KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51 Posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 16989 times:
In the early 1970s, when the relationship between China and the US began to thaw, China bought some (14-18?) Boeing B-707-320B/C for international air travel, for CAAC. IIRC, they also bought 100% of the P&W JT-3D engines as spares.
When the Chinese decided they didn't need all those spare engines for their B-707s, they decided to build their own airplane, called the Y-10.
The Shanghai Y-10 looked remarkably like the B-707-320C, except for a few minor issues. For example, the Y-10 did not have the famous Boeing style "eye brow" windows, or the "stinger" style HF radio antenna atop the fin. Other than those two features, the two airplanes types looked identical.
Both Shanghai and Boeing publicly said the two airplanes are very different, even though they had the same dementions and looked (externally) alike.
IIRC, there were only 2-4 Y-10s built, and it never went into production, or scheduled airline service. I believe all Y-10s were used for a short time for government transport services, but not VIP service. IIRC, all were parked by 1986, or so.
CV990 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 16880 times:
In my opinion China received their 707's and then tried to use Boeing 707 technology to "create" a new airplane called Y-10, maybe they wanted to do something like a KC-135 "made in China", but it didn't worked out!!!
Regarding CAAC/Air China 707's there are a few still flying:
Caboclo From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 203 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 16839 times:
Reverse engineering an aircraft seems to be a lot harder than it looks. Even the Soviets had a hard time with it; they built some great clean sheet planes, but when they tried to copy western designs the results weren't so good. Witness their space shuttle. The TU-204/757 is another example. It is certified and they have sold a few, but even the Russian airlines aren't buying very many of them. Getting back to China, I think they will do a lot better with their recent approach of getting foreign airframers to license them the technology and help set up factories in China. Funny how much difference a little honesty can make.
Rampart From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 3157 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 16765 times:
Quoting Caboclo (Reply 2): Getting back to China, I think they will do a lot better with their recent approach of getting foreign airframers to license them the technology and help set up factories in China. Funny how much difference a little honesty can make.
You don't think the upcoming ARJ21 isn't just a little derivative of the MD-95, from when McDD and China were exploring partnerships? Did/will AVIC pay any royalties to Boeing? Maybe they did, I don't know.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 16737 times:
What about the Y-10s? Are any still in flyable condition? Where are they?
Reverse engineering an aircraft seems to be a lot harder than it looks. Even the Soviets had a hard time with it; they built some great clean sheet planes, but when they tried to copy western designs the results weren't so good. Witness their space shuttle. The TU-204/757 is another example.
Don't forget the Tu-2/B-29, but that was a little more successful for the USSR.
Astral From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 16543 times:
It is a reverse engineering aircraft, but not completely. There was an article in a Chinese aviation journal in 2001 talked about the Y10 development. The external 'shape' was very similar, but so was the IL62 compared to VC10, as aircraft design during the 60's period came from the same aerodyamic principles. However, internally the Y10 was quite different than the B707. According to the article, every systems onboard were not the same as that of the B707, and the structure was vastly different. That is why both Boeing and China refere the Y10 as a 'different' aircraft to the B707.
The major problem with the Y10 was its weight, plus with a very small CG shift limit, making it not save for civil application. In fact China never took any of very few Y10 made into any kind of services, and no VIP flights !! One Y10 is now in an air force museum, and I think the Chinese will move it to the aviation museum in Beijing in the near future.
A342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4722 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 16513 times:
Quoting Caboclo (Reply 2): but when they tried to copy western designs the results weren't so good. Witness their space shuttle.
They may have copied the principle, but not the design itself. The only (unmanned) flight the Buran made was successful, but the breakup of the Soviet Union (read: funding problems) prevented further flights.
Marky From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 215 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 16245 times:
The Chinese built MD-80s did all go to Chinese Airlines to begin with, but many have since been sold on, Spirit certainly had a few.
Although they were built in China they were built under very strict oversight by McDonnell-Douglas, so much so that they are covered by the McDonnell-Douglas type certificate and are considered by aviation authorities to have been 'built' by McDonnell-Douglas
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20365 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 16130 times:
It looks like a case of "convergent design." That is to say that form follows function. Given the technology of the time, if you wanted to make an aircraft that was going to perform similarly to a 707, it was probably going to look like one.
In reality, this aircraft looks about as much like a 707 as a DC-8 does. The F100 and DC-9 looked similar, too. It's a turbojet-powered plane with 4 underwing mounted engines. The nose is a different shape, as are the wing-body fairings and engine pylons.
I'm not saying it wasn't based on the 707 or reverse-engineered from one, but it's definately not a carbon-copy.
Rikkus67 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1684 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 16027 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 17): 'm not saying it wasn't based on the 707 or reverse-engineered from one, but it's definately not a carbon-copy.
I have to agree with you there, at least as far as the empenage and nose/cockpit windows go. I would be curious as to the fuselage diameter and wingspan dimensions/flap layout, and how closely they match that of the 707...
AApilot2b From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 574 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 15945 times:
Quote: Your comparing a child's toy with an airliner?
No.... I am stating that I would not actively choose to fly on an airliner that I knew was manufactured in China. After all, the term "Quality" and "Made in China" do not normally go together.
That aside, seriously guys... it is obvious from the photos that this is not a 707 look alike. Why would you defame the beautiful 707 by saying such a thing?
CV990 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 15625 times:
Quoting AApilot2b (Reply 20): Why would you defame the beautiful 707 by saying such a thing?
You're absolutely right and you have "my blessing"!!! Last weekend we had here in LIS the EU/Africa summit and I saw 3 707's, one from Mali already converted with new nacelles, and 2 still original, just with the Q kit, one from Angola - D2-MAN - and one from Romania - YR-ABB - and it was fantastic to see them still flying with a long track of black smoke coming from all 4 engines and the noise was nostalgic...the Angola one was infact an ex: Pan Am 707-32, N886PA, that I saw still in Pan Am colors many years ago!!!
Talking about Chinese 'cloning' cars, I do have to admit to finding it amusing that a company called "China Brilliance" makes a car called the "BS6". Bullsh*t 6, anyone? It recently failed miserably in crash tests, as this LINK so graphically shows.
: "Passenger cabin intrusion" doesn't begin to describe the behavior of several Chinese cars and there's no way I'm even looking at one until (a) they
: A Chinese copy of a Russian copy of a British jetliner?