What's new

Chinese CH-47 Chinook exposed

How about posting some facts about what we copied instead of claiming we copied something from the Nazis. And we didn't have any intentions to take down China. Have we invaded China before?

Anyways good luck making your own aircraft carrier. And hoped you can make your own helicopter if you claimed to have the technology instead of copying it exact replica. I was surprised it was not something different.

Aren't all modern missiles seriously advanced versions of the basic German V2 Rockets? Wasn't the Manhattan project an extension of the German Nuclear Fissile Research? The list is almost endless. Nazi Germany was superb at whatever they did, their downfall was that they wanted to do everything very very quickly.
 
Below is blueprint of Ho2-29:
xin_4904071116241401118734.jpg


The restored model:

124087_21n.jpg


299a515c2dccac72b2941c6467b94f60.jpg



Let your B-2 call Ho2-29 DADDY.
Img203785385.jpg

Sigh. Let me ask you this when was the German plane made?

freel

Here is the American versions before the German design.

Designed by San Diego High School student Charles L. Freel, the Freel Flying Wing was a development of a successful 36" wingspan experimental model built under supervision of Letain T. Kitterege, aircraft rigging class instructor. Begun in 1933, construction of the full-scale wing was completed in 1935. Flight tests were conducted by Mr. Kitterege and Charles Freel.
The wing was a full cantilever wooden structure made in two 26' sections bolted together at the center. Tapered in planform and thickness, the wing offered both strutural and aerodynamic advantages. Main spars running the full length were "I" beams with plywook webs and spruce cap strips. The NACA airfoil section was chosen on the basis of moment coefficient. Tapered ribs were made of 1/4" spruce with 1/8" diagonals. The wing and all control surfaces were covered with fabric.
Lateral and logitudinal control was accomplished by means of a combination aileron and elevator control device which functioned in the same manner as the control wheel in a conventional aircraft. The unit was linked by bellcrank and push rods to two 14' moveable surfaces in the trailing edge of the wing on each side of the ship. When the control wheel was turned left or right, the simultaneous control device produced a movement up on one side and down on the other 14' aileron. When the wheel was moved backward or forward, the ailerons moved up or down together and functioned as an elevator.
Directional control was provided for by 7' movable surfaces at the outboard trailing edge of the wing. Operating on a drag principle, and working independently of each other, they were actuated by cable and foot control, and took the place of a rudder. The sweep back and dihedral of the wing added further stability to the ship.

freel2.gif

freel6.gif

freel3.gif


Northrop N-1M - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jack Northrop became involved in innovative all-wing aircraft designs in the late-1920s, with his first Flying Wing being built in the 1928–1930 time period. That first prototype, the 1929 Flying Wing X-216H, evolved from earlier design studies. The X-216H had twin rudders with a single horizontal stabilizer running between them; both rudders were connected by twin booms to the thick, all-wing blended fuselage. The aircraft had an open cockpit in the center wing section and single, rear-facing, pusher propeller connected to a piston engine blended into the all-wing shape. The X-216H was first test flown in 1929 with Edward Bellande at the controls; [1] the aircraft displayed adequate performance and was noted for its unique all-metal stressed skin and multi-cellular construction. At about this same time, Jack Northrop became aware of Walter and Reimar Horten's pre-war record-setting "tailless" flying wing glider designs being tested in Germany.[2]

The N-1M was one of a progression of experimental aircraft that further developed Northrop's all-wing concept. The aircraft was produced in the United States and was developed during 1939 and 1940 as a flying testbed for the purpose of proving Jack Northrop's vision of a practical Flying Wing. Built mostly of specially laminated layers of glued wood, the design of both wooden wings allowed for easy configuration changes with the central blended fuselage, which was made of tubular steel. The diminutive, twin engine test aircraft served its purpose well, first taking to the skies on 3 July 1941 at Baker Dry Lake in California.[3][N 1]
300px-Northrop_N-1M_Udvar-Hazy.jpg


Aren't all modern missiles seriously advanced versions of the basic German V2 Rockets? Wasn't the Manhattan project an extension of the German Nuclear Fissile Research? The list is almost endless. Nazi Germany was superb at whatever they did, their downfall was that they wanted to do everything very very quickly.

