COMAC C919

SinoSoldier said:

So you haven't bothered to peruse through my posts, since I've clearly listed engineering as one of the key experiences listed in the C919 project.

What I'm attempting to dispel is the idea that the C919 represents some sort of quantum leap in Chinese aerospace technology/industry or something that will break Boeing & Airbus' grip on the airliner markets. With regards to the technology that actually powers and gives life to the C919, it is COMAC's American and European partners who should be commended for this achievement.

Not to say that the Chinese won't turn towards domestic suppliers for future aircraft, but the C919 isn't one of them.

Same could be said of the HAL Tejas or, to an extent, the Saab Gripen.

Click to expand...

Tell me, how many engineering projects involving complex systems have you participated in? It is easy for business users/outsiders to make demands and critize, but they generally have no idea the amount of efforts involved, even with prebuilt components. Components' spec may say one thing but they behave in other ways, components may not talk to each other, components may behave weirdly under certain conditions. The list can go on and on.

Don't critize or belittle others' efforts if you don't know jack

Hendrik_2000 said:

Rhetoric rhetoric,Your argument fell flat against the firm order shown below, which mostly are Chinese airlines order. Remember there is more Chinese airlines than shown below as this list is not comprehensive

Click to expand...

And what does it prove?
So far it is hardly connected: C919 isn't in operation(and, btw, ARJ-21 is only nominally so. Patriotic feelings are important, but, unlike abovementioned Aeroflot, Chinese airlines actually operate in a competitive environment).
There is one detail though: testing is notoriously slow. It doesn't only indicate delays, problems, and inexperience, it also quite likely indicates wish to build trust to C919.

Hendrik_2000 said:

But based on estimates performance and use of the same engine as Airbus, Boeing
They should not be far off

Click to expand...

Estimates are estimates, let us wait for testing results, as well as early operations(which will show how product support works).

Hendrik_2000 said:

Again no comparison to Soviet because the Soviet-designed plane has never reached the efficiency, noise level, or the service and logistic excellence of their competitor

Click to expand...

Until the late 1980s they never really aimed, to begin with. They were designed for specific soviet conditions, which, say, currently in many ways right off disqualify western planes. For there is need to somehow connect many small, remote locations with low levels of traffic, yet unable to support "western" level of infrastructure financially.

Btw, the last generation of civilian soviet airliners also had good, erm, estimates. Reality has proven to be different.

antiterror13 said:

is there anything not a fault in your eyes? apart of yourself of course .... just wonder

Click to expand...

You see no fault in government bailouts going directly to the pockets of CEOs?

nemo said:

It's more than that. More than technical issues is the regulatory barrier to entry to US and EU. Currently, anyone who passes FAA will be given EU certification, and vice versa. This means non-US/EU manufacturers will be at a disadvantage. China need to pay the due of passing foreign certifications. After that, it can force US/EU to recognize Chinese certification as equivalent to their own by threatening to impose certification requirement on foreign aircraft if they insisted on requiring their own certifications on top of Chinese ones.

Click to expand...

COMAC is working with EASA official to gain European certification first; in fact, the announcement came just before the C919's maiden flight. COMAC seems to be more wary of the FAA this time around, seeing that it hasn't yet even certified the ARJ21 as of today.

vincent said:

Tell me, how many engineering projects involving complex systems have you participated in? It is easy for business users/outsiders to make demands and critize, but they generally have no idea the amount of efforts involved, even with prebuilt components. Components' spec may say one thing but they behave in other ways, components may not talk to each other, components may behave weirdly under certain conditions. The list can go on and on.

Don't critize or belittle others' efforts if you don't know jack

Click to expand...

Strawman tactics aside, what have you actually put forth to dispel my argument? Having "developed" the C919 by yourself does not mean that you own its supply chain or technological IP rights. No matter how much involvement COMAC engineers and technicians were engaged in, the fact of the matter is that the C919 is reliant on almost completely foreign-developed components. While nobody disputes the symbolic nature of the C919 and the human effort it represents, the technological basis of the C919 is not "Chinese". It's funny to see Chinese members criticize the Tejas for utilizing foreign parts but can't bear to have the tables turned on them. There very well may be an indigenized Chinese airliner in the pipeline, but the C919 isn't one of them.

SinoSoldier said:

Strawman tactics aside, what have you actually put forth to dispel my argument? Having "developed" the C919 by yourself does not mean that you own its supply chain or technological IP rights. No matter how much involvement COMAC engineers and technicians were engaged in, the fact of the matter is that the C919 is reliant on almost completely foreign-developed components. While nobody disputes the symbolic nature of the C919 and the human effort it represents, the technological basis of the C919 is not "Chinese". It's funny to see Chinese members criticize the Tejas for utilizing foreign parts but can't bear to have the tables turned on them. There very well may be an indigenized Chinese airliner in the pipeline, but the C919 isn't one of them.

