 |
|
| Hobby Forum Index » Models - Scale » Italian Fighter looks a lot like a P-36... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Musicman59... |
 Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 4:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
there does not seem to be a lot of design copying during World War II,
but this Italian fighter seems to have some very similar lines to a
P-36.
Didn't the copying start in ernest after the war when the Soviet Union
was copying the B-29, etc.?
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXXPT0&P=W
Craig |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| William Banaszak... |
| Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 8:56 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Musicman59 wrote:
Quote: there does not seem to be a lot of design copying during World War II,
but this Italian fighter seems to have some very similar lines to a
P-36.
Didn't the copying start in ernest after the war when the Soviet Union
was copying the B-29, etc.?
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXXPT0&P=W
Craig
It's a development of the Re 2000 which most closely resmbled the
Seversky P-35. Despite the resemblance I don't think there was any
production license nor any parts that would cross-fit.
Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Don Stauffer... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:14 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Musicman59 wrote:
Quote: there does not seem to be a lot of design copying during World War II,
but this Italian fighter seems to have some very similar lines to a
P-36.
Didn't the copying start in ernest after the war when the Soviet Union
was copying the B-29, etc.?
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXXPT0&P=W
Craig
Depends on whether you mean authorized or non-authorized copying. The
former started VERY early. Usually called "licensed copy". I suspect
with the termoil the world was in during the war the niceties of
licensing were ignored, so it makes sense that there was a lot more
non-authorized copying.
That being said, if you are optimizing a design for certain performance
specs, it is very common for folks to arrive at very similar solutions,
at least in the basic shapes and arrangements.
Certainly the Russians and the Japanese made absolute copies of allied
planes from just before to after the war. However, others that merely
were similar in appearance are ones I'd give the benefit of the doubt to
the designer.
Brings up a gripe of mine- patenting. Patents, at least in US, are
supposed to be NOVEL, something a normal practicioner of the state of
the art would not think of. All these airplanes and car designs that
folks patent- ridiculous. Of course, the patent office no longer really
checks very much for novelty- let the courts decide that. To me a
design really should be novel for folks to get a patent. No patent, no
penalty for copying.
That being said, I wonder if the cost of reverse engineering wouldn't be
more than simply doing a fresh design. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| El Viejo Dragon... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:54 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
You all folks forget one simple thing.
When an engineer seeks a solution to a problem, first thing is to look
for an existing design that works and then adapt and/or improve it to
suit your application.
Nowadays, I'm surprised that nobody tried to patent the wheel.
Hell, we wouldn't have the Internet today if the guys who invented it
and made it work were thinking or enforcing patents for their excellent
work.
--
Vedran Kalamiza
www.HRCappuccino.org |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Enzo Matrix... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:36 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Don Stauffer wrote:
Quote: Musicman59 wrote:
there does not seem to be a lot of design copying during World War
II, but this Italian fighter seems to have some very similar lines
to a P-36.
Didn't the copying start in ernest after the war when the Soviet
Union was copying the B-29, etc.?
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXXPT0&P=W
Craig
Depends on whether you mean authorized or non-authorized copying. The
former started VERY early. Usually called "licensed copy". I suspect
with the termoil the world was in during the war the niceties of
licensing were ignored, so it makes sense that there was a lot more
non-authorized copying.
That being said, if you are optimizing a design for certain
performance specs, it is very common for folks to arrive at very
similar solutions, at least in the basic shapes and arrangements.
Which explains the F-15 and MiG-25, as well as the TU-144 and Concorde.
The phenomenon is very apparent in the fossil record, where it is known as
"convergent evolution".
--
Enzo
I wear the cheese. It does not wear me. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bruce Burden... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 9:43 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Don Stauffer <stauffer at (no spam) usfamily.net> wrote:
:
: folks patent- ridiculous. Of course, the patent office no longer really
: checks very much for novelty- let the courts decide that.
