Public administration, Peking University Professor Lu Feng (source: network)
Like aircraft (especially large aircraft) such highly complex products, its product development is not the key to mastery of a single technology, but the ability to integrate various technologies. This "integrated" embodied in the overall aircraft design programmes. This aircraft was right in choosing the path of independent research and development.
Plane decision retroactive
The 21st century business Herald (hereinafter referred to as the 21st century): ten years ago, I read your written report on the study on development strategy of large aircraft in China, it was a great influence on decision making report now is still enlightening to read. You are not aviation manufacturing industry, what led you to participate in the debate about big planes?
Public administration, Peking University Professor Lu Feng: revisited is about large aircraft in 2003, general area in this year, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Chinese Academy of engineering Academician Wang daheng wrote to principal responsible comrades of the State Council, recommendations made to restart the development of China-made large aircraft. "Transport ten" in 1985 after the horse, 1990 this topic has been raised again, everyone in the industry knew, when key leaders of the State Council has clearly said: this Government does not consider larger aircraft. Background at the time China was in the throes of reform of State-owned enterprises, a large number of defense industry conversion, since then, China's defense industry has experienced 20 years of transformation.
Why the aircraft was again? There are two important events: the first thing is the Taiwan Strait crisis of 1996, and in 1999, NATO bombed the Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia, sensitive nerve hurt China's national sovereignty. In the context of such large aircraft were reopened. After these two events, the leadership of the Chinese Government started to increase industry input to the defense industry, so there we see today a number of achievements, such as f-20, f- -10 fighter, and so on. XI Jinping China will provide 100 million in military
I aircraft involved in the debate, which started from the perspective of the industry. In 2004, I completed a research report on China auto industry development, the social impact of the report is large, the core of the report view: 20 joint venture mode of automobile industry in China is wrong, must rely on themselves, to take the road of independent development. After the report came out asked me: "do you have interest to large aircraft? "I am dedicated to industrial research, of course, interested, so he was brought into the research problem in large aircraft.
Of the 21st century: this year is the "transport ten" dismount the 30 anniversary of the puzzling is that directly related to the above incident should be military, why mention large aircraft technology?
Wind: the scientific and technological community has been considered "shipped ten" is one of the great achievements of science and technology. When relying on our own efforts to make big planes, also flew to Tibet several times to deliver relief goods, the memory of this period of history is gone away. Scientific and technological community is very pragmatic, "transport ten" dismounted several times repeating China's large aircraft program. Military support aircraft project because it was air force's weaknesses, such as lack of airborne early warning, tankers and so on, these special large aircraft are required for modification of the aircraft platform to do it. In my judgement, enhance national defense industrial building in China again in the late 1990 's when due to the needs of the air force, is also out of this thing.
Of the 21st century: since 2004 we started first round of argument on the big plane, why is it organized by the Ministry of science and technology?
Wind: 2003 Wang daheng wrote to leaders of the State Council have suggested that China should make a big plane, indeed state leaders were persuaded, but there were objections, so the State Council proposed to demonstrate whether on large aircraft on the national medium-and long-term science and technology development plan (2006-2020) of the argument. Precisely because of the national medium-and long-term science and technology development plan is the Ministry of science and technology lead, was joined by the Department of science and technology. First round of argument is "China to do, can do" problem of large aircraft.
Of the 21st century is said to be in the national program for medium-and long-term science and technology development in 16 major projects, large aircraft processes are the most difficult, is that so?
Wind: first round of arguments I didn't participate, but know a few. Say you will be surprised, most reluctant to return to the aircraft project was two aviation industry group of China's leadership. Of course not directly opposed, but always wanted to redefine the project. First, the original China aviation industry group is developing the ARJ21 aircraft (2002 State Council approved the project), this is a commuter aircraft, and is not a national project. Its research and development processes to be harder than I thought, and break the budget, duration of procrastinating. National development and Reform Commission, is not satisfied. So they want to define the project as big national project of aircraft, so countries will ARJ-21 the next. In fact until a commercial aircraft if ARJ-21.
Second, they believe that large military transport aircraft on the project should be large, do not. Main reason is more difficult than military. My wife knows, civil aircraft research and development is not easy, because of the need to obtain an airworthiness certificate. Someone even said that we cannot compete with Boeing and Airbus. Confidential faced competition, while the military is not the problem.
