China advised to get out of civilian airplane business | You serious?

[MastanKhan]

My comment on The Street.

Note To China: Get Out of the Airplane Business -- Leave It to Boeing and Airbus | The Street

Hi,

So where is china going to buy the engine for their planes----.

 

[Akasa]

How much have you earned from CCP for this job?

A lot greater than what an average Viet makes.

Hi,

So where is china going to buy the engine for their planes----.

A recent report stated that the Chinese have over ten engine projects running. The most likely candidates would be the high bypass WS-20, CJ-1000A, or perhaps a variant of the two.

 

[imiakhtar]

A recent report stated that the Chinese have over ten engine projects running. The most likely candidates would be the high bypass WS-20, CJ-1000A, or perhaps a variant of the two.

In similar ilk to what I said before, if China can't get a relatively "simple*" straight pipe military turbojet to run reliably, what makes you think they can produce a fuel efficient HBPR turbofan for the civilian market where engines are expected to stay on the airframe for 1000s of hours.

*Of course jet engine design and manufacture is anything but simple.

My comment on The Street.

There is a huge difference in certifying civilian aircraft and military platforms. As such your reply listing China's military/space developments is pointless in the civilian aerospace context.

then all you have done has been right

Randy T in Seattle and Leahy in Toulouse are hardly losing sleep over comac and other aero-developments.

If its in china interest they should build

Good luck selling them to airlines worldwide.

Tell me how is the Xian MA60/600 doing?

This means west is so scared that they could lose potentially atleast 600 [minimum] transport aircraft sales of airbus and boeing within next 7 years. If C919 costs $85-88m this means China bag $55B something not including support and other costs.

Imagine if in next 5-7 years China reveal a project that compares 747 nightmare!

China can't get her crap together and assemble a DC-9 build (ARJ-21) with tooling from McD in a timely fashion. Not only that, but they've had to acquire the services of antonov to do the wing design work for them. Despite having had test frames flying for 5 or so years, it's the manufacturing and certification process which is letting them down. They have no experience in the certification process whatsoever. As such, how on earth are they going to bring to market a VLA in the next 10 or so years?

he Comac ARJ21 regional jet project has been delayed again, with the aircraft now due to enter service in April or May 2015, eight years later than scheduled early in the program and 13 years after development began.

ARJ21 Delayed Again, Due To Enter Service April-May 2015

I bet we'll be able to out-compete them on a cost basis too.

You know, the airbus A320 assembly line in Tianjin has the highest cost per aircraft. That's right, it's more than Hamburg, Toulouse and definitely more than Mobile, Alabama when it gets up and running.

Building the plane is not a problem

Judging by the problems the ARJ21 has had, it seems to be a case of 50:50.

Anyone who think America or the west would share its latest tech with China is a delusional fool

Actually, transfer of technology with China is not the biggest issue. As has been hinted at, it is a case of China not respecting property rights. For example a company I used to work for developed a product using patented technology from a US company. However, those rights were respected and we drew up an agreement where the US company would receive royalties for the product that we sold.

The US uses Boeing. Europe uses Airbus. China must use its own planes.

A very myopic view of a globalised world. You are wrong.

The US uses Embraer, Bombardier, Boeing and Airbus. The same can be said for EU and China.

A recent report stated that the Chinese have over ten engine projects running. The most likely candidates would be the high bypass WS-20, CJ-1000A, or perhaps a variant of the two.

In similar ilk to what I said before, if China can't get a relatively "simple*" straight pipe military turbojet to run reliably, what makes you think they can produce a fuel efficient HBPR turbofan for the civilian market where engines are expected to stay on the airframe for 1000s of hours.

*Of course jet engine design and manufacture is anything but simple.

My comment on The Street.

There is a huge difference in certifying civilian aircraft and military platforms. As such your reply listing China's military/space developments is pointless in the civilian aerospace context.

then all you have done has been right

Randy T in Seattle and Leahy in Toulouse are hardly losing sleep over comac and other aero-developments.

If its in china interest they should build

Good luck selling them to airlines worldwide.

Tell me how is the Xian MA60/600 doing?

This means west is so scared that they could lose potentially atleast 600 [minimum] transport aircraft sales of airbus and boeing within next 7 years. If C919 costs $85-88m this means China bag $55B something not including support and other costs.

Imagine if in next 5-7 years China reveal a project that compares 747 nightmare!

China can't get her crap together and assemble a DC-9 build (ARJ-21) with tooling from McD in a timely fashion. Not only that, but they've had to acquire the services of antonov to do the wing design work for them. Despite having had test frames flying for 5 or so years, it's the manufacturing and certification process which is letting them down. They have no experience in the certification process whatsoever. As such, how on earth are they going to bring to market a VLA in the next 10 or so years?

he Comac ARJ21 regional jet project has been delayed again, with the aircraft now due to enter service in April or May 2015, eight years later than scheduled early in the program and 13 years after development began.

