Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
blueflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 4352
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:08 pm

The Trump administration is considering not issuing export licenses for further LEAP engine deliveries to China for the Comac C919. An extension of the existing license for avionics is also in doubt.

The stated reason is concerns that China may reverse-engineer the products and break into the global market.

GE which sells the avionics and manufacturers the LEAP in a joint venture with Safran, is in favor of the licenses being issued. GE argues the government is underestimating the difficulties to duplicate the required advanced manufacturing techniques.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-admi ... _lead_pos1

I get that protecting IP is a hot-topic issue, however I suspect this is more of a bargaining position to get concessions from China. It's a bit late to be concerned about IP when deliveries have already started.
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1548
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:31 pm

Would any country trust the promise of a contract with a US company in the future, if this actually happens?
 
x1234
Posts: 943
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:50 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:36 pm

I was wondering the same thing. All this does is push China closer to Russia like they currently do with military arms. Plus this is a civilian plane. And how about hundreds of years ago American companies were using stolen European I.P.?
 
petertenthije
Posts: 3972
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 10:00 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:39 pm

If the government wants to prevent the LEAP engine from being reverse engineered, then surely banning them for the C919 won’t be enough. Then the sale of Airbus or Boeing’s with such an engine would also have to be banned.

Also, GE is not in favor and they (co-) own the design. I don’t think the US government had a part in developing the engine, so they should have no say in this. Or was the LEAP funded with government grants?
The first thing to remember is always treat your kite like you treat your woman.
Get inside her five times a day and take her to heaven and back!
Lord Flashheart, 1989
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2057
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:40 pm

Why is the US Gov worried about IP theft but the manufacturer is not? Government taking measures for the companies' own good...
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2999
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:42 pm

Didn't know GE was in the avionics area.
 
pipeafcr
Posts: 430
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 1:47 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:55 pm

This will only cause further development of key industries outside the US scope
Felipe Carrillo
 
swapcv
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 4:11 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 8:12 pm

Hehehe, and then the US wonders how the heck did China, Russia, India and many other emerging countries develop similar or equivalent tech. They did this to the USSR in the 1970's vis-a-vis the L1011 license, and in the late 80's with China on arms, and in the 90's with India on Cryogenic Engine Tech, and fast forward today, all of them have similar or equivalent tech and don't rely on the US for the same, thus eliminating the US' lead in such tech. If the US Govt. is worried about reverse-engineering of it's technology, then they must stop trading all together, because let's face it, China or Russia already have the means to develop the same and perhaps, sell it at far less cost compared to their American peers, whether there will be takers for the same is another matter.

Regards,

Swapnil.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8482
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 8:17 pm

pipeafcr wrote:
This will only cause further development of key industries outside the US scope


Sure - engine building and aircraft building is easy. Anybody can do it!
 
pipeafcr
Posts: 430
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 1:47 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 8:26 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
pipeafcr wrote:
This will only cause further development of key industries outside the US scope


Sure - engine building and aircraft building is easy. Anybody can do it!


It's simple economics, when there's a demand someone is going to come in to fulfill it. I'm sure China is able to develop any industry by this point as they have the human capital and resources required to do so
Felipe Carrillo
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 561
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 8:28 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
Didn't know GE was in the avionics area.


GE bought Smiths Aerospace in 2007 and renamed it GE Aviation Systems who does quite a bit of avionics work.
 
workhorse
Posts: 821
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 8:38 pm

If this goes through, hopefully it will sign the end of any Boeing sales in China.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10862
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 8:39 pm

petertenthije wrote:
If the government wants to prevent the LEAP engine from being reverse engineered, then surely banning them for the C919 won’t be enough. Then the sale of Airbus or Boeing’s with such an engine would also have to be banned.

Also, GE is not in favor and they (co-) own the design. I don’t think the US government had a part in developing the engine, so they should have no say in this. Or was the LEAP funded with government grants?

