Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
rbretas
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2016 10:21 am

Mitsubishi Aircraft to cut over half its workforce and close offices around the world

Sat Jun 13, 2020 3:52 am

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2020/06/ebfd76da7551-mitsubishi-aircraft-to-more-than-halve-workforce-under-restructuring.html

Development centers in Canada and sales offices in the United States and Europe will also be closed. Washington testing site is to remain open.
The changes are expected to cut development costs by more than half.


I wonder if it is truly due to the pandemic or just a reflex of a failed project.
 
bkmbr
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:27 am

Re: Mitsubishi Aircraft to cut over half its workforce and close offices around the world

Sat Jun 13, 2020 4:45 am

Probably both. at this rate I'm starting to have doubts if Mitsubishi will be able to finish the certification program of the M90 to begin with.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 4534
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Mitsubishi Aircraft to cut over half its workforce and close offices around the world

Sat Jun 13, 2020 6:23 am

Could also be moving its resources to the new branch they acquired from Bombardier?
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate. 求同存異. よく見て・よく聞いて・よく考える
(≧▽≦) Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
(≧▽≦) Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
 
VV
Posts: 1871
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Mitsubishi Aircraft to cut over half its workforce and close offices around the world

Sat Jun 13, 2020 7:45 am

c933103 wrote:
Could also be moving its resources to the new branch they acquired from Bombardier?


Don't you think it would be the other way round?

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries acquired what remained of Bombardier Commercial Aircraft. I think they have just taken too many former Bombardier employees who are not necessarily needed to run the CRJ program.

Bombardier must be extremely happy to get rid of employees without having to lay anyone off. Now MHI may have to do the dirty job.
 
VV
Posts: 1871
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Mitsubishi Aircraft to cut over half its workforce and close offices around the world

Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:44 am

rbretas wrote:
https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2020/06/ebfd76da7551-mitsubishi-aircraft-to-more-than-halve-workforce-under-restructuring.html

.....

I wonder if it is truly due to the pandemic or just a reflex of a failed project.


The first thing to do is probably to acknowledge that the SpaceJet program will not make any money, considering the amount of cash already spent so far for a regional aircraft. We know that the market for regional aircraft is not so big.

If they know that the objective is not to make money than it is okay to continue developing the SpaJet.

It is clear that an aircraft that is launched in 2008 should have entered into service by now. Even Bombardier succeeded to do it with the C Series.

From the press article mentioned above, I read the following.

    Mitsubishi Aircraft will also reshuffle its development team, with Chief Development Officer Alex Bellamy stepping down while Yasuhiko Kawaguchi, who has experience working at the U.S. test site, will take the lead in aircraft development as chief engineer, starting on July 1.

Mitac will have to consider restructuring his first line too. The current set up does not make much sense.
 
davidjohnson6
Posts: 905
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:10 pm

Re: Mitsubishi Aircraft to cut over half its workforce and close offices around the world

Sat Jun 13, 2020 4:50 pm

Have Misubishi now realised that you need the explicit backing of a major state - the first model will take far longer than you imagined to bring to market, the second model will probably break even, and the third model of aircraft you make will make money

If you want to design and manufacture aircraft nowadays, you need to measure profit on a 30+ year horizon
Last edited by davidjohnson6 on Sat Jun 13, 2020 5:19 pm, edited 3 times in total.
 
airhansa
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Sat Jun 13, 2020 10:15 pm

I know this is considered one of the greatest evil sins of western geopolitics, but has anyone ever considered the idea of a tie-up with a Chinese aviation giant? China would love to have more diversity in terms of manufacturers, and Japan can sell its planes on the Chinese market to consumers who would enjoy Japanese safety-quality. From there, brand recognition can help Mitsubishi to sell in other third world markets and eventually the West as well.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 4534
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Mitsubishi Aircraft to cut over half its workforce and close offices around the world

Sun Jun 14, 2020 4:27 am

VV wrote:
c933103 wrote:
Could also be moving its resources to the new branch they acquired from Bombardier?


