COMAC C919

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Nemo, your message sounds good, and it does look like that's COMAC's current objective. It also falsify some posters' claims of utilizing domestic supply chain for most of C-919's construction.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Who did that? I say earlier in my post that having foreign component facilitate easier licensing and ease potential client domestic or foreign about reliability and maintenance . I think you are putting word in our mouth
For all those skeptic read this write up by Henri K a Aerospace executive with long years of experience in China If anyone can comment he is certainly credible
He said the main problem can be distilled to integration and management of disparate supplier and having the industrial process to speed up the fabrication of high quality component.Since it is their first time and they start from the scratch. Just like every one was saying Technical challenge is the least problem
95% is the GOAL! that they want to achieve eventually NOT NOW, by substituting one component after another after
2017-05-06-C919-le-premier-avion-moyen-courrier-chinois-prend-son-envol-12.jpg

2017-05-06-C919-le-premier-avion-moyen-courrier-chinois-prend-son-envol-04.jpg



For its maiden flight, the aircraft registered B-001A, or MLN 10101 in internal code COMAC, is piloted by a crew composed of two test pilots, one observer and two test engineers.

Captain CAI Jun (蔡俊) is a former pilot of China Esterne Airlines with 10,300 flying hours. The 41-year-old man was trained at the test pilot school in the United States and was flying mainly on the Airbus A320s and the ARJ-21 , another 90-seat COMAC aircraft. CAI has been actively involved in the development of C919, including the evaluation of the industrial model and the control rules of the Iron Bird, as well as the ergonomics of the cockpit and the writing of the various pilot procedures. His co-driver WU Xin (鑫 鑫), meanwhile, has a very similar course, with 11,500 hours of flight in his active.

During the first flight of C919, they were both assisted by QIAN Jin (进 进), a very experienced observer with 22,000 flight hours and former Boeing 777 pilot, plus the two test engineers.

The plane took off at 14:01 local time from an unopened runway at Shanghai airport, under a gray sky overcast sky, and did not move far from Shanghai. Accompanied by another plane - Embraer Legacy 600 - which contains other technicians and also some privileged journalists, the C919 has turned over a coastal area located 130 km north of Shanghai.

The aircraft evolved at 10,000 feet (~ 3048 meters) at a speed of around 180 knots (333 km / h).

The first flight of C919 ended at 15:19, that is 1:18 after takeoff. Under the watchful eye of the tens of millions of viewers who attended the first live flight, the 5 crew members got off the plane and were welcomed by COMAC staff and journalists. A time when the Chinese have waited for 50 years.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The trajectory of the C919 during its inaugural flight.

10 years of development for a 150-seat aircraft may seem long for Airbus and Boeing, the two giants on the market. But for COMAC, everything is starting from scratch, even though the company has already gained some experience with the ARJ-21 program, a smaller plane whose test flights lasted 7 years.

If we look at the course of this first C919, from its birth to its first flight, it will be noticed that the main difficulty for the Chinese is perhaps not in conceptual engineering but in the maturity of industrial processes and The management of its supply chain.

Indeed, barely two and a half years after the launch of the C919 project, the first physical model of the front cover has already been built in Shanghai. It was necessary to wait until May 2014 for the front section to leave the chain in Nanchang, followed by the other sets of the structure until the end of 2014, coming all over China - the front tip of Chengdu, Harbin gates, wings Xi'an, the front and rear sections of Hongdu, and the empennages of Shenyang. And this is not to mention some embedded systems that come from Western companies, such as the LEAP-1C engines of Snecma and General Electric for example (Airbus A320 NEO uses the LEAP-1A reactor ), to be integrated into the aircraft.

The final assembly lasted until the end of 2015, and the roll-out of the first C919 took place on 2 November 2015, knowing that in the framework plan approved by the Chinese government, it was planned to make the first flight From C919 to 90 months after the launch of the program.

The Chinese program has thus accumulated 20% of delay compared to the initial plan.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The front tip of C919
The first flight originally planned for 2016, but obviously the ground tests took much longer.The aircraft finally started its taxiing tests in December 2016, and passed the first flight technical review in late March 2017.

The C919 has the ambition to compete in the Chinese market, first of all, the Airbus A320 and the Boeing 737 , both well installed for more than 30 years. The same needs in terms of capacity and autonomy, as well as consumption, mean that the three devices have similar performances and characteristics, which can be seen here:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Comparison of section of the Airbus A320, the Boeing B737 and the Comac C919.

Airbus A320 Boeing B737-800 Comac C919
Length 37.57 m 39.50 m 38.90 m
Height 11.76 m 12.50 m 11.95 m
span 34.10 m 35.70 m 35.80 m
Distance to be crossed 6,100 km 5,765 km 5,555 km
Ceiling 12,000 m 12 500 m 12 131 m
Speed 1 004 km / h 885 km / h 900 km / h
Capacity 150 to 180 seats 162 to 189 places 158 to 174 places
Considered strategic for the country and thus obtained strong political support, the C919 program has so far registered 570 firm orders and options from 23 companies, mainly Chinese.

But the road is still long for this jewel of Chinese aeronautics. The aircraft must first complete the flight tests, which will be carried out by a total of six prototypes, in order to obtain the TC (Type Certification) from the Chinese CAAC authorities before the same certification can be considered by the US FAA authorities. European EASA.