Many engines, including LEAP, use a lot of technology derived from military engines. So they need US export licenses. A lot of the CFM56’s core technology (which of course was developed into the LEAP) was developed from the F101 which power the US’s B-1 bombers which was later developed into the F110 which powers F-14/F-15/F-16s.


As the OP said this is less fear of reverse engineering and more using the export licenses as a bargaining chip (aircraft order, better trade deal, etc).

workhorse wrote:
If this goes through, hopefully it will sign the end of any Boeing sales in China.

No, because if push comes to shove the US can deny export licenses for things on Airbus products destined to China.
 
nine4nine
Posts: 654
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:44 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 8:59 pm

I get it. It prevents China the rights to technology that they copy and fabricate their own versions of it 100% copied from the imported original. It allows them to mimic the same tech that US companies have spent millions to billions in development costs while China can replicate exactly and profit without fronting much cash at all for development. China needs to learn like everyone else has to design develop and engineer their own homegrown products for once.
717, 727-100, 727-200, 732, 733, 734, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 742, 748, 752, 753, 762, 763, 772, 77W, 787-10, DC9, MD80/88/90, DC10, 319, 220-300, 320, 321, 321n, 332, 333, CS100, CRJ200, Q400, E175, E190, ERJ145, EMB120
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 5486
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 9:30 pm

nine4nine wrote:
I get it. It prevents China the rights to technology that they copy and fabricate their own versions of it 100% copied from the imported original. It allows them to mimic the same tech that US companies have spent millions to billions in development costs while China can replicate exactly and profit without fronting much cash at all for development. China needs to learn like everyone else has to design develop and engineer their own homegrown products for once.


Shouldn't someone have thought about that before allowing the sale of LEAP-engined MAXes and NEOs to China then?
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1555
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 9:34 pm

Presumably the Trump Administration is 100% confident China doesn't hold IP's and / or make strategic components for any US built aircraft and engines.
 
flybyguy
Posts: 1419
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 12:52 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 9:35 pm

Polot wrote:
No, because if push comes to shove the US can deny export licenses for things on Airbus products destined to China.


This process is indicative of bargaining with Beijing under the guise of IP concerns. Honestly, China has some of the world’s most prolific MROs so the PRC already has access to European and US aviation IP. Not to mention acquisitions in US general aviation space provide direct access to IP at the design level to the Chinese government.

I speculate that perhaps this is one of many levers the US government is using to potentially help the recertification effort for the 737 MAX.

petertenthije wrote:
Also, GE is not in favor and they (co-) own the design. I don’t think the US government had a part in developing the engine, so they should have no say in this. Or was the LEAP funded with government grants?


I don’t agree with this statement. Any technological intellectual property that can be used to further weapons development of foreign governments or entities can be considered to be in the national interest and must fall under export control protocols. It’s not up to GE to determine what technologies they can hand over to Beijing to advance GE’s short term economic interests in China’s command & control economy. Unfortunately, my industry is littered with first hand accounts of economic extortion by the Beijing government as a key lever used against foreign companies to further the economic and geopolitical interests of the PRC. In other words, hand over your intellectual property to mandated local ‘partners’ or we (China) tie up your business aspirations in bureaucratic red tape until said foreign company complies or withdraws from China.
"Are you a pretender... or a thoroughbred?!" - Professor Matt Miller
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24780
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:52 pm

mxaxai wrote:
Why is the US Gov worried about IP theft but the manufacturer is not? Government taking measures for the companies' own good...

Because the manufacturer has already made the investment in integrating with C919 and management is already including C919 into its sales projections.

Whatever loss the company suffers due to IP theft will be the problem of the next generation of managers, this generation wants the near term sales and thus profits, and will have cashed out long before the IP theft of current generation tech has an impact.

Meanwhile, all of this ignores that the main path of IP theft is cyber crime ( ref: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... tole-61912 ).
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Ertro
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:28 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:44 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
pipeafcr wrote:
This will only cause further development of key industries outside the US scope

Sure - engine building and aircraft building is easy. Anybody can do it!


