Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Enders: China Likely To Be Aviation Power Of C21  
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3398 posts, RR: 1
Posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6513 times:

From Aviation Week:

China’s drive to become a major power in the commercial aircraft industry is unstoppable, and incumbent manufacturers should make the best of it by pursuing opportunities in the fast-growing Chinese aviation market, says Airbus’ top executive.

Tom Enders, president and CEO of the European aircraft builder, says China “is most likely going to be the aviation nation of this century. I see no way of preventing that.”

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...%20Rise%20Unstoppable&channel=comm

I'm not so sure that China will be able to compete with Airbus and Boeing for a long time into the future.

How many generations of airliner will China need to produce before it will be able to offer designs that compete with new designs from Airbus and Boeing? For example, Airbus and Boeing have sat on their laurels with the 737 and A320 to some extent, so there might be the opportunity for the Comac C919 to compete with them but only temporarily since within a few years new designs from Airbus and Boeing would outclass it. Would that pattern not persist for generations, whatever sector China tried to take on?

China may be very well positioned to compete on price at the moment but the yuan is heading for revaluation as time goes by, so that advantage looks set to be eroded in the coming years.

Perhaps the airliner industry in China will be confined principally to supplying indigenous airlines, albeit in a market that may expand much more than others during this century.

What do you think? Is Enders right in thinking China will be "the aviation nation of the century"?

67 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31439 posts, RR: 85
Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6480 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

China is an important market for both Airbus and Boeing so a competent indiginous product is going to depress demand for aircraft from both manufacturers. Airbus has built a FAL in China to assemble A320s for domestic carriers, but how many assembly jobs does that really offer? I can't see it as a long-term lever to keep China buying Airbus aircraft if the C919 proves to be up to the job of meeting China's domeastic airline narrowbody needs.

As an export model, I see it more as a threat for being placed with developing airlines in developing countries where the Chinese government can provide direct financing and support to place their product as opposed to the current process where they usually buy very old Western aircraft who have reached their scrap value floor.

I would not expect an "established" airline already operating 737s (Classics and NGs) or A320s to switch to the C919, even if it proves a competent platform.

[Edited 2010-07-06 10:49:50]

User currently offlineCFBFrame From United States of America, joined May 2009, 531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6408 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
would not expect an "established" airline already operating 737s (Classics and NGs) or A320s to switch to the C919, even if it proves a competent platform.


Stitch- I agree with you. The challenge for Airbus will be the C919, which has been developed through the consignments granted in exchange for market access. Enders knows placing a assembly line in China had the potential of doing one of two things; keeping the lion's share of the single aisle market, despite gaining share also providing technical development for the development of a domestic offering. China did this to both Boeing and MD some years ago. Today, the country is smarter and they've moved quickly to leverage the Airbus technology.

Good article to show that Enders has resigned himself to believe the actions Airbus has taken were the best and right alternative. We all know China to be a closed market, where all outsiders believe theirs will be better than those who preceded them. Common lesson- the issues faced in the past are the same as today. Although there's volume in them there hills, is it really worth the effort. Answer- Generally China ends up winning, while the companies are left to rationalize.


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6382 times:

China is in a position to supply narrowbody aircraft to itself. That alone takes a large chunk out of Boeing and Airbus.

But in terms of providing long term QUALITY products to the major airlines internationally, I've seen it with no other products produced in China in my lifetime, and can't see it happening with aircraft. Unless, of course, there is a paradigm shift within that nation, to one where quality matters, not units produced.

Currently, major manufacturers are willing to outsource parts production to china because they can test the quality of those parts over time and reject them if necessary (or ignore the problem like Dell did). But I'm not sure a western airline is going to be willing to bet it's fleet future on a turn-key Chinese product any time soon. Rejecting entire aircraft is far more difficult, as is finding shoddily made components in a completed product before delivery. It's only after some time that you'll discover the "equivalent" part that the Chinese factory decided to use rather than the specced part.

