Visit to Le Bourget, Paris Airshow 2011

The biennial Le Bourget 2011 was held from the 20^th to the 26^th June at Le Bourget airport, 12 km away from and northeast of Paris. The Le Bourget is one of the top three Air Shows in the world, along with Farnborough (UK) and Singapore air shows. This year, the business atmosphere was somehow cooled and dampened, perhaps reflecting the incomplete economical recovery and worries of many countries, declining defense budgets of the European nations and the US. Hence, the Le Bourget 2011 was surprisingly small in scale, lacking in exhibits and participations from leading aerospace companies. Furthermore, the visitor experience was somehow disappointing. The weather didn't help much either. 

Day 1-3: Plenty of space under Airbus A380 during daily downpour (Credit: Badische Zeitung)

In the exhibition halls and tents

Le Bourget 2011 was not as big and comprehensive as I had expected. The business atmosphere was pretty dampened mainly due to cutting defense budgets in most European nations and the US. Many global leading aerospace companies shied away from the expensive exhibition halls and were only present in their chalets (for business to business meetings) and outdoor aircraft static exhibits, which their costs were mostly absorbed by the US Air Force through their participation. The absence of US leading aerospace companies such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman in the exhibition halls has greatly reduced Le Bourget’s leading position in aerospace exhibition. The conservatively designed exhibition stands of other aerospace giants, such as EADS, Finmeccanica did not help the dampened atmosphere much either. Their exhibition stands were unsophisticated, plain and somehow lacking in exhibits. The only other European aerospace giant, BAE Systems, was not even present in the halls! So much for the business climate this year!

Another personal disappointment, Le Bourget 2011 was very focused on aerospace systems, i.e. fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircrafts and space. I was disappointed that there weren’t more land and naval systems, which were more represented at Farnborough and the Singapore Air Shows.

Fortunately, the climate at the suppliers was much better. I could feel that the suppliers were more upbeat than the aircraft assemblers. In any case, whether Airbus or Boeing wins, globalised suppliers always get a share of them. For example, many French component suppliers, which are located just kilometres away from Airbus headquarter in Toulouse, also supply to Boeing in Everett in the US as well. Similarly, numerous American suppliers supply to Airbus as well.    

The aerospace emerging players such as China, Turkey and South Korea were also present. One of the highlight from the Chinese was the cabin mock-up its newest commercial jet the COMAC C919 was unimpressive and conventional at best. South Korean and Turks showcased their ambitious programs of military helicopters and jets. The Japanese announced some good news about the developmental progress of its newest regional jet MRJ (Mitsubishi Regional Jet).

The Russian presence was quite dominant with its large showcase of recently consolidated aerospace conglomerates such as UAC (United Aircraft Corporation that consolidated MIG, Sukhoi, Tupelov, Yakovlev etc.) and Oboromprom (Russian Helicopters including Kamov and Mil) and their so call newest products, actually heavily upgraded versions of their legendary Cold War products.

Russian UAC exhibition stand

The flying display

As much as I would like to finish my job of visiting the supplier stands in the exhibition halls, it was hard for me (perhaps anyone) to stay in-door whenever the roaring sound of high-speed jets started echoing in the halls, which served intuitively like calling bells for the visitors to move to the next exhibition program. The daily flying display started at 13:30 and ended at around 17:30.  Unfortunately, the weather wasn’t very kind from the first day to the fourth day as the dark low level clouds obscured blue sky, greater restricting the altitude of the flying display (especially for the fighter jets doing vertical looping).

Flying premieres of the vertical wings

The flight show schedule was adjusted daily according to the weather situation. Day two commenced with low flying helicopters such as Siebel unmanned Camcopter, the AgustaWestland AW149 helicopter, Eurocopter X3 hybrid rotorcraft and EC175 helicopter and lower-decibel generating lightweight aircrafts. This year saw the premiere flying display of the Eurocopter high-speed X3 hybrid rotorcraft (I refuse to call it a helicopter). However, the X3 failure to demonstrate its maximum speed called for some disappointment from the spectators. The X3 flew the standard helicopter flight manoeuvre and skipped the highly anticipated high-speed level fly-pass over the runway.

X3 Hybrid High-speed Rotorcraft

The fast jets

We were rewarded for our patience in the drizzling rain with some clearing of the cloud and finally, the fast jets rocketed one by one into the sky. Without saying, the first was the Dassault Rafale fighter jet in its special 30,000 flight hours commemorative dark grey colours, which didn’t make it easier to spot in the grey cloudy sky. Fortunately, the French air force pilot flew impressive low-level stunts beneath the cloud layer.