It would probably take another 15 to 20 years for COMAC to worry about Airbus and Boeing.The C919 program should therefore be seen as the A300 at the time, which also attracted suspicions and doubts 30 years ago when the Europeans launched the project that later became Airbus.

Finally, what does the name C919 mean?

In fact, C means COMAC, the number 9 is also pronounced 久 in Chinese which means "durable" or "longevity", and 19 means 190 places, the capacity of the C919.

It is therefore understood what the project represents C929 that the Chinese have officially launched with the Russians in 2016 (see our article "
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
").

Henri K.

Share this article
 
Last edited:

Blackstone

Brigadier
@Hendrik_2000 , the context of my post you quoted is to support Sinosolider's reasonable message on COMAC taking measured steps with the C-919. I agree with Sinosoldier on this topic because while no one claims COMAC can't at some point in the future acquire capability, skills, and know-how to source 95% of the plane's components and subsystems from local sources, that day isn't near. My view is Sinosoldier's statement is on solid ground.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
@Hendrik_2000 , the context of my post you quoted is to support Sinosolider's reasonable message on COMAC taking measured steps with the C-919. I agree with Sinosoldier on this topic because while no one claims COMAC can't at some point in the future acquire capability, skills, and know-how to source 95% of the plane's components and subsystems from local sources, that day isn't near. My view is Sinosoldier's statement is on solid ground.

It doesn't as I said before China can source all those component except the engine domestically BUT doing that only lengthen the time and even prolong the certification process. Just like everybody was saying .So the decision to use foreign component is smart one from the POV of marketing and license. So his whining has no place
He make even outrageous post claiming Bombardier help Comac which is BS
Henri K write up support my contention that project integration is time consuming adding novice component supplier will prolong it. Even though China has built landing gear and avionic for military. But civilian airliner required MUCH HIGHER standard than military since many lives depend on it and any mishap will result in court suit which is ruinous to company balance sheet and reputation

So this guy eat the western propaganda lock stock and barrel without even thinking!
We have many example already Tejas vs J 10 one want to do everything themselves and one choose pragmatic solution.See the result?
 
Last edited:

Blackstone

Brigadier
It doesn't as I said before China can source all those component except the engine domestically BUT doing that only lengthen the time and even prolong the certification process. Just like everybody was saying .So the decision to use foreign component is smart one from the POV of marketing and license. So his whining has no place
He make even outrageous post claiming Bombardier help Comac which is BS
Henri K write up support my contention that project integration is time consuming adding novice component supplier will prolong it. Even though China has built landing gear and avionic for military. But civilian airliner required MUCH HIGHER standard than military since many lives depend on it and any mishap will result in court suit which is ruinous to company balance sheet and reputation

So this guy eat the western propaganda lock stock and barrel without even thinking!
We have many example already Tejas vs J 10 one want to do everything themselves and one choose pragmatic solution.See the result?
We simply disagree on point and on facts vis-a-vis Sinosoldier's related posts. It doesn't matter if he or anyone else "eat Western propaganda lock stock...," because that's secondary to if their claims are fact-based and could be independently verified. Reasonable people's reading of Sinosoldier's post in question would agree with his view the C-919 was a step in the right direction, but not the entire journey.

Sinosoldier's message as I described was self-evident and can't be falsified by facts, and yet some folks take exception to it. I suspect the real issue isn't they see factual or rational problems with his post, but they simply don't like what he said.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Nemo, your message sounds good, and it does look like that's COMAC's current objective. It also falsify some posters' claims of utilizing domestic supply chain for most of C-919's construction.

Why does it falsify that objective? Domestic supply chain is not the first (current) objective, but I don't see Nemo's message reject it to be the second (future) objective.

In view of today's political environment, moving to domestic supply chain is naturally the next move by COMAC because avionics for example from US may not be a reliable source (political interference, remember Intel Chips?). Only chance of COMAC to drop that objective is if those suppliers (Panasonic, GE, Rockwell Collins etc.) are as reliable to COMAC as they are to Boeing and Airbus, that chance is thin at this moment.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Maybe you mean something different in bold part of your message, but if COMAC's goal is what you described, then the C-919 is so far a failure since many of its most important subsystems are imported from other countries. More likely the 919 is continuing education to build on what COMAC learned making the ARJ-21. In other words, its the next important step in the 'journey of a thousand miles.'

Why is an alpha version of software not having delivered a feature planned in final version being a failure of the final version? Windows 10 alpha build crashes my test PC, but I won't call that failure of Windows 10 RTM, will you?
 

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
It'll really matter when China's to attempt to produce government and/or military versions of C919.
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Why is an alpha version of software not having delivered a feature planned in final version being a failure of the final version? Windows 10 alpha build crashes my test PC, but I won't call that failure of Windows 10 RTM, will you?
Let's get to the real issue:
1) Sinosoldier said the C-919 was only a step in the right direction, and COMAC still has a way to go
2) Some people more credit for COMAC's achievements
3) Sinosoldier's message was then attacked not because it was factually wrong, but because they didn't like it

That's what all the shouting is about.
 
Top