I agree with Stitch that China could place aircraft in "one-off" places if they include a support package to keep them flying and in better shape than the 20 year old aircraft they have now. That isn't as likely with major carriers who maintain their aircraft themselves on a daily basis and who dump aircraft from 15 years (depending on cycles).

Now, Enders is taking a 90 year view, which is very politician like, since he won't be running Airbus for 20 more years let alone 90, so there is no consequence to him being wrong, but we can only project forward for the foreseeable future, and 90 years is not foreseeable. One can't imagine that someone in 1910 could have looked forward 90 years and seen how the rest of the century would unfold and who would be the major players internationally.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3731 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 6320 times:

Or Enders is just using this reasoning as an excuse to further 'give away the farm'. An excuse to move more production to China? Very short-sighted imo.

User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8775 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 6265 times:

Quoting art (Thread starter):
How many generations of airliner will China need to produce before it will be able to offer designs that compete with new designs from Airbus and Boeing?

You can be sure that China has full access to internal Boeing and Airbus resources. It is a national priority of China to obtain that technology. When the time comes, China will use the 787 and A350 blueprints as a starting point for more advanced, Chinese designs.

It's not like they don't have enough engineers.


User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 6181 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
I would not expect an "established" airline already operating 737s (Classics and NGs) or A320s to switch to the C919, even if it proves a competent platform.

If it indeed proves to be a competent aircraft, on what reasoning though are you suggesting that 'established' airlines wouldn't fly it?


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31439 posts, RR: 85
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 6055 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 6):
If it indeed proves to be a competent aircraft, on what reasoning though are you suggesting that 'established' airlines wouldn't fly it?

The 737 and A320 replacements should be better and "established" airlines already have long histories with either one or both OEMs so I expect a mix of inertia, complacency, comfort and their natural conservativeness (though that seems to have fallen by the wayside with their rush to embrace the 787 and A350) will influence their decision to "go with what they know".

Mind you, I'm not talking forever, here, but more a timeframe of the next two decades or so.


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 6017 times:

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 6):
If it indeed proves to be a competent aircraft, on what reasoning though are you suggesting that 'established' airlines wouldn't fly it?

Just look at the resistance to the Russian 100 seater. I'd say it's because their history works against them, but as I stated above (opinion), the shoddy quality of Chinese turn-key products works against them just as much.

Now, Japan used to be known for poor quality as well, but there was a paradigm shift in the country to change that image through actually building high quality products in all fields they were looking to compete in. Same is true for Korean brands. China has to make that same wholesale change in their group think to achieve that result. And it can't happen overnight.

It's going to take years and years of in service proof that the Chinese airliners are reliable, and not simply by taking the word of the Chinese carriers either. Because no developed world carrier is going to be able to sell the fleet decision to their board of director as a launch customer or even early customer.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8775 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5943 times:

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 8):
China has to make that same wholesale change in their group think to achieve that result. And it can't happen overnight.

No, it didn't happen overnight that Japan learned to build high quality cars. But, nobody denies that it did happen.

Korea, too. China will get there about 20 years behind Korea. That puts their high tech aviation at about the year 2040. Unlike Japan, China has the size (and the domestic market) to support an airliner manufacturing industry. China will be a top-3 economy along with the EU and the USA, ultimately probably bigger than either.

About technology, Japan has been a leader for 40+ years. Korea, today, is a leader. China will be a tech leader the day after tomorrow. Their primitive financial system and legal systems will have to advance, in order to support the commercial structure. This is their biggest problem IMO.


User currently offlineJetmatt777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2851 posts, RR: 33
Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5908 times:

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 3):
But in terms of providing long term QUALITY products to the major airlines internationally, I've seen it with no other products produced in China in my lifetime, and can't see it happening with aircraft. Unless, of course, there is a paradigm shift within that nation, to one where quality matters, not units produced.

