self-deployment ferry missions up to 1260 nm range.
The Comanche was designed for air transportability in a number of Air Force transports. It met or exceeded the entire required load and unload timelines.
Supportability was a high priority for the Army to reduce operations and support costs and to improve aircraft availability in the field. Comanche’s unique fuselage design permitted judicious locations for doors and access panels, easing the maintainer’s job. Two maintenance levels were planned compared to three for the existing fleet. A 40% reduction in maintenance burden was projected compared to the existing fleet.
The following describes the Comanche at the time of the Full Scale Development proposal, August 31, 1990. Some of this was altered as the program proceeded.
The Fuselage
After many conceptual design studies, the Boeing Sikorsky team chose an unusual design for the fuselage. Unlike virtually all other helicopters (and fixed wing aircraft for that matter) it was decided not to use the exterior surfaces of the aircraft for the primary fuselage structure. Because of the need for a low radar signature, the aircraft weapons had to be stored within the fuselage and then extended out when they were to be deployed. LHX also required a retractable landing gear for both low radar signature and for high speed. Additionally, the Army’s emphasis on supportability required many access panels to simplify maintenance tasks. It became apparent that a conventional fuselage would be very structural inefficient (i.e. heavy and flexible) and difficult to design. An alternate approach was created to have a simple structural box beam internal structure with the outside skin unloaded from the primary structural loads. Doors and access panels could then be placed in the most optimum positions, improving both radar signature and ease of maintenance for the internal components.
Early in the program this started to be described as the “fuselage within a fuselage” with some derogatory implications that it must be too heavy. In actuality, it became one of the most positive attributes of the Boeing Sikorsky design.
The Main Rotor System
Advances in technology lead to a new concept for the main rotor, the bearingless main rotor, or BMR. This was a simple flexbeam which replaced the conventional flapping, lead-lag, and pitch change bearings of existing helicopters. Early helicopters had metal bearings for all three motions and these were grease lubricated. This then lead to oil lubricated bearings to reduce maintenance requirements. In the 1960s a concept was developed to replace these conventional bearings with elastomeric bearings that require no lubrication; first being used on the Sikorsky CH-53D and then on the UTTAS/Black Hawk.
The Black Hawk tail rotor was the first production use by Sikorsky of the flexbeam concept. It used two graphite flexbeams connecting two rotor blades, clamped together for the four-bladed rotor. The LHX applied the flexbeam approach to the main rotor.
Conventional hinged rotors have a specific hinge offset – the ratio of the flapping hinge position radially as a percentage of the rotor radius. This strongly affects the rotor control power and dynamic characteristics. Helicopters then in production had hinge offsets from 0 to 5 percent. Bearingless rotors have the same attribute, using the term “equivalent offset” to compare them to hinged rotors. Because LHX was to be a very maneuverable aircraft, a high equivalent hinge offset was desired. Boeing Sikorsky chose a 10% equivalent offset to get the agility desired for LHX.
A decision was made to use five rotor blades to reduce individual blade forces and moments as well as to improve the rotor’s acoustic signature. Thus the rotor was called a “Pentaflex”. Variable speed was also used to help control the acoustic signature. This was accomplished by varying the engine speed.
The main rotor blades were all composite, based on proven low-risk Boeing production designs. They had also been proven to be ballistically tolerant to 23 mm rounds.
Crew Station
Comanche had a two-person tandem cockpit. They were identical and the aircraft was fully operable by one pilot from either station. The flight controls were fly-by-wire with a right sidearm controller for pitch, roll, and yaw control. A left side collective pitch controller was used. Pilots had a 30˚ by 60˚ field of view NVPS (Night Vision Pilotage System) and a dual independent IITV (Image Intensified TV) system. Helmet-mounted displays provided all data and displays for eyes-out flying and fighting with a 35˚x 60˚ field of view. Seats were armored and crashworthy.
