Will China's new generation of submarines be as advanced as modern Western designs?

[f-22fan12]

China is working on two new classes of submarines. The first is the new Shang Class (NATO codename) attack submarine. The Shang class is said to have performence equal to Victor III class submarines of the Soviet Union/Russia. The second is the Jin Class (NATO codename.) The Jin class is set to carry the JL-2 SLBM. It has a long range reach and would certainly increase the PLAN's strategic capabilities. Does anyone know how these subs stack up to modern western subs.(type 212, Virginia, Akula)

[nz enthusiast]

I imagine the only thing holding it back could POSSIBLY be the noise it produces. If anything that was probably the most significant difference between US and USSR submarines in the Cold War and I have this hunch that the Chinese might continue that trend.

[contedicavour]

It would be interesting to know to what extent Russia is willing to help the Chinese shipbuilding industry in developing designs of the same capability as a Akula-II or Severodvinsk.
Despite gains from the price of oil and natural gas, Russia will have trouble matching China's ever increasing defence budgets. If Russia gives away the technological edge, one day they may regret it.
I'd expect the new Chinese SSNs to be comparable to the later Victor-III or the earliest Akula-I, not more.

cheers

[tphuang]

It's not advanced enough, that's why they are working on 095 right now. Not sure if there is a 096 project going though. I think right now, they are just settled with 094 and having a real SSBN.

[Sansei442/100]

It's not advanced enough, that's why they are working on 095 right now. Not sure if there is a 096 project going though. I think right now, they are just settled with 094 and having a real SSBN.

I wonder if the Russians are going to assist with the Type 095-if I was Russian I wouldn't:)

Anyway, have there been any confirmed SLBM launches from the 094 yet or are they afraid to come out of their Bohai Sea 'bastion' and face the Seawolf SSNs?:D

[falcon2k7]

I would think that the Chinese would know of the noise problems that Soviet era subs had before the Akula. So while based on those designs, I would think the chinese would be hard at work trying to correct those flaws.

[Viktor]

I wonder if the Russians are going to assist with the Type 095-if I was Russian I wouldn't:)




I would and I would charge big money for it... by the time they understand that tehnology Russian research centars will developt newer ones.. and so on ...either way Russia is helping China , specialy Rubin design buiro.

[crobato]

It would be interesting to know to what extent Russia is willing to help the Chinese shipbuilding industry in developing designs of the same capability as a Akula-II or Severodvinsk.
Despite gains from the price of oil and natural gas, Russia will have trouble matching China's ever increasing defence budgets. If Russia gives away the technological edge, one day they may regret it.
I'd expect the new Chinese SSNs to be comparable to the later Victor-III or the earliest Akula-I, not more.

cheers

For one thing the Chinese are more than capable of making seven bladed skewed propellers. These propeller designs are much more quieter but harder to make without the precision tooling. Hence the 80's furor in the US Congress when Toshiba sold a precision machine tool to Russia that was said to be used to make propellers which end up in the Akula to help make it the quietest Russian nuclear sub yet.

Nowadays, the props are more prolific and in more than just the Akula. The Kilo 636s have them, including all the ones sold to China.

The Chinese uses the same props on the Song class subs. Also on the Yuan class. By inference no doubt they would end up on the 093 and 094. Not only do the Chinese have the machines that can make the props, they can also make these machines by themselves without importation.

[tphuang]

I wonder if the Russians are going to assist with the Type 095-if I was Russian I wouldn't:)

Anyway, have there been any confirmed SLBM launches from the 094 yet or are they afraid to come out of their Bohai Sea 'bastion' and face the Seawolf SSNs?:D

why would they get Russian assistance if their requirements are going to be higher than what the Russians are going for?

[badguy2000]

I wonder if the Russians are going to assist with the Type 095-if I was Russian I wouldn't:)

Anyway, have there been any confirmed SLBM launches from the 094 yet or are they afraid to come out of their Bohai Sea 'bastion' and face the Seawolf SSNs?:D
JL2 has been tested several time.but they usually are low ballistic test.

Chinese always keeps a low profile ,which is quite different from their RUssian counterpart.

[XaNDeR]

I really really doubt that the new chinese subs will be comparable to usn sub's

[speed651]

From the exhibition on PLA 80th anniversary, a Type 093 submarine was exposed.

