R680 Powered Beech 18

In article k4Cub.45679$Dw6.223691@attbi_s02,
"Robert Bates" wrote:

Does anyone have time in a R680 powered Beech 18? If so, what sort of
performance numbers are they capable of and are they reasonably safe on one
engine?



Are you sure that it isn't a Jacobs-powered MOdel 18? I used to know a
man who had one (late 1970s) in CA. He used to take it to all the
fly-ins. It had smaller fins/rudders than the C/D/H-18 and bumped cowls.

Robert

The Beech 18/ C-45/ AT-11 were the same 'basic' airplane.

The first 40 built in the late 30's had 330 HP Jacobs with P & W 450
HP engines in the Military C-45/AT-11/etc.

I got some time in the C-45.with the 450 HP P & W engines.

Your R680 is the 300 HP Lycoming (Model HRE). Didn't find any mention
of this engine in the early D-18's but may have been a proto or first
engine before they went to the 330 Jake?

C-45 bird flew ok. Would fly on one engine after airborne an cleaned
up . Not any super performance of course. Max altitude on SE was
probably 5K or so (from memory).

Much better performer than 'Bobcat' on SE.

Was a good little twin for its era.

Some are still flying today.

On the Lycoming and Jacobs. Don't have the weight on these birds but
were probably much lighter than the military versions (Military always
added a lot o 'junk' and gross went up). Even with a light civilian
bird, I'd guess the Lycoming was a little short on power so they went
to the Jacobs?

Enough. Others may have some more first hand experience on the Twin
Beach and knowledge of very early versions?

Big John


On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 04:12:00 GMT, "Robert Bates"
wrote:

Does anyone have time in a R680 powered Beech 18? If so, what sort of
performance numbers are they capable of and are they reasonably safe on one
engine?

C-45 bird flew ok. Would fly on one engine after airborne an cleaned
up . Not any super performance of course. Max altitude on SE was
probably 5K or so (from memory).

I remember when I trained on the Beech-18 (E-18S...I think), the manual refered
to the installation of JATO pods to "assist in the event of an engine failure
or for short take-offs".
I wish we had them when I was taking off fully loaded with cargo over a high
population area. Fun fun fun...

Some are still flying today

There are quite a few still flying today. I can think of 5-6 cargo companies
off the top of my head that still use them and private ones are all over the
place.


-John
*You are nothing until you have flown a Douglas, Lockheed, Grumman or North
American*

Big John wrote in message . ..
Robert

The Beech 18/ C-45/ AT-11 were the same 'basic' airplane.

The first 40 built in the late 30's had 330 HP Jacobs with P & W 450
HP engines in the Military C-45/AT-11/etc.

I got some time in the C-45.with the 450 HP P & W engines.

Your R680 is the 300 HP Lycoming (Model HRE). Didn't find any mention
of this engine in the early D-18's but may have been a proto or first
engine before they went to the 330 Jake?


Don't forget that the early aircraft certified under TC's 630 and
A684 could have been powered by Wright 760's....

Craig C.

Robert,

Where in the world have you found an R-680 powered Twin Beech? That
has got to be an incredibly rare beast. I thought only one or two of
the very first ones had other than Pratt and Whiskey R-985s. The
early ones were much lighter, but, still, the performance had to be
marginal at best.

Have you ben able to get your hands on a manual for the R-680 powered
model? Given that it would have been written in the 1930s when most
manuals were pretty basic, I'd be curious what it reported about
performance. Does the airplane even have feathering props? What is
the serial number of this airplane?

All the best,
Rick

"Robert Bates" wrote in message news:k4Cub.45679$Dw6.223691@attbi_s02...
Does anyone have time in a R680 powered Beech 18? If so, what sort of
performance numbers are they capable of and are they reasonably safe on one
engine?

On 19 Nov 2003 08:02:58 -0800, (Rick Durden)
wrote:

snip

Where in the world have you found an R-680 powered Twin Beech? That
has got to be an incredibly rare beast. I thought only one or two of
the very first ones had other than Pratt and Whiskey R-985s. The
early ones were much lighter, but, still, the performance had to be
marginal at best.

Have you ben able to get your hands on a manual for the R-680 powered
model? Given that it would have been written in the 1930s when most
manuals were pretty basic, I'd be curious what it reported about
performance. Does the airplane even have feathering props? What is
the serial number of this airplane?

snip

My initial thoughts are that Beech made a twin trainer similar to the
Bamboo Bomber that was powered by 300 hp R680's.

