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 31st Aug 2016, 17:34
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Received 18 Likes on 6 Posts
A huge amount of the UK network is built on this equipment
Actually its built on UK designed, Uk built, Uk maintained equipment. the Chinese only bought the company after it was all installed and they had absolutely nothing to do with its design.
GrahamO is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 17:37
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
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... How I think isn't important. What I know you don't know is important.
There may not be any so far, doesn't mean there won't be any in future. They may not build exact engine down to specs, but they will acquire necessary knowledge to have a functional engine by any means.

Long March development and Hughes/Loral contribution is a perfect example.
notapilot15 is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 17:45
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Turbine D:
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. . .
It's surprising to me how many people do not recognize the IMMENSE value of competition in the marketplace. Remember when "portable" phones were labeled BRICKS? Not so long ago! The same applies in the aerospace industry - each player seeks to outdo the guy from Long Beach or Montreal. The result is the faster, lighter, cheaper product for the customer. When government comes along to bail out the underperformer, there's no real benefit to the consumer, NOR to his taxes payable next April!
barit1 is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2016, 17:49
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Turbine D
Same can be said for their commercial engines, at least under the Soviet system of operating.
I hope you're not talking about rocket engines.
That proves your entire "Soviet system" premise completely false.

The one thing that can be said about a Russian ICBM is that it's pretty much guaranteed to work out of the box, which is why the USA buy motors.

Buks seem to work pretty reliably too..

The various failures of Bulava, ProtonM (another Perm thing!) etc, happened well after the dissappearance of the USSR, even last year.

You might just get my point here:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_LBOVGLglU
up_down_n_out is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2016, 03:41
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
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.
Never were truer words spoken - and this is an area where China repeatedly falls down badly. They fail to understand the vitally important principles of "product backup", of the value of "name brands", and the superior response (by purchasers) to a name brand, that has repeatedly produced a quality product over a long period of time.

You would get your aircraft engine from China, produced from Glorious Golden Treasure Aircraft Engine Factory Number One, and wearing the Fan Lei brand - but your buddy would get his engine from The Glorious East Is Red Aircraft Engine Factory Number Three - and wearing the Long March brand.

Neither engine would consist of any compatible parts, nor would they have comprehensive manuals written in clear and competent English - and the following month, you'd find the managers and a range of suppliers to Glorious Golden Treasure Aircraft Engine Factory Number One have all been jailed on corruption charges, and you'd find parts for your most excellent Chinese aircraft engine are not available, due to the major factory disruption.

Last edited by onetrack; 2nd Sep 2016 at 02:43. Reason: clarification ...
onetrack is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2016, 13:31
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by onetrack
Neither engine would consist of any compatible parts, nor would they have comprehensive manuals written in clear and competent English - and the following month, you'd find the managers and a range of suppliers to Glorious Golden Treasure Aircraft Engine Factory Number One have all been jailed on corruption charges, and you'd find parts for your most excellent Chinese aircraft engine are not available, due to the major factory disruption.
This argument would not hold water, because we are sending our planes for heavy mx by non-certified, zero English knowledge mechanics. Most mechanics working on our planes cannot read/write English.

A complete overhaul of GE90 in a week at a third world MRO facility is considered a greatest achievement.
notapilot15 is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 01:28
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
notapilot,
This argument would not hold water, because we are sending our planes for heavy mx by non-certified, zero English knowledge mechanics. Most mechanics working on our planes cannot read/write English.

A complete overhaul of GE90 in a week at a third world MRO facility is considered a greatest achievement.
I highly doubt any of what you have written here is factual...
Turbine D is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 03:31
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Turbine D
notapilot,


I highly doubt any of what you have written here is factual...
Flying Cheaper - Video | FRONTLINE | PBS
http://amfa32.com/Legislative/CRS%20...aintenance.pdf
notapilot15 is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 03:34
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: A better place.
Posts: 2,326
Received 26 Likes on 18 Posts
Agree with previous posters - Japan couldn't manufacture with notable quality 40-50 years ago - Korea more recently.
Now look at them.
A few people are trying to say aerospace and aerospace propulsion are an order of magnitude more complex than building transistors, cars or ships?
True, but I think with China - only a matter of time.
They'll never master the complexities of supply chains, cutting edge (bad pun) metallurgy and customer support?
That's a big call and I think it's foolish to underestimate them.
Put yourself in China's shoes.
Would suggest that in Beijing there's a tremendous appetite to gain and master sophisticated aerospace technology by whatever means, return to your historical position of greatness, gain face and re-assume what you see as your true place in the world.
I look at the people cleaning my office each night and often think to myself "...for all this time we treat them like ****, one day there's going to be payback."
tartare is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 10:44
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
tartare - There are subtle differences between the Chinese and Japanese attitudes, and national characteristics - and the differences are, the Japanese had extensive exposure to American construction styles and repair techniques at the end of WW2 - whereas the Chinese didn't.