Don't think it is only aircraft industry which reads newspapers and takes notice what is going on in the world.
Many other branches of industry could be thinking that since this kind of talk has already been heard in 2 different areas of technology it is quite possible to happen also on some 3rd and 4th area of technology and then it might affect me. And next time the country affected might not be china but some other country which my factory happens to be located. If I have choice of 2 different suppliers of vital key technology would it be safer to choose a supplier that is not in USA even if my factory is not in china and I am not in airplane or telecommunication business?
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7344
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:52 pm

All they need is one engine to reverse engineer, which they already have as well as various fully constructed cutting edge civilian jetliners. Stopping future deliveries of 1 engine isn't going to change anything.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5452
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:58 pm

This entire thing is so ridiculous. As someone who has followed Chinese aeroengine industry for a long time, I can say this is entirely unfounded. They will probably end up using some Russian engines or work with a continental European company. Sure the fuel efficiency will be subpar, but did anyone really expect c919 to succeed outside of China and select third world countries?
 
tphuang
Posts: 5452
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:00 am

TWA772LR wrote:
All they need is one engine to reverse engineer, which they already have as well as various fully constructed cutting edge civilian jetliners. Stopping future deliveries of 1 engine isn't going to change anything.

Do you have an idea how long it took them to reverse engineer a very old version of cfm56 or spey? And their reverse engineered version was not very good.

Aeroengine is a seriously difficult thing to replicate.
 
User avatar
PepeTheFrog
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:24 am

If this happens, what could it potentially mean for the LEAP powered A320neo aircraft that are built in TSN? The US will have to halt engine shipments too if they are afraid of reverse engineering.

blueflyer wrote:
The stated reason is concerns that China may reverse-engineer the products and break into the global market.


China can buy a bunch of 737 MAX aircraft and would still be able to reverse engineer the engine. So the official reason sounds pretty odd.
Good moaning!
 
Nick614
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 10:55 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:29 am

China has been trying to reverse engineer Russian engines for fighters for decades and still hasn't been able to do so.
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 5486
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:40 am

It's nothing but a bargaining chip, but an obvious and clumsy one.
Then again, it's a one way to bring the subject of rampant theft or forceful transfer of IP in China to the negotiating table.
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5087
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:30 am

JerseyFlyer wrote:
Would any country trust the promise of a contract with a US company in the future, if this actually happens?

the Real question is? Do you believe the Trump Administration actually Cares? They'd need hell of a lot more tech to reverse engineer Avionics and Engines . They can already buy Russian engineered avionics AND Engines. So? You have to ask yourself? Have they made that many inroads into building their OWN airplanes? Their fighters are Knockoff's of Russian Fighters. Are they so effective? What say you?
'
 
Iloveboeing
Posts: 469
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:02 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:03 am

nine4nine wrote:
I get it. It prevents China the rights to technology that they copy and fabricate their own versions of it 100% copied from the imported original. It allows them to mimic the same tech that US companies have spent millions to billions in development costs while China can replicate exactly and profit without fronting much cash at all for development. China needs to learn like everyone else has to design develop and engineer their own homegrown products for once.


Well said! As much as China will always have a place in my heart (studied and lived there for awhile and also speak some Mandarin), they need to learn to develop their own things. The A320, um, I mean, C919, is a direct result of the West's stupidity of outsourcing things to China and allowing them to copy Western technology. I mean seriously, the Chinese copy EVERYTHING! It's almost like they are wanna-be Westerners and are ashamed of their own culture.. They're eating Western food, wearing Western clothing (I even wore a tangzhuang on the streets of Hong Kong several times to prove a point---even to the symphony!), watching Western entertainment....the Chinese were supposed to be their own nation. If they wanted a new airplane, they should've designed it themselves.

Airbus was a fool to open a FAL in Tianjin and Boeing will be foolish to do the same thing. China has the potential to deliver unique things to the rest of the world; they've just got to be forced to do it. I guess all the Chinese intellectuals that we rounded up and murdered during the 1950s and 1960s would have been useful now had they been alive and had offspring today.
 
