Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Russian Copycats  
User currently offlineBigPhilNYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4077 posts, RR: 54
Posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5202 times:

I know very little about Russian planes. But it seems to me that Russians have a copy of so many other Americna made planes.

I have seen planes that with the exception of a few minor detials liek cockpit windows or a neddle here and there, are dead ringers for the MD-80, 757, 727 and so forth.

Did they do this intentionally? What's the deal?

Also, how stupid am I for not knowing?

Regards

-Phil


Phil Derner Jr.
67 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBmi330 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1450 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5150 times:

What Russian or former USSR plane looks like the 757 I wanna see that? Would be so cool. Get the 727 comareson and MD80 I think is it not just something to do with airplane design of the period e.g. quad 707 and DC8 , DC10 and L1011. What about the A340 and IL96 that right name? The idea that the Flaps at the front of the TU144 was stolen and used on the mirage fighter (think that's right)

User currently offlineVonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4627 posts, RR: 36
Reply 2, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5143 times:

Well, some of them seem to be copy cats ie: TU-204 and the 757. But MD-80?!

Also, Americans never admit this but many of the US military aircraft designs had things that were "copied" from the russians. I believe thrust vectoring was one of them (not sure though). It goes both ways.



Word
User currently offlineVonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4627 posts, RR: 36
Reply 3, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5126 times:

"What about the A340 and IL96 that right name?"

The IL96 is based on the IL86 which was in service way before the A340. I think perhaps even the IL96 might have been before the A340 though I'm not positive.



Word
User currently offlineN754pr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5124 times:

Well other people just steal things like the jet engine.......  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

User currently offlineBmi330 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1450 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5117 times:

I no that I was just making a comparison and didn't no the numbers for the IL89 proud I got the rite aircraft for IL96 but. I should have made it clear but no worries as long as the guys like you to keep me accurate I can get away with little errors thanks! IL96 was introduced early middle 90's not sure though.

User currently offlineBmi330 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1450 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5112 times:

Good point If you want a copycat think this way no UK no jet engine. 1st commercial aircraft Comet UK everyone follows the British lead in technology anyways! Just a small splash of patriotism there.

User currently offlineBmi330 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1450 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5075 times:

How kool is the TU-204 that is one kick ass airplane it is really like the 757.

User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5063 times:

phil, the us stole from the soviet union, the soviets stole from the us. it does go back and forth. the tu-154 is not the 727, its way bigger. i do not know of any other planes that are direct copies. the dc-3, yea. the tu-204, maybe. il-86/96 no, tu-134 is not a dc-9. the only plane that i am aware of that was directly copied is the b-29. do you have history and discovery wings? if so, watch that. youll definately see a history of soviet aviation on it. that should explain everything.


"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineBoeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5017 times:

VC-10 was copied into IL-62M. There are some copies, but there are still some differences. Cold War politiking and spying play a role.

B4e-Forever New Frontiers


User currently offlineFlybynight From Norway, joined Jul 2003, 1005 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5006 times:

Except for the winglets, I'd swear the TU 204 was a 757. It is amazing how similar they are!

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Morley




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Josep Duran - IBERIAN SPOTTERS





Heia Norge!
User currently offlineBmi330 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1450 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5004 times:

Maybe Boeing sold them the molds etc like fiat do with there old car modles form the 757? You used airscotland well done that man.

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16259 posts, RR: 56
Reply 12, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4998 times:

The IL96 is based on the IL86 which was in service way before the A340.

The IL-86 was clearly based on the A300B. The inability of the USSR to produce reasonably efficient large high bypass turbofans meant that the IL-86 required 4 engines instead of 2.

The IL-62 was a copy of the VC-10.

The TU-154 was a copy of the 727 which itself was a copy of the Trident.

The TU-104 was a copy of the Comet.

The TU-134, while based on the TU-124, was a copy of the DC-9/BAC-111.