No way I will ever fly on a Chinese made airplane. Not going to happen for me. There's a good chance shortcuts would happen (whether admitted or not), that would be found out the tragic way, to make the product cheaper to drive sales -- unacceptable in this industry.



No info
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1118 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 5718 times:

Quoting Jetmatt777 (Reply 10):
No way I will ever fly on a Chinese made airplane. Not going to happen for me. There's a good chance shortcuts would happen (whether admitted or not), that would be found out the tragic way, to make the product cheaper to drive sales -- unacceptable in this industry.

They are unlikely to miss you.

Quoting art (Thread starter):
Is Enders right in thinking China will be "the aviation nation of the century"?

A century is a very long time, especially in terms of a country's ability to grow its economy, develop a domestic aviation market large enough to rival all, and to produce several generations of aircraft of its own to support this market.

I am personally much more amused by anyone who thinks that he may be wrong. Unless, perhaps, China decides to close its doors and turn itself into a hermit kingdom tomorrow. North Korea is unlikely to be a viable inspiration for the Chinese thou.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 9):
China will be a tech leader the day after tomorrow. Their primitive financial system and legal systems will have to advance, in order to support the commercial structure. This is their biggest problem IMO.

I am not sure how the world's second largest economy as of 2010 could arrive there with merely a "primitive" financial system and legal system. If anything, the Chinese probably taught the world what is good governance along with sound economic policies and a sophisticated judiciary system then the other way round for thousands of years, and that experience continues to influence current public policy even if the Chinese government appears to put up a supposedly "communist" front.



It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5951 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 5652 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Flighty (Reply 5):
You can be sure that China has full access to internal Boeing and Airbus resources. It is a national priority of China to obtain that technology. When the time comes, China will use the 787 and A350 blueprints as a starting point for more advanced, Chinese designs.

That's called reverse engineering. EADS and Europe accused the US of protectionism. Well, both the US and Europe need to open their eyes, smell the coffee and protect their proprietary as well as higher forms of data more than ever. As more and more companies try to edge their way into Boeing's and Airbus' market, you can be certain there is going to be an elevated rate of industry espionage.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 5):
It's not like they don't have enough engineers.

Don't be so sure. Have you heard of Contractors?

Lastly, the Chinese manufacturers and the Chinese Government could engage in major subsidies. And who is going to stop them???


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4409 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5627 times:

Who of you is wearing Chinese made shoes - knowing that aircraft can be replaced, your feet cannot.

Western world is driven by greed and nothing else, and if the C919 or the next or the next after next proves more economic after ALL evaluation ( cost, fuel, maintenance cost, etc.) by more than A and B can give as rebate, the MoL of this western world will buy it, and You will fly on it no matter what You write now.


User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2038 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5535 times:

If someone 30 years ago had said that the likes of Fokker and BAE would have vacated the regional jet market, and that Embraer of Brazil would be one of the 2 major players, most people would have been surprised.

If Brasil (a country most people associate with Football, beahces and skimpy bikinis) can achieve this, it's naive to expect China to stay in the background. I confidently expect China to have a wider range of airliners within the next 30 years, whether they'll be producing all the engines and systems themselves is less clear. Even if the US and EU countries don't touch them, there's a massive world out there...



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlinehuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1118 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5525 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 14):
If Brasil (a country most people associate with Football, beahces and skimpy bikinis) can achieve this, it's naive to expect China to stay in the background. I confidently expect China to have a wider range of airliners within the next 30 years, whether they'll be producing all the engines and systems themselves is less clear. Even if the US and EU countries don't touch them, there's a massive world out there...

  

I do not want to generalise, but I something chuckle when I read sceptical comments about China, and then notice a certain correlation with a particular flag beside most of their author's user names.

Anyway, I am certainly looking forward to an "A-B-C" range of aircraft models in future!



It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5489 times:

The question isn't "if" China will ascend to number one, but "when."

