• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Loser Chinks build a dud based on outdated and "borrowed" technology

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
64,962
Points
113
printLogo.png

China's homegrown jet shows wrong way to take off

By Adam Minter
1:30 PM Friday Nov 13, 2015
GettyImages-459797451_220x147.jpg

After 13 years of development, and probably billions in costs, the ARJ21 remains heavier, slower, and less fuel-efficient than its competition.


China's grown tired of being a low-tech manufacturer of things that other people design. So it's throwing money and resources at an industrial upgrade.

On Tuesday, the government proudly announced one of the fruits of that effort: The country's first indigenously designed passenger jet, the 90-seat ARJ21, will be delivered to state- owned Chengdu Airlines by year's end.

There's just one problem. Of the roughly 350 additional ARJ21s on order, almost all are slated for another Chinese state-owned airline or leasing company. International airlines don't appear terribly interested.

READ MORE:

China unveils first large passenger plane
China unveils jetliner in bid to compete with Boeing, Airbus

It's hard to blame them. After 13 years of development, and probably billions in costs (the development costs have never been disclosed), the ARJ21 remains heavier, slower, and less fuel-efficient than its competition.

Even worse, it won't be certified by the U.S. Federal Aviation Authority, meaning it can only fly in China and the handful of South American, Asian, and African countries that recognize Chinese safety-certification standards. (Chinese state media has trumpeted the purchase of three aircraft by the Republic of the Congo.) Last fall one leading analyst concluded: "We do not consider the ARJ21 to be a viable commercial project."

That's not what China envisioned when the plane was conceived in 2002.

The ARJ21 was supposed to compete in the market for passenger jets with fewer than 100 seats -- currently dominated by Embraer and Bombardier -- and to jumpstart an aircraft manufacturing sector that would eventually challenge Boeing and Airbus. Passenger growth numbers provided incentive. Boeing expects China will need 5,580 new planes over the next two decades as it grows into the world's largest commercial aviation market.

So what's gone wrong?

First, while China's large, captive market of state-controlled airlines offers a commercial safety net, it's also dampened the incentive to innovate. Why worry about demanding foreign buyers when the government can ensure that the plane is purchased in respectable numbers at home?

China chose to base the design for the ARJ21 on the 1960s-era DC9 and reportedly has used tooling left behind in China by McDonnell Douglas in the 1990s to build it.


Second, China decided to dive straight into building a complete plane, using imported or at least foreign-designed components. That's the same approach Xiaomi used to develop a Chinese competitor to the iPhone. Indeed, Atlantic correspondent James Fallows has called the ARJ21's larger cousin, the C919, a "huge flying counterpart to the iPhone."

That might work well for products that have refresh cycles measured in months, such as smartphones. But if you're building a jet, it's a recipe for instant obsolescence. Even the newest, most innovative components can quickly become outmoded if delays occur, as they have repeatedly with the ARJ21 and its inexperienced design teams.

Most importantly, in its rush to build a jet, China chose to base the design for the ARJ21 on the 1960s-era DC9 and reportedly has used tooling left behind in China by McDonnell Douglas in the 1990s to build it. That means engineers have packed relatively new technologies into a heavy, old design, with predictably disappointing results.

China would've been better off following the path chosen by Japan, which launched its first indigenous passenger jet in 40 years, the Mitsubishi Regional Jet (MRJ), on Wednesday.
Unlike the ARJ21, the Japanese plane is a high-tech, fuel-efficient marvel with more than 400 orders, the vast majority of which are international. Also unlike the ARJ21, the jet will almost certainly be certified to fly in the U.S. and most of the rest of the world.

Unlike the ARJ21, the Japanese plane is a high-tech, fuel-efficient marvel with more than 400 orders, the vast majority of which are international.


The success and credibility of the MRJ has much to do with the fact that Mitsubishi has for years been an innovative manufacturer of aircraft parts, including high-tech composite wings for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, as well as a collaborator with top aircraft manufacturers around the world. During the height of the 787 development program, some 22,000 Japanese worked on elements of the cutting-edge plane.