The Mission Equipment Package (MEP) for Comanche consisted of:
Night Vision Pilotage System, NVPS
The “see” part of “see without being seen” came from the Target Acquisition System (TAS) and the Night Vision Pilotage System (NVPS). These were mounted on the nose of the aircraft to provide maximum field of view, a view unobstructed by the rotor, and to reserve the mast-mounted position for future inclusion of the Longbow system. They included both a Forward Looking InfraRed system (FLIR) and a Low Light Level TV (LLLTV). The NVPS provided both navigation and reconnaissance capabilities, was capable of night nap-of-the-earth and terrain avoidance flying in adverse weather conditions, and gave a clearer definition of the horizon than previous systems.
The FLIR at that time was “second generation” and could detect smaller temperature differences than earlier FLIRs. (The actual temperature numbers are classified.) It also included an image intensifier function. It had a 30º by 60º sensor field of view, and a 35º by 60º field of view as displayed on the pilots’ Helmet Mounted Display (HMD). This was a 31% increase over what was then being used on the AH-64 Apache. The visual range of the system was a 40% increase over the Apache.
Target Acquisition System, TAS
The target acquisition system had the same advanced features as the pilotage system, with a second generation FLIR and a 40% increase in standoff and detection range. Also, it included a heads-up, eyes-out helmet-mounted display, and the ability to work in adverse weather conditions and with battlefield obscurants. It also had an Aided Target Detection and Classification (ATD/C) function with files of known enemy vehicles which could be compared with the view being received. This included a search-on-the-move function; moving target detection; and automatic multitarget prioritization, tracking, weapons selection and fire control. Hover search times were less than six seconds; scene review was conducted after the aircraft had remasked. When a match was found, this information was displayed to the pilots, and a weapons cueing/rangefinding function initiated. This resulted in a 95% reduction in target acquisition time and three times more target location accuracy compared to systems then in use. False alarm rates were projected to be five times lower than the Army’s requirement.
Helmet Mounted Display
The HMD included individual, independent bi-ocular wide-field-of-view displays with image intensifiers. Symbology for heads-up and eyes-out operation was included. The imagery consisted of sensor video from the Night Vision Pilotage System (NVPS) or the Electro-Optic Target Acquisition and Designation System (EOTADS) and video from the helmet mounted image intensifier sensor. Symbology consisted of flight graphics and alphanumerics which were overlaid over the imagery.
Integrated, Communication, Navigation, and Identification Avionics, ICNIA
The Integrated Communication/Navigation/Identification system included Global Positioning (GPS) navigation with accurate back-up provided by both Doppler and inertial inputs to assure mission completion. The navigation system was fully coupled to the flight control system to provide automatic flight along selected waypoints. Navigation and tactical overlays were provided on a digital map for tactical awareness and easier, more thorough mission planning. Optimum route selection was updated in real time. Target data could be transferred from the aircraft to the tactical operation center. The system was designed to be highly fault tolerant, reliable and survivable. It was designed for straightforward future growth.
Mission Electronics
The mission electronics used highly redundant, fault-tolerant architecture. They included 33-bit processors, an 800-Mbps sensor bus, a 50-Mbps data bus and dual 1553 data buses. It was projected to have a 95% level of automatic fault detection and a 98% level of automatic fault isolation to the line replaceable unit (LRU) level. Electronic racks were installed in the rear of the fuselage at waist-high level where they were easy to access for maintenance. Compartments on both sides of the aircraft provided separation for improved survivability. Racks were sealed and cooled with filtered air. They were pressurized for moisture- and NBC-protection. The design included 30% spare processor capability and a 50% bus throughput margin in reserve. 14 open rack positions were included for new modules and capabilities, such as the LONGBOW preplanned product improvement. Modular electronics is located in the tailcone for ease of maintenance and growth
They also included embedded programs for in-cockpit training of the various systems.
there is more but i don’t want to spam i just hope this give more info about the Rah-66 !
I can see a bunch of things that don’t align with any primary sources I’ve seen. And even if the response looks AI generated
Sure but reliability and ability to achieve said specs are not modeled in game Gaijin uses what is stated for all vehicles basically across the board where possible, with few exceptions.
