China's bid to challenge Boeing and Airbus falters

[y_p_w]

At the very least China doesn't have a strong history of civil aviation. They send an inordinate number of people to the US for training in anticipation of piloting large jets. Part of it would be that the military controls the airspace there. I don't think learning English is an issue since English is the language for pilots and ATC around the world anyways.

 

[fdcg27]

No doubt about the long and deep aviation knowledge our country has. Still, Japan developed one of the best fighters of WW2 lacking any such base of experience. Most of what's involved in developing and certifying a fairly current airliner is readily available information. The engines themselves are a major deal, but no transport airframer since De Havilland has built their own. They're bought pieces. The Chinese should be able to build a single aisle airliner, although their efforts to date don't really demonstrate this.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by fdcg27

The Chinese should be able to build a single aisle airliner, although their efforts to date don't really demonstrate this.

They built a copy of the F-22 and F-35 ... so I'd think they could copy someone's commercial jet liner. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=china+f-22+copy

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted by fdcg27

The Chinese should be able to build a single aisle airliner, although their efforts to date don't really demonstrate this.

Who has done that in the past 70 years? US. Canada. Germany. Netherlands. France. UK. Brazil. Russia/USSR. Japan. Still - the hardest thing is really the engines, and it's easy enough to buy from PW, GE/CFM, or RR. Even the Chinese effort involves buying from CFM.

 

[marine65]

Originally Posted by fdcg27

No doubt about the long and deep aviation knowledge our country has. Still, Japan developed one of the best fighters of WW2 lacking any such base of experience. Most of what's involved in developing and certifying a fairly current airliner is readily available information. The engines themselves are a major deal, but no transport airframer since De Havilland has built their own. They're bought pieces. The Chinese should be able to build a single aisle airliner, although their efforts to date don't really demonstrate this.

The Japanese Zero was a Howard Hughes designed aircraft that was rejected by the U.S. prewar. Howard sold the design to Mitsubishi.

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted by fdcg27

Still, Japan developed one of the best fighters of WW2 lacking any such base of experience.

I'm glad you brought that up!! Wiki has a great page disusing the Zero. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_A6M_Zero The Japanese did take knowledge from American manufacturers, that's for sure. Not unlike the Chinese...

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by y_p_w

Originally Posted by edyvw

Originally Posted by A_Harman

Jet engines take longer to develop than airframes. If the engine problem is due to unexpected loads being place on it by the airframe, it's going to take a lot longer than a year to fix. More like three.

Like I pointed before, their miliatry ejts are still reliant on Russian manufacturing. Their F22 copy is completely reliant on Russian engines. When pillar of economic development is copy/paste, doing something on your own is really, really painful.

Depends on what. The Chinese are having a huge push in AI and any kind of complacency is misplaced. The main issue with those engines meant to super cruise is that the "secret sauce" is reliably making single crystal turbine blades. That's more art than engineering, and even the Russians haven't mastered it yet. PW and GE mastered that 2 decades ago and Rolls starting to make them now, but the Russians haven't quite figured it out yet, and the Chinese are so far behind that they're just buying Russian engines. It seems like the Chinese are trying to figure out the technique and can't seem to master it. It's about making them fast enough. They can keep on trying and rejecting most of their output, as well as putting up with early failures.

I agree with this. However, complacency goes both ways. With recent developments in China I would say they are stepping into this teritory more than we do. Complacency in regimes like Chines is more common than government organizations like in the US. Russians are behind because Russians really never pushed for such development in 80's. Once USSR collapsed that was it. When we talk about Russians we have to differentiate from perception and reality, being that their economy is smaller than Italian. That limits how much they can do, regardless what they claim, and they claim a lot of things.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted by edyvw

When we talk about Russians we have to differentiate from perception and reality, being that their economy is smaller than Italian. That limits how much they can do, regardless what they claim, and they claim a lot of things.

At the very least there were some technologies that they were very good at from the Soviet days, and that they're still pretty good at today. They're economy as a whole may be a mess, but at the very least they've figured out sending people into space and have high performance aircraft engines that don't blow up.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by y_p_w

Originally Posted by edyvw

When we talk about Russians we have to differentiate from perception and reality, being that their economy is smaller than Italian. That limits how much they can do, regardless what they claim, and they claim a lot of things.

At the very least there were some technologies that they were very good at from the Soviet days, and that they're still pretty good at today. They're economy as a whole may be a mess, but at the very least they've figured out sending people into space and have high performance aircraft engines that don't blow up.

