COMAC C919

The 4th C919 (B-919E) , whose C919 fleet has flown 655 commercial flights, carrying a total of nearly 82,000 passengers.

sahureka said:

It's not like you change the turbofan of one model for another as easily as you change a wheel on a car.
For example, in the SSJ-100, to install the PD-8, the Russians also had to replace the pylon that supports it, then modifications to the control center + other modifications must be made.
The hypothesis of also re-engineering the SSJ-100s which are currently powered by the French/Russian SaM146 turbofan had been raised since the French side caused sanctions and stopped supplying spare parts, but at the moment research has led to the conclusion that the cost any changes would make the operation very expensive.

Click to expand...

Much of this is the actual cost of a new engine. It is really expensive. Not the aircraft modifications to use the engine.

So the Russians have been running a program to be able to maintain the SaM146 engine by themselves. They initially had issues with the fuel filters of the engine. So they came up with a method to wash the filters so they could be reused. But now they can make their own fuel filters. They can also make their own spark plugs and are able to repair the ECUs of the engine by themselves. There are programs ongoing to further increase the depth of repairs to the engine that they can make. They have funded import substitution of the air starter valve, combustion chamber, and other components.

China should consider making their own consumables for the CFM LEAP to prevent them having similar issues.

sahureka said:

So either the aircraft is designed from the beginning with the possibility that it can receive different engine models, or it becomes very difficult to do so later when hypothetically the turbofan used until now due to external causes is no longer supplied or supported.

Click to expand...

The C919 was already designed with consideration for having two engines so I doubt it would be that difficult to add another engine model. Much of the cost would be in the certification you would need to put a new engine type in service.

sahureka said:

So either the aircraft is designed from the beginning with the possibility that it can receive different engine models, or it becomes very difficult to do so later when hypothetically the turbofan used until now due to external causes is no longer supplied or supported.

Click to expand...

i agreed with your statement. it is financially painful to change entire engine system for a civilian aircraft. but we don't have choice. a powerful country like China should have domestically build civil aircraft..

C919 is designed with consideration for having two engines. from the day1, COMAC has CJ-1000 in mind. LEAP is a stopgap engine until domestic platform successfully develop.

COMAC along with domestic players spend millions of dollar and time to develop entire indigenous system at home.

CJ-1000 along with nacelle successfully developed. and China also did major breakthrough in ''avionics switching engine chip'' it is one of the core component in avionics system.

in 15th five year plan (2025-2030) 90 percent components/parts will be domestically produced..

Let says all the components of C919 is produced locally with only the two Safran Leap 1C engines being the imported one, what is the percentage of localization rate then?

Micron said:

Let says all the components of C919 is produced locally with only the two Safran Leap 1C engines being the imported one, what is the percentage of localization rate then?

Click to expand...

hard to say. list prices vs ASP can vary. For example, recent CA purchase of 17 aircraft show the actual C919 price to be around $59 million. Now, list price for leap engines are about $14.5 million each or $29 million for 2. It's unclear to me what level of discounts are negotiated. ASP of engines are not really discussed widely

If China can make CJ-1000 at much lower cost than Leap 1C engine, and thus lower the unit cost of C919, won't that be an incentive to airlines operators? Assuming there is not much difference in fuel consumption rates bwteween the two engines.

China attempting to get European certification for C919:

lcloo said:

If China can make CJ-1000 at much lower cost than Leap 1C engine, and thus lower the unit cost of C919, won't that be an incentive to airlines operators? Assuming there is not much difference in fuel consumption rates bwteween the two engines.

Click to expand...

it would be years before China can make engines cheaper than GE, who has been making them for decades.

lcloo said:

If China can make CJ-1000 at much lower cost than Leap 1C engine, and thus lower the unit cost of C919, won't that be an incentive to airlines operators? Assuming there is not much difference in fuel consumption rates bwteween the two engines.

Click to expand...

hmm, operating cost goes far beyond fuel consumption rate

China seeks European approval of C919, wants its home-grown jet to compete with Boeing and Airbus abroad​

Click to expand...

The Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) told an annual industry working conference in Beijing on Thursday that it would increase its efforts to work with the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to allow its “domestic civil aircraft to go abroad”, according to CAAC News, a publication owned by the Chinese aviation regulator.

Click to expand...