Chinese Aviation Industry

Mischa said:

Let me make myself more clear (again): for less developed, marginal, less dense regions including Xinjiang, Tibetan plateau, Inner Mongolia, and Forest areas in Northeast China, regional aircraft is a more suitable way to provide fast connections to regional big cities than the railway. I was not talking about everywhere in China, especially I was not mentioning the East.

Nobody needs regional flights in the East for sure. With large populations, limited land resources, dense motorways/highways system, and also developed intercity/high speed/fast railway system, the requirement of fast connection to regional big cities has been met. But in the marginal regions that I mentioned above, it's a totally different story.

Click to expand...

Have you ever looked at the per trip operating cost of a220-300 vs regional jet? This kind of calculation has been done in America and Europe. Even with scope clause factored in, regional jets total trip costs are often close to the cost of a220. That's why you don't see turboprops anywhere.

Also, they don't have any operational flexibility. If you think about the added costs of maintaining and supporting an additional fleet type, what's the justification to incur so much cost for an aircraft that is only needed in small numbers, has very small secondary market, low production run and general high maintenance?

tphuang said:

Have you ever looked at the per trip operating cost of a220-300 vs regional jet? This kind of calculation has been done in America and Europe. Even with scope clause factored in, regional jets total trip costs are often close to the cost of a220. That's why you don't see turboprops anywhere.

Also, they don't have any operational flexibility. If you think about the added costs of maintaining and supporting an additional fleet type, what's the justification to incur so much cost for an aircraft that is only needed in small numbers, has very small secondary market, low production run and general high maintenance?

Click to expand...

I have never scoped into A223, but I knew the actual trip cost of CZ's E190. It was a disaster, so they quickly phased it out. I can understand that there is no demand for a regional jet in China, but why not a turboprop? I see many turboprops in Canada, Florida, Nordic and the UK.

Adding a new model is always a challenge, every airline tries to keep its fleet neat to reduce the cost. But does that mean the Chinese airlines should continue to use mainline jetliners to provide basic air transport service in the marginal place? In China, the cost of this service is covered by a subsidy from the government. We are always discussing from an airliner's point of view, but the government surely wants some cheaper solution.

Mischa said:

But actually, ARJ is a mistake in the market decision. The project was initially proposed in 2000 when they forecasted that the demand for regional jets would be more than 900 by 2010. Some inertial affected too, as all the previous commercial aircraft jointly developed with foreign manufacturers were regional jets. But gradually the actual demand becomes 0. What the Chinese market needs is mainline narrowbody jets, and C919 was quickly rolled-out.

Click to expand...

As you point out, competence wise, regional jet was the only feasible option for China.

Mischa said:

Japanese choose to suspend MRJ. Doubtlessly, it's a correct idea from the business aspect. But it also means they abandon all the efforts they have made and they still know nothing about designing a commercial aircraft. Their next bird will probably be a disaster too, even though they find the correct market. The cake is there, but the Japanese just cannot take a bite.

Click to expand...

Good for business, but bad for competence buildup.

So, mistake or not in business perspective, it is one step that every beginner must take. Not trying to split hair, but if it is the only option one has, I have to call it the right decision.

Mischa said:

I have never scoped into A223, but I knew the actual trip cost of CZ's E190. It was a disaster, so they quickly phased it out. I can understand that there is no demand for a regional jet in China, but why not a turboprop? I see many turboprops in Canada, Florida, Nordic and the UK.

Adding a new model is always a challenge, every airline tries to keep its fleet neat to reduce the cost. But does that mean the Chinese airlines should continue to use mainline jetliners to provide basic air transport service in the marginal place? In China, the cost of this service is covered by a subsidy from the government. We are always discussing from an airliner's point of view, but the government surely wants some cheaper solution.

Click to expand...

Yes, E90 is a disaster from cost point of view, but A220 series is great. The trip cost of A220-300 for B6 is about the same as E90 and it has 40 more seats. DL has said the trip cost of A220-100 is only slightly higher than that of CRJ-900 that it's regional fleet operate. So, a lot of time, the mainline aircraft has almost the same trip cost as the smaller regional aircraft despite having 40 more seats.

Keep in mind, that for US regionals, E75s have essentially put turboprop out of business. Regional fleets are not ordering turboprops. They are ordering E75s because the economics of turboprop doesn't really work anymore.

Could you create a new turboprop design and be a lot more efficient? Definitely. But there are challenges:
1) Aeroengine companies are not designing new and more efficient engines here, so there is a big gap with where turbofan engines are at
2) It's a very small market, so there is a lot of hidden cost involved with not having a secondary market for spares and such. It's a bad idea for airlines to get involved in a program with under 500 commercial aircraft. There is no leasing market, so once you don't want it anymore, the aircraft really can't get sold or leased to another airline
3) Due to low production run, aircraft maker really cannot lower the cost of production. Even worse, the suppliers are likely not going to want to support this series of aircraft for too long.
4) As efficiency in engine continues to go up, the fuel cost per pax goes down. The fuel cost per labor goes up. And that really does not work in turboprop's favor since you have to spread the cost of 2 pilots + 2 FAs among 70 passengers vs 2 pilots + 3 FAs among 140 passengers. The math for this is terrible.
5) Adding turboprop for most airlines would require adding a new fleet type, which adds a lot of cost.

"China Civil Aviation News" and China Civil Aviation Network reporter Zhang Renyin reported: Boeing and Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China) announced today that the two companies are cooperating on a sustainable development project to develop and test aircraft that can be used in production civilian aircraft. Ramie fiber reinforced polylactic acid-based composites (RRP) for aircraft cabin components. Compared with traditional plastics used to manufacture civil aircraft cabin components, RRP has the advantages of light weight, high strength, and 100% degradable.

"We are very pleased to announce this new sustainable cooperation project with COMAC. This is another example of the two aircraft manufacturers working together to build a better future for the civil aviation industry," said Boeing China President Xie Lijia.

The project is implemented by the COMAC-Boeing Sustainable Aviation Technology Center. The R&D team has produced a small batch of RRP aircraft seat trays for testing. According to experts involved in the project, the small table board has passed the flammability and overload tests, and has been evaluated in the real flight environment of Boeing's "environmental verification aircraft" in 2022.

The COMAC-Boeing Sustainable Aviation Technology Center, established in 2012, focuses on multiple sustainable development areas, including green aviation, air traffic management, cabin environment, industry standards and operational safety. During the 14th China International Aviation and Aerospace Expo in 2022, the two companies signed an agreement to extend the cooperation of the center for another five years.

Currently, more than 10,000 Boeing aircraft flying around the world use Chinese-made parts and components. Boeing's operations in China directly contribute more than $1.5 billion annually to the Chinese economy in the form of multi-supplier purchases, joint venture revenue, operational activities, training, and R&D investments.

The MA60 weather modification plane. Four have been delivered so far. It carries an array of atmospheric sensors to help it efficiently carry out cloud seeding operations. In addition to making rain, it can also reduce precipitation when needed, such as during flood control operations.

by78 said:

Two AG600Ms have been transferred the China Flight Test Establishment at Yanliang earlier this year. By the middle of 2023, AG600M is expected to demonstrate its firefighting capabilities and complete 40% of scheduled flight and other tests as part of its airworthiness certification.

Click to expand...

An AG600M has been transferred from the China Flight Test Establishment at Yanliang to the National Civil Aircraft Research and Flight Test Base (国家民机科研试飞基地) in Weinan, where the airframe will carry out compliance testing in a variety of environmental conditions.

A tour of the production facility of the , where the AG600 and other general aviation aircraft are assembled.