The TU-204 was clearly a copy of the 757 of course.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineDulles From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 80 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4989 times:

I agree with those who say that it was going both ways. Like between any competing corporations. Isn't it true that the majority of the US population are now smiling at the words of the former president "Gentlemen do not spy", which were pronounced to support his decision to block (as it turned out, temporarily) the creation of what is now National Security Agency (the main wiretapping and encryption/decryption agency in the US located near Baltimore). This is a reality of life, and it would be naive to deny or ignore it, regardless of moral beliefs. Russians have had extremely good intelligence for decades, and it has been used for technological espionage in full. On the other hand, it is a fact of life that, for a variety of reasons, Russians had a superb school of physicists in the first half of the 20th century. Nothing even close to it was in chemistry or biology. That school has produced such personalities as Korolev (all the Russian successes in space), Kurchatobv, Sakharov, et al. (nuclear power/weapons), and a whole slew of aviation scientists/engineers (Typolev, Ilyushin, Antonov, Yakovlev, even Sikorsky). It is not by accident that the WWII-outsourced nation turned out to be able to get its own nuclear bomb just 2 years after the US tests, created the thermonuclear bomb before the US, scared Americans shitless with Sputnik, and led space exploration for decades afterwards despite all the von Braun's documentation and von Braun himself acquired by the US in the end of the WWII (not to mention its economic power). Therefore, it would be extremely naive to believe that Soviet planes have been just "copycated" from American prototypes (as the most primitive propagandists would like to represent it), although it would be equally incorrect to claim that Russians have not used the intelligence findings at all. Unfortunately, that generation of aviation scientists is mostly gone now, and it was somewhat symbolic that the Paris crash of TU-144 occurred shortly after Tupolev, Sr. died, handing this particular project to his son, Tupolev, Jr.

Dulles


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29799 posts, RR: 58
Reply 14, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4983 times:

Gues, not a single one of those aircraft is a copy of the other.

Form follows function.

If you desing aircraft for simular roles with simular requirements there will be simularities.




OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineBigPhilNYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4077 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4971 times:

their are OBVIOUS superficial similarities that can't be in any way coincidental.


Phil Derner Jr.
User currently offlineFlybynight From Norway, joined Jul 2003, 1005 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4972 times:

L188 - An interesting thought! But, if you look at a A340 and a B777, they really don't look much alike, yet the serve the same basic need. The TU-204 is a mirror of a 757. It's like trying to tell the difference between the Olson twins!



Heia Norge!
User currently offlineDc10guy From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4959 times:

Russia may have copied the concept of a lot of western airplanes, But their airplanes are designed by them and do a real good job of flying. The AN124 comes to mind. Sure it looks like a C-5 but it is a better airplane in a lot of ways. Bottom line is Russia builds great airplanes too.


Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
User currently offlineBigPhilNYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4077 posts, RR: 54
Reply 18, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4938 times:

Oh, to clarify, in no way was I trying to say that the Russians were messed up in copying, or necessarily meaning that THEY copied US. Nor was I saying that can't amke planes.

Jsut discussing similarities. Obvious ones.  Big grin



Phil Derner Jr.
User currently offlinePositive rate From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 2143 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4913 times:

The TU-154 is a 727 copy
The IL-62 is a VC-10 copy
The TU-144 is a Concorde copy
The TU-204 is a 757 copy
The IL-76 is a C-141 Starlifter copy


In the case of the TU-144 and the IL-62 the soviets actually admitted that they sent spies over to the UK to steal blueprints from these aircraft, and thus they made pretty similar models of their own. Ok there are some differences between the TU-144 and Concorde but a lot of it was copied.