[Truculent]

An arms control"expert" has just started this series on chinese ssbn:
http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/1581/will-chinas-deterrent-go-to-sea-094-ssbn-1

[speed651]

In the "Expo of National Defense and Armed Forces Achievements since New China's Foundation" held in Beijing, Type 093 nuclear-powered submarine is exposed by a photo of its surface sailing state. The photo has no explanation of the sub's designation name but a unclear comment: "New Type Nuclear Submarine", because China never open the fresh weapon's exact model. The distinguished appearance comparing with Type 091 sub, however, tells that the boat in the photo is the legendary Type 093 attack nuclear submarine.

The most notable change in Type 093 submarine is the disappearance of controlling plane on sub's sail. Previously an unconfirmed blurred image of Type 093 submarine on Internet also corroborates the change. If the Type 093 sub uses "bow diving planes" like U.S. navy Virginia class submarines, the main reason is Type 093 has a smaller "conning tower" with no space for rudder steering gear. PLA navy has known the fact that a decreased sized sub sail can reduce the noise and resistance force when in underwater maneuver.

someone interested can see photos and my detailed article in my blog.

[gf0012-aust]

PLA navy has known the fact that a decreased sized sub sail can reduce the noise and resistance force when in underwater maneuver.

sorry, thats plain wrong. acoustic transmission issues have little to do with sail size. they do however get significantly influenced by design. More to the point, that sail design is an ideal noise maker in a contemp sense.

sail planes or bow planes influence manouvre characteristics.

the actual design of that PLAN boat shows no contemp design influence at an acoustic minimisation level.

[dioditto]

I thought the forum rules strictly forbid "versus thread"...?!

F-22fan12... didn't you get warn several times not to make similar thread of this nature?

[gf0012-aust]

Not only do the Chinese have the machines that can make the props, they can also make these machines by themselves without importation.

I'm not so sure that this is entirely true. China was importing US made milling machines for complex designs as recently as Nov 2006 (according to Modern Steel Construction) I've misplaced my copy, but I think it was the December edition. These machines have been used for making complex designs (like propellors and complex angle components in aircraft and ships) in the past. In fact the sale of this particular machine caused some grief as it clearly was dual use technology - and thus questionable as an export item.

Remember that Chinas capacity to build complex airframes was also due to the importation of Cincinnatti 5 Axis presses also made in the US. These machines cannot be copied yet (or they still wouldn't be buying them)

[gf0012-aust]

I thought the forum rules strictly forbid "versus thread"...?!

F-22fan12... didn't you get warn several times not to make similar thread of this nature?

As long as the discussion is broad based with respect to technologies and competencies - rather than "my gun is louder than your gun" then the thread will survive a lockdown.

any discussion about submarines will be extremely lightweight anyway - as no one in the know is going to say much in an open forum.


its certainly possible to make general comment on the obvious design issues etc... but as for systems etc... the right people will stay zippered.

[crobato]

I'm not so sure that this is entirely true. China was importing US made milling machines for complex designs as recently as Nov 2006 (according to Modern Steel Construction) I've misplaced my copy, but I think it was the December edition. These machines have been used for making complex designs (like propellors and complex angle components in aircraft and ships) in the past. In fact the sale of this particular machine caused some grief as it clearly was dual use technology - and thus questionable as an export item.

Remember that Chinas capacity to build complex airframes was also due to the importation of Cincinnatti 5 Axis presses also made in the US. These machines cannot be copied yet (or they still wouldn't be buying them)

These are old news. Though Chinese factories like to use US made machine tools due to familiarity, brand strength and recognition, local manufacturers are catching up. However, restrictions have made it very difficult to import US tools with potentially dual use aspects which makes repeat buys like the Cinci 5 axis machines difficult to happen.

Here is good PDF.

http://www.amtonline.org/document_display.cfm?section_id=93&document_id=40147&top=0&level=

In page 12, as of 17 identified local manufacturers of machine tools, seven produce those with 5 axis capability, including one identified with the Defense ministry.

[nero]

.
if china is importing complex tools from the U.S , then they must be up to something.

how does chinese SSKs compare with those of thr west ??

iam asking this beacause american SSK tech is next to nothing, although the americans r world leaders in SSN designs.

how does the yuan class compare with something like the MARLIN.

an analysis would be great

.

[crobato]

if china is importing complex tools from the U.S , then they must be up to something.

Yup and its called building a manufacturing economy.

[StingrayOZ]

I think thats a big jump..

I suppose I also own dual use technology with a mill and lathe?