The Americans realised the Japanese desperately needed jobs right after the end of WW2, so they engaged them to recondition all their military equipment.
The Japanese aren't slow learners, and they rapidly picked up on the American way of doing things, as regards engineering design and practices, metallurgy, workshop skills, training methods, and a host of other useful manufacturing tips, as well.
In addition, the Japanese are perfectionists and anal about many things - qualities that bode well for rapid industrial gains.
The simple reason the Japanese produced rubbish in the 1950's was that no Western country was prepared to give them the quality iron ore and other raw and exotic materials needed to improve the end-quality of their products.
Once the West relaxed in the late 1950's, and allowed Japan to acquire the superior quality raw materials they needed, Japanese product quality rose rapidly.

The Chinese on the other hand, have never been exposed to a technologically superior conquering Western force, that then allowed the conquered to acquire the conquerers technologies.
In addition, the Chinese overall have a tendency to be quite gung-ho, and they often have a tendency to lack attention to detail.
There would no doubt be more than a few sizable Chinese engineering disasters that we haven't heard about.

The current industrial revolution in China is being driven by Chinese who have spent extensive time in the West, and who have been tertiary-educated in prominent Western education centres.
These people are highly competent in English and all the sciences, and they understand Western methods of technology and production processes.
However, this group are still a considerable minority in China, and it won't be until China acquires a greater number of these people, will the Chinese then be able to match the highest technological achievements of the West.
onetrack is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 10:49
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: A better place.
Posts: 2,326
Received 26 Likes on 18 Posts
Have no doubt you're right onetrack.
But I get the feeling it may happen faster than we all think...
tartare is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 11:05
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by onetrack
The Chinese on the other hand, have never been exposed to a technologically superior conquering Western force, that then allowed the conquered to acquire the conquerers technologies.

The current industrial revolution in China is being driven by Chinese who have spent extensive time in the West, and who have been tertiary-educated in prominent Western education centres.
Have you ever travelled much in China?
They don't need to be exposed to superior technology, countries like France have been bending over backwards to give it to them on a plate for the last 20 years!

Have you ever been on a Chinese TGV?

It's light years better than anything from France or Germany, and invariably more secure... (heard of some nut pulling out a Kalashnikov from a toilet on a Chinese train have we?).

You might criticise what you like in Russia or China (BRICS EH?) but from what I can see on PP it's 99% hearsay.
up_down_n_out is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 12:59
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Japan couldn't manufacture with notable quality 40-50 years ago - Korea more recently.
Now look at them."

Agreed - but they still don't make aircraft engines. I really believe most people who fly the things daily have absolutey no idea of the degree of scientific work, design and production expertise required to build a modern, commercial jet engine.
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 13:44
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
up_down_n_out - Unfortunately, the Chinese rail industry has not yet been able to convince any other country that it has the skills, knowledge, and abilities to build a safe, secure, and fault-free high speed rail network for them.

Part of the problem may be - that the Chinese rail accident/fatality rate is a closely guarded State secret - which does not engender confidence in the people they are trying to sell their rail networks to?

https://www.chinafile.com/reporting-...ain-crash-data

I have little doubt about the tightness of security within the country, seeing as the PLA oversee anything and everything even remotely associated with the CCP - and they carry out the CCP's requirement to keep strict and tight control of Chinas populace, and the countrys projects, with great efficiency.

In addition to a paucity of rail accidents/fatalities information from China, is a similar paucity of information regarding industrial accident rates in China.
However, these unimportant details matter little within a country well known for glossing over its industrial failures.
Worship of its Communist dictator founder has to assume primary importance over the loss of a few lives and a few billion yuan, within their great industries.

Last edited by onetrack; 2nd Sep 2016 at 13:54.
onetrack is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 14:34
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
notapilot,
A complete overhaul of GE90 in a week at a third world MRO facility is considered a greatest achievement.
I am an engine guy not an aircraft guy. So after looking at and reading the links you sent, where is evidence supporting your above statement? GE maintains engine overhaul facilities around the world for airlines that don't have overhaul capability. What do you expect? For instance, there are over 20,000 CFM56 engines in operation around the world. Do you expect them to all be returned to the US for overhaul? The Frontline show is six years old. If you want to dig back further in time, when most major US airlines did their own engine overhauls in-house, if approved to do so, you would find similar stories. For example more than one major used forklift trucks to remove and install engines from the wings, instead of precision tooling designed for this task. The Chicago O'Hare crash proved the forklift short cut didn't work so well. I consider the Frontline story to be mostly sour grapes by disgruntled former employees. I have seen other programs like this on 60Minutes. You only know that if you know a great deal about the topic being presented.
Turbine D is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 14:58
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by onetrack
up_down_n_out - Unfortunately, the Chinese rail industry has not yet been able to convince any other country that it has the skills, knowledge, and abilities to build a safe, secure, and fault-free high speed rail network for them.