There are quite a few Stearmans flying around with 300 hp 680's that
are an STC'd install using the modified engine mount, dishpan, etc.
from the the Beech twin trainer.

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/early_years/ey23.htm

TC

The only one I saw was at Steve Wolfe's hanger in the early '90s and I
thought that it was interesting at the time but I didn't learn any more
about it than the engine installation. The performance specs for the Jacobs
powered version would also work. What I am trying to accomplish is an
interesting, but affordable to fly classic by re-powering an engineless
Beech 18.




wrote in message
...
On 19 Nov 2003 08:02:58 -0800, (Rick Durden)
wrote:

snip

Where in the world have you found an R-680 powered Twin Beech? That
has got to be an incredibly rare beast. I thought only one or two of
the very first ones had other than Pratt and Whiskey R-985s. The
early ones were much lighter, but, still, the performance had to be
marginal at best.

Have you ben able to get your hands on a manual for the R-680 powered
model? Given that it would have been written in the 1930s when most
manuals were pretty basic, I'd be curious what it reported about
performance. Does the airplane even have feathering props? What is
the serial number of this airplane?

snip

My initial thoughts are that Beech made a twin trainer similar to the
Bamboo Bomber that was powered by 300 hp R680's.

There are quite a few Stearmans flying around with 300 hp 680's that
are an STC'd install using the modified engine mount, dishpan, etc.
from the the Beech twin trainer.

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/early_years/ey23.htm

TC

"Robert Bates" wrote in message
news:EhXub.249932$HS4.2225277@attbi_s01...
The only one I saw was at Steve Wolfe's hanger in the early '90s and I
thought that it was interesting at the time but I didn't learn any more
about it than the engine installation. The performance specs for the
Jacobs
powered version would also work. What I am trying to accomplish is an
interesting, but affordable to fly classic by re-powering an engineless
Beech 18.

Do you think that in the long run R985s might be the best route? They would
give you better resale and are pretty near bullet proof. Fuel burn would be
a consideration and might eat up a lot of the increase in resale.

In article EhXub.249932$HS4.2225277@attbi_s01,
"Robert Bates" wrote:

The only one I saw was at Steve Wolfe's hanger in the early '90s and I
thought that it was interesting at the time but I didn't learn any more
about it than the engine installation. The performance specs for the Jacobs
powered version would also work. What I am trying to accomplish is an
interesting, but affordable to fly classic by re-powering an engineless
Beech 18.



What you would end up with is an underpowered, overweight,
underperforming paperweight, as the STC process would be overwhelming.

TC,

The AT-10 you mentioned did ring a few bells. Talk about an
incredibly rare airplane that wasn't built to last...wooden fuel tanks
wrapped in rubber, amazing. I wonder if any are in existence outside
of museums, they'd be even more costly to keep flying than a Cessna
T-50.

I've flown the 300 hp Boeing Stearmans and have always thought that
was the correct engine for that airframe as the original 220 hp
version is pretty badly underpowered. I had no idea that the engine
mod was essentially a bolt on from the AT-10. I had a vague
understanding that a lot of BT-13s gave their all for the R-985 mount
so the Boeings could become crop dusters.

So, AT-10s from Beech live on (in part) on Boeings built about five
miles southeast...

Now, as to putting an R-680 on a Beech 18 airframe that wasn't
originally designed for the small engines....well there are
'interesting' ideas all the time in aviation. Just yesterday I got
word of a guy who droped a Chevy V8 into a Cessna 150, used rubber
hoses for the fuel lines and couldn't seem to understand why the FAA
was a little less than understanding about the whole thing. Just
because he hadn't sought to get any sort of approval before deciding
to fly it...

All the best,
Rick

wrote in message . ..
On 19 Nov 2003 08:02:58 -0800, (Rick Durden)
wrote:

snip

Where in the world have you found an R-680 powered Twin Beech? That
has got to be an incredibly rare beast. I thought only one or two of
the very first ones had other than Pratt and Whiskey R-985s. The
early ones were much lighter, but, still, the performance had to be
marginal at best.

Have you ben able to get your hands on a manual for the R-680 powered
model? Given that it would have been written in the 1930s when most
manuals were pretty basic, I'd be curious what it reported about
performance. Does the airplane even have feathering props? What is
the serial number of this airplane?

snip

My initial thoughts are that Beech made a twin trainer similar to the
Bamboo Bomber that was powered by 300 hp R680's.

There are quite a few Stearmans flying around with 300 hp 680's that
are an STC'd install using the modified engine mount, dishpan, etc.
from the the Beech twin trainer.

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/early_years/ey23.htm

TC