Theres a big jump between owning a 5 axis mill with many, many, many civil applications and it being a dedicated source of magical nuclear submarine or aircraft carrier propellors. Why can't they be allowed to make there own props for there own use?

Look at the french, they own plenty of 5 axis mills, and still can't make a proper propellor.

[gf0012-aust]

These are old news.

November 2006 is old news? They're still purchasing complex machines from the US, and there are still machines in australia (and europe) that are embargoed from export to china - and its common knowledge that they can't duplicate those machines or they'd be producing them themselves by now.

The reality is that china is not in a position to demonstrate complex manufacturing skills in some sectors.

A cursory look at the hull design of the 093 shows that fairly quickly to anyone who's familiar with signature management. Its a 20 year old design and shows none of the advances made in hull shape design that have been around for 7-8 years or more.

eg, the work undertaken for Airbus and Boeing is with US, Spanish, Swedish or German equipment - no chinese machinery is certified for these platforms. Thats certainly the information provided to some of the Airbus component manufacturers in Australia. Even though china comes in cheaper for some components, the work is still being done offshore. eg, billets of complex metals, compound components.

[speed651]

Remember that Chinas capacity to build complex airframes was also due to the importation of Cincinnatti 5 Axis presses also made in the US. These machines cannot be copied yet (or they still wouldn't be buying them)
:p:
China Dalian Machine Tool Group has produced a 5-axis 5-linkage mill. You can find the photo pictured in April 2007. This is the address:

chinaneast.xinhuanet.com/jszb/2007-04/17/xin_200404170833453597620.jpg
:)

[gf0012-aust]

:p:
China Dalian Machine Tool Group has produced a 5-axis 5-linkage mill. You can find the photo pictured in April 2007. This is the address:

chinaneast.xinhuanet.com/jszb/2007-04/17/xin_200404170833453597620.jpg
:)

and I'll bet you all the tea in china that those machines are not certified to do any contract work for Airbus of Boeing passenger aircraft. ;)

[Schumacher]

November 2006 is old news? They're still purchasing complex machines from the US, and there are still machines in australia (and europe) that are embargoed from export to china - and its common knowledge that they can't duplicate those machines or they'd be producing them themselves by now.

.................

Hmm ... so a European country buys a Boeing jet means Europe can't produce an aircraft ? There are many commercial & practical reasons to choose from multiple sources.
We're not sure of the quality of these Chinese machines but your reason for saying China can't produce them just because it still imports some of them lacks commercial sense, especially when others have produced sources that Chinese are producing them.

If US is allowing exports of these sensitive complex machines to China, I think it actually supports the claim that China is producing them.
With sensitive techs, the thinking is not to sell until the buyers are going to get them one way or another anyway. So, might as well allow the sale to make some money. :)

[gf0012-aust]

With sensitive techs, the thinking is not to sell until the buyers are going to get them one way or another anyway. So, might as well allow the sale to make some money. :)


Sorry, thats not true. I'm aware of numerous technologies that are embargoed (in australia) for sale to china due to concerns about theft of IP and due to the technology sophistication.

We have (and every Govt I've dealt with on military sales) has a list of countries embargoed on specific technologies. I've been involved with this for some 8 years through various projects. I think I might have a fair idea of what we do and do not allow in and out.

Not all countries are going to sell everything for a quick buck - and even the US has those policies in place. The US covers it under ITARS provisions - and those ITARS provisions even effect overseas participants in labeled projects.

[Schumacher]

Sorry, thats not true. I'm aware of numerous technologies that are embargoed (in australia) for sale to china due to concerns about theft of IP and due to the technology sophistication. .....

We have (and every Govt I've dealt with on military sales) has a list of countries embargoed on specific technologies. I've been involved with this for some 8 years through various projects. I think I might have a fair idea of what we do and do not allow in and out.

Not all countries are going to sell everything for a quick buck - and even the US has those policies in place. The US covers it under ITARS provisions - and those ITARS provisions even effect overseas participants in labeled projects.

Yeah, I think most know this, ie there are numerous techs that are not allowed to be sold to China.
But I'm talking about the 5-axis machine which, as you said, US has exported to China.
I'm saying that this shows the machine is not that sensitive a tech, which I doubt since it's critical for ships & aircraft etc, or that US knows China producers are making them anyway.

[gf0012-aust]

I'm saying that this shows the machine is not that sensitive a tech, which I doubt since it's critical for ships & aircraft etc, or that US knows China producers are making them anyway.

