Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Comac Building 4,000 Acre 11 Building Factory...  
User currently offlinemorrisond From Canada, joined Jan 2010, 243 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

Please see the attached article http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...y-of-vision-for-comac-c919-378637/

That sounds like one very large factory - notice the mention of twin aisle capability as well.

Who thinks that after 2025'ish Boeing and Airbus will sell more 50% of what they were projecting to the Chineese and many others in the world?

It's going to be pretty hard to compete with a country who most likely will not only sell at barely a profit to maintain jobs - they will most likely sell at substantial losses to to take share and given they are pretty good at figuring out how to build things with substantially lower labor costs - there costs will be much lower anyways.

If Boeing and Airbus want to compete in that space in the future they are going to have to spend the next decade figuring out how to slash there production costs by an order of magnitude.

Time to figure out automated production of non-autoclave frames.....

38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 1, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1133 times:

Quoting morrisond (Thread starter):
Who thinks that after 2025'ish Boeing and Airbus will sell more 50% of what they were projecting to the Chineese and many others in the world?

Me. 13 years is too fast for even the Chinese to have a commercially competitive widebody or to have the narrowbody production capacity to satisfy their own demand (all the FAL's in the world don't help when you're pulling on the same supply chain). Give them 20-30 years, they'll probably have it.

Quoting morrisond (Thread starter):
It's going to be pretty hard to compete with a country who most likely will not only sell at barely a profit to maintain jobs - they will most likely sell at substantial losses to to take share and given they are pretty good at figuring out how to build things with substantially lower labor costs - there costs will be much lower anyways.

Labour costs are a relatively small piece of the overall cost. The Chinese certainly have a labour cost advantage but it's countered by a significant (today) technology and supply chain penalty. The supply chain issue will eventually go away but, at the same time, the labour advantage will erode to. They'll certainly be competitive but it's not the slam-dunk it's often portrayed to be.

Quoting morrisond (Thread starter):
If Boeing and Airbus want to compete in that space in the future they are going to have to spend the next decade figuring out how to slash there production costs by an order of magnitude.

Nope. For starters, China's cost advantage isn't an order of magnitude, so A & B don't need to cut by the that much. But, more importantly, they will compete on technology and performance, not price.

Tom.


User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10008 posts, RR: 96
Reply 2, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1130 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting morrisond (Thread starter):
If Boeing and Airbus want to compete in that space in the future they are going to have to spend the next decade figuring out how to slash there production costs by an order of magnitude

move portions of the assembly processes to China?

If you can't beat em .......

Rgds


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1820 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1130 times:

A+B can always play the safety card, CAAC having third world standards for safety regulations.

User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6609 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1133 times:

Brazil and even Russia are ahead of China and they don't really compete with A/B yet, so I'm not that worried. And that's for airframes, for engines and systems the west is the game. And as tdscanuck said, China's wages are increasing rapidly. As we saw with the high speed rail disaster and many other scandals, China's populace will not stand for subpar security forever either.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineMountainFlyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1133 times:

IMHO, before China could feasibly market a major product like an airliner outside of China, they will have to overcome major stigma with production quality. China has this funny habit of flooding markets with sub-par products, often copies of similar non-Chinese products, in order to gain market share. Sure, it works just fine with consumer items sold at Wal Mart, but when was the last time you saw a Chinese car on the road?

One small example was in 2008 when gas prices spiked, scooter sales in the US skyrocketed. Chinese companies took advantage of this and flooded the US with cheap, junky scooters that had about as much reliability as Power Wheels cars with absolutely no customer service. In some cases, resellers are still trying to offload 2008 inventory of these things, many of which can barely eek out a few hundred miles of use before major failure. After many hard learned lessons, the market for these scooters largely shifted back to high quality Japanese, European, and even Taiwanese products that often cost at least two or three times as much as the Chinese products. Many people decided the up-front savings was not even close to worth it.

Granted, scooters can hardly be compared to airliners, but I think the same principle applies. We have all seen how China's high speed rail systems have come under scrutiny do to some high profile accidents in the last couple of years. China will need to prove their ability to increase quality control and reliability before they can expect to become major players in the world airliner market IMHO. It will probably happen, but it is going to take time.

On a side note, foreign companies with production in China seem to have a better stigma seeing as their quality control oversight seems to be better than that of native Chinese companies.



SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
User currently offlineAither From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 858 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1130 times:

Airbus & Boeing have both so much subcontracted the work to big suppliers they can now provide fully integrated systems. It has not became so difficult to build an airplane anymore : just sign contracts with Thales, Honeywell, Rolls Royce etc. and you get almost an entire aircraft done.