Dassault Rafale in commemorative colours pulling negative Gs (Credit: Badische Zeitung)

Rafale at full-afterburner (Credit: M. Scott Mahaskey/Staff)

The Eurofighter Typhoon also showed its presence at the display but it was definitely flown by, my guess, by a less experience Italian air force fighter pilot. To my disappointment, the 5 minutes display of the Eurofighter was much less spectacular than that of the Rafale and it was really a shame that the pilot didn’t push the aircraft to its limit. The Eurofighter flew more like a Cessna, making boring and unimpressive loops and rolls throughout the display. Even before the end of the display, my mind was already telling me how the cash-strapped Italian government has been punishing its Air Force by cutting flying hours of its Eurofighter pilots.

The legendary Lockheed Martin F-16 Viper also flew this year and, as usual, put up a respectable and familiar display of very tight and high-speed turns, which put Eurofighter to shame. It was piloted by US Air Force pilot based in Germany and was worth every cents of my ticket.       

The whispering giant Airbus A380 in Korean Air and Airbus colours

It was a free marketing gag for the Korean Airline (KAL) as Airbus borrowed KAL’s not yet delivered A380 for some aerobatic flying during the show. Looking from the ground, the A380 looked more like an airship than a plane, performing some manoeuvre more likely performed by an Zeppelin airship. Anyway, it’s always interesting to watch the whispering giant rolling in the sky. True to its well-known nickname, the whispering giant, the A380 flew with an eerily low noise. For unknown reason, Airbus finally brought in its own A380 in Airbus colours from Toulouse on the third day of the air display.  

Whispering A380 in Korean Airline colours showing off a steep take-off

Extreme aerobatics by the little giants

The Alenia/Lockheed Martin C-27J military cargo aircraft flew like a light aerobatic jet, performing loops and aerodynamically impossible stunts. The rudder and rear stabilizers authority was very good and the aircraft responded impressively to each rudder and stabilizer deflections visibly. The aircraft was performing slaloms in the air just like a car. The most spectacular part with the aggressively steep and high speed landing approach, somehow similar to the Sarajevo landing approach (a defensive landing manoeuvre against hostile firing during landing) often performed by the German Luftwaffe Transall C-160, which ended with a thrust reversal manoeuvre that displayed the C-27J reverse rolling capability in case it overshot its parking space.

The C-27J was followed by its bigger brother the Lockheed Martin C-130J, the largest version of the venerable C-130 series of military cargo aircraft. The C-130J also put up a respectable aerial aerobatic display. Besides the manufacturer of both cargo aircrafts, both aircrafts use the same engine, which reduces the logistical footprint immensely. Both aircrafts have really succeeded in impressing the spectators and in shedding off the common belief that cargo aircrafts are boring to fly.

 Alenia/Lockheed Martin C-27J rolling steeply overhead before final approach

The green flyers

This year flying display also marked the increasingly emphasis on future propulsion systems and fuels. There were 2 display aircrafts that use hybrid and electric propulsion systems. They are from Diamond aircraft and EADS Innovation Works. Furthermore, Boeing flew in its 747 flying test-bed that uses fuel mixture containing 15% bio-fuel. Most importantly, the highlight of the event was the Swiss Solar Impulse aircraft, which didn’t make its debut flying display at Le Bourget due to poor weather. The Solar Impulse uses 100% solar energy for propulsion.

Review of Le Bourget Air Show

Overall, Le Bourget 2011 was a good show, even though the event did not turn out to be as big and interesting as I had expected. Personally, I thought that Farnborough and Singapore Air Show are better organised and more successful in the following ways.

First, the visitor experience at Le Bourget was less than satisfactory (I’m being very polite and diplomatic here). The signboards, marshalling and organisation were very confusing and rather ineffective. It seemed that the welfare of the visitors was not adequately addressed (too little visitor centric planning). Amenities such as café, washrooms, information counters were poorly indicated. The washrooms were embarressingly small and absolutely insufficient to cater to the visitors (it was already bad enough on trade days; you can imagine what would happen on public days!).

Second, the French organisers have not made use of the opportunity to generate profit from food and beverages. Pity that the renowned French cuisine was not presented at all at the event. What a waste to showcase French gastronomy to the international visitors! Wherever I went, I saw the disappointment from the look of many international visitors, who had to swallow dry baguettes, French chocolate donuts and sandwiches throughout the event in desperation of satisfying their hunger.

