Quote: Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (Comac) will unveil at the show a model showing the exterior design of its much-anticipated Comac C919 - the aircraft China hopes will establish the country as one of the world's top commercial aircraft-makers.
Finally China is venturing into commercial aviation.
It certainly does! Whilst we need to see the details, they probably have suffient plans and specs to copy the A320 pretty closely. Chinese culture does not have a concept of intellectual property. They will probably develop it quite independently once they arrive at the critical mass of independent know-how.
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
On the outside it does seem to resemble the a320. The seat count (130-200) seems to imply at least two variants, maybe even three (think a319/a320/a321). I do think I see winglets on the wing, but it's hard to tell from the picture.
What's much more important is what's on the inside. Will it have FBW, how much of the plane will be composites and "traditional" alloys, etc. I'm also very curious if they will use next gen engines (GTF) or more traditional engines. They appear to be talking to everyone right now.
Airbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 9702 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 26741 times:
Quoting Kappel (Reply 3): On the outside it does seem to resemble the a320.
The front section looks a lot like a mini A380 nose with 787 cockpit windows. Seems to me like they actually may have put some thought into it rather than just make a carbon copy of the A320 blue prints. But then again, until we see the actual specs this means absolutely nothing.
Perhaps yes, but as I've repeatedly said, how do you make any modern aircraft radically any different? Because of it's very nature of design one can't feasibly get away from people saying "it's a copy of xxxxx". 'Comparing' such is pretty daft if you ask me.
Kappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 16
Reply 7, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 26403 times:
Quoting AirNz (Reply 6): 'Comparing' such is pretty daft if you ask me.
Agreed, just look at the similarities between the a350 and 787.
Quoting Airbazar (Reply 5): But then again, until we see the actual specs this means absolutely nothing.
Again agreed. The outside really says very little about the plane. I have some doubts that this will sell in big numbers outside China, but then again, who thought ten or twenty years ago thousands of jets would be bought from a Brazilian company.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 9824 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 26260 times:
Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 1): They will probably develop it quite independently once they arrive at the critical mass of independent know-how.
There is no way to gauge when they will have "critical mass of independent know-how." The C919 does not represent it. While China's engineering talent is very good, their track record of transport machinery is abysmally poor. It is changing... slowly.
Quoting UAL747DEN (Reply 8): China's way of saying thank you to Airbus for giving them the information that they need to get their own aircraft up and running!
Of course. But when I saw the thread, I was really expecting a copy of the Boeing 727
AirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2195 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 25784 times:
If you or I designed a 150 seater it would look like an A320.
If you or I designed a 250-300 seater wide bodied twin it would look like a 787.
Modern planes look alike, cos an opimum shape has been founded for particular types of a plane using current technology. Seeing that the ARJ-21 has an Antonov desgined wing, a whole new Chinese designed plane is a massive leap forward...
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
RIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1880 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 25553 times:
Quoting Kappel (Reply 7): The outside really says very little about the plane. I have some doubts that this will sell in big numbers outside China, but then again, who thought ten or twenty years ago thousands of jets would be bought from a Brazilian company.
- yep, that's the thing, what exactly they intend to achieve: to build something good enough to be able to sell it domestically and to the countries/airlines that currently fly third hand 732s/310s - or to really eventually become a major player in narrowbody market. I'd still expect Russia to be there first...
VC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3392 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 23844 times:
What impact will this have on Embraer? Embraer built a plant in China for the E170 if I'm not mistaken. Will Embraer design something totally new? Is there a hole in the commercial aircraft space that they could fill?
The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6818 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 23115 times:
Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 16): It wouldn't surprise me if it is, China is natorious for stealing designs. Look at that other jet they just came out with.. they use the same fuse and all as a DC-9/MD-80 etc.
I was actually really suprised it wasn't a diesel-9 derivative with modern high bypass engines myself
Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 1): It certainly does! Whilst we need to see the details, they probably have suffient plans and specs to copy the A320 pretty closely. Chinese culture does not have a concept of intellectual property. They will probably develop it quite independently once they arrive at the critical mass of independent know-how.
It will probably be a quite cost-reduced version, though...Chinese factory managers are notorious (in electronics manufacture, in particular) for making unannounced cost reducing changes in products (even ignoring their effects on the product's durability, longevity, or safety ) and pocketing the the change from the cost reductions. I worked for a fortune 500 company, who manufactured electronic products in China, and got burned by this at one of our factories Can't say more without violating my NDA...
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
Quoting KL911 (Reply 2): Since the A320 is build in China I would be sure they have the specs..
Creating a model is easy, but what will they offer to attract foreign buyers?
Oh, for a new aircraft company to do the 130 to 200 seat range with a first product in 2016... Very aggressive. Which engine? They have one year, maybe 18 months, to persuade Pratt, GE or RR to develop a new engine. If its an existing engine.. Boeing and airbus will be pushed to actually go forward with their re-engine programs.
Actually, SNECMA might be their best bet for a new engine design...
From the source link: "US firm Goodrich, meanwhile, is forming a joint-venture with China's Xian Aircraft in the hope that this new venture can secure C919 work.
The Chinese joint-venture plans to make landing-gear and engine nacelle components."
Ok, so the gear will be Western designed. Now lets find out details on the wing box, wing aerodynamics, tires, engines, APU, flaps, avionics, hydraulics (or will this be an 'electric plane?'), and ???. What is the base material? Is the wing being designed by China or outsourced (I hope at a minimum Antonov or Sukhoi is brought in to optimize the aerodynamics, otherwise, there is little chance to beat even the 737NG's efficiency).
