User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5006
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 3:49 am

Hi!
Am I the only one that thinks the TU-204 is a spitting image of B 752????
Winglets off, and....voilá!
Question: Is the TU-204 aquipped with US engines??
Hejdå/ Bye in swedish
Michael
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
ra-85154
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 10:16 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 3:54 am

Maybe, its just an aircraft with some same specifications and they share their size but I think thats about it...don't forget the resemblance between for instance a DC-9 and a BAC-1-11.
The Tu-204 is powered by Solovjov PS-90 engines but also Rolls Royce engines
Doei / bye in Dutch
Martijn
 
airbus380
Posts: 1575
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:50 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 4:15 am

It is just my personal opinion, but I think that all Russian made aircraft resemble Boeing aircraft and Airbus aircraft in some way.
 
CPDC10-30
Posts: 4681
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 4:30 pm

RE: Airbus380

Mon Oct 08, 2001 4:17 am

Then how about the IL-86? It was built way before the A340 and has a similar layout.
 
airbus380
Posts: 1575
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:50 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 4:24 am

The IL-86 is like the 707 but a wider body in my opinion.
 
Guest

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 4:44 am

There is a similar look to the 757, but that is pretty much where it ends. The Tu-204 is FBW...the 757-200 isn't. Powered by different engines (of course).

Airbus380 (how are the Russian language courses going?  Insane )

The Il-86 is nothing like the 707.

But what aircraft is the Il-96 a rip-off of?
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 5:07 am

Airbus380, either you are ignorant, or you are purposely over-generalizing for some reason.

Yes, many russian airliners do look similar, but others do not. And if you widen it to russian aviation in general, it becomes even less accurate.

As for the Il-86 being like the 707 - If you sufficiently loosen your standards for comparison, everything looks alike.
 
airbus380
Posts: 1575
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:50 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 5:22 am

Hey all you Russian aviation buffs, did you ever hear about the KGB stealing Concord plans, building the TU-144, and taking credit for the design?
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 5:29 am

Airbus380 - Have you ever compared a Tu-144 and Concorde?

Plans might have been stolen - but the Tupolev folks obviously didn't follow them very well.  Smile
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 5:39 am

A380, Some pictures for you - note the exact same wing and engine placement  Smile


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Philippe noret



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Frank Zahorik



And the exact same tail/fin section  Smile


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Konstantin von Wedelstaedt



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Peter Vercruijsse

 
User avatar
Crosswind
Posts: 2536
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2000 4:34 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 6:47 am

Aviatsiya,
Of course a "Westernised" TU-204 is available with RB211-535E4 engines, the same engine that powers the B757.


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Faerberg Leonid



I think it will be the first JAR-certified Russian airliner when the lengthy task of translating all the aircraft manuals into English has been completed.

TNT are supposed to be seriously interesed in the RR powered TU-204 for their night freight ops.

Regards
CROSSWIND
 
donder10
Posts: 6944
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2001 5:29 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 6:51 am

It really does look like a 757 but with the winglets of the 737NG and the nose cone of the A32X.
 
airbus380
Posts: 1575
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:50 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 10:39 am

The Russians did steal the Concord design, and made a few VERY minor changes to try to cover it up. Just like Bill Gates allegedly stole the Microsoft OS GUI from Steve Jobs if you have ever seen Pirates of Silicon Valley.
 
sushka
Posts: 4657
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 1999 12:33 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 10:43 am

Airbus380, Youre taking Russian lessons? Molodets! Zhelayu uspeha.
Pershoyu Spravoyu Litaki!
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 10:51 am

"a few VERY minor changes"??? A380, you are kidding right? (I hope)

Well, then there must be a lot of corporate espionage from Airbus, because the A380 is just a 747 with "a few VERY minor changes".  Smile
 
9V-SPK
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:53 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 10:57 am

Oh come on chill out you guys!There's nothing to argue actually!