Third, security was surprisingly weak. All visitors were only given a visual and magnetic scan at the entrance. There was no CT-scan or explosive scan at all. By looking at the number of high ranking politicians, military top brasses and senior business executives present at the event, one could imagine the consequence of any lunatic actions.   

Finally, I felt that Le Bourget could be better organised in public transportation (not only for the ingress and egress to the exhibition but also considering the entire transportation system in Paris). Coincidently or rather deliberately, some Paris subway drivers and staffs (underground railway transportation) decided to strike in the same week and caused massive havoc in Paris transportation. The frequency of Le Bourget shuttle busses were very low. A typically 45 minute trip from Paris downtown to Le Bourget took almost 3 hours for visitors. The train stations and bus stops looked like refugee camps in Africa. There were no transportation marshals to alleviate the situation. I felt that there was not a slightest sign that the French city had done any pre-emptive planning in support of the Le Bourget Air Show in case of such agonising and unfortunate situation. I think if the French organisers would put a little more of its systems engineering from its world-class aerospace industry into its world-class event, it would have turned out much better. The benchmark has been lowered for next year’s Farnborough and Singapore Air Show. 

End of Show - Until 2013!

The BRIC League in the Pursue of Global Aerospace Industrial Supremacy

This review summarises the current state of aerospace industries in the BRIC countries and provides a pin-hole peep into the future for the global aerospace industry.

Why Aerospace Industry?

Airbus A380 Production (Credit: Airbus / Masclet)

    When nations choose to display their national pride in technological advancement, aerospace industry always comes out top of the list. Try recalling the launch of the Russian Sputnik into the space, the ambitious America’s Mission to the Moon and the creation of the Pan-European consortium Airbus. Momentous events such as these have always been seen as testaments of pride and global leadership for nations. Why has the aerospace industry always been used as the trophy of emerging nationhood and global dominance? My guess is that aerospace technologies have remained as mystifying to nations as they were more than a century ago since the first controlled flight over Kitty Hawk in 1903. It is one of the ultimate technological frontiers, among others, that provide technological spill over to other industries, such as advanced materials. Moreover, products of aerospace technologies are generally more visible to other due to its use in the airline industry or defence. Try comparing Paris or Farnborough Air Shows with Biotechnica (Europe’s most important exhibition for biotechnology, haven’t heard of it, right?). These are probably some good reasons that drive emerging nations across the world in diverting billions of dollars into this politically contested and profit-opaque industry from many other possibly more lucrative and essential industries like agriculture and energy.

The BRIC Countries’ Aerospace Technological Development

    The BRIC countries that consist of Brazil, Russia, India and China (therefore the acronym BRIC) are the economical growth magnets for global imports and products, undeniably the engines of global economy. Logically, none of these countries have shown desire to leave their domestic markets for exploitation by the foreign players. Be it washing machines, automobiles or consumer products, these nations aim have a slide of their own market and create their own domestic players that could hopefully one day compete with the foreign 1^st tier global incumbents and perhaps even in their own tufts in the future. That includes the aerospace industry. Interestingly, the aerospace industries of the BRIC countries have shown remarkable technological achievement relative to other industries. For example, the highly successful Brazilian Embraer and Russian Tupolev range of commercial regional jets and Chinese J-10 and J-20 stealth fighters. This is due to a number of pragmatic and critical reasons. First, the aerospace industry is always somehow associated with national defence. All aircrafts can be militarised, even for simple propeller driven aircrafts like the Cessna or Beechcraft. Countries develop their aerospace industries to support national defence. With the exception of Brazil, all BRIC nations have been latecomers in the commercial aircraft industry and have predominantly focused on military aircrafts.

    Among the BRIC nations, Russia has the longest aerospace experience and technological capability. It had a global commercial aircraft industry that mainly served the Warsaw Pact nations and allies. In fact, Russia introduced in 1956 the world’s first operational commercial jet, Tupolev Tu-104, which unfortunately wasn’t very popular (only 200 built). Subsequent Russian aircrafts experienced limited market success mainly due to political market constraints. Even after the end of the Cold War, Russian commercial aircrafts were not globally competitive due to the lack of development funding, technological inferiority and western safety standard. It is only recently that Russia returned to take on the global commercial jet market with the MS-21 and SSJ 100 regional jets, albeit with very strong technological assistance from private western aerospace suppliers.  

