China's transport, tanker & heavy lift aircraft

Engineer

Engineer

Major
MiG-29 said:
I guess you think buying an engine is basicly like going for candy to a candy shop, or buying screws at home depo.

Buying any jet engine, requires know the engine manual. that requieres the technical assistance of Klimov in JF-17, even Al-31 has maintainance manuals that are needed to mantain the engines on Su-27s.

D-30 is no different, specially when you order 190 of them.

When China orders 190 engines of D-30K, they are signing contracts, since the engine requiere tooling and preparations at the shops, plus exports permits once they get out of Russia.
Click to expand...

What a wonderful example. A screw from Home Depot ending up on an aircraft doesn't make Home Depot a partner to Airbus, Boeing or any other aircraft company. This is true even when the screw, bolt, or rivets comes with technical manuals, as is the case with aviation bolts. So, buying engines is indeed like buying screws, and Russia being a supplier of engines doesn't mean the country is part of the Y-20 program.

MiG-29 said:
To further add, RD-93 can not be re-exported without Russian authorization, in few words when china fits Russian engines to their aircraft they are signing a contract with United Engine Corporation and Rosoboronexport.
Y-20 is no exception, in fact recently Russia is asking China not to use Al-31s for research for their engine programs.

If you understand that you will understand Y-20`s engines are no candies you buy in a candyshop

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

All Russia did was sell the engines. Fitting those engines to Chinese aircraft doesn't give Russia any right over Chinese aircraft. Notice how Russia does not have any say over how China uses those engines. This lack of authority is what differentiate a supplier from a partner.
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
MiG-29 said:
i hope you can show me with the list of suppliers of Y-20 that are all chinese otherwise, it seems you are just guessing.
If you can not prove it then sorry, your ability to proof your point is no more than a personal guess
Click to expand...

So, aside from Russian engines you have no proof that one single Y-20's supplier is not Chinese. That means your claims about Russian contributions in the Y-20 are just your fantasies with no basis in facts.
 
MiG-29

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
Engineer said:
So, aside from Russian engines you have no proof that one single Y-20's supplier is not Chinese. That means your claims about Russian contributions in the Y-20 are just your fantasies with no basis in facts.
Click to expand...

Okay prove it.

You will need a very long list by the way, since many aircraft components are build by several companies and many suppliers.
 
MiG-29

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
Engineer said:
Your lack of proof already proved I am right. I rest my case.
Click to expand...

uhmm so you can not prove it, your case is you can not prove it, so we are in a draw, simple like that.

I am guessing and you are guessing, other wise you would have come up with the list.
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
MiG-29 said:
uhmm so you can not prove it, your case is you can not prove it, so we are in a draw, simple like that.

I am guessing and you are guessing, other wise you would have come up with the list.
Click to expand...

Since you claimed that Russia provides sub-systems on the Y-20 aside form engines, the burden of proof is on you. Without proof on any of your claims, your statements have no truth value whatsoever. I rest my case.
 
MiG-29

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
Engineer said:
So you have no proof on any of your claims. Your statements have no truth value whatsoever. I rest my case.
Click to expand...

I have family who works in the aerospace industry, to work in the aerospace industry means there are articles as simple as a harness which are built by a company and do not are mention when the final product is sold, even a landing gear has providers, aircraft are not a name, but a pyramid of names where the main manufacturer gets credit for all the final product, when you get to technical stuff and not picture analisys, as we usually do, You will find providers.

I said find all the Y-20 subsystems and prove with official sources all those suppliers are chinese.

You rest your case because you can not sustain your case with facts, if you work in the aerospace industry you know aircraft are the product of hundred of minor providers.
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
MiG-29 said:
I have family who works in the aerospace industry, to work in the aerospace industry means there are articles as simple as a harness which are built by a company and do not are mention when the final product is sold, even a landing gear has providers, aircraft are not a name, but a pyramid of names where the main manufacturer gets credit for all the final product, when you get to technical stuff and not picture analisys, as we usually do, You will find providers.

I said find all the Y-20 subsystems and prove with official sources all those suppliers are chinese.

You rest your case because you can not sustain your case with facts, if you work in the aerospace industry you know aircraft are the product of hundred of minor providers.
Click to expand...

Having family members working in the aerospace industry isn't a proof. Surely, if you boldly asserted that Russia provided more than engines on the Y-20, you must have a document on hand listing all the suppliers on Y-20 with Chinese president Xi Jinping's signature at the bottom. Let us see that.

Providing proof; that is what you are good at doing with all those links you have provided, no? Oh, I forgot that they never proved anything you claimed. You only provided those links and quotes to distract from the actual discussion. You have no proof, never have, and never will. I rest my case.
 
MiG-29

MiG-29

Banned Idiot
Engineer said:
Having family members working in the aerospace industry isn't a proof. Surely, if you boldly asserted that Russia provided more than engines on the Y-20, you must have a document on hand listing all the suppliers on Y-20 with Chinese president Xi Jinping's signature at the bottom. Let us see that.

Providing proof; that is what you are good at doing with all those links you have provided, no? Oh, I forgot that they never proved anything you claimed. You only provided those links and quotes to distract from the actual discussion. You have no proof, never have, and never will. I rest my case.
Click to expand...

From the start i said is a guess, but if your guess wants to be a fact you need facts, otherwise you are just guessing like i do.
I have family who works for small companies that provide to much larger and notorious companies, and i know is a very large supply chain any aircraft has.

The Russian article i posted said there is collaboration between Ukraine and China in Y-8 and Y-20 as well as ARJ-21.

If you think is only a firm, then you are mistaken, nations have businesses not only with big firms but also small firms.

I am guessing, i have always admited, but you are guessing and thinking you are showing facts
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
MiG-29 said:
From the start i said is a guess, but if your guess wants to be a fact you need facts, otherwise you are just guessing like i do.
I have family who worf for small companies that provide to much larger and notorious companies, and i know is a very large supply change any aircraft has.

The Russia article i posted said there is collaboration between Ukraine and China in Y-8 and Y-20 as well as ARJ-21.

If you think is only a firm, then you are mistaken, nations have businesses not only with big firms but also small firms.

I am guessing, i have always admited, but youa re guessing and thinking you are showing facts
Click to expand...

So many words, but there is no proof on your claim about collaboration on the Y-20 whatsoever. If you have actual proof showing Y-20 is a collaboration between Russia and China, you would have provided one long ago. You do not, and hence you need to go off tangent about civilian airliners, going in circles and circles to avoid the point. I rest my case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top