Insertnamehere
Posts: 336
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 3:44 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:29 am

Translation: the US Government is protecting Boeing from competition.
 
Insertnamehere
Posts: 336
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 3:44 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:32 am

Insertnamehere wrote:
Translation: the US Government is protecting Boeing from competition.

What I said seems a little too vague. But I mean that The US government is trying to curtail the C919 project as it’s more competition for the 737 program which is a mess.

While China has a history of this if they did want to export to the global market and compete they couldn’t just rebrand a phone and it will become magically successful, this was tried already in mobile phones and failed as major Chinese manufacturers of phones are successful and innovate much more then their US competitor Apple. At the end of the day the US government is trying to curtail competition from China.
 
Toinou
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2019 8:21 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:38 am

I guess the main difference between the EU and the US on that topic lies in the way it is applied: in the EU, it is presented as a simple application of usual rules, while in the US, especially in the last years, it looks much more like retaliatory sanctions against a growing power. The result is almost the same, but the impression it makes, in PR term, is vastly different.

I guess some companies, in very different fields, are probably more and more trying to do business, or at least R&D, with as few as possible US implication to avoid this kind of perceived interferences (even though they may be similar in other places).
 
astuteman
Posts: 7184
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:56 am

Iloveboeing wrote:
Airbus was a fool to open a FAL in Tianjin and Boeing will be foolish to do the same thing.


Not sure your swipe at the Tianjin FAL is all that well directed.

From
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comac_C919

From 2010 to 2015 the Chinese cyberthreat actor Turbine Panda, linked to the Ministry of State Security’s Jiangsu Bureau, penetrated a number of the C919’s foreign components manufacturers including Honeywell and Safran.[12] Crowdstrike contended that the operations involved both cyber intrusion and theft as well as HUMINT operations with the aim of transitioning component manufacturing to domestic companies using stolen intellectual property and industrial processes


Canada's Bombardier Aerospace has been collaborating since March 2012 on supply chain services, electrical systems, human interface and cockpit; and on flight training, flight-test support, and sales and marketing, from June 2013


The engine's nacelle, thrust reverser and exhaust system will be provided by Nexcelle, with such features as an advanced inlet configuration, the extensive use of composites and acoustic treatment and an electrically operated thrust reverser.[58] Michelin will supply Air X radial tyres.[59]

Its integrated modular avionics architecture is based on Ethernet.[39] The landing gear is made in China by a joint venture of Germany's Liebherr and Avic's Landing Gear Advanced Manufacturing Corp: Liebherr LAMC Aviation.[44]

While the airframe is entirely made by Chinese Avic, most systems are made by Western-Chinese joint-ventures:
with UTAS for the electric power, fire protection and lighting;
with Rockwell Collins for the cabin systems and avionics,
with Thales for the IFE,
with Honeywell for the flight controls, APU, wheels and brakes;
with Moog for the high lift system;
with Parker for the hydraulics, actuators and fuel systems,
with Liebherr for the landing gear and air management;
and the CFM engine and Nexcelle nacelle are entirely foreign


Both Pratt & Whitney and CFM International offered to provide the engines for the aircraft, the former offering the PW1000G and the latter the LEAP-1C;[61] the latter was ultimately selected.



Pretty much the whole of the western Aerospace industry has piled in behind the C919 opportunity.
Far more than the Tianjin A320FAL will ever tell them
As far as banning CFM deliveries, and China being unable to replicate it...

AVIC Commercial Aircraft Engine Co was also tasked with developing an indigenous engine to be used with the aircraft.[63] The ACAE CJ-1000A was unveiled at the 2012 Zhuhai Airshow.


From
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACAE_CJ-1000A

The CJ-1000A is developed for the Comac C919 narrow-body airliner with a thrust of 98–196 kN; 22,000–44,000 lbf


To validate its technologies, the first CJ-1000AX demonstrator assembly was completed in December 2017 after an 18-month process, 24 more prototypes will support an airworthiness certification campaign and it should enter service after 2021.[3] In May 2018, the first demonstrator was powered on in a Shanghai test cell and its core reached 6,600 rpm after overcoming connections and debugging issues, completed on 30 March


Feels a bit late to assume China won't or can't develop an alternative....

