Speaking of him, he did claim in a comment responding to a related post recently that allegedly two units have been delivered to COMAC. So I suppose that is some progress and not all bad news.
COMAC C919
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
A bit weird for someone to suggest the CJ-1000 is going to be delayed “further” when a senior industry figure in Chinese aerospace said just last year in public that the project was on schedule.
“During an interview on state broadcaster CCTV, Zhang Yanzhong of the Chinese Academy of Engineering offered a rare public update on one of the country’s most closely watched aviation projects: the CJ-1000A, a domestically produced large commercial jet engine.
Designed to power the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (Comac) C919 – China’s answer to the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 narrowbody aircraft – the CJ-1000A is seen as paramount to the country’s efforts to limit its reliance on foreign aerospace technology. Zhang said the engine’s development is progressing smoothly and remains on schedule.
“All I can say is that our engine is progressing as planned, and the current progress is very positive. As for when it will be installed on Chinese aircraft – just wait for the good news,” he told CCTV.”
Bad wording on my part, I think he just means the project is going to plan and the plan was always TC by 2027 not Q2 of this year as suggested by the article or other internet rumors. As for simply "appearing" on a Chinese aircraft, reasonably credible rumor is that it's going to be pretty soon (and allegedly it would also be the first CXF prototype), but actual test flight is still quite far away.
Same guy also said COMAC doesn't actually intend on installing CJ-1000A on C919s but only CXF (Fully domestic upgrade of C919) which is apparently going to be its own thing and not part of the same series as the current in production C919s. Which brings up the question on whether it is possible to switch atleast some of the current order book of C919s with CXF.
@sunnymaxi
he also said, 飞早呢，挂眼前
Flight is coming soon, it's already in sight.
these people have created confusion .. but nevertheless an interesting scenario has created if they directly put CJ-1000A on CFX variant. but i believe installation on C919 coming soon. let see
IMO, he means roll out is soon, but first flight is still far away
yeah maybe. but he is clear cut about two units being delivered. if true it means COMAC planning to install CJ-1000A Engines. but installation doesn't mean flight will be tomorrow. it will take time or maybe could be early like the end of year. who knows. so wait
someone told me, commercial Engine certification is hell of a task. there are thousands of files and each and every file is auditable and entire assembly line inspection by the team. production unit will de-assemble and assemble again for the verification. The authorities need to confirm that the prototype = blueprints = future mass production and many more process involved.
Last edited:
To be clear people should make a distinction between a new engine being certified and a version of the plane with the new engine installed being certified. These are two different steps. Once the engine itself is certified there’s probably at minimum another 2 years of test flights with the version of the plane it’s supposed to enter commercial adoption with before the engine enters proper commercial use.
Allegedly CJ1000A's initial planned time on wing is 8000hrs which is around 2 yrs in actual operation. Relative to the current LEAP-1 which has a on wing time of roughly 20000hrs (IDK where he got this data because this is typically measured in cycles not hrs), though originally LEAP's actual TBO cycle was somewhere between 2000-6000 cycles and was only later improved to beyond 10000 cycles.
According to this LEAP-1 initially only had an average of 2800 cycles on wing before first shop visit at EIS and assuming a generous 2hr flight time per cycle is in fact only around 5600 hrs on wing before shop visit. If CJ1000A truly can achieve 8000 hrs on wing initially than it would have been doing far better than competitors at that stage, though it still remains to be seen if AECC can actually improve life time as fast or as significantly as CFM or PW once the type enters service.
Weirdly, he insisted 20,000 hours instead of cycles which is absolutely not true.