用户名:   密码:

当前位置:首页社区国外译帖美国美国网民热议:中俄宽体飞机项目不是另一个空客
看世界译帖
美国

美国网民热议:中俄宽体飞机项目不是另一个空客


Why Sino-Russian Widebody Project Is Not Another Airbus
译者:unknown     发布时间:2017-11-16     超过 0 位网友阅读

我同意这个基本前提,但我不会低估中国在这一行业中扮演主要角色的决心

原文地址:http://aviationweek.com


In May the Chinese and Russian governments announced a joint venture (JV) to build a new clean-sheet twin-aisle jetliner. The twinjet will be intended to carry 280 passengers up to 7500 nm competing with Airbus’s A350-900 and Boeing’s 787-9. Like those aircraft the new C929 as it has been called is expected to include composites for about 50% of its airfrx.

五月份,中俄两国政府宣布成立一家合资企业来研发全新的双通道宽体客机.  这款双发客机预计的最大载客量为280人,最大航程7500英里(1.2W公里) ,将会与空客的A350-900和波音的787-9竞争 . 新的C929会与前两者一样使用复合材料, 据说会达到50%左右.

中俄宽体飞机项目不是另一个空客

It is tempting to think of this new concept as a game-changer. After all Russia has deep aerospace engineering experience and China is one of the two biggest commercial jetliner markets (with the U.S.). Barriers to entry in the twin-aisle market are higher than for almost any other industry. Vladimir Putin’s Russia is eager to restore the country’s former aerospace glory and China’s government wants to create a national aircraft industry.

人们很容易将他们视为游戏规则改变者。毕竟俄罗斯拥有深厚的航空航天工程经验,而中国是最大的两个商业喷气客机市场之一(另一个是美国)。宽体客机市场准入门槛几乎?#28909;?#20309;其他行业都要高。?#31449;?#39046;导的俄罗斯急于恢复该国过去的航空航天辉煌,中国政府也希望创建一个国家飞机产业。

Also only two countries have developed jetliners in this class on their own the U.S. and the former Soviet unx. European manufacturers were only able to join the club by pooling the continent’s resources under Airbus. A Sino-Russian Airbus sounds like a disruptive event.

而且只有两个国家曾经du立开发过这个级别的飞机一个是美国一个是前苏联. ?#20998;?#21046;造商只能通过将?#20998;?#22823;陆上的资源集中到空客公司才能跻身这个领域. 一个中俄联合版?#30446;?#23458;听上去是d覆性事.件.

However this is not another Airbus in the making. The story of Russia’s sole twin-aisle family and the history of Russia’s previous aviation joint ventures serve as a cautionary tale for this project.

然而这不是筹建中的另一个空客. 俄罗斯唯一宽体客机机型研发历程以及俄罗斯之前的航空合资企业的历史,为这个项目提供?#21496;?#31034;。

Russia’s Ilyushin Il-86 and Il-96 twin-aisle quadjet series were not a terribly successful family. Just 104 Il-86s and about 30 Il-96s have been delivered since 1979. The Il-96 intended to rejuvenate the family and let Russian industry compete with Western jetmakers in the post-Soviet era has been a notable failure. Il-96 production still sputters along at a very low level today and hopes of relaunching it with Pratt & Whitney engines and Rockwell Collins avionics died in the early 2000s. The Il-96 competed with and lost against Airbus’s A340 family which was not exactly the greatest triumph of jetliner technology either.

俄罗斯的伊尔- 86和伊尔 - 96四发宽体客机系列并不是非常成功的型号。自1979年以来,只有104架伊尔- 86s和大约30架伊尔- 96s交付使用。前苏联时代,伊尔- 96计划推出型号,让俄罗斯工业与西方飞机制造商竞争,结果完败。目前,伊尔- 96仍在很低的水平上维持运转,利用普惠公司的引擎和罗克韦尔柯林斯公司的航空电子设备的?#30431;?#37325;新上天的希望在21世纪初也破灭了。伊尔- 96与空客A340的型号竞争并失败,这也显示其喷气客机技术并不是很成功。





[email][email protected][/email] on Jul 17 2017
While I agree with the general premise I wouldn't underestimate the Chinese determination to be a major player in the business. This partnership may be one of a few steps needed to get there once they do they will be a formidable competitor. The next step will probably be a joint venture with an underfunded western engine manufacturer perhaps.