In the first round in the argument of experts are basically in agreement in all its aspects, have argued that China must make its own large aircraft. Conflicts focus on what is in military transport and civilian aircraft, so a "military" and "civil aircraft" the two views. Aviation industry group, wants to go to military aircraft, COSTIND as authorities support them, because their needs are also on the support of the military aircraft. "Civil aircraft" are experts at the Ministry of science and technology; there will still be a national development and Reform Commission, but at that time the Commission was "assembled", whether it is on the military or civil aircraft, all want to find a foreign partner. First argues that the military had the upper hand.
Of the 21st century: "transport ten" success is a miracle, in the conditions, "transport ten-" what is the most important factor of success?
Wind: the key is technical and institutional innovations. "Transport ten" project in Shanghai, but in fact formed a technology leader in autonomous systems, or engineer in charge of the system. "Transport ten" leading Ma Fengshan was an outstanding technical leadership and technology experts. Meanwhile, the aviation industry leading group under the State Council is responsible for the operational guidance and coordination is in charge when he was Deputy Commander of the air force General Cao Lihuai, who also serves as the head of the leading group of aviation industry at that time.
I had on "shipped ten" why can made asked had participation had "shipped ten" development of one designer, he said has three a important of conditions: first, command who is Cao Lihuai such playing had battle of people, may they does not understand technology, but they understand strategy, and understand decision, including organization led bomb, and missile, and satellite, development and test of Zhang aiping General,, should said they is unprecedented of generation people, so is China defense industry in that era can made huge achievements of reasons. When technical differences in technology, General Cao Lihuai will listen to the views of the pros and cons, understand each other, he would make a decision later, must be implemented, did not discuss his judgment from the cruelty of the war experience, second, Ma Fengshan technology leader, he has a vision, technology, and innovation, so get rid of the Soviet model. He was the Chief Architect of h-6, until today's h-6 remained the main air force bomber; and, third, participate in "transport ten" developed by this group of people are drawn from all parts of the development line, does not require much time of running, work would start immediately. So "transported ten" only a 10-year period to come, with two bombs and one satellite is of the same order of magnitude. "Transport ten" development cost totaling 537.7 million Yuan, which develop charge 334 million Yuan, capital of 174.7 million Yuan, Shanghai to provide liquidity of 29 million Yuan, today we restarted development of the C919 large aircraft, the initial budget is RMB 60 billion-70 billion, how many times it is! So "transported ten" horse is a pity.
Of the 21st century: the circumstances under which you are joined to a second demonstration of it?
Wind: because writing a research report on large aircraft. When it was aircraft proved most difficult. Did not focus on theoretical argument, but people say the words. I in the report on the automotive industry from multiple angles, technical competence is not purchased, so I think "transport ten" dismount not just abandoning a product, but at the same time destroying the build of our own research and development platforms and systems, research and development capabilities, of course also lost. In January 2005, I completed the nearly 70,000-word report on the study on development strategy of large aircraft in China, first in the internal publication of this report, policymakers see the, and later spread to the community. It should be said that my report was more emphasis on independent innovation "school" provides theoretical support.
Academician Wang daheng wrote to leadership of the State Council, he was telling the big planes, but no civil or military machine, that is why there is military or civil aircraft behind the dispute. Demonstration of disagreement because the first round, so for large aircraft in 2006, the State Council put forward the second argument, this argument called "reasoning of large aircraft project". And the State Department made clear that second argument into the national medium-and long-term science and technology development program (2006-2020) in 16 major projects of demonstration.
From the topic, on the premise that the State Council has decided to larger aircraft, on just how the issues to be discussed. The national program for medium-and long-term science and technology development is led by the Ministry of science and technology, time when the argument lists of experts, national defense, national development and Reform Commission and the General Assembly opposed my participation, the then Minister of science and Technology Xu Guanhua told me, since the State Ministry of science and technology lead, looking for the people involved in the argument is based on the Ministry of science and technology.
Of the 21st century: this matter aside, I personally think that, Xu Guanhua, Minister of science and technology development and a major strategic advancement of the project played a very big role, is a person who should be remembered.
Wind: his greatest contribution is to encourage innovative approaches proposed, and the other is 16 major projects, has a direct relationship with him, eventually became the central decision. Second round of expert group, consisting of 19 members, although relevant ministries experts disputed the list part of the demonstration, but final approval of the top. Demonstration group of experts including one or two airlines group leaders, academics, technical experts, as well as from users of the representatives and officials of the China International Engineering Consulting Corporation. Group who demonstrated two f-8II Chief Architect of academician Gu Songfen, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics President Li Wei, former Zhang Yanzhong, General Manager of China Aviation Group to serve as its Chairman. Sorghum as a scholar and I participate. Because at that time the Central determination is clear, so the second round of argument is not much conflict.
