|
|
To provide a new generation of corporate transports, Beech looked to Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites Inc. to design and produce the SCAT 1, an 85% scale technology demonstrator of a canard-configured aircraft. Success in testing led to the construction of the Model 2000 Starship 1. The Starship design has compound
taper main wings, which mount the two pusher engines. Large endplate fins, known as tipsails, provide longitudinal stability, augmented by two small fins on the wing trailing edge. Additional keel area is provided by a ventral fin under the extreme rear of the slender fuselage. The large canard foreplanes of variable-geometry, sweeping forward by 4° for low-speed flight and 30° back in the cruise. Virtually the entire structure is made of Nomex honeycomb and graphite/epoxy composites, with titanium used in high-stress areas.
The first of three flying pre-production Starship 1s flew on 15 February 1986. Another three airframes were produced for static, damage tolerance and pressure testing. Basic FAA certification followed on 14 June 1988, and the first production.machine flew on 25 April 1989.
This has been used for customer demonstration flights, resulting in 40 orders by June of that year.
| MODEL | Beech 2000 Starship 1 |
| ENGINE | 2 x Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A-67A turboprops, 895kW |
| WEIGHTS |
| Take-off weight | 6531 kg | 14398 lb |
| Loaded weight | 4484 kg | 9886 lb |
| DIMENSIONS |
| Wingspan | 16.6 m | 54 ft 6 in |
| Length | 14.05 m | 46 ft 1 in |
| Height | 3.96 m | 12 ft 12 in |
| Wing area | 26.09 m2 | 280.83 sq ft |
| PERFORMANCE |
| Cruise speed | 621 km/h | 386 mph |
| Ceiling | 12495 m | 41000 ft |
| Range | 3132 km | 1946 miles |
| John Graham, jockog3(@)aol.com, 07.08.2009 Beech is/was tryin to buy up and destroy all the airframes. It was not because of poor performance, but rather because of the high cost of production and support. There were approximately 50 Starships built. Last I heard there are 4 or so that continue to fly. The similar-in-design Avanti has set speed records for many routes for turboprops and is very roomy given its performance relative to the size of the Starship. | | leo rudnicki, leo_rudnicki(@)hotmail.com, 08.04.2009 The info given seems incomplete. Last I heard, Raytheon was trying to buy back and terminate all vestiges from memory. It seems curious that many or most of the aircraft using scale testing either weren't very good or failed outright and did not achieve viable advantage from it. The Piaggio Avanti,a competitor,now run by Ferrari, also failed to achieve big sales succes due to persistant component failures (nosewheel steering and flap actuators) It seems the customers are conservative in taste. |
|
Do you have any comments about this aircraft ?
|
|  COMPANY PROFILE
FACTS AND FIGURES© The lighter weight
allowed for a larger
cabin than the King Air
which was powered by
the same engines. © The Starship's engines were
mounted in the rear to reduce
cabin noise. The main wing was
positioned aft to balance lifting
forces and mount the engines. © The Starship had two five-bladed, fully
feathering, reversible, hydraulically
controlled, constant speed, dynamically
balanced propellers. © It was believed that composite
materials might explode if struck by
lightning, so a web of metal wires
was inserted between composite
layers to act as a Faraday cage and
protect the occupants. © Partly to avoid resonance issues, the
Starship eschewed a conventional
fin and rudder for control surfaces
on 'tipsails' at the wingtips.
| |
|
|