我同意这个基本前提,但我不会低估中国在这一行业中扮演主要角色的决心。这?#21482;?#20276;关系可能是他们完成工作所需的几个步骤之一,他们将是一个?#30475;?#30340;竞争对手。下一步可能是与某个资金不足的西方引擎制造商建立合资企业。



PAULY on Jul 19 2017
Fantastic point. China will forge ahead and if it costs them an arm and a leg to get in the game so be it.

奇妙的观点。中国将继续向前发展,如果这?#30431;?#20204;付出了更多的代价,那么就应该这样做。



123dcp on Jul 19 2017
Agreed. China is likely willing to fund several not very successful efforts on the way to owning a real competitor to the duopoly. Eventually they may be willing to fund efforts to develop an engine manufacturer as well. I suspect getting into the engine-making game might involve even more restrictions on technology transfers though. That could make it very hard to create a real competitor with the potential for sales outside of China.

同意。为了成为双头垄断的一个真正的竞争对手, 中国可能愿意为?#22797;?#19981;太成功的努力提供资金。最终,他们可能愿意为开发引擎制造商提供资金。?#19968;?#30097;进入引擎制造游戏可能会?#32422;?#26415;转让有更多的限制。这种限制将使中国很难成为中国市场之外有潜力的竞争者。



[email][email protected][/email] on Jul 19 2017
A cautionary tale is the automotive industry. They have been working with German and American manufacturers for years but have yet to produce an indigenous automobile that sells well beyond its borders.

一个引为鉴戒的案例是汽车工业。多年来,他们一直与德国和美国的制造商合作,但尚未生产一种在其境外销售业绩良好的国产汽车。



[email protected] on Jul 19 2017
The automotive industry is indeed a cautionary tale. But not in the way you're depicting. China is now the largest auto market in the world by a large margin. Domestic manufacturers have both expanded greatly and dramatically improved their quality. JD Power expects them to reach parity in 2018. They're not selling in the US yet but they've been exporting more than a million cars per year since 2012.

汽车业确实是值得警示。但不像你描述的那样。中国现在是世界上最大的汽车市场。国内制造商的规模?#26412;?#25193;大,产?#20998;?#37327;也大大提高。市场调查机构JD Power预计,它们将在2018年实?#21046;到?#20986;口?#21046;健?#34429;然现在他们目前还没有在美国销售,但自2012年以来,他们每年出口的汽车超过100万辆。



[email][email protected][/email] on Jul 19 2017
Buick has been importing SUVs from China to the US for about a year now. And Volvos from China are now also selling in US dealerships.

别克从中国进口suv已经有一年了。现在中国的沃尔沃也在美国经销商处销售。



Spectre49 on Jul 19 2017
What the China is a competitor enthusiasts miss is that in computers autos boom boxes you can go bust and rebuild quickly.

中国是一个竞争对手,但在计算机自动化的?#27604;?#26399;,你可以快速的破产和重建。

But the successful ones have been PRIVATE often arms of Western Companies (Apple products made to order) .

但成功的都是私企,通常都是西方企业的子公司(苹果产品的订单)。

None of the good stuff comes from a Government owned factory.

这些好的东西都不是来自国有企业。

Add in that aircraft are 20+ year programs not one year not 3 months 20+ years.

耗在这架飞机是一个需要20+年的项目,不是1年,不是3个月   20+年。

So far China has missed the boat with two programs (and neither aircraft is certified to a recognized world standard but it US Japan or Europe)

目前为止,中国已经错过了两个项目的机会(这两架飞机都没有获得国?#26102;?#20934;?#29616;ぃ?#38500;了美国日本?#20998;?。)

The show stopper comes when Russian says we want our 15 billion up front and we aren't contributing a dime.

