Z-20 (all variants) thread

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Can Sirkorsky actually sue Harbin over the Z-20 ?

unless Sikorsky can prove it violates a Copyright, External appearance is not proof of a direct copy, and Generally Copyrights have a expiration date. The nly thing that could happen is if it turned out that the Z20 had any US made parts or parts made by a US owned maker. But I bet the PLA worked hard to keep any US parts out.

 

[broadsword]

Can Sirkorsky actually sue Harbin over the Z-20 ?

If Sikorsky could, then Boeing would have sued Airbus, and Lockheed and MD would be suing each other over their Tristar and DC-10.

 

[davidau]

spot the differences with Blakhawk...

 

[broadsword]

So while to the casual observer the Z-20 is the doppleganger of the Blackhawk, and helicopters are not governed by the same aerodynamic laws as aeroplanes, there have been updates and modifications, the Z-20 is as similar to the Blackhawk as Blackstone is to the Blackhawk.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

Just to Clarify T2contra MD merged with Boeing over 20 years ago.
There have been cases where a maker has tried to sue another because a new product was confused for a copy of a existing one. HK for example was about to launch one against the Mexican government's Dirección General de Industria Militar del Ejército for the FX05 Xiuhcoatl beliving it to be a clone of the G36 but in the end HK realized that the resemblance was only skin deep.

In this case there are clear indications that the "Copyhawk" is a case of imitation not necessarily replication.
Because the PLA likely looked at there S70 C2 and used it as the basis of writing there requirements for the Z20 they ended up with a final product that looked similar. Just like how the Russian Buran and US Shuttle look alike. or the US B1 and Russian Tu160, The Yak 24 and the Penski H21 (Flying banana). There seems to be a big difference though between the Z20 which although similar has been obviously meant to "Improve and Sino-fy" The Blackhawk and what the Iranians did with the Shabaviz 2-75 and the Bell 214 which is a straight copy.
I mean China in 1988 evaluated the A129 when looking for a new attack chopper. They used knowledge gained from that to set a template for what they felt a Attack chopper should look like and designed the Z10. Had they studded the Mi24 instead I imagine we would see Transport attack choppers. had they studied bell choppers instead of Blackhawk and Eurocopter I imagine Skids would be more popular.

So while to the casual observer the Z-20 is the doppleganger of the Blackhawk, and helicopters are not governed by the same aerodynamic laws as aeroplanes, there have been updates and modifications, the Z-20 is as similar to the Blackhawk as Blackstone is to the Blackhawk.

Form follows function. and Helicopters are more about function. one of the biggest driving factors to the blackhawk design is the landing gear. remember that the Blackhawk was designed in the early 70's and first entered service in the early 80's. The direct predecessors of the Blackhawk was the Bell UH1 Iroquois better known as the Huey. the Utility Tactical Transport Aircraft System program that lead to the Blackhawk demanded dual stage oleo (Shock absorbing) main landing gear, a Crash rated Tail boom Armored crew and passenger seats, every thing had to be able to take a bullet or survive a hard crash with lots of redundancy. It's built like a A10 minus the canon.
. The PLA looking at such a platform and using it in the highlands would logically say when building there successor. "We should carry over these features"
heck if you look at the Successor concepts in the US the Defiant and Valor they have a lot of the same features. look at the KA60 from Russia, same basic features.

 

[broadsword]

Just to Clarify T2contra MD merged with Boeing over 20 years ago.

To clarify further, the DC-10 was produced well before the merger.

There have been cases where a maker has tried to sue another because a new product was confused for a copy of a existing one. HK for example was about to launch one against the Mexican government's Dirección General de Industria Militar del Ejército for the FX05 Xiuhcoatl beliving it to be a clone of the G36 but in the end HK realized that the resemblance was only skin deep.

There is no confusion between the Z-20 and the Blackhawk among the keen observers.

In this case there are clear indications that the "Copyhawk" is a case of imitation not necessarily replication.
Because the PLA likely looked at there S70 C2 and used it as the basis of writing there requirements for the Z20 they ended up with a final product that looked similar. Just like how the Russian Buran and US Shuttle look alike. or the US B1 and Russian Tu160, The Yak 24 and the Penski H21 (Flying banana). There seems to be a big difference though between the Z20 which although similar has been obviously meant to "Improve and Sino-fy" The Blackhawk and what the Iranians did with the Shabaviz 2-75 and the Bell 214 which is a straight copy.
I mean China in 1988 evaluated the A129 when looking for a new attack chopper. They used knowledge gained from that to set a template for what they felt a Attack chopper should look like and designed the Z10. Had they studded the Mi24 instead I imagine we would see Transport attack choppers. had they studied bell choppers instead of Blackhawk and Eurocopter I imagine Skids would be more popular.