User currently offlineSovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2609 posts, RR: 16
Reply 20, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4821 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Ok....
First of all why is everyone always starting these threads about Russia copying others? Why can't someone start a thread about USA copying Europe? Or the opposite? They copied the hell out of each other. I'm amazed at the number of people spitting on Soviet planes just because they have similarities with western planes. Think about it...DC-9, BAC111 and Caravelle all look similar. How is the Tu-134 a copy of the DC-9? The wings are a way different shape, it has those things on the wings where the gear retract. It certainly looks more narrow, it has a glass nose and the tail looks completely different than a DC-9. You can say that only the fuselage looks like a DC-9. In that case all narrow-body planes are copies of each other. I do agree that the Tu-144 and Il-62 took some concepts from the Concorde and VC-10. Tu-154 and 727??? Look at my description on the Tu-134 vs DC-9 above and you'll get your answer(except the glass nose plus the Tu-154 is bigger). The Il-76 was like an An-12 with jet engines and changes in the tail and wings.

Flybynight- A340 and B777 don't look much alike but A330 and B777 do.

L-188 is right. When you need to design a plane with certain characteristics the final product looks like what someone else would build. We're all human after all. The reason A340 and B777 don't look alike is because of the number of engines. The Il-86 doesn't look anything like the A300 except that it is a widebody. Wings, tail, gear, everything is different. Actually it looks like everyone copied Britain. They first made the jet engine, then 3 engines in the tail(Trident), then 2 engines in the tail(BAC111), then 4(VC-10). So what didn't they do? Introduce engines on pylons which Boeing did. Airbus copied Boeing and it can go on forever.....Look at all the original and fascinating planes Russia has that no one else does. An-22, An-72, An-225, Tu-114, Mig-25 and so on....
And lastly...Lockheed took the Yak-141 concept of VTOL and put it in the F-35....legally with the permission of the Yakovlev bureau.


User currently offlineOsteogenesis From Germany, joined May 2003, 647 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4809 times:

Bmi330

Good point If you want a copycat think this way no UK no jet engine. 1st commercial aircraft Comet UK everyone follows the British lead in technology anyways! Just a small splash of patriotism there.

What about the German technology that went into the US, Great Britain and the Soviet Union after the war?

This had a high impact on aviation and the space industry.

Even the Americans accept that they would not have reached the moon buy now without all the work that was done by Werner von Braun and co.

Maybe in aviation the German advantage was not so big but the F-86 and the Mig 15 used Me262 technology.

Did you saw the 2010 space Odyssey film? When the American Nasa guy tells the Russian “Our Germans are better then your Germans”.  Big grin


User currently offlineLn-kgl From Norway, joined Sep 1999, 1039 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4792 times:

I've made three special versions of my drawings at Plane-Spotter to suite the limitations here at Airliners.net. This should illustrate the similarities and differences between Tu-204 and B757-200 - as an extra I've also included the A321. One thing strikes me, the difference in wing design - around 4 meters greater wingspan, winglets and wing placed more forward on the fuselage for the Tu-204, but both have almost the same wing area. Another difference is the smooth curves the cockpit windows of the Tu-204 has compared to the 757. The tail then, also quite different. The fuselage then, double bubble with 757, not by Tu-204. Then we're only left with the engines, pylons different - but one version of the Tu-204 (Tu-204-120) have the same engines as some 757s - RB.211-535E4, but we can't count that as a similarity since they are British  Big grin







Kurt
http://www.plane-spotter.com


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13208 posts, RR: 77
Reply 23, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4752 times:

The Russians made aircraft to suit their needs, hence the vogue in rear mounted engines as they were seen as less vunerable to FOD than wing mounted.
(The new Russian Regional Jet project has been criticized for having wing mounted engines for this reason).
Many strips in the vast USSR were not well maintained, they needed tough aircraft to operate from them.
The VC-10 was designed for operation out of limited airfields on BOAC routes, the IL-62 was the same for Russia, no spying has ever emerged.
There was some spying on Concorde, but it only allowed Tupolev to play catch up, it did not change the fundamental problems with the TU-144.
But the Russian industry has some very capable design teams, if their products seem like crude copies that is coincidental, the exception was the TU-144 as that was for prestige and Tupolev was under extreme political pressure to 'beat' Concorde, not to design a workable aircraft for Aeroflot.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29799 posts, RR: 58
Reply 24, posted (11 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4729 times:

The 777 and the A340 may not look alike, but compare a 330 and 777, they most certainly do.