[Edited 2012-11-07 09:27:39]


Never trust the obvious
User currently offlinemorrisond From Canada, joined Jan 2010, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1130 times:

I wasn't thinking of China selling it's first Gen Single aisle and twin aisle outside China - I was more referencing the fact that China will compel it's airlines to buy Local and China will put pressure on places like Africa to buy it's product as well.

The Chineese market especially figures large in Airbus and Boeing sales for the next 20 years - neither forecast assumes a Chineese widebody or significant Chineese narrowbodies - you don't a factory as big as they are to build 10 per year....


User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7293 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1129 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 1):
Me. 13 years is too fast for even the Chinese to have a commercially competitive widebody or to have the narrowbody production capacity to satisfy their own demand (all the FAL's in the world don't help when you're pulling on the same supply chain). Give them 20-30 years, they'll probably have it.

Look at how quickly the Chinese overtook first the Japanese and then the Korean shipbuilding industry, when they set their minds to something they can achieve a lot in a very short space of time. I don't see it being a lot different in the aerospace industry.


User currently offlinemorrisond From Canada, joined Jan 2010, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1130 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 8):
Look at how quickly the Chinese overtook first the Japanese and then the Korean shipbuilding industry, when they set their minds to something they can achieve a lot in a very short space of time. I don't see it being a lot different in the aerospace industry

Agreed - I would bet they annouce a Twin Aisle aircraft in 2015 (Once they have had time to reverse engineer the 787) for early 2020's intro and will be making 50-100 per year by 2025 - the one thing they know how is to build on very large scales.

Boeing and Airbus ignore this threat at there own peril.


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8317 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1131 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 8):
Look at how quickly the Chinese overtook first the Japanese and then the Korean shipbuilding industry, when they set their minds to something they can achieve a lot in a very short space of time. I don't see it being a lot different in the aerospace industry.

Ships don't carry thousands upon thousands of families every day to go visit grandma and grandpa   You're comparing apples and oranges.

Quoting morrisond (Reply 7):
I wasn't thinking of China selling it's first Gen Single aisle and twin aisle outside China - I was more referencing the fact that China will compel it's airlines to buy Local and China will put pressure on places like Africa to buy it's product as well.

That's a more relevant point but they've tried that before and failed. Russia and Brazil are far ahead of China and they still haven't made a big dent into the NB market. My first visit to China was in 1992 and back then the argument was exactly the same. It's been 20 years and still nothing.


User currently offlinecosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1129 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 4):
Brazil and even Russia are ahead of China and they don't really compete with A/B yet, so I'm not that worried.

Only the paranoid survive
User currently offlinecosmofly From United States of America, joined May 2009, 649 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1133 times:

The A.net filter does not like the name of the book so it deletes my link.   It is by Intel CEO Andy Grove

[Edited 2012-11-07 13:26:29]

User currently offlineAither From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 858 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

I'm sure A&B have identified the threat but they are owned by short sighted investors. Instead of keeping innovation within their walls they are subcontracting for profitability. It just makes innovation available for new competitors as the know how is now subcontracted outside these companies.

Meantime in China :
"Comac's research center requested most of its 2,000 employees work from 8:30 am to 8:30 pm Monday to Friday, and eight and a half hours on Saturdays for the rest of the year, according to one of the people, who asked not to be identified because they aren't authorized to release the details. Workers previously did overtime only for specific projects, the person said. "



Never trust the obvious
User currently offlineGSPSPOT From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3016 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1131 times:

Quoting morrisond (Reply 9):
Agreed - I would bet they annouce a Twin Aisle aircraft in 2015 (Once they have had time to reverse engineer the 787) for early 2020's intro and will be making 50-100 per year by 2025 - the one thing they know how is to build on very large scales.

I think they will be able sell these proposed airframes to their own captive airlines just fine, but international carriers (and the pax they need to be willing to fly on them) will be a completely different story. Most folks, especially in the West, want to see a proven track record and some kind of proven competence & reliability before even CONSIDERING a move to a new manufacturer.



Finally made it to an airline mecca!
User currently onlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5452 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 5):
before China could feasibly market a major product like an airliner outside of China, they will have to overcome major stigma with production quality

Before Japan could ever sell a car in the West...

I totally realise that there is nothing in common between a car and a plane other than that they both move, but if they put their mind to it these countries can - with patience - shift peoples' mentality,

(see also: the rise of Skoda in Europe over the past 20 years)

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 5):
when was the last time you saw a Chinese car on the road?

