747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3301 posts, RR: 2 Posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2687 times:
I know that China has been working on a widebody design, but I thought it was in the 787/ A350 size area. I found out that China is working on a superjumbo.
So here is my question, do anybody know anything about the design of China widebody/ Superjumbo? Is it going to be a midsize widebody or a Superjumbo?
Rheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1956 posts, RR: 52 Reply 2, posted (4 years 6 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2409 times:
I bet the next airliner we'll see from China, if any, is an unlicensed copy of the A320. They are not capable yet of developing their own airliner without help from the outside, be the help deliberate or not.
Caryjack From United States of America, joined May 2007, 265 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2178 times:
How did you find this out? By superjumbo you can only be referring to an A380 sized airliner. Only the most fervent nationalist could believe that China is capable of such a Great Leap Forward.
I think "working to copy a design" is closer to the truth, and that's being generous. It's ironic that one of the brightest persons I know is a young Chinese soon-to-be aerospace engineer who hopes to be a Boeing intern. Go figure.
Quoting Flyf15 (Reply 3): If China develops a widebody, I wouldn't be surprised to see it be some kind of A300 copy.
This gets my vote. It's an excellent aircraft that works well for pax and cargo plus many are available to copy at good prices. Plus, who is going to complain?
Quoting UAL747 (Reply 4): Probably almost carbon copy
You’re probably right and the plane will probably almost make it into service. I understand that the Chinese attempted to copy a Boeing airliner many years back. I believe they purchased a 707 then took it completely apart and copied each part. They managed to assemble two of their versions and one actually flew. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Y-10
Perhaps the Chinese should take a page out of their auto industry's play book (copied from the Koreans) - start small with a cheep, sort of good product then work your way up. I'm told that Chinese cars will be introduced in the US in 2010 (the Cherry I believe). Outside of political interference, there's no reason it can't work. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jan/15/business/fi-chinacar15
Thanks,
Cary
Alessandro From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2104 times:
Quoting Caryjack (Reply 5): You’re probably right and the plane will probably almost make it into service. I understand that the Chinese attempted to copy a Boeing airliner many years back. I believe they purchased a 707 then took it completely apart and copied each part. They managed to assemble two of their versions and one actually flew. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shangha..._Y-10
With the exception of the engines which they took from the B707.
I agree the A300 will be the next candidate for copy, A320 they already assemble in PRC so no point compete against yourself.
I doubt PRC will sell "homegrown" product in US, rather buy SAAB or Volvo from GM/Ford.
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6302 posts, RR: 39 Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1975 times:
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 9): Nobody thought the Japanese would sell in the US. Then nobody thought the Koreans would sell...
True, but it took quite a while to overcome that resistance. Airliners are much harder to sell than automobiles; all manufacturers currently selling them have established track records and support networks. In the large airliner field (A & B), the entry costs will be enormous. On top of that, it will be necessary to establish a perfect safety record. Any crash that gets blamed on the aircraft will destroy any chance of selling to a Western airline. I'm not saying that they can't do it, but it will be very, very difficult.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
Quoting Caryjack (Reply 5): I think "working to copy a design" is closer to the truth
Oh, this again. Right, we all know about the reverse engineering in the past and so on, and yes the new ARJ looks very much like a DC-9, but as has been discussed at length the fact is that it is in fact significantly different from the DC-9 series both in terms of some external features and, more importantly, what lies under the skin. It may be easy and seem funny to constantly go on about 'copying' designs, but underestimate China at your peril.
✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
Caryjack From United States of America, joined May 2007, 265 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1882 times:
Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 6): China would probably Reverse Engineer an A300.
Reverse engineering implies analysis and improvement. If that's the case an A300 would make an excellant starting point.
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 7): That model was copied by the Koreans from the Japanese.
You're right of course and the result was the same for sure but I don't think the Japanese plan called for much more than survival.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 11): the new ARJ looks very much like a DC-9, but as has been discussed at length the fact is that it is in fact significantly different from the DC-9 series both in terms of some external features and, more importantly, what lies under the skin.
I haven't followed this discussion but I'm sure you're right so a considerable ammount of engineering went into making a good airliner better. This is much different than that Chinese example of buying a good airliner to copy piece by piece and expecting anything resembling good results. By your account people have discussed the merrits of DC-9s vs ARJs but you've never seen that same discussion about the 707 vs the Y-10.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 11): It may be easy and seem funny to constantly go on about 'copying' designs
Easy? It's in your face but I see nothing funny about it. The auto industry example was used to suggest how China could develope it's own products from the ground up then perhaps transfer that play book to the avation industry.
It's taken most of Europe's avation resoruces to put the superjumbo into service. If you think China can do it as a first step then you've orverestimted them.
Perhaps China should take a page out of Japan's play book. Start with the wings then work your way fore & aft.
Quoting Alessandro (Reply 12): The Japanese has been selling cars in the US since 1950ies, so nothing new about that.
Considering where Japanese were in the 1940s, I'd say it was new and more than remarkable.
Thanks,
Cary
747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3301 posts, RR: 2 Reply 14, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1827 times:
Nobody thought the Japanese would sell in the US. Then nobody thought the Koreans would sell...
The Japanese has been selling cars in the US since 1950ies, so nothing new about that.
My point was that if today people think PRC cars will sell in the US, they are just repeating the same statements made about Japanese cars back in the day. And the naysayers were wrong at the time.
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 10): . In the large airliner field (A & B), the entry costs will be enormous. On top of that, it will be necessary to establish a perfect safety record. Any crash that gets blamed on the aircraft will destroy any chance of selling to a Western airline. I'm not saying that they can't do it, but it will be very, very difficult.
Quite right. This also means that starting with a widebody is probably not the best course of action
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
My point was that if today people think PRC cars will sell in the US, they are just repeating the same statements made about Japanese cars back in the day. And the naysayers were wrong at the time.
I´m in doubt, especially since the test of Landwind on EuroNcap. Sure KIA sells cars here and
Dacia throu Renault (Dacia sold by Volvo dealers here in Sweden), but still hard if you have no backer and are the new kid of the block.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3301 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15904 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2006, 1956 posts, 
Go figure. 
Plus, who is going to complain?
From India, joined Jan 2001, 31228 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6347 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
