B-29 vs. Tu-4
JDupre5762
Does anyone know if a photographic comparison study has been done detailing the
similarities and differences between the B-29 and the Soviet copy the Tu-4?
I know that the myth is that the B-29 was copied in every detail but could that
really be true? I find it hard to believe that Tupolev would have copied
every fastener, circuit breaker, switch, valve, light fixture and instrument,
etc., etc. when there were already equivalents available from Soviet industry.
Thanks to all
Regards,
John Dupre'
Massachusetts, U.S.A.
Venik
resulting Tu-4 was a better plane than the original B-29.
Venik
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Venik's Military Aviation Page
http://pw1.netcom.com/~venik/index.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------
When the American Cheif of Naval Operations, Admiral Ernest J. King,
remarked upon the stirring courage of the Red Army, Stalin replied,
"It takes a brave man not to be a hero in the Red Army."
Grey Ghost
--------------89D3E9FE6A307295CAB300EA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Wait Guys:
I have seen Many pics of a plane called the Tu-4 and it did not have any thing
close to the likes of a B-29. It did though have a great similarity to a XB-70.
Accept of a few things like a nose cone that would go flush with the fusalage and
it was smaller but still had a claimed Mach 3. any one else see this???
The Gray Ghost
____________________________________________________________________
JDupre5762 wrote:
> Does anyone know if a photographic comparison study has been done detailing the
> similarities and differences between the B-29 and the Soviet copy the Tu-4?
>
> I know that the myth is that the B-29 was copied in every detail but could that
> really be true? I find it hard to believe that Tupolev would have copied
> every fastener, circuit breaker, switch, valve, light fixture and instrument,
> etc., etc. when there were already equivalents available from Soviet industry.
>
> Thanks to all
>
> Regards,
>
> John Dupre'
> Massachusetts, U.S.A.
--------------89D3E9FE6A307295CAB300EA
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML>
Wait Guys:
<BR>I have seen Many pics of a plane called the Tu-4 and it did not have
any thing close to the likes of a B-29. It did though have a great similarity
to a XB-70. Accept of a few things like a nose cone that would go flush
with the fusalage and it was smaller but still had a claimed Mach 3. any
one else see this???
<UL>The Gray Ghost</UL>
____________________________________________________________________
<P>JDupre5762 wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>Does anyone know if a photographic comparison study
has been done detailing the
<BR> similarities and differences between the B-29 and the Soviet
copy the Tu-4?
<P>I know that the myth is that the B-29 was copied in every detail but
could that
<BR> really be true? I find it hard to believe that Tupolev
would have copied
<BR> every fastener, circuit breaker, switch, valve, light fixture
and instrument,
<BR> etc., etc. when there were already equivalents available from
Soviet industry.
<P>Thanks to all
<P>Regards,
<P>John Dupre'
<BR>Massachusetts, U.S.A.</BLOCKQUOTE>
</HTML>
--------------89D3E9FE6A307295CAB300EA--
Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci
In article <19971012164...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
JDupre5762 <jdupr...@aol.com> wrote:
>Does anyone know if a photographic comparison study has been done detailing the
> similarities and differences between the B-29 and the Soviet copy the Tu-4?
>
>I know that the myth is that the B-29 was copied in every detail but could that
> really be true? I find it hard to believe that Tupolev would have copied
> every fastener, circuit breaker, switch, valve, light fixture and instrument,
> etc., etc. when there were already equivalents available from Soviet industry.
While there may well have been some "of the shelf" bits and peices, the
B-29 was seriously cutting edge technology, and likely duplicating even
the more mundain features would have been an important boost to the Soviet
technical base. Certainly the engines, computers, and electronics were
copied peice by peice, not having indiginious versions to draw from.
Then, the Tu4 was fitted with native features too, like 23mm cannons
and home-grown radars.
Suoperficially, the only obvious differnces between a Tu4 and B-29 would
be things like different radio arials, un-cuffed propellors on the Tu4,
maybe a missing small observer's dome up forward, different guns in the
turrets and simular nit-picks.
Toomas Tyrk
--------------0F92EC09503520ED86C513EC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Grey Ghost wrote:
>
>
> Wait Guys:
> I have seen Many pics of a plane called the Tu-4 and it did not have
> any thing close to the likes of a B-29. It did though have a great
> similarity to a XB-70. Accept of a few things like a nose cone that
> would go flush with the fusalage and it was smaller but still had a
> claimed Mach 3. any one else see this???
>
> The Gray Ghost
>
It was T-4, not the Tu-4. It was construcyed by Sukhoi Bureau.
Toomas Türk
--------------0F92EC09503520ED86C513EC
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML>
Grey Ghost wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<P>Wait Guys:
<BR>I have seen Many pics of a plane called the Tu-4 and it did not have
any thing close to the likes of a B-29. It did though have a great similarity
to a XB-70. Accept of a few things like a nose cone that would go flush
with the fusalage and it was smaller but still had a claimed Mach 3. any
one else see this???