Robert H. Goddard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Robert Hutchings Goddard (October 5, 1882 – August 10, 1945) was an American professor, physicist, and inventor who is credited with creating and building the world's first liquid-fueled rocket,[1][2] which he successfully launched on March 16, 1926. Goddard and his team launched 34 rockets[3] between 1926 and 1941, achieving altitudes as high as 2.6 km (1.6 mi) and speeds as high as 885 km/h (550 mph).[3]

Goddard's work as both theorist and engineer anticipated many of the developments that were to make spaceflight possible.[4] He has been called the man who ushered in the Space Age.[5]:xiii Two of Goddard's 214 patented inventions — a multi-stage rocket (1914), and a liquid-fuel rocket (1914) — were important milestones toward spaceflight.[6] His 1919 monograph A Method of Reaching Extreme Altitudes is considered one of the classic texts of 20th-century rocket science.[7][8] Goddard successfully applied three-axis control, gyroscopes and steerable thrust to rockets, to effectively control their flight.

Goddard's military rocket
Not all of Goddard's early work was geared towards space travel. As the United States entered World War I in 1917, the country's universities began to lend their services to the war effort. Goddard believed his rocket research could be applied to many different military applications, including mobile artillery, field weapons and naval torpedoes. He made proposals to the Navy and Army. No record exists of any interest by the Navy to Goddard's inquiry. However, Army Ordnance was quite interested, and Goddard met several times with Army personnel.[13]:89

During this time, Goddard was also contacted by a civilian industrialist in Worcester about the possibility of manufacturing rockets for the military. However, as the businessman's enthusiasm grew, so did Goddard's suspicion. Talks eventually broke down as Goddard began to fear his work might be appropriated by the business. However, an Army Signal Corps officer tried to make Goddard cooperate, but he was called off by General George Squier of the Signal Corps who had been contacted by Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, Charles Walcott.[13]:89–91 Goddard became leery of working with corporations and was careful to secure patents to "protect his ideas."[13]:152 These events led to the Signal Corps sponsoring Goddard's work during World War I.[13]:91

Goddard proposed to the Army an idea for a tube-based rocket launcher as a light infantry weapon. The launcher concept became the precursor to the bazooka.[13]:92 The rocket-powered recoil-free weapon was the brainchild of Dr. Goddard as a side project (under Army contract) of his work on rocket propulsion. Goddard, during his tenure at Clark University, and working at Mount Wilson Observatory for security reasons, designed a tube-fired rocket for military use during World War I. He and his co-worker, Dr. Clarence Hickman, successfully demonstrated his rocket to the U.S. Army Signal Corps at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, on November 6, 1918, using two music stands for a launch platform, but the Compiègne Armistice was signed only five days later, and further development was discontinued as World War I ended.[31]

The delay in the development of the bazooka and other weapons was a result of Goddard's serious bout with tuberculosis—the long recovery required. Goddard continued to be a part-time consultant to the U.S. Government at Indian Head, Maryland,[13]:121 until 1923, but his focus had turned to other research involving rocket propulsion, including work with liquid fuels and liquid oxygen.

Later, the former Clark University researcher, Dr. Clarence Hickman, and Army officers Col. Leslie Skinner and Lt. Edward Uhl continued Goddard's work on the bazooka. A shaped-charge warhead was attached to the rocket, leading to the tank-killing weapon used in World War II and to many other powerful rocket weapons.[13]:305

Although Goddard had brought his work in rocketry to the attention of the United States Army, between World Wars, he was rebuffed, since the Army largely failed to grasp the military application of large rockets and said there was no money for new experimental weapons.[13]:297 German military intelligence, by contrast, had paid attention to Goddard's work. The Goddards noticed the some mail had been opened, and some mailed reports had gone missing. An accredited military attaché to the US, Friedrich von Boetticher, sent a four-page report to the Abwehr in 1936, and the spy Gustav Guellich sent a mixture of facts and made-up information, claiming to have visited Roswell and witnessed a launch. The Abwehr was very interested and responded with more questions about Goddard's work.[62]:77[16]:227–8 Guellich's reports did include information about fuel mixtures and the important concept of fuel-curtain cooling,[63]:39–41 but thereafter the Germans received very little information about Goddard.


