Made under license

[The Basket]

So let's say country x buys the licence for the DC-3. What have they bought?

The airframe? Engines? Dials and gauges?

The tech pack? Jigs? Do they have full access to the aircraft or only the buys the bits the main contractor does?

 

[Shortround6]

This may be taking the easy way out but each "deal" may have been different. Even if Douglas licenced the DC-2 (or -3) to different countries/companies each deal may have differed in the amount of "help" Douglas supplied, including but not limited to, Pattern aircraft, parts kits for X number of aircraft to be assembled in the licensing country. This could also be on a sliding "scale" with several 100% complete kits and then kits with progressively few Douglas supplied parts until the licensee is doing 100% of the airframe. How much tooling was supplied by Douglas or how many drawings for assembly jigs were supplied may also differ.
Instruments could be local or sourced from a country that speaks the same language as the Licensee. Or from the companies that supply Douglas with appropriate labels/units of measure. Douglas did not make their own instruments (Neither did any other airframe maker).

Engines are not up to the Airframe maker (like Douglas) licence. Douglas might help to arrange engine purchases or simply refer the customer to the favored engine makers sales office.
Same with propellers and other major hardware. Like landing gear or brakes.

MY father was a production engineer for Colt Firearms and Colt in the 1970s set up M-16 factories in 3 different Asian countries and almost in a 4th. My Father was involved with two of them (Korea and the Philippines). He was not the lead engineer. However each factory had a different rate of manufacture (number of guns per month), each country had a different education standard for machinists. Each country was supposed to make a different product than M-16s once the initial production run was completed.
This meant that different machines and tooling were used in each factory rather than just duplicating or expanding purchase numbers of like machinery.

There was no one size fits all licence agreement.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

So let's say country x buys the licence for the DC-3. What have they bought?

The airframe? Engines? Dials and gauges?

The tech pack? Jigs? Do they have full access to the aircraft or only the buys the bits the main contractor does?

Depends on the contract...

 

[GrauGeist]

The license allows the type to be manufactured by another company.
In the case of the Japanese L2D, Nakajima manufactured it and equipped it with their own engines.
The designation even credits Douglas:
L2D means second type in the "L" series (L for transport) followed by the "D" for Douglas.
Nakajima also built the DC-2 under license as well.

 

[The Basket]

My query is that Douglas will be the designer and main contractor.

But parts of the aircraft will not be made by Douglas. So if all the Japanese are buying is the tech pack then you have a basic metal airframe.

Could Douglas offer parts that it sub contracted? Or does Douglas already have this agreement?

Seems a minefield of ifs and buts

 

[GregP]

It is. Caveat Emptor.

 

[pbehn]

I met a German welder in Greece. He was working on license built Leopard II tanks bought from Germany by the Greeks. Since the Germans supplied the engines, the guns and guidance systems + most of the amour and drive system it was hard to see what the Greeks did TBH. All contracts are different, the Russians didn't bother with an agreement for their B-29s, they didn't get much customer service either.

 

[GrauGeist]

My query is that Douglas will be the designer and main contractor.

But parts of the aircraft will not be made by Douglas. So if all the Japanese are buying is the tech pack then you have a basic metal airframe.

Could Douglas offer parts that it sub contracted? Or does Douglas already have this agreement?

Seems a minefield of ifs and buts

The Japanese manufacturer Mitsui (a subsidiary of Nakajima), purchased technical data and the production rights from Douglas in February 1938 for $90,000 ('38 dollars). The Japanese also purchased production machinery from the U.S. to facilitate production of the aircraft, of which Mitsui and Showa made technical revisions to the design to conform to Japanese Navy specifications.
These L2Ds were made entirely from scratch with virtually no support from Douglas.
The "Tabby" had native engines (Kinsei 43), instrumentation and tires, built with native metals, woods, wiring and other parts.
The only thing that can be connected to Douglas, is the design and some imported production machinery.

There were 21 Douglas built DC-3s purchased by the Japanese government between 1937 and 1939, intended for the two "airways" owned by the Japanese military, but reverted to the Navy. The last 5 Douglas built DC-3s that were delivered to Japan, were refitted by Showa to their specs.

So it it breaks down like this:
Douglas built - L2D1
Nakajima (Mitsui) built: L2D2
Showa built: L2D2-1

 

[FLYBOYJ]

My query is that Douglas will be the designer and main contractor.