Absolutely true. There is that however, though. Some things they do are so simple but so effective that it is astonishing. During Bosnian war I dealt with Western made anti aircraft weapons that we managed to smuggle and Russian made we seized. Most definiately Russian made were much more effective, easier to deal with, more robust etc. But, anything that requires logistics is a problem, a huge problem. Their unreliability in spare parts supply completely negates advantages they have. Once Serbian pilot at Air War College here while we were drinking told me how they ordered 10 engines for MIG29, 7 did not start in test center. The build quality? That is afterthought. I remember when we got 20+ UH-1 after Bosnian war through equip and train program. We had some MI-8's. I mean every single one MI8 had different cockpit. It is like every shift had its own way of assembling helicopters. We got UH-1, and first comment of my friend was: ah, each one is the same But, when they nail something, it is usually deadly as [censored] 70 years after

 

[Snagglefoot]

To be fair, the first commercial jet liner was not built by the Americans. It was the de Havilland Comet built in Britain.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted by edyvw

We had some MI-8's. I mean every single one MI8 had different cockpit. It is like every shift had its own way of assembling helicopters. We got UH-1, and first comment of my friend was: ah, each one is the same

How does that work. I've certainly heard about how pilots just get whatever aircraft is assigned to them out of a pool of serviced aircraft. There's the known name of a particular pilot (and perhaps radar operator) stenciled on the plane, but that supposedly means nothing as to who gets to fly a particular aircraft. It's got to be a huge pain to get something different each time. Now I have seen US military aircraft, and some are absolutely ancient. I toured a KC-10 once. It kind of depressed me that the pilot was so much younger than me and probably younger than then plane. But there were dials and gauges everywhere. I wonder what his transition would be if he wanted to be an airline pilot since almost no airlines have planes without modern controls. I do remember seeing an open cockpit door once when boarding a Southwest 737 and that thing must have been 25 years old with gauges and dials everywhere. I thought they would have retired it by then.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by y_p_w

Originally Posted by edyvw

We had some MI-8's. I mean every single one MI8 had different cockpit. It is like every shift had its own way of assembling helicopters. We got UH-1, and first comment of my friend was: ah, each one is the same

How does that work. I've certainly heard about how pilots just get whatever aircraft is assigned to them out of a pool of serviced aircraft. There's the known name of a particular pilot (and perhaps radar operator) stenciled on the plane, but that supposedly means nothing as to who gets to fly a particular aircraft. It's got to be a huge pain to get something different each time. Now I have seen US military aircraft, and some are absolutely ancient. I toured a KC-10 once. It kind of depressed me that the pilot was so much younger than me and probably younger than then plane. But there were dials and gauges everywhere. I wonder what his transition would be if he wanted to be an airline pilot since almost no airlines have planes without modern controls. I do remember seeing an open cockpit door once when boarding a Southwest 737 and that thing must have been 25 years old with gauges and dials everywhere. I thought they would have retired it by then.

These were smuggled ones from Ukraine when USSR collapsed. Things you could get from there at that time . I think Croatia smuggled 40 MIG21's on trucks through Romania and Hungary in 1993. Also, in case of Mi8, they were different than MI8 that ex-Yugoslavia was using and than Serbia flew after collapse (those were much better). The fit and finish was horrible, some gauges were placed in different spots. For us was not a problem because we had 4, so everyone knew how certain helicopter operates, when it operated. But one begs the question about their operability during USSR and how all that functioned. Sometimes later, way later after I left the country, Bosnian air force sent newer models, including MI17 that were acquired from Russia as part of debt settlement from 70's and 80's to Ukraine for upgrades. They got back worse helicopters than they sent. They have kept fuel tanks dry, which cause almost disaster etc. etc. As I said, Russians can make some really good stuff, but system overall was rotten. The fact that they collapsed should not surprised anyone. One fact that illustrates how bad it was. Yugoslavia was flying F84 and F86's in 50's that were donated and purchased after Tito broke up with Stalin. So, sometimes in 1958 Nikita Khrushchev wanted to make things better with Tito, so ges to Belgrade to apologize. So, Tito to open Easter market for Yugoslavian economy decides that air force could buy some stuff from USSR. Russians offered 80 MIG21's for 10 million pair of shoes!!! My late friend who was one of the first to go for training there, told me how they took them to city to show them people waiting in line to get shoes from Yugoslavia. That is at the same time when Russian space program was at its peak. Unreal.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted by edyvw

These were smuggled ones from Ukraine when USSR collapsed. Things you could get from there at that time . I think Croatia smuggled 40 MIG21's on trucks through Romania and Hungary in 1993. Also, in case of Mi8, they were different than MI8 that ex-Yugoslavia was using and than Serbia flew after collapse (those were much better). The fit and finish was horrible, some gauges were placed in different spots. For us was not a problem because we had 4, so everyone knew how certain helicopter operates, when it operated. But one begs the question about their operability during USSR and how all that functioned. Sometimes later, way later after I left the country, Bosnian air force sent newer models, including MI17 that were acquired from Russia as part of debt settlement from 70's and 80's to Ukraine for upgrades. They got back worse helicopters than they sent. They have kept fuel tanks dry, which cause almost disaster etc. etc.

