Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Russia to start making bootleg parts for Boeing and Airbus aircraft.

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Russia to start making bootleg parts for Boeing and Airbus aircraft.

Old 9th Jun 2022, 04:30
  #21 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 23,913
The samples were collected before we actually sent them an engine I seem to remember
NutLoose is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2022, 06:01
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary Alberta
Posts: 5,960
In Stanley Hooker's wonderful book, "Not much of an Engineer", he describes a visit to China in the 70s, where he was shown a Chinese copy of the Russian copy of the Nene. He observed to his hosts that even RR's mistakes had been faithfully copied!
India Four Two is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2022, 07:04
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 468
The Tu-4 bomber, a high priority carbon copy of the B-29 in metric dimensions and the first nuke capable bomber the Soviet Union had, even copied the battle damage repairs of the original US aircraft that had emergency landed in the far east.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2022, 11:30
  #24 (permalink)  
fdr
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 3rd Rock, #29B
Posts: 1,389
Originally Posted by Economics101 View Post
This is part of a wider-ranging exercise in patent violation and Intellectual Property theft which has now been sanctioned by Russian Law. See this week's Economist: https://www.economist.com/business/2...property-theft
gotta say that the Russian IP office is a lot less irritating to push standard patents through than the USPTO... The plaque from the US is nicer though.
fdr is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2022, 15:48
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Onehouse
Posts: 7
Not just the Russians/Chinese. I vividly remember touring the Trident factory at Hatfield in the mid seventies and being told that a left had thread on a fitting of the Trident wing had been slavishly (and pointlessly) copied by Boeing on their 727.
302szd55 is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2022, 21:03
  #26 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 23,913
That was because Boeing were unable to figure out the S ducting design for the upper engine and were struggling until the U.K. shared their designs for the Trident with the US on a like for like basis, this they did giving Boeing the edge, who refused to return the favour with their own technology

Meanwhile, a rival airliner emerged, this time from Boeing in the United States, in the form of the 727, which also had a trijet configuration.[16]Boeing had begun its studies into this sector of the market in 1956, and elected to launch its own trijet programme in 1959. Airco executives, who were at the time intensely exploring various alternatives and further partnerships with other aircraft companies, considered the possibility that Boeing might choose to drop the 727 project and instead co-manufacture the DH.121 in the USA; Lord Douglas was one of the proponents of this initiative.[16] As a result, Airco invited a team of Boeing engineers and executives to Hatfield; (Boeing later permitted a return visit by de Havilland representatives to Seattle); however, Boeing revealed few details of their plans for the 727, while virtually all information on the DH.121 had been shared with Boeing, an openness that had allegedly "amazed" them.[16] British commentators have tended to interpret this episode as involving the acquisition of sensitive proprietary data on the DH.121 by a direct competitor.[17] Woods remarked that "de Havilland solemnly handed all its research over to its rivals...the crowning piece of stupidity".[16]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Siddeley_Trident
NutLoose is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2022, 12:36
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: OnScreen
Posts: 223
Originally Posted by NutLoose View Post
The samples were collected before we actually sent them an engine I seem to remember
So, enhancements could be requested, upfront the manufacturing/delivery ?
WideScreen is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2022, 12:56
  #28 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 65
Posts: 9,702
I recall reading, about 20 years ago, of the Chinese copying a British innovative refuse collection truck. It could load more quickly and carry more trash. The British inventor got nothing nor, no support in seeking redress.
PAXboy is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2022, 14:36
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Europe
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by Less Hair View Post
The Tu-4 bomber, a high priority carbon copy of the B-29 in metric dimensions and the first nuke capable bomber the Soviet Union had, even copied the battle damage repairs of the original US aircraft that had emergency landed in the far east.
There's a story behind that. Essentially it boils down to the engineers tasked with copying the B-29 being (a) afraid for their lives if they got it wrong and did not deliver; and (b) interpreting Stalin's instructions, who said he wanted an exact copy. If the battle damage repair were not replicated exactly, the question would arise why Stalin's instructions for an exact copy were disobeyed. Not following Stalin's instructions tended to be bad for one's health, possible your family's health, and even the health of co-workers.

It might also have been Stalin's way of assuring quality control, in much the same way as the well known story of David Lee Roth of Van Halen and the brown M&Ms. So long as people don't know what you are going to check up on, they have to make sure everything (including the important bits) meets the specifications; and if something minor doesn't meet the specification, you know attention to detail has been lacking.

