Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwawaysea | Hacker News Reader

> Production of both the ARJ21 and C919 have relied on foreign suppliers for parts to build the braking system, engines and hydraulic pressure components. Chinese manufacturers have been able to make the less essential components, according to industry observers, but they are seen as likely to require more maintenance and incur additional costs.

How long before China also challenged the turbine and avionics market? They aren’t there yet but I feel like they have the economic capability to get there.

View on HN

>> Production of both the ARJ21 and C919 have relied on foreign suppliers for parts to build the braking system, engines and hydraulic pressure components. Chinese manufacturers have been able to make the less essential components, according to industry observers, but they are seen as likely to require more maintenance and incur additional costs.

> How long before China also challenged the turbine and avionics market? They aren’t there yet but I feel like they have the economic capability to get there.

I don't know, but I think they'll get there sooner rather than later.

IMHO, China's "more advanced" economic competitors have established a pattern of self-assuredly resting on their laurels in some area (and focusing too much on ideological purity re: economic theory) until their leading positions have been undermined and they lose.

>> focusing too much on ideological purity re: economics

I hate how people take Economic theories as some irrefutable fact even though they're all proven wrong in the real world. I mean look at any economic study or forecasting from any of the major firms and the one thing that they're consistent on is being wrong.

I swear Economists are just like modern day shamans/seers, filling the role that was once held by court wizards. While modern economists may not cut the heads off chickens or consult the stars they do have bogus "models" and secretive proprietary forecasting tools they use to fool idiots into thinking they have special insights. And this is very dangerous too since Economists tend to be very dogmatic, stubborn and seem to double down even when their theories fail, it's like a religion, and they refuse to ever admit their world view is wrong.

> it's like a religion

The parallels run pretty deep. Smith's "invisible hand" most likely referred to the hand of God, but I guess these days blind faith in that concept somehow qualifies as secular and scientific.

Okay, I have to throw out my naive theory here: I believe economy is actually function as religion for governing a modern society. Religion has been keeping society work, stay stable, and find purpose for citizens in history; modern economy does exactly the same, it meets our needs for fulfillment, lead people to behave in certain manner, and keep countries stable. They are vital for our society. You can tell when economy is good, everything is rosy, and people are nice, there was no polarization. It ignites our greed and then fulfils it, we feel happy and willing to follow its lead.

Also, their bogus computer “models”, were generated in Microsoft Excel.

And once in a while, they go: Oops, my computer made a mistake.

That's what's supposed to happen though right?

People start making products. They get better and better at it. They move up the value chain. Etc. That's market capitalism.

China is only doing it as fast as they are because we take ill advised actions like declaring, "We won't give you X anymore." As if that will stop a nation like China from figuring out how to manufacture the X's they need to make Y's. Naturally, they start successfully manufacturing X's a lot sooner than experts expect because they have greedy businessmen who want to continue making money selling Y's.

Certification will be a big issue for them. That's where the US/Europe will try to stop them.

>That's where the US/Europe will try to stop them.

I'm sure they're shaking in their boots at the thought.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com