Besides there are plently of examples of aircraft with simular looks and designed for simular missions in the west. Are they copycats too?

A-320/737
F-100/DC-9
Convair 340/Martin 440
Beechjet/Learjet
Nordatlas/C-119
CRJ/EMB-145


[Edited 2003-08-03 12:29:16]


OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
25 Post contains images Ebos : Glad the russians made some design improvements when copying Russian stuff looks much better imho than the western 'plastic' aircraft. The design of t
26 RayPettit : Re B757 and Tu204 - well shape wise they may be similar but thats a fairly standard configuration of an aircraft for a given market. And the Tu134 has
27 UN_B732 : The Tu-134 is also smaller than the DC-9. -UN
28 Positive rate : I never understood the purpose of the glass nose on Soviet planes like the TU-134. Was it supposed to be for a Navigator to look out of or something?
29 L-188 : Yup. 10 out of 10 for that one. Easier to see landmarks on the ground.
30 Jwenting : It was also capable of being fitted with a machine gun. I don't know if that was ever done, and it would have been pretty useless but it WAS designed
31 Post contains images Vafi88 : The Tu-144 was NOT a copy of the concorde. If you can remember, the reason the first one crashed at an air show was spies that got too close while in
32 Flybynight : Weren't the Concorde and the TU-144 being built at the same? What I'm trying to say, wasn't there a race to see who would fly first? Sorta like the US
33 Ilyushin96M : The idea that the Russians copy Western aircraft today is ludicrous. The definition of "copy" is to reproduce something in an identical fashion, so th
34 OD720 : I can't believe that the IL-86 is considered as a copy of the A300. Are some people trying to stretch their immagination or what? Different engine con
35 Airman99o : I am supurised that someone had mentioned that the Tu-104 was a copy of the comet. Ya sure! The Russians had used a Bomber, Cannot remember which one.
36 USAFHummer : The Tu-104 was a civilian spinoff of the Tu-16 Badger strategic bomber...I cant see how it could possibly be a Comet ripoff...IMO the two bear very li
37 Ben : Im not going to repeat what a lot of you have already said.... but it's great to see so many posts on here putting down the idea that the USSR copied
38 Post contains images Keesje : Aircraft looking broadly similar in configurations are copies only for rookies. Below the skin the aircraft are totally different. The Russian copying
39 Megatop : I don't like this copycat thing. Remember that a plane is just a fuselage, wings, engines ect. But would some of you also state that the B767 or B777
40 RIX : "This Aircraft [Tu104] was way ahead of the British. I think by a couple of years at least." - oh, no. Comet made its first flight in 1949, first pass
41 Superfly : I find it interesting that the members here who know the facts and figures on different aircraft are know that the Russians are not copy cats. Yet tho
42 Cancidas : the only american plane that was copied was the B-29! that's is people, now can we please stop knocking the russians? they're not copycats. mc
43 An-225 : By the way, originally, IL-86 was supposed to have 4 rear-mounted engines, just like IL-62. Ilyushin Bureau decided to do away with the design and go
44 Post contains links and images Superfly : An-225: Good point, I forgot about IL-86 initially having 4 rear-mounted engine design before they build the existing one. Can anyone tell us what the
45 Heavierthanair : G'day The nature of any business is to remain competitive, if you are a newcomer the goal is to become a recognized and serious player. In the first c
46 Post contains links and images Boeing4ever : Can anyone tell us what the AN-72 is supposed to copy? Actually An72 looks like a copy of the Boeing YC-14. From: http://www.aerosite.net/yc14.htm B4e
47 OD720 : Hi B4E, We come back to the same place as we started, if a plane looks similar from the outside doesn't mean that it is a copy. Does this mean that th
48 Post contains images Keesje : Either you arrange for means to obtain blueprints of a competing design, as did Tupolev with the 144 Concordsky and IAI with the Kfir I guess If you a
