Chinese Aviation Industry

China suppposedly began its next-gen fighter project in the late nineties- yet not even a full-scale mockup has been shown.

Click to expand...

Wasn't it mentioned when it was announced that CAC had won over SAC in competition for the J-XX that both had to submit full-size scale mock-ups?

Engineer said:

I'm not as confident as you are concerning the aviation industry, seeing China's impressive list of variants of J-8, Y-8, and H-6. J-8 first took off back in 1969, and over the past 40 years, the only major change it has was the switch from frontal intake to side intakes. Y-8 is now a 50 years old design and was first produced in China in 1972. After so much work in reverse engineering the design and spending three decades in building it, you'd think Shaanxi would know the design inside and out. Instead, they went straight to Antonov when modifying the design to Y-8F600. It has been six years and the other redesign of the Y-8 -- the Y-9 has yet to have a prototype in sight (unless they used up their only prototype on the ill-fate YJ-200). H-6 is basically the same situation, a 50 years old design which only recently has its major modification.

ARJ-21 is a kit bash of American's DC-9 body, with Russian Antonov designed wings, and American's GE engines.

It seems whenever they encountered a problem, a shortcut is taken, and by not solving the problem, the problem is solved.

Click to expand...

J-8 to upgraded to J-8H/F can launch BVRAAM, a major feat not just a small change. It doesnt matter about the years in service an aircraft is in, if its still capable then why replace it? Just cause some platform design was 40 years old doesnt mean the current ones in their inventory is still 40 year old technology. American superpower still uses B-52, C-130, F-16 and etc...

You cant snap your fingers and the problems is fixed. China has only has 8-10 years of decent funding and educated knowledge. Russia, Europe and Russia has had +40 years of knowledge of trial and error. Shortcuts let see Space Program, Satelitte, domestic GPS, telecommuncations, turbofan engines, munitions, etc....using technology thats already available off the shelf or on market speeds up development, and service time.

If you analyse the ARJ-21 as a DC-9 knock off, then if China develops something that can fly its a knock off, if it has 4 wheels and drives its a knock off. Obviously every nation that develops military hardware are exposed to certain foreign nations technology and will incorporate that into their own, not just China.

ARJ-21 is a kit bash of American's DC-9 body, with Russian Antonov designed wings, and American's GE engines.

When designing a aircraft for the international market, it would make sense to offer a range of engine choices. Boeing do.

Designing aircraft isn't as easy as just canibalizing a lot of parts from various other aircraft and then just sewing them together into some kind of aerial Frankenstein's... sure, they might have studied existing parts for design inspiration, but a lot of engineering went into deciding how the parts on the thing should be modified and combined to create an aerodynamically sound and efficient design. Even if they have taken shortcuts on this particular project, the experience and lessons learnt will carry over to future projects.

Did you write a "research paper" before? What is yours?

You put anything of other people's together-it is yours!

Indeed, with today's mainstream technology, and the basic laws of physics, there are only so many ways to shape an efficient fuselage and wings. And chances are, with over 100 years of aircraft development, some crazy guy had a similar design once.

However, if a design really is knocked directly off another, then history is full of examples of major powers knocking off technology from more advanced nations and using it for their own benefit.
Genghis Khan knocked off Chinese military technology and conquered half of Eurasia, Americans copied the Germans (or in most cases hired the actual Germans) for jet engines, tanks and field equipment, and see where that brought the Americans.

I'm not saying ARJ-21 is a knock off of a DC-9. I'm saying it is taking a DC-9 fuselage, literally. Of course changes have to be to accommodate new wings and engines, but given that they needed help from Antonov to even modify a Y-8, I am doubting that the modification designs are actually done by Chinese aviation companies.

Like I've said, it is problem solved when the problem is just given to someone else to solve. Changing this would be a great improvement to the aviation industry.

Hendrik_2000 said:

Your critic is unwarranted because China didn't start in earnest of modernization until early 90's that is only 18 years. And for decade after that the budget for military are minimal because there are other urgent need. Only in the last 8 years is the budget growing at respectable pace

Click to expand...

Yet Chengdu managed to come up with two respectable design in these past 30 years, and Xi'an one. What are all those aerodynamics experts and structural engineers paid to do in other companies over the last 30 years?

Hendrik_2000 said:

Let face it unless you have highly developed civilian technology you are not going to get sophisticated Military Technology. You should read the book by the designer of Leopard tank in which he said that after the war The German who designed the best tank has completely lost the ability to design tank .So he has to start from scratch but the German highly developed Automotive technology saved the day.

Click to expand...

I have yet to see civilian launchers and civilian nuclear submarines.

Hendrik_2000 said:

The same with China they have to start from scratch and if you watch the designer of JF17 and Space program They are all people in 30's and early 40's Give them some time they will matured

Click to expand...

Space program isn't exactly an area where you can just let someone else does the work for you. You don't go up to someone and ask whether you can produce their ICBMs with licenses.

Hendrik_2000 said:

Now that they finally go through the process of designing J10 and JF17 I have no doubt that you will see original design in the future

Click to expand...

And both of them came from Chengdu, where people are actually working, not sit on their ass and waste the already limited fundings.

I have yet to see civilian launchers and civilian nuclear submarines.

Click to expand...

Whether it is civilian or military nuclear power plant It is the same pricinple and most likely have the same supplier of equipment. Most of the problem with military has to do with shielding in very confine space and noise requirement

And both of them came from Chengdu, where people are actually working, not sit on their ass and waste the already limited fundings.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't characterize it as such. There is less urgent requirement for bomber than fighter In the old days they used bomber to deliver nuclear load but that function has been superceeded by missile so there is less urgent requirement. Plus China is not going to invade other country anytime soon

Engineer said:

I have yet to see civilian launchers and civilian nuclear submarines.

Click to expand...

Indeed. China is quite good in both field. See Yuan Class sub and SY-400 MLRS.

Engineer said:

Space program isn't exactly an area where you can just let someone else does the work for you. You don't go up to someone and ask whether you can produce their ICBMs with licenses.

Click to expand...

Indeed. They do it by themself, they only got limited assistence from russians.
Talking about ICBM, China had DF-4 by 1989, which can reach US with its 13.000km range. But since these are not mobile TEL system, they have persued the DF-31A (11.000+ km range), now they got the sub launched JL-2 ICBM (8000+km) equipped on Type 094 SSBN (Jin Class).

Engineer said:

And both of them came from Chengdu, where people are actually working, not sit on their ass and waste the already limited fundings.

Click to expand...

You have forgot the J11. Now it's 100% produced in China, sinodefence is just not enough updated on this things.