And it won't be the first time the west has underestimated how quickly "the competition" gets up to speed. The USSR got the bomb years before anyone expected it, and they shocked the hell out of the west when they launched sputnik in 1957. I doubt very much if the western mindset has changed much in the passing years -- airs of superiority are always slow to die.

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 12):
That's called reverse engineering. EADS and Europe accused the US of protectionism. Well, both the US and Europe need to open their eyes, smell the coffee and protect their proprietary as well as higher forms of data more than ever.

Every emerging nation has benefitted from a little reverse engineering. The first tranche of US jet engines were reverse engineered from Rolls Royce (as were the first Russian engines) with a healthy sprinkling of German technology wrapped in. I don't recall Rolls Royce getting much for that.



Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3398 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5422 times:

Quoting Arrow (Reply 16):
The question isn't "if" China will ascend to number one, but "when."

It looks like China will become the largest economy in the world in the course of the next few decades. Not that surprising really, given a population that is at least 4 times as large as that of the USA. It does not follow that it will become the largest player in every economic sector.

I think it would take decades for the Chinese commercial aircraft industry to reach the point where it can field Chinese-designed and -built aircraft of sufficient quality and efficiency to challenge Airbus and Boeing in a free market. Until the Chinese can do that, I think they will have an "also ran" aviation industry that may be used to supply domestic demand (as directed by the Chinese government) but may be of little other use.

On the other hand, they might prove me wrong by catching up with A and B by 2030 or so... or the Chinese government might tire of spending many billions time and again on developing new designs without seeing a competitive product emerging from the ocean of money invested.


User currently offlineJetmatt777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2851 posts, RR: 33
Reply 18, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5370 times:

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 13):
Western world is driven by greed and nothing else, and if the C919 or the next or the next after next proves more economic after ALL evaluation ( cost, fuel, maintenance cost, etc.) by more than A and B can give as rebate, the MoL of this western world will buy it, and You will fly on it no matter what You write now.

I don't think it would come down to every airline operating a Chinese made aircraft on every route. So, I think I will stand my ground and choose different flights or airlines. I think the backlash in America by purchasing such an aircraft would be negative PR for that airline where they wouldn't do it.

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 15):
I do not want to generalise, but I something chuckle when I read sceptical comments about China, and then notice a certain correlation with a particular flag beside most of their author's user names.

I don't think anyone can deny the quality of pretty much ALL Chinese made items. I think it's stupid to get your hopes up that this will be a cost-effective, reliable, and safe product. Everything I have bought or used that has a "Made in China" label on it is the most substandard piece of garbage, I don't expect anymore from this product. Give it half of a decade, if it has the safety record of Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier, Embraer, etc.. Then we'll talk. But until then - who knows what shortcuts will be taken to make the product cheaper and more attractive to the bottom line.



No info
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8775 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 5237 times:

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 11):
I am not sure how the world's second largest economy as of 2010 could arrive there with merely a "primitive" financial system and legal system.

Yes, it's remarkable. If you are saying the Chinese financial system is a modern one, I would have to strenuously disagree. The legal system, internally, I know nothing about. Externally, it's absent.

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 11):
If anything, the Chinese probably taught the world what is good governance along with sound economic policies and a sophisticated judiciary system then the other way round for thousands of years,

This is very true!

Quoting Jetmatt777 (Reply 18):
I don't think anyone can deny the quality of pretty much ALL Chinese made items. I think it's stupid to get your hopes up that this will be a cost-effective, reliable, and safe product.

Actually China enjoys top assembly quality in many fields. Apple builds their stuff there without any real issues. But, Chinese-branded merchandise is still not making a positive impact in the USA. When they do, it will change the landscape.


User currently offlineTobias2702 From Germany, joined Sep 2008, 731 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 5168 times:

Just read an interesting article in a German news magazine. It sheds an eye on the fact that much more than in respect to aviation, China is the word's powerhouse in terms of high-speed rail links, which turns into a major threat of air travel and restricts airline growth rates. As a consequence, some analysts expect a merger of China Southern and China Eastern. Is this likely to happen?

