COMAC C919

pmc

Major
Registered Member
I made assumptions based on the articles I cited. You may ask the Russian planners behind this program for why the MC-21 seem not entering series production sooner. What civilian aircrafts with latest avionics are you talking about ?
Taking time for replacements is alright. Never have i made that an issue either.
You seem to miss the subject of discussion often. You linked an article regarding Automotive combustion engine while we are talking about Civilian aircrafts. Very odd replies from you. And there was no attempt from me to compare C919 and MC21. Strange.
I am showing you the policies. that is impacting both public and private business.
you are assuming that they started this MS21 project without investing in avionics?. when it is fundamentally contrary to all Russians decisions. They could have easily re engined TU-204SM and be done with cheap.
They are the risk taker from start to make planes that exceed specifications of latest Airbus. with cabin width that exceed A-321XLR.
 

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
I am showing you the policies. that is impacting both public and private business.
you are assuming that they started this MS21 project without investing in avionics?. when it is fundamentally contrary to all Russians decisions. They could have easily re engined TU-204SM and be done with cheap.
They are the risk taker from start to make planes that exceed specifications of latest Airbus. with cabin width that exceed A-321XLR.
Again, you may read the article I cited. You are raising questions that is better directed at the authorities than somebody in a defence forum.
 

pmc

Major
Registered Member
Again, you may read the article I cited. You are raising questions that is better directed at the authorities than somebody in a defence forum.
The article mentioning a government tender for domestic avionics for MS21.
Do you think Government will issue such a tender if the Government is not reasonably confident about developments in the industry?
 

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
The article mentioning a government tender for domestic avionics for MS21.
Do you think Government will issue such a tender if the Government is not reasonably confident about developments in the industry?
The same article goes on to say they are waiting for responses ( yet to receive one ). But assuming they already got responses by 2021 ( and we don't know because Russia is not publicing it) then the active development can only be assumed to have started by 2021.

Then one may wonder when exactly would a fully Russianized MC-21 finally become available in the global market.
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
The same article goes on to say they are waiting for responses ( yet to receive one ). But assuming they already got responses by 2021 ( and we don't know because Russia is not publicing it) then the active development can only be assumed to have started by 2021.

Then one may wonder when exactly would a fully Russianized MC-21 finally become available in the global market.
Speed is a project management issue, not a capabilities issue. If the problem was capabilities you’d be stuck doing basic R&D, not product integration.
 

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
Speed is a project management issue, not a capabilities issue. If the problem was capabilities you’d be stuck doing basic R&D, not product integration.
Depends on whether you have all underlying technogies and supply chains figured out.
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
Depends on whether you have all underlying technogies and supply chains figured out.
Things like landing gears and avionics are not bottlenecks. The way a lot of this works is that for parts of performance and requirements that aren’t cutting edge you already have off the shelf solutions. That’s what R&D pipelines are for. You’re only inventing new parts for engineering performance parameters you’ve never attained before, and all those foreign sourced components are pretty standard and well trodden technologies. There’s no mystique about these things. I can understand people being disappointed by setbacks but setbacks don’t change the fundamentals of how development processes work. This sort of blind uninformed correction of priors isn’t good analysis or meaningful insight.
 

pmc

Major
Registered Member
The same article goes on to say they are waiting for responses ( yet to receive one ). But assuming they already got responses by 2021 ( and we don't know because Russia is not publicing it) then the active development can only be assumed to have started by 2021.

Then one may wonder when exactly would a fully Russianized MC-21 finally become available to global market.
Your article is from January 2020 about MS-21

In September 2020 they feel confident of certifying SuperJet Russian versions by 2023. but the actual order was given in January 2018.(You think they would not have given such order for MS21)
SSJ wiill be using PD-8 engine developed from PD-14 with maximum unification of avionics.
since PD-14 engine is ahead of PD-8 engine. so its reasonable to assume that Russian version of MS21 will be ahead of SSJ-R.
avionics is not bottleneck. its engine certification that dictate timelines.
These projects are interconnected.
ARJ and C919 has no relationship.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
Things like landing gears and avionics are not bottlenecks. The way a lot of this works is that for parts of performance and requirements that aren’t cutting edge you already have off the shelf solutions. That’s what R&D pipelines are for. You’re only inventing new parts for engineering performance parameters you’ve never attained before, and all those foreign sourced components are pretty standard and well trodden technologies. There’s no mystique about these things. I can understand people being disappointed by setbacks but setbacks don’t change the fundamentals of how development processes work. This sort of blind uninformed correction of priors isn’t good analysis or meaningful insight.
If they are well trodden technologies then there shouldn't be any problems for MS21/MC21. But that isn't the case. And engineering performance parameters one haven't attained yet is what is needed to be competitive in the global markets. Isn't MC21 an aircraft for export ? You are implying that all technologies Russia derived from foreign suppliers are there because it made better financial sense and not because Russia can't do it itself. Russia picked Foreign suppliers who were supplying the established players like Airbus ( a good move ) and these suppliers had built not only their products but also the reliable production of these products due to sustained investments and effort.
Avionics is indeed a bottleneck for Russia, especially for a civilian passenger jet, for the time being. I'd assume every technology not substituted yet to be a bottleneck.
 
Last edited:

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
Your article is from January 2020 about MS-21

In September 2020 they feel confident of certifying SuperJet Russian versions by 2023. but the actual order was given in January 2018.(You think they would not have given such order for MS21)
SSJ wiill be using PD-8 engine developed from PD-14 with maximum unification of avionics.
since PD-14 engine is ahead of PD-8 engine. so its reasonable to assume that Russian version of MS21 will be ahead of SSJ-R.
avionics is not bottleneck. its engine certification that dictate timelines.
These projects are interconnected.
ARJ and C919 has no relationship.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
It is planned that the share of Russian components will be 50-60%.

So lets wait till 2023. Then we will look into SSJ including its systems and ofcourse PD8.
 
Top