Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
exhausted

Planes That Look Alike

Recommended Posts

Basic features or more, but should not include developments such as P-39 and P-63.

 

Fore example:

 

Su-24 = F-111

800px-T-6-1_NTW_5_93.jpg

F-111-Aardvark-4-MHQG2BYVN8-1024x768.jpg

 

T-4 = Alphajet

Blue_Impulse_T4_B.jpg

DassaultDornier-Alpha-Jet-1.jpg

 

J-22 = Jaguar

300px-J22yu.jpg

800px-Jaguar_33_ardennes_2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That photo of the Early prototype that eventually became the Su-24 looks more like the JH-7 Flying Leopard...

2-JH-7+DIAGRAM.jpg

Edited by ZmelliFahrdz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you're insinuating the Tu-160 is a copy of the B-1B, but what's funny about that is that the TU-160 from a design perspective is in no way related to B-1B. Simply looking at similar planform and saying "that's a copy of that" is silly. The designs look similar because they're made with the same basic requirements in mind. There's only so many ways of designing an effective variable inlet engine nacelle, or VG wing. Interestingly, apart from general layout, in almost every other aspect, they are different from one another.

 

The actual "daddy" of Tu-160 is Myasischev M-18, which looks much more like the final 160 than NAA's winning 1970 B-1 design:

 

M-18_01.jpg

M-18_02.jpg

M-18_05.jpg

 

And I don't see how the SU-24 looks anything like the F-111 except both are VG aircraft and have side by side cockpits. Especially since Su was originally designed as a fixed-wing aircraft. Again, in almost every aspect apart from general planform, they are different from each other. Might as well say the TSR-2 looked just like the RA-5C.

 

How about some planes that really do look like one another?

 

Lockheed Tristar:

l1011dll.jpg

 

Douglas DC-10:

Aircraft.dc-10.750pix.jpg

 

Boeing 727:

boeing_727-100_sun_air_ra.JPG

 

Tupolev 154:

tupolev-154.jpg

 

Ilyushin Il-62:

1051274258_RA-86531_Ilyushin-Il-62_VIM-Airlines.jpg

 

Vickers VC-10:

vc10_mickbajcar.jpg

 

I was going to post the Concorde and Tu-144 too until I realised they don't really look the same at all, except for both being supersonic deltas :(

Edited by Julhelm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That photo of the Early prototype that eventually became the Su-24 looks more like the JH-7 Flying Leopard...

2-JH-7+DIAGRAM.jpg

 

more like Su-15 actually with a triangle wing .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree, but there is an older one

 

164678RA_5C_Vigilante_0006.jpgPapy

 

post-3395-0-79348800-1336031753.jpg Original

 

post-3395-0-21250000-1336032050.jpg Copy :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bf109 and Ki61...

 

Oh yes, the Hughes H1 racer and the early Fw190... especially viewed from head on.

Edited by Major Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Super Mystere & Super Sabre

post-64647-0-43983900-1336053165.jpg

post-64647-0-00169100-1336053177.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-3395-0-22420000-1336059974.jpg

 

F-86 and Ta-183

 

post-3395-0-42190500-1336060097.jpg

 

and MiG-15bis

Edited by Gepard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SEPECAT Jaguar and Mitsubishi F-1 have similar layouts and fuselages.

 

269.jpg

 

242.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cessna 172 and P-51 mustang.

 

Both have wings with control surfaces.

Both have a propeller in front.

Both have a place for someone to sit with glass in front and on the sides.

Both have a vertical control surface at the rear of the plane.

Both have smaller horizontal control surfaces at the rear of the plane.

They both use wheels to move along the ground.

 

It's all relative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shenyang J-11

300px-Chinese_Su-27.JPG

 

Sukhoi Su-27

300px-Su-27_low_pass.jpg

 

Not copies honest

:blink:

Edited by MigBuster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-3395-0-79348800-1336031753.jpg Original

 

post-3395-0-21250000-1336032050.jpg Copy :grin:

 

 

More like

 

Original:

RA-5C_RVAH-6_in_flight_1970.jpg

 

Copy:

mikoyan-gurevich-mig25-foxbat_5.jpg

 

:grin:

Edited by Toryu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MiG-23 and F-4 Phantom. Similar intakes, similar performance, similar radar and missile capabilities. Scaled down to 1 seat and 1 engine with VG wing for short takeoff performance.

 

The A-5 Vigilante certainly set the standard for a practical Mach 2.5+ airframe (as opposed to the SR-71's Mach 3.5+ airframe), but aside from the basic planform and intake arrangement, the A-5, MiG-25 and F-15 have very little in common. look at how the horizontal and vertical tail surfaces are attached to the airframe and the underlying structures that hold everything together.

 

The A-5's fuselage is rather unique due to its intended capability to lob nuclear weapons out of its internal center tube.

 

The MiG-25 has intakes/exhausts necessary for its unique engine configuration and high altitude/speed performance. Its internal structures gave up strength and limited maneuverability to focus on top speed at high altitude.

 

The F-15's budget was justified as a response to the MiG-25, but the original Mach 3 concepts looked nothing like the MiG-25. At the same time Boyd was calling for weight and size reduction, the Navy was trying to trap the USAF into buying the F-14 (as they did with the F-4). So, the resulting F-15 proposals had to meet very complicated restrictions:

1) Give up the VG wing to cut weight, complexity, and look as dissimilar to the F-14 as possible.

2) Add a large bubble canopy to overcome situational awareness issues encountered in Vietnam (didn't we already learn this lesson in WW2?).

3) As high a top speed as possible despite having a large bubble canopy, no VG wing, and minimal high-temperature materials.

4) Have a large wing area and turn like a bandit despite the high speed requirement.

 

The F-14 variant for a fixed wing proposal looked a lot like the F-15/A-5 Mach 2.5 layout and was being drawn up well before the MiG-25s layout was evident.

The original 60,000 lb Mach 3 VG F-15 proposals had spaced engines just like the F-14. I am guessing the engines were pulled back in for two reasons: the change to the fixed wing design with the twin tail booms was more practical and to not look like an F-14.

 

So while the layouts already existed and the A-5 marked the first full-scale production example of that type, it looks like less a case of blatant copying and more a case of engineers facing certain problems arriving at similar solutions. The MiG-25 that landed in Japan gave the US an up close inspection that revealed how different Soviet engineering was to anything the West would have produced. There's a lot more to aircraft design than the basic wing/tail plan view.

 

Now, for a nearly identical external copy:

US space shuttle oribiters versus Buran.

Soviet engineers arrived at an extremely similar solution, too similar!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has always been some copying of basic ideas, since its art after all, and these souls were extreme artists.

 

How about missiles? Okay R-3 = AAM-N-7 but usually everbody had way different looking missiles. I like the Red missles since I like big fins on missiles and old cars. I tend to thinki that auto engineers copied the big fins of early rockets for the 50s cars. Both eventually lost their big fins. :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am the happy owner of "The Complete Book of Fighters" by Green & Swanboruogh, containing a couple of hunderds of biplanes looking VERY much like another couple of hundreds of other biplanes.....:grin:

Same timeframe, same tasks always produces look alikes......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-3395-0-80089100-1336145301.jpg

original: MiG-21F13

copy: J-7

post-3395-0-54092600-1336145263.jpg

 

 

post-3395-0-88435800-1336145521.jpg

the original and the very close soviet answer

post-3395-0-68674000-1336145542.jpg

Edited by Gepard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..