Quoting art (Reply 17):
It looks like China will become the largest economy in the world in the course of the next few decades.

BTW, this is a position that (implying today's measurements) China held all the time until the industrial revolution in Europe took place.

--Tobias--



PA, AF, UK, BA, AB, DL, LH, FR, BD, A3, EZY, DY //// A319/320/346, B733/735/73G/738/744/763, AT4, 146, CR2, DH4
User currently offlinewarren747sp From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1172 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5063 times:

The build the MD-80s pretty well and are in service with US airlines. However, Douglas probably had very high standards in their factory in Shanghai. We will have to see how the ARJ plays out. The Russians are extremely unhappy that they copied their SU fighter design and made countless copies of their own!


747SP
User currently offlineSurfandSnow From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 2908 posts, RR: 31
Reply 22, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4970 times:

Quoting art (Thread starter):
China’s drive to become a major power in the commercial aircraft industry is unstoppable

China's drive to become a major power in EVERY industry is unstoppable   .

Quoting art (Thread starter):
China “is most likely going to be the aviation nation of this century. I see no way of preventing that.”

I'm a bit confused by what he means by "aviation nation". Sure, Chinese people might fly a lot more than they do now, but I highly doubt that the Chinese aircraft manufacturers will make China "the" aviation nation over the U.S., Canada, E.U., and Russia...

Quoting art (Thread starter):
I'm not so sure that China will be able to compete with Airbus and Boeing for a long time into the future.

Agreed. It has taken Russia 20 years to woo a prominent airline (in this case, Alitalia) with one of its planes. The Russians have been building large commercial planes for decades...

I'd say China might stand a chance to compete by next century, but not this one!

Quoting art (Thread starter):
How many generations of airliner will China need to produce before it will be able to offer designs that compete with new designs from Airbus and Boeing?

The first generation probably won't be competitive at all. The second generation might be, but that will be a LONG way off...

Quoting art (Thread starter):
Perhaps the airliner industry in China will be confined principally to supplying indigenous airlines, albeit in a market that may expand much more than others during this century.

Most likely. Just as Russian airliners only sell in Russia and the old Soviet realm (and even then the airlines prefer Western models) the Chinese will have a heck of a time selling these planes.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
As an export model, I see it more as a threat for being placed with developing airlines in developing countries where the Chinese government can provide direct financing and support to place their product as opposed to the current process where they usually buy very old Western aircraft who have reached their scrap value floor.

This isn't a "threat" at all. Boeing hardly cares if some fly-by-night African airline is buying an old 737-200 to fly twice a week across the jungle. They are making their money selling new aircraft to rapidly growing Middle Eastern and East Asian airliners and parts/support to existing American and European operators that have HUGE fleets already.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 3):
Unless, of course, there is a paradigm shift within that nation, to one where quality matters, not units produced.

Exactly. It seems that as countries like Vietnam and Bangladesh tout their extremely cheap labor, firms are moving away from China. China probably already is looking at ways to boost its quality as its costs are no longer the lowest available to multinationals. However, proving this quality will certainly take time.

Quoting Jetmatt777 (Reply 18):
I don't think anyone can deny the quality of pretty much ALL Chinese made items. I think it's stupid to get your hopes up that this will be a cost-effective, reliable, and safe product. Everything I have bought or used that has a "Made in China" label on it is the most substandard piece of garbage, I don't expect anymore from this product.

Many of us feel this way, avoiding Chinese-made goods whenever possible. My grandma even asked for dining plates "not made in China" last Christmas  . No practical U.S. airline would ever order a Chinese-made airliner so long as this negative stigma exists.



Flying in the middle seat of coach is much better than not flying at all!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26029 posts, RR: 22
Reply 23, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4962 times:

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 22):
Just as Russian airliners only sell in Russia and the old Soviet realm (and even then the airlines prefer Western models) the Chinese will have a heck of a time selling these planes.