Click to expand...

Hold on.
So this technological basis thing is the deal breaker huh?
I'm not sure what your thoughts are on this: whether this lack of tech base a good thing or bad thing.
I believe other posters are not taking the full import of your statements kindly, not the actual fact per se.

The problem here is your are bringing in a grownup yardstick to measure a baby. Do you see the absurdity of it?

We see it is half full, you see it is half empty.

So let me ask you this again: is it a good thing or bad thing China uses foreign technology to get C919 off the ground?

SinoSoldier said:

Strawman tactics aside, what have you actually put forth to dispel my argument? Having "developed" the C919 by yourself does not mean that you own its supply chain or technological IP rights. No matter how much involvement COMAC engineers and technicians were engaged in, the fact of the matter is that the C919 is reliant on almost completely foreign-developed components. While nobody disputes the symbolic nature of the C919 and the human effort it represents, the technological basis of the C919 is not "Chinese". It's funny to see Chinese members criticize the Tejas for utilizing foreign parts but can't bear to have the tables turned on them. There very well may be an indigenized Chinese airliner in the pipeline, but the C919 isn't one of them.

Click to expand...

You are comparing. 6.5 tons single engine fighter aircraft with a 42 tons twin engine civilian airliner, and you don't see the absurdity of it?

Getting C919 to fly is a major milestone for the Chinese aviation industry and took a lot of engineering efforts. For some one who doesn't know jack about engineering, belittling Chnese engineers' accomplishments only show your ignorance

Gloire_bb said:

And what does it prove?
So far it is hardly connected: C919 isn't in operation(and, btw, ARJ-21 is only nominally so. Patriotic feelings are important, but, unlike abovementioned Aeroflot, Chinese airlines actually operate in a competitive environment).
There is one detail though: testing is notoriously slow. It doesn't only indicate delays, problems, and inexperience, it also quite likely indicates wish to build trust to C919.


Estimates are estimates, let us wait for testing results, as well as early operations(which will show how product support works).


Until the late 1980s they never really aimed, to begin with. They were designed for specific soviet conditions, which, say, currently in many ways right off disqualify western planes. For there is need to somehow connect many small, remote locations with low levels of traffic, yet unable to support "western" level of infrastructure financially.

Btw, the last generation of civilian soviet airliners also had good, erm, estimates. Reality has proven to be different.

Click to expand...

A lot of verbiage but NOT A SINGLE sentence dispute my argument . The proof is in the pudding Chinese airlines do take order from the government as shown in the attachment How else can you explain when each of the airlines makes initial order of 20 ?

SinoSoldier said:

Strawman tactics aside, what have you actually put forth to dispel my argument? Having "developed" the C919 by yourself does not mean that you own its supply chain or technological IP rights. No matter how much involvement COMAC engineers and technicians were engaged in, the fact of the matter is that the C919 is reliant on almost completely foreign-developed components. While nobody disputes the symbolic nature of the C919 and the human effort it represents, the technological basis of the C919 is not "Chinese". It's funny to see Chinese members criticize the Tejas for utilizing foreign parts but can't bear to have the tables turned on them. There very well may be an indigenized Chinese airliner in the pipeline, but the C919 isn't one of them.

Click to expand...

I just have simple question If it so easy to design Jetlineer with 159 passenger how come there are only handful of country that can do it
According to your theory C 919 is no achievement at all all the technology is supplied by the western country

How come Japan, India, didn't produce jetliner?
Tejas was initially designed with domestic technology in mind.
But they couldn't do it so they have import all the component

China J10 has designed J 10 with most of the component domestically built but instead of waiting forever for WS10 to mature they use AL31F as interim solution I don't see any problem with that . Now that WS10B is mature we see some J10 with WS10B

IN fact most of J11B, J16 are equipped with WS10A There are more than 400 engines flying now with no accident reported sofar So what is your problem?

Did Tejas fly with kaveri or is there any single jet designed by India fly with their own engine?
China just start manufacturing commercial jet liner now It is ridiculous to expect that it has to fly with their own engine when typical engine development time is 20 to 30 years

As vincent said you don't know a jack about engineering!
No one has monopoly on engineering The US learn it from the brit and the german

Well after the first flight we haven't heard anything as to the status of trial . Well here it is
The first prototype of C919 will start long-distance flight tests, while the second will be inaugurated by the end of the year
The second plane will test mainly the engine and the first one is flight control aerodynamic, etc

The first plane




The 2nd plane