Chinese Engine Development

Bltizo said:

.....................
edit: also, saying "this is the current level of Chinese engine tech relative to the best" isn't quite accurate either, because even assuming CJ-1000 is as advanced as LEAP 1 and assuming that they get CJ-1000 in service by their projected date, CJ-1000 does not reflect upon the level of advancement for other classes of turbofan engines, especially higher thrust high bypass turbofans, if we are talking civilian. It would be most accurate to say CJ-1000 could reflect the level of aimed advancement relative to other LEAP 1 or CFM-56 thrust class turbofan engines. It's pedantic, yes, but it's also a distinction that is important to make.

Click to expand...

If you want to quote me, this is what I said "this is the current level of Chinese commercial jet engine tech relative to the best.", not "current level of Chinese engine tech" because in military engine, the gap is smaller.
Feel free if you prefer to compare CJ1000 to higher thrust western engines. I'm comparing tech and generation level instead of thrust level.

Bltizo said:

As a PR event? Of course they'll put out a confident face. They could even believe in their own ability to reach the projected schedule. I'm sure we all do too.

But we also should be realistic and critical, and appreciate that they're still at a somewhat early stage of development and calling the programme as "going well" is probably a little premature...........

Click to expand...

That's where China differs from the west and many western observers don't get. They are not under pressure to have this PR event unlike say Boeing who must have one every quarter and answer tough questions and lie if they have to.
If things are 'not well' with CJ1000, AVIC will simply keep quiet.
After so many words, you have not had one which shows why you should be considered as more 'realistic' than what they say.
All you have said is basically, there's no guarantee, anything can happen, it's difficult. Which is not wrong but is something anyone even without any knowledge of the subject can say which really doesn't add any value to the discussion. I'm just expecting more substance.

latenlazy said:

*cough* WS-10 *cough*

Click to expand...

You mean they have media events to announce WS10's setbacks and give awards to those who caused them ? LOL

Schumacher said:

You mean they have media events to announce WS10's setbacks and give awards to those who caused them ? LOL

Click to expand...

No. They had media events to announce the WS-10's completion and certification along with awards, and then the WS-10 encountered issues in production. The point is having an event is not a sign of immunity from problems.

Schumacher said:

If you want to quote me, this is what I said "this is the current level of Chinese commercial jet engine tech relative to the best.", not "current level of Chinese engine tech" because in military engine, the gap is smaller.
Feel free if you prefer to compare CJ1000 to higher thrust western engines. I'm comparing tech and generation level instead of thrust level.

Click to expand...

As long as that is clear then that is fine.

That's where China differs from the west and many western observers don't get. They are not under pressure to have this PR event unlike say Boeing who must have one every quarter and answer tough questions and lie if they have to.
If things are 'not well' with CJ1000, AVIC will simply keep quiet.
After so many words, you have not had one which shows why you should be considered as more 'realistic' than what they say.
All you have said is basically, there's no guarantee, anything can happen, it's difficult. Which is not wrong but is something anyone even without any knowledge of the subject can say which really doesn't add any value to the discussion. I'm just expecting more substance.

Click to expand...

Private companies may have stockholders to answer to, government owned companies have officials to answer to, and PR in both cases are designed for both the public as well as private owners or government, respectively. Prestige, public interest, and hype are the goals of PR regardless of whether it is being implemented by a private or government owned company.
And like latenlazy said, PR events are not necessarily a sign that difficulties are not currently being encountered, and certainly it does not mean that difficulties are not likely in future.
So PR events actually are not entirely useful for determining the progress or lack of progress of a particular programme -- it depends on what a specific event is about, and what the specific awards are for.

More importantly, I was not suggesting that the programme could not be going well at present, but rather I'm saying that the optimism of saying the programme possibly going well at present is not very useful and betrays a false sense of optimism for the business end of the development cycle which will likely be very challenging and delayed, given China's past history in developing turbofans, not to mention the difficult experience of even advanced engine makers in pursuing new technology designs. If you think these are not important factors to consider in this case then I can't see what will convince you.

What I'm saying is, let's not paint too rosy a hope for how CJ-1000's development may progress, and let's not be too confident when the chances of delay and substantial difficulties in its future is more likely than not.
I can't see how you can disagree with the notion that we should approach CJ-1000's development prospects with caution, when we consider the past difficulty China has faced in developing turbofans, and the difficulty even some western companies have faced in developing new generation turbofans as well.

latenlazy said:

No. They had media events to announce the WS-10's completion and certification, and then the WS-10 encountered issues in production. The point is having an event is not a sign of immunity from problems.

Click to expand...

So having an event is a sign of problems instead ? LOL
Did I say CJ1000 will be immune from problems ? Or are you saying CJ1000 is 'not well' now ? Can you list some of the problems you know ?
Please, something more than because 'anything can happen' or 'it's difficult'.

Bltizo said:

.......
Private companies may have stockholders to answer to, government owned companies have officials to answer to, and PR in both cases are designed for both the public as well as private owners or government, respectively. Prestige, public interest, and hype are the goals of PR regardless of whether it is being implemented by a private or government owned company.
......................
What I'm saying is, let's not paint too rosy a hope for how CJ-1000's development may progress, and let's not be too confident when the chances of delay and substantial difficulties in its future is more likely than not.
I can't see how you can disagree with the notion that we should approach CJ-1000's development prospects with caution...........

Click to expand...

