Comments on: China has a shortfall of jet engines

By: pzatchok

pzatchok — Sun, 29 Dec 2019 23:17:58 +0000

Don’t think of this as an underproduction of engines but rather an overproduction of air-frames.

By: commodude

commodude — Fri, 27 Dec 2019 23:31:21 +0000

It was illegal for Toshiba to transfer 5 axis lathe tech to the Soviets…..but they did.

Loral’s tech transfer to China SHOULD have been illegal….but wasn’t.

Cisco transferred root legacy code to China as part of the deal to build plants there.

Boeing has transferred dual use tech to China in order to manufacture cheap aircraft assemblies:

https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=129489

The outright transfer of jet engines may be banned but the transfer of metallurgy technology, missile tech, and high tech production and assembly has continued unabated.

By: David

David — Fri, 27 Dec 2019 19:57:38 +0000

Jet engines is one place where the Chinese still lag behind. There were lots of triumphal articles when they had ws15s ready to install in production aircraft. But I’m not surprised to hear that they can’t make many yet. But I assume they’ll ramp up quicker than the linked article suggests.

By: M Puckett

M Puckett — Fri, 27 Dec 2019 17:50:35 +0000

Thanks to ITAR Robert.

I would argue though in some ways, the cure was worse than the disease. An over-reaching over-reaction to the failures of the Clinton administration.

By: Jay

Jay — Fri, 27 Dec 2019 15:27:39 +0000

Commodude,
Your statement reminds me of the 007 movie “A View To A Kill”, at the end-
General Anatol Gogol:
[Bond has just received the Order of Lenin from General Gogol] The order of Lenin, for Comrade Bond. The first ever non-Soviet citizen to receive this award.

M:
I’d thought the KGB would have celebrated if Silicon Valley had been destroyed.

General Anatol Gogol:
On the contrary, Admiral, where would Russian research be without it?

By: Robert Zimmerman

Robert Zimmerman — Fri, 27 Dec 2019 14:32:12 +0000

In reply to commodude. While your cynicism about American business has been justified many times, in the case of China don't expect it. It is by law illegal for American companies to do this kind of work with China.

By: commodude

commodude — Fri, 27 Dec 2019 09:48:08 +0000

As to US companies supplying enemies with critical tech advancements…..Loral, Toshiba, Cisco…..We kept first the Soviet and now the Chinese tech bases alive and competitive.

By: commodude

commodude — Fri, 27 Dec 2019 09:46:17 +0000

That’s a redux of a story from WW1, where British sailors were killed by shells from German guns which had patent marks from British manufacturers on them. I don’t have the precise reference in front of me, however, IIRC, Tuchman covered it in “The Proud Tower” and Furguson goes over it in “The Pity of War”.

By: Col Beausabre

Col Beausabre — Fri, 27 Dec 2019 03:41:54 +0000

Don’t worry, US firms will plug the gap. Anything for a buck….Remember those stories of US troops being hit by Japanese shells that had “Made in USA” stamped on them? (almost assuredly a legend, but it expresses the disgust the average Joe and Jill had with the pre-Pearl Harbor”business as usual” types). Look at the way US firms kowtow to Chinese censorship so they can make a buck in a dictatorship. Yes, I’m looking at you, NBA