当俄罗斯人说我们想要我们的150亿美元预付款,而我们没掏一分钱,这个节目的终结者就来了。

When you can't even build a competitive aircraft let alone certified then you have no chance to have a generation shift and make a leap past Airbus and Boeing and that is what it would take.

当你甚至无法制造出一架有竞争力的飞机,更别提获得?#29616;?#20043;后,那就无法超越波音和空客。

Sure you can force the local airlines to take what is built but they simply park them and hide them on low use routes that their competitor have to sue the same poorly maintained aircraft on and not loose money.

当然,你可以强迫当地的航空公司使用建造的飞机,但是他们会搁置不用或藏在不常用的航线?#24076;?#36825;样他们的竞争者就只能使用同样维护不良的飞机?#21592;?#35777;不亏损。

Aircraft are a whole different ball game.

飞机是一种完全不同的游戏



SlowMan on Jul 19 2017
"And Volvos from China are now also selling in US dealerships."

现在中国的沃尔沃也在美国经销商处销售

And this is why you should avoid Volvos altogether. Volvo is not safer than its rivals anymore so there is no reason to buy it.

这就是为什么你应该避免买沃尔沃。沃尔沃已经不再比竞争对手更安全,因此没有理由购买沃尔沃。



Daniel Su on Jul 19 2017
Interesting is really a fantastic point. In addition maybe SAFAN is the first choice partner of the Sino-Foreign commercial engine JV.

真是有趣的奇妙观点。此外,也许SAFAN是中外商业引擎合资企业的首选合作伙伴。



davidjpritchard... on Jul 17 2017
The Russian commercial aviation industry has come a long way since the 1990's with the TU204 and IL 96 programs. The Sukhoi Superjet 100 has EASA certification and the MC 21 program (which you forgot to mention) will get EASA certification.

自上世纪90年代以来,通过图204客机和伊尔96项目,俄罗斯商业航空工业已经取得了长足的进步。苏霍伊超级100型客机获得了?#20998;?#33322;空安全局?#29616;ぃ琈C-21客机?#19981;帷?

On the Chinese side they have learned how to build commercial aircraft to western standards with ARJ 21 and C919 (C919 is currently going thru the process for EASA certification)

在中国方面,他们已经学会通过ARJ 21和C919建造可达到西方标准的商用飞机(C919目前正在进行EASA?#29616;?

At 2.5 aircraft a month production rate for the 929 wide-body program (600 aircraft for 20 year program( (which Airbus and Boeing will not be selling) China alone can take the entire production run.

929宽体客机项目(20年生产600架客机)平均每月生产2.5架飞机  仅中国就可以完成整个生产过程

It might be time to give credit to UAC engineering prowess with the first out of autoclave composite wing for the MC21 (process to be used for 929) It still needs to be announced that the fuselage will be composite (makes sense for long range flights) and produced in China. This composite technology will put the 929 at least with par with 787 and A350 and possibility ahead since these aircraft programs were launched over 10 years ago.

也许是时候赞扬UAC工程技术能力的时候了,为MC21(计划应用到929)生产?#35828;?#19968;个热压复合机翼。需要说的是机身将是复合材料的(对长途飞行来说是有益)并且将在中国生产。这一复合材料技术将使得929至少与787和A350水平相当,而且鉴于后两者是十年前推出的,所以甚至领先都是可能的。

The bottom line is the Russians have the engineering and Chinese have endless money to make the 929 program successful (part of the national policy "Made in China 2025)

最重要的是,俄国人拥有工程技术,中国人有无穷无尽的资金来保证929项目的成功(这是“中国2025制造计划”国家政策的一部分)

Your story could be one from the early 1970's with changing the names from UAC/Comac to Airbus.