From my point of view, EVEN the Russians stole the design (Example Concorde - T144) well obviously the Concorde wins.You have to admit that Sushka, that after the TU144 crashed in the Paris Airshow and since then Concorde was the leader for Super-Sonic jets, obviously.But i still wondered why Russian government didn't release the Tu-144 anymore.I think it's a wonderful airliner.

Some of the planes from Russia MAY BE a copy-cat of American Planes, but also could be the other way round.I've read some airliners books, and they mentioned stealing designs from the Boeing Company.Sushka, usually the Russian Airliners were build to compete with Western Airliners, but actually there's no harm.Russia is a big and strong Aviation country, and both Western Countries and Russia had different markets fo different planes.Airbus380, there's also the chance that Wstern Countries would wanna steal the designs of Russian.

Myself think that it the 752 and TU-204 does look like, from its appearance.Maybe most parts look the same, just like they have 2 engines, a pair of wings, tails etc, but still they are totally different!Russian Made, American Made!

Best Regards
 
sushka
Posts: 4657
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 1999 12:33 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 11:01 am

I really like the IL62 but how could you think up a plane that looks just like a VC10 without some sort copying.
Pershoyu Spravoyu Litaki!
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 11:25 am

C'mon guys... Even if planes look the similar externally, they would probably be vastly different "under the hood", so copying the layout doesn't save you much work, since you still have to engineer and build the plane. (This would be necessary for a soviet builder anyway, since their tools and standars were different)

Planes also usually look alike becuase they are created to with similiar (or identical) requirements. Given 60's technology, and the task of building a Mach 2 jetliner, you are bound to end up with superficially similar designs. For example, lets consider the problems encountered for a supersonic transpor design:
1. Low air resistance needed - Solution: Use a long slender body with sharp nose
2. Sharp nose gives very poor pilot visibility during landing - Solution: make the nose pivotable
3. We need a wing that can preform well in sub-, trans-, and super-sonic flight - Solution: Look at existing Mach 2 fighter, a delta wing works well.
And on and on and on...

So given the same requirements, it is not unusual to end up with something similar.

But did KGB steal the Concorde design and show it to the Tupolev design firm? Oh most likely - But they chose some different design paths that made having the Concorde design pretty much worthless. The Concordes blended delta-wing would provide different handling and windtunnel data than the Tu-144's "staggered" delta wing and canard.

For the same reason, why do Boeings and Airbus' planes look so similar? Does that mean that they steal from each other? Or is the similarity between the 777 and A330 just a product of similar requirements?

The answer should be straightforward...
 
sushka
Posts: 4657
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 1999 12:33 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 11:31 am

Im not saying that they copied, but maybe they thought that the VC10 was a neat design so they wanted to make one just like it, or vice versa
Pershoyu Spravoyu Litaki!
 
9V-SPK
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2001 11:53 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 11:35 am

Well...i guess we'll never know the answer!
Afterall, we aren't spies and have no clues, we only guess!

Best Regards
 
airbus380
Posts: 1575
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:50 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 12:34 pm

A show on Discovery Wings said that the TU-144 is like the Concord with the exception of the canards and minor changes on engine position. Where do you think the name Concordski came from?
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 12:42 pm

"Someone on TV said so, so it must be true!" - Gaaah. I give up.  Sad Goodnight.
 
airbus380
Posts: 1575
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:50 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 12:59 pm

"Konkordski": The Tu-144
What's the old saying? "Industrial espionage is the sincerest form of flattery?" With the Americans hard at work creating the SST and the British and French working together on the Concorde, the Soviets decided they had to have one too. And not just any one; it would be the biggest and fastest too. And where better to start than with the actual blueprints for the Concorde prototype? While the Soviet Union did not produce innovative engineers in the same quantities as the West, the Soviet Union did produce something perhaps even better: World-class spies.

Riding high on the success of Sputnik and other space achievements, Nikita Khrushchev was not about to let his perceived technological lead over the west slip over the development of little more than an airplane. He gave his vast spy network their orders and thus undertook an effort involving exchange students, executives for the Soviet Aeroflot airline in Paris, and even top KGB agents. Though the intelligence gathering alone probably involved more man-hours than the British and French spent total to make the Concorde, the Soviets had enough "borrowed" technology to proceed.