<UL>The Gray Ghost</UL>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>It was T-4, not the Tu-4. It was construcyed by Sukhoi Bureau.
<P>Toomas Türk</HTML>
--------------0F92EC09503520ED86C513EC--
Carlo Kopp
John S. Shinal wrote:
>
> Say, now THAT'S a unique warbird, true ? And knowing the
> fUSSR, there's probably a hundred of them in a storage in Siberia,
> earmarked for "reservist" replacement crews !
There were reports of the PLA-AF still maintaining several Tu-4s, some
of which were re-engined with turboprops. Anybody else have any details
to add ?
C
Massa
Venik, Shut Up.
If the russians were capable of doing better, they wouldn't have to copy our
design. You have too much pride in a country that is as poor and run-down as
it is.
Venik wrote in message <344187...@ix.netcom.com>...
>JDupre5762 wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone know if a photographic comparison study has been done
detailing the
>> similarities and differences between the B-29 and the Soviet copy the
Tu-4?
>>
>> I know that the myth is that the B-29 was copied in every detail but
could that
>> really be true? I find it hard to believe that Tupolev would have
copied
>> every fastener, circuit breaker, switch, valve, light fixture and
instrument,
>> etc., etc. when there were already equivalents available from Soviet
industry.
>>
>> Thanks to all
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> John Dupre'
>> Massachusetts, U.S.A.
Yevgeniy Chizhikov
Grey Ghost wrote:
>
> Wait Guys:
> I have seen Many pics of a plane called the Tu-4 and it did not have
> any thing close to the likes of a B-29. It did though have a great
> similarity to a XB-70. Accept of a few things like a nose cone that
> would go flush with the fusalage and it was smaller but still had a
> claimed Mach 3. any one else see this???
>
> The Gray Ghost
You mistaken here. You have a picture of T-4 supersonic bomber designed
by Sukhoy.
Yevgeniy Chizhikov.
Venik
Massa wrote:
>
> Venik, Shut Up.
> If the russians were capable of doing better, they wouldn't have to copy our
> design. You have too much pride in a country that is as poor and run-down as
> it is.
Russia doesn't have to be rich and prosperous for me to be proud of it.
Tupolev copied B-29 at Stalin's insistence. As you realize, Stalin
wasn't the guy you could say "no" to and live to write about it in your
memoirs. The fact that Tu-4 s better than B-29 can hardly be argued. Why
don't you follow your own advize and find an NG according to your IQ.
Massa
Shut up, BOY! Go back to that hellhole that you call HOME!
We invented the airplane to begin with, we invented the computer you are
using, and we designed the Internet. And I think Dr. Goddard was refining
his rockets way before you had missiles.
Yevgeniy Chizhikov wrote in message
<34426753...@popmail.csuohio.edu>...
>Massa wrote:
>>
>> Admit it, Venik- We're the innovators, and you're the duplicators.
>
>You copied everything from Germans first, not much innovations from your
>side. There were large numbers of German scientist work for you, bigger
>than for Russians. We also put first sattelite, you duplicate us. We fly
>into space, you duplicate us, we launched first ICBM, you duplicate us.
>Space station, once again duplicated. Stealth technology had been
>started by Russian, you duplicated. Heard about Ye-8, most favorable
>designe of light fighter in Europe and American X-31, duplicated once
>again. It is abivious that airdinamics is not strong point of Americans.
>Through-the-tube missiles, pathetic atempt to duplicate. Or VLS,
>close-in weapons systems, cruise missiles for submarines, once again
>pure duplication. US companies buying Russian rocket engines, sound to
>me like they do not believe that they could do better than old Soviet
>technology. It is not even a duplication, but simple use of foreign
>technology. We have to just wait a little and you will duplicate
>off-boresight missiles and helmet-mounted sight, just like you did with
>trust-vectoring. Europeans and Israel already doing so. Americans usualy
>on the slow side. So, better YOU shut your mouth.
>
>Yevgeniy Chizhikov.
Massa
Admit it, Venik- We're the innovators, and you're the duplicators.
Venik
Massa wrote:
>
> Admit it, Venik- We're the innovators, and you're the duplicators.
The one thing I have to admit is that, though very few Americans indeed
are innovators, the majority of them graduated from American
high-schools and watch too much CNN.
Yevgeniy Chizhikov
Massa wrote:
>
> Admit it, Venik- We're the innovators, and you're the duplicators.
You copied everything from Germans first, not much innovations from your
Erich Weinfurter
Yevgeniy,
If Russia did everything first, and all the Americans do is copy it, WHY
are you going the school in Ohio??????
Yevgeniy Chizhikov
Erich Weinfurter wrote:
>
> Yevgeniy,
>
> If Russia did everything first, and all the Americans do is copy it, WHY
> are you going the school in Ohio??????
