Tupolev Tu-4. When The Soviets Reverse Engineered The Boeing B-29 Superfortress, 1943 [1078X1500]

[-]

Hattix@reddit

Stalin saw copying the B-29 to be a shortcut to heavy bombers, and refused to listen to reason from Antonov and Tupolev. Tupolev was already designing the Tu-2 (also known as ANT-64), a long range heavy bomber with ability to be quite superior to the B-29. Tupolev argued that Soviet engineers would gain nothing by rote-copying some foreign aircraft.

Part of the reason was Stalin's famous paranoia. He saw foreign agents everywhere, and if a design could be validated against something external, foreign agents would have nothing to gain.

In the end, Tupolev used Stalin's two-year deadline against him, and managed to use some higher performing Soviet built parts, such as the engines (2,400 hp, vs. the 2,200 hp Wright R-3350s on the B-29) and 23 mm guns, as they were more immediately available.

Against the B-29, the Tu-4 was slightly slower, slightly heavier, could fly substantially higher, had a three-ton higher maximum take-off weight, about the same combat range and performed pretty much as what it was: A slightly more powerful B-29.

[-]

LordHardThrasher@reddit

My favourite fact about this is the blind copying, resulting in the word "Boeing" being stamped on various parts.

[-]

DonaldBecker@reddit

People get the wrong impression about this fact.

There wasn't a patternmaker painstakingly copying the logo onto their wooden pattern, resulting in a similar part. They simply used the original captured part as the pattern to make the sand casting mold.

The result is a visually identical part with far less skilled labor, and no need to test and iterate.

The part is going to be a few percent smaller, perhaps 2-5%, due to shrinkage. That's not going to matter in parts such as rudder pedals.

While there are downsides, such as reduced draft (taper), the resulting part could be superior to the original casting because corrective machining is already incorporated into the copy.

[-]

FatDudeOnAMTB@reddit

I heard the rudder pedals were made with Boeing cast in the tread like the original.

[-]

Busy_Outlandishness5@reddit

when your boss is Beria, there's very little room for individual initiative or interpretation.

[-]

Bossman131313@reddit

Oddly enough even with the slightly higher max takeoff weight it still had a smaller bomb load than the American B-29. The exact specifics of how much more depends on how the American and Soviet aircraft were configured as well as the the role it was fulfilling at that moment.

[-]

55pilot@reddit

They copied everything to detail, even the same rivet spacing.

[-]

Demolition_Mike@reddit

Yeah, but they didn't upgrade the gun turrets - so they broke very often when firing the bigger 23mm guns

[-]

Rc72@reddit

My favourite tidbit about this is how the model was unveiled in the 1947 Tushino Aviation Parade. First, three aircraft flew over: everybody assumed them to be the three B-29s that were known to have crash landed in the Soviet Union during WW2. Then a fourth aircraft arrived...

(Clearly, Stalin had a sense of humour. A sick, twisted sense of humour, but a sense of humour nonetheless.)

[-]

AdolfsLonelyScrotum@reddit

Another tidbit - one of the B29s that landed into soviet captivity was the plane whose interior fuselage was personally signed by General Hap Arnold at a visit to the factory.

[-]

kraftwrkr@reddit

And running this program? None other than Lavrentiy Beria, everyone's favorite supercreep!

[-]

ZeroNighthawks@reddit

Oh damn, I didn't know Beria ran that program

[-]

kraftwrkr@reddit

He was a busy creep.

[-]

Anindefensiblefart@reddit

I love his tacos

[-]

_badwithcomputer@reddit

The aluminum sheet metal thickness was also thicker on the Tu-4 due to the Imperial to Metric conversion in standard sheet metal manufacturing. Making it much heavier and reducing the range significantly.

[-]

DanTMWTMP@reddit

I did not know this. This is an amazing historical tidbit! Thank you so much for taking the time to type all that out and posting this! Very cool!!

[-]

Days0fvThunder@reddit

by the time the Tu-4 was introduced, the superior B-50 was already in service in the U.S.

[-]

Bossman131313@reddit

Oddly enough even with the slightly higher max takeoff weight it still had a smaller bomb load than the American B-29. The exact specifics of how much more depends on how the American and Soviet aircraft were configured as well as the the role it was fulfilling at that moment.

[-]

Jamatace77@reddit

Don’t know how true it is but I’m sure that I read somewhere the copying on the reverse engineering was so specific that even the yoke and rudder pedals of the Tu4 had the Boeing logo on them

[-]

greed-man@reddit

Yes. And somewhat famously, a hole in the fuselage had been patched on one the planes, and it was replicated on the TU-4.