:
Two problems here:
1) The supremes (before the bush boffins), tried to play politics,
and get congress off of its collective dead ass and fix a bad
law, so they decided to make software patentable, and perhaps
so called "business methods" patents.
Problem - the USPTO was not equipped (and, for that matter, still
is not), to have patent examiners who are also software engineers.
So, a lot of crap is approved for a patent.
2) "prior art" is ass backwards. It is better, from a legal stand
point, to NOT LOOK for prior art. Then, if it is found, you can
plead ignorance.
Problem - the USPTO is looked upon as a revenue center, not a cost
center - another ass backwards problem. So, patent examiners are
required to approve X major patents and Y minor patents per time
frame, so they do not look for prior art, either.
This is another reason a lot of bad patents are issued - there is
an incentive NOT to look for prior art. And, the submission is
secret, so there is no opportunity to search for prior art before
a patent is issued, then you have to fight to get it revoked - a
very difficult process. Meanwhile, piss poor patents are still
(legally) valid until they are revoked, so the patent trolls can
continue to milk the (sorry) system.
And, frankly, having judges decide the legitimacy of patents is
ludicrous. They know even less about technology, and still must
work within the legal framework that permitted software patents
in the first place.
Bruce
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I like bad!" Bruce Burden Austin, TX.
- Thuganlitha
The Power and the Prophet
Robert Don Hughes |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Don Stauffer... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 17, 2009 8:19 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Enzo Matrix wrote:
Quote: Don Stauffer wrote:
That being said, if you are optimizing a design for certain
performance specs, it is very common for folks to arrive at very
similar solutions, at least in the basic shapes and arrangements.
Which explains the F-15 and MiG-25, as well as the TU-144 and Concorde.
The phenomenon is very apparent in the fossil record, where it is known
as "convergent evolution".
Exactly. Those are some of the planes I was thinking of. I worked at
MD when the 15 was born, and when the 25 was first shown. Few thought
the Mig (wasn't it the 29 that looked so much like the 15?) was a copy. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Pietro... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 3:00 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
The reason for the Reggiane Re.2000 looks like Seversky P.35 is that
Roberto Longhi, the chief designer of Reggiane, had worked in the United
States for the Uppercu Burnelli Corp. and collaborated with Alexander
Kartveli of Seversky.
Ing. Longhi also learned that american aviation factories use to protect
with primer all interior parts of airplanes and so he applied this
tecnique to Reggiane airplanes.
Reggiane were the best built italian airplanes of that years, and
Re.2005 remains probably the best and more beautiful italian fighter of
WWII.
Pietro
Musicman59 ha scritto:
Quote: there does not seem to be a lot of design copying during World War II,
but this Italian fighter seems to have some very similar lines to a
P-36.
Didn't the copying start in ernest after the war when the Soviet Union
was copying the B-29, etc.?
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXXPT0&P=W
Craig |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| GordonD... |
| Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 3:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Enzo Matrix" <enzo55 at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7jsas8F36p9gpU1 at (no spam) mid.individual.net...
Quote: Don Stauffer wrote:
Musicman59 wrote:
there does not seem to be a lot of design copying during World War
II, but this Italian fighter seems to have some very similar lines
to a P-36.
Didn't the copying start in ernest after the war when the Soviet
Union was copying the B-29, etc.?
http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0001p?&I=LXXPT0&P=W
Craig
Depends on whether you mean authorized or non-authorized copying. The
former started VERY early. Usually called "licensed copy". I suspect
with the termoil the world was in during the war the niceties of
licensing were ignored, so it makes sense that there was a lot more
non-authorized copying.
That being said, if you are optimizing a design for certain
performance specs, it is very common for folks to arrive at very
similar solutions, at least in the basic shapes and arrangements.
Which explains the F-15 and MiG-25, as well as the TU-144 and Concorde.
Or the Space Shuttle Orbiter and Buran.
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland
"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:13 pm
|
|