Don't you think it would be the other way round?

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries acquired what remained of Bombardier Commercial Aircraft. I think they have just taken too many former Bombardier employees who are not necessarily needed to run the CRJ program.

Bombardier must be extremely happy to get rid of employees without having to lay anyone off. Now MHI may have to do the dirty job.

Wouldn't those Bombardier employees be under MHIRJ instead of MITAC for now?
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate. 求同存異. よく見て・よく聞いて・よく考える
(≧▽≦) Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
(≧▽≦) Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 689
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 2:36 pm

And the saga of "Lazy Godzilla" continues ...
How long will customers be willing to wait ???

Source: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... nt-shakeup

Excerpt:

“The company’s priority will be on obtaining type certification for the SpaceJet M90,” Mitsubishi Aircraft said in a statement issued Monday.
“To maximize the efficiency of type certification flight tests in the future, this fiscal year Mitsubishi Aircraft will focus on reorganizing,
improving the current design at the aircraft-level, and validating data earned by over 3,900 hours of flight test.”
Plans now call for the development of the M100, long beset by a series of major delays, to extend into at least 2021,
marking the sixth certification postponement for the program.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20349
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 3:03 pm

First it is good news that the M90 certification continues. At this time Mitsubishi heavy industry cannot afford the losses the program previously incured.

The fact that M100 development will continue, after a delay, means that the program has a market.
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24657
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 3:39 pm

airhansa wrote:
I know this is considered one of the greatest evil sins of western geopolitics, but has anyone ever considered the idea of a tie-up with a Chinese aviation giant? China would love to have more diversity in terms of manufacturers, and Japan can sell its planes on the Chinese market to consumers who would enjoy Japanese safety-quality. From there, brand recognition can help Mitsubishi to sell in other third world markets and eventually the West as well.

Some things to consider:

Japan Inc has had the goal of being able to build its own airliners for decades now, MH90 was supposed to be a big step in that direction

Sino-Japanese politics are quite complicated

Intellectual property theft is rampant in China
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 689
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 3:40 pm

lightsaber wrote:
First it is good news that the M90 certification continues. At this time Mitsubishi heavy industry cannot afford the losses the program previously incured.

The fact that M100 development will continue, after a delay, means that the program has a market.


When the last order occurred?
 
User avatar
ADent
Posts: 1123
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:11 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 3:58 pm

EMBSPBR wrote:

When the last order occurred?

On 19 June 2019, Mitsubishi signed a MOU with an unnamed American customer for 15 of the new 76-seat SpaceJet M100 variant.

On 5 September 2019, Mesa Airlines signed a MOU for up to 100 SpaceJet M100s, 50 of which are targeted as firm orders and 50 as purchase rights.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20349
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 3:59 pm

Revelation wrote:
airhansa wrote:
I know this is considered one of the greatest evil sins of western geopolitics, but has anyone ever considered the idea of a tie-up with a Chinese aviation giant? China would love to have more diversity in terms of manufacturers, and Japan can sell its planes on the Chinese market to consumers who would enjoy Japanese safety-quality. From there, brand recognition can help Mitsubishi to sell in other third world markets and eventually the West as well.

Some things to consider:

Japan Inc has had the goal of being able to build its own airliners for decades now, MH90 was supposed to be a big step in that direction

Sino-Japanese politics are quite complicated

Intellectual property theft is rampant in China

Whomever partners in China takes a risk of IP theft.

The program has been a major learning curve on the difference between certified design and production and automotive production.



As to the question on the last order, 5 September 2019 by Mesa. I assume they differed. Wikipedia has a nice list.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_SpaceJet

Now obviously the SkyWest order needs renegotiation

Obviously more orders are required as is true of the potential competitor. It takes 300+ aircraft in service to perform annual overhauls on the components. The 717 survives because Boeing paid vendors to overhaul when demand was sufficient. It cost Boeing cash to modify contracts.