That's what people said about Chinese-built cars a few years ago, but they're now beginning to make inroads into other markets, and some observers say that China will eventually become the world's largest car manufacturing country.


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 24, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4937 times:

China has a serious disadvantage when compared to the US and the EU in regards to how many of the population actually can fly. While they have plenty of airlines, GA activity is tiny and the number of airports small--China resembles Japan very much in that respect. I feel that this lack of an aviation culture will hold China back, regardless of whether they develop an airliner-building industry or government-fattened defense contractors. There needs to be considerable liberalization in China's aviation policy to become more free, more like the US and hopefully cheaper than the EU.

And product support is the huge question mark that will have to be answered. Companies like Boeing and Gulfstream are famous worldwide for their commitment to keep customers' planes in the air. It's going to be a long time before any Chinese aircraft company is as trusted as the current established names in aviation.


25 mham001 : They already are the largest but quantity does not in any way relate to quality.
26 beeweel15 : One bottom line is that we gave them all the ideas which they copied. Take a look at that A/C that looks almost identical to the DC9/MD80 to give a go
27 ikramerica : Exactly. China has/had more cheap labor and housing than anywhere in the world, and also lacked those pesky environmental laws that added to costs of
28 SP90 : I think China can build a competitive airliner when they can build a competitive turbofan engine. That is the single biggest obstacle holding them bac
29 merlot : As more and more people jump on the bandwagon of an idea, especially a prediction about the future, the greater the chance is that the prediction wil
30 WarRI1 : I could not agree more. How could this huge population be furnished with food and goods to keep them satisfied, without eventually running into food
31 Post contains images allegro : So many interesting posts! This is clearly a space to watch in the future. This project is as important to the Chinese gov't as is their manned space
32 ikramerica : So true. It's not to say it won't happen, but it's not a fait accompli. I would say India has a greater chance than China except India's government i
33 cerecl : Not anytime soon. MU just absorbed FM, I don't think merger between any of the big three was ever on the agenda. Besides, high-speed rail, while much
34 ContnlEliteCMH : From my point of view, this is backwards. The Chinese government appears to put a supposedly "capitalist" front all while systematically denying indi
35 MingToo : The exploding capacitors that caught Dell out were Taiwanese, not Chinese. A number of Taiwanese companies used an incorrect stolen Japanese formula
36 Post contains images cerecl : How so? Chinese are very prudent with their wealth. One has more chance to win a wrestling match with a 300-pound gorilla than to witness "credit ove
37 Post contains images huaiwei : And the rest of the world is based on freedom from Western oppression, liberty from Western domination and pursuing your dreams for a multi-polar wor
38 merlot : It's a great point you two are making: to the Chinese western values such as personal liberty, freedom of expression and protest, an ability to read
39 Post contains images WarRI1 : My thoughts also. One can easily dismiss the value of personal freedom, private ownership, while enjoying it themselves, the question is why? When so
40 MingToo : I would point out once more that you make the error of comparing 'GDP' with 'producing'. Hey, here's an idea. Instead of me mowing my lawn and you mo
41 Post contains images cerecl : Speaking from first-hand experience, yes. That is not what I or Huaiwei said. We never said Chinese do not share or desire some Western values. We si
42 WarRI1 : Those words are not mine, somehow attributed to me. It happens once in awhile.
43 WarRI1 : I was not directing my remarks towards China, I was directing my remarks at people who leave their country of origin, and do nothing but disparage th
44 Post contains images cerecl : Then I have no choice but to conclude that you are directing your remarks at a strawman. As the flag next to my login name shows, I reside in Austral
