have any cj1000a engines flight tested with c919 yet? if they did it might take some time to instill confidence for mass production.
COMAC C919
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
Sometimes it’s not haste but confidence. Cost of bad product is extremely high in commercial aviation and companies aren’t stupid.
Tell that to Boeing.
And again, their previous target was 30 planes a year, that was in January. Did something change in the last 3 months for them to revise their production targets upwards by so much? Did a new factory appear out of thin air? Did supply chain magically get less complicated under Trump's tariffs?
It's pretty simple here, in January Comac leadership looked at all the current state of their supply chain and production lines and went "Our target is 30 planes a year". So unless there's new production lines, new supply chains, or Comac somehow got their hands on thousands of experienced and trained engineers in 3 months, the only way to get more production is to push the existing production lines and workers to their limits. Unless Comac somehow grossly misjudged what their new production lines were capable of in January. And even then, going from 13 planes a year, to 50 planes a year is unprecedented. You don't move that fast without some hiccups.
They probably won't hit their target, but rushing production is what got Boeing into their current situation. Comac is still quite new at this too, they don't nearly have the experience of Airbus and Boeing. And again, safely above all.
According to , these were the first 4 years of A320 deliveries from Airbus
Year | Delivery |
|---|---|
1988 | 16 |
1989 | 58 |
1990 | 58 |
1991 | 119 |
So C919 jumping from 13 last year to 50 next year isn't out of line.
But there are other risks that come with COMAC ramping up C919 production. When they were building 5 to 10 planes per year, it was only mildly concerning to the U.S. Sanctioning COMAC to stop the production of 5 to 10 planes hardly seems worth the trouble.
But if the production rate is 50, it would be downright alarming for the U.S. Especially since every C919 built comes at the expense of Boeing, not Airbus. Increasing the C919 production rate will increase the likelihood of the U.S. stopping COMAC from receiving LEAP engines.
High C919 production rates is risky, unless the CJ-1000A is very close to certification.
Chinese regulators aren’t like American regulators.
No, what got Boeing into their current predicament was extremely sloppy and lax product development and production management practices for the sake of *cost cutting*. It has nothing to do with production speed.
lcloo
Captain
Saw a news reporting yesterday that 27 countries have recognised certificate of air worthiness of C919, including Canada, Brazil, New Zealand, Australia and Russia. No full list was disclosed but I believe all ASEAN (probably minus Philippines) countries are in the list.
However, we still need affirmative announcement from COMAC to be sure.
However, we still need affirmative announcement from COMAC to be sure.
antiterror13
Brigadier
Any links? I tried google, but no luck
The B737 and A320s are at 400-500 per year, and they have production backlogs beyond 2030.
So I don't think 50-75 C919 per year will trigger anything.