你的故事来?#26434;?970年代 ,把名字从UAC / Comac换成了空客。

The lesson for western aviation industry for the new wide body competition is:
"Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

新的宽体客机竞争需要?#28216;?#26041;航空业汲取的教训是:“那些没有从历史中吸取教训的人注定要重蹈覆辙。”



musha on Jul 19 2017
That said IL96 is pretty good from frx pov. it has of course totally obsoleted avionics but this is plus as well as modern avionics has less weight. Major trouble of IL96 is engines and neither Russia nor Chine produces engines of required scale.
so this is story of PD35 development (russian project for engine for place of this size).

有传说伊尔-96的机身很好。当然,它完全淘汰了航空电子设备,应用了最新的而且减轻了重量。伊尔-96的主要问题是发动机,俄罗斯中国都无法生产它需要的
所以这是PD35发展的故事(俄罗斯的发动机项目是这样的)。



rkapo77 on Jul 19 2017
Davidjpritchard: You say it all and say it well. The articke is a joke. History.

你说得好,说得好。这篇文章就是个笑话。历史。



[email protected] on Jul 19 2017
With a lot of help the Russians have been able to produce an aircraft in the Superjet that cannot compete with what Embraer in Brazil has been doing for decades. It does rather put the whole thing in context.

有了大量的帮助,俄罗斯人能?#24674;?#36896;一架超级喷气式飞机但无法与巴西航空工业公司(Embraer)竞争,他们干这个已经几十年了。应该把这个写到文章里。



dinant van den Belt on Jul 19 2017
Where I'm puzzled is the fact that it will be a me too product. When Airbus joined the market it changed the industry by making the flight engineer redundant.
Next to the fact that Russia and China both have there own interest in this market which can be conflicting.

我感到困惑的是,它将是一个产品。当空中客车加入市场时,它使飞行工程师变得多余,从而改变?#33487;?#20010;行业。
其次,俄罗斯和中国在这个市场上都有自己的利益,将会有冲突。



[email][email protected][/email] on Jul 19 2017
Both the A300 and A310 had a flight engineer. Airbus's game changer was fly-by-wire on the A320

A300和A310都有一个飞行工程师。空客的游戏规则改变者是A320



yankeeclipper747 on Jul 19 2017
Early A300's did but not for long and I never saw an F/E on a A310.

早期的A300有,但是?#24576;中?#22810;久,而我?#28216;?#22312;A310上看到过飞行工程师。



skitnik on Jul 19 2017
@WJLAviator you are wrong. Only the first Airbus A300B1/B2 (don't mix with A300B4 aka A300-600) had flight Engineer. The first ever "Glass Cockpit" aircraft with out Flight Engineer was A310. There the ECAM system was for the first time embodied that made the F/E redundant. But since A310 was the first A/C to be certified to have systems and some engines instruments on electronic displays it was required to have conventional instruments as well. I am A310-200/300 and A300-600 Certifying Engineer since 1991.

你错了。只有第一架空客A300B1 / B2(不要与A300B4 即 A300-600混了)有飞行工程师。第一架没有配备飞行工程师的“玻璃化座舱”飞机是A310。首次安装了飞机电子中央监视器,所以就没必要配备飞行工程师了。但是由于A310是首架在电子显示屏上显示?#20302;?#21644;引擎指导书的?#29616;?#39134;机,所以也需要传统的?#28508;懟?#33258;1991年以来,我一直担任 A310-200/300 和 A300-600的?#29616;?#24037;程师。



[email][email protected][/email] on Jul 19 2017
skitnik I concede your point I must have only flown on the flight deck of an A300B1/B2 and not the later B4. I did some work many years ago for a cargo airline looking at a computerised loading system and looking back they must have been operating a B1/B2. Mea Culpa.

我同意你的观点,我仅在A300B1 / B2的驾驶舱飞行过,没在B4过。?#25913;?#21069;在货运航线工作中上看到过一套电脑化的装载?#20302;常?#29616;在想想它们一定是也在B1 / B2上运行。认错。



[email protected] on Jul 19 2017
Airbus was the originator of the wide body twin. The A320 came later.

