• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

G.E. to Share Jet Technology With China in New Joint Venture

techs

Lifer
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/business/global/18plane.html?_r=1&ref=technology

G.E. to Share Jet Technology With China in New Joint Venture

As China strives for leadership in the world’s most advanced industries, it sees commercial jetliners — planes that may someday challenge the best from Boeing and Airbus — as a top prize.

And no Western company has been more aggressive in helping China pursue that dream than one of the aviation industry’s biggest suppliers of jet engines and airplane technology, General Electric.

On Friday, during the visit of the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, to the United States, G.E. plans to sign a joint-venture agreement in commercial aviation that shows the tricky risk-and-reward calculations American corporations must increasingly make in their pursuit of lucrative markets in China.

G.E., in the partnership with a state-owned Chinese company, will be sharing its most sophisticated airplane electronics, including some of the same technology used in Boeing’s new state-of-the-art 787 Dreamliner.



Just wonderin' if the Chinese would share their technology with the US on anything?


BWAAHHH. I made a funny!

Oh, btw, the Republicans still plan to vote against branding China as a currency manipulator! More jobs to China ftl.
 
They shared advanced tech with Iran that help them build centrifuges... at-least China has no intentions nuking us yet...
 
GE is not going to share the creme de la creme. GE is doing this because it means they will buy more GE engines whether they are on an Airbus or Boeing aircraft. Boeing does the same thing with aircraft production. They give a piece of the production pie to a partner. The partner gets jobs and tech, Beoing gets aircraft orders.
 
GE is not going to share the creme de la creme. GE is doing this because it means they will buy more GE engines whether they are on an Airbus or Boeing aircraft. Boeing does the same thing with aircraft production. They give a piece of the production pie to a partner. The partner gets jobs and tech, Beoing gets aircraft orders.

Yeah, and then China cuts them both out and just copies the tech that the original companies gave. Just look at what happened with HSR locomotive manufacturing.
 
Yeah, and then China cuts them both out and just copies the tech that the original companies gave. Just look at what happened with HSR locomotive manufacturing.

Jet engine and aircraft manufacturing is different though. It will be a while before China can accurately reverse engineer high performance aircraft and its associated technology. Rifles and tanks sure but if you look at some of the reverse engineered aircraft they took from Russia, its complete and utter crap. The tolerances and manufacturing processes are beyond their means for the time being not to mention, reverse engineering something is very, very difficult.

If/once China advances far enough and starts pushing the technological envelope, they might have a different perspective on intellectual property. I suspect they will have other issues come to a head before that though. Social issues, environmental issues, food & water, etc...
 
GE is not going to share the creme de la creme. GE is doing this because it means they will buy more GE engines whether they are on an Airbus or Boeing aircraft. Boeing does the same thing with aircraft production. They give a piece of the production pie to a partner. The partner gets jobs and tech, Beoing gets aircraft orders.

However in 2 years time China will open their own engine plant... putting out engines that are eerily similar to the GE designed ones.
 
However in 2 years time China will open their own engine plant... putting out engines that are eerily similar to the GE designed ones.


My response.

Jet engine and aircraft manufacturing is different though. It will be a while before China can accurately reverse engineer high performance aircraft and its associated technology. Rifles and tanks sure but if you look at some of the reverse engineered aircraft they took from Russia, its complete and utter crap. The tolerances and manufacturing processes are beyond their means for the time being not to mention, reverse engineering something is very, very difficult.

Highly specialized, high-tech things cannot be reversed engineered by China because they don't have the technical know how as of yet. Check out some of the copies of Russian aircraft they've made. Current-gen engine tech? Forget about it. I highly doubt the possess the manufacturering process in its entirety to produce the engines not to mention the proprietary software used to drive them. The software is just as important.
 
