Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Chinese engines anyone?

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Chinese engines anyone?

Old 29th Aug 2016, 20:52
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Just take a look at how many Chinese people are on UK and US aeronautical engineering courses at Universities.
Miles Magister is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2016, 22:53
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Maine USA
Age: 82
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Back in 1937, everyone knew that the Japanese could only produce inferior copies of Western technology.... Just sayin'.
PersonFromPorlock is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2016, 23:34
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by esa-aardvark
Suggest you guys look at Chinese achievements & intentions in Space before
writing off their engine efforts.
John
Their space technology leap frogged with Hughes and Loral Aerospace screwup.
notapilot15 is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2016, 03:49
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,042
Received 250 Likes on 162 Posts
Most people who use iphones may not appreciate how hard some folks in China work to produce parts of them.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2016, 10:27
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: uk
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Jet engine is nothing but bunch of cases, discs, blades and tubes of different materials and sizes. 3D imaging and metallurgy analysis is good enough to reverse engineer the hardware. Girls will get the control module software.
Notanengineer either.
Wageslave is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2016, 17:39
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Flapping_Madly
Typical BBC accuracy. So China gets engines from GE and P&W do they. No mention of RR then.
From the context of the article, they were talking about where engines for China's current indigenous commercial aircraft are sourced from. Hence GE for the ARJ21 and P&WC for the MA60/600/700. RR would be relevant in the context of military aircraft (JH-7), though the less said about a certain Chinese warehouse visit to inspect ex-Phantom Spey engines the better.

Re: metallurgy, they've no doubt embraced the proud tradition of dumpster diving for metal shavings. (This approach even worked for the U.S. Navy when they were working to confirm the hull design of the Project 705/Alfa SSN.)
turboshaft is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2016, 19:11
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by PersonFromPorlock
Back in 1937, everyone knew that the Japanese could only produce inferior copies of Western technology.... Just sayin'.
After the war and into the 1960s and 70s, anything made in Japan was considered junk. Today, that's where the good stuff comes from, particularly electronics. Now that perception paints China with the same reputation - except in many cases, it holds merit.
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2016, 19:52
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: All over the place
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Couple of interesting stories regarding hacking into Safran and the former Turbomeca.

Hackers break into French defence industry ? TechEye

Exclusive: France's Snecma targeted by hackers - researcher | Reuters

There have been numerous stories circulating in the industry about breaches of Computer systems from other manufacturers as well.
rotor-rooter is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2016, 19:53
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Róisín Dubh
Posts: 1,388
Received 11 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by vapilot2004
After the war and into the 1960s and 70s, anything made in Japan was considered junk. Today, that's where the good stuff comes from, particularly electronics. Now that perception paints China with the same reputation - except in many cases, it holds merit.
Even 10 years ago we all laughed at Korean cars. Now look.
Una Due Tfc is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2016, 21:49
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Russian jet engine designers have very good aerodynamic knowledge that is applied to their fan, compressor and turbine airfoil parts. What is significantly lacking is the capability to manufacture the parts to the design requirements. When the Soviet government owned and ran the jet engine businesses, everything was a paper transaction. The more engines produced, the better, full employment forever. What the parts cost, let alone total engines was a mystery. Maybe that is changing now, but it will take awhile.

Meanwhile, the story in China is different. They have very acceptable manufacturing knowhow and capabilities.What they have been lacking is good design knowhow and design experience. They are gaining that knowhow rapidly by one means or another. IMHO, they will be a major jet engine player quickly.
Turbine D is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 09:36
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
Well the Russians have tried to compete on engines for years and have always stuggled - the sort of stuff you can copy IS important but not as important as the quality of the supply chain for every item on the engine - and that you can't copy
As usual I have no idea where you get this nonsense from.
The airline industry is NOT a level playing field which is how Airbus and Boeing got where they are.

