COMAC C919

Blackstone said:

If my half of post 129 was viewed in a vacuum, then you'd be correct in your concerns. But, the context of my answer to MwRYum's post is while the C-919 didn't meet the goal of producing the aircraft from an entirely home-base production chain (thus the failure), it was nevertheless a step in the right direction.

Click to expand...

Ok, so MwRYum's key goal is the final ultimate goal, not the first step. Note, I don't use his word "entire" as most of us know that is not possible nor profitable to do, and I believe MwRYum himself did not really mean it if I am right about him. In this sense, he was talking about the final step, while you were talking about the first step. You two were focusing on two aspects, two ends of the same chain.

I am afraid using the word "failure" only makes yourself more than likely being understood the opposite way than you intended to because you and MyRYum are addressing different points of the project. So I still think an alternative expression will probably serve your purpose better.

BTW, it is from this, I had the sense that "both sides have valid points" only different angles. Hope this answer your previous question in #152

SamuraiBlue said:

You must be kidding or military standards in PRC is completely different from the rest of the world.

Click to expand...

He is not kidding -- the reliability standard for civilian aircraft is at least a magnitude greater than military standard. The testing and certification requirements are greater by magnitudes -- since military is free to waive anything if it is willing to assume the risk for greater performances and/or lower costs.

And per my statement on commercial expediency on the imported subsystems, it is actually very easy to boost domestic contents -- the military version will replace all imported contents with domestic to the furthest possible extent, and since military can waive any requirements, that would not be an issue. But this project will fail as a commercial project if you put in subsystems that has not been certified for commercial use. And commercial volume is potentially much greater than military orders.

COMAC's decision is perfectly logical on both commercial and national interest ground.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Right now, C919 sits in about the same seating range as 3-4 offerings from the big 2, The 737,A319, A320. But it also has to compete with the Bombardier C300, It also has coming competition from the Irkut MC 21 and Superjet 130. So that's competing for market setting in 3-4.5 competitors ( Suhkoi and Irkut are both owned by the Russian UAC) not a crack yet.
Yes it flew unlike the Russian ones.

Until they hit the 250-300 seat capacity of the Projected C929 they are not going to dent Boeing (767/777/787) or AB(330/340).
then they will be sitting in a position to dent but the So called Duality is a bit misleading in that class it's actually a Trility as In that class you also have the Russian IL96 which the Comac would likely be replacing as the Russians were atleast rumored to be joining in on the C929.

That would however still not touch the Jumbo class where the Duality is absolute The 747 and A380.

Click to expand...

But you forgot most of the growth will be in China. The projection is that in the next 20 years China will need 7000 plane
And the government has leverages on most Chinese airlines since they are wholly owned by the government
They will take the marching order from the government no if and but
if they can capture just 10% they will make a big dent on the earning of Duopoly
Bombardier has trouble selling it on profit They got sale by deeply discounting the price but it hemorrhage their bottom line How long can they sell on the loss


China has to make this investment if they want to be on the race and has say in civilian aircraft manufacturing
Skepticsm is not new. When airbus started everybody doubted the viability of European plane manufacturer. And true enough, they loss money year after year But the European government steadfastly support Airbus
Slowly they gain order and it become avalanche now. So don't underestimate the power of government specially China with deep pocket

JsCh said:

Link to weixin of AVIC's institute of aviation optoelectronic about their HUD used in C919 (in mandarin)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Mr. Sino Soldier I thought you say the HUF is imported technology. I want to throw in my 2 cents worth when it comes to transfer of technology from Bombadier. No company that I had worked for which manufacturers in the US and China share no how when it comes to the final details of the same product they manufacturer not so much management would not allow it but the technical guys would not share it 100% for fear of eventually loosing market share and jobs which is human nature. To think that Bombardier somehow had transferred all they know about manufacturing the C919 just so they can have a foot in the door of the Chinese market, I don't think so.

The deputy designer said more than 50% of C919 component are source from China here it is from the horses mouth

C919 powered by majority Chinese technologies
By Tu Lei Source:Globaltimes.cn Published: 2017/5/5 12:10:20



Zhou Guirong, the deputy chief designer of the C919, said Thursday that the overall localization rate of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

can reach over 50 percent, meaning more than half of its components are sourced from domestic enterprises and joint ventures between domestic and foreign companies.

According to COMAC, a total of 16 foreign suppliers have been involved in the C919 program including GE, Honeywell and CFM, with joint ventures covering avionics, flight control, power, fuel and landing gear systems.

Companies under the Aviation Industry Corporation of China have been central to the manufacturing of the C919, producing the aircraft’s head, body and central wing structure.

“The C919 is a sleek, modern and efficient airplane. It is ready to compete on a global scale, heralding China’s ambitious plans to grow and develop its domestic air transportation industry,” Steven Lien, president of Honeywell Aerospace Asia Pacific, said in a note sent to the Global Times on Wednesday.

COMAC and Honeywell have been working together since COMAC was founded in 2008, starting with the ARJ21 regional jet and continuing with the C919 program.

Honeywell has provided the aircraft its auxiliary power system technology, generating power in flight and starting the main engines before takeoff. Furthermore, pilots use the HonFei fly-by-wire flight control system and advanced Honeywell navigation technology to operate and navigate the aircraft.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Right now, C919 sits in about the same seating range as 3-4 offerings from the big 2, The 737,A319, A320. But it also has to compete with the Bombardier C300, It also has coming competition from the Irkut MC 21 and Superjet 130. So that's competing for market setting in 3-4.5 competitors ( Suhkoi and Irkut are both owned by the Russian UAC) not a crack yet.
Yes it flew unlike the Russian ones.