But parts of the aircraft will not be made by Douglas. So if all the Japanese are buying is the tech pack then you have a basic metal airframe.

Could Douglas offer parts that it sub contracted? Or does Douglas already have this agreement?

Seems a minefield of ifs and buts

It is. When I worked for Lockheed the Japanese bought 3 P-3s outright, kits to build another 5 then they built tooling to build the rest of their fleet all under a licensing agreement. Engines and avionics were purchased separately IIRC.

 

[swampyankee]

My query is that Douglas will be the designer and main contractor.

But parts of the aircraft will not be made by Douglas. So if all the Japanese are buying is the tech pack then you have a basic metal airframe.

Could Douglas offer parts that it sub contracted? Or does Douglas already have this agreement?

Seems a minefield of ifs and buts

It's certainly a minefield. Leaving aside details like different units of measure and drawing conventions, there are also parts that airframe makers design but don't produce, as they don't have that sort of equipment. This likely includes things like forgings and castings, but may also include things like elastomeric parts for engine mounts, oleo-pneumatic struts, and de-icing boots.

 

[The Basket]

Points of interest to me.

In the late 30s Japan was trying to be self sufficient in aviation so choosing a western design is odd choice. Although not uncommon because aspects of the DC-3 maybe was more interesting than the aircraft as a whole. Plus western manufacturing techniques.

Also in the late 30s, Japan went dark and closed as much of their technology to western eyes as possible.

By licencing the DC-3, it would have allowed Douglas engineers a good insight into the true strength and capabilities of the Japanese industrial military complex. Very welcome intel to western spies.

Also the fact America was willing to trade the latest tech with the Japanese was very short sighted and hardly wise. By the late 30s the expansion policy was visible and should have rang alarm bells.

 

[SaparotRob]

I believe it was President Coolidge who said "The business of America is business."

 

[SaparotRob]

Not up on Marxism but was it Lenin who said "the capitalists will sell us the rope we will hang them with."? Kinda' appropriate considering what The Basket just wrote.

 

[GrauGeist]

The Japanese had closer ties to Heinkel than they did with Douglas.
As it is, they purchased both the DC-2 and DC-3, as well as Pratt & Whitney engines.

The Aichi D3A was based on the Heinkel He70 and powered by the Kinsei 54, which was based on the Pratt & Whitney R-1690.

The Heinkel He66 (He50) was built for Japan and became the Aichi D1A.

Douglas engineers weren't in Japan, but Heinkel engineers were.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Points of interest to me.

In the late 30s Japan was trying to be self sufficient in aviation so choosing a western design is odd choice. Although not uncommon because aspects of the DC-3 maybe was more interesting than the aircraft as a whole. Plus western manufacturing techniques.

Also in the late 30s, Japan went dark and closed as much of their technology to western eyes as possible.

By licencing the DC-3, it would have allowed Douglas engineers a good insight into the true strength and capabilities of the Japanese industrial military complex. Very welcome intel to western spies.

Also the fact America was willing to trade the latest tech with the Japanese was very short sighted and hardly wise. By the late 30s the expansion policy was visible and should have rang alarm bells.

There were many countries that sold airframes to future combatants. Tensions between the Japanese and United States really didn't come to a critical point until 1940/41. I don't know if any illegal intelligence gathering was conducted by either side during this period but I can tell you that there wasn't that much to actual airframe construction.

 

[pbehn]

There were many countries that sold airframes to future combatants. Tensions between the Japanese and United States really didn't come to a critical point until 1940/41. I don't know if any illegal intelligence gathering was conducted by either side during this period but I can tell you that there wasn't that much to actual airframe construction.

Tensions had been building between UK and Germany since 1933 but Messerschmitt were still paying royalties for use of leading edge slats on the 109 and on 3 Sept 1939 some of the Germans interred when war was declared were machine tool specialists installing machines in a Rolls Royce factory. In hindsight it seems strange but at the time stopping it would probably increase tensions further, it certainly wouldn't have stopped the Bf109 having slats.

 

[special ed]

Don't forget the Japanese bought the first DC-4.

 

[GrauGeist]

Don't forget the Japanese bought the first DC-4.

They bought the DC-4 prototype (DC-4E) and based a bomber on it's design, the production version (DC-4A/C-54) was different.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

They bought the DC-4 prototype (DC-4E) and based a bomber on it's design, the production version (DC-4A/C-54) was different.

Nakajima G5N - Wikipedia

 

[FLYBOYJ]

DC-4E