Actually they are now exporting cars to Australia. Admittedly, though, the only people who are buying them are those that want a new car but can't afford anything else. I genuinely believe that they are simply trying to prove that they work, a loss is inconsequential to them. It's something of a long term investment.

http://www.cherymotors.com.au/
http://www.greatwallmotors.com.au/

Quoting morrisond (Reply 7):
China will put pressure on places like Africa to buy it's product as well.

Good point. China can be quite "persuasive" in trade negotiations...

[Edited 2012-11-07 16:14:08]

[Edited 2012-11-07 16:16:07]


Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlinemorrisond From Canada, joined Jan 2010, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

GPSPOT see my reply No 7, I made that exact point -sales outside of China will be pretty small but we have to remember just how big the Chineese air market could be by Mid 2020's - a place where B & A are expecting to sell 100's of wide bodies. I would hazard a guess that India or the former Soviet states won't have much of an issue either - that's only about 50% of the World's population.

Besides if they use western engines, avionics and mostly systems I wouldn't have that much of an issue flying in a Chineese frame and most of the public won't care either.

I would also guess that the time between generations for the Chineese will be much shorter as well, they should be onto second gen single aisle by early 2020's and second gen twin aisle before the end of the 2020's.


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 17, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

Quoting Aither (Reply 6):
It has not became so difficult to build an airplane anymore : just sign contracts with Thales, Honeywell, Rolls Royce etc. and you get almost an entire aircraft done.

With the tiny minor detail of structure, aerodynamics, flight controls, testing, and support...something only the OEM's know how to do at the moment (at least at commercial scale). And they're not sharing.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 8):
Look at how quickly the Chinese overtook first the Japanese and then the Korean shipbuilding industry, when they set their minds to something they can achieve a lot in a very short space of time. I don't see it being a lot different in the aerospace industry.

The *huge* difference is that China has the internal supply chain to build ships. The few bits they can't do internally are coming from non-saturated supply-chains. In stark contrast, the major airframe Tier 1 suppliers don't have enough capacity to support much excess production right now. They will ramp up, to be sure, but that takes time and money and cannot be done as quickly because they're not under Chinese control.

Quoting morrisond (Reply 9):
Boeing and Airbus ignore this threat at there own peril.

In what fantasyland are Boeing and Airbus ignoring this threat?

Quoting Aither (Reply 13):
Instead of keeping innovation within their walls they are subcontracting for profitability.

Who figured out all composite primary structure? Chevrons? Brake-to-vacate? Cockpit commonality? Drooped spoilers? Streamwise flaps? All-electric architecture? FBW? The OEM's. Don't confuse subcontracting construction with subcontracting innovation.

Tom.


User currently onlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5435 posts, RR: 30
Reply 18, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

China is one day going to be able to compete but it's probably going to take a couple of decades. First, it's a moving target. China has yet to be able to produce an airliner from 2 generations back...this when they had the entire template to work off of.

Next, their next gen aircraft still hasn't made it off of the CAD screen...this when they are assembling the very plane they are basically copying.

It took the better part of a decade to get the 787 into service and Boeing is pretty experienced building twin aisle aircraft.

So l reckon it will be at least double that, AFTER they decide to build a twin aisle.

It's not that they aren't capable of learning how to do it...it's just that there is a whole lot to learn...and it takes a long time to learn it.



What the...?
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7464 posts, RR: 17
Reply 19, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1127 times:

China is in a HUGE bubble right now, and this whole aviation venture is only adding more air to the bubble. Any day now, this bubble is going to pop, unless China does something to actually build upon what they are creating. I'm just sitting here waiting.


次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7293 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1126 times:

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 5):
but when was the last time you saw a Chinese car on the road?

They are gaining in popularity in Russia and Eastern Europe; as the products get better they will do like the Japanese and Koreans before them produce excellent products at prices other companies can't match.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 10):
Ships don't carry thousands upon thousands of families every day to go visit grandma and grandpa You're comparing apples and oranges.

No they are just the backbone of world trade. The Chinese will soon entre the cruise ship market where they will produce a product which will carry thousands of families.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 17):
The *huge* difference is that China has the internal supply chain to build ships. The few bits they can't do internally are coming from non-saturated supply-chains. In stark contrast, the major airframe Tier 1 suppliers don't have enough capacity to support much excess production right now.

Most of the major suppliers to the maine industry in China have sent up manufacturing plants in China, just like they did in Korea, I don't see any reason why component suppliers to the aero industry couldn't do the same, it is after all in there best interests to do so.


User currently offlineMountainFlyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1126 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 15):
Before Japan could ever sell a car in the West...