On February 26, 2007, when Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao presided over an Executive meeting of the State Council heard a special leading group on large aircraft large aircraft project report, approved in principle for large aircraft development of major science and technology projects officially approved, agreed to form a large passenger aircraft company, and carry out related work as soon as possible.
It is important to note, demonstrated in the first round of military and civil aircraft is a zero-sum game, but the outcome of the second argument is a military machine together, resolving contradictions. I belong to the "optimistic", China is so big, civil aircraft, military aircraft are needed, are supposed to do. In March 2007, China announced the launch of large plane project, the C919 in Shanghai, "the games" in Shaanxi.
"Transport ten" dismounted and destroyed the aircraft research and development platform
21st century: I two times to Shanghai interview, most sad of memory is in Shang fly and one had participation "shipped ten" of old workers of talk, in ARJ-21 of assembled workshop, he told I, now of aircraft is make assembled, and development "shipped ten" of when, engine, and airlines electric system including line cable are is we himself do of, only in Shanghai on has more than 30 more than radio supporting factory, established has big aircraft of industry chain. What do you think about this problem?
Wind: the ARJ21 and C919 cannot be said to be "assembled", because the whole project and the overall design is autonomous, and assemble foreign products are essentially different. Now, of course, development of large aircraft, many systems are imported. "Transport ten" horse, it undermined China's supporting capacity. As the older worker says, "transport ten" after the horse industry also broke or broke is the basis of ability. When participation "transport ten" people are retired. For 30 years, although the Beihang University graduates every year, but these young engineers who had a plane? So "transported ten" horse, not just throw away a plane, and almost belittle, China lost its civil aircraft product development platform, the result is that China's civil aviation technical capabilities of a long period of stagnation and decline.
But at the same time, Boeing and Airbus in the continuous improvement and innovation in product development platform, technical capacities with product updates, upgrades, and continuous improvement.
So, China's technological capability and the United States, the European technological capability gap trends over the past 20 years showing them, and getting bigger. This widening gap is actually a Chinese entered the field of civil aircraft encountered keep raising the threshold. After more than 20 years when we come back bigger and stronger aircraft when reality is, has no relevant industry chain in China, everything has to be started from scratch.
Of the 21st century: current commercial aircraft using the "main manufacturer and supplier mode", this is a world trend or in general practice or a last ditch choice?
Wind: the pattern itself is no problem, Boeing, Airbus is also the pattern. But we both have a great deal of difference. Although Boeing put some development dumped to Japan, country, but Boeing zhiqian aircraft of all main parts are is himself do of, industry chain had in himself of hands, just because cost reasons now not himself do has, but capacity has never no interrupted had, they has technology and capacity to coordination supply chain, Boeing is suppliers of boss, suppliers is supply of, I'm afraid this COMAC also do not to. Suppliers of COMAC may sometimes have to listen, because we don't know much.
Why is this situation? Because we have no experience at all. I think technique includes two things: one is generic or explicit knowledge, the second is tacit or implicit knowledge. Common knowledge is a primary reason, in part, on the nature of public goods. Tacit knowledge and its derived from the know-how and operational details can only be access to the experience, which can only learn. From this point of view, because we lack experience, so looks are the main mode of manufacturer-supplier, in essence, there is a difference between.
Of the 21st century: the COMAC C919 has established 16 joint ventures now, how would you rate it?
Wind: in fact, like a plane (especially large aircraft) such highly complex products, its product development is not the key to mastery of a single technology, but the ability to integrate various technologies. This "integrated" embodied in the overall aircraft design programmes. This aircraft was right in choosing the path of independent research and development.
For setting up a joint venture company, it is clear that the purpose of localization of parts, this is our decades of thought. China's auto industry to realize localization is to set up many joint ventures, but there was no Germany suppliers, we can do it yourself? That's problem right there. Suppliers do not have the ability to let the plane fly up into heaven, they can only do the avionics, engine and so on, makes an airplane fly where the skill is the main manufacturer. Even if Boeing all support from the vendor, it is I will let you do what you have to do what Boeing aircraft for almost 100 years, they know how to fly planes, so suppliers honestly listen to Boeing.