Care to take a look at Perm engines?
They're pumping the gas you use to cook your boiled eggs.
Perm Engine Company

Idem, are Antonov struggling?
Motor sich?
About - Motor Sich

Talking ignorant twaddle is inexcusable in a day and age of instant access to info!
up_down_n_out is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 12:21
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Una Due Tfc
Even 10 years ago we all laughed at Korean cars. Now look.
They are pretty much at the top of the tree with shipbuilding now.
Small specialist vessels excluded.
Tech Guy is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 15:25
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
up down n out,
As usual I have no idea where you get this nonsense from.
The airline industry is NOT a level playing field which is how Airbus and Boeing got where they are.
There are two industries, the aircraft industry and the aircraft engine industry. The playing fields for both (in the Western world) were level. The players today in both industries represent the "cream that rose to the top" as the saying goes. The players got there by ingenuity and timing, e.g., having the right product at the right time with the right quality and at the right price. Those that didn't have these attributes didn't survive. Government owned and run businesses generally fail to meet one or more of the attributes. They might survive, but they aren't the "cream of the crop".
Turbine D is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 15:35
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: on a blue balloon
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's not only about technology.

When a customer spends hundreds of millions on airframes and engines it enters a 20 year marriage with the manufacturer. In response it expects impeccable support.
Unless the airlines believe the manufacturer gets the best possible person to develop and run support services the project will fail. In this regard the Russians have the same problem as the Chinese. No customer wants to discover the hard way that the responsive support chief has fallen foul of politics / corruption and has been replaced by a government croney.
oldchina is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 15:41
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
notapiilot,
Jet engine is nothing but bunch of cases, discs, blades and tubes of different materials and sizes. 3D imaging and metallurgy analysis is good enough to reverse engineer the hardware. Girls will get the control module software.
So how do you reverse engineer the materials that go into a jet engine? How do you reverse engineer the specification composition limits? How do you reverse engineer the processes used to produce the materials? How do you reverse engineer the quality inspection methods and requirements?

I think you are in over your head with your jet engine quote.
Turbine D is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 16:05
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Turbine D,

That is because you are thinking like a product engineer who depends on fundamental research for solutions, and proud for any innovation. They always think, it is so unique no one can reproduce. All a copier need is something performs similar to the genuine product.

Have you noticed the soft spoken, innocent intern in the corner cubicle working seriously.
notapilot15 is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 17:38
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"As usual I have no idea where you get this nonsense from"

There is a very big difference in putting a big compressor on a fixed site on a gas pipeline and having an engine stuck on an aeroplane go from 0-40,000 ft for +20,000 hours

Some Russian military engines have been competitive in terms of performance but really poor in terms of reliability

Russian airframers have, in general, been much more competitive and in military terms they were often ahead
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 17:52
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
notapilot,
That is because you are thinking like a product engineer who depends on fundamental research for solutions, and proud for any innovation. They always think, it is so unique no one can reproduce.
Jet engines have been around for years, name a couple that have been reversed engineered. You should be able to answer the four questions I previously asked you if you were at all knowledgeable about jet engines... How I think isn't important. What I know you don't know is important.
Turbine D is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 18:11
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Turbine D
notapilot,
Jet engines have been around for years, name a couple that have been reversed engineered.
You should be able to answer the four questions I previously asked you if you were at all knowledgeable about jet engines....
Learning curves are tough things.
I remember Yamaha's pathetic attempts to prove they could make a F1 engine.

I can think of a certain leading aerospace country that unsuccessfully tried to reverse engineer Concorde making it considerably larger, heavier and with a different construction.
It was a recipe for failure, which of course that was what it became.

The rest is history.
BA concorde would still be flying today if hadn't been for french sabotage.
The TU144 scarcely ever flew successfully and kept breaking down or up.

Putin's KGB didn't need sabotage, the wound was self inflicted from the start.

Talking of which the only thing they can so far be proud of, for supersonic freighters is the TU160, and that's was monumentally unreliable to begin with.

Dropping bombs on people leads to remarkably rapid progress usually.
up_down_n_out is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 18:12
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some Russian military engines have been competitive in terms of performance but really poor in terms of reliability
Same can be said for their commercial engines, at least under the Soviet system of operating. The way it worked, taking a four engine airliner like a Boeing 707, was this: The State run airline ordered a new airliner and one of the engine producers got an order for 16 engines. Then once the new aircraft began flying, 12 of the engines rotated into the engine inventory. Meantime, four engines were enroute back to the engine source for repair, four repaired engines were enroute to the airline engine depot and four engines were awaiting installation on an aircraft. On wing life was awful. This was related to me by Soviet aircraft engine officials during visits to various engine plants including Perm who I did think was the best of the bunch on the commercial side of the business. In all of this, no actual money was involved in the transactions, just paper orders from Central Planning.
Turbine D is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.