Would it be fair to say the CJ-1000A development is nothing to do with the Tianjin A320 FAL?

Rgds
 
speedbird52
Posts: 1033
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:30 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:06 am

Not sure how I feel about this as I equally hate the Chinese government and the American economic monopoly of the global economy.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14094
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:33 am

I assume US aerospace suppliers said some bad words after hearing this and are already doing damage control with their customers.

I think China is increasingly developing advanced products and selling them and protectionism is here. When things go south it's far easier to say it all unfair then blame yourself.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
EightyFour
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 10:35 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:46 am

Trump proving that even a broken clock is right twice a day.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9413
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:48 am

blueflyer wrote:
The Trump administration is considering not issuing export licenses for further LEAP engine deliveries to China for the Comac C919. An extension of the existing license for avionics is also in doubt.

The stated reason is concerns that China may reverse-engineer the products and break into the global market.


Stopping supply forces building your own supply. ( usually combining own work enhanced by carefully looking left and right.)
Counter to other market participants China is rather open about how they work that.
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 9413
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:02 am

keesje wrote:
I assume US aerospace suppliers said some bad words after hearing this and are already doing damage control with their customers.

I think China is increasingly developing advanced products and selling them and protectionism is here. When things go south it's far easier to say it all unfair then blame yourself.


US problem is their view of IP as tangible property. Some nonworking legal fiction.
( and, as can be seen, it requires massive force to keep that legal fiction functional in a limited arena.
the fight is a retreating action.)

Innovation is not static "invent once, sit on your laurels the rest of your life"
but dynamic. A stream process. continuous.

Funny: there are so many US movies around were an invention "chip, whatnot" was stolen, retrieved, destroyed with no way to reclaim, lots of strife
while in reality even if lost, the abstract knowledge can be used to rematerialized it, inventions are repeatable, can be recreated with or without knowledge of the previous instantiation.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7344
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 1:13 pm

tphuang wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
All they need is one engine to reverse engineer, which they already have as well as various fully constructed cutting edge civilian jetliners. Stopping future deliveries of 1 engine isn't going to change anything.

Do you have an idea how long it took them to reverse engineer a very old version of cfm56 or spey? And their reverse engineered version was not very good.

Aeroengine is a seriously difficult thing to replicate.

The Soviets successfully reverse engineered the B29 during the 40s using nothing but slide rulers and forced labor. Im pretty sure the Chinese, who at least have state of the art CAD software and forced labor, can rip off the designs for anything from one example. And they have more than one engine btw, as well as hundreds of 787s and A350s running around. They can and will copy anything they can and pass it off as homemade. Yeah it can be a threat to Airbus and Boeing and the like, because all it takes is one Chinese airline executive to piss off one high ranking communist party member who has another party member friend who is over COMAC to force said airline to buy 100 C919s. Sure China may even throw some for free to SE Asia and Africa, but those airlines will park those after 2 years and those pilots will go back to flying 735s and EMB 135s because the Chinese wont be able to support them.

So let China rip it off. The rest of the world will know its a shit product with shit support structure.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5452
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:26 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
tphuang wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
All they need is one engine to reverse engineer, which they already have as well as various fully constructed cutting edge civilian jetliners. Stopping future deliveries of 1 engine isn't going to change anything.

Do you have an idea how long it took them to reverse engineer a very old version of cfm56 or spey? And their reverse engineered version was not very good.

Aeroengine is a seriously difficult thing to replicate.