49 Luzezito : To go beyond what has been said in this thread, and in many other before: aren't many if not all western manufacturers not using CATIA computer softwa
50 AngelAirways : The 144 and concorde have very different aerodynamic designs. The 144 has a TOTALLY different delta wing (no its not just a triangle. it's a lot more
51 Cv747 : I am always amused when I see the Phrase who copied from the Americans. It is just wrong to think that planes are coppied. (Except for the TU-4, which
52 Post contains links and images Ebos : Wonder what's the An-22 a copy of... View Large View MediumPhoto © Sven De Bevere Sven
53 Ben : CV747, Thanks for your input on the MiG-29. I heard that the avionics installed on the F-16 / F-15 were only better for long range operations (ie. bei
54 GDB : The TU-144 could carry more and do it faster than Concorde...on paper, not in reality, how could it if it had to maintain at least a partial reheat in
55 Ben : I think the AN-72 was meant as a tactical transport replacement for the AN-26 GDB, That is absolutely correct. An-26 / An-32 .. which are very similar
56 Sovietjet : Ben- The Mig-29 is indeed inferior in long-range fight both with its R-27 missiles(less range than AIM-120) and its radar. However, in dogfights Mig-2
57 Post contains links and images Fanofjets : Cancidas is correct - the only direct Russian copy of a Western aircraft was the Tupolev Tu-4, rivet for rivet copied from the B-29 (which, in the mea
58 RIX : "the 144 flew first, it flew faster and carried more passengers" - here we go again... The very first prototype, CCCP-68001 (the one that was the firs
59 Dulles : >The TU144 was to good to be through from those damn commies Except the "commies" have created it... And it was their main mistake, I think, which, fo
60 Post contains images Boeing4ever : We come back to the same place as we started, if a plane looks similar from the outside doesn't mean that it is a copy. Does this mean that the Tornad
61 Post contains links and images RIX : "the planes were full at least sometimes (I can testify that personally as a passenger of such flight, contrary to what RIX claims)" - here is the sou
62 Dulles : >BTW, quite recently there was a topic here asking if someone of the forum members ever flew on Tu144. Probably it was before you joined us (July 4, 2
63 RIX : "I do not believe that this discussion group is a good place for politically-flavored wrestling." - me neither. I don't think my reference to some tec
64 Dulles : >"I do not believe that this discussion group is a good place for politically-flavored wrestling." - me neither. I don't think my reference to some te
65 HlywdCatft : Was the Buran ever launched? What did the rocket set up look like for it being launched? Did it have the two rocket boosters and the giant fuel tank t
66 Post contains links Boeing4ever : Buran made one unmanned flight. The Booster used was called Energya I believe. These sites are useful: http://www.aerospaceguide.net/buran/ http://par
67 AA777MIA : Has anyone actually flow one of the russian airliners, or are you just offering opinions... I would actually like to hear a comarison of the two...
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Russian Jet Takes Off With "hole In Wing" posted Wed Mar 21 2012 05:37:52 by bobmuc
Model Of A Cabin Russian MC-21 posted Tue Mar 20 2012 07:46:51 by tvoipolet
Aeroflot: English Or Russian? posted Fri Mar 9 2012 12:44:46 by olddominion727
Russian Aviation Thread #1 2012 posted Wed Feb 15 2012 11:43:56 by B738FlyUIA
VVO To Be First Russian Airport For 'Open Skies' posted Mon Feb 13 2012 07:42:16 by bjorn14
High Quality Videos Of Russian SST.... posted Mon Jan 16 2012 12:27:44 by alberchico
Russian Aviation - Aeroflot Skips The TU-204? posted Tue Dec 13 2011 09:33:25 by Tupolev160
Russian Pilot Smoked Marijuana Before Flight posted Tue Nov 8 2011 10:59:36 by oksman
Russian LCC Market - Non-existent? posted Sun Oct 23 2011 12:28:36 by FCAFLYBOY
Russian Aviation Thread #1 2011 posted Tue Jan 11 2011 10:11:26 by Severnaya