I mean, man seriously, how can we copy CH-47 if you don't provide the TOT? copy means exactly the same, do you thinks its possible?

Didn't you guys got this aircraft from the Vietnam War?
 
Last edited:
Chinese Military operate Chinook is not an open Secret. Back in the 1980s before the Arms Embargo hits China, Chinese had ordered certain number of UH-60/SR-71 Blackhawk and CH-47 Chinook as well as some AH-1H Super Cobra

Official news is that the Chinese did not get any of those due to the Embargo hit after 1989 incident, but truth surface really fast that the UH-60 were indeed delievered to PLA force before and after the embargo.

47471c5301035v9i


blackhawk-helicopter-photosblackhawk-down-helicoptersblackhawk-rc-helicoptersblackhawk-helicopter-modelsblackwater-helicoptersblackhawk-helicopter-picturestuff-works-helicopter.jpg


A friend of mine once told me, BUT I CANNOT VERIFIED THE VALIDITY THO, during the lates 80s and early 90s, US Shipped enough parts for the Chinese to build 2 full frame of Super Cobra and the somewhere between 4-8 Chinook were delievered to Chinese Army Air Force.

Again, this is a hearsay, i am no way vouching for this piece of information. Just that i will not be surprise if the Chinese have any operational version of Blackhawk, Chinook and Super Cobra
 
@Aeronaut, you strongly needs to ban Oldman1 on certain Chinese Threads, for the last 3 days a few of Chinese Threads have been ruined and derailed by Oldman1 with idiotic comments [Chinese members can give you reference and links as well].

You/moderators need to take action otherwise Forum quality would go down. Please do remove all unrelated posts on this and other Chinese Threads it needs to be cleansed.

Oldman1 I suggest you quietly runaway from these/other Chinese Threads because your posts are all on the record you are the one creating trouble threads.
 
Based on Chinese experiences on copying things from military hardware, movies, to clothing, wouldn't matter. But it tells us that you can't make something like that. At least the Russians were able to make good helos based on their own design.
Yup! Russian build helo that can't be fitted into their tactical transport airlift. And need the An-224 to get the job done which deployment is restricted. Using S-70 design, Z-20 is able to fit into Y-20 transport aircraft and achieve the both desire performance and tactical purpose.

As for helo design, we can come up with our own design if needed. WZ-10 attack helo is such. As for Kamov helps in designing WZ-10 is just pack of rubbish. Does WZ-10 design ever link to any of Kamov product? The russian are just desperate to claim any credit from China successful design.
 
@Aeronaut, you strongly needs to ban Oldman1 on certain Chinese Threads, for the last 3 days a few of Chinese Threads have been ruined and derailed by Oldman1 with idiotic comments [Chinese members can give you reference and links as well].

You/moderators need to take action otherwise Forum quality would go down. Please do remove all unrelated posts on this and other Chinese Threads it needs to be cleansed.

Oldman1 I suggest you quietly runaway from these/other Chinese Threads because your posts are all on the record you are the one creating trouble threads.
Doesn't matter, No Oldman1, there will be other "Oldman1"s, just ignore him and his comments, you know, such kind of people like mocking and belittleing China, We Chinese are used to these, and develop better and stronger under their mocking.

As to copy, America and German both have the experience, now, they have very strong industry, so they think copying is disgraceful(of couse, in some extent, it is), but don't know their forefathers had done these while their country is not that strong.
If now strong industry support you, any innovative ideal are unreal, China now is not leader, for us, first thing is not lag behind the world leader further.
 
Doesn't matter, No Oldman1, there will be other "Oldman1"s, just ignore him and his comments, you know, such kind of people like mocking and belittleing China, We Chinese are used to these, and develop better and stronger under their mocking.