These experiences gave Mitsubishi several advantages. Engineers familiar with making lightweight, fuel-efficient, composite components were quickly able to build a state-of-the- art airframe for the MRJ. Furthermore, Mitsubishi's experience working with manufacturers and regulators in other countries has smoothed the FAA certification process. Unlike China, which expects regulators to bend, Mitsubishi just opened an office in Seattle to navigate regulatory issues and provide support to North American buyers.

The MRJ's success should serve as a cautionary tale to any Chinese official who thinks bottomless funding, a will to succeed, and a large domestic market are all that's needed to create innovative products. Just as often, they result in an unproductive misallocation of Chinese resources and energy. The ARJ21 might someday be viewed as an important waypoint on China's aviation adventure. For now, it's little more than a flight delay.
By Adam Minter

Copyright ©2015, NZME. Publishing Limited

 
Still going to kill Ang Moh stategically, financially n economically. Making deeper debts and bankruptcy for Ang Mohs. Takeover the market and earn all the profits as well. Regardless what Ang Mohs thinks.

Now WHO is THE LOSER?

THE SORE ONE!

:D
 


Wait till u see me do a review "soon" based on a complaint from a verified Qoo10 customer, on this "invention" by a Tiong company :D


21747387db2d702a5e7ce8e916fcaff421deaa9c.jpg
 
i have absolute faith and confidence in the motherland china,all those defects and disadvantages dont make a difference if they are able to build a regional jet for less than 15% of the regular price.make anything that cheap it will break the market totally,soon china will conquer the other 90 percent of the world market,pretty soon even countries like zimbabwe and uganda and north korea can have their own airlines.
 
Last edited:
China is modernising, but it is still a while before her technology matches current players in the high technology areas. She should work and improve on lower tech products and materials first, like latex. The below article is about condoms from China that just doesn't cut it.

Cheers!

http://qz.com/75957/110-million-def...xample-of-chinas-dangerous-counterfeit-trade/

China’s $250 billion knock-off trade doesn’t just mean fewer handbag sales for LVMH, or a hit to the DVD sales market. It can also have potentially lethal consequences.

Take, for example, counterfeit condoms, 110 million of which the Food and Drugs Authority of Ghana has impounded over the last week due to poor quality. Testing revealed the condoms to have holes and break under pressure. It also found that they were unusually small and insufficiently lubricated.
And those hole-riddled, flimsy, undersized condoms were made in China, the FDA confirmed Tuesday, identifying Henan Xibei Latex Company Ltd. as the manufacturer. (Here’s the company’s Alibaba.com profile, should you be in the market for defective protection). On top of that, Yenghana reports that the leaky condoms are counterfeit, and that the purported manufacturer, BeSafe, has never sold its products in Ghana.

This isn’t the first time that a Chinese company has been implicated in selling faulty or knock-off condoms. They’ve been bedeviling global public health officials for more than a decade (examples here, here, here and here).
The Chinese government has scrambled to keep up with shady manufacturers, as the industry has grown. Now the fourth-largest maker of condoms—after the US, the UK and Japan—China exports some 1.6 billion a year. Past crackdowns by the Chinese police have revealed shady techniques like lubricating the condoms with vegetable oil (which can rot the rubber) and recycling used condoms as hairbands.
And the cycle of counterfeiting is self-perpetuating, because China’s reputation for making shoddy condoms means that bona fide Chinese manufacturers earn a minimal premium compared with the markup for European brands.
Of course, faulty condoms up the chances of transmission of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, as well as the likelihood of pregnancy. “This is a huge, huge problem,” said Faustina Fynn-Nyame, director of Marie Stopes International in Ghana, told the Guardian. “There will be a lot of unintended pregnancies as a result of this, and that means maternal mortality and unsafe abortion. Commercial sex workers also use these products [so] the consequences could be enormous.”
 
This is what happens when there is no accountability-billions can be lost with no one answerable for it.
No different from a peesai where billions are also lost on failed investments-but simply explained away with the term "long term investments'.
But if a shipping company started in 1968 still lost millions year after year and is sold off -what do you call that?-learning experience and lets move on?
 
Arj 21 is an old design.

Should focus on c919 with much upgraded avionics.

Kiwis should do more research before babbling out nonsense.
 
