Chinese Aviation Industry

Tirdent

Junior Member
Registered Member
AFAIK the US imported Al-Li technology from Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union.
The DC-XA LOX tank for example was made in Russia if I remember correctly.

Older alloys may have worse performance but they were already in use for many applications.

Al-Li is a Western invention actually, but the first-gen alloys, dating back to the mid-1950s, had a number of deficiencies that precluded widespread adoption. Pretty much the only aircraft with significant use of such materials to enter service was the A-5 Vigilante, the very similar British TSR.2 would also have adopted it but was of course cancelled. I *think* the problem was high cycle fatigue, so until the 3rd gen alloys were developed, throw-away liquid propellant rocket tanks (most famously the Space Shuttle external tank) were the only application in the West.

The Soviet Union took a few years longer, but had much greater success - IIRC in the 1st/2nd/3rd generation classification commonly adopted, second generation actually refers exclusively to the Soviet efforts. These alloys were used in a wide variety of production aircraft, though not to the extent of largely replacing conventional aluminium. That only became possible with the 3rd generation (Boeing looked at it for the 777, but considered the technology too immature at the time), of which there are both Western and Russian varieties. Transfer of Soviet know-how after the collapse of the USSR may well have informed and stimulated Western 3rd gen development.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
I never said abandon the basics. I just said start developing hypersonics/supersonics as well. So let's sum up:

Hypersonic and supersonic aircraft only really work for the military, who need the speed. That means limited numbers.

Look at the example of Concorde.
It was never more than a niche product with very expensive airfares that meant if couldn't compete against subsonic passenger aircraft.
Speed = high fuel consumption = very expensive tickets.

So for passenger aircraft, subsonic aircraft are still the way to go.
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Just look at the supersonic transport programs in the US. It is small aircraft as playthings for the rich. Like Boom.
Those companies also have minimal funding and it is highly unlikely they will produce an aircraft in series.
In fact it looks to me like most efforts are doomed to failure.

Hypersonics have too many unsolved issues. People have pursued these technologies at least since the 1950s with little success. Materials problems and lack of advanced enough propulsion technology always precluded it from happening.
 

Tyler

Captain
Registered Member
There has (to my knowledge) literally never been a case where any country anywhere has successfully "leapfrogged" a R&D field by developing a future technology without first indigenously developing the existing technology.

The fact of the matter is that most new technologies depend on the knowledge of old ones. How is China going to develop supersonic aircraft engines without first building engines capable of powering regular aircraft?
 
Last edited:

Orthan

Senior Member
I am the one who wanted China to pursue better relations with the US

Things are not that simple. IMO, china doesnt have better relations with the US not because it doesnt want, but because it would have to give up too much in order to achieve it.

I am proposing China take steps

What you are proposing just doesnt make sense. Thats why people attack it. COMAC´s only choise to approach Boeing and airbus´s level is to take gradual steps. Will they have success in the long term? its a very complex industry. Who knows? But thats the only way.

There goes all civilian air travel in China, overnight.
Chinese travellers would all have to use high-speed trains. And then boeing and airbus would lose an enormous market. The US and europe would lose much more than they would gain. Thats why something like that isnt on anyone´s mind. Again, things are not that simple.
 

longmarch

Junior Member
Registered Member
News sanction list is out, COMAC is not on it. Either there is another one in the making, or they don't want to complicate 737 Max situation?
 

Tyler

Captain
Registered Member
Things are not that simple. IMO, china doesnt have better relations with the US not because it doesnt want, but because it would have to give up too much in order to achieve it.



What you are proposing just doesnt make sense. Thats why people attack it. COMAC´s only choise to approach Boeing and airbus´s level is to take gradual steps. Will they have success in the long term? its a very complex industry. Who knows? But thats the only way.


Chinese travellers would all have to use high-speed trains. And then boeing and airbus would lose an enormous market. The US and europe would lose much more than they would gain. Thats why something like that isnt on anyone´s mind. Again, things are not that simple.
Chinese travelers will have to resort to traveling on Y-20. It is inconvenient but when forced to, there is few choice.
 
Top