There will be no demand for 3+ years. I consider cutting the spend wise.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
bkmbr
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:27 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 4:51 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Whomever partners in China takes a risk of IP theft.

The program has been a major learning curve on the difference between certified design and production and automotive production.


Any comercial partnership, regardless of the nationality of the companies, have risks of IP theft, and moreover, it’s not like China needed a commercial partnership as the only resort to do this. The Chinese have an entire sector of their economy specialized in reverse engineering western products, especially electronics. They could just buy a model airplane and disassemble it to have access to a good part of the model’s IP, in addition what could they gain from the MRJ that they no longer have?

The avionics and engines on the MRJ the Chinese could use are already use and have extensive experience as operators through the Chinese airlines. The big risk for Western companies with the Chinese is not that they steal IPs, but that they absorb the methods of organizing and developing aircraft, which they do not yet have in the same Western standard and that makes a union with Mitsubishi irrelevant to them.

The auto industry is indeed a good example of this, Chinese cars produced with Chinese brands 25 ago were a joke, now a days a Chery or Geely car in the same price range to their western competitors are incredibly similar in many ways thanks to the experience and methods learned in the various joint ventures with foreign manufacturers thirsty for the Chinese domestic market.

Mitsubishi has not developed any radically new technology with the MRJ and most components used by MRJ were already available to the Chinese anyway through the operation of other similar aircraft, so one can imagine that in terms of technological resources an MRJ and a C-919 are not radically different from each other to justify an investment of this size by them. Organizationally what would the Chinese gain from siding with the dumpster fire that Mitsubishi management is right now? Both are at the same level of development and certification problems for their planes, the Chinese will gain virtually nothing with the MRJ project. The situation however would be completely different if we were discussing an alliance of the Chinese with Bombardier from 5 years ago (as it almost happened BTW) or with Embraer who has the organizational and logistical experience to not only design the plane but to certify them in Western markets.

A union with Mitsubishi would be the union of 2 companies that in fact have the same kind of problems and would not bring any significant advantage to the Chinese and would only provide cash for MHI but an alliance between Embraer and COMAC (for example) would become a real threat for the Airbus-Boeing duopoly.
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 689
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 6:14 pm

ADent wrote:
On 5 September 2019, Mesa Airlines signed a MOU for up to 100 SpaceJet M100s, 50 of which are targeted as firm orders and 50 as purchase rights.


Mesa won’t take it since it’s a paper plane only ...

I mean, real orders ???
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20349
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 6:29 pm

EMBSPBR wrote:
ADent wrote:
On 5 September 2019, Mesa Airlines signed a MOU for up to 100 SpaceJet M100s, 50 of which are targeted as firm orders and 50 as purchase rights.


Mesa won’t take it since it’s a paper plane only ...

I mean, real orders ???

Mitsubishi has stated, as noted above, they will still develop it.

The majority of my career is spent on the paper (design) side. Rumors had a significant MOU list, many waiting for MR9 certification.

The US regionals need a scope compliant aircraft. Pilots learned their lesson and are being strict on scope. There is zero demand in the US until mainline fleets build back up and oil becomes pricey enough, I estimate over $60/bbl. So delaying the spend was the wise move.

This will allow the E1-175 to gain a small number of orders during the recovery.

As you point out a paper airplane. Step 1 is certify the M90 and learn the lessons.

Step 2 is debug it.

Then design and manufacture the M100.

The sales of the E2 showed there was little demand for small jets. Even the A220-100 has fewer than acceptable orders while the A220-300 has done ok, why so much of the A319/73G market passed on same gauge and upgauged.

The good news is it is moving forward.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
TonyClifton
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 6:36 pm

lightsaber wrote:
EMBSPBR wrote:
ADent wrote:
On 5 September 2019, Mesa Airlines signed a MOU for up to 100 SpaceJet M100s, 50 of which are targeted as firm orders and 50 as purchase rights.


Mesa won’t take it since it’s a paper plane only ...

I mean, real orders ???

