Airspeed-Curtiss Ambassador: The Users

Rallymodeller

Rallymodeller

Charter Member
Thought I'd start a new thread for these: the American users of the Airspeed-Curtiss ACW-57 Ambassador.

As I said in my other thread on the subject, I love the Ambassador and thought it didn't get a fair shake. So what would happen if we take a fine but underproduced/marketed propliner and added a floundering but in need of products manufacturer? Curtiss licensing and adapting the Ambassador for North American users. Engines changed to R3350s (reflected in the FDE, it's a little more sprightly) and American avionics. Fist US-built version flown from KBUF in 1951, in service early 1953.

First up, the launch customer, Eastern:

EasternACW-57atKLGA_zps2b26330c.jpg


There will be more backstory to these as I get more posted (including the prototype). Now that I have the paintkit all sorted, the repaints should come faster. After I get the first few done and the FDE and panel finalized, I'll upload a package.
 
Really looking forward to this development process and the end results. An interesting concept.
 
If you plan to release your works to share with the community, now would be a good time to write to the graphics and gauge copyright holders to request permissions to use and distribute their work. And please be sure to include a list of copyright holders for each of the items otherwise over time, these things slip through the cracks.
 
Milton Shupe said:
If you plan to release your works to share with the community, now would be a good time to write to the graphics and gauge copyright holders to request permissions to use and distribute their work. And please be sure to include a list of copyright holders for each of the items otherwise over time, these things slip through the cracks.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. When I get the panel and FDE finished to my liking I'll take care of that. I don't want to be stepping on anyone's toes. I am keeping a list of what came from where -- it looks as if the three or four people I sourced gauges and panel bits from are still active (such as yourself) so it shouldn't be a problem.
 
You know, Jagdflieger, looking at that screenshot of the Ambassador next to its full-sized stablemate in the background gives one a couple of ideas. It appears to be a little larger than a DC-3, which had some basic amenities for passengers to enjoy. This would in theory make the Amb a little more comfortable since it had that much more room for more goodies. If you were flying on a Connie in those days of yore, one would expect fairly posh service on that Connie, I would say. Maybe the Amb could have had a slightly downgraded level of service to the Connie, due to space limitations - however, what a way to advertise what awaits on the larger airplane! The Ambassador looks to be a good sized airplane for use on feeder routes for those airlines that flew Connies as well. Given these two circumstances, I would think some of the liveries would include those for airlines that operated Connies. Seems this is already being considered given the EAL livery.
 
Close, SS. While the Ambassador was intended as a DC-3 replacement -- actually, a part-replacement for the "interim" Vickers Viking -- it was in fact larger and far more comfortable; it was noted for it's relative quiet and freedom from vibration. In terms of cabin size, it is more on par with Viscounts and CV440s.

To give me a starting point, I began with Martin 202 and 404 users -- EAL, NWA and TWA. In planning I also have National, Mohawk (natural, given the Ambassadors would be built in Buffalo), and Frontier. I am deliberately avoiding real-world Viscount users both because of the timeline (entering service in 1953) but also to reflect the actual rivalry between the two planes, given that they were designed to roughly the same Brabazon Committee specification. In the alternate timeline I am working out, the Ambassador is somewhat more expensive than the Convair Twins, but is larger, faster, longer-ranged and more comfortable.
 
Out of curiosity, are you planning on doing any AMB's in Southern Airlines colors? They were 202/404 users, I think.
 
The 'alternate reality' is reasonably sound and has some historical support. Traditionally U.S. airlines shied away from foreign aircraft except when the competitive advantage was greater than the politics (Viscount being the best example, AVRO Jetliner being a low point). When it became obvious that turbines were here to stay and the Convairs and Martins were showing their age, the only good replacement was the Fokker F.27 but it was ..umm.. Dutch (and carried the stigma of the name). Along comes Fairchild (another fading manufacturer) who obtained a license and built the FA-27 and -227 which populated many of the short-haul routes in the '60s.

