Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Chinese Helicopter Industry

Today, I saw a really good interview the chief designer in the Z-15 from the Chinese side (who is also the deputy chief designer of 602 Institute. If you can read Chinese, the original interview is as follows, it provides a really solid look at China's helicopter industry.
记者:我们知道直-15是一种6-7吨级的中型直升机,请问杨总,这种吨位的直升机主要用途是什么?

杨总:中国和西方国家,如法德英美的直升机吨位范围一般是从1.5吨到15吨左右,俄罗斯直升机的吨位范围要更大,20吨30吨都有。出于经济性考虑,我们和欧美主要发展的是1.5-15吨的直升机。6吨级的直升机属于中型直升机,其特点是通用性强,使用范围非常广泛。就直-15来说,它的载客人数很合适,经济性好,不大不小,可以用于运输、外部吊挂、电力巡检、旅游观光、航拍、森林防火和巡视、搜索救援、以及像四川地震这样的伤员紧急救护方面。以前法方和中方都没有这样吨位的直升机,我们之所以开发这个吨位的直升机也就是考虑到它用途广泛。欧直第一次在美国直升机航展上推这个型号,就获得了111架的订单,后来又陆续获得十几家的订单,我们中方目前也有了十来架的意向订单。

记者:从外观和座舱配置来看,直-15确实是一种比较有档次的飞机。

杨总:对,直-15之所以上档次,首先体现在它是按照最新的适航标准来研制,其安全性可以满足最新的适航标准,其次从经济性方面来看,它在油耗、使用维护性和客服支持培训等方面,已经代表了目前直升机的最先进水平。

记者:直-15和我国之前研制的直升机比如直-9最大不同点在什么地方?性能上有何特点?

杨总:直-9是上世纪70年代末生产的一种直升机,虽然它的母版也是民机,但设计之时的适航要求是上世纪的标准,从安全性方面来说肯定不如按照最新适航标准打造的直-15。对于民机来说重要的是好用和耐用,在这方面我们的直-15代表的是最新的设计水平。

记者:您觉得我国现在直升机研发水平如何?直-15和以前的直升机相比是否一个很大的进步?

杨总:现在我们也有完全国产化的直升机,如直-9和直-11,但从好用耐用方面和国外产品比还是有差距,国外直升机可能寿命是两万小时,国产的就只有5-6000小时,另外我们在售后服务方面还和国际先进水平有差距,毕竟发达国家广泛使用直升机已经有很多年历史。

不过这些年我国直升机产业在消化吸收国外技术方面取得了很大进展,下一步就是自主创新了,在这个方向上我们已经走过一段路程,但在比较核心的技术如动力和传动方面与国际先进水平仍有差距。在各方面的因素影响下,国内直升机市场表现还是不太好,这点也可以理解,就像买汽车,客户不光考虑的是性能,还有安全性和经济性以及售后服务。不过作为最新产品,直-15在经济性等方面比之前有很大的提高,完全和国际接轨,我们的设计要求和设计目标都完全是按照用户需求来制定,我们认为它的市场前景肯定比之前的国产直升机要好。

记者:在直-15之后我们是否还在研制更大型的直升机?

杨总:有这样的规划,直-15之后我们在研制十几吨级的直升机。

记者:如果我没记错,直8也是这样的吨位?

是的,但是直8是上世纪5、60年代的技术,毕竟是老机型了。目前我们正在进行项目论证,可能过一两年就会立项。

记者:类似米-26那种超重型直升机我们有发展计划吗?超大型直升机和中小型直升机研发方面有没有什么不同?

杨总:我们也有这方面的想法,在设计方面其实超重型直升机和中小型直升机区别不大,主要的差别还是体现在制造阶段。

记者:通过今年的汶川地震,可以看出我国直升机市场的缺口还很大,通过这一次,国家对直升机的地位更加重视,这是否意味着我国的直升机产业会进入一个快速发展阶段?