The Soviets successfully reverse engineered the B29 during the 40s using nothing but slide rulers and forced labor. Im pretty sure the Chinese, who at least have state of the art CAD software and forced labor, can rip off the designs for anything from one example. And they have more than one engine btw, as well as hundreds of 787s and A350s running around. They can and will copy anything they can and pass it off as homemade. Yeah it can be a threat to Airbus and Boeing and the like, because all it takes is one Chinese airline executive to piss off one high ranking communist party member who has another party member friend who is over COMAC to force said airline to buy 100 C919s. Sure China may even throw some for free to SE Asia and Africa, but those airlines will park those after 2 years and those pilots will go back to flying 735s and EMB 135s because the Chinese wont be able to support them.

So let China rip it off. The rest of the world will know its a shit product with shit support structure.


Right because things haven't got infinitely harder to copy in the last 70 years. They are not going to be able to copy leap 1c. It's just such a ridiculous idea.
 
Arion640
Posts: 3112
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:30 pm

Another boeing protection policy
 
WIederling
Posts: 9413
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:01 pm

tphuang wrote:
Right because things haven't got infinitely harder to copy in the last 70 years. They are not going to be able to copy leap 1c. It's just such a ridiculous idea.

you sure? :-)
The idea that something cannot be copied or recreated is what I deem "ridiculous".
( Especially in relation to a country that has borrowed and homesteaded so much.)

Just a question of effort and time.

Tu-4 was a fully metricized recreation of the B29 in less than two years:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_T ... evelopment
Murphy is an optimist
 
tphuang
Posts: 5452
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:05 pm

WIederling wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Right because things haven't got infinitely harder to copy in the last 70 years. They are not going to be able to copy leap 1c. It's just such a ridiculous idea.

you sure? :-)
The idea that something cannot be copied or recreated is what I deem "ridiculous".
( Especially in relation to a country that has borrowed and homesteaded so much.)

Just a question of effort and time.

Tu-4 was a fully metricized recreation of the B29 in less than two years:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_T ... evelopment

I am 100% sure. Sure they might copy it in 20 years but then they might as well as just continue with their own development. People on this thread really are showing very little comprehension of Chinese aeroengine industry.
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2057
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:13 pm

Revelation wrote:
mxaxai wrote:
Why is the US Gov worried about IP theft but the manufacturer is not? Government taking measures for the companies' own good...

Because the manufacturer has already made the investment in integrating with C919 and management is already including C919 into its sales projections.

Whatever loss the company suffers due to IP theft will be the problem of the next generation of managers, this generation wants the near term sales and thus profits, and will have cashed out long before the IP theft of current generation tech has an impact.

It's a free market. Let companies destroy themselves if they really want to. There are others that will pick up the slack. It's not the government's problem that GE is a suicidal dinosaur.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24780
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:24 pm

WIederling wrote:
US problem is their view of IP as tangible property. Some nonworking legal fiction.
( and, as can be seen, it requires massive force to keep that legal fiction functional in a limited arena.
the fight is a retreating action.)

Innovation is not static "invent once, sit on your laurels the rest of your life"
but dynamic. A stream process. continuous.

Yet if you can't gain from your innovation no one will put in the efforts, thus the need for protection.

Protection of IP is far from a US thing, the patent was invented in Olde Europe during the Renaissance and EU now has a full non fiction legislative realm ( ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_ ... operty_law ), but thanks for the jingoistic slap none the less.

As above, the legal and political realm isn't where the action is anyways, the real IP theft happens in the cyber realm, and most companies can't seem to understand how any one unguarded entrance can be exploited. They'd rather pay lawyers than security experts.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
AYVN
Posts: 73
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:51 pm

In leg shooting contest China might have very innovative options too, ranging form stopping IPhone/Pad assembly and export without notice to banning all rare metal exports.
China might not be strong in aviation industry, but in leg shooting contest it doesn't really matter very much. Shoot where it hurts, even if it means shooting thru own leg too.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7344
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 4:53 pm

tphuang wrote:
WIederling wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Right because things haven't got infinitely harder to copy in the last 70 years. They are not going to be able to copy leap 1c. It's just such a ridiculous idea.

you sure? :-)
The idea that something cannot be copied or recreated is what I deem "ridiculous".
( Especially in relation to a country that has borrowed and homesteaded so much.)

