1st Flight Of 1st Large China Jet Delayed

Revelation · Tue Aug 06, 2013 11:34 am

Quote:

Comac Said to Delay Maiden Flight for First Large China Jet
By Jasmine Wang - Aug 6, 2013 1:20 AM ET

Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China will delay the maiden test flight of the country’s first large passenger plane to 2015 from an earlier plan for next year, four company officials familiar with the plan said.

Comac, as the company is also known, delayed the flight of C919 because of certain procedures that aren’t linked to technical matters, the people said, declining to be identified as the information isn’t public. The Shanghai-based planemaker may notify suppliers about the decision as early as this month.

Ref: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...for-china-s-first-large-plane.html

Can anyone clarify what "certain procedures that aren’t linked to technical matters" means?

If they aren't technical, then what are they? Financial? Political? Bureaucratic?

CrimsonNL · Tue Aug 06, 2013 11:57 am

This C919 is starting to look more and more like the Western jets

Martijn

KarelXWB · Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:13 pm

By the time the C919 enters the market, the more fuel efficient A320neo and 737 Max will be here too.

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
If they aren't technical, then what are they? Financial? Political? Bureaucratic?

They maybe need more time to make the shared cockpit with Bombardier work.

Polot · Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:23 pm

Is anyone surprised? They still can't get the ARJ21 certified.

Revelation · Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:43 pm

Quoting CrimsonNL (Reply 1):
This C919 is starting to look more and more like the Western jets

Good one!

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 2):
By the time the C919 enters the market, the more fuel efficient A320neo and 737 Max will be here too.

Seems so. In theory they could have been first to market with LEAP technology but that seems to be not on now.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 2):
They maybe need more time to make the shared cockpit with Bombardier work.

Could be, but that would be a technical issue whereas the announcement said the delay was not technical.

Quoting Polot (Reply 3):
Is anyone surprised? They still can't get the ARJ21 certified.

No, I'm just trying to figure out more about the reason for the delay.

Maybe I should ask Edward Snowden?

[Edited 2013-08-06 05:44:00]

ozglobal · Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:59 pm

Isnt' this a copy of an A320?

dtw2hyd · Tue Aug 06, 2013 2:23 pm

No worries, it will pickup pace once A320 production starts in China.

PPVRA · Tue Aug 06, 2013 2:33 pm

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
Can anyone clarify what "certain procedures that aren’t linked to technical matters" means?

I thin it means the delay is not due to technical matters. In other words, it's not the plane's fault.

Rdh3e · Tue Aug 06, 2013 2:49 pm

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
If they aren't technical, then what are they? Financial? Political? Bureaucratic?

"The technology we were planning on stealing to make this aircraft isn't yet available for stealing."

I kid of course, but to me it means some sort of government issue.

[Edited 2013-08-06 07:50:24]

BaconButty · Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:06 pm

According to Leeham.net CFM have refused to allow a Chinese assembly line for the LEAP engine, and GKN have been unable to reach agreement regarding building the Horizontal Stab. Issues like these seem to fit the OP (and don't bode well for the program)

http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/2013/08/02/c919-program-in-trouble/

connies4ever · Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:23 pm

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 6):
No worries, it will pickup pace once A320 production starts in China.

Believe deliveries have been going on for some time. in fact, 1st Sharklet-configured vehicle recently delivered:

http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pr...h-sharklets-goes-to-china-eastern/

KarelXWB · Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:33 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 10):
Believe deliveries have been going on for some time

Yeah, first delivery was in June 2009.

The Tianjin contract has been extended from 2016 to 2025 and the plant will also produce the A320neo from 2017.

Revelation · Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:13 pm

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 9):
CFM have refused to allow a Chinese assembly line for the LEAP engine

Hmm the reference says:

Quote:

According to this report, CFM doesn’t plan to proceed with an assembly line within China for the LEAP-1C that will power the C919. Concerns over intellectual property and the business case for the airplane are cited.

Definitely sounds ominous...

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 9):
Issues like these seem to fit the OP (and don't bode well for the program)

Yes, to all of the above...

lightsaber · Tue Aug 06, 2013 6:39 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 2):

By the time the C919 enters the market, the more fuel efficient A320neo and 737 Max will be here too.

The niche the C919 hoped to fill will be closed.

Quoting Polot (Reply 3):
Is anyone surprised? They still can't get the ARJ21 certified.

The ARJ21 will be quite the case study in mis-management.

Quoting DTW2HYD (Reply 6):

No worries, it will pickup pace once A320 production starts in China.

Funnier if there wasn't truth (C919 brakes come from the A320 per export control training I attended earlier in the year.)