杨总:以前大家对直升机的用途不是非常了解,通过这次地震大家了解了直升机这种飞行器的特点和用途。和固定翼飞机相比,直升机的飞行更加灵活,它是六自由度的,也就是说可以上下前后左右飞,还能悬停。直升机对于起降场所的要求也很低,只要有一块平地就可起降。四川地震的救灾过程中充分反映了直升机的性能特点,使我们国家领导人认识到直升机在国民经济建设和国防建设中的重要性。

以前很多人不太了解直升机,汶川地震后胡主席和中央军委以及总装备部的领导对直升机的发展做了重要的批示,这是一个方面,第二个方面,通过汶川地震很多人都认识到我们国家发展直升机产业的紧迫性,不光是对经济建设,而且对我们国防建设也是相当重要。中国作为一个政治经济大国,缺乏直升机是不行的,不管是对经济建设也好还是国际地位也好直升机都具有非常重要的意义。第三方面,我们有过市场调查,随着经济的发展,人均国民生产总值的提高,一个国家的直升机数量会象当年的汽车那样出现“井喷”式的增长。

直升机有一个相对的缺点就是使用成本比较高,比较昂贵,这也意味着,要大量使用直升机,必然需要国民经济发展到一定阶段才可以,美俄及西方国家都是这样,从我们的市场调查来看中国现在也已经基本上到了直升机大面积使用的“井喷”阶段。全世界现在大约总共有3-4万架直升机,其中美国一个国家就拥有上万架,我国的军用直升机也就只有几百架,民用的更少,不到200架,和发达国家有不小差距,但差距同时也就表示有发展的潜力,预计10年20年以后,我国的民用直升机保有量将会有一个大的增长,到那时保有量起码会达到两三千架。

记者:您觉得直升机设计上最关键的技术是什么,我国在这方面的水平如何?

杨总:我个人理解,不管是军用还是民用直升机,最关键的技术还是安全性的设计,对民机来说安全性是进入市场的门槛、许可证。在和欧直合作以前,我们对于对于什么是安全性,怎样把安全性体现到设计中去,都不是非常清楚,而且对如何验证直升机的安全性也不是很有经验。通过国际合作,我们对此有了更多的认识。从关键技术来说,我们和欧直合作最大的收获,就是学习安全性的设计,分析和验证。只有满足了安全性的要求,才能进军国际市场,如果不满足这样的要求,西方国家是不允许你卖的,当然第三世界国家可能会不一样。

除此之外,我们也了解了西方国家的飞机的总体设计理念,从合作中学到了质量控制和管理经验,这些经验不仅对直升机,对固定翼飞机的设计以及我国整个航空业,乃至汽车等民用产业都有借鉴意义。我上大学时,老师曾说过“航空是一个国家工业化水平的一面镜子”,之所以这么说就是因为航空产品的研发涉及众多领域,例如材料,工艺,电子,机械等等,航空工业的产值也许没法和汽车或软件相比,但航空产品的技术水平实际上是一个国家工业水平的体现,只有把相关的每一个方面做好了,航空产品才会有竞争力,才能有进步。反过来说,若是航空产品有进步了,就也证明了国家的工业水平整体有提高。

如果我们中国有一天可以研制出A380,波音747这样的大飞机,那就说明我们的技术创新能力就可以和美国媲美了,我们就是一个工业强国了,那时候我们的国家领导人出访美国,或许就完全可以跟美国总统用同样的底气说话了。航空工业的水平不仅仅反映一个国家工业发展水平,也体现出一个国家的组织和管理水平,也是验证一个国家体制是否优越的标准。

记者:您觉得世界直升机未来发展有着怎样的趋势?

杨总:从总的趋势来说,安全舒适、经济性、好用耐用这些要求就像奥林匹克的宗旨“更高、更快、更强”一样,永远是直升机发展的主题,可以说是一种无止尽的追求,从安全来说,其核心问题就是适航要求,民用直升机的适航要求是更新很快的,在这样的条件下,我们的安全要求也就越来越高,从舒适性方面的要求来说,振动水平和噪音应该要越来越低,从经济性方面来说,追求越来越低的油耗,越来越容易保养。

记者:由于汶川地震的影响,我们国家未来对直升机行业的投入应该会增加,是不是意味着性能更好的直升机能更快的被研制出来?

杨总:单纯在直升机的功能方面满足要求还是能够做到的,但要好用耐用又安全,受制于我国的技术水平,目前还有一定难度。例如发动机,工作时最高温度上千度,最低也有8、900度,在这样的条件下要工作2万小时,还要不出故障,以我国目前的工业基础来说还是有比较大差距。关于这个,我还是刚才的观点:航空工业水平要提高,设计制造以及工艺材料等各方面都要搞上去,缺一不可,国家有足够投入,有一个合理的体制,才能逐步赶上。航空工业发展和足球有些类似,踢足球不是光有钱有人就够,如果没有好的机制,还是没有办法在赛场上创造佳绩,而作为航空工业,没有好的机制,就无法达到和人家(发达国家)一样的水平。

记者:今天从您这里学到了解了很多关于直升机的知识,非常感谢您接受我们的采访!