One Step Ahead
The Soviet goal was not only to copy what the British and French (and separately, the Americans) were doing, but to beat them to finish line too. In charge of getting the Soviet project finished before the Concorde was Andrei Nicholayvich Tupolev. Tupolev had designed many Soviet aircraft (even while jailed by Stalin in the early 40s) that had bore his name (he's the "Tu" in Tu-144).

As the prototyping project was nearing completing, the Soviets learned the Concorde prototype was going to fly for the first time in early 1969. The project was put into overdrive to ensure they flew theirs first. The goal then became to fly the Tu-144 by the end of 1968.

First Test Flight of Supersonic Commercial Aircraft
The first flight of a supersonic passenger plane took place on December 31, 1968 on the secret Zhukovsky Airfield near Moscow. The flight was not announced to the world in advance so that if something went wrong, they would not have to admit failure. Among the invited crowd that cloudy day to witness the historic flight were the 80-year-old Tupolev and his son Alexei, who would inherit his fathers role upon the elder's death in 1972. As the delta-winged aircraft made its way down the snow-covered runway, nobody was prouder at having beat the Concorde (by two months) than Tupolev. It was the crowning achievement in a life that began before the Wright brothers even tinkered with bicycle.


Western Response
When the Soviets sent pictures of the triumph around the world, the French and British, who knew what the KGB had been up to and countered by giving phony plans to known spies, were not amused. The Western press soon nicknamed the Concorde look-alike the "Konkordski."

However, in their race to be first, the Soviets had taken shortcuts: Where they did not have complete blueprints for a critical part or when they did but they couldn't decipher the complex plans, they engineered it themselves. But they did so without the experience of the Western engineers who had designed each part to work well with all the rest. This lead to some fairly serious deficiencies in the design. Most notably, the plane was far less stable at slower speeds which lead to some harrowing landings.

The Soviets went back to the drawing board and radically re-engineered the Tu-144 and were ready in early 1973 to show off their new marvel to the world. This new design relied far less heavily on "borrowed" technology from the West and even featured an innovative feature called cannards, which were two smaller wings immediately behind the cockpit. These cannards provided more lift for takeoff and more stability at landing (the were retracted during flight).

1973 Paris Airshow
With the new and improved Tu-144 ready, the Soviets wanted to show off their new plane at the most prestigious event in aviation: The annual Paris Airshow. This is where the best and latest aircraft are shown to potential buyers and the world. As Boeing had all but given up on the SST, this show turned into a showdown between the Concorde and the Tu-144. Neither had flown a single passenger yet and the world waited to see who would dominate supersonic transport in the Super70s and beyond.

Before a third-day crowd of 200,000, the Concorde, flown by British pilots John Farley and Andy Jones, went first and wowed the public with speed and maneuvers never seen on a commercial craft before. Then it was the Soviets turn. The Tu-144 taxied and took off. It made some impressive 360 degree turns above the runway and other maneuvers similar to what the Concorde had just done. What happened next is best summarized by John Farley who watched it all from the ground:

"Because there was no cloud, he could go up and up and up, and, I don't know, three and a half, four thousand feet. This thing was just going up, looking at it as we were, you know, going away from us like this. And then suddenly, it just very abruptly leveled off. I mean, really violently. And it did something that you never see big airplanes do: Really violently change their pitch attitude. And both Andy and I went, "Ooooh!" You got this vision of this aircraft coming down. And it has to do with the angle, the speed, and the distance remaining when you think, 'That's not right.' And I said to Andy, "He's lost it." And at that point, with the aircraft still fairly well up, probably -- I don't know -- 1,500 feet or a bit less, it started to break up and had clearly been overstressed."

All six aboard the Tu-144 were killed as were 8 French citizens on the ground. Why did the plane make the sudden move to level off? Only since the opening of the former Soviet Union has evidence surfaced to back up what had long been suspected. A French Mirage fighter had secretly been ordered to shoot footage of the plane from above it and, of course, the Soviet pilots were not informed. The sudden, fatal maneuver was made to avoid a collision with the Mirage. The French government colluded with the Soviets to cover up the story (they conveniently lost the black box recorder and never publicly released a full report). In return, the French would not claim in their abbreviated report (little more than a press release) that there was anything mechanically wrong with the Soviet aircraft.