Until they hit the 250-300 seat capacity of the Projected C929 they are not going to dent Boeing (767/777/787) or AB(330/340).
then they will be sitting in a position to dent but the So called Duality is a bit misleading in that class it's actually a Trility as In that class you also have the Russian IL96 which the Comac would likely be replacing as the Russians were atleast rumored to be joining in on the C929.

That would however still not touch the Jumbo class where the Duality is absolute The 747 and A380.

Click to expand...

I thought you are going to end with a "boo!", LoL.
So you imply they are invincible; almost felt like you are writing a gospel of duality, whatever your theology is.
Well the operative word here is " right now", which will get you into a bind when it comes to high technology stuff like aerospace. Let me ask you this: how long is "right now"? How much do you want to stretch your "right now"? 10 years? 100 years?
I guess you already knew how many Chinese STEM Phd's are working for Boeing "right now".
Granted, I'd agree with you if you say "right now" is what matters most, but ambition and vision, nurtured with ample resources and determination determine the future.
Like a guru said it's all about defining the reality and giving hope to get there. China has a vision to define the future reality and she got tons of hope and confidence.
So a few decades later, maybe we will be writing a gospel of real trinity of aerospace LoL.

BOO!

I am simply pointing out where we stand in terms of what is in the market.
I am not making projections down the line to far. But I will point out that Airbus is a like Comac is partially a state owned like all state owned makers they have in' s though state carriers.
Although Chinese air transport industry will grow i have no doubt but i doubt absolute domination just as today there is no real duality until the jumbo class, and many air lines operate a mix of Boeing and AN there is plenty market. And the "Developed markets" in the US, Asia, latin America, Africa and Europe are not going to give up flying any time soon, and existing customers are still buying replacement aircraft as well.
Chinese aviation may expand no doubt, but that's just shifting RMB from one pocket to another. Where the Comac bird has an edge I think is the developing markets of the developing world. Nations where air travel can only grow.

And no I was that. I will say supercalifrajulisticexpialitiotius!

TerraN_EmpirE said:

I am simply pointing out where we stand in terms of what is in the market.
I am not making projections down the line to far. But I will point out that Airbus is a like Comac is partially a state owned like all state owned makers they have in' s though state carriers.
Although Chinese air transport industry will grow i have no doubt but i doubt absolute domination just as today there is no real duality until the jumbo class, and many air lines operate a mix of Boeing and AN there is plenty market. And the "Developed markets" in the US, Asia, latin America, Africa and Europe are not going to give up flying any time soon, and existing customers are still buying replacement aircraft as well.
Chinese aviation may expand no doubt, but that's just shifting RMB from one pocket to another. Where the Comac bird has an edge I think is the developing markets of the developing world. Nations where air travel can only grow.

And no I was that. I will say supercalifrajulisticexpialitiotius!

Click to expand...

Thank goodness I just found my long lost user name!

Like I said, China has ambition, an ambition as big as any nation's. Even though it is hard to quantify it, it has real world effect down the line, doesn't matter you like it or not. Today's realities are yesterday's ambitions, so will be future realities today's ambition.

China herself is an EM economy. The myriad challenges she faces to get an escape velocity to lift herself out of middle-income trap would require all sorts of high value industries going off the ground asap, hence the need for the "oh I'm going by the industry" crowd to brace for the impact as you will be seeing and hearing more of this stuff the rest of your useful life. Of course, you can certainly scoff off the baby steps but it nonetheless does not make you feel any secure if that's what it's all about - feeling secure in the thought those startups are far and away a very distant me looking up the ladder once upon a time.

One thing for sure is China will learn what works for her, how to work with others and still come off top of class one way or the other. She has a vision, political will and, last but not least, hard work.

That is a bit of a problem here. This is not just China. This is a product on the global market. It's hard to bring a new product in to topple an establish brand and market. I mean how may times has some actually threatened to take down Coke or Pepsi and actually stood a chance?. The Chinese owned airlines may buy but that is only so many units. To make it globally and end the "duality" it needs global buys. That means orders for export and in significant numbers. Remember the Russians produced airliners in many of the same classes as Airbus and Boeing, but they only had domestic and embargoed market buys like the DPRK and Cuba.
As such we don't often think of the Russian liners or consider them and go back to thinking of the big 2. Also remember that some makers have been pushed from the industry in the past but it took a massive market change to do that.
My point is and remains that the C919 is not a a major threat to the existing market. Claims that it means the end of Boeing and Airbus are at best hyperbole at worst delusional. What it is, is another product entered into the market with an unknown on returns. The hope is it succeeds but unlike a PLAAF fighter it's success or failurewill be public and global not tied to a singular consumer.

vincent said:

Guy, designing and building a complex product is not just "human resource management, project leadership". There are lots of engineering work involved. It's not just putting pieces together and expect the end result to work. One have to make sure each piece meet the specs and they fit with each other. Computer systems are able to communicate with each other. The hydraulic systems respond to the control system at the right time with the right amount of force and with the right duration. The sensors pass the right information in the correct format....

Click to expand...

So you haven't bothered to peruse through my posts, since I've clearly listed engineering as one of the key experiences listed in the C919 project.

What I'm attempting to dispel is the idea that the C919 represents some sort of quantum leap in Chinese aerospace technology/industry or something that will break Boeing & Airbus' grip on the airliner markets. With regards to the technology that actually powers and gives life to the C919, it is COMAC's American and European partners who should be commended for this achievement.

Not to say that the Chinese won't turn towards domestic suppliers for future aircraft, but the C919 isn't one of them.

Same could be said of the HAL Tejas or, to an extent, the Saab Gripen.