Beechcraft Starship: A Beautiful Nonsense?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 พ.ย. 2024
- Explore the extraordinary story of the Beechcraft Starship, an iconic symbol of ambition in the executive turboprop world. Launched by Beechcraft in the mid-1980s, the Starship program emerged as a grand vision of innovation, only to become a behemoth of failure. This video uncovers the turbulent journey of the Starship, from its inception in the early '80s, through the challenges of an aviation recession and the oil crisis, to its ultimate fate.
Discover the alliance between Beechcraft, under Raytheon's wing, and the maverick designer Burt Rutan, as they embarked on a mission to outdo the legendary King Air. This collaboration aimed to blend cutting-edge technology, such as carbon fiber reinforced plastic and innovative "pusher" propellers, with the audacious design of a canard-configured aircraft. However, this path was fraught with engineering and aerodynamic complexities, leading to a series of missteps and miscalculations.
Delve into the technical challenges that plagued the Starship, from its ambitious design decisions like the swept wings and canard configuration to its complex cockpit filled with electronic flight instrument systems. Learn about the Starship's struggle with weight issues, certification hurdles, and the high expectations set by its proposed performance capabilities. Despite its ground-breaking design and state-of-the-art features, the Starship faced skepticism and competition from emerging executive jets, which offered similar performance without the complexities of its design.
Witness the Starship's market debut and the challenges it faced, leading to a strategy shift to leasing and the eventual end of its production in 1995. This tale is not just about technological overreach but also a lesson in missed opportunities and the importance of pragmatic innovation in aviation.
The Starship's legacy, a high-tech marvel that fell short in comparison to its less expensive counterparts, offers a cautionary tale of ambition versus practicality in the dynamic world of aviation. Join us as we explore the highs and lows of the Beechcraft Starship, a remarkable chapter in aviation history.
_________________________________________________
To contact me directly: Dashboardglobal@techie.com
_________________________________________________
Our channel is about Aviation.
We make the best educational aviation videos you've ever seen; my videos are designed to clear misunderstandings about airplanes and explain complicated aviation topics in a simple way.
Unbelievable beautiful aircraft. Very unique sound when passing overhead. Second fir me, only to the F-14 in aesthetics.
Last I knew there were two or three still flying. L3 had one and they teamed with the other owners to buy a couple of "parts birds" and store them in Marana, AZ for spare parts
I got to routinely see L3's when it visited the airport I worked at. Always wanted a ride, but never got the chance.
".. typically above mach 70" - if the plane is going that fast it needs to have a very blunt nose, so that the hypersonic shock-wave and plasma are kept as far away from the airplane skin as possible, to avoid the plane melting.
I think they mean mach 0.7 but I got a point of amusement out of the mental image of a plastic Airplane doing that speed while melting like a candle in the oven.
Beechcraft and Raytheon didn't count on all the FAA changes and resulting weight addition. The Starship wasn't designed to have flaps. They are useless since the front wing stalls first. Also the carbon fiber construction was overbuilt compared to the original design because the FAA didn''t really know how it would age and handle flight stress. So it's like a DC-3, way overbuilt. It has an unlimited lifespan on the airframe. If it were built as it was designed and with modern avionics, it would be a fanstastic airplane. I believe the original design of the Long EZ and Very EZ was for safety first rather then efficiency. The airplane will essentially land itself if you keep it level.
The lack of mentioning the Starship's FAA changes and resulting weight addition--that I too recall--is a major negative of this video, which is otherwise well done.
Well...
There are aircraft designers...
And there are Artists...
And then there is Burt Rutan.
I was blessed to see the Starship up close when it was shown here in Venezuela. The air force had a fleet of King Air planes for transport, and the higher ranks invited us, the King Air technicians, to assess the Starship. We were given free access to the entire plane, and instead of a written report, the air force generals sat down with us to hear our opinions in a less formal setting.