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 9):
According to Leeham.net CFM have refused to allow a Chinese assembly line for the LEAP engine

Smart business decision. The Chinese like to play by their own rules, including schedules. Why should CFM/GE employ a large number of individuals in an idle factory? If China wants the engine, they'll still buy them.

There is no business case, until the C919 is in production, for another engine factory. CFM has time on their side.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 12):
Definitely sounds ominous...

Companies are finally waking up to the IP theft issue. China must implement better intellectual property protection to gain higher end production.

Lightsaber

ADent · Tue Aug 06, 2013 8:09 pm

So the ARJ-21 is a medium jet?

We're Nuts · Tue Aug 06, 2013 8:14 pm

When you factor in those four company officials' impending trial and execution for leaking this damaging information, the timeline will probably slip even more!

Revelation · Tue Aug 06, 2013 8:28 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 13):
Companies are finally waking up to the IP theft issue.

They are voting with their feet.

ikramerica · Tue Aug 06, 2013 10:11 pm

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 5):
Isnt' this a copy of an A320?

Maybe they ran out of toner?

dwightm · Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:37 am

Funniest series of posts I have enjoyed in a while!

planemaker · Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:26 am

Have to chuckle remembering how someone posted quite regularly that the C919 was going to kill the 737.

bohica · Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:58 am

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
Can anyone clarify what "certain procedures that aren’t linked to technical matters" means?

If they aren't technical, then what are they? Financial? Political? Bureaucratic?

It doesn't matter what the reason is. The bottom line is they can't get it up.

zeke · Wed Aug 07, 2013 2:14 am

Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):

My guess is this is that neither COMAC or the CAAC know how to certify an aircraft, the engineering justification, flight testing, and data analysis is a very complicated process, which in many respects is more complicated than the actual design. The investment also needs to be there, Airbus will be running up to 6 telemetry rooms concurrently for the A350 certification, that is a lot of planning, equipment, and skilled staff required.

COMAC can reverse engineer, or source off the shelf parts for a design (like a brake assembly), it is entirely different to justify the function of that component in the system to the certification requirements (the brake system in normal and abnormal operations), esp if that system is not mechanical.

Existing aircraft manufacturers have numerous test processes they have used to certify their designs, in many cases they can just modify a previous process to meet the amended certification standards. This is how they are able to certify so much of a new design before first flight and to have relatively short flight test campaigns.

Lufthansa · Wed Aug 07, 2013 2:17 am

My question is what is bombardier doing getting involved in this?
A common cockpit for example? Is there thinking purely that this will help sell more C-Series inside china?

And I don't blame GE for this decision. If Rolls and Pratt both refuse to do the same what choice with the chinese have if they want any kind of credibility? They're not in a place yet where they can make those kind of demands, pure and simple. And if they wonder why the prospect of lower production costs isn't seducing these company's anymore they only have themselves to blame for past behaviour and business practices.

YLWbased · Wed Aug 07, 2013 4:55 am

Quoting CrimsonNL (Reply 1):

This C919 is starting to look more and more like the Western jets

Martijn

Where is the "like" button when I want one?

YLWbased

CPHFF · Wed Aug 07, 2013 6:35 am

IMHO I think that the only shot that the C919 has to achieve any substantial sales, is if the Chinese Government force Chinese airlines to buy them. Same goes for the Irkut MS-21 from UAC in Russia (if that one ever leaves the ground).

The embarresment of the ARJ21..........., and they certainly did not start with a clean sheet design.

A friend of mine works in the Chinese Automotive Industry. They purchased the complete assembly equipment from SAAB Automobile (discontinued model 9-5, developed in 1997) and are making a Chinese variant. My friend says that they at one time had to wait 11 weeks for a decision to move a bracket for the AC compressor unit 5mm (yes, 5 millimeter). It took that long for the change to go through the hierarchy...., and NO ONE in the decision chain wanted any accountablility for their decisions. He's coming back to Europe this fall.

Lufthansa · Wed Aug 07, 2013 11:00 am

Quoting CPHFF (Reply 24):
d NO ONE in the decision chain wanted any accountablility for their decisions. He's coming back to Europe this fall.

