COMAC C919

Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
dingyibvs said:
His statement was factually wrong because he considered that "step" to be a small step, others here have made the case that it's a bigger step than he thinks.
Click to expand...
Small steps vs. bigger ones sound like opinions to me, relative to reaching 95% domestic-supplied subsystems and components. It's not unreasonable to say C-919 made some small achievements but has a long ways to go. It's also reasonable to be for people to say the C-919 made some major milestones too.

taxiya said:
I have said twice, and this is my third time to say that "I was not involved in the original discussion vis-à-vis Sinosoldier and others."

If what you summarized Sinosoldier's point as he intended, I endorse that view too. And that view does not call a failure, but first step.

As I (once again) did not follow the lengthy chain, I do not know other's view, I will not comment on them.

My reply to your post was only concerning how and why you see the first step of a long project being a failure. That is a legitimate question, isn't it? If you have substances in calling that a failure, I appreciate that you share with the rest. If you claim that wording is only semantic, then I got your meaning and have no intension in chasing you for the choice.
Click to expand...
Can you link the specific statement I made? I generally don't consider small steps that contribute to bigger ones as failures.
 
Last edited:
Y

Yvrch

Junior Member
Registered Member
You are welcome.

Blackstone said:
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.'
Click to expand...
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Blackstone said:
Small steps vs. bigger ones sound like opinions to me, relative to reaching 95% domestic-supplied subsystems and components. It's not unreasonable to say C-919 made some small achievements but has a long ways to go. It's also reasonable to be for people to say the C-919 made some major milestones too.


Can you link the specific statement I made? I generally don't consider small steps that contribute to bigger ones as failures.
Click to expand...
Blackstone said:
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.'
Click to expand...

Your post #129 was the one that got my question. Here I quote above. I do realize that you put a IF and was referring other describe as the COMAC goal (which I did not read into). It is this confusion that made me wonder. I may have misunderstood you totally opposite to your intention, for that I apologize, it is always problematic when getting in the middle of a messy, lengthy and hot debate.
 
Hendrik_2000

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
jobjed said:
Hahahaha oh you sweet summer child. There are plenty of Chinese who are diseased with an inferiority complex and refuse to believe their own people can match the great White men. Examples: democracy activists, Falun Gong practitioners, many Taiwanese and Hong Kongers etc.

Nonetheless, it's prudent to recognise that someone who understates Chinese accomplishments will more than likely not be Pakistani. It is literally more likely for a Chinese person to shit-talk China than a Pakistani. This is precisely why Pakistan is probably the only Chinese ally worth protecting; everyone else like Cambodia, DPRK, Bangladesh etc are only "allies" as long as there are obvious benefits to the relationship.
Click to expand...

Well you don't have to go far , you see a lot of that type here too!
Anyway on different subject from the Chief designer of C919
"Unlike ARJ we designed every part of C919 by ourselves"
Zhang Miao Chief designer of C919
 
Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
taxiya said:
Your post #129 was the one that got my question. Here I quote above. I do realize that you put a IF and was referring other describe as the COMAC goal (which I did not read into). It is this confusion that made me wonder. I may have misunderstood you totally opposite to your intention, for that I apologize, it is always problematic when getting in the middle of a messy, lengthy and hot debate.
Click to expand...
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.

MwRYum said: ↑
Reminds me of the same bunch of whinners who dizz at MIC whenever the opportunity arises, and all I need to remind them is pointing at their iPhone, said "it still haven't blown your hands off, right?"

What if I remind you that China has been building components like vertical stabilizers for Boeing and Airbus for 30+ years? Or there's an A320 assembly line in Chongqing? How about a 737 assembly line planning for China (date for it coming online is unknown at this time)?

Simply put, C919 like everything else, has to start from somewhere. Project management, components and system integration are the key points this time, increasing domestically-produced components will be targets to attain in future production batches and successive projects, such as C929 and C939.

The key goal is as much as to produce a full aircraft as to build up an entire home-based production and supply chain. Think Samsung: they produce an entire smartphone as they OEM all aspects of hardware key to smartphone - battery (hmmm, dicey!), semiconductors, display/touchscreen, processors, solidstate memory chips, circuitry....now think about the supply chain for commercial aviation. It's not that different fundamentally. The said production cluster can equally compete for component supplyer status as they'd provide for their own home-grown industries. Market competition comes in many forms and levels.
Click to expand...

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.'
Click to expand...
 
Y

Yvrch

Junior Member
Registered Member
Well Taxiya, I don't think you are in the wrong.
Even taking "if" into consideration, there's no valid reasoning to call it a failure, at all. If it is anything else, it is Chinese practical street smarts that get the ball going and move the needle. It breaks the strangle hold in this economically strategic areas and use stranglers technology to boot. Once the entry barrier is broken the whole chain reaction of cascading supply chain will mushroom into existence and will bloom in earnest given the resources and support the state has set its sight on. It's a national level strategic undertaking, so no holds barred to get there.

I think you would feel the same about the following but it's entirely your call.

It is one thing to disagree with acceptance when countered with realistic logical thinking, but quite a different another when one has to disagree as a last resort for being entirely pissed the whole time about non-nonsensical, one dimensional swelled head arguments, resulting in not wanting to deal with, or even talk about it at all. I believe that's the level of disgust some have already shown abundantly when the "balance" ruse is pitched as a counter.
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Gloire_bb said:
It'll really matter when China's to attempt to produce government and/or military versions of C919.
Click to expand...
An up hill battle, very very very few modern products are actually single nation sourced, those that are, usually are exceptionally simple or specialty products. Even then the raw materials normally are imported.
So the subcomponets of a complex machine can be international but the final product will still need to be integrated and assembled some place.
Take a classic example, the US SR71 Blackbird was built to spy on the Russians. Yet the only reliable sources of titanium was... Russian.
For the Chinese domestic market and fanboi wants having a near whole product using no foreign components may be a want but for a civilian commercial product having out sources allows a degree of logistics supply chain making it more friendly to global users and buyers.
I.E. if I can buy parts for it in France and I am Air France I might be more willing to buy it.

Still the claim or this being a break in to the global Boeing Airbus duality it over stated for a number of reasons. First this is a regional class liner, if you look globally there are a lot of makers in this class. Not just the big 2. It would not be until a eventual C929 that we can talk about a break in the duality.
 
Y

Yvrch

Junior Member
Registered Member
Fair enough comment; you got to be this yay high to get a seat in the ride.

But any bumptious half wit can discern the crack in this choke hold, regional or not. You don't want to go with break, then we can call it a crack and call it the day. It is one small step for the duality maybe, but a giant leap for contemporary China.
It is the industry that 8 million new grads and would-be STEM grads will find their careers and inspiration.
It flew, yippee ka yay!
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top