I totally realize that there is nothing in common between a car and a plane other than that they both move, but if they put their mind to it these countries can - with patience - shift peoples' mentality,

...and Japan is really only now, a good 40 years after they broke into the western auto market, starting to make inroads into the airliner market with the MRJ. I am not saying China can't, I am simply stating what must be overcome before they can.

I realize it is not totally accurate to compare Japan and China, but all the same, there are some similarities. Japan took a couple decades to truly break into the western auto market, and that was with an arguably superior product. China is a good 40 years behind Japan in that respect, and they have an arguably inferior product at this point. Also, a good chunk of Japan's success in the auto market could appropriately be attributed to the U.S. auto companies being complacent and believing their product was "good enough." I would argue that at least in the airliner world, while Boeing and Airbus are perhaps shortsighted as someone mentioned above, they still produce an excellent and superior product. If anything, A & B's products have gotten even better over the last 30 years. Let's hope it remains that way.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 19):
China is in a HUGE bubble right now, and this whole aviation venture is only adding more air to the bubble. Any day now, this bubble is going to pop, unless China does something to actually build upon what they are creating. I'm just sitting here waiting.

   What he said. This could be a huge monkey wrench in everything China in the coming decade.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 20):
They are gaining in popularity in Russia and Eastern Europe; as the products get better they will do like the Japanese and Koreans before them produce excellent products at prices other companies can't match.

This is where I don't believe you can compare China to Japan. Others may disagree, but I believe Japan is different in the fact that they came to the market with a product that was arguably superior from an early stage, and they broke directly into western markets. Japan took advantage of western complacency did an excellent job of creating quality products at competitive prices. China is more or less using their pricing power and economic power to break into markets wherever they can, and quality, while improving, has been more or less of an secondary priority.



SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
User currently offlinemorrisond From Canada, joined Jan 2010, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1126 times:

Was someone saying something about China 40 years to get up to Developed Country standards in Cars?

http://wot.motortrend.com/new-chines...41.html#13523863270681&188,shopper

Basically, the article is talking about a new Higher end Chineese car brand much like the Japaneese did with Lexus and Infiniti back in the 80's.

With the right partners anything is possible - Magna has the technology to essentially build a car for a manufacturer. You would also be surprised about how many modules in Modern Cars are not built by the OEM's and in fact do come from China - especially for North America Domestic Manufacturers.

Someone else pointed out that Aviation Suppliers don't have the capacity to suppy the Chineese with Engines and components for several hundred new aircraft and thousands over time - My point is that this won't be additional capacity - it will replace frames made by B&A who will no longer need those components.

It may not be by 2025 but by 2030 the Chineese will be a force to be reckoned with in large scale aircraft production.


User currently offlineMountainFlyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1126 times:

Quoting morrisond (Reply 22):
Was someone saying something about China 40 years to get up to Developed Country standards in Cars?

No, that is not what anyone said, at least not in terms of technology. Nowhere in any of my posts did I say China was behind on technology. That is what you are referring to by posting this article.

The 40 years reference refers to markets. Japan really started breaking into the western markets approx 40 years ago. Technology aside. China is only now beginning to break into markets outside of its own in the same markets. I'm not saying it is linear and that China will follow the same timeline, I'm simply saying China is nowhere near Japan in breaking into western markets...yet.

Also, I know you haven't said this, but technology is not synonymous with quality. US car manufacturers learned this the hard way in the 90's when they filled their vehicles with gadgets to try and impress buyers. Buyers preferred Japanese relative reliability vs gadgets and technology with relatively poor quality. The Chinese may have the technology, but I would still argue that quality is not up to standards...yet. Will it get there? Maybe...someday. That remains to be seen. Nothing is certain. Thirty or forty years ago we would not even be having this conversation since China was just another third-world country with a lot of people. Thirty years from now, who knows what will change. Maybe we'll all be flying in Russian planes by then.

Quoting morrisond (Reply 22):
Basically, the article is talking about a new Higher end Chineese car brand much like the Japaneese did with Lexus and Infiniti back in the 80's.

Exactly. The 80's were 30 years ago. Maybe my 40 years is a little too far.

Quoting morrisond (Reply 22):
You would also be surprised about how many modules in Modern Cars are not built by the OEM's and in fact do come from China - especially for North America Domestic Manufacturers.

