COMAC C919
- Thread starter Deino
- Start date
I don't believe it until see it.
The report used the word "delivered" not certified. All the reports over the internet are sourced from , in it the word was 预计将于2022年完成交付, which is delivery. Whatever that word means it is clearly not certification.
IMO, it is a bad report with ambiguous wording that reveals nothing. Probably the interviewee (COMAC vice manager) did not really say anything meaningful, the author made up the rest that is already known. Note, only two sentences are from COMAC, the rest 80% of words are from the reporter.
And this contradicts the one above dramatically!
Summary
- C919 is overweight, shortening range, and adversely affecting fuel economy.
- Commercial success of the C919 won’t be possible.
According to what data they can say it is overweight and unable to make commercial success?
Also about flight test progress, COMPLETING 15% of tests, doesnt mean it is the only tests that have been ongoing! It might be ongoing many other tests but they are not COMPLETED yet, maybe all other tests are ongoing, in different stages, and might be concluded this year, or maybe not, but certainly it is not just 15% tests done
Also about flight test progress, COMPLETING 15% of tests, doesnt mean it is the only tests that have been ongoing! It might be ongoing many other tests but they are not COMPLETED yet, maybe all other tests are ongoing, in different stages, and might be concluded this year, or maybe not, but certainly it is not just 15% tests done
According to what data they can say it is overweight and unable to make commercial success?
Also about flight test progress, COMPLETING 15% of tests, doesnt mean it is the only tests that have been ongoing! It might be ongoing many other tests but they are not COMPLETED yet, maybe all other tests are ongoing, in different stages, and might be concluded this year, or maybe not, but certainly it is not just 15% tests done
But this "just 15% tests done" is not according to them but was officially confirmed by COMAC
I think that ever since the events of 2018/2019 the political barriers were a given. So export sales of the plane outside China were/are not likely anyway.
As for sales within China, I guess it's possible that a certain number HAVE to be purchased by state owned airlines.
But also, the way I am looking at gas prices and fuel burn data - I don't see it impossible if C919 could actually compete even if being somewhat overweight and with high fuel consumption. If the data below, that I've found, is correct:
1. A320 burns $2030 worth of fuel per hour. A320 Neo burns $190 worth of fuel per hour less.
2. A320 has a list price of $101 million. A320 Neo has a list price of $110 million.
3. If you're a huge customer, ordering dozens of planes at once and don't mind waiting a few years - Airbus will give you a huge discount. Allegedly, discounts of up to 50% off the list price were not unheard of.
4. A320 airframe life is some 60 000 flight hours. Which is usually spent within 25 years, and then the plane is retired.
So... IF C919 can manage A320 fuel burn figures, and if the plane flies 2400 hours per year, it will use $456 000 worth of fuel more than A320 neo within one year. Within 25 years that will rise to $11.4 million more. So, as long as C919 real pricetag can be kept, say, 12 million less than A320 neo with a 50% discount - meaning under $43 million - the C919 might be competitive enough for the domestic Chinese airlines. If Airbus manages to make A320 neo profitable even if it's sold at just $55 million - then I'd say it's plausible COMAC can also eventually sell C919 for 40-ish million and still be profitable.
Probably not in the first several years, until production ramps up and matures, but in the medium term - it's a possibility.
As for sales within China, I guess it's possible that a certain number HAVE to be purchased by state owned airlines.
But also, the way I am looking at gas prices and fuel burn data - I don't see it impossible if C919 could actually compete even if being somewhat overweight and with high fuel consumption. If the data below, that I've found, is correct:
1. A320 burns $2030 worth of fuel per hour. A320 Neo burns $190 worth of fuel per hour less.
2. A320 has a list price of $101 million. A320 Neo has a list price of $110 million.
3. If you're a huge customer, ordering dozens of planes at once and don't mind waiting a few years - Airbus will give you a huge discount. Allegedly, discounts of up to 50% off the list price were not unheard of.
4. A320 airframe life is some 60 000 flight hours. Which is usually spent within 25 years, and then the plane is retired.
So... IF C919 can manage A320 fuel burn figures, and if the plane flies 2400 hours per year, it will use $456 000 worth of fuel more than A320 neo within one year. Within 25 years that will rise to $11.4 million more. So, as long as C919 real pricetag can be kept, say, 12 million less than A320 neo with a 50% discount - meaning under $43 million - the C919 might be competitive enough for the domestic Chinese airlines. If Airbus manages to make A320 neo profitable even if it's sold at just $55 million - then I'd say it's plausible COMAC can also eventually sell C919 for 40-ish million and still be profitable.
Probably not in the first several years, until production ramps up and matures, but in the medium term - it's a possibility.
I think his point was that 15% of certification tests complete (measured in items ticked off) does not mean 85% of test campaign time (measured in flight hours or months) still lies ahead. A large fraction of the remaining issues could be 95% done and imminently count toward the "complete" column. This is a valid point, but at the same time it takes some believing to think COMAC will check off 85% of the outstanding items in less than a year - there are only so many tests you can run in parallel with 5 or 6 prototypes.
LNC is probably right to be skeptical of EIS in 2022.
As for weight, these guys are well-connected in the industry, they're a professional airline and aviation consultancy after all - it is their job to be. There are various ways in which such information could have come to their attention, for example a contact at an airline might be in the know on weight guarantees provided by COMAC as part of a C919 sales pitch. This need not even have been a successful bid, so could involve airlines outside China.
Why should this article from leehamnews mean any more value?
An article from COMAC, Chairman of COMAC talking about work in 2022. It does not say anything about targeting end of 2022. He does however have the following words "在后续的型号工作中，希望大家做到‘一切为了取证交付，一切围绕取证交付，一切服务取证交付’". It translates as "in the following word, I wish everybody do everything for certification and delivery". He emphasized it three times. It seems that certification and delivery (first commercial) is indeed same thing in COMAC's mind/plan/perspective.
Of course, without specifically saying "targeting 2022 certification", everything is just a guess or wish.