The ramifications of the decisions made by that idiot Clinton are still reverberating even today.

[tphuang]

As long as the discussion is broad based with respect to technologies and competencies - rather than "my gun is louder than your gun" then the thread will survive a lockdown.

any discussion about submarines will be extremely lightweight anyway - as no one in the know is going to say much in an open forum.


its certainly possible to make general comment on the obvious design issues etc... but as for systems etc... the right people will stay zippered.
so do the recently revealed pictures of 093 yield any kind of surprise or is it exactly what the submarine community expected it to look like? (if this is not too sensitive of a question to ask). I'm just asking this, because it looks different from Victor 3 (which is the often used comparison to 093).

[gf0012-aust]

so do the recently revealed pictures of 093 yield any kind of surprise or is it exactly what the submarine community expected it to look like? (if this is not too sensitive of a question to ask). I'm just asking this, because it looks different from Victor 3 (which is the often used comparison to 093).

well, you appreciate the fact that I'm not going to say much in a public forum. but based on work we've done on other subs etc... at a core design level, the 093 doesn't rattle my cage.

if those photos are legitimate, then its apparent that at the design level it is at least a generation behind. It doesn't matter to me whether its chinese, bulgarian, lithuanian or from mars - the design is a giveaway about what thought processes went into the acoustics management side of the equation.

whats important is that the chinese have made a serious attempt and that they will obviously use this as a development mule. the question for me (or maybe others like me with a vested interest) is that if the basics indicate prev generational thought, then the internal systems are going to be effected as well.

obviously I can't do much about it if people don't like my comments - but if the US. UK, French or Germans came out with that hull design I'd be sitting here going "wtf??"

design indicates mindset.

[tphuang]

well, you appreciate the fact that I'm not going to say much in a public forum. but based on work we've done on other subs etc... at a core design level, the 093 doesn't rattle my cage.

if those photos are legitimate, then its apparent that at the design level it is at least a generation behind. It doesn't matter to me whether its chinese, bulgarian, lithuanian or from mars - the design is a giveaway about what thought processes went into the acoustics management side of the equation.

whats important is that the chinese have made a serious attempt and that they will obviously use this as a development mule. the question for me (or maybe others like me with a vested interest) is that if the basics indicate prev generational thought, then the internal systems are going to be effected as well.

obviously I can't do much about it if people don't like my comments - but if the US. UK, French or Germans came out with that hull design I'd be sitting here going "wtf??"

design indicates mindset.

no, I don't mind. I didn't expect them to develop anything close to the current generation.

I figured you guys previously have an image of what you expect 093 to look like. And then when these photos came out, did a comparison. I don't know if the previous comparisons between 093 and Victor 3 were rhetorics for the mass public or a general belief by the submarine community. But looking at their photos (not knowing much about submarines), they look quite different to me. My question is what kind of influences does the 093 seem to have?

[gf0012-aust]

no, I don't mind. I didn't expect them to develop anything close to the current generation.

I figured you guys previously have an image of what you expect 093 to look like. And then when these photos came out, did a comparison. I don't know if the previous comparisons between 093 and Victor 3 were rhetorics for the mass public or a general belief by the submarine community. But looking at their photos (not knowing much about submarines), they look quite different to me. My question is what kind of influences does the 093 seem to have?

From a purely academic level, my sense of it is that China decided to go with this design as a mule. Going on prev design and development behaviour they will do short runs on specific mules to develop the competency.

Any sub is a threat, so if it had a sail built like the sydney opera house, given a decent crew it would still cause concerns. technology is always only part of any threat matrix assessment.

What is apparent to me (in a broad sense) is that the design hasn't been influenced by the Victors. There seems to be heavy LA, Trafalgar, Oberon influence in some areas. Considering the fact that these 3 were all benchmark designs at the nominal acoustic measurement level, then they've been paying attention to more than the russians (whose early boats were never acoustically equivalent to their adversarial contemporaries)

Re public media comment about PLAN designs, you seem the same nonsense coming out about some of the Indian Navy subs. You can't manage the press (as such), so you let them run at the mouth and then lean back and watch them "eat their young" when they get it wrong. eg I don't know of anyone in the acoustic community who was anticipating a rebirthed Victor to appear, irrespective of all the chatter that was happening elsewhere.