It was to be fitted with both RF and IR jammers, Note below listed ALQ-136, -144 & M-130, and later ALQ-211(V)3 & -212 systems.
Sure, but as above relative to other systems with known performance is provided as reference so things can be estimated in said absence or based on abstracted data based on systems implemented in game.
Where is the extra ammo coming from? As far as i know there was no gunpod or extended ammo bay planned.
A lot of heli are suffering because “Bad” missile and only a few get FnF missile. And MMW radar missile are not the answer. USA literally don’t have a better missile. They have two options 1 have about the same range as missile in game and was cancel and another its still on test fase.
Also i love how Bias post muh 1000000 times RCS than X. When in reality it only reduce the detection range 1/4 of a normal heli. So if a X heli can be detect by radar at 100km this thing its detectable at 25km.
Biased people don’t realize that not only this thing fail. But also much newer project like Invictus also fail.
If these people have read anything about RCS they would know that this won’t work. Even the frontal arc it have a lot of gaps and surface that lower it RCS. But they haven’t and only come here posting pr stuff.
another book talks about the rah-66
I put some images
am sorry for spamming forum won’t allow me to put all images
I hope some of these sources help in Rah–66 understanding and improvements also please correct me if any if the info I gave was wrong thank you!
Why? They could be implemented the same way as IIR missiles since MMW blocking smoke formulations do exist and including it in the generic mix seems fair for game balancing purposes
The AGM-179, or -176 is right there, For the Comanche sure, it’s limited to the hellfire but the AH- 58 / -64s do have options, and the AH-1Z has more exotic options as well.
Source?
Not in any way related to the underlying technical concepts, but more on the political side of things and that in the late 90’s early 2000’s a land war in Europe which the Comanche was tailored specifically for became much less likely and so could no longer justify ongoing costs, where pressing need for funding appeared in other areas which curtailed the project.
Certainly doesn’t look PR related at all, does it?
Cockpit for the RAH-66 is very basic and for the most part incorrect. Even the flight controls are static
In part because gaijin in their infinite wisdom thought the pilot was actually in the back while making the model. However, come dev it got reported that the pilot is up front and they had to panic develop the actual pilot seat.
This is why the gunner’s rear seat model is so unusually detailed, even if low rez.
I’m still fuming over here about the fact the armor is gone… No fun hydra/gun runs
it would be amazing if the pilot and gunner’s seat’s were operable. Will be pretty handy especially for sim players. Pilot focusing on flying and RWR. Gunner seat for if u have a good spot u wanna engage and can operate from that
Did they give a reason for it? Almost all topics created regarding this was closed.
It wouldn’t make sense if it was for balance because then helis without detailed modules are put at a massive disadvantage already.
Why not role out armor for helicopters gradually? They seem to be okay when doing it for detailed modules
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/clKKlYpB3Cjs
I cant wait for them to do a complete 180 on this statement when they add the Su-57.
Im so sick of this bs, one day they say “potential capability is enough for a feature to be added” then the other they say “was not implemented so wont be added” Like wtf is your standard then??
Yeah that’s my bad, I saw someone’s report on it get thrown out and decided to report it too.
[DEV] RAH-66 Comanche pilot and gunner places reversed
Thought immediately after making the report that they would do it and here we are.
The thing is though both cockpits are near enough identical to each other, the only noticeable difference is the lack of a keyboard for the gunner, so I don’t know why but instead of just finishing the cockpit why they decided to give up on it.
But honestly how they have handled the Comanche is appalling. No IRCM, no countermeasures, cut the amount of Stingers in half, only AGM-114B which left US service before the Comanche was built, gun can’t be stowed, no armour, had to fight for an RWR and they gave up on the report for a better RWR too. Infact all the outstanding dev reports have just been abandoned.
I would say its surprising but that would be a complete lie.
So IRL, did the Commanche ever get the infrared jammer or no?