Commercial Success? Nyet!
Despite the cover-up, the damage was done and the Tu-144 was destined to become little more than a footnote in the history of aviation. On Nov. 1, 1977, a Tu-144 flew from Moscow to Alma-Ata, Kazakhstan, making its first passenger flight. But due to mechanical problems it was unable to maintain even its modest one flight per week schedule. A total of 17 Tu-144's were manufactured, including a prototype and five D models.

Reverse Industrial Espionage

What's good for the goose... In 1993, the Americans - led by Boeing and NASA - decided to take advantage of the thawing of the Cold War and created a program to learn what they could from the design of the Tu-144. A June '93 agreement signed by Al Gore and Russian prime minister Viktor Chernomyrdin created the project which was jointly funded by NASA's High Speed Research (HSR) program and Boeing. What was in it for the Russians? Russian pride at showing the Americans something they were unable to produce was certainly a factor but the American's hard currency was the primary motivator.

A Tu-144 that had been in storage for years was obtained and modified by the Tupolev Aircraft Design Bureau in 1996 creating what NASA called the Tu-144LL Flying Laboratory. It was hoped the knowledge gained from the flights would benefit NASA & Boeing's in their efforts to "develop the technology that may enable design of an efficient, environmentally friendly second-generation supersonic transport in this country."

This program involved eight experiments - six aboard the aircraft and two ground test engine experiments. Between November 1996 and February 1998 the Tu-144LL flew 19 research flights. The follow-on Tu-144LL program encompassed about eight flights, focusing on extensions of five experiments from the first project and two new experiments to measure fuel system temperatures and to define in-flight wing deflections. You can learn more about this program from NASA.

Inside the Tu-144
The Tu-144 required a crew of 3 and could carry 140 passengers 6,500 kilometers at a top speed of 2,500 kph. Its wingspan was 28.8 meters, its length was 65.7 meters and it carried four Kuznetsov NK-144 afterburning turbofan engines to a maximum altitude of 18,000 meters. Without passengers and cargo, the Tu-144 weighed in at 85,000 kilograms. The Tu-144LL is constructed mostly of VAD-23, a light aluminum alloy, with integrally stiffened panels. Titanium and stainless steel were used for the leading edges, elevons, rudder and under-surface of the rear fuselage.


Satisfied??

Warmest regards,

Airbus380
 
Wasilenko
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2000 4:56 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 7:33 pm

Interesting!

Airbus380 you had forgoten to make one little statment however, "Tu-144 won the first prize at the Paris Air Show and Concorde did not!" Although it is true that Russian engineers did have Concorde blueprints it is very imporatant not to forget that a lot of design analysis came from russian military aircraft such as these shown below:


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Paul Chandler


WOW, Look here is another copy of Concorde, it has a pivotable nose just like Concorde!

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Dmitry Avdeev



Now back to the question.
How about Yak-40, as I understand Western Aviation had nothing even close to it for at least 20 years. Not to forget the fact that Yak-40 was the world's first passenger jet to meet the Ch3.

Tu-134 was the world's first airliner to have its tailplane fully positioned on the top of the stabiliser, now how many planes use such configuration now?

Wasilenko
 
sterne82
Posts: 394
Joined: Sun May 07, 2000 4:50 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 7:34 pm

Little correction; the TU-204 is not powered by "Soljolev" engines but by Perm PS-90A, the same than the IL-96-300 is using.

Moreover, the TU-204 and TU-214 could be powered by PS-90A, NK-93 and RR-211-524. And you could put russian or american avionics in it... That's a true flexible airliners, no?

Indeed, the B752 and TU-204 looks closely the same, they are built different way, and the russians engineers are well know for building structures which are able to run more than 30 years... I do not know if an B752 will be able to fly as much as a TU-204 will be able to?

