Chinese Aviation Industry

Blackstone said:

Unlike Boeing or Airbus, China can not go fully alone on commercial jetliners at this point in time, not even close. It can't make Trent 1000 or GNex turbofans for large aircrafts, nor can it make CFM56 engines for planes like the C-919. It will be decades before China could go it alone and be completely self-sufficient. All this isn't to say China Aviation hasn't made tremendous progress, it obviously has, but going alone is an entirely different matter.

Click to expand...

Whether it's decades or years does not matter, China has the scientists, the will and the money to sustain a viable program for decades, that is a fact. We can't say about all the others who is facing profit problems and budgeting issues that are not healthy for the program to survive. It is after all...about the program.

Equation said:

No China can go it alone if it wanted to, it's Europe, Russia, and the US doesn't want to see a real meaningful competitor by restricting the market with FAA rulings. Russian definitely can't do it alone that's why they needed Chinese money. Similar to Russia's T-50 PAK-FA that needed a partner in order to get it the program going and it's NOT doing any better than China's J-20.

Click to expand...

China can go alone that is true, Russia can go alone, Germany can go alone, France too, the problem is COMAC does not think like you, in reality COMAC works with UAC, you might not like it, but they go with UAC for a simple reason.


If China goes alone, they have to invest 100% in the project, Russia also can go alone too, in fact Russia can simply re-engine the Il-96 and modify it and go alone, but is that convenient?

The answer is not, first is time, if you want to make a B-777 you need the engine, military engines are difficult, but commercial aircraft engines are much more difficult?

Why? simple safety, if you notice the B-777 has been sold in larger numbers than the A-340 and il-96, Do you know why?

Simple the twin engine means higher simplicity, the 4 engines means lower thrust engines, but B-777 offers 2 engines with very safe qualities upon a very long range and low fuel consumption.


Can china make the engine? yes they can the question is when?, if it enters after several decades kaput, the aircraft becomes obsolete, so then you rely in foreign suppliers.

Market share.

A wide body is less demanded than a shorter range, smaller aircraft, so if you try to compete with Boeing, if you jet is obsolete you lose, airliners will choose right away Boeing, that is what happened in Russia.

Aeroflot did not use Il-96, they started using Airbus and Boeings, because the market demands those types of aircraft .


B-777 defeated the A-340 and Il-96, that is a reality, in fact even B-767 was defeat in sales by the B-777.

B-767 defeated the DC-10, L-1011, Il-86.


If you think everything is about the project you are wrong, aircraft are business, get them on time, get them with the best price per unit and operation costs then you get a winner.


Is not that Germany can go aloneor not or France can not go alone, they can go alone, they did it before 1970, go and google 1970s and 1960s airliners and you will find they did, There are VC-10s, Mercures, Fokkers, etc etc but the question is why compete in a very small business? the reality Airbus showed a larger company is better than many smaller companies making the same type of aircraft. why because these companies did not get bankrupt and they are still in business

COMAC and UAC know that, there is no room for each nation making the same type of aircraft and competing, in fact the Japanese have been really fool with MRJ by going alone, these days the best way to succeed in the aviation business is cooperate, Embraer is not Brazilian, it is Brazilian only in name, in reality is a mini Airbus, that has made them be the third largest manufacturer.


Nationalism is good for the masses, but not good for business, at least in commercial aviation

Equation said:

Whether it's decades or years does not matter, China has the scientists, the will and the money to sustain a viable program for decades, that is a fact.

Click to expand...

Chinese think in centuries, and that's useful here.

Blackstone said:

Unlike Boeing or Airbus, China can not go fully alone on commercial jetliners at this point in time, not even close. It can't make Trent 1000 or GNex turbofans for large aircrafts, nor can it make CFM56 engines for planes like the C-919. It will be decades before China could go it alone and be completely self-sufficient. All this isn't to say China Aviation hasn't made tremendous progress, it obviously has, but going alone is an entirely different matter.

Click to expand...

Since when Boeing or Airbus made turbofan engines?

I think an interesting question is what happens after C929?

The logical progression would be to an A380/747 competitor. Given the A380's airport limitations and struggle to find routes that maximise its utility, the target would probably be to produce an aircraft larger than 777X but smaller than A380, powered by two engines in the ~60-ton range, basically a twin-engine 747-8.

Lethe said:

I think an interesting question is what happens after C929?

The logical progression would be to an A380/747 competitor. Given the A380's airport limitations and struggle to find routes that maximise its utility, the target would probably be to produce an aircraft larger than 777X but smaller than A380, powered by two engines in the ~60-ton range, basically a twin-engine 747-8.

Click to expand...

I say the next plane should be Concorde type of commercial jet plane.

b787 said:

If you think everything is about the project you are wrong, aircraft are business, get them on time, get them with the best price per unit and operation costs then you get a winner.

Click to expand...

The Program is EVERYTHING. NO program, no project means no business and no market share what so ever. If you think China will always somehow continue to struggle with any engine development that means you have no idea how healthy China's R&D engine are doing. Only haters, doubters, and naysayers makes such a claim that China engines will take "decades" to be ready. This isn't about nationalism, it's today's reality. And the reality is China is not suffering economically like Europe and Russia, so therefore they were able to have money and man power to sustain a viable and strong program going. That is very important, those who underestimate that will pay dearly.

Equation said:

I say the next plane should be Concorde type of commercial jet plane.

Click to expand...

Yes, that is the other possibility: a leap into new forms of technology and transport. And considering the possible spectrum of such technologies, a new supersonic transport is actually one of the more conservative paths available when compared to e.g. hypersonic spaceplanes.

Equation said:

The Program is EVERYTHING. NO program, no project means no business and no market share what so ever. If you think China will always somehow continue to struggle with any engine development that means you have no idea how healthy China's R&D engine are doing. Only haters, doubters, and naysayers makes such a claim that China engines will take "decades" to be ready. This isn't about nationalism, it's today's reality. And the reality is China is not suffering economically like Europe and Russia, so therefore they were able to have money and man power to sustain a viable and strong program going. That is very important, those who underestimate that will pay dearly.

Click to expand...

you got me wrong i am not saying China can not do it, but what is the best for business, can china do it, of course they can do it, but is that the best?


If you go and read you will see Airbus was created so in Europe they did not duplicate programs, for example the Mercure is more or less the equivalent to the B-737, the Trident to the B-727, the VC-10 to the DC-8, the Fokker 100 to the DC-9.
If you were right then COMAC and UAC will not work on a joint venture, the reality is the Chinese are not going alone on a large program like a B-777 type aircraft or even a B-787 .

the A-300 was made to join forces, why? because it was more profitable for them to join forces rather than compete directly with Boeing and among themselves

Russia and China are doing the same, but still both have small numbers, in fact COMAC has very few ARJ-21s delivered i think 4 only, trying to compete with Boeing is suicide because the B-787 and B-777 market is monopolized by Boeing, not even Airbus with A-340 and A-350 are competing.

And by the way you are wrong. the European and American aircraft industries are healthy between them they have sold more than 20000 jet airliners and still are selling many aircraft.
The problem is not program, you are very wrong, the problem is make money with it, having a prototype does not guarantee success, many aircraft never go beyond a few examples.