[-]

Silent-Creek@reddit

Did some research and couldn’t find this mentioned anywhere. A few stories of a type writer being standard issue due to being found on the original planes, and even a few anecdotes about copying the nose art, but couldn’t find anything mentioning a patch. Can you link?

[-]

greed-man@reddit

The Tupolev design bureau carefully monitored the quality of the products. Some suppliers lobbied for their own products or manufacturing techniques, but Tupolev demanded conformance to the Boeing sample. In addition to the risk of cascading effects from a change, Tupolev realized that Beria might perceive some change, however innocuous, as being treason.

https://www.airandspaceforces.com/article/0609bomber/

[-]

Silent-Creek@reddit

Cool quote and article…. Neither of which mentions a door patch. Still can’t find it mentioned anywhere.

[-]

particlegun@reddit

I recall seeing a youtube video of B-29s being used to train RAF Gloster Meteor pilots how to shoot down Tu-4s in 1948. It was quite interesting as it showed the various ways to take on a formation of B-29/Tu-4 bombers.

https://youtu.be/-dMog3T3CAc

[-]

LunchboxP226@reddit

Impressive engineering feat given soviet technology. There was this one joke I heard about soviet machinery in the TV drama about chernobyl that I can't remember word for word...

[-]

AU_Forte@reddit

People forget that the B-29 was the pinnacle of technology when it was produced. Pressurised cabin, tricycle landing gear, remote controlled guns. It was a massive step forward over its predecessor. Its development cost more than the Manhattan Project!

Psychologically, it would’ve been a gut punch to the West at the time. As if Russia or China suddenly presented a fully functional carbon copy of the F-35 today.

[-]

Ibegallofyourpardons@reddit

The B29 program was more expensive than the Manhatten project.

copying it saved the USSR a veritable fortune at a time when it was broke; not that is was never not broke.

but just after the war, it was very, very cash strapped.

[-]

longraphe@reddit

I'm surprised the Germans didn't reverse engineer an allied bomber, or at least produce more of the Ju 290s/ upscaled 390s.

[-]

Algaean@reddit

Mostly a capacity issue, they had problems building enough engines for their existing fighter and bomber needs; would you rather have 1 heavy bomber or 4 air defense fighters?

(Plus, building strategic bombers is harder than it looks!)

[-]

longraphe@reddit

I agree. Also, the worsening military situation saw a ban on building bombers.

[-]

Plump_Apparatus@reddit

The Germans couldn't produce a powerful enough engine for a heavy strategic bomber.

[-]

TallestHamAround@reddit

They had several sufficiently capable engines in active service, so that's a blatant lie. They simply never felt the need to have one, and even if they did have them anyways, they never would have reached the US or the Urals. Nothing the allies had could have either.

[-]

Plump_Apparatus@reddit

They had several sufficiently capable engines in active service, so that's a blatant lie.

Wow, coming out of gate aggressive, eh?

Germany consistently failed to produce aviation engines capable of over 2,000 PS. Germany spent over a decade trying to do so. The Jumo 222 never reached production status, the only engine that did was the DB 606(and related 610, 613) which powered the only heavy bomber that Germany produced, the He 177. The 606 joined two DB 601s V-12 side by side with both cranks driving a common gearbox. The 606 never matured into a reliable engine, and despite over 1,000 He 177s being produced they never amounted to any real value as te only thing the DB 606 did reliably was catch fire. The Bomber B and Amerikabomber programs produced nothing, as there was no engine for the platform.

So no, it's not a blatant lie. It's some basic WW2 aviation history that anyone interested in the topic is well aware of.

[-]

TallestHamAround@reddit

Well, I might remind you of something.

Did the B-17, B-24, Lancaster, Halifax, Stirling, G5N, or PE-8 have 2,000 HP engines?

No. No they did not. Not one of them did.

And yet all are heavy strategic bombers. Maybe you should give awareness a try before preaching it.

[-]

Plump_Apparatus@reddit

Did the B-17, B-24, Lancaster, Halifax, Stirling, G5N, or PE-8 have 2,000 HP engines?

Where would Germany get more BMW 801s, the only engine of that class, when all of them were being consumed mostly by the Fw 190?

Further, the bomber B program was meant to replace such designs as the Dornier 17 and JU-88, not produce a heavy strategic bombers.

It was to a produce a new Schnellbomber that was significantly larger and faster than the existing Do 17 or the Ju-88. Germany failed to produce a engine powerful enough to do so, which is why the Bomber B program never went anywhere.

Other than that you seem like a real asshole, likewise I'm out.

[-]