That's not critics about B752 but only some thoughts and point of vieuw. Badfully, the russians airliners have such a bad reputation in western europe and Usa... but that's real good airliners... have a look to the IL-96-300, Il-96-400, TU204/214/234 and TU334 these airliners needs to be more know.

Cheers,

Benjamin
 
Wasilenko
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2000 4:56 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 7:43 pm

Another little corection Benjamin PS stands for PAVEL SOLOVIEV The engines were renamed after the engineer died in the early 90s. Pavel Soloviev was one of the best turbine engineers in Russia.

Wasilenko
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 11:09 pm

A380, I'm aware of the information in the article - And I still don't see how it contradicts what I have written in this thread.

My original point stands - I'm sure they had the plans (the KGB were good), but they did not appear to follow them well if you examine the shape and details of the planes. There are plenty of photographs on this site of both planes - You are welcome to check them out.


 
Guest

RE: TU-204= B752?

Mon Oct 08, 2001 11:53 pm

It, as all Russian aircraft are, is very crude to say the least. A sorry example of the 757.
 
airbus380
Posts: 1575
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 6:50 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

Technical data
Type Tu-204-120
Function Passenger
Year 1992
Crew 3
Engines 2*19500kg Rolls-Roys RB211-535E4
Length 46.2m
Wingspan 42m
Wing area 182.4m2
Empty weight 58300kg
Loaded weight 103000kg
Landing weight 88200kg
Wing Load (kg/m2) 565
Trust-to-Weight 0.38
Cruise Speed 850km/h
Airstrip demand 1800m
Range 6500km
Cruise Ceiling 12600m
Payload
Load 21000kg
Cabin LxWxH 30.18x3.57x2.16m3
Seats (economy) 214
Seats (economy+business) 196
Seats (economy+business+first) 168

B757-200
Wing span 38.05 m (124 ft 10 in)
Wing chord: at root 8.20 m (26 ft 11 in)
at tip 1.73 m (5 ft 8 in)
Wing aspect ratio 7.8
Length: overall 47.32 m (155 ft 3 in)
fuselage 46.96 m (154 ft 10 in)
Height overall 13.56 m (44 ft 6 in)
Tailplane span 15.21 m (49 ft 11 in)
Wheel track 7.32 m (24 ft 0 in)
Wheelbase 18.29 m (60 ft 0 in)
Passenger doors (two, fwd, port):
Height 1.83 m (6 ft 0 in)
Width 0.84 m (2 ft 9 in)
Passenger door (rear, port): Height 1.83 m (6 ft 0 in)
Width 0.76 m (2 ft 6 in)
Service door (fwd, stbd): Height 1.65 m (5 ft 5 in)
Width 0.76 m (2 ft 6 in)
Service door (stbd, opposite second passenger door):
Height 1.83 m (6 ft 0 in)
Width 0.84 m (2 ft 9 in)
Service door (rear, stbd): Height 1.83 m (6 ft 0 in)
Width 0.76 m (2 ft 6 in)
Emergency exits (four, overwing):
Height 0.97 m (3 ft 2 in)
Width 0.51 m (1 ft 8 in)
Emergency exits, optional (two, aft of wings):
Height 1.32 m (4 ft 4 in)
Width 0.61 m (2 ft 0 in)

Performance (with 201 passengers; at max basic T-O weight except where indicated)
Max operating Mach No. (MMO): A, B, C, D 0.86
Cruising speed: A, B, C, D M0.80
Approach speed at S/L, flaps down, max landing weight:
A, C 132 kt (245 km/h; 152 mph) EAS
B, D 137 kt (254 km/h; 158 mph)
Initial cruising height: A 11,675 m (38,300 ft)
B 10,790 m (35,400 ft)
C 11,795 m (38,700 ft)
D 10,880 m (35,700 ft)
Runway LCN at ramp weight of 100,244 kg (221,000 lb), optimum tyre pressure and subgrade C flexible pavement: H40 × 14.5-19.0 tyres 36
T-O field length (S/L, 29ºC):
A 1,814 m (5,950 ft)
B 2,378 m (7,800 ft)
C 1,677 m (5,500 ft)
D 2,104 m (6,900 ft)
Landing field length at max landing weight:
A 1,463 m (4,800 ft)
B 1,555 m (5,100 ft)
C 1,418 m (4,650 ft)
D 1,494 m (4,900 ft)
Range with 201 passengers:
A 2,570 n miles (4,759 km; 2,957 miles)
B 3,930 n miles (7,278 km; 4,522 miles)*
C 2,375 n miles (4,398 km; 2,733 miles)
D 3,695 n miles (6,843 km; 4,252 miles)*