Capitalism / Free trade

At its best
That's bullshit. Alstom, Semen, Kawasaki and others shared technology with the Chinese in joint ventures in train designs. The Chinese turned around and started building trains that competed against these companies. The Chinese will have no second thoughts about stealing tech. These guys are world-class thieves. This isn't "capitalism/free trade at its best."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704814204575507353221141616.html
Train Makers Rail Against China's High-Speed Designs

By NORIHIKO SHIROUZU

QINGDAO, China—When the Japanese and European companies that pioneered high-speed rail agreed to build trains for China, they thought they'd be getting access to a booming new market, billions of dollars worth of contracts and the cachet of creating the most ambitious rapid rail system in history.
China's Route for High-Speed Rail


Getty Images Workers at the Beijing South Railway Station

What they didn't count on was having to compete with Chinese firms who adapted their technology and turned it against them just a few years later.
Today, Chinese rail companies that were once junior partners with the likes of Kawasaki Heavy Industries Ltd., Siemens AG, Alstom SA and Bombardier Inc. are vying against them in the burgeoning global market for super-fast train systems. From the U.S. to Saudi Arabia to Brazil and in China itself, Chinese companies are selling trains that in most cases are faster than those offered by their foreign rivals. On a recent visit to China,



2:01 China inaugurates another link in its high-speed rail network, a service between Shanghai and Hangzhou, which has shown the capability of sustaining speeds of more than 245 miles per hour. Video courtesy of Reuters.​

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he is interested in Chinese help to build a planned high-speed line in his state.
The progression of China's rail business reflects a national economic strategy of boosting state-owned firms and obtaining advanced technology, even at the expense of foreign partners. It's an approach that is challenging the U.S. and other powers, and fueling a broader angst among multinational firms doing business here.
Industries such as autos and aerospace have long sought to tap China's vast market, entering into joint ventures that have brought them enormous reward. But by handing over their technology, some companies have opened the door for homegrown competitors to compete in the global marketplace. China's market share of manufacturing of advanced machinery could climb to 30% of global exports within the decade, from 8% today, said Min Zhu, special adviser for the International Monetary Fund and former deputy governor of the People's Bank of China, at Monday's Wall Street Journal CEO Council.
China acknowledges that the trains its own companies are now selling were developed using foreign technology. But officials say domestic companies like China South Locomotive & Rolling Stock Industry (Group) Corp., or CSR, added their own innovations that make the final product Chinese. "China's railway industry produced this new generation of high-speed train sets by learning and systematically compiling and re-innovating foreign high-speed train technology," the Railways Ministry said in a faxed response to questions. Some foreign executives say that such "re-innovating," if it involves selling the trains overseas, is a violation of China's agreements with them.
P1-AY252_TRAINS_NS_20101117184434.gif