Arj 21 is an old design.

Should focus on c919 with much upgraded avionics.

Kiwis should do more research before babbling out nonsense.

I agree the article is biased, but the author Adam Minter could have done a better job in research.

The ARJ-21 is based on the 1980s assembly line build by McDonnell Douglas in China. This assembly line was set up to build the MD-80, a modernized version of the DC-9. Comparing the 1960s DC-9 as the author did to the actual MD-80 assembled in China is like comparing apples and oranges. Just like today, there is no comparison between a Boeing 737 build in the 1970s and one of the Boeing 737 Next Gen build today. McDonnell Douglas and even even its predecessor Douglas Aircraft company are notorious for over engineering their designs. They build robust strong designs that last many years longer then their competitors. Hence, you still fine many WW2 era Douglas DC-3 flying around as well as cargo conversion DC-8s. Outside of tanker aircraft for the USAF, you will not find many examples of the Boeing 707 (the DC-8's contemporary) flying in the world today.

Bearing this in mind an ARJ-21 based on the MD-80 design will be heavier then contemporary aircraft designs, simply using the jigs and tools from the McDonnell Douglas production line, by virtue of the over engineering. Additionally, Chinese aircraft companies are no where near as advanced in the use of composites and lightweight material that western companies are. I would wager that even a second tier manufacturer like Bombardier or Embraer uses more carbon fibre composites in its aircraft. Therefore, it follows the ARJ-21 will be heavier. This affects the speed and range as well as fuel consumption of the ARJ-21. However, in a low fuel cost environment now, that may not be as harmful as it seems. Especially if the ARJ-21 was say $10 million cheaper then a similar western aircraft. You have to burn a lot of fuel to make up the difference in savings on the aircraft price. If these ARJ-21s are build anything like their MD-80s predecessor, they will last a long time.

The question is how much composite material did the C919 incorporate in its design? If there was not a lot, then it will be heavier then its contemporary B737 and Airbus 300 family. All the avionics in the world will not help it. Both these designs already have a mostly western avionics suite as well as western engines. Basically they are competing on price. If they both decide to get certification from the US FAA, then some airlines may take a chance on them if the price is lets say 20% or more less then a competing design.

As for my 2 piece, the stupid PAP made a mistake when they did not pursue an aircraft assembly facility in Singapore. We were already quite advanced with LASS and later ST Aerospace/SAE building their own Skyhawk trainers, re-engining the SKyhawk and creating new F-5E recce planes, plus heavy depot maintenance for C-130 and even to today cargo conversion on certain aircraft types. The should have approach Boeing and bought the entire MD-80 assembly line in China and ship it lock stock and barrel to Singapore. We should have been building this aircraft here in SIngapore. They really missed the boat on the deregulation of the airline business in Asia. Just selling a locally manufactured 100 + seater to GLCs Silk Air and Tiger Air would have already recouped most of the start up cost. Just Silk Air alone has 72 aircraft on order or in service. Tiger has another 28 in service and another 37 on order. That is over 130 aircraft sales. Plus if they are lucky, they might sell some to Indon, Vietnamese, or Myanmar airlines.
 
Wah you think China only just started manufacturing planes?

Bunch of jokers. Do you guys know what you are talking about?

Without China do you think your consumer devices and everything else you buy can be so much affordable?
 
C 919 got the interests of low costs carriers worldwide including ryan air. they are thinking about hundreds of aircraft to replace their b737's. Then multiply that with airasia, lion air, easyjet etc and you got your foothold if the price is right.
C919 uses GE's latest LEAP engine so its there with the rest. the body is the same diameter as airbus a320 which it assembles in Tianjin.
This means trouble for bombardier C-series, also about the same size but smaller diameter body. seats 5 in a row. But c-series is the most advance in terms of using light materials, but costs could be prohibitive.uses P&W geared turbofan(to reduce rpm of main rotor blades and thus reduce air drag by making it larger) PW1000G. this is suppose to be the most fuel efficient jet engine currently.but question remains on the gear part as it was never applied in jet engines before.
The MRJ on the other hand is smaller. maybe practical for airlines operating from smaller towns such as penang, Phuket or surabaya.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top