| > if only because their ambitions are fairly modest (they're seeking to build a better GA piston engine, not re-invent the industry) and because they're filling a fairly obvious gap. The problem (IMHO) is that aircraft engines are safety of flight components. So, most engines are overdesigned by well reputed companies (definitely not start-up material). They may succeed and prove me wrong – I am not an expert in that area. > it's important to understand that it was originally designed to fulfill a local need, not for export, and that not only was the project an engineering success which established AFAIK, the whole idea of the rooivalk was to be a Soviet tankkiller (with obvious export potential). After 1990, there was no reason for continued funding of the project. > which established companies like Aerosud and ATE (both doing quite well) but its development made sense under the circumstances at the time. Maybe. But its development also established companies such as Denel (which is a continual drain of millions on the government budget). > South Africa was one of the research leaders in Lithium-ion battery technology prior to '92, but has done very little research in the field since then. A battery company will then make more sense than a car company (the market for Lithium Ion batteries are much larger). My point is just that less grandiose schemes will probably have a larger payoff. The fairly high labour rate is an unfortunate effect of legislation (with 40% broad based unemployment, the cost of labour should be much lower). If the country wants to succeed it should become a lot more like china. |