sorry mate, i just recollect from my memories from various media
COMAC C919
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
You literally asked why they would do that and pipaster gave you a solid reason???
I don't see how he answered why they would give initial C919s with CJ1000A engines for purposes of the government's executive transport fleet.
He talked about "secrecy the armed forces allows" -- government transport aircraft are not the same as being operated by the PLA.
He then talks about buying Russian aircraft as a "solution" in case the US sanctions COMAC, which also doesn't address my question because he's talking about solving a problem that results from a decision to use C919s with CJ1000As for government transport to begin with!
Using C919s with CJ1000As for the purpose of "national security" to subsidize it under WTO is also something that is outside of their options -- the primary lead operators of C919 are already commercial airlines, not for a military role. CJ1000A variants won't change that, and it would only be a minor or temporary reprieve because the C919+CJ1000A will still be mostly used by commercial airlines in the long term.
More importantly, he doesn't address the bigger hurdle I mentioned, namely the risks of introducing a new engine to service and choosing to give it to a transport fleet that is an executive transport for government officials.
If anything, it should make more sense that acting as a government transport would be one of the last roles that C919s with CJ1000A engines takes, after its reliability has been well demonstrated elsewhere first.
The lack of acknowledgement of this particular problem is the most confusing.
If the CJ-1000 has initial reliability issues they could just use it as an engine in the Y-20.
As a quad-engine it will be way less susceptible to crashes due to engine failure. It will also help drive economies in scale with production.
It is just that the WS-20 engine manufacturers won't like this.
As a quad-engine it will be way less susceptible to crashes due to engine failure. It will also help drive economies in scale with production.
It is just that the WS-20 engine manufacturers won't like this.
COMAC have strict rules in regards ''not to crossover with Military industrial complex'' . in past COMAC rejected three proposal of Shenyang for engine development. COMAC also granted 50 percent stake and decision making in AECC.
CJ-1000A so far doing well. Team have successfully collected material evidence from airborne testing. in February, CAAC(Civil Aviation Administration of Chin) announced to accelerate the certification process of CJ-1000A this year.
COMAC will gradually integrate CJ-1000A with C919. means initially only few units of C919 will have domestic engines then planes continue to operate for quite some time until engine get maturity for volume production..
Payload Range Diagram of C919 (all current delivered C919 are STD, we have not seen the long range variant C919ER yet)
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Generally military are very conservative and despite how they would be treated if they were flying commercially, military executive aircraft are not has heavily used. As such they tend to have longer service lives. The A319 and 737-800 in PLAAF VVIP service are between 12 and 10 years old and could easily serve another 20 years due to low flight hours depending upon maintenance. This is why Military services are often just as happy to buy used airliners for conversion.
What will usually happen to force retirement is when the supply chain that supports the aircraft dries up. Which isn’t likely to happen soon for the A319 or 737 NGs.
The Air China 747-8I that is chartered for Government duties will age out before the 737 VVIP aircraft.
As to using this for risk reduction. That generally doesn’t work. Particularly as the military wants those aircraft to be useful for decades and the degree of changes that a NEO type certification and modification program can cause is such that it’s not likely for the prototypes to be sold even to a military. They will fly demonstrations evaluate conditions then store maybe display or scrap.
If/When Sinofied C919 roll out they will go to commercial customers first then down the line a bit Military.
Exactly, and modern military transports often still require modifications that are not going to be implemented on civilian aircraft. This degree of modification will often require a full disassembly and reconstruction.
And I thought I was getting jaded in my old age. Well National Security is a well known means of hiding corruption as we are talking executive aircraft the ones whom would be flying on them would also be the ones who started taking heads if they found out about short cuts. Particularly as these aircraft have a way of being put in a pride of place as part of the pageantry of government.
In example here we see (sorry for the audio) one of the B737 of the PLAAF landing in Belgrade.
It was enough to Jamaica Canada buy him a new airplane.
The whole question was on the indigenous supply chain version.
Russian aircraft ties you into Russian supply chain which is having a hard time as is. It also would be a step backwards. If your aim is independence and hardening against outside influences. You basically traded Washington for Moscow.
Farther we are not talking about the military specific mission aircraft. We are talking about basically the Private jets of the CCP top leadership.
The PLAAF as been using Y9 for the basis of its MPA, AEW, Electronic and signals intelligence aircraft. Now those are missions where an airliner could do the job. The 737-NG and Global Express 6500 both do those Airbus has pitched the A320 for them as well. However that’s a different question of modification. We are also not talking about tankers. In the long run the PLA may choose to adapt 919 to more specialized military roles
For the Government executive/Military transport role the degrees of modification vary depending upon the military and budget some are literally stock airliners with a generic single class interior or Combi airliners that can be reconfigured between passengers and cargo. These save mileage on your dedicated transports. On the far end you can have aircraft like the VC25A or E4B where the aircraft has undergone massive changes even replacing parts of the fuselage so as to harden it against EMP. It has a whole suite of communications systems air to air refueling receptacles and a host of defensive systems.
Most however fall in between the two sides. The German Air Force’s new A321NEO LR is a prime example. It’s a Combi aircraft that can serve as freighter, airliner, Corporate Jet, flying ambulance. It received a major overhaul of its electronics system to accommodate military communications systems and likely a defensive aids suite.
What @gelgoog is proposing isn’t actually that far out of line. It’s actually quite common. Really he is not saying to build Y20 powered by CJ1000A but test them on Y20. Or rather A Y20 or two not in military service.
Many western engine makers have flying engine test stands that are modified 747 or 757 or other existing retire aircraft that they modify by either swapping off engines for prototypes or bolting engines on.
It’s less risky than just putting them under the wings of a 919 and praying.
Then you push harder into full tests on 919.
Additionally the Chinese government has has in the past demonstrated that it is willing to do as it pleases in regard to breaking some rules on duel use. B-4052 and B-4053 are 737 that were converted by the PLAAF for use as command posts. Notable for the communications faring mounted on their dorsal. This was not a Boeing approved modification.
There is no way Batik Air is larger than Garuda Indonesia ( and her sub Citilink )
antiterror13
Brigadier
Batik Air is the worst customer service I have experienced, extremely bad, dishonest
Is there reliable evidence or source to prove this?