You're just making general unhelpful comments about PR purposes. PLA or Chinese major state firm PR are in fact excellent source of info, more so than even many 'leaks'. They don't give specifics but paints a good big picture view.
If they have problems, they'll say they have problems but usually only after it's fixed and they give awards to those who fixed it.
Major un-fixed problems ? they'll keep quiet and that's when you rely on big shrimps leaks.
So the conclusion, the report shows CJ1000 is going well now & on schedule.
That's the only logical conclusion, nothing about painting a rosy picture or being cautious.
If you want to make predictions about the future and use replies to my post to make them, I'll just ask for specifics otherwise it's just blind speculations.

Schumacher said:

So having an event is a sign of problems instead ? LOL
Did I say CJ1000 will be immune from problems ? Or are you saying CJ1000 is 'not well' now ? Can you list some of the problems you know ?
Please, something more than because 'anything can happen' or 'it's difficult'.

Click to expand...

No. Having an event is a sign of *absolutely nothing*. Neither imperviousness nor failure. That's the point. We are not saying the CJ1000 is not going well. We are saying the CJ1000 going well now does not guarantee they won't run into problems later, hence the wait and see approach.

These things are not binaries of extremes.

And as I recall your claim was that China now had something comparable to the LEAP engine. Hence the word of caution, because we don't actually know that that's the case. If the program isn't complete, then they don't have the engine yet.

Schumacher said:

You're just making general unhelpful comments about PR purposes. PLA or Chinese major state firm PR are in fact excellent source of info, more so than even many 'leaks'. They don't give specifics but paints a good big picture view.

Click to expand...

Actually what I said was that PR events can be useful or they might not be useful. Not every PR event or release from Chinese state firms or from the PLA is useful. I've been watching the PLA as long as most of us here, I'm quite well aware as to what constitutes usefulness and what doesn't.

If they have problems, they'll say they have problems but usually only after it's fixed and they give awards to those who fixed it.
Major un-fixed problems ? they'll keep quiet and that's when you rely on big shrimps leaks.

Click to expand...

Sigh, if you seriously think that we know about every challenge and delay which goes on in these projects via big shrimps or via PR events "after" the fact, then I have a bridge to sell you...

So the conclusion, the report shows CJ1000 is going well now & on schedule.
That's the only logical conclusion, nothing about painting a rosy picture or being cautious.
If you want to make predictions about the future and use replies to my post to make them, I'll just ask for specifics otherwise it's just blind speculations.

Click to expand...

You're saying CJ-1000 is going well now and on schedule at present -- I will entertain that notion for the purposes of discussion.
However, my point in my last post, is that we should recognize that even if development is going on well, the early stage of development they are at means they have not hit the yards yet, and they will likely face substantial difficulty as they progress further into development stages once they build a prototype and begin flight testing.
This is a general, broad point I'm making and I chose deliberately to maintain such a position. If you ask for "specifics" I will give you a general answer, because I was never making a specific claim in the first place, but rather a broad one.
However, this is not blind speculation but rather trying to extrapolate and predict how their development might progress based on past experience in developing turbofans in China, as well as difficulties faced by other more advanced western companies, not to mention the delays which C919 itself has already faced.

My fundamental argument is that we should be cautious and not be too complacent or rosy with regards to the project's upcoming developmental stages because there is a high possibility of them facing challenges and possible delays as they progress into advanced development.
If you believe my argument is flawed, then you can say why you believe they will not face any challenges or possible delays as they progress into development, and explain why we should remain very optimistic regarding its development.
If you agree with me that there is a strong likelihood that they will face challenges and delays -- which is not a very ambitious claim at all -- then we have no further issues.

latenlazy said:

No. Having an event is a sign of *absolutely nothing*. Neither imperviousness nor failure. That's the point. We are not saying the CJ1000 is not going well. We are saying the CJ1000 going well now does not guarantee they won't run into problems later, hence the wait and see approach.

These things are not binaries of extremes.

And as I recall your claim was that China now had something comparable to the LEAP engine. Hence the word of caution, because we don't actually know that that's the case. If the program isn't complete, then they don't have the engine yet.

Click to expand...

Wow, giving awards, congratulatory messages, universally recognized as actions to celebrate achievements and excellence becomes meaning absolutely nothing ? You may want to try changing the meaning in the dictionary while you're at it.
You can be skeptical and cautious all you want, I'll ask for the reasons. If all you got is 'nothing is guaranteed', I'll call it what it is, being pedantic.
They say & market CJ1000 as comparable to LEAP to equip C919 in the future. Did I say now ? If you're skeptical, I'm interested if you know the performance parameters to cast doubts on their words.

Bltizo said:

Sigh, if you seriously think that we know about every challenge and delay which ......

Click to expand...

Did I say 'every' ?

Bltizo said:

You're saying CJ-1000 is going well now and on schedule at present -- I will entertain that notion for the purposes of discussion.........If you ask for "specifics" I will give you a general answer, because I was never making a specific claim in the first place, but rather a broad one......

Click to expand...

Yes, it's established you don't have specifics. Yours is just a general claim that can apply to almost any future complex unknowns, which is fine. All I'm doing is describing what you say as pedantic and one lacking in substance.
Don't think this is between you and me. You're casting doubts on people who put billions where their mouth is & know much more than you. When asking for specifics, I just want to know how much you're putting where your mouth is just so to decide which side to take more seriously.