The 4th C919 for China Eastern Airlines (and 10th C919 overall) with the registration number B-002C conducted its maiden flight this morning. Posted by @老王RR涡扇花动机 on Weibo.
COMAC C919
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
Weren't they planning to deliver 5 by end of year? And the 4th is still only doing its maiden flight?
The C919 will have two more variants - Shortened/Plateau and Stretched. Posted by @垂直风行 on Weibo.
TL; DR - C919-shortened should be in the same category as the A319neo, while the C919-stretched should be in the same category as the A321neo.
Besides, other than China and Nepal, the former variant should be able to see some prospective customers from South America as well.
TL; DR - C919-shortened should be in the same category as the A319neo, while the C919-stretched should be in the same category as the A321neo.
Besides, other than China and Nepal, the former variant should be able to see some prospective customers from South America as well.
Last edited:
There is like no demand in the market for 319neo. Why do the brainiacs at comac think there will be demand for a shortened version of c919. Complete waste of time.
There is no demand because it has been replaced with more modern aircraft like the Airbus A220. But in COMAC's case there is a huge gap in their lineup where there is no 150 passenger aircraft. The ARJ-21 can only carry like 100 passengers while the C919 carries like 190 passengers.
So the market for such an aircraft is clearly there. And given the state of the Chinese airline industry, which is basically state owned, the government can just make them buy the COMAC plane instead of the Airbus A220 or the Embraer E2. It is also much cheaper to make a shortened version of the C919 than develop a whole new aircraft.
Not certain if the particulars about safety margins at the airports indicated (the high altitude ones) versus payload compromises. But a 'clean start' it will provide the Goldilocks solution for these specific Chinese airports.
I would assume they don't expect big demand on the civilian market as a result.
If it could be made into a military aircraft (big if) the shorter version would make a lot of sense. Reducing fuel burn/increasing range for ISR platforms in particular, but also with certain variants that could land in three Western airports.
Just because there is a gap, doesn't mean there is demand.
for example, United Airlines future fleet plans have a huge gap between 76-seat regional jet to 160 seat MAX8. Why do you think airlines need a MAX7 or A319NEO sized aircraft?
Take a look at Easyjet. It was at one point the largest A319CEO operator. And then decided the economics are garbage, so it's future fleet plan are A320/A321NEO. No A319NEOs
I remember this issue was heavily discussed at a.net when it came out.
Economics dictate that an aircraft CASK continues to come down as you stretch it further and add more rows of seats. Demand for A322 would be far more than A319 for example.
In JetBlue's case, it had a replacement program for 100 seat E90. Instead of going with the similar sized A220-100, it directly went to A220-300 and said that the extra 40 seat could just be filled with lower priced ticket.
Stretched C919 will have demand for sure. As COMAC make changes to C919, it's range and efficiency will improve. With such improvements, a stretch C919 will have adequate range for domestic option. Over time, you'd see more demand for stretched vs original and most optimized version. And then you go through a re-engine program. Normally when that happens, the stretched version becomes the most optimized member of the family and then you want to do a second stretch. Over time, the original version will loose its appeal.
You are seeing that right now with A320NEO. Most airlines would rather have A321NEO. You can take a look at the last 5 years of order history in the NEO program
Each airline company needs to evaluate its own aircraft requirements taking into consideration passenger demand and available airport slots. But you cannot say there is no market for aircraft in the 150 passenger range when there are 718 orders for the Airbus A220-300. There might be much lower demand than for larger aircraft types like the Airbus A320NEO or A321NEO but it is still significant. Making a new C919 variant with shorter airframe is relatively inexpensive to develop and IMHO well worth it.
China needs the smaller aircraft to service remote locations. Far from the central population core where the high speed rail (HSR) network is well developed. Making comparisons with the US or EU market in small aircraft is also kind of irrelevant since neither have as well developed HSR networks. In the US there is basically no HSR, and in the EU the HSR connections between countries are poorly developed. Which is why companies like Southwest or Easyjet exist in the first place. With well developed HSR a lot of these medium range airliners are rendered useless.
Air China right now has 33 Airbus A319 aircraft. China Eastern Airlines has 35 Airbus A319. Sichuan Airlines has 23 Airbus A319. China Eastern Yunnan Airlines has 37 Boeing 737-700. Tibet Airlines has 27 Airbus A319.
So I would say there is a demand for at least 200 of these aircraft in China. Which is not insignificant. As for the effort to make such a version, it is basically a C919 with one section removed, and it might even use the same engine tuned down with software. It won't cost a lot to develop it.
The COMAC C919 was likely developed with the intent to have a shorter and longer version in the first place. In the MC-21 to make the 300 version you need to weld together an extra section, which isn't required in the 200 version. I suspect in here the same applies.
China needs the smaller aircraft to service remote locations. Far from the central population core where the high speed rail (HSR) network is well developed. Making comparisons with the US or EU market in small aircraft is also kind of irrelevant since neither have as well developed HSR networks. In the US there is basically no HSR, and in the EU the HSR connections between countries are poorly developed. Which is why companies like Southwest or Easyjet exist in the first place. With well developed HSR a lot of these medium range airliners are rendered useless.
Air China right now has 33 Airbus A319 aircraft. China Eastern Airlines has 35 Airbus A319. Sichuan Airlines has 23 Airbus A319. China Eastern Yunnan Airlines has 37 Boeing 737-700. Tibet Airlines has 27 Airbus A319.
So I would say there is a demand for at least 200 of these aircraft in China. Which is not insignificant. As for the effort to make such a version, it is basically a C919 with one section removed, and it might even use the same engine tuned down with software. It won't cost a lot to develop it.
The COMAC C919 was likely developed with the intent to have a shorter and longer version in the first place. In the MC-21 to make the 300 version you need to weld together an extra section, which isn't required in the 200 version. I suspect in here the same applies.
market only exists if the economics work. Market exists for A220-300 because it's economics work. Market doesn't exist for A319NEO or a C-919 shrink because the economics will be horrendous. shrinks just don't work these days.
787-8 was the original variant and now the economics is so terrible vs 789/78X that no one buys it.
It's all about economics. Nobody wants airliners with bad economics.
787-8 was the original variant and now the economics is so terrible vs 789/78X that no one buys it.
It's all about economics. Nobody wants airliners with bad economics.