And there you have a classic chinese problem. So many things are done on relationships rather than merit you get this kind of "don't stick your head out mentality"... and of course...if there is no upside for getting things right (because you got the position based on your connections rather than what you've produced for the company) then why risk a good gig? That type of attitude hardly fosters innovation and that is going to be the challenge for the chinese, and they need to be aware that they don't lose their most creative thinkers when it comes to innovation to other countries who create a better work environment for these people. Chinese have focused on being cheap, largely through labor rates. They haven't yet focused enough on what drives innovation and efficiency. It's not that its not possible (Hong Kong's very existence proves it is!) but there are a few cultural hang ups holding back some of china's brightest. Don't think its lost on those people, there's plenty of mainland chinese nationals working at universities right across the western world.

connies4ever · Wed Aug 07, 2013 11:07 am

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 25):
And there you have a classic chinese problem. So many things are done on relationships rather than merit you get this kind of "don't stick your head out mentality"

In Japan there is a saying "The nail that sticks out will be hammered down". I'm reasonably confident there is a Chinese equivalent, and, in fact, throughout East and Southeast Asia.

goosebayguy · Wed Aug 07, 2013 11:19 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 13):

Companies are finally waking up to the IP theft issue. China must implement better intellectual property protection to gain higher end production

But its China that is hoovering up all the worlds IP.

[Edited 2013-08-07 04:24:52]

KarelXWB · Mon Aug 19, 2013 5:34 pm

There is another delay!

> First first flight at the end of 2015 instead of Q2 2015
> EIS at the end of 2016
> First delivery 2017
> Aviationweek believes Comac will needs 2 years for certification instead of 1 year

There is also some positive news:

> The iron bird is finally being fitted
> By mid-2014 the iron bird should be fully operational with all systems

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....xml%2FAW_08_19_2013_p39-606453.xml

[Edited 2013-08-19 10:42:37]

B2443 · Mon Aug 19, 2013 5:52 pm

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 26):
In Japan there is a saying "The nail that sticks out will be hammered down". I'm reasonably confident there is a Chinese equivalent, and, in fact, throughout East and Southeast Asia.

Replace "nail" with "bird" and "hammered" with "gunned", you've got it...枪打出头鸟。

as far as C919's concerned. it'll be a long way as it's system engineering, not just automotive or aerospace alone..

FWAERJ · Mon Aug 19, 2013 6:36 pm

Quoting CPHFF (Reply 24):

IMHO I think that the only shot that the C919 has to achieve any substantial sales, is if the Chinese Government force Chinese airlines to buy them.

You forgot the other trade practice that the Chinese are good at: state-subsidizing a huge chunk of C919 exports and undercutting Airbus and Boeing on price to the point where A and B can't compete with COMAC, even though the C919 will be a far inferior product to the A320NEO and 737 MAX.

It's happened before in many other industries, and it just might happen in commercial airplanes. And if it does, expect a joint US/EU WTO filing in a jiffy.

[Edited 2013-08-19 11:47:42]

B2443 · Mon Aug 19, 2013 7:02 pm

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 30):
And if it does, expect a joint US/EU WTO filing in a jiffy.

Then they will rally all the western suppliers (GE, Honeywell come to mind) to lobby for them.

lightsaber · Tue Aug 20, 2013 1:33 pm

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 30):
You forgot the other trade practice that the Chinese are good at: state-subsidizing a huge chunk of C919 exports and undercutting Airbus and Boeing on price to the point where A and B can't compete with COMAC,

In aviation, the purchase price is only 10% to 15% of the opperating cost. This isn't like pipe or another commodity. The quality of the product drives cost more than the manufacturing costs.

And this a market neither Europe nor the USA will stand by and allow subsidies... WTO fight galore...

Quoting B2443 (Reply 31):
Then they will rally all the western suppliers (GE, Honeywell come to mind) to lobby for them.

But they stole from Goodrich the brakes. That alone gives a powerful way to block sales to Western nations.

Lightsaber

MaverickM11 · Tue Aug 20, 2013 2:02 pm

This will be such a disappointment to all the Chinese carriers that were looking forward to being pressured to order it

dtw2hyd · Tue Aug 20, 2013 2:13 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 13):
Companies are finally waking up to the IP theft issue. China must implement better intellectual property protection to gain higher end production.

I think judicial system is the problem. IP protection laws are there to serve only Chinese companies. When Apple wants to sell iPad in China and some local company had iPad registered trademark, Apple has to settle for $60 Million after a loosing a legal battle. Where as you can get a car with BMW front-end and Lexus rear-end, or any combination there of.

pliersinsight · Tue Aug 20, 2013 2:15 pm

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 33):

This will be such a disappointment to all the Chinese carriers that were looking forward to being pressured to order it

Which i suspect is the motivation for their aircraft industry, as well as other things like their BMW and Benz clones. China is the #2 or #3 GDP in the world, so it only stands to reason that they would not want to let the billions spent with Boeing and Airbus literally fly out of the country when they could copy the technology and sell it at home.

abba · Tue Aug 20, 2013 2:42 pm

Quoting pliersinsight (Reply 35):
China is the #2 or #3 GDP in the world, so it only stands to reason that they would not want to let the billions spent with Boeing and Airbus literally fly out of the country when they could copy the technology and sell it at home

But the question still remains whether or not even China in itself - perhaps with a few custermers outside - is big enough to be able to support a healthy OEM that would have the resources to develop a product on par with what Boeing and Airbus can offer.