I remember when Soldier of Fortune magazine was offering a reward for anyone who could fly out a Soviet helicopter. I thought it was an Mi8, but now that did some research it was an Mi-24, back in 1985. I think they were specifically asking for one from a Nicaraguan defector and weren't going to pay if some mercenary went in to steal one and deliver it.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by y_p_w

Originally Posted by edyvw

These were smuggled ones from Ukraine when USSR collapsed. Things you could get from there at that time . I think Croatia smuggled 40 MIG21's on trucks through Romania and Hungary in 1993. Also, in case of Mi8, they were different than MI8 that ex-Yugoslavia was using and than Serbia flew after collapse (those were much better). The fit and finish was horrible, some gauges were placed in different spots. For us was not a problem because we had 4, so everyone knew how certain helicopter operates, when it operated. But one begs the question about their operability during USSR and how all that functioned. Sometimes later, way later after I left the country, Bosnian air force sent newer models, including MI17 that were acquired from Russia as part of debt settlement from 70's and 80's to Ukraine for upgrades. They got back worse helicopters than they sent. They have kept fuel tanks dry, which cause almost disaster etc. etc.

I remember when Soldier of Fortune magazine was offering a reward for anyone who could fly out a Soviet helicopter. I thought it was an Mi8, but now that did some research it was an Mi-24, back in 1985. I think they were specifically asking for one from a Nicaraguan defector and weren't going to pay if some mercenary went in to steal one and deliver it.

What POS MI24 was. 3m shorter rotors than MI8 and weapon pods.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by y_p_w

Originally Posted by edyvw

When we talk about Russians we have to differentiate from perception and reality, being that their economy is smaller than Italian. That limits how much they can do, regardless what they claim, and they claim a lot of things.

At the very least there were some technologies that they were very good at from the Soviet days, and that they're still pretty good at today. They're economy as a whole may be a mess, but at the very least they've figured out sending people into space and have high performance aircraft engines that don't blow up.

They had some pretty cool stuff from the cold war like the Ekranoplan nicknamed the "Caspian Sea Monster":

 

[wpod]

The Chinese named the manufacture Boing,,,

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted by anndel

Originally Posted by 4WD

I have been saying for over 10 years … if you require cheap labor to make something … give me Mexico any day

Same here, I'd buy Made in Mexico first waaaay before China. Sad to say my iPhone is made in china and wish Apple and Samsung make their phones in South Korea or Mexico.

iPhones are made in China because Apple's Taiwanese contract manufacturers prefer to manufacture there. They used to manufacture in Taiwan until they got priced out. China frankly isn't the cheapest any more, but Foxconn and Pegatron find China to be easier to navigate since they have a lot of workers and they speak the same language. I really don't think Apple really cares. If Foxconn and Pegatron set up iPhone manufacturing in Mexico and could get the same price/quality Apple wouldn't care. Now Foxconn did talk big about Brazil but they got out. They were talking big in Wisconsin but that's probably not going to materialize either. However, it does look like they're going to actually start producing in India. The power adapter for my wife's Mac was assembled in India, although the manufacturer is Flextronics (says it right on the label).

While India does have a larger English speaking labor force, it’s still logistically challenged. Vietnam is the new China. Thailand as well.

 

[y_p_w]

While India does have a larger English speaking labor force, it’s still logistically challenged. Vietnam is the new China. Thailand as well.

I talked to someone who contracted out Chinese manufacturing back around 2002, and she was telling me that they were already feeling pressure from lower costs in Southeast Asia and South Asia.

Even then, Foxconn has been doing fairly well with manufacturing in India, although the big problem was that they had employee availability shortages in the past year for the obvious reasons. The factories there only produce for the Indian market, which I suppose simplifies a lot of things including regulatory customization. And Apple is specifically asking for output to move out of China because of worries of disruptions. Even Chinese companies are having their devices made in India.

EXCLUSIVE Foxconn’s iPhone output in India down amid COVID surge-sources

Production of the Apple iPhone 12 (AAPL.O) at a Foxconn (2317.TW) factory in India has slumped by more than 50% because workers infected with COVID-19 have had to leave their posts, two sources told Reuters.

www.reuters.com

Exclusive: Apple supplier Foxconn to invest $1 billion in India, sources say

Foxconn <2317.TW> plans to invest up to $1 billion to expand a factory in southern India where the Taiwanese contract manufacturer assembles Apple <AAPL.O> iPhones, two sources said.

www.reuters.com

Taipei-headquartered Foxconn will add some 6,000 jobs at the Sriperumbur plant in Tamil Nadu state under the plan, one of the sources said. It also operates a separate plant in the southern Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, where it makes smartphones for China's Xiaomi Corp, among others.​

 

[Zee09]

Just say no to all things Chinese..
Hear that @AutoMechanic ???