In addition to a paucity of rail accidents/fatalities information from China, is a similar paucity of information regarding industrial accident rates in China.
Oh grief! That "whataboutism" is really a staggeringly stupid statement.

Some people have short memories.
You remember Paddington?
Potters bar 2002?
Hatfield 2000?
French TGV accident with fatalities on a NEW section of line - November 2015.

As for industrial accidents, they are dwarfed and always have been by coal mining, so as coal mining deaths declined in advanced countries leading to increased imports, deaths increased in those countries that expanded mining... India, China...

"On November 25, 2006, the worst mining disaster occurred in modern Polish history, 23 miners lost their lives...

In recent years the Turkish coal mining industry has been found to have the very worst safety record in the world, in terms of fatal accidents per million tons of coal produced...

I don't really think anyone on PP (or in the west for that matter) has the least right to point a finger at China.

I have been on the Chinese "TGV" several times.
It's impressive and it runs to time, which is more than can be said for Eurostar.

Last edited by up_down_n_out; 2nd Sep 2016 at 15:11.
up_down_n_out is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 19:58
  #57 (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,
Motor sich?
About - Motor Sich

Talking ignorant twaddle is inexcusable in a day and age of instant access to info!
Just to bring you up to date, Motor Sich isn't in Russia, it is located in the Ukraine, the city of Zaporizhia (Ukrainian spelling) along the Dnieper River. Motor Sich did build D-18 turbofan engines for the An-225 heavy lift freighters. The freighter was used by GE to haul GE90 engine fan modules as it was the only commercially available freighter to handle that large a diameter piece of hardware. In case you are wondering the D-18 engine was inherited from the Soviet Union (Russia) before the collapse. I saw the engine running in a test cell at Motor Sich and saw all the parts laid out on tables. The D-18 engine design was a three spool engine knock off of the early RB-211 engine, borrowed or stolen Western world technology. It took some time to become reliable as there were a lot of technical problems to overcome in getting it to work properly.

Interestingly, the Motor Sich people drove me to the hydro-electric dam on the river to show the GE turbines and generators that were part of the Dnipro-HES 1927-1932 project. Some were destroyed during WWII by the Germans, but the remaining units I saw still produce electricity on a daily basis.

Last edited by Turbine D; 2nd Sep 2016 at 20:09. Reason: inserted word
Turbine D is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2016, 23:13
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auckland, NZ
Age: 79
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
As I understand it, in the PRC you can get any grade of manufacturing you want, from horrible rubbish to exquisitely precise.

The problem seems to be that there is not yet a widespread culture in which people do their jobs honestly and competently just because that's the right thing to do (and the important jobs here are managerial ones). Doing business on a small scale with Chinese people can be highly satisfactory, but it's a societal issue. Western companies have got bitten by assuming, for instance, that dairy providers won't contaminate their milk with melanin to boost the protein count, because it's a terrible poison; or by assuming that Chinese certification of steel means what it says. On the other hand, people who do rigorous QC can get very high quality products (like Foxcon), and I assume the PRC government gets the quality it wants and expects on the goods it cares about (I've read somewhere that Chinese copies of at least some Soviet aircraft were better built than the originals).

The question with aeroengines would then be whether they need such a complex system of supply and assembly that you have to rely on people doing the Right Thing, or whether you can keep tight controls over every stage of the process.

If you need a culture of doing it right, then it's probably too early for good engines from the PRC; on the other hand, modern management methods in the West tend to erode that culture (drive out costs; plan for success; manage by targets; don't let the professionals capture the process).
FlightlessParrot is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 02:15
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Turbine D
GE maintains engine overhaul facilities around the world for airlines that don't have overhaul capability.
I think you are mixing GEBS facilities with GE facilities. Taikoo Engine Services (a HAECO company) is a GE authorized GE90 facility.
Company's key capabilities include performance restoration, quick turn shop visits, as well as module and component repair services.
Even now DL has large in-house engine overhaul facility obviously with engine manufacturer cooperation JV/Authorized Service.

When Lufthansa issues RFP for engine overhaul, LHT Gmbh has to compete with LHT Manila and Ameco Beijing (LHT 25% owned).

Airline management are not looking for quality, they are looking for lowest bidder with minimum off wing time.

So facility with large number of cheap work force wins. If you tag and bag every turbine blade it will take months. No airline likes that even if it is the Engine manufacturer's recommendation.

IAG chief is on record saying he wants to grind down efficiencies in maintenance.

IMHO, most cabin smoke, hydraulic leak incidents are happening right after aircraft return to service after maintenance at these cheap facilities. As long as statistics and cost are in their favor, bean counters wouldn't care who did the work.
notapilot15 is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 02:35
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Perth, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Age: 72
Posts: 896
Received 31 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by barit1
Turbine D:

............. When government comes along to bail out the underperformer, there's no real benefit to the consumer, NOR to his taxes payable next April!
Do you mean like when the US government bailed out GM, et al - 2008's style?
WingNut60 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.