Of course that might have been the role of the envisioned but not-developed turbine Ambassador... alas

BTW, the Ambassador was well-suited to turbine power - it was used as a testbed for the Bristol Proteus (Britannia, et al 3900HP), RR Dart (1600HP), Napier Eland (which did see use on the Canadair development of the CV-440 CL-66 Cosmopolitain 3500HP), and the RR Tyne (CL-44, Vanguard 5400HP). Of course an American license-built variant would likely have seen Allison D-501's.
http://www.abpic.co.uk/search.php?q=Rolls Royce&u=operator&oo=ffx
http://www.the-best-of-british.com/planecrazyheritage/farnborough/Fnb55/5504.htm
http://www.the-best-of-british.com/planecrazyheritage/farnborough/Fnb58/Fnb030a.jpg
http://www.vickersvanguard.net/page120.html
http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/GibbinsBryan/10666.htm
 
Rallymodeller said:
Close, SS. While the Ambassador was intended as a DC-3 replacement -- actually, a part-replacement for the "interim" Vickers Viking -- it was in fact larger and far more comfortable; it was noted for it's relative quiet and freedom from vibration. In terms of cabin size, it is more on par with Viscounts and CV440s.
Click to expand...

Nice comparison of the DC-3 and the AS.57 here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/batman60/6072547959/
 
For those of us who saw and heard the Ambassador in RL the idea of fitting them with 3350's is a bit strange. The Centaurus engines had the loveliest sound imaginable, in fact they sounded just like turbines on low throttle ... much nicer than the shrill Viscounts.

Hauzenberger and Hermann actually did the turbo-prop version, too, you can find it at Flightsim under the name as57turb.zip.

A native FSX Ambassador (from a different developer) is available, too...
 
The Allison 501s probably wouldn't have been necessary. Given that Curtiss-Wright were the big dogs in the US aero-engine world at the time at least as far as recip engines go, it should be no surprise that they were chock full of their own turboshaft projects. First there was the T35 submitted to the USAF by 1944. The XT35 was running at 6,600shp on the test stand by 1948, and it was estimated that they could be enlarged to 10,000shp by adding compressor stages. But at 4500 lbs, it was 450 lbs heavier than an R4360. CW was targeting a weight of 3800 lbs for the powerplant, but it was still a damn big engine for the output.

Later and more promising, a turboshaft version of the CW-licensed J65 Sapphire was built as the T49, and this flew in 1955. It produced 6,600shp out of the box in '53, and was raised to 10,300shp (on the XB-47D) by the time the project was cancelled near the end of 1955.

The T49 was a good engine, even by later standards. A civil version, derated to around 4-5000shp, would have been easy for CW. Especially if they had an aircraft to put it in.

A really good page about early US turboshaft design (focusing on Wright engines, but with mention of the monster GE T57) can be found here.
 
mjahn said:
For those of us who saw and heard the Ambassador in RL the idea of fitting them with 3350's is a bit strange. The Centaurus engines had the loveliest sound imaginable, in fact they sounded just like turbines on low throttle ... much nicer than the shrill Viscounts.

Hauzenberger and Hermann actually did the turbo-prop version, too, you can find it at Flightsim under the name as57turb.zip.

A native FSX Ambassador (from a different developer) is available, too...
Click to expand...


I have everything D-GHHH has put out that I could get my hands on, so you wanna believe I have the Turbo-Ambassadors. :cool: I love their stuff. The Proteus looks like it belongs, but the Tyne installation was so slipshod-looking that it's hard to imagine it came from Rolls-Royce.

And as far as the sound I cannot agree more -- that lovely crackle at full tilt as well -- but my decision to put an R3350 in an American version was done with an eye to practicality. R3350s were plentiful over here and well-understood by American mechanics. To American mechanics, the sleeve-valve system was seen as overcomplicated. And given that the in-service date is 1953, the Turbo-Compound version was released for civil use that year with 3250hp for takeoff, versus around 2600hp for the Centaurus 661. Last, it's an in-house thing, so the Curtiss engineers would have known that the TC Duplex Cyclone would be just around the corner. Launching it with TC power would have been great for marketing.

This is mostly a fun exercise on my part, and an attempt to breathe some more life into these great sims. Were I really serious, and had I the 3D modeling chops, I would love to modify the design to include all the possible variants. But since that's not the case, I have to content myself with FDE and cosmetic changes.
 
I sure wish I could have flown in an ambassador. I did fly in the Convair 240s and DC-6s in the 60s, but to have flown in a Connie or an Ambassador sure would have topped the decade off nicely.

Thanks for the link on that Turbo Ambassador. I've got it in the library now.
 
This is a fine looking plane, fits right in to the great British innovation period.
Very nice to have an American variation, great paints!
I've only been flying the DanAir version, and always wondered whether it would be possible to replace the window textures?!
There is a designated texture file, but any alterations have no effect. It's like flying around with gaping holes in the fuselage...
Looking forward to the new paints,

Regards,
Stuart
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top