45 MingToo : Many apologies. Sorry, I didn't realise that could happen.
46 merlot : Thanks for the 'dumb and happy' insult! ....as with all insults it speaks MOSTLY about the person making it and what they fear. The points you, Cerec
47 MingToo : Wasn't really meant as an insult, it's a quite common political term for the softer mechanisms of the western style of control. It's not a matter of
48 MD11Engineer : Having some knowledge about the Philippines (my fiancee is Filipina-Chinese), I have to say that while the Philippines have a very free and outspoken
49 merlot : The Western press and even its government ministers argue only how China will come to dominate the world within a few years and is an economic supers
50 MingToo : I hardly think that is me alone that sees the western media as a soft control mechanism. It doesn't necessarily imply any sort of conspiracy either,
51 cerecl : That is never my point, and I don't think it is Huaiwei's point either. We made no comparison on how much importance the people in China and in the "
52 WarRI1 : I do not doubt it. I much prefer the line from George Santayana. "Those who cannot remember the past are condemmed to repeat it" I believe near the t
53 Flighty : Taiwan and Hong Kong are the pleasant, civilized places they are today because of Western and Eastern influences and their own excellent efforts. I a
54 MingToo : I think you are replying more to my point than to Merlot's here. I didn't say that all mother's in the West eat at McDonalds and nobody in China does
55 WarRI1 : I think that proves part of what I said, we chose to hand it over for greed and profit. Reverse engineering is always quicker after someone else has
56 ContnlEliteCMH : I basically agree with both of these statements. Those who think there is significant difference between Republicans and Democrats have been sucked i
57 B2443 : That happens when the country pours billions of RMB's into becoming 'independent'. When they focus, they will produce. BTW, These are heavy industrie
58 B2443 : Of course they do and they have in the past 2000+ years. Sometimes it's more frenquent but in the last 600+ year, it happened 4 times: the establishm
59 Post contains images cerecl : This assumes that the current leadership is inert and irresponsive to popular demand, which is a quite popular view butis not true. The government of
60 MingToo : I think it is also easy to get a clouded view of political freedom in the West in history. When did we really become truly democratic in the electora
61 Rheinbote : Alright, China is likely to become an aviation power in terms of numbers of fleet size, both civil and military. I don't buy into simple extrapolation
62 mariner : If you mean Mr. Enders, I don't think he painted the Chinese aerospace industry as a threat. I thought he stated a commercial reality. mariner
63 Rheinbote : You are right. I addressed, in rather general terms, what I perceive as a bias amongst analysts. That bias doesn't seem to be based on technical and
64 mariner : Most everyone has an agenda or a bias - most analysts - as is obvious from several of the long posts in this thread which seem based more on prejudic
65 Rheinbote : That's my point, Enders thinks along the lines of the C919 not being "entirely competitive", while I say it may not be competitive AT ALL because the
66 mariner : That seems harsh, but okay, you may be right, I don't know. I suspect that at some point the Chinese will produce a "fully functional" plane and at t
67 Rheinbote : Agreed, I just don't think they're there yet. The way I see it the C919 largely aims at learning how to conceive an overall aircraft systems architec
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
CRJ Production Likely To Be Cut posted Wed Nov 11 2009 13:55:22 by CRJ900X
YNG Soon To Be In Need Of New Airport Director posted Fri Jul 17 2009 21:25:35 by YNGguins
What Plane Is It Likely To Be (Thompson Airways) posted Tue Apr 14 2009 14:13:29 by Captainsimon
Air China Reported To Be Customer For 15 77Ws posted Wed Mar 5 2008 13:19:31 by PlaneHunter
Air China - Likely To Start Service To DEN posted Thu May 24 2007 16:40:47 by DIA
Martin George To Be New CEO Of Gulf Air? posted Sat Nov 18 2006 21:17:14 by GF-A330
Air Paradise To Be Resurrected Out Of DPS posted Sun Nov 5 2006 08:02:08 by Jimyvr
UA DEN-NRT Is Likely To Be Launched posted Sun Nov 5 2006 06:21:20 by Jimyvr
FI: China Set To BE Offered A320 Line posted Mon Jan 23 2006 13:01:34 by Leelaw
Bombardiers C-Series Program Likely To Be Scrapped posted Tue Dec 6 2005 07:06:50 by AC787