Height (m): 13.56
Length (m): 47.32
Max Range (nm): 2570
Max T-O Weight (kg): 99790
Max Wing Load (kg/m2): 538.7
Wing Span (m): 38.05

Do I see any similarities??? This is funny. The TU-204 was made to compete with the 757 and Airbus A319/320/321 market! Wow, the TU-204 has been such a great success. Wink/being sarcastic
 
sterne82
Posts: 394
Joined: Sun May 07, 2000 4:50 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:57 am

Excuse me Wasilenko, I didn't knew that.

Next time I'll check my sources before speaking!

Benjamin
 
glider
Posts: 292
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 6:38 am

RE: Airbus380

Tue Oct 09, 2001 1:50 am

When I was at the airport of Caïro; we were transprted by bus to the terminal. We passed by an Air Cairo Aircraft which I thought was a B757. I hadn't seen the winglets... But indeed my first thought was that it was a 757.
So, in sme ways, I agree with you Solnabo

Best Regards,
Glider
 
User avatar
B737-112
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 1999 6:01 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Tue Oct 09, 2001 4:51 am

Why does a "modern" TU-204 still require 3 cockpit crew? It's a glass FMS right?
 
sterne82
Posts: 394
Joined: Sun May 07, 2000 4:50 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Tue Oct 09, 2001 4:41 pm

Indeed that's a EFIS flight deck, but when the aircraft have been designed, Aeroflot asked to put a 3 man crew instead of a 2 man crew. But if you asked Tupolev, you might have a 2 man crew on the TU-204

For exemple, during communist times, it was 6 men who was used on TU-154... with this system, all the members could have a look to the others one... no unemployement problems?!

Cheers,

Benjamin
 
trintocan
Posts: 2725
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 6:02 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Tue Oct 09, 2001 11:13 pm

The TU-204 could be considered the Russian equivalent of the 757-200 but is certainly not identical even though the resemblance is striking. The 204 does incorporate more advanced technologies such as fly-by-wire whereas the 757, by being designed for the US markets, retained more traditional controls.

I have only seen 1 TU-204 (in LGW, taking off for Freetown in Sierra Leone) and it does look marvellous, the winglets add a new element not seen in the 757-200. Hopefully many more are produced - the recent deals with China and with local airlines could see more being built although the uncertainty now may be a deterrent.

Trintocan.
Hop to it, fly for life!
 
OO-AOG
Posts: 1395
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2000 1:24 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Wed Oct 10, 2001 4:33 am

We used to lease a TU-204 for cargo ops and I've enjoyed a jump seat on it once. This aircraft is really nice, the cockpit is EFIS and indeed, there's a small F/E station. Strangely there's no GPS but 3 INS. Flight deck instruments are in russian but there's an available english langage option offered by Tupolev for western operators. This a/c had a dispatch reliability approaching 100% (far better than our older Boeings and Airbuses), the 204 could definately be a good workhorse in many western operator's fleets. Main problems would be certification, maintenance and spares...very expensive to organise for a small scale operation though. Anyway the russians have the technology for sure.
Falcon....like a limo but with wings
 
tsully
Posts: 680
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 5:02 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Wed Oct 10, 2001 6:18 am

I think the Tu-204 looks very similar to the 757.
Have you ever seen Russia's "spaceshuttle" in Gorky Park, in Moscow?