COMAC has the master manufacturer-supplier model lacks is experience and ability. We should not be blindly optimistic at the moment and even say technology leadership, technology leadership is not determined to have the money to do it, leading technology is based on long-term technology accumulation. All in all, I think it is better than never, we're doing less than the highest level without experience, but not'll never experience.
Aircraft must be firm to go
Of the 21st century: the C919 will be offline, but before that, because of the flight will be rescheduled, COMAC had faced a lot of pressure, what do you think?
Wind: I think the community should be more lenient to COMAC. See what they're doing on the surface is the product of the C919 large aircraft, but behind this product is that they are building and improving product development and technical capabilities of the platform. One hope the C919 will succeed, of course, but if the situation is not going well, never to early on the advantages and disadvantages of winning or losing, or will again "brought ten" of the tragedy, we have been taught.
China is now entering the threshold of large aircraft manufacturing process, such a large and complex technical products requires the accumulation of experience, as long as we have a research and development platform, as long as the aggregate of a research and development team, no matter what difficulties will go all the way to success. National strategic goal is not just to get one or two products but establish sustainable product development platform to obtain technical capacity. Proceeding from this, early product level is not a key, the key is can continue to improve, and ultimately to achieve industrialization.
As long as a clear strategic focus, not just because of the short-term shortcomings and weaknesses and shaken the will for a long time and the established objectives. So people must fully understand the precious nature of technical capacity, to develop large aircraft technical ability to be strong-willed and give long-term support.
Of the 21st century: C919 line, immediately faced flight, obtain an airworthiness certificate, a long road. ARJ-21 test flight when, because the icing tests found that piece of cloud, flying around the world, how can not find the icy weather conditions. In fact, freezes the ideal weather conditions in the Great Lakes region-specific areas, this United States Federal Aviation Authority clear. So when our plane finally came to this region, they never even got to the scene. I would like to say that ARJ-21 is a 70-seat regional jets, while the C919 is Boeing's workhorse in the share market, obtain an airworthiness certificate may not be optimistic.
Lu Feng: China's jumbo aircraft project will touch on international vested interests of the nerve, we must not underestimate the United States and European Government and business collusion killing motive of China's civil aviation industry. United States and the European people than many Chinese people also understand that once China started to build jumbo aircraft development platform, the problem is no longer the product right out of the current level is low or high, but China's technological capacity would grow up through this platform. At national level in order to clear this matter, even the United States or Europe does not give us a certificate of airworthiness, we should adhere to the fly, cannot fly domestic flying international routes.
China has a big special effect, we market large enough to afford a civil aircraft industry, where there is a will, one day, he has to give us, not 10, 20, 20, no, 30, does not fly without authentication. Of course, the airworthiness system we have to study hard, this is the valuable experience accumulated over the years.
It is important to note, for large, complex technical systems industries, such as aviation, telecommunications, rail industry, its international competitiveness in addition to the product itself, in fact, Government and national capacities is an important part. The so-called market economy is a very complex structure, never simple. So to speak, textbook economics tells of the market economy is the vegetable market, hundreds of vegetable stall nobody can influence market prices, most of perfect competition. But high-end manufacturing systems are not, such as Boeing, Airbus, the two companies decided the industry technological progress speed, industrial chain structure and prices, of course, behind their experience accumulated together with the Government, people buying Boeing aircraft and a large part of the United States Government is confident.
But now some people in China will think that if the Government everything there is good market economy, industry will be able to upgrade, this is too naïve. United States Federal Government is very strong, including regulation of the aviation market.
Of the 21st century: the C919 will be officially offline, what do you think?
Wind: this day is very memorable, which marks a historic breakthrough for Chinese high-end manufacturing, also marked China's industrial development from the addicted to low economic activity began to rise to the high end climbing.
China's large aircraft program is one that many people, generations to strive for, including "transport ten" that the sacrifice of a generation. Therefore, although the commercial aircraft to make a commercially successful companies, but it was assumed by the trust of a nation. We should support every Chinese aircraft to do so. Even now the gap with the advanced level for 50 years, but if you insist on a 200-year, 50-year gap that is nothing. Congratulations to COMAC!
Source: the 21st century business Herald
Original title: the ups and downs: 30 years of China's large civil aircraft
Last updated: 11/02 16:39
No comments:
Post a Comment