COMAC C919

SinoSoldier · May 7, 2017

antiterror13 said:
wowww, you are really disrespectful to thousands bright Chinese engineers who put together all pieces/puzzles tirelessly for months into C919. I am really wondering whether you have such experience in design?

It is really big achievement ...... I understand that it is no where near Boeing or Airbus (at least not yet)

Name one instance in which I showed "disrespect" towards those who worked for the C919 program.

SamuraiBlue · May 7, 2017

TerraN_EmpirE said:
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.

I agree. Furthermore, the biggest issue for COMAC is what I had posted before when this plane was still in it's planning stage how much COMAC will be willing to invest in global maintenance and training facilities for both pilots and maintenance crew.
Airliners all have unique licensing and this plane will be the same where a pilot will required to be certified after going through simulation training. COMAC will require not only to develop the simulators but also need to set them up even before a single plane is sold. Same with maintenance crew which requires hands on training of the train with manuals in various languages BESIDES Chinese since the airline operators are certainly not going to translated them.
Without the supportive conditions it will not even make it to the starting gate.
It's not a chicken or the egg situation, COMAC must lay the egg first, investing in the required global support chain for the plane to be even considered as a possible candidate.

SinoSoldier · May 7, 2017

Hendrik_2000 said:
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?

"Smart" might not be the correct term to use; importing foreign components was the only way C919 was going to get off the ground (no pun intended) without horrendous delays. Sure, COMAC could've gone all nationalistic and limited themselves to domestic parts only, but frankly did not do so simply because American & European subsystems have been thoroughly tested, likely far more advanced, cheaper, and most of all reliable. That itself shows just how much the Chinese vendors have to catch up.

It's entertaining that you bring up the J-10 vs Tejas argument since the latter was the one that incorporated enormous amounts of foreign components -- your definition of a "pragmatic solution".

SinoSoldier · May 7, 2017

vincent said:
Dude, the problem with @SinoSoldier's comments is he is dismissing all the engineering efforts went into designing and building the plane as "HR and PM" efforts. I guess you two have never done any engineering work. Designing and building a complex system like an airplane is never easy, otherwise Bombardier C-series wouldn't be delayed for years and required billions of "investments" from various levels of government, even though they had years of experiences with building aircrafts.

Bombardier turned out to have a management team that would rather use government bailouts to raise the salaries of their CEOs rather than help out the company itself. That, I suspect, is where the fault lies.

Yvrch · May 7, 2017

TerraN_EmpirE said:
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.

Sometimes it will get one dizzy getting ahead of oneself I think.
No need to exaggerate and hyperventilate at the thought of C919 at the gate.
Ambition to become a fully developed country do not necessarily entail any of those threatening, like the claim of Boeing and Airbus demise at Chinese hands,unless you are equating competition to threats.
Actually I didn't notice anybody saying this is the beginning of the end of this duopoly.
For me personally, it would be more like trio-poly competing for the global market share.
For sure the entity of COMAC itself, not C919 per se, is a slightly vague, but nonetheless plausible threat to the existing duopoly and I'm hoping all quarter wits like me has some sensibility to understand it.

Hendrik_2000 · May 7, 2017

Well now that you mention Coke and Pepsi Where is McDonnell Douglass and Lougheed now ?

Soviet union economy never achieve world scale as China does now. So there is no comparison
China has the scale and it is only beginning. Chinese tourist grow exponentially over the year and they feverishly build bigger and bigger airport

As I said before most airline in China are owned by government and if need be they will be told to buy Chinese product period
That is the difference between China and the rest of the world They captive market that ensure the success of C919
BTW the medium size jet like C919 is the segment of the industry comprising 75% of the market. So it in accurate to say that unless China built bigger jet the future of industry is questionable
People in the know doesn't just glibly dismiss Chinese ambition as foolish
What China does it now is setting up the ecosystem of component supplier Not doing that it will be foolish of them because it is huge industry

SinoSoldier · May 7, 2017

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.

Uh, there are fifteen Il-96 aircraft in service. Even if its operators refuse to buy Airbus' or Boeing's aircraft, such an order of C929s (in the late 2020s, by the way) will hardly put a dent in the widebody market that is essentially dominated by A&B.

C919 will mostly be sold within China itself, but its greatest value will not come from any sort of imaginary market share but rather the experience from its development and project management.

TerraN_EmpirE · May 7, 2017

Where is Lockheed? They got pushed out after the failure of a commercial liner. Where is MD? They had a series of products fail and were bought out by Boeing.

If the only buys (there a few foreign ones) are Chinese then the success is artificial and the product will fail.
75 % may be accurate but how much is the Chinese domestic market vs the global.one. An isolation based market is a dead end market.

Gloire_bb · May 7, 2017

Hendrik_2000 said:
As I said before most airline in China are owned by government and if need be they will be told to buy Chinese product period

Nope, it doesn't work this way. Unless you want them thrown off market, off course.

1.You may "ask" them, but product(whole product, not just the plane itself) will have to be competitive enough across the board. Because "asked"company is an enterprise, it actually can be somewhat patriotic in its choice, it can be threatened and/or rewarded, but all this to certain degree.

First and foremost - air transportation is just wealthier business than aircraft production.
At worst, you'll get situation when your liners will be considered as a national "bribe": buy some of this stuff to operate unhindered, and park them somewhere.

2.Such overconcentration on "closed" home market is deadly in its own right.
Above Russian liners were remembered. Yes, there were a lot of reasons they were so unsuccessful after the fall, primarily the very disintegration of SU itself.
But there were others(reasons), and many of them closely related to wishes of one main "customer". Ssy, it was Aeroflot, which specifically asked for 3rd crew position on tu-204 and not Tupolev.

Yvrch · May 7, 2017

SamuraiBlue said:
I agree. Furthermore, the biggest issue for COMAC is what I had posted before when this plane was still in it's planning stage how much COMAC will be willing to invest in global maintenance and training facilities for both pilots and maintenance crew.
Airliners all have unique licensing and this plane will be the same where a pilot will required to be certified after going through simulation training. COMAC will require not only to develop the simulators but also need to set them up even before a single plane is sold. Same with maintenance crew which requires hands on training of the train with manuals in various languages BESIDES Chinese since the airline operators are certainly not going to translated them.
Without the supportive conditions it will not even make it to the starting gate.
It's not a chicken or the egg situation, COMAC must lay the egg first, investing in the required global support chain for the plane to be even considered as a possible candidate.

No duh, Captain Obvious.
Yes grease is greasy , oil is oily, smoke is smokey. Very true.

COMAC C919

SinoSoldier

Colonel

SamuraiBlue

Captain

SinoSoldier

Colonel

SinoSoldier

Colonel

Yvrch

Junior Member

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General

SinoSoldier

Colonel

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King

Gloire_bb

Captain

Yvrch

Junior Member