There's a lot more down the rabbit-hole hole of copying high technology. Sometimes seemingly nonsense or trivial design decision have underlying reasons that are important (such as the research needed to replicate the manufacture of Space Shuttle tiles, which hinged upon discovering an apparently unimportant impurity in one of the chemicals used in the process affected the outcome, so using purer raw materials failed in getting the correct end-product* & **), or deliberate bits of nonsense included to show that a copy is in fact a copy rather than an original design. Copies are sometimes made because the copier does not understand the underlying engineering sufficiently to make a functional replica from the ground-up, as opposed to an exact replica. And, even if you have the original, and even know the manufacturing process used to make it, you can still miss important elements if your product depends upon specific raw materials or undocumented practices executed by experienced technical personnel.

*It's alluded to on page 7a of this very old presentation: Producing the High Temperature Reusable Surface Insulation for the Thermal Protection System of the Space Shuttle (Kevin Forgsberg) - while some contaminants/impurities were definitely not needed, it turned out when moving from the lab to full production that certain others were.
**It turns out I mixed up two stories here. I'm leaving the Space Shuttle Tile Manufacture presentation in, as it is interesting, but what my memory mixed up was the FOGBANK story: Nuclear Weapons Journal, issue 2, 2009 p20: Fogbank: Lost Knowledge Regained.

When investigating historical records with respect to impurity levels during the Fogbank purification process, personnel discovered that in some cases the current impurity levels were much lower than historical values. Typically, lower impurity levels lead to better product quality. For Fogbank, however, the presence of a specific impurity is essential.


Semreh is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2022, 21:06
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 457
I see the Russian press are now claiming that Boeing is having to reduce production of the 737 due to loss of Russian titanium.
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2022, 05:32
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: OnScreen
Posts: 223
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
I see the Russian press are now claiming that Boeing is having to reduce production of the 737 due to loss of Russian titanium.
Nowadays, Russia is no longer a major Titanium (ore) supplier. In the Cold-War age, Ukraine (Donbas ????) was important, though now, it has been overtaken by significant other resources, including Australia. So, yeah, this looks like a tit-for-tat propaganda.

Or. maybe, the US could scrap some SR-71 ? The CIA obtained the Titanium for those devices from the USSR, using a large scale, multi-country decoy operation to hide the final destination for the metal.
WideScreen is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2022, 08:42
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 1,233
We've got piles of Titanium round the back of the workshop. Make me an offer!
blue up is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2022, 23:42
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,543
2020 figures for the top titanium producers, metric tons

1. China 110,000
2 Japan 50,000
3 Russia 33,000
4 Kazakhstan 15,000
5 Ukraine 6,000
6 India 250

Titanium dioxide production 2021

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...de-by-country/

USGS data

https://www.usgs.gov/centers/nationa...nd-information
megan is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2022, 16:36
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: OnScreen
Posts: 223
Originally Posted by megan View Post
2020 figures for the top titanium producers, metric tons

1. China 110,000
2 Japan 50,000
3 Russia 33,000
4 Kazakhstan 15,000
5 Ukraine 6,000
6 India 250

Titanium dioxide production 2021

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...de-by-country/

USGS data

https://www.usgs.gov/centers/nationa...nd-information
I checked the figures yesterday, and this showed up:

Ilmenite is the most important ore of titanium
Russia is not even in the list.

I think, the difference is "Production of Titanium" and "The most important ore of titanium", or so to say, the production of Titanium isn't the relevant item, though, where to find the Ore. Production can (in principle) be done everywhere, bla bla Technology, etc. Correct me, when I am wrong.

This link neither lists Russia: Titanium Minerals Worldwide by country
WideScreen is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2022, 22:50
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: not where I want to be
Posts: 338
Originally Posted by India Four Two View Post
In Stanley Hooker's wonderful book, "Not much of an Engineer"...
Thanks for the reference, looked a worthwhile read so it's now on my list...
First_Principal is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 03:04
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 1,069
As we see in the Olympics, if Russia plays by a different rule book they get excluded, thereby further increasing their sense of isolation and paranoia.

ďItís hatred (by the West) of all things Russian that discriminates against us. Please remove these unfair sanctions.Ē

DPRK (NK) still hasnít figured out why the world places sanctions on them either. Russia looks to be following suit.
jolihokistix is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.