Talk:Tupolev Tu-144

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Tupolev Tu-144 is part of WikiProject Aircraft, an attempt to better organize articles related to aircraft. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
Aviation WikiPortal


Anyone here know why the tu-144 failed in "commercial" operation? (In as far you can talk of commercial operation in a communist planned economy that is). I mean 48 flights in total... that isn't a lot? I don't know if aeroflot was supposed to make money on this, but in a country the size of the USSR it isn't difficult to think of obvious advantages. Maybe technical issues?

As far as I know, there were actually two issues with the TU-144. Beside the fact that it is/was considered the better airplane compared with the Concorde, the Russians had major problems with the reliability of the chosen engines and their pride forbid to choose western engines. Though the engines delivered the required thrust the biggest problem (technically as well as commercially) was the fuel consumption. The possible range flying supersonic speeds was so dramatically reduced that any commercial efforts would have failed.


The real issue is but one: the computer engine control syetem. In short, human control is too crude and wasteful, especially when using afterburning (reheat; injecting fuel into the engine axhaust to augment thrust by up to 50%), which both the Tu-144 and Concorde do; automatic control is needed. Since the late 1980s, such controld (FADEC -- fully automatic digital engine control) have entered widespread service. In the 1960s, the Soviets were behind in computing (Stalin had declared cybernetics a dark capitalist art...) and made a basic error in specifying analogue computers for the Tu-144. When they realised their mistake (early 1970s), they repeatedly tried to purchase digital engine control systems from Britain's Lucas, with any and all deals blocked by Nato's Cocom. The last efforts coincided with the end of detente in the early Carter presidency, which is also when the Tu-144 went belly upwards. No range: it's all as simple as that.
A second factor, and hugely important in the Soviet context, was that the Tupolev design office had lost its political leverage. Old man Tupolev was a wily and astute sod who had got onto the inside track to Khrushchev's favour, but once K. was out of power, Tu just kept losing and losing and losing. Old man Tu died in late 1972 and, as opposed to the abrasive and results-minded fiend of a father, Tu Jr. was a wimp who squandered what was left. Ilyushin picked up the Tupolev silver, largely. Devoid of friends, the Tu-144 would have died of pneumonia after the slightest cold, and it didn't help matters at all that it 1. crashed in Paris, of all places, for all the world to see; 2. crashed again, killing a test pilot. Spent propaganda got short shrift in Soviet times.
Other than that, the Tu-144 was the better design. It had some 10% better lift/drag ratio than the Concorde, flew an appreciable tad faster, and lifted a usefully larger (by 20-40%) payload. The Americans are no fools, and NASA picked the winner for its work. Just consider that there were at least two Concordes lying idle that could have been had in 1997, and either of them would have flown right away, compared to the major work (including new engines!) the Tu-144 needed.
That spying thing is really tiresome. Goebels would have been impressed; it is bound to be accepted as true history within a generation. More's the pity! The French were fond of accusing all and sundry of copying the Caravelle, but frankly, would anyone condemn Douglas for copying the BAC One-Eleven or Caravelle, or Boeing of copying the Trident, or Douglas again of copying the 707? And would any designer worth his salt not be interested in "the blueprints" of his rivals' work? Just to set the record straight, in the 1960s the average set of airliner drawings and documentation (one is useless without the other) came to 2 tonnes or two library rooms, or one library hall. Just the one set of 1960s flight crew manuals comes to two solid briefcases' worth of bumf. Now, that sort of bulk would have been noticed by customs... Microfilm hidden in someone's lipstick case/underpants/walking stick? No good for anything other than 1. a vague idea of where the other side is headed; 2. a spy movie of the naive kind. And don't be so sanguine as to imagine the Brits and Frenchies were all terribly gentlemanly and left the Russkies get on with it in peace!..Livedvalid 00:14, 24 June 2006 (UTC)


<quote>Based on stolen information </quote> ... is there proof for this??? maybe we should re-word the sentence? -- WojPob

I heard it was the other way round - that the British and French stole the design from the Russians. I will delete the reference to this controversy altogether. GrahamN 16:43 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)
The accusations of industrial espionage on the part of the Tu-144 designers is out there; a Google search on "Tu-144 Concorde industrial espionage" will turn some of them up. Some of the references are questionable, but the PBS series "Nova" was willing to state the accusations exist. I think it's definitely safe to say there were allegations of industrial espionage. As far as accusations of the French and British stealing from the Soviets, I've never heard that one. Dave Farquhar 19:06 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)
Er, no, on reflection you are right. I got confused with the space shuttle. I heard a radio programme some time ago about the Soviet version of the shuttle, now mouldering away in a half-collapsed hanger somewhere. There was an allegation that the Soviets thought of it first and the Americans pinched the idea, and possibly also the design. No idea how much truth there was in that. GrahamN 14:27, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Interesting part of history I had forgotten about. Anyone know if any of the Tu-144's are still around?