杨总:不客气。


Some of the interesting points that Mr. Yang made:
  • China is developing helicopters in 1.5 t to 15 tonne range like US and Europe is doing rather as opposed to Russian portfolio which includes much heavier models. It seems to follow a general trend in the development of Chinese maufacturing industry where they are generally trying to follow the path of West. Most of China's recent indigenous efforts (not licensed/unlicensed production like flankers/Mig-21s) are actually showing more Western influences.
  • EC-175/Z-15 received 111 orders in its first airshow appearance and orders from 10+ customers since. Chinese companies have also placed orders for 10+ Z-15s.
  • Obviously, China feels that its self-produced helicopters like Z-9/11 are generation(s) behind Z-15. Z-9/11 only have a lifespan of 6000 hours compared to 20,000 hours for a modern western helicopter. This project is not only important for improving technologically, but also improving after-sales servicing and support.
  • They are also proceeding with their 10+ tonne helicopter project independently and may launch the project in 1 or 2 years. It may be in conflict with Z-8, but that's ancient technology.
  • Chinese helicopter market has a huge upside. At the current time, there are only several hundreds military helicopters + <>
  • The biggest gain from cooperation with Eurocopter is learning how to develop a safe/reliable design. Prior to this cooperation, China had little idea on how to design something that would be able to pass the strict Western aviation standards. They also learnt the design process of Western companies, which includes the quality control and management practices.
Out of all the above points, I think that last one is what most people should understand about China. As written in this article, what China really seeks is learning the process of developing a successful product. They went from a minor partner in the EC-120 project to become an equal partner in EC-175. By the next step, they probably would like to develop a new helicopter (like the 10 tonne helicopter) independently. That helicopter would most likely not be cutting edge in the civilian market like EC-175 will be, but it will be developed through this Western design model. The same thing has already happened in the automaker and shipbuilding industry and probably will happen in the airliner industry. American gov't spends a lot of time trying to stop China from having access to sensitive military/dual use technology. It's true that such technology are helpful to the Chinese military buildup, but what China really has copied from the West is its design and management practice (although it still has a long way to go). It gets upset about Canada exporting a few PW engines for the prototype part of Z-10 project, but nothing seems to happen with Sikorsky after S-300 and S-92 deals. Not that I think it's all Sikorsky's fault. In a market where Eurocopter and Agusta are more than willing to cooperate and/or give China license production, Sikorsky has little choice to do the same. And at the end of the day, China can always go to the Russians/Ukrainians for engines, if Western engines are denied for its military projects. And with Russian expertise in heavy lift helicopters and Western cooperation in 1.5 to 13 tonne helicopters, China is developing a helicopter industry through a whole range of weight classes for military and civilian use.

6 comments:

dlhh said...

Thks for the info.

Have you read about Wo & Guo, the spies executed for betraying strategic missile secrets to Taiwan.

the link: http://china.org.cn/china/features/content_16903174.htm

Bet Taiwan & US now have a pretty good idea about the capabilities of China's missile.

Feng said...

hard to say really. Nobody except the Chinese knows how much he stole. There are more stuff stolen that I'm sure is not reported.

dlhh said...

Well, Guo is a missile expert working for the PLA. Even if he did not manage to pass all the info, the US & Taiwan will have apretty good knowledge of what the PLA is developing and their thoughts on missile defence.

Feng said...

There is a lot of theft going on both sides, I don't know what you are trying to say here.

Jiang said...

HAHAHA, US stealing Tech From China now!!

dlhh said...

What it means is that a missile expert working in the most sensitive areas of PLA R&D is able to give the US deep insights into the PLA strategies and thinking.

Its a major coup by Taiwan intelligence. It was reported that Taiwan intelligence set up a special department to analyse Guo's reports.

By the way, we should continue here our disagreements on your so called knowledge on PLA's sales policies and your statement that Prasun K. Sengupta reports are all unreliable.

Richard Fischer and IAASC quoted from him and I believe if you do some research you find other sources use his articles too.

Tell me which atricles I quoted from him whiach you find is wrong and we can see if you right on anything.