ARJ21 Delayed Again, Due To Enter Service April-May 2015

I bet we'll be able to out-compete them on a cost basis too.

You know, the airbus A320 assembly line in Tianjin has the highest cost per aircraft. That's right, it's more than Hamburg, Toulouse and definitely more than Mobile, Alabama when it gets up and running.

Building the plane is not a problem

Judging by the problems the ARJ21 has had, it seems to be a case of 50:50.

Anyone who think America or the west would share its latest tech with China is a delusional fool

Actually, transfer of technology with China is not the biggest issue. As has been hinted at, it is a case of China not respecting property rights. For example a company I used to work for developed a product using patented technology from a US company. However, those rights were respected and we drew up an agreement where the US company would receive royalties for the product that we sold.

The US uses Boeing. Europe uses Airbus. China must use its own planes.

A very myopic view of a globalised world. You are wrong.

The US uses Embraer, Bombardier, Boeing and Airbus. The same can be said for EU and China.

 

[bolo]

In similar ilk to what I said before, if China can't get a relatively "simple*" straight pipe military turbojet to run reliably, what makes you think they can produce a fuel efficient HBPR turbofan for the civilian market where engines are expected to stay on the airframe for 1000s of hours.

*Of course jet engine design and manufacture is anything but simple.



There is a huge difference in certifying civilian aircraft and military platforms. As such your reply listing China's military/space developments is pointless in the civilian aerospace context.



Randy T in Seattle and Leahy in Toulouse are hardly losing sleep over comac and other aero-developments.



Good luck selling them to airlines worldwide.

Tell me how is the Xian MA60/600 doing?



China can't get her crap together and assemble a DC-9 build (ARJ-21) with tooling from McD in a timely fashion. Not only that, but they've had to acquire the services of antonov to do the wing design work for them. Despite having had test frames flying for 5 or so years, it's the manufacturing and certification process which is letting them down. They have no experience in the certification process whatsoever. As such, how on earth are they going to bring to market a VLA in the next 10 or so years?

he Comac ARJ21 regional jet project has been delayed again, with the aircraft now due to enter service in April or May 2015, eight years later than scheduled early in the program and 13 years after development began.

ARJ21 Delayed Again, Due To Enter Service April-May 2015



You know, the airbus A320 assembly line in Tianjin has the highest cost per aircraft. That's right, it's more than Hamburg, Toulouse and definitely more than Mobile, Alabama when it gets up and running.



Judging by the problems the ARJ21 has had, it seems to be a case of 50:50.



Actually, transfer of technology with China is not the biggest issue. As has been hinted at, it is a case of China not respecting property rights. For example a company I used to work for developed a product using patented technology from a US company. However, those rights were respected and we drew up an agreement where the US company would receive royalties for the product that we sold.



A very myopic view of a globalised world. You are wrong.

The US uses Embraer, Bombardier, Boeing and Airbus. The same can be said for EU and China.



In similar ilk to what I said before, if China can't get a relatively "simple*" straight pipe military turbojet to run reliably, what makes you think they can produce a fuel efficient HBPR turbofan for the civilian market where engines are expected to stay on the airframe for 1000s of hours.

*Of course jet engine design and manufacture is anything but simple.



There is a huge difference in certifying civilian aircraft and military platforms. As such your reply listing China's military/space developments is pointless in the civilian aerospace context.



Randy T in Seattle and Leahy in Toulouse are hardly losing sleep over comac and other aero-developments.



Good luck selling them to airlines worldwide.

Tell me how is the Xian MA60/600 doing?



China can't get her crap together and assemble a DC-9 build (ARJ-21) with tooling from McD in a timely fashion. Not only that, but they've had to acquire the services of antonov to do the wing design work for them. Despite having had test frames flying for 5 or so years, it's the manufacturing and certification process which is letting them down. They have no experience in the certification process whatsoever. As such, how on earth are they going to bring to market a VLA in the next 10 or so years?

he Comac ARJ21 regional jet project has been delayed again, with the aircraft now due to enter service in April or May 2015, eight years later than scheduled early in the program and 13 years after development began.

ARJ21 Delayed Again, Due To Enter Service April-May 2015



You know, the airbus A320 assembly line in Tianjin has the highest cost per aircraft. That's right, it's more than Hamburg, Toulouse and definitely more than Mobile, Alabama when it gets up and running.



Judging by the problems the ARJ21 has had, it seems to be a case of 50:50.



Actually, transfer of technology with China is not the biggest issue. As has been hinted at, it is a case of China not respecting property rights. For example a company I used to work for developed a product using patented technology from a US company. However, those rights were respected and we drew up an agreement where the US company would receive royalties for the product that we sold.



A very myopic view of a globalised world. You are wrong.

The US uses Embraer, Bombardier, Boeing and Airbus. The same can be said for EU and China.