[Schumacher]

..................
What is apparent to me (in a broad sense) is that the design hasn't been influenced by the Victors. There seems to be heavy LA, Trafalgar, Oberon influence in some areas. Considering the fact that these 3 were all benchmark designs at the nominal acoustic measurement level, then they've been paying attention to more than the russians (whose early boats were never acoustically equivalent to their adversarial contemporaries)

Re public media comment about PLAN designs, you seem the same nonsense coming out about some of the Indian Navy subs. You can't manage the press (as such), so you let them run at the mouth and then lean back and watch them "eat their young" when they get it wrong. eg I don't know of anyone in the acoustic community who was anticipating a rebirthed Victor to appear, irrespective of all the chatter that was happening elsewhere.

Considering that 093's design phase was around mid or early 90s & PLA capability at that time, I don't think many observers will have seriously thought it's at current, latest generation level. Being at similar level as LA & Trafalgar class seems about right.

[crobato]

November 2006 is old news? They're still purchasing complex machines from the US, and there are still machines in australia (and europe) that are embargoed from export to china - and its common knowledge that they can't duplicate those machines or they'd be producing them themselves by now.

Did you actually read the PDF? its dated on September 2006. There are thousands and thousands of companies in China, many foreign owned. Who is to say who bought what and where did it go to? The defense industry is just a minor fragment for all the machine tool users in China. If you read the PDF, the US is actually seriously lagging behind in terms of machine tool shipments to China, compared to Germany, Japan, Sweden and other countries, including Taiwan.

The part there that should be noted is that one of those Chinese major machine tool makers is one that is heavily tied with the Defense Ministry.

It should be noted that in April 2006, according tot he PDF the AMT noted 17 Chinese makers of CNC machine tools, 7 of which have displayed 5 axis machines.

Here is an update for 2007.

http://machine.2456.com/eng/feature/details.asp?fsiid=6&fsid=2415&e=1

Now its up to 20 manufacturers, which displayed around 70 models.

Which ones are tied to the Defense Ministry I don't know, certainly not all of them would be tied to the Defense Ministry, and those who do, probably a small fraction.

And it kind of helps if the company you are importing these tools from is a company you bought.

China machine tool giant acquires German plant

China's machine tool manufacturer tycoon, Shenyang Machine Tool Group (SMTL) announced here yesterday that it has bought Germany's Schiess AG.

http://english.people.com.cn/200411/16/eng20041116_164046.html

This is not to suggest that this company is PLA related since 30% of the company was just sold to a New York firm.

http://www.easybourse.com/Website/dynamic/News.php?NewsID=214884&lang=fra&NewsRubrique=2&pageliste=

Its not necessary to import an entire machine, just enough of the parts to make your own. Many of the China made machine tools do use parts imported ffrom Germany, Japan, Sweden, etc,.

[gf0012-aust]

Did you actually read the PDF? its dated on September 2006.

I did, and you notice that my reference was November 2006. The last time I checked a Julian calendar, Nov was more recent than Sept when backtracking.... :rolleyes:

So, mainland china has the capability because they bought US and German technology in late 2006?

Are these machines certified and cleared for Airbus and Boeing contracts automatically then? Because I'm unaware of any chinese complex tech that is certified for Airbus or Boeing. Even BMW were still using their own gear and not sourcing chinese manuf product.

Happy to be corrected, but in any of the briefings I've attended its been made patently clear that chinese QC does not meet the required standards and hence the continued use of non chinese plant.

[swerve]

... The last time I checked a Julian calendar, Nov was more recent than Sept when backtracking.... :rolleyes: ...

Julian? Good grief! I didn't realise you were that old. Were you on the first fleet? :D

BTW, it's also true for the new-style Gregorian calendar. ;)

[f-22fan12]

I thought the forum rules strictly forbid "versus thread"...?!

F-22fan12... didn't you get warn several times not to make similar thread of this nature?

Here's why. This thread was started along time ago. Before all the Warnings. And its not really a "versus" thread.

[hallo84]

well, you appreciate the fact that I'm not going to say much in a public forum. but based on work we've done on other subs etc... at a core design level, the 093 doesn't rattle my cage.

if those photos are legitimate, then its apparent that at the design level it is at least a generation behind. It doesn't matter to me whether its chinese, bulgarian, lithuanian or from mars - the design is a giveaway about what thought processes went into the acoustics management side of the equation.

whats important is that the chinese have made a serious attempt and that they will obviously use this as a development mule. the question for me (or maybe others like me with a vested interest) is that if the basics indicate prev generational thought, then the internal systems are going to be effected as well.

obviously I can't do much about it if people don't like my comments - but if the US. UK, French or Germans came out with that hull design I'd be sitting here going "wtf??"

design indicates mindset.

No one seriously expect a Jump from 091 Han to Virginia class. It's still a good attempt even if it's a generation behind. The 093 will never the less give PLAN what it lacks most in the Han, a relativelt trouble free system.

Its been suggested to be using H/SQG-207 flank array developed in 1990...

But what's the estimated size of the boat based on the new picture?
Kind of hard since there nothing to compare to...

[crobato]

I did, and you notice that my reference was November 2006. The last time I checked a Julian calendar, Nov was more recent than Sept when backtracking.... :rolleyes:

So, mainland china has the capability because they bought US and German technology in late 2006?


The earlier times I heard of a Chinese made CNC goes way back before 2000. The German firm was bought in 2004. Shenyang Machine Tools Group is a major exporter of machine tools around the world and they have a branch in the US.

And did you notice that the latest CMIT is in April 2007? Having 7 manufacturers displaying their products in 2006 to 20 manufacturers with 70 models is quite a jump, and that's for one year.


Are these machines certified and cleared for Airbus and Boeing contracts automatically then? Because I'm unaware of any chinese complex tech that is certified for Airbus or Boeing. Even BMW were still using their own gear and not sourcing chinese manuf product.

And who are the ones doing the certification? Do you have to apply and do you need to even bother.

Do you need Airbus, BMW and Boeing certification in order to work on J-11s?


Happy to be corrected, but in any of the briefings I've attended its been made patently clear that chinese QC does not meet the required standards and hence the continued use of non chinese plant.

Maybe Western standards are still higher but it does not mean that the PLA standards have to match that. The PLA standards may still be relatively high but still below the highest Western standards. What is important is that it is good enough for domestic consumption.

[crobato]

No one seriously expect a Jump from 091 Han to Virginia class. It's still a good attempt even if it's a generation behind. The 093 will never the less give PLAN what it lacks most in the Han, a relativelt trouble free system.

Its been suggested to be using H/SQG-207 flank array developed in 1990...

But what's the estimated size of the boat based on the new picture?
Kind of hard since there nothing to compare to...


The most important thing first of all is safety. At least despite the early attempts, they have not gotten into K-19 like situations so far (knock on wood). Unlike the Soviets, which are willing to mass produce subs even when they know about the radioactivity problems and are willing to send people into it, the PLAN is willing to nip the bud before anything really serious would happen. If you are able to contain your safety issues, that is by far the most important step, and from then on, work from there.

[gf0012-aust]

But what's the estimated size of the boat based on the new picture?
Kind of hard since there nothing to compare to...

Nothing in the public domain.

[dioditto]

Are these machines certified and cleared for Airbus and Boeing contracts automatically then? Because I'm unaware of any chinese complex tech that is certified for Airbus or Boeing. Even BMW were still using their own gear and not sourcing chinese manuf product.



gf0012-aust, I am curious, what's the accuracy of current "certified and cleared for Airbus and Boeing contracts" multi-axis CNC machines suppose to have?? 0.1 micron ?? 0.008 micron?? What exactly are the requirements ??

[gf0012-aust]

gf0012-aust, I am curious, what's the accuracy of current "certified and cleared for Airbus and Boeing contracts" multi-axis CNC machines suppose to have?? 0.1 micron ?? 0.008 micron?? What exactly are the requirements ??


Gee, I guess you'd ask the CATIA programmers about what critical components are being machined up. Basically, and more importantly, I don't care what build quality mainland chinese platforms are.

You'll have to get an answer from one of the fan clubbers.

[dioditto]

Gee, I guess you'd ask the CATIA programmers about what critical components are being machined up. Basically, and more importantly, I don't care what build quality mainland chinese platforms are.

You'll have to get an answer from one of the fan clubbers.


Chill dude, I am just curious that's all. It's not like those are state-secret. LOL.
I already got the answer no thanks to you :p:

[gf0012-aust]

Chill dude, I am just curious that's all. It's not like those are state-secret. LOL.
I already got the answer no thanks to you :p:


No need for me to chill, I'm stone cold on the subject.

Glad to see you've found the info you need.

Welcome back from your time in the sin bin. :)