It is about keeping Threads in order and check with best quality posts whether oldman1 or cowman2 all need to understand if they can't discuss technical stuff regarding the product and decent discussion they need not join those threads, oldman1 is acting his usual desi hindustani way.
 
China take what good and discard what bad as they try to build their country in the 21st century, adaptation is a way to speed up the process of catching up to the more advance nation. 1st you adapt and learn all you can about the proven design without bankrupt yourself in spending money in R&D in the unproven design to build what you need, since build upon the proven design for one need, they also build up their manufacture base and institution for future R&D to build for what they want, need are always the 1st priority in life, what you want later in life shall and will be affordable to you in time and money. China in the future will probably spend money and time to innovate a complete new kind a weaponry which other nation don't have in the arsenal. You only want to invent something completely new to everyone, why reinvent the wheel and wasted the precious time, money, human resource over a well proven design can be easily obtain in the hitech information age?
 
Failed you to take you down? What is this Boxer Rebellion?

We didn't copy anything from the Nazis.

Maybe not copy, but you sure didn't achieve everything by yourself.
Rocket technology came from the Nazis.
The entire space program happened because of the Nazi scientists and engineers.
I personally know a gentleman who was in SS, moved to Canada on the basis that he would work with the Aerospace giants there. He was one of the leading man in developing the CANADARM.
 
buddy we didn't initiated any reverse engineering project publicly. i dont want to be pretend like you...
all you do could be not success in a REP. There will be a certain difference between a genuine one and clone one that your people have done... I wish you that soon you will be recovered from this REP hysteria ...
stubborn prejudice, please try to make one by yourself. We produce thousands of it and you buy dozen of it, that's the difference. Means you are outgunned.

As one crashs in the war, your inventory varinish very quickly. We could easily reimburse by producing more.

China is not interested in fighting Inida, the main reason is you are not taken as serious threat.

The gap between two of us is too big for China to be feeling threatened.

Rest your case before deemed as sourgrape.

When PLA army use hundres of Z20 to mobolize its troops, you guys still count on the bought helo to carry few soldiers along the border. Most of the IA soldiers have to climb up the moutain by their own.

I hope no war between China and India. If that happens again, i think PLA will prevail without doubt. This will lead to two serious consequences:
1. India hate China forever
2. India loose confidence forever
 
Last edited:
Making friends with China have two big benifits:
1. border secured
2. saving money to buy rip-off

buddy we didn't initiated any reverse engineering project publicly. i dont want to be pretend like you...
all you do could be not success in a REP. There will be a certain difference between a genuine one and clone one that your people have done... I wish you that soon you will be recovered from this REP hysteria ...
The problem is:
1. India can't copy as cash cow
2. India unable to copy as DRDO sucks
3. India don't want to copy and standing on the morale ground
4. Indian is too lazy and lame to copy

which one you think is your real status?

The benifits of 'copy' of China:
1: Cost reduction
2. to outgun our enemy in numbers
3. refer to mature tech which reinforce the national security
4. No delays happens
 
Last edited:
some licensed productions

Martin B-57 Canberra - English Electric Canberra
McDonnell-Douglas AV-8 Harrier - British Aerospace Harrier
McDonnell-Douglas T-45 Goshawk - British Aerospace Hawk
Raytheon T-6 Texan II - Pilatus PC-9
Lockheed US101 (VH-71) - EH Industries EH-101
Allis-Chalmers J36 Engine - De Havilland Goblin
Pratt & Whitney J42 - Rolls Royce Nene
Westinghouse J54 - Rolls Royce Avon
Wright J65 - Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire
Wright J67 - Bristol Olympus
Westinghouse J81 - Rolls Royce Soar
Allison TF41 - Rolls Royce Sprey
The Packard V-1650 - Rolls Royce Merlin
 
Indians are told by the west "Don't copy our product, buy it !" and they listen...
Everyone would copy a better product, especially if it's for national defence...but the Indians prefer to be slaves and pays billions instead of doing it by them self....what a waste of money...
 
Back
Top Bottom