Just a question of effort and time.

Tu-4 was a fully metricized recreation of the B29 in less than two years:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_T ... evelopment

I am 100% sure. Sure they might copy it in 20 years but then they might as well as just continue with their own development. People on this thread really are showing very little comprehension of Chinese aeroengine industry.

Their "own" development is just rip offs of other countries material. Innovation is what makes the US a superpower as well as the former USSR (yeah they had their own rip offs but they were also pretty crafty coming with their own stuff too). China is good and all but their engineers are just taught how to "do" and not how to think. A cheap Chinese version of a LEAP engine is exactly that, and like I said before, the world knows it. Even the local Chinese airlines don't have faith in Chinese aircraft because even they know its crap.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5452
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 5:36 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
tphuang wrote:
WIederling wrote:
you sure? :-)
The idea that something cannot be copied or recreated is what I deem "ridiculous".
( Especially in relation to a country that has borrowed and homesteaded so much.)

Just a question of effort and time.

Tu-4 was a fully metricized recreation of the B29 in less than two years:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_T ... evelopment

I am 100% sure. Sure they might copy it in 20 years but then they might as well as just continue with their own development. People on this thread really are showing very little comprehension of Chinese aeroengine industry.

Their "own" development is just rip offs of other countries material. Innovation is what makes the US a superpower as well as the former USSR (yeah they had their own rip offs but they were also pretty crafty coming with their own stuff too). China is good and all but their engineers are just taught how to "do" and not how to think. A cheap Chinese version of a LEAP engine is exactly that, and like I said before, the world knows it. Even the local Chinese airlines don't have faith in Chinese aircraft because even they know its crap.


How very stereotypical of you. So if cheap chines version of a leap engine is garbage, why are you afraid of them copying it? If they copy it 20 years late and it's still not as good, there is no commercial application to it.

As I said, there is no threat here of China really copying Leap-1C. Only this administration with no concept of how complex building a modern aeroengine would make a decision like this. What will probably happen is that CFM will lose all their sales on those Chinese airline bound C919 to some Russian engine option. C919 or a chinese aeroengine option is not a threat.
 
raylee67
Posts: 934
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 5:50 pm

But is US selling the LEAP engines to the airlines in China for their 737MAX? If yes, why can't China just use those LEAPs to reverse engineer?
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 359/51 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI LX
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21888
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:08 pm

x1234 wrote:
I was wondering the same thing. All this does is push China closer to Russia like they currently do with military arms.


I think that's the point.

Anyway, why couldn't China copy GE/PW technology from Boeing and Airbus models that they have purchased?
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
airzona11
Posts: 1784
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:13 pm

AYVN wrote:
In leg shooting contest China might have very innovative options too, ranging form stopping IPhone/Pad assembly and export without notice to banning all rare metal exports.
China might not be strong in aviation industry, but in leg shooting contest it doesn't really matter very much. Shoot where it hurts, even if it means shooting thru own leg too.


But that is actually making the counter point. China doesn’t have the IP on iPhones. Apple can move that production else where. That hurts China. China has that business because of their labor capital. Indonesia/Vietnam/you name other SE Asian country would gladly absorb that work. If China steals the IP (which is this concern) than it could start to do damage/control the market higher up the value chain. Same goes for banning rare metal exports, price goes up, suddenly California for example starts to make financial sense to start those mines again.

Airbus/Boeing have final assembly plants in China but they control so much of the process, there is limited risk exposure (the highly complex materials and components arrive already assembled).

Property rights are crucial the functioning of a market.
 
Elementalism
Posts: 608
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: US Gov May Stop Engine, Avionics Deliveries to C919

Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:36 pm

mxaxai wrote:
Why is the US Gov worried about IP theft but the manufacturer is not? Government taking measures for the companies' own good...


Short sighted businessmen. That is why. Every one of my friends that does business in China knows the Chinese are full on stealing their IP. But the higher ups like the short term profit.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos