Civilian Aviation Technology

bladerunner said:

Im too lazy to do the research, plus I have as much engineering aptitude as a blowfly when it comes down to the technical points of jet engines,. So will they be as good as the P&W Geared Turbo Fans, that I read about last summer, or the latest variants of the RR Trent RB211?

Click to expand...

The mounting evidence is that performance was secondary to other considerations in the engine selection process. Both GE and Safran (the parent company that owns Snecma) have an established footprint of joint ventures in China. Pratt & Whitney and Rolls-Royce do not.

A GE joint-venture is expected to supply avionics for the C919. Another joint venture is expected to supply nacelles for their engines, while a Safran joint venture is expected to supply landing gear hardware. In the words of one French newspaper, this kind of JV activitiy, "has allowed the men at Safran to understand what their partners [at Comac] wanted: a proven technology, partnerships with local industry and a final assembly line of engines."


Pratt & Whitney and Rolls-Royce could have offered final assembly of their engines, but they did not have the same established portfolio of joint ventures in China.

With regard to actual engine performance, we have to be careful to differentiate between what is being advertised to the press, and precisely what is being guaranteed for delivery.

CFM's LEAP-X was originally aimed at developing a family of related engines, sharing common core technology, for introduction into service in the 2020 timeframe. This extended family of engines was expected to include both turbofan, and open rotor derivatives. Both GE (the senior partner in CFM) and Rolls-Royce have been emphasizing for some time now that their intended paths for delivering double-digit improvements in fuel consumption are associated with open rotor technology.

What we are commonly seeing in the press is a classic game of "bait and switch". GE spokepeople will emphasize that LEAP-X technology will eventually deliver double-digit improvements in fuel consumption. Still other press releases will announce how CFM plans to deliver the LEAP-X1C engine to Comac. Never however, do the GE or CFM spokesmen claim that the LEAP-X1C will deliver that same kind of double-digit improvements in fuel consumption that they have been claiming will come when the full suite of LEAP-X technologies (including open rotor technologies) are ready for production in 2020. In the words of Safran's Chief Executive for Aerospace, Defense and Security, Jean-Paul Hereman, when developing their proposal for the LEAP-X1C for Comac, "We had to identify technologies that would be ready for certification in 2014."


According to at least one industry financial analyst, what Comac has actually signed up for is an upgraded CFM56. In his words, "Taking that engine type is low risk for the Chinese."


So the bottom line is: No, the engines that Comac have signed up for will not offer the same benefits in performance that other, future technology engines have promised to offer. Performance was secondary to other considerations, including minimizing risk, and maximizing the involvement of joint ventues.

Pointblank said:

....The civil aerospace industry is a very cruel and unforgiving industry, where just one mistake can take down a company that dominated it.

Click to expand...

And as I already said, you make truly 'insightful' comments.
Comac guys who must have always been expecting it to be a cakewalk should definitely read this before any further investments.
Sure, I also TOTALLY agree Comac who has the backing of the China, like Boeing has the US and Airbus has Europe, will have the financial staying power or less of MD or de Havilland. LOL

Schumacher said:

And as I already said, you make truly 'insightful' comments.
Comac guys who must have always been expecting it to be a cakewalk should definitely read this before any further investments.
Sure, I also TOTALLY agree Comac who has the backing of the China, like Boeing has the US and Airbus has Europe, will have the financial staying power or less of MD or de Havilland. LOL

Click to expand...

Having the financial backing of a country still won't guarantee success; Canadair in the mid 1980's recorded a number of record losses in Canadian corporate history as a Crown Corporation (a company owned by the government), and that company was essentially folded and bought out on the cheap by Bombardier who completely redid the entire lineup to make it competitive. Canadair's product? The CRJ and related business jets.

Pointblank said:

Having the financial backing of a country still won't guarantee success; ....

Click to expand...

You're right on that one. Besides that and others , you need something more important, a ready market for your product. For a start, China is going to have to go mostly with the local commercial aviation market.

December 18, Hanzhong Municipal People's Government, China Aviation General Aircraft Company was held in Hanzhong strategic cooperation agreement signing ceremony to officially launch Hanzhong aviation industry base construction projects. in the Hanzhong building in an area of 500 acres of Hanzhong Air general aviation aircraft industrial base and further promote the development of aviation industry Hanzhong.

Pointblank said:

Having the financial backing of a country still won't guarantee success; Canadair in the mid 1980's recorded a number of record losses in Canadian corporate history as a Crown Corporation (a company owned by the government), and that company was essentially folded and bought out on the cheap by Bombardier who completely redid the entire lineup to make it competitive. Canadair's product? The CRJ and related business jets.

Click to expand...

I don't think that is relevant to discussion in here. Tell me which crown corporation in Canada make money. CANDU anyone ? As I remember Canadair loose money exactly because Ottawa refused to spend money for building newer model. The most important thing is ready made market for the product and China will need thousand of Civilian aircraft in year to come EAD loose money as recently as last year. Never discount China's will or determination to produce home made Aircraft!. They will get there sooner or latter because now they have the industrial base and Design group. Read the book about the designer of Leopard 1 where he basically start from scratch since the generation who design the panther and tiger has long been retired or dead in 1970. He said it was possible because German has wide and deep Automotive industrial base

The same thing when Canada design the City class Frigate. St John shipbuilding basically start from scratch there is 30 year Gap between Tribal class and City class when Canada doesn't built a single warship. but Canada had excellent University and Great company like CAE and UNIVAc Int other word the industrial base is there

Canada has a history of dropping goverment support project Eg Avro Arrow when Canada is years ahead of US in developing a supersonic interceptor but technological advance ecclipse the need for interceptor as Missile is the main platform for Nuclear bomb so there is no need for interceptor.

Canadair was created out of Canadian division of Northrup that built F 18 in Quebec . When the program ended, in order to preserve job, The federal goverment created Canadair. They decide to built bussiness jet in highly crowded industry with the like of Gulfstream and Cessna when the real money is in regional jet connecting outlaying area to the hub.

Pointblank said:

Having the financial backing of a country still won't guarantee success; Canadair in the mid 1980's recorded a number of record losses in Canadian corporate history as a Crown Corporation (a company owned by the government), and that company was essentially folded and bought out on the cheap by Bombardier who completely redid the entire lineup to make it competitive. Canadair's product? The CRJ and related business jets.

Click to expand...

Guarantee success ? and what is your point ? If a guarantee is what you look for before starting investments then you obviously shouldn't be talking about any business let alone one as big as aviation.
So you want to compare China's ability to support, in financial and market terms, its aviation industry to that of Canada's. LOL I guess you are entitled to your opinion.
I'd actually give it a high probability that China ability to support its aviation industry in the coming years would surpass even that of the US and EU.

Schumacher said:

I'd actually give it a high probability that China ability to support its aviation industry in the coming years would surpass even that of the US and EU.

Click to expand...

So what you are suggesting is, if China's aviation ambitions in building bigger planes, had less than a auspicious start and started to bleed red ink all over the place heaven forbid, the government will support it , come what may?

bladerunner said:

So what you are suggesting is, if China's aviation ambitions in building bigger planes, had less than a auspicious start and started to bleed red ink all over the place heaven forbid, the government will support it , come what may?

Click to expand...

Yes, isn't what I said already obvious ? Boeing and Airbus and indeed any other companies go through periods of red ink and survive through government supports.
And don't play with words like 'come what may'. What's the amount of red ink do you expect ? and have some kind of basis to justify your estimate not just pick some astronomical unsustainable number out of the thin air just to fit your 'come what may' scenario.

Whether the Chinese will be success in their second attempt (first attempt was Y-10 in the 1970s) on building a plane of A-320 size will depends on

1) Is there a sufficiently large market ready to accept this aircraft?
I think yes, domestic Chinese market itself is large enough. Don't take my words, check out forecast from Boeing and Airbus. Asia Pacific region will be world's largest aviation market in 20 years time, China will be world's 2nd largest market after USA.

2) Do they have access to advance civil aviation technology?
There is no embargo on civilian technology and everybody is hunger for a big share in China's future purchases. China has money to buy whatever their can not make.

3) Will foreign buyers have confidence in the aircaft?
There will be a lot of bias opinion at the beginning. The Chinese will have to show how good or bad C919 is in their domestic market, and the later evolution of the aircraft to meet all needs of interested buyers. We can't have definite answer now, we will have to wait. Personally, I have confidence they will succeed.

4) Will they lose money?
In business you do not expect to make money in the first few years, of course there are many exceptions. Beside the usual low salaries, there may not be much cost advantage. However, if they constantly improve on the manufacturing process with better cost efficiency, black ink at the bottom line will be common sight each year. Also R & D expenses has large effect too, cost over-run is really bad, if they manage within budget, making money shall be no problem.