Sukhoi SuperJet 100 (Credit: Businessweek)

    China recognised the strategic and immediate need to have its own aerospace industry after the defeat of the Chinese nationalist government in 1949. After several decades of technological learning through licensed production, reverse-engineering, technological cooperation and indigenous development, the Chinese aerospace industry is ready to expand its global aerospace footprint today. In fact, China has once attempted in the 1980s to enter the commercial aircraft market with the Y-10 commercial jet, which was eventually abandoned due to various techno-political reasons. Since then, China diverted its effort entirely towards military aircrafts. It is only very recently that China staged its prominent comeback with the COMAC C919 and ARJ21 regional commercial jets. Like the Russian, Chinese aircraft company, COMAC, fully exploited the force of globalisation by getting major western aerospace suppliers onboard, thereby providing valuable technologies in the Chinese aircrafts.   

ARJ21 (Credit: COMAC)

C919 (Credit: COMAC)

    India’s aerospace industry is the least developed among the BRIC nations. It is still at its infancy stage of development and has yet to produce any truly successful aerospace product in both its domestic and the global markets. Some notable products are the Indian Light Combat Aircraft and Light Combat Helicopters, which experienced severe development schedule and cost overrun, even with foreign technical experience from the Europeans and Russians. Commercial aircraft designed and made in India will be highly unlikely in the next two decades. Even so, aerospace technological development in India will certainly benefit from the imminent technological transfer packages that are associated to Indian’s future purchases of military aircrafts from the US, Europe and Russia.

    Brazil’s aerospace development is the most remarkable among the BRIC nations. Brazil can boast its aviation heritage with some of the pre-eminent historical aviation pioneers such as Alberto Santos-Dumont, who invented the world’s first hybrid-lift aircraft. Nevertheless, the development of Brazilian post-war aerospace industry would not have been possible with the help of the Americans and Europeans. After several decades of foreign technological aid and indigenous effort, Brazil prides itself as the world’s fourth largest commercial jet exporter, among the big players like Boeing, Airbus and Bombardier.

    In contrast to the aircraft segment of the aerospace industry, it is interesting to note all BRIC countries already possess operational space systems such as satellite and space launch vehicles (yes, rockets!). Moreover, China, India and Russia have operational ballistic missiles (intercontinental or tactical ballistic missiles). What can we really derive from this is that the technological evolution and advancement in these countries is really simply dependent on the national interest and resource prioritisation and allocation.

    The Achilles’ heel of BRIC aircraft industries is the lack of competitive system technologies such as engines, sensors and avionics. That’s why all major aircraft programs in the BRIC nations are still relying heavily on western system suppliers. This industrial weakness will certainly change in the near future especially in Russia and China. Brazil will likely to continue to rely on its trusted western suppliers from the US, Canada and Europe, while focusing only in system integration and sales.     

What’s on the horizon and the Implications for the Incumbents?

    One thing for sure, the global aerospace competition will intensify. Incumbent aerospace players such as Boeing and Airbus can no longer to operate in the same way as they had in the past decades. The line between partner and competitor will diminish. Mainly due to globalising western aerospace suppliers, technological barriers and edges will become more temporal and opaque. More cooperation among aerospace players is expected and a new form of industrial competence, cooperative competence, will be in great demand and developed. Environmental friendliness, passenger flying experience and lifecycle cost (not just aircraft price) will be the key competition differentiators. The non-technological factors such as on-time delivery, airport ecosystem compatibility and after-sales support excellence will play greater part in the product differentiation among players.      

    On the military front, stealth and unmanned aircrafts will become the indispensible platforms of the air battlefield in all global theatres. Future Systems-of-Systems war-fighting concept will see greater integration of aircrafts into the gaining greater battlefield awareness (C4ISR) and more responsive target allocation. For sure, the world’s air forces will decline in size but increase in terms of asset value due to exponential increase in price of military jets and support complexity. There will be greater civilian-military integration as modern aircrafts will no longer be serviceable by drafted airmen, who will need greater expert support from civilian contractors.

Figure: Manned-Unmanned Aircraft Teaming (Credit: Boeing)

In conclusion, the aerospace industry will become more complex and more systemic in nature. It will require a whole new range of disciplines and expertises that go beyond traditional aerospace fields. It will certainly remain one of the key growth and most dynamic industries in the coming decades.    

Boeing Rotorcrafts

COMAC

A Look at German Engineering from a Singaporean perspective

German engineering has enjoyed sterling reputation and is universally regarded as the benchmark for many aspiring industrializing nations. Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Siemens and Bosch are impeccable brands that represent quality and engineering finesse. Germany's enduring industrial prowess is one of the reasons why developing nations are still sending their top students to study engineering and technologies in Germany (except French-speaking nations, which probably prefer to send their students to the French Grand Ecole or French Engineering Schools – I’ll come back to this again later).