Latest info available at http://www.moninoaviation.com/tu144llupdate.html
If you are interested, it seems you can buy it from these guys: http://www.tejavia.com/
-- Egil 17:39 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)
There are a number of Tu-144s in museums and sitting outside of airports in Russia. As I recall, the last flyable one--the Tu-144LL that NASA used--was sold in 2002 and is now in a museum in Germany. Dave Farquhar 19:06 Apr 11, 2003 (UTC)

As for whether the Russians stole the design - well, Soviet airliners do have a habit of looking like western designs. Like the Ilyushin that had 4 engines at the rear, just like the Vickers VC10...oh, my, what a coincidence. Concorde went through dozens of design modifications before the final version took shape, many of them looking like something out of a 1950s space comic, and yet the Tu-144 just happens to look similar to the final design.

"Plagiarize! let no one else's work evade your eyes! Remember why the Good Lord made your eyes, and plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize! But remember always, please, to call it research!" -- Tom Lehrer, "Lobachevsky"

Lee M

> a Tu-144 and a retired Air France Concorde, probably being the only place in the world showing both planes next to each other

Only probably? The whereabouts of all Concordes are known, therefore this IS the only place.

Nice PD NASA photo is at http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/gallery/photo/TU-144LL/Small/EC98-44749-25.jpg


As for whether the Russians stole the design - Let's also not forget about the Tu-4.

Yes, the design of Tu-4 was stolen, and Tu-4 and B-29 are not just similar, they're identical. In the case of Concorde and Tu-144 it's not the case, because they have similar, but notably different design. First of all, it's the shape of wing. Next, Tu-144 is notably larger. And last, Concorde has its engines placed far from its body (fuselage), and Tu-144's engines are grouped near it. Well, I saw a documentary film called "The Battle of Supersonics", where was stated that Russian & French enginners even shared their experience in some work about the Supersonics. --unpluggged 20:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)


I found this: http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Tupolev-Tu_144

Looks to me like a nice copy of this page without any statement of the content's origin (and all linked pages look the same...). The self-description of nationmaster moreover states they would offer original documents. Uwe

sorry, I looked closer, there is a statement on above mentioned page:

" The Wikipedia article included on this page is licensed under the GFDL.

Images may be subject to relevant owners' copyright.

All other elements are (c) copyright NationMaster.com 2003-5. All Rights Reserved.

Usage implies agreement with terms."

However, it is placed right at the end of the page, with a quite large white space between itself and the last line of the actual content (approx. 18...20 lines of paragraph text). Uwe, again

==specs== from [1]

HISTORY:

First Flight 31 December 1968 Service Entry

26 December 1975 (mail service) 22 February 1977 (passenger service)

CREW: 3 flight crew

PASSENGERS: 98 in two classes 120-140 in one class

ESTIMATED COST:

unknown

AIRFOIL SECTIONS: Wing Root unknown Wing Tip

unknown

DIMENSIONS: Length 215.54 ft (65.70 m) Wingspan 94.48 ft (28.80 m) Height 34.42 ft (10.50 m) Wing Area 4,714.75 ft2 (438.0 m2) Canard Area

unknown

WEIGHTS: Empty 187,395 lb (85,000 kg) Typical Load unknown Max Takeoff 396,830 lb (180,000 kg) Fuel Capacity internal: 154,325 lb (70,000 kg) external: not applicable Max Payload

unknown

PROPULSION: Powerplant four Kuznetsov NK-144 turbofans Thrust 176,368 lb (784.56 kN)

PERFORMANCE: Max Level Speed at altitude: 1,555 mph (2,500 km/h), Mach 2.35 at sea level: unknown cruise speed: 1,430 mph (2,300 km/h) Initial Climb Rate unknown Service Ceiling 59,055 ft (18,000 m) Range 3,510 nm (6,500 km) g-Limits unknown

KNOWN VARIANTS: Tu-144 Prototype Tu-144S First production model; about 14 built Tu-144D Improved model, possibly with more fuel efficient engines, and used primarily for high-speed research Tu-144LL Refurbished Tu-144D fitted with more powerful engines, updated avionics, and various test equipment and operated jointly by Russia and NASA for high-speed research

KNOWN OPERATORS:

Aeroflot NASA

[edit] Tu-144LL flight restrictions

What about this statement in the article?!: For the last research flights, the Testbed 144LL reg 77114 and the last remaining Tu-144D reg 77115 were under restriction not to exceed Mach 1.

Actually this cannot be true. NASA describes in TM209850, 2000 the Mach 2 missions their pilots have flown in September 1998.

MS

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/u/p/Talk%7ETupolev_Tu-144_9366.html"