We all agreed the aircraft was beautiful, and we could service it with our tools and knowledge, but it wasn't a real improvement over our current fleet. In addition, we didn't need the extra speed because we already had several Citation and Falcon business jets for those missions. Furthermore, our King Air were able to land on rough runways, something a pusher-prop aircraft can't do.
Thanks for the upload!
...brings back memories of the few times I got a tour of the Starship at Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport.
"Reasons for the lack of demand probably included price, performance, and economic conditions. The list price in 1989 was $3.9 million, similar to the Cessna Citation V and Lear 31 jets, which were 89 and 124 knots faster than the Starship at maximum cruise, respectively. The Piper Cheyenne turboprop was faster and sold for $1 million less.[18]"
The Piaggio Avante was omitted from the comparison. It is a vastly better aircraft. And ironically, it borrowed the three-surface concept from Rutans own Grizzly.
My boss owned an airplane and we flew it out of Van Nuys, CA. However, it was constantly in need of repairs, and we had trouble keeping props on it. Any dirt or dust kicked up by the wheels would get caught in the props, leading to downtime while we waited for replacements. It was also difficult to find licensed pilots to fly it. Although it looked cool and had more space inside than jets, it was much slower. Making lease payments on an airplane that was often grounded was a major hassle. Eventually, all the owners started suing because their planes were constantly grounded and needed to be extensively repaired.
I got to see one of the Starships fly at Oshkosh in 2011! Very cool to see it airborne, but I didn't know then what the history was. This was the year that the EAA had a tribute to Burt Rutan, and brought a number of his designs to the show. Mr. Rutan gave a lecture, and he didn't have many good things to say about Beechcraft. Now I'm wondering how much of the Starship's problems was due to the Mr. Rutan's basic design and how much was due to how Beechcraft implemented the design.
The biggest problem was that the market mostly collapsed while they were trying to get the plane built and sorted out.
The way Beechracft implemented the cockpit instrumentation was a major factor. Lighter, lower power flat panel screens would have greatly improved the weight issue. The Starship was a brilliant design, poorly executed. Beechcraft bit off more than they were ready to chew and Raytheon let them.
At those times low power flat panel screens where a myth.
The example you provided for the Vari-Eze was actually a Long-EZ.
The Piaggio Avanti killed the Starship. It's larger inside, yet lighter. It has smaller engines, but much faster than the Starship.
I am surprised that Burt Rutan was involved, and wonder if Raytheon had input he disagreed with. All of the wing sweep seems a bit silly; especially in the canard. The main wing sweep in the Long EZ is understandable for pitch balance in a smaller aircraft. I think the Piaggio looks far more sensible.
I seen one of the like 6 still airworthy coming in for a landing in the small private airport in my town. Thx to flightradar24 I confirmed my sighting lol
about 30 years ahead of its time - OLED systems now could easily handle all of this in the flight deck
You speak words of revolution
it was not ahead of its time. The Piaggio P180 Avanti first flew in 1986 so this starship was actually 3 years behind innovation
@@kalissandra I was referring to the monstrously heavy CRT systems they had and why I specifically referred to OLEDs.
@@kalissandra The Starshjp flew in February of '86 and the Avanti in September of '86
No disrespect, but did Burt Rutan design any commercially successful plane?
None I am aware of.
The maintenance costs plus Downtime of the Starship doomed it.
speed 400mpg ?
Miles per gigawatt, duh.
Yes, at "mach 70"... :)
It never really delivered but kingair is certainly not a good plane. it's hideous inside and out and it's high end jet priced yet slow and noisy.
I had confidence in your aeronautical expertise as soon as you first proclaimed its top speed to be 400 MPG later a speed of above Mach 70! Dude, you should pick up a different hobby! 🤣
That's a bad video. You keep comparing to "traditional" airplanes when you already know (because you fleetingly mentioned for 2 seconds) that the Piaggio P180 Avanti was already created and actually flew in 1986 which is 3 years before the first starship flight in 1989.
Hmmmm….. airplane technology didn’t get to where it is today by going with the status quo. It takes a lot of courage to try something different, and win or lose there are valuable lessons to be learned.
I’m here from Reddit