I would not be surprised at all, but this proves nothing. In my first post I spoke explicitly about the difference between foreign companies with Chinese sourced suppliers. Many companies, including US and Japanese, have Chinese sourced suppliers, but those suppliers are generally subject to higher levels of quality control. The companies that I am referring to seem to be the ones you are saying are going to take over the world; the Chinese domestic manufacturers. They have no outside forces pushing quality control to the same levels as suppliers for foreign companies. That's one argument against a state run (or at least manipulated) economy. They don't have to answer to customers for quality. If the government provides the market (by pushing Chinese airlines to buy Chinese planes regardless of quality), they build.

Quoting morrisond (Reply 22):

It may not be by 2025 but by 2030 the Chineese will be a force to be reckoned with in large scale aircraft production.

I don't doubt that you're right, at least partially, but I also don't believe it is going to be the bloodbath you seem to think it might be.

[Edited 2012-11-08 07:43:05]


SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 24, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1129 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 20):
Most of the major suppliers to the maine industry in China have sent up manufacturing plants in China, just like they did in Korea, I don't see any reason why component suppliers to the aero industry couldn't do the same, it is after all in there best interests to do so.

They can, and in most cases they will, but it will take a lot longer than the purported 2025 timeframe. Also, for several key suppliers, it is *not* in their best interest to expose themselves to that level of technology transfer (for both strategic and legal reasons)...they will have to retain some key capabilities outside China.

Quoting morrisond (Reply 22):
Someone else pointed out that Aviation Suppliers don't have the capacity to suppy the Chineese with Engines and components for several hundred new aircraft and thousands over time - My point is that this won't be additional capacity - it will replace frames made by B&A who will no longer need those components.

It has to be additional capacity; the worldwide airliner demand is going up faster than the OEM's can keep up. If they're just re-allocating market share of existing capacity then the entire industry will fall on its face.

Tom.


25 Aesma : Well, what should A/B do they're not doing ? Seems to me their customers are already pushing them quite hard to come up with better airplanes.
26 JoeCanuck : One of the most desirable and prestigious car brands in China is Buick. Their popularity in China is why GM never killed the brand when they axed Pon
27 morrisond : I don't doubt that have a very big hill to climb - but the point I continually try to make - albeit I guess unsuccessfully is that whatever they end u
28 Post contains links Revelation : See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei for a textbook example.
29 tdscanuck : As far as I know, A & B don't forecast individual sales to China. They forecast *demand* in China and then, separately, forecast what market shar
30 Post contains images redzeppelin : A friend of mine is a college economics professor. He told me recently that current trends indicate we are only 3-5 years from reaching the inflectio
31 travelhound : Ship building is relatively basic when compared to manufacturing in the aerospace industry, compliance requirements are also relatively low in compar
32 morrisond : If you understand the Chinese model at all its not about making money it's about employing people, even if B&A have the same production cost Comac
33 aklrno : I was about to make the same point, but I think for some products it is fewer than 3 years away. 30 years ago people were complaining that Japan and
34 B2443 : I think the Chinese are doing ARJ/C9X9's for themselves, regardless of foreign orders. They need to modernize the entire industry inside out, not so m
35 planemaker : Increasingly there is little that is "typical" about Chinese companies, or China for that matter. And, certainly, nor is losing billions "typical". S
36 tdscanuck : The C919 will never be competitive with the NEO or MAX. It's starting from so far behind that they can't catch up that fast...by the time they hit wh
37 CPHFF : They can't even get the ARJ21 Certified and delivered to customers. They've been at it for 8 years, and that aircraft is essentially a MD95 with new w
38 planemaker : To clarify, I was not referring to market share competitiveness, even within China... and that should be for fairly obvious reasons - from delayed EI
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...
Small Plane Hits Building In Santa Monica? posted Fri Aug 10 2012 18:48:09 by PHX787
Building A B737 For Norwegian DY ( Video ) posted Fri Jul 20 2012 03:06:07 by Mortyman
BA Interested In Boeing Building The 777X posted Thu Apr 26 2012 10:14:04 by redrooster3
Is It Dangerous Building Boeings In Everett? posted Tue Mar 20 2012 17:48:45 by B737900
"China Is Building 78 New Airports" By 2020 posted Mon Feb 27 2012 10:34:33 by readytotaxi
Building A Sukhoi Superjet 100 posted Tue Nov 15 2011 22:13:48 by BoeingVista
Building A New Q400 In Under 4 Mins posted Fri Oct 14 2011 23:49:01 by airnorth
OSL T2 Building Approved. Ready In 2017 posted Wed Dec 22 2010 10:13:19 by Mortyman
Suspicious Package Found At DL Cargo Building BOS posted Tue Nov 23 2010 11:24:12 by ua777222
What Is The TSA Doing At The Rental Car Building? posted Mon Nov 15 2010 15:41:23 by varigb707