I did not follow the long argument between Sinosoldier and others, so I can not say anything, and I am inclined to believe both sides have their good points. But calling the first prototype('s lacking of something) of a decades long product a failure is quite off IMO, the more accurate expression could be "first milestone reached, future achievement remains to be seen."
COMAC C919
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Sinosoldier post IS NOT SELF EVIDENCE IT PREJUDICE BASED ON EATING THOSE PROPAGANDA AND HE IS NOT CHINESE HE IS PAKISTANI I GUESS.
His post do injustice to many hard working worker who putting long hour of overtime and weekend Basically racist I would say!
You too including having never work in engineering based your judgement purely on prejudice!
I strongly object to that
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
I said specific to airliner. I am not saying in general
Military standard is not necessarily higher but DIFFERENT!
I know what I am talking about!
2 valves looks the same, one nuclear and one commercial But the amount of engineering and documentation on nuclear one is 6 times more than commercial that is what I meant by higher
Last edited:
Blackstone
Brigadier
Dude, if you want a victory over semantics, then have one. That's not the issue I addressed vis-a-vis Sinosoldier; which is posters attacking the messenger and not the message. If you don't agree with it, then we're done on this topic.
Blackstone
Brigadier
What the heck are you talking about? Take a deep breath, calm down, and take a moment to reflect.
- How hard people work on projects don't always ensure successful project outcomes. Hard workers are to be applauded, but it's results that define success or failure of C-919 key milestones and objectives
- Sinosoldier saying C-919 is a step in the right direction, but COMAC still has a ways to go (I'm paraphrasing) is factually correct
- Sinosoldier's statement didn't contain any racially-based claims or arguments. Your accusation of racism is not only wrong on facts, it's also contemptible for the try
- You claim my support of Sinosoldier's comments is based "purely on prejudice." Your charge is not only wrong on facts, it's also contemptible for the try
Dude, the problem with @SinoSoldier's comments is he is dismissing all the engineering efforts went into designing and building the plane as "HR and PM" efforts. I guess you two have never done any engineering work. Designing and building a complex system like an airplane is never easy, otherwise Bombardier C-series wouldn't be delayed for years and required billions of "investments" from various levels of government, even though they had years of experiences with building aircrafts.
Zahid
Junior Member
Dude, calm down.
I have been here for the past 11 years and I know specific Pakistani posters, down to their IDs at PDF. I have also been reading @SinoSoldier 's posts since 2009. He sure is not from Pakistan. When you are talking about him being a Pakistani, and talking about racism, you basically have lost it.
I strongly resent your post and I have a serious objection to it. Keep Pakistan and your notions of racism out of this discussion - they have no bearing upon the quality of discussion and basically show your mentality.
@Deino I hope you would be kind enough to delete the above post. Thanks in advance.
chill. I did not know that your usage of "failure" is more of semantic rather than a serious consideration. I took it the second way and expected a reason from you why you think so.
I have told you earlier that I believe both sides have their valid points, so no agree or disagree from my side.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
He didn't say that he said basically it screwing job all China did was to screw component and that is not big deal. It is condescending attitude that is reprehensible!
The only country that can do complete design including the component is western country
US, Europe . If that is not tinge with racism I don't know what. Because China can build avionic , landing gear etc we see it with Y 20, Y 8
Western country set the standard unfortunately the whole world has to follow. So china has no choice here
If that is so easy why would Japan or any other country do it EXPLAIN IT!
You defend it because it is inline with your prejudice too!
Last edited:
Blackstone
Brigadier
Both sides have valid points? Oh really? Let's test your claim in context of my post vis-a-vis Sinosoldier's message:
Sinosoldier's point on the C-919 is basically it's a step in the right direction on meeting 95% local suppliers, but COMAC still has a ways to go. I endorsed his view. What's the other side of the argument?