Through my personal working experience in the last decade in German Industrial companies with German engineers and perhaps even more importantly with German mechanics, technicians and blue-collar workers, I have come to realise something that I didn’t realise during my undergraduate studies at a German technological university (Darmstadt University of Technology).

Whenever we speak about German industrial professions, the first thing that instantly comes into our mind is the engineers or scientists. While it is clearly a fact that Germany has produced numerous eminent engineers and scientists such as Wernher von Braun, Willy Messerschmitt, Werner von Siemens, Rudolf Diesel, Karl Benz and more recently Physic Nobel Prize Winner Wolfgang Ketterle, they represent only the pinnacle of German industrial system. Technological ideas have to be coupled with robust industrial processes and systems to ensure that ideas can be transformed into useful products. Technologies alone are insufficient for industrial success. In my opinion, the unsung heroes of the German industries are the dedicated and passionate German blue-collar work force. They are the ones who would go against the German white-collar engineers, who are already considered as very precise and quality conscious, in ensuring the absolute product quality and engineering perfection that German products represent. These blue-collar workers are the invisible guardians of German product quality. To them, good is not good enough. 

Numerous times in my career, I have witnessed mechanics and technicians from the production department lecturing design engineers on their lack of quality awareness and precision in design documentation (e.g. tolerances and quality of design). Try that in Chinese factories, you might get fired immediately! As a matter of fact, German blue-collar workers receive apprenticeship or trade training (die Berufsausbildung) that most countries envy (I would say that includes the US). A three to four years German apprenticeship in trade schools or in companies remains the secret behind the success of German industries. It is precisely this combination of strong technological universities and high quality trade schools that make German industries so unique and competitive, despite their exorbitantly high labour wages and 30 days annual vacation (usually more like 45 days if you include days off in lieu of overtime). A recent report by the Economists, German workers work the least in the EU. Now, the caveat of this dual-qualification system is the need for greater social equalisation. Otherwise, it might not work. In Germany, the wage difference between qualified blue-collar work force and graduate engineers is lower than many emerging countries. Blue-collar work force may have a lower basic wage, but there are rooms to close the gap through overtime and special allowances like job physical hazard compensation. Furthermore, blue-collar workers (if employed full-time contract) enjoy higher labour protection than their white-collar colleagues.  

For nations that still aspire to develop their nascent industries using the German recipe, it is not only important to develop the quality white-collar work force (i.e. graduate engineers), but also the quality of the blue-collar work force. More importantly, a meritocratic and egalitarian environment and a sense of professional pride within the blue-collar work force is crucial for the sustainability of the industrial system (i.e. all jobs are important, they are just different in roles and responsibilities). Without these, there will not be a credible second line of industrial defence formed by the blue-collar work force to realise the innovations generated by innovative but "sloppy" engineers.  



Apprentice at Audi AG (Credit: Azubi-Magazin)

Link to working hours: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world_business/view/1133240/1/.html

Why German aerospace companies should find greater synergy with automotive companies in composite material technologies?

German aerospace companies are facing the daunting challenge of the slowly recovering world economy, dwindling German defense budget and shrinking military force level. The fate of these companies is not only important to the Germany's national security but also to the local employment and its aerospace technological leadership. As lead users of advanced composite materials, German aerospace companies should consider capitalizing its developed competences in other industries such as automotive and rail systems. Automotive companies such as BMW and Daimler are switching their attention from metallic car body to composite types at mass production level.

Composite materials offer significantly lower weight advantage (30-50%) compared to aerospace grade aluminum alloy and even more for steel alloy. Furthermore, composite materials reduce corrosion and fatigue problems. However, current composite material technologies is the relatively high production costs that make them uneconomical for mass production. However, latest advances in out-of-autoclave technologies could solve this problem soon.

As aerospace production volume  is nothing close to those of automotive manufacturers, there is currently little aerospace companies could hedge against in times of economical crisis. Perhaps, it's imperative for German aerospace companies to consider exploring greater (if any) joint industrial opportunity with automotive industries to reap greater value through greater economy of scale and industrial collaboration. Diversification of product and service portfolio of German aerospace companies may well be a solution for surviving through the current dry spell and any future cyclical downturns.

BMW's New Megacity Full Composite Body Car (Credit: BMW Archive)

For more information, visit: BMW i8 homepage