空中客车是宽体客机的鼻祖。A320是后辈。



Eddie Abel on Jul 19 2017
The real innovation was putting 2 advanced engines on a wide body airfrx.

真正的创新是将两个先进的发动机放在一个宽大的机身上。



[email][email protected][/email] on Jul 19 2017
I do recall that when the Airbus A300 first arrived on the scene the knowledgeable commentators all stated with absolute certainty that Airbus would NOT be a threat to Boeing because of the years of experience Boeing had in building jet airliners.

我确?#23548;?#24471;,当空客A300第一次到达现场时,见识广博的评论员都说,空客不会对波音造成威?#29627;?#22240;为波音公司在制造喷气式客机方面有多年经验。

Both Russia and China are huge markets and are developing a highly skilled workforce backed up by an unprecedented technical education system that the USA and particularly the UK seem to have abandoned.

俄罗斯和中国都是巨大的市场,并且正在发展一种由一个前所未有的技术教育体系支持的高技能劳动力,而美国,尤其是英国似乎已经放弃了这一体系。



David Pritchard got it right
Your story could be one from the early 1970's with changing the names from UAC/Comac to Airbus.
The lesson for western aviation industry for the new wide body competition is:

"Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."你的故事来?#26434;?970年代 ,把名字从UAC / Comac换成了空客。
新的宽体客机竞争需要?#28216;?#26041;航空业汲取的教训是:“那些没有从历史中吸取教训的人注定要重蹈覆辙。”



[email protected] on Jul 19 2017
Very true. Competitors that have to rely on markets for financing projects are at a disadvantage to those that have the resources of governments backing them up. If Airbus had been a purely commercial company at its inception there's no way they could have developed a broad portfolio of aircraft to challenge Boeing in every market in anywhere near the time frx that they did with government backing. China has an even greater ability to do that today than the Europeans did beginning back in the 1970s.

非常对。那些不得不依赖市场融资项目的竞争对手?#38405;?#20123;有政府支持的项目的人来说处于不利的地位。如果空客在其成立之初是一家?#30475;?#30340;商业公司,那么他们就不可能开发出一种广泛的飞机组合在各个领域来挑战波音飞机,它做到了,是因为有政府的支持。相比于?#20998;?#20154;在上世纪70年代开始的做法,中国现在更?#24515;?#21147;做到这一点。



Rick Shaw on Jul 19 2017
Russia is a huge market?
They have a shrinking population of 145 million (9th in the world) and rank 72nd in per capita GDP just behind Greece. The only thing they sell that the rest of the world wants to buy is natural resources weapons vodka and caviar.

俄罗斯是一个巨大的市场?
他们的人口不断减少1.45亿(世界排名第九),人均GDP排名第72位,位于希腊之后。他们出售的世界上其他国家唯一想买的东西,那就是天然资源武器伏特加和鱼子酱。


更多
评论加载中。。。
?#19968;?#35201;发表看法:
"看世界"温馨提醒:
1、请勿发表违反国家法律评论,评论请文明用语;
2、禁止发布广告评论。
匿名发表  用户名: 密码: 验证码:

浏览过本页的网友还关注:
美国译帖 - 热门推荐
第一赞助商
双语美文 - 阅读榜
第二赞助商
美国译帖 - 最新收录
第三赞助商
国外?#21028;?#35770;坛 - 为您推荐
第四赞助商
经验分享 - 阅读榜
欢迎爱好网帖翻译的朋友加入我们:
QQ?#28023;?07195648
联系邮箱:[email protected]
无觅关联推荐,快速提升流量
加拿大西部快乐8开奖
在线博彩 重庆时时彩20分钟一期 开淘宝店真实经历 99彩票论坛 重庆时时彩输了好几万 河北快3开奖号码查询 加拿大pc28投注软件 打新稳赚不赔吗 陕西快乐10分规则 分分彩平台 六肖中特公式 福利彩票走势图走势图彩宝贝 复式彩票怎么算价格 贵州11选5的走势图 100tkcom马经彩图