817Dreamliiner · Tue Aug 20, 2013 2:51 pm

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 33):
This will be such a disappointment to all the Chinese carriers that were looking forward to being pressured to order it

I know wiki isnt the best source, but it seems the Chinese airlines/leasing companies have already ordered it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comac_C919#Orders_and_deliveries

slimshady · Tue Aug 20, 2013 3:42 pm

The cultural differences in this project are astounding. Just a few points in random order
- The Chinese have no experience in designing aircraft to western regulatory standards.
- They have no experience with system suppliers and integrator
- Commercially, they expect all of their suppliers to work at risk without a contract. A lot of western suppliers are getting fed up with this.
- COMAC/AVIC is being super-secret with their communication with the outside world stemming from being a military design, development and manufacturing entity after working for decades under a communist regime.
- industry analysts are greatly reducing the forecast for COMAC. I think it was 3000 planes to 1000.

I absolutely LOVE this article.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....e-xml/awx_07_06_2013_p0-594323.xml

DTWPurserBoy · Tue Aug 20, 2013 4:27 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 21):
My guess is this is that neither COMAC or the CAAC know how to certify an aircraft, the engineering justification, flight testing, and data analysis is a very complicated process, which in many respects is more complicated than the actual design. The investment also needs to be there, Airbus will be running up to 6 telemetry rooms concurrently for the A350 certification, that is a lot of planning, equipment, and skilled staff required.

China is still on their learning curve and I predict that in ten years they will be an international aviation force to be respected. They learned a lot from the MD-80/90 production and now from the A320. Certification to international standards is a very difficult thing to do but knowing the tenacity of the Chinese and their pride in their industrial accomplishments I am confident they will do just fine.

lightsaber · Tue Aug 20, 2013 4:27 pm

I personally think the C919 will happen. I also think it won't be able to compete with used A320s/737NGs...

Quoting slimshady (Reply 38):
- Commercially, they expect all of their suppliers to work at risk without a contract. A lot of western suppliers are getting fed up with this.

Most are no-bidding such contracts. No Western vendor will bid without risk clearly allocated in a contract. COMAC might not understand this, but the Western vendors do. China is just not getting as much on aerospace as they like as often the Jargon from team to team varies.

We work with AVEC and due to components on the LEAP, probably with COMAC in the future. They aren't happy how little information we provide other than what is contractually specified. And we've done more than a few 'stop works' waiting for money. Cest la vie. Let's just say the ARJ-21 hasn't solved all of their issues (I'm under NDA, so no further discussion.).

Lightsaber

lightsaber · Tue Aug 20, 2013 6:39 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 39):
China is still on their learning curve and I predict that in ten years they will be an international aviation force to be respected. They learned a lot from the MD-80/90 production

Big difference between manufacturing, certification, and designing from 1st principal physics. Each is their own skill set which has experts within the industry.

But the IP issue is changing the game. China just demanded all this information for hardware on the ARJ-21... we won't provide. We'll take the penalty payment happily and move on and let them find another vendor. Or... they take what we offer. I had a vote... I'm protecting our IP. (note: no competent competitor would disclose what China/AVEC is demanding.)

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 39):
knowing the tenacity of the Chinese and their pride in their industrial accomplishments I am confident they will do just fine.

I know they'll try. But time is such a factor in developing technology. Eventually aviation in China will be a force to reckon with, but not within 15 years. Look how long it took Airbus to mature and that was building off Dassault, SNECMA, Donnier, employees hired from Fokker, Messerschmidt (yes, the factories still exist and still produce), British Aerospace (various companies), MTU, and other European contributors. Even then, their aircraft still have a respectable non-European content.

What you propose takes 17 to 20 years on the accelerated path.

Lightsaber

DTWPurserBoy · Tue Aug 20, 2013 9:18 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 41):
What you propose takes 17 to 20 years on the accelerated path.

You are, of course, correct. This, combined with a little hacker's luck, might speed up the timeline.

I am watching with great interest the Japanese aviation sector, too. However, their labor costs are so high I am not sure if they would be a viable stand alone competitor or a partner in a joint venture down the road. Also, it takes a skilled eye to determine with accuracy where a hole exists that needs to be filled. IMHO it is a true 737 replacement family.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net