Because I don't have any other choice. I also pay my own money. As for
S-32 it is not a copy of X-29. It is abivious that Americans was a
little slow to "copy" X-29 from German Ju-287. Because Russians "copied"
it first from Germans and tested on Tsybin's LL-3 in 1949. Before that
Russians worked with another forward swept wing aircrft. For information
look at Russian Aviation Page:
http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/six5th_5.html
Yevgeniy Chizhikov.
Katana
if thats not the actual german airframe..then why are there german markings
on the left wing of this plane................not a copy my ass.....thats
the real freaking german plane..........so...no the russuians didnt copy
it..they stole the original.
Paul J. Adam
In article <61tpqq$2...@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net>, Massa
<som...@somewhere.net> writes
>Shut up, BOY! Go back to that hellhole that you call HOME!
>We invented the airplane to begin with, we invented the computer you are
>using, and we designed the Internet. And I think Dr. Goddard was refining
>his rockets way before you had missiles.
Shame you took a superb machinegun (the German MG42) and turned it into
the M-60, then... What did the USMC replace that with? Some other
triumph of American engineering? Nope, the Belgian FN-MAG.
Impressive. Not.
--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...
Paul J. Adam pa...@jrwlynch.demon.co.uk
Massa
????relevance????
Paul J. Adam wrote in message ...
Gregg Germain
Venik (ve...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: The fact that Tu-4 s better than B-29 can hardly be argued.
Can you list the ways the TU-4's are better than the B-29's?
--- Gregg
"I don't want to die, baby.
gr...@head-cfa.harvard.edu but if I gotta die......
Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics I'm gonna die last."
Phone: (617) 496-7237 Robert Mitchum
Paul J. Adam
In article <6208lf$e...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, Massa
<som...@somewhere.net> writes
>????relevance????
Copying. As in "how not to". As in "the US does it too".
paulc@teleport
Yevgeniy Chizhikov <y.chi...@popmail.csuohio.edu> wrote:
>Massa wrote:
>>
>> Admit it, Venik- We're the innovators, and you're the duplicators.
>You copied everything from Germans first, not much innovations from your
>side. There were large numbers of German scientist work for you, bigger
>than for Russians. We also put first sattelite, you duplicate us. We fly
>into space, you duplicate us,
so ,
care to list the planets Russians have walked on ?
Truth Hurts !
add a com to the address for email
Henry Sokolski9001
In article <34411053....@news.mindspring.com>,
jsh...@mindspring.com (John S. Shinal) wrote:
>x-no-archive: yes On 12 Oct 1997 16:48:43 GMT,
>jdupr...@aol.com (JDupre5762) wrote:
>
>>Does anyone know if a photographic comparison study has been done
detailing the
>> similarities and differences between the B-29 and the Soviet copy the Tu
4?
>>
>>I know that the myth is that the B-29 was copied in every detail but could
that
>> really be true? I find it hard to believe that Tupolev would have copied
>> every fastener, circuit breaker, switch, valve, light fixture and
instrument,
>> etc., etc. when there were already equivalents available from Soviet
industry.
>
> The legend is that it was Stalin's order to copy it in every
>detail. Allegedly that included a mysterious hole in the left wingtip
>that apparently served no discernable purpose.
>
> I suppose that in that place and time, I'd have done what the
>psycho ordered and been done with it. Not worth getting shot over, eh?
>
> Say, now THAT'S a unique warbird, true ? And knowing the
>fUSSR, there's probably a hundred of them in a storage in Siberia,
>earmarked for "reservist" replacement crews !
>
>John S. Shinal
> jsh...@mindspring.com
>WEB : http://homepage.usr.com/j/jsshinal
Actually, a few years ago I had a friend who had some contacts in the PLAF
(Chinese Air Force). They had a lot of old Soviet-model aircraft (and
reverse-engineered copies) in storage that they were considering selling off
to Western collectors. These included some of the first Soviet jets, some
early trainers, and a handful of Tu-4s. I'm not sure he actually sold any
(it wasn't his first line of work), but he had the contacts. The prices
were a little high for me, though, and the Tu-4 didn't fit in my garage <g>.
Urban Fredriksson
>I know that the myth is that the B-29 was copied in every detail but could that
> really be true?
No, and the Russians have said as much lately.
> I find it hard to believe that Tupolev would have copied
> every fastener, circuit breaker, switch, valve, light fixture and instrument,
> etc., etc. when there were already equivalents available from Soviet industry.
Exactly: This sort of thing makes a straight copy
impractical, so you have to reverse engineer it to fit
into what you already produces.
--
Urban Fredriksson gri...@kuai.se http://www.alfaskop.net/%7Egriffon/
Model railways http://www.alfaskop.net/%7Egriffon/modrail/
A boundary between the known and the unknown always exists.