And note the "Australia" reference.
This is because they are also looking at Australian manufacturer of trikes (Airborne) and did not change the proposal when they sent it to me. Obviously someone will sell something to them quietly. I already know of a popular French trike design being made very quietly in China.
Abid
--- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, "apollonorthamerica" <apollonorthamerica@...> wrote:
>
> Ed,
> Yes and so. There is nothing here that the Chinese if determined can't solve within less than a decade. Under-estimating a growing powerful economy while ours is stagnant would be a foolish mistake. The way US is headed right now in trade deficits and manufacturing, I fully expect us to be second class citizens in about 25 years next to China. I hope and wish this will be turned around but it won't happen just because Republicans want to cut spending 100 billion dollars. No one in the US power structure seem to take a serious goal oriented view to bring manufacturing back to the US and keep it here and make the playing field truly even. They all pay lip service to it. Its pathetic and US public falls for it over and over.
>
> Very recently I got a solicitation from a Chinese "Group". One passage they presented in their plan was as follows:
>
>
> <Quote>
> "As already noted, the Group's analysis and research leads them to the view that a tricycle-style powered micro-light is the preferred aircraft type, at least in the context of the initial phase of the project.
> They therefore wish to identify a foreign partner with rights to the design of an appropriate aircraft, prepared to enter the project with them. In brief the intention is that:
> 1. The Group will obtain rights to the aircraft design and manufacture in China.
> 2. They will work (as appropriate with the present owner of the design) to enhance the existing design, specifically from the perspective of materials used (carbon fibre, etc) and where possible, safety improvements (the latter in deference to the perceived Chinese "risk-averse" attitude to this activity)."
>
> OWNER OF THE AIRCRAFT DESIGN
> The Group seeks access to the design of a currently successful tricycle micro-light aircraft. The preference is that rights to the design in China would be assigned to the Group (or more realistically to the company when established). The design would be modified and enhanced as described above, before being put into production in China with the progressive roll out of the wider business model.
> Within this general intent there are a number of variables that will need to be resolved, including short- and/or long-term benefits for the design owner. For example:
> --- Opportunity for the original designer/design owner to be involved in the further development and modification of the aircraft.
> --- Opportunity for the design owner to use the enhanced design in Australia.
> --- Opportunity for the design owner to source new aircraft from the China manufacturing facility and import them to Australia (and potentially elsewhere) at a significantly reduced landed price than costs of manufacture in Australia.
> --- In addition, the Group's hope is that the design owner will accept a share in the Company. The quantum of this will need to be resolved through negotiation, but perhaps of the order of around 3% of the value of the floated company.
>
> <Un-Quote>
>
> They had the usual cheaper labor, let us copy and enhance your design and then manufacture in China and you can buy from us, you will get ownership in our company etc. temptations but we are committed to making our flagship in the US and do not want to sell any design to Chinese in the way they proposed it. Thankfully I do not have to answer to shareholders and so on but only my own soul and conscience and my own dream, otherwise this answer would not have sat well.
>
> I am telling you, they are opening their airspace and they are building the infra-structure for light to heavy GA ... everything. They want it fast tracked by buying up successful proven designs and technology. We should not under-estimate them. We need to do whatever we have to do to remain ahead. Its a war out there and US is still sleeping.
>
> Abid
>
>
>
> Ed Wrote:
> The active word here is "potential". What most here in the US do not know about is the total missing infrastructure in China to support GA or Sport aviation. It is so far off as not to be seen with the Hubble telescope. A few examples. All flights in China require a filled flight plan and are always in communication with ATC. All pilots in China must have a second class medical or better. All pilots must have a private license or better. You are looked down on without an instrument rating. There is no LL fuel. There are very few airports in all of China. Those that are there are set up for scheduled commercial flights or crop dusting. No FBO's No hangars, No shades, No repair facilities, No mechanics, No parts, No flight schools (a few commercial schools) No instructor base, it is safe to say, no private pilots, a hand full. Only a few hundred GA aircraft in all of China. The only place you find any of what we take for granted is at the big international airports. There is no recreational aviation in China, no plans to get into it. The push is to expand the airport base and find ways and means to introduce the GA concept as we understand it. Many fear an "open sky policy", a long way off, but it will come piecemeal to some degree, it is just going to take a very long time. We have it so good here.
>
> I have been to China each year for the past three, have two small crop dusters there I was lucky enough to get in. I'm one of few around to have a Chinese pilots license, and proud to have it. Some day I will have to write the story about getting my medical there, a total riot, you would think I was going to be an astronaut.
>
> Ed
>
No comments:
Post a Comment