The future of China's rail industry is being assembled amid a flurry of welding sparks in a sprawling CSR manufacturing complex in the port city of Qingdao. Called the CRH380A, the newest train is equipped with first-class seats that fold completely flat, and it can go up to 236 miles per hour. When it goes into service in 2012 linking Beijing and Shanghai, the train will cut travel time to four hours from 10, and will be part of a network that is expected to extend 9,700 miles by 2020.
CSR obtained Japanese high-speed technology starting in 2004 as part of a deal with Kawasaki. CSR engineers and executives say they have adapted and improved that technology to make trains that are faster and better. The fastest trains now operating in Japan and Europe run about 199 mph.
Smiling proudly on the factory floor before half-assembled sections of the needle-nosed, blue-and-silver CRH380A trains, Liang Jianying, a senior CSR engineer, explains how the company reduced wheel-to-track friction and made the train more aerodynamic. "We improved, optimized, and self-innovated...and came up with a brand new design," she says.
"See, this is nothing like Kawasaki's bullet train," chimes in Wu Qunliang, chief spokesman for the CSR factory. "Real original innovation is rare," adds Wang Xinhong, another senior engineer. "We attained our achievements in high-speed train technology by standing on the shoulders of past pioneers."
Foreign companies are generally reluctant to criticize the powerful Railways Ministry publicly. Bernd Eitel, a spokesman for Siemens, says the German company has "a trusting relationship" with its Chinese partners and expects that to continue. Bombardier China President Zhang Jiawei said in a statement that "we have contracts and agreements, and both sides respect" them. A spokeswoman for the French company Alstom declined to comment, citing the "sensitive nature" of the subject.
But Kawasaki, in a statement, says it and other high-speed train producers disagree with China's claim that it has created its own technology. Most of its trains in operation today, some executives say, are almost exactly the same as its foreign partners' trains. They cite a few tweaks to the exterior paint scheme and interior trims and a beefed-up propulsion systems for faster speeds. "China says she owns exclusive rights to that intellectual property, but Kawasaki and other foreign companies feel otherwise," Kawasaki said in a statement, adding that it hopes to resolve the issue through commercial talks. Kawasaki says it is emphasizing in those negotiations that its technology-transfer contracts with the Railways Ministry state that the technology is for use exclusively within China, and that Chinese companies can't use it in products they intend to export.
Privately, some executives are more blunt. "Claiming most of the recently developed bullet trains as China's own may be good for national pride... but it's nothing but deceitful propaganda," says a senior executive at Kawasaki. "How are you supposed to fight rivals when they have your technology, and their cost base is so much lower," the executive adds.
Other countries have also used and adapted foreign technology. Post-war Japan pulled off its transformation in part by reverse-engineering foreign technologies, eventually developing a stable of tech companies, steel producers, shipbuilders and auto makers, including Honda and Toyota. South Korea followed a similar path.
What's unique about China is its vast domestic market, which makes foreign companies willing to hand over their technology know-how for a piece of the action. As China increasingly favors domestic suppliers, it's able to up the ante further, demanding that companies who want to do business transfer ever more advanced technologies. "Any company bringing new technology, innovation or ideas to China has to deal with shanzhai, what one could readily refer to as 'bandit' culture," says Andrew Forbes Winkler, an analyst with Commodore Research & Consultancy in New York. "From cellphones to automobiles, Chinese companies have taken pride in using others' intellectual property and either innovating or counterfeiting goods."
China's high-speed rail ambitions are already global. China Railway Group Ltd., a civil-engineering company, is participating in a high-speed rail project in Venezuela. China Railway Construction Corp. is helping build a high-speed line in Turkey linking Ankara and Istanbul. China's Railway ministry has said Chinese companies are bidding for contracts in Brazil, and that Russia, Saudi Arabia and Poland have expressed interest. The Obama administration, which has allotted $8 billion to build high-speed train networks, has said it is open to bids from Chinese companies. A U.S. Department of Transportation spokeswoman declined to comment on the dispute with Kawasaki.
Gov. Schwarzenegger's office declined to comment about his interest in Chinese trains, but Jeffrey Barker, a deputy executive director of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, said the state is years away from taking bids from manufacturers and that when it does, the "process will certainly ensure that any technology transferred to the United States is done so properly, in accordance with all intellectual-property laws."
High-speed rail was pioneered in post-war Japan in the 1950s and early 1960s with the construction of the Shinkansen. France, Germany and other European countries followed suit in the 1980s. Serious thinking about building faster rail in China began in the 1990s, with the aim of developing the poor hinterland. But efforts fizzled.
The government looked abroad. In 2004, it signed deals to buy trains from Alstom and Kawasaki, which shipped the first batch over fully assembled. Later, the companies helped set up production facilities within China. They trained Chinese engineers while helping the country develop its own supply chain for train components. Siemens and Bombardier later signed similar deals. Executives from Siemens and Kawasaki both say they were eager for contracts, and feared that if they didn't do deals with China, their competitors would. They say they didn't expect Chinese companies to be a competitive threat for many years, maybe decades.
Kawasaki's 2004 deal with the Railways Ministry, worth 80 billion yen, or about $760 million at the time, included transfer of the whole spectrum of technology and know-how for the iconic bullet train called Hayate, or "fresh breeze," to Qingdao Sifang Locomotive & Rolling Stock Co., a CSR unit. The Chinese company called the train, capable of speeds up to 155 mph, the Hexie Hao, or "Harmony," echoing a political slogan of Chinese President Hu Jintao.
Kawasaki exported nine Hayate train sets to China. It then helped produce 51 additional Hayates in China, partly using components imported from Japan. Kawasaki took dozens of CSR engineers to Japan for training. Some later helped set up the Qingdao factory, which now churns out about 200 train sets a year. Over the ensuing years, China asked Kawasaki and others to provide additional technology to make its trains go even faster. Each time Kawasaki signed a deal, it gained "several million dollars" as a fee, according to the senior Kawasaki executive.
Some executives questioned the wisdom of dealing with China. "We didn't take part in the export project to China," says Yoshiyuki Kasai, chairman of Central Japan Railway Co. "The conditions were not favorable—they wanted all the technology to be transferred for free. That was not good for us."
CSR and the other main Chinese train maker, China North Locomotive & Rolling Stock Industry (Group) Corp., began producing trains that operated at even higher speeds. In late 2007, ahead of the Beijing Olympics, China opened a high-speed rail line linking the capital and the port city of Tianjin. It operated at a top speed of 205 mph. Last year, another line started with trains running up to 217 mph.
Some say China's rise as a new train power brings more good to the industry than bad, helping to push others to build their own networks. Says Murray King, a rail analyst at research firm APCO Worldwide Inc.: "You have to give at least partial credit to China."
—Kersten Zhang, Sue Feng, Gao Sen and Josh Mitchell contributed to this article. Write to Norihiko Shirouzu at norihiko.shirouzu@wsj.com