It looks (almost) exactly like our space shuttles here in the States. I am convinced our design was copied. In any case, the Russians ran out of funding for their shuttle and it now serves as a very cheesy amusement park "ride" in Gorky Park.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy I use the term "ride" very loosely; you must physically rock your seat, otherwise there is no movement.


пика (goodbye in Russian)

tsully
I love America. I guess that makes me Bush's poodle, but I'd rather be a dog in New York City than a prince in Riyadh.
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Wed Oct 10, 2001 10:34 am

The Buran is a story by itself... Yes, it is an aerodynamic copy, but the wing is placed further forward due to more forward center of gravity. Otherwise the inside is completely different, as is the delivery system to orbit.

The "Buran" in Gorky park is not the real thing, its an old aerodynamic test article. The real "Buran" is in storage in Baikonur on top of an Energia booster mockup, seemingly ready to go - Unfortunately it was too expensive to keep up, so the electronics and interior have degraded over time beyond any hope of salvage.

http://k26.com/buran/Future/1.01/1.01.html

Too bad really, since many consider to actually be a better and more capable design than the US shuttle, although it was/is less technologically advanced. It did however have one unmanned flight, completed two earth orbits and landed using a autonomous computer landing system, which is very impressive.
 
EssentialPowr
Posts: 1646
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2000 10:30 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Wed Oct 10, 2001 11:02 am



The DC3 (Il-3), B29 (Bull), F111(Su-24), F18 (Mig29) F15 (Su27)B1 (Blackjack), 727 (Tu154), 757 (Tu204), C141 (Il76), and Space Shuttle (Buran) were all closely copied. Not that the Soviets couldn't create good native desgins, but a large part of the early Soviet design bureaus focused on "reverse engineering" b/c it saved R&D costs.

The DC3 and B29 were DIRECT Copies, which started the trend...
 
IMissPiedmont
Posts: 6200
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 12:58 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Wed Oct 10, 2001 12:18 pm

TransSwedes examples of "exact" wing and tail have made me consider another visit to an optomitrist. Hell, to my old eyes they don't look anything alike.
The day you stop learning is the day you should die.
 
BA
Posts: 10133
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Wed Oct 10, 2001 12:44 pm

These days there are many aircraft that look a like.

The 757 is a great example. Of course, the TU-204 is very similar to the 757. Same goes with the A321.

Eventually, we are going to see more aircraft that look alike.

The B-1B Lancer Bomber closely resembles the Russian Tupolev TU-160 Black Jack Bomber.

Tupolev TU-160 Black Jack:

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Dmitry Avdeev


Rockwell B-1B Lancer:

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Pierre Lacombe



These days aircraft manufactuers are always copying off of other aircraft designs in some way.

The same goes for cars. Lexus' are starting to look very similar to Mercedes Benz E-Series and S-Series cars.  Smile

Regards.
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: TU-204= B752?

Wed Oct 10, 2001 11:22 pm

IMissPiedmont wrote:
>TransSwedes examples of "exact" wing and tail have
>made me consider another visit to an optomitrist. Hell,
>to my old eyes they don't look anything alike

Exactly!  Smile Didn't you see the smileys? I was being ironic, pointing out the obvious differences.

EssentialPowr wrote:
>The DC3 (Il-3), B29 (Bull), F111(Su-24), F18 (Mig29)
>F15 (Su27)B1 (Blackjack), 727 (Tu154), 757 (Tu204),
>C141 (Il76), and Space Shuttle (Buran) were all
>closely copied.

Some maybe, but certainly NOT the F-18/Mig-29 and F15/Su-27. They fulfill similar roles, but there is no copying going on there - they look vastly different, with different aerodynamics, and the russian aircraft have superior manueverability.

But even most of the rest are doubtful - C-141/Il-76? Gimme a break... With that kind of comparison, all planes look basically alike, and all cars are spitting image of each other.
 
Guest

RE: TU-204= B752?

Thu Oct 11, 2001 12:19 am

EssentialPower

There is a reason the Li-2 (not the Il-3....the Il-3 was a fighter designed by Polikarpov) is a copy of the DC-3.....because it was licenced-built in the Soviet Union.