Form follows function. and Helicopters are more about function. one of the biggest driving factors to the blackhawk design is the landing gear. remember that the Blackhawk was designed in the early 70's and first entered service in the early 80's. The direct predecessors of the Blackhawk was the Bell UH1 Iroquois better known as the Huey. the Utility Tactical Transport Aircraft System program that lead to the Blackhawk demanded dual stage oleo (Shock absorbing) main landing gear, a Crash rated Tail boom Armored crew and passenger seats, every thing had to be able to take a bullet or survive a hard crash with lots of redundancy. It's built like a A10 minus the canon.
. The PLA looking at such a platform and using it in the highlands would logically say when building there successor. "We should carry over these features"
heck if you look at the Successor concepts in the US the Defiant and Valor they have a lot of the same features. look at the KA60 from Russia, same basic features.

There are enough improvements and changes in the Z-20 to make a copyright case moot.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

That's kinda my point.

They may resemble each other but that's simply because of the efficiency of the design. It's like the wing in nature. The Bat, the Bird, the Pterodactyl and the insect. They all evolved the same idea independent of each other why? because it works so well.
Form follows function.
The PLA set the demands for Harbin, 10 tonne class with a set capacity of 4 man crew with 12-14 man chalk, twin engine for reliable range and power, sliding doors with sliding windows for easy ingress and egress, a set maximum height and length single rotor, shock absorbing landing gear.
And there response was logical.
2 engines with a 5 bladed main rotor to milk every bit of power from the engines for hot and high.
2 large doors with large windows for troops to get into and out of no ramp as it would weaken the tail and demand a taller chopper.
they could have used a festron tail like the Z9 and Z19 but that would have placed more weight on the rear of the chopper demanding a beefier tail wheel and placing limits on performance and capacity.
3 gear like that on the Blackhawk to absorb hard impact in emergency.

It's not that they copied the Blackhawk they just posed the same equations and got the same answers. Because of the PLA's experience with the Blackhawks they wanted something that performed in the same way to fill the same niche. So it's only logical that the Machine has similarities.

 

[broadsword]

That's kinda my point.

They may resemble each other but that's simply because of the efficiency of the design. It's like the wing in nature. The Bat, the Bird, the Pterodactyl and the insect. They all evolved the same idea independent of each other why? because it works so well.
Form follows function.
The PLA set the demands for Harbin, 10 tonne class with a set capacity of 4 man crew with 12-14 man chalk, twin engine for reliable range and power, sliding doors with sliding windows for easy ingress and egress, a set maximum height and length single rotor, shock absorbing landing gear.
And there response was logical.
2 engines with a 5 bladed main rotor to milk every bit of power from the engines for hot and high.
2 large doors with large windows for troops to get into and out of no ramp as it would weaken the tail and demand a taller chopper.
they could have used a festron tail like the Z9 and Z19 but that would have placed more weight on the rear of the chopper demanding a beefier tail wheel and placing limits on performance and capacity.
3 gear like that on the Blackhawk to absorb hard impact in emergency.

It's not that they copied the Blackhawk they just posed the same equations and got the same answers. Because of the PLA's experience with the Blackhawks they wanted something that performed in the same way to fill the same niche. So it's only logical that the Machine has similarities.

My point is that they updated it, so to the experienced observer, they are not the same, and the Blackhawk customer who is not a layman, is not going to mistake the Z-20 for the Blackhawk. And the Z-20 customer knows he is not buying a duplicate of the Blackhawk. So a judge hearing the copyright case understands the customers' point of view.

 

[MwRYum]

All good points and Sikorsky's (and in extension, LM) legal division would've been gone through this whole thing by now (because I just can't believe they haven't got wind of Z-20, that thing have been in test flight for more than 4 years now), concluded there's no case even if AVIC decided to put Z-20 in 2018 Zhuhai Airshow, and take pre-orders from potential export buyers.

But...we should know that by comparison, the mainstream media (*cough* Fake Media *cough**cough*) and the general public ain't that smart or observant. Obviously they'd thought there's a story to spin amid the Sino-US trade war, and gonna paster the Sikorsky and its parent company LM, for "comments". Which is why I said earlier Sikorsky AC should prepare a press kit...

 

[asif iqbal]

Who cares if it works go for it !

USAF used German design for B1