COMAC C919

sndef888 said:

I don't think China can make a commercially viable civilian engine

Click to expand...

I doubt that china will ever make a civilian plane that is competitive in international markets, and that also includes the engine part.

Even if china is able to make one that has decent performance and cheaper than the alternatives, it will most likely still use western tech, and that will always be a political risk that international companies probably won´t take. Unless that it will basically only produce planes for its domestic market, regardless of how good they are, no matter the cost to companies and consumers.

And more important than economics of whatever civilian planes china produces, its their safety. Chinese planes will have to have safety levels equal to those of boeing and airbus. And that wont be easy.

Orthan said:

I doubt that china will ever make a civilian plane that is competitive in international markets, and that also includes the engine part.

Even if china is able to make one that has decent performance and cheaper than the alternatives, it will most likely still use western tech, and that will always be a political risk that international companies probably won´t take. Unless that it will basically only produce planes for its domestic market, regardless of how good they are, no matter the cost to companies and consumers.

And more important than economics of whatever civilian planes china produces, its their safety. Chinese planes will have to have safety levels equal to those of boeing and airbus. And that wont be easy.

Click to expand...

Wow! Just wow!

I'll just throw this here


Two of my best friends work for the company, and they'll attest to the fact that O'Leary always has his way.... if Ryanair wants the C919s, EASA will make it work certification wise. Plus its not like the Neo and MAX haven't had their delays and problems either. If the largest low cost carrier in Europe buys in, the rest of the dominos will follow.

Orthan said:

I doubt that china will ever make a civilian plane that is competitive in international markets, and that also includes the engine part.

Even if china is able to make one that has decent performance and cheaper than the alternatives, it will most likely still use western tech, and that will always be a political risk that international companies probably won´t take. Unless that it will basically only produce planes for its domestic market, regardless of how good they are, no matter the cost to companies and consumers.

And more important than economics of whatever civilian planes china produces, its their safety. Chinese planes will have to have safety levels equal to those of boeing and airbus. And that wont be easy.

Click to expand...

That's what they thought every time the US issued a ban. It was the same thing with satellites, then with the Israeli AWACs, with the supercomputer chips, etc... Every time time China prevailed and will prevail, and the same story is shaping up with semiconductors and lithography as well. China has more STEM personnel than the entire West combined and international math competitions are always dominated by the Chinese, from every country. There can only be reason for why China can master tech that the rest of the world cannot, never the other way around. For China, it is only a matter of time and incentive causing drive.

America wants to hurt China in every way possible because it sense the mortality and fragility of its reign by China's growing power. It will not ban the engines because it fears for what China will make if they do.

Orthan said:

I doubt that china will ever make a civilian plane that is competitive in international markets, and that also includes the engine part.

Even if china is able to make one that has decent performance and cheaper than the alternatives, it will most likely still use western tech, and that will always be a political risk that international companies probably won´t take. Unless that it will basically only produce planes for its domestic market, regardless of how good they are, no matter the cost to companies and consumers.

And more important than economics of whatever civilian planes china produces, its their safety. Chinese planes will have to have safety levels equal to those of boeing and airbus. And that wont be easy.

Click to expand...

There is a fundamentally racist sentiment underpinning this sort of opinion. And I don't think something like this ought to be tolerated here at SDF.

Heresy said:

There is a fundamentally racist sentiment underpinning this sort of opinion. And I don't think something like this ought to be tolerated here at SDF.

Click to expand...

I agree that there is some implied bias and assumed perpetual superiority in sentiment expressed above.

Even if china is able to make one that has decent performance and cheaper than the alternatives, it will most likely still use western tech

Click to expand...

Why? Why can't the Chinese come up with their own shit?

And more important than economics of whatever civilian planes china produces, its their safety. Chinese planes will have to have safety levels equal to those of boeing and airbus. And that wont be easy.

Click to expand...

Boeing safety (Mostly just based on 747 list):

1. Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
   (boeing-s-737-max-software-outsourced-to-9-an-hour-engineers in India)
2. Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
3. On May 7, 1990,
   Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
   Flight 132 touched down at Delhi-Indira Gandhi International Airport after a flight from London-Heathrow. On application of reverse thrust, a failure of the number-one engine pylon-to-wing attachment caused this engine to tilt nose down. Hot exhaust gasses caused a fire on the left wing. The aircraft, VT-EBO, was damaged beyond repair.
4. On December 29, 1991, China Airlines Flight 358, a 747-200, crashed shortly after takeoff from Chiang Kai-shek International Airport in Taipei, Taiwan, killing all five crewmembers, when the number-three and number-four engines (the ones on the right wing) detached from the aircraft.
5. On October 4, 1992, El Al Flight 1862, a 747-200F, crashed shortly after takeoff from Amsterdam Schiphol Airport after the right-side engines both fell off, due to metal fatigue, and damaged the right wing, killing all three crew members and the single passenger on board, as well as 39 people on the ground.
6. On July 17, 1996, TWA Flight 800, a 747-100 bound for Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris, exploded during its climb from JFK in New York, killing all 230 people aboard. A spark from a wire in the center fuel tank is believed to have caused the explosion. Changes in fuel tank management were adopted after the crash.