I'm referring to military or would be military tech only. USA does not give closest allies latest military tech, so why would it be different to a non ally nation?

 

[Akasa]

In similar ilk to what I said before, if China can't get a relatively "simple*" straight pipe military turbojet to run reliably, what makes you think they can produce a fuel efficient HBPR turbofan for the civilian market where engines are expected to stay on the airframe for 1000s of hours.

*Of course jet engine design and manufacture is anything but simple.

And what makes you believe building a civilian turbofan requires going down the same developmental avenue, and thus face the same potential bottlenecks, as military equipment? China does not face restrictions from international suppliers unlike military engines, and China also has the support of virtually all domestic supply chains unlike the case of military-grade materiel which requires specially-geared companies. The fact is, companies like Airbus and Boeing all started from small enterprises, and through research and development, managed to climb to the top. In fact, those who come after Airbus and Boeing are in a technical sense better off since they would face lower market development costs.

 

[Kyle Sun]

In similar ilk to what I said before, if China can't get a relatively "simple*" straight pipe military turbojet to run reliably, what makes you think they can produce a fuel efficient HBPR turbofan for the civilian market where engines are expected to stay on the airframe for 1000s of hours.

*Of course jet engine design and manufacture is anything but simple.



There is a huge difference in certifying civilian aircraft and military platforms. As such your reply listing China's military/space developments is pointless in the civilian aerospace context.



Randy T in Seattle and Leahy in Toulouse are hardly losing sleep over comac and other aero-developments.



Good luck selling them to airlines worldwide.

Tell me how is the Xian MA60/600 doing?



China can't get her crap together and assemble a DC-9 build (ARJ-21) with tooling from McD in a timely fashion. Not only that, but they've had to acquire the services of antonov to do the wing design work for them. Despite having had test frames flying for 5 or so years, it's the manufacturing and certification process which is letting them down. They have no experience in the certification process whatsoever. As such, how on earth are they going to bring to market a VLA in the next 10 or so years?

he Comac ARJ21 regional jet project has been delayed again, with the aircraft now due to enter service in April or May 2015, eight years later than scheduled early in the program and 13 years after development began.

ARJ21 Delayed Again, Due To Enter Service April-May 2015



You know, the airbus A320 assembly line in Tianjin has the highest cost per aircraft. That's right, it's more than Hamburg, Toulouse and definitely more than Mobile, Alabama when it gets up and running.



Judging by the problems the ARJ21 has had, it seems to be a case of 50:50.



Actually, transfer of technology with China is not the biggest issue. As has been hinted at, it is a case of China not respecting property rights. For example a company I used to work for developed a product using patented technology from a US company. However, those rights were respected and we drew up an agreement where the US company would receive royalties for the product that we sold.



A very myopic view of a globalised world. You are wrong.

The US uses Embraer, Bombardier, Boeing and Airbus. The same can be said for EU and China.



In similar ilk to what I said before, if China can't get a relatively "simple*" straight pipe military turbojet to run reliably, what makes you think they can produce a fuel efficient HBPR turbofan for the civilian market where engines are expected to stay on the airframe for 1000s of hours.

*Of course jet engine design and manufacture is anything but simple.



There is a huge difference in certifying civilian aircraft and military platforms. As such your reply listing China's military/space developments is pointless in the civilian aerospace context.



Randy T in Seattle and Leahy in Toulouse are hardly losing sleep over comac and other aero-developments.



Good luck selling them to airlines worldwide.

Tell me how is the Xian MA60/600 doing?



China can't get her crap together and assemble a DC-9 build (ARJ-21) with tooling from McD in a timely fashion. Not only that, but they've had to acquire the services of antonov to do the wing design work for them. Despite having had test frames flying for 5 or so years, it's the manufacturing and certification process which is letting them down. They have no experience in the certification process whatsoever. As such, how on earth are they going to bring to market a VLA in the next 10 or so years?

he Comac ARJ21 regional jet project has been delayed again, with the aircraft now due to enter service in April or May 2015, eight years later than scheduled early in the program and 13 years after development began.

ARJ21 Delayed Again, Due To Enter Service April-May 2015



You know, the airbus A320 assembly line in Tianjin has the highest cost per aircraft. That's right, it's more than Hamburg, Toulouse and definitely more than Mobile, Alabama when it gets up and running.



Judging by the problems the ARJ21 has had, it seems to be a case of 50:50.



Actually, transfer of technology with China is not the biggest issue. As has been hinted at, it is a case of China not respecting property rights. For example a company I used to work for developed a product using patented technology from a US company. However, those rights were respected and we drew up an agreement where the US company would receive royalties for the product that we sold.



A very myopic view of a globalised world. You are wrong.

The US uses Embraer, Bombardier, Boeing and Airbus. The same can be said for EU and China.

Indeed , we do not have good engine ,we do not have as much experience as west.

But we are catching up,we are developing our indigenous engine and we are going to have our own big bird ,no matter for military or civil use.