The size of the engines on the model implies a current generation engine. The wing-body contour seems inefficient. I know these seem like nitpicks... but there is a reason it takes billions to launch a new aircraft. The details are important! Its not good enough to match two established competitors. The old 'rule of thumb' is they need either 7% 'more' of something. 7% less fuel burn or 7% more range or payload, or ...
HA! My drone is lighter than required for registration.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 9824 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 22401 times:
Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 19): but there is a reason it takes billions to launch a new aircraft. The details are important! Its not good enough to match two established competitors.
China has the money. If only that was all it took. It also takes decades of experience. Steep learning curve. A culture of marketing and lifetime support.
China's industry is probably not yet mature enough to do a project like this, at any cost. They don't have the _companies_ needed to mount such a project. They will succeed in the business, but not now.
Lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 15218 posts, RR: 100
Reply 22, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 21670 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting Flighty (Reply 20): China's industry is probably not yet mature enough to do a project like this, at any cost. They don't have the _companies_ needed to mount such a project. They will succeed in the business, but not now.
e.g. we see Mitsubishi re-entering the market with a regional jet. That alone with the Japanese industry, whom makes parts for Boeing, IAE, and others, is a major step for them. Going straight into the #1 market will be... a challenge.
Farzan From Sweden, joined Jul 2007, 190 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 21222 times:
Quoting Kappel (Reply 11): On a side note, what's the status of the ARJ?
China daily had an article last week stating that deliveries of the first ARJ21's will start in 2010. In a separate article it was said that foreign companies where lining up to get in on the the Chinese "Jumbo Jet" project. (C919).
NCB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 21175 times:
Quoting Flighty (Reply 9): Of course. But when I saw the thread, I was really expecting a copy of the Boeing 727
China is quite advanced in aerospace, unlike what many things.
They already do active supply work for Airbus and Boeing, they have their own active designs, they design and their own fighter jets, their own engines.
It's a 100 year old industry in China, there have been pioneers there too, like Guo Yonghuai, an aerodynamics researcher and Feng Ru who built his own machine from scratch and flew it no much after the Wright Bros.
There is not enough info about C919 to determine what it will be like, but I do see it meet the requirements of the domestic market. I'd definitely wait a few years for the engine technology, with all the promising aspects it would be such a shame to equip them with standard CFM's.
There will finally be A, B and a C
: No there will be A, B and FAW aerospace. And if they have the same quality as the "cars" they make, we are in for a few surprises. just my 2 centavos.
: I am unsure that there would be a "C" in this figure with this jet alone. (I know that the ARJ is stillthere) but not the great variation in market c
: I'd probably design something that looks like a 727.
: This (what's in the photo) is really just a bad model, so I would not read much into design cues. I mean look at the R1 door, it is way too small (unl
: Yeah, as I said too... Any time a photo like this has cool "visual effects" processed onto it, it's usually hiding an underlying truth: it's crap. Th
: It's OK coming up with an A320 copy, but that's mid/late 80s technology, add some bells and whistles and at best late 90s technology. The next generat
: Agree, but, I'm willing to give them a chance. The 787 had all these cool design touches that didn't make it to the final stage...the sharkfin, etc.
: As most of the fellow A-netters suggested.... Looking at China's reputation I feel the aircraft would be a copy of probably the A320 which is already
: If that's true then I think it will only be A+C. The B company appears to have a problem right there
: The lowest picture shows another plane: the ARJ21 which is flying already (and some say is flying since the sixties )....
: Just read the Bloomberg article which provides a little more detail (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=am7fsSBVrBrQ). The 168 seat p
: If they are using cheaper materials, that means a heavier plane (or shorter life). Due to the numerous short fields in China, its likely this design
: googled this up. The China engineering ESD&I team is supporting the flight test aircraft fleet operation, trouble shooting, engine flight test item an
: I find it utterly shocking that someone can utter such a line in this forum and no one takes issue with it. Is there any justification to attribute t
: The old Soviet bloc manmaged to support a serious airliner industry until the Sovier Union collapsed, only exporting to its allies, so on that basis t
: I had posted here many many times on the C919, may I ask those interested for more information to do a search for what I had reported. Just to repeat
: It's not rocket science.... Holland, a tiny country, had Fokker producing F50, F70 and F100's for clients all over the world. Why can't China do the s
: Haha Arguably, the work that went into the A380 or the B787 and their engines is the full equal of rocket science. Narrowbodies, maybe not so much.
: Engines come from a total different supplier... And we're talking narrowbody here right?
: Experience. Sorry if it bothers you, but China is a country that CURRENTLY has no regard to for intellectual property, from the highest levels down t
: P&W wants role on China's C919 http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-pw-wants-role-on-chinas-c919.html PW has the advantage of offering a next-gen e
: As expected. Offering the GTF as well as LeapX would offer airlines the option off waiting a few yrs before selecting the engine. A risk reducing opt
: We shouldn't interpret too much from what looks to be a very preliminary model. I'd like to see some more performance specs first, as well as what sys
: Considering the "success" of Russian airplanes, I wonder who will want to buy Chinese airplanes. Probably only China and its close friends. And it wou
: After the war it seems that the "entry level" requirements of a country to be considered"serious" it had to have its own (uneconomic) airline. As a re
: - which [domestic market] will be quite enough for both Russia and China to justify development of everything smaller than widebody. Make it more att
: Okay let me summarize. China makes an model airplane. Model airplane resembles real Airbus and Boeing airplanes. China is stealing...China does not re
: If Noel Forgeard was still around, he might say it's a "Chinese copy" of the A320.
: Let me summarize. China shows a crappy looking model of an aircraft with few details. People point out China's long HISTORY of intellectual property