 
Last edited:
GE venture was blessed by the US Dept of Commerce.
That means nothing when the Dept. of Commerce is filled by former industry men
My response.



Highly specialized, high-tech things cannot be reversed engineered by China because they don't have the technical know how as of yet. Check out some of the copies of Russian aircraft they've made. Current-gen engine tech? Forget about it. I highly doubt the possess the manufacturering process in its entirety to produce the engines not to mention the proprietary software used to drive them. The software is just as important.
But they will learn. Hopefully, GE has learned from the aforementioned companies in that WSJ article.
 
Worked out great for Japanese high speed train manufacturers, and pretty much every other company that did technology transfers to China.
 
Let Rolls-Royce give them their avionics and engine tech, worked out well when they shared the Nene with the Soviets back in the day.
 
But they will learn. Hopefully, GE has learned from the aforementioned companies in that WSJ article.

You're right. However, if they change nothing with their education system, it will take at the very least an entire generation to create and build stuff that the west was building 20 years ago and it won't be competitive with stuff that will be current gen tech.

Also, I truly believe that if or when China starts pushing technology rather than "drafting," they will have more respect for intellectual property. As of now, like someone else mentioned, they have absolutely no regard. Plus, in 40 years, they will have bigger problems such as social, environmental, food/water, etc...
 
Cool! Here we have two corrupted entities trading cheap labor for technology, one gaining higher profits and market share, the other gaining prestige, fragmented, compartmentalized technology to play jigsaw puzzle with and more foreign currency to better leverage themselves on the world stage.

But the overriding question still remains: Can you make yourself fly in an aircraft built in or built with engine parts made in China?
 
Last edited:
But the overriding question still remains: Can you make yourself fly in an aircraft built in China?


As a pilot, I can say I wouldn't fly an airliner made in China. One of the big problems with airlines around the world is use of counterfeit parts that come from China. They are reverse engineered parts that are far inferior to OEM parts. I won't name any names but some of the major US airlines have outsourced their heavy maintenance to offshore maintenance shops to cut costs. The problem is that these shops aren't under FAA jurisdiction, they don't use FAA certified maintenance personnel, and some use counterfeit parts as often as they can. The airlines get away with it because they are large multi-nationals that have more lobbying money than we can imagine.
 
You're right. However, if they change nothing with their education system, it will take at the very least an entire generation to create and build stuff that the west was building 20 years ago and it won't be competitive with stuff that will be current gen tech.

Also, I truly believe that if or when China starts pushing technology rather than "drafting," they will have more respect for intellectual property. As of now, like someone else mentioned, they have absolutely no regard. Plus, in 40 years, they will have bigger problems such as social, environmental, food/water, etc...

It took the Japanese how long?
 
H54, that's mostly wishful thinking. GE is going to get played just like every other western firm got played. Not that GE would mind - they'll still make more money than they would otherwise. There is a funny story I read a while back (can't find a link, sorry) about VW opening up their Chinese joint venture in the 90s. At the time, they best they could do was copy trivial electronics like cd players and VW thought they would be safe because car engineering and manufacturing is so much more involved, but they were quickly proven wrong.

More timely, you should read about what's been happening in the chinese wind power industry in the last few years: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/15/business/global/15chinawind.html?pagewanted=all
 
Back
Top