If you think Boeing gave a fuck about safety, then they would not have outsourced 737MAX testing to $9/hr Indian grad students.

If anything, the Chinese would work EXTRA hard to make sure COMAC's record is spotless, instead of resting on their laurels, as Boeing did.

Orthan said:

I doubt that china will ever make a civilian plane that is competitive in international markets, and that also includes the engine part.

Even if china is able to make one that has decent performance and cheaper than the alternatives, it will most likely still use western tech, and that will always be a political risk that international companies probably won´t take. Unless that it will basically only produce planes for its domestic market, regardless of how good they are, no matter the cost to companies and consumers.

And more important than economics of whatever civilian planes china produces, its their safety. Chinese planes will have to have safety levels equal to those of boeing and airbus. And that wont be easy.

Click to expand...

Its about eclipsing and leapfrogging not just direct comparison or linear catching up...

China will never catch up to Internal Combustion Engine technology of German tech but it doesnt have to.... ICE cars going the way of the dodo bird

In semiconductors silicon is at its ends, literally. New materials, techniques and discoveries will be needed in future to the further computer advancement.... otherwise Moore's law dies and we stop at 2nm forever...

Boeing 737 (the second most popular airplane in history) has existed since the 1960s... sure it underwent a glass cockpit upgrade in the flight deck but its still more or less the same airframe since before man landed on the moon or something like that... Now you say the MAX is fly by wire, true but look at the fiasco that was the MCAS that intentionally killed all those innocent lives simply because Boeing cheaped out and only used one pitot tube to measure AoA for an airframe from Pan Am era instead of redesigning everything to fit the new engines cg etc... and then on top of that neglected to even notate MCAS functionality in the pilots manual in fear of needing to retrain pilots in the full motion simulators and they only did a ipad training for the pilots to save money.. plus they hired Indians at 9 bucks an hour to code their MCAS flight software... all to save a buck...

You think Boeing is the paragon of safety? This ain't the 1970s nomo

quantumlight said:

China will never catch up to Internal Combustion Engine technology of German but it doesnt have to.... ICE cars going the way of the dodo bird

Click to expand...

Except it did
Commercial success is hard to achieve in an environment with already established players but this doesn't indicate a technical deficiency.

China has Boeing on its balls. Why China have to do everything on her own when no one else do? US doesn't own the own world.

MwRYum said:

It'd need to be more specific than that for Boeing to deploy their lobbyists in The Swamp...

Such as the remaining orders of 737Max for China Southern Airline? Or future orders of certain raw materials(?) by Boeing?

Click to expand...

Yup exactly Boeing has not receive any order from China since the ban was not lifted yet and it won't in foreseeable future . Boeing is now begging China to lift the ban and US government lobby China no result sofar
The company has been all but shut out of new orders in the world's biggest aircraft market since 2017, which contributed to its decision to cut production of its long-haul 787 model.

Boeing faces rocky path to gaining approval for 737 MAX return in China​

Jamie FreedStella QiuNorihiko Shirouzu

• Political and regulatory obstacles delaying return -sources
• Boeing won't increase MAX production until China situation clearer
• China pursuing homegrown aerospace ambitions with rival C919

BEIJING, June 23 (Reuters) - Trade power tensions, regulatory hurdles and attempts by the West to counter Chinese competition are delaying a return of the 737 MAX in China, frustrating Boeing Co as a potential rival demonstrates its growing influence.

Six months after the West lifted an almost two-year flight ban on the MAX, there is no clear end in sight for the crisis surrounding Boeing's fastest-selling jet in China - the first nation to ground it in 2019 after two deadly crashes in five months.
The company had hoped for China to approve the MAX to return to the sky by the end of last year; in January 2021, Boeing said it expected the MAX to be approved by regulators everywhere by the end of June. Now, with help from the Biden administration, Boeing is stepping up efforts to convince China the plane is safe and reset its most strategic partnership as airlines start to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic.

But people familiar with the discussions say regulatory and political obstacles mean any resolution is still months away. For Boeing Chief Executive David Calhoun, that means seeing profits and market share slip to European rival Airbus SE .

"I do know that if it goes on for too long, I pay a price," he told a Bernstein conference this month. "I pay a price because they're (China) the biggest part of the growth of the industry in the world."
Because of the China uncertainty, Boeing is not confident it can raise production beyond the 31 MAX planes per month level it expects to hit by early 2022, Calhoun said.

The company has been all but shut out of new orders in the world's biggest aircraft market since 2017, which contributed to its decision to cut production of its long-haul 787 model.