The B-29 was ripped off by the Soviets and turned the Tu-4, which was not so successful.

The Su-24 shares no real similarities to the F-111, except for the swing-wing design and concept.

The MiG-29 looks nothing like an F/A-18, and the only thing in common they may have is their role.

The Su-27 kinda looks like an F-15, and to the untrained eye they do look identical, however, the Su-27 is in no way a rip-off of the "western" F-15.

The Tu-160 and the B-1 do look similar, but judging by the fact that the Tu-160 had been in development for sometime before the B-1, is it at all possible that the Soviet design was stolen, and then reduced in size to produce the B-1?

The Tu-154 a rip of the 727? Does that mean the 727 is a rip off of the Trident?

The Tu-204 shows no similarities to the 757 except for the look of the aircraft, and even then, the Tu-204 looks more alike an A321 than it does a 757. Add to the fact, that the Tu-204 is probably more technologically advanced than the older 757 model.

The Il-76 is said to look similar to a C-141, but personally I see no similarities at all, and I fail to understand why the Soviets would steal a design which is some 10 years old, and then produce an aircraft which is technically and operationally more advanced and efficient.
 
2000first
Posts: 162
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2001 11:50 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Wed Oct 17, 2001 11:31 pm

dont forget about the Illyshin62.... it was a blatant copy of the VC-10!
 
Areopagus
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 12:31 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Thu Oct 18, 2001 1:26 am

Aviatsiya, I agree with most of what you said. Today's airliners mostly look like the 707, Caravelle, or A300, but that doesn't mean they're rip-offs. It just means that highly efficient configurations have been found and proven by time.

But I must take issue with your statement: The Tu-160 and the B-1 do look similar, but judging by the fact that the Tu-160 had been in development for sometime before the B-1, is it at all possible that the Soviet design was stolen, and then reduced in size to produce the B-1?

The B-1A first flew in December 1974; the Tu-160 first flew in December 1981. There is no chance that the B-1 copied the Tu-160.
 
XXXX10
Posts: 702
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2000 7:10 am

Horses For Courses

Thu Oct 18, 2001 2:04 am

It should be remembered that the Russion aircraft are designed/built with different criterea

Western manufacturers like Boeing and Airbus are in competition with each other and are under pressure to produce the most effeicent designs for the airlines.

There is almost no competition amongst the Russian and Ukranian plane makers (although they are tring to now compete with the west) so they are not under the same pressures.

The Western aircraft whilst being more efficient are much more expensive to buy, while the Russian aircraft can be acquired for a fraction of the cost.

It is also worth remembering that the Russian aircraft are designed to operate at more basic airfields and climate extremes which also makes them different.
 
lapa_saab340
Posts: 391
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2001 8:42 pm

RE: TU-204= B752?

Fri Oct 19, 2001 3:32 am

Airbus380, I don't know if you're joking or if you truly are that ignorant. While it's true that some designers 'borrow' ideas from others (The T-tail and rear engine config of the BAC-111, the three-engine layout used on the Trident, the rear engine T-tail config of the VC-10), I don't think it's fair to say that Russian designs are crude copies of western aircraft, as some pointed out. Somebody also pointed out that the Russians copy fighter designs from the West, while you forget that the F-15 was itself a 'copy' of the MiG-25 when it was designed.

To say the Tu-144 was copied from the Concorde is ridiculous. As TransSwede pointed out, a lot of the similarities in design are due to the fact that they were made for similar missions. The proposals by Boeing and Lockheed were not that much different themselves either, and in fact the Tu-144 more closely resembles the Lockheed proposal than Concorde. The Tu-144 uses a double-delta shape, absent on Concorde; the engine placement was different in the early Tu-144s; and also if you look at Concorde from the front you'll notice the shape is a lot more complex than the Tupolev's. Like someone said earlier, if they DID steal the blueprints, they must've used them as sandwich wrappers or toilet paper.

And if Russian aircraft are such pieces of junk, could anyone please explain what the Cold War was all about? The space race too?