Mitsubishi has stated, as noted above, they will still develop it.

The majority of my career is spent on the paper (design) side. Rumors had a significant MOU list, many waiting for MR9 certification.

The US regionals need a scope compliant aircraft. Pilots learned their lesson and are being strict on scope. There is zero demand in the US until mainline fleets build back up and oil becomes pricey enough, I estimate over $60/bbl. So delaying the spend was the wise move.

This will allow the E1-175 to gain a small number of orders during the recovery.

As you point out a paper airplane. Step 1 is certify the M90 and learn the lessons.

Step 2 is debug it.

Then design and manufacture the M100.

The sales of the E2 showed there was little demand for small jets. Even the A220-100 has fewer than acceptable orders while the A220-300 has done ok, why so much of the A319/73G market passed on same gauge and upgauged.

The good news is it is moving forward.

Lightsaber

Agree with all this. M100 does not need to be available tomorrow. Taking the time to get the MRJ developed, refined, fixed, tweaked during this lull will only help the M100 in the future when they pull the trigger. The demand for widespread replacement or orders isn’t happening in the near future. Come the other side, they can have a more polished product in time for the replacement cycle. Any weight losses they can find in the meantime helps.
 
User avatar
ADent
Posts: 1123
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:11 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:06 pm

EMBSPBR wrote:
ADent wrote:
On 5 September 2019, Mesa Airlines signed a MOU for up to 100 SpaceJet M100s, 50 of which are targeted as firm orders and 50 as purchase rights.


Mesa won’t take it since it’s a paper plane only ...

I mean, real orders ???

28 January 2015 - Japan Airlines - 32 Firm orders according to https://www.flightglobal.com/jal-firms- ... 42.article .
ANA has 15 on order too.

This plane has swept the market ;) as its closest competitor (175E2) has no orders. :stirthepot:
 
bkmbr
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:27 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 7:51 pm

ADent wrote:
28 January 2015 - Japan Airlines - 32 Firm orders according to https://www.flightglobal.com/jal-firms- ... 42.article .
ANA has 15 on order too.

This plane has swept the market ;) as its closest competitor (175E2) has no orders. :stirthepot:


Thanks to the artificial limitation of the US Scope Clause. The E175SC E1 for example have over 100+ firm orders right now even though it is a plane with higher fuel consumption. The only worldwide real competitor of the ERJ175E2 is the ERJ175SC E1, the moment the ERJ175SC E1 stops being produced and the ERJ175E2 is the only option certified and ready to fly commercially these numbers will probably change. With the M90 in danger of being canceled, the CRJ line out of production and the M100 probably following the same fate as the SSJ70 project, there will be no viable alternative for the 76-passenger segment outside the 175E2 within a few years, an airplane that is already practically certified.
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 689
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 9:49 pm

ADent wrote:
28 January 2015 - Japan Airlines - 32 Firm orders according to https://www.flightglobal.com/jal-firms- ... 42.article .
ANA has 15 on order too.
This plane has swept the market ;) as its closest competitor (175E2) has no orders. :stirthepot:


This is for M90.
Apples to apples.
Oranges to oranges.

Just to remind that on April 30th., Embraer has delivered 637 E175-E1, plus 163 units on firm backlog, plus 293 options.
Source: https://daflwcl3bnxyt.cloudfront.net/m/ ... l/1Q20.pdf

And, for the E175-E2, even if they don´t sell no one single plane, it´s a real prototype flying with a second to follow in few weeks.
A real plane.
Not a paper plane. :stirthepot:
Or even a plane with ten prototypes, none certified, and still on development more than 10 years since launched ...

Impossible as people do not see the obvious here, that the issue is not just about funds, it is about technical competence.
Their learning curve should have been achieved some time ago ...
 
TonyClifton
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 16, 2020 9:53 pm

Oh man is another thread going to evolve into ERJ v MRJ/scope arguments?
 
Nean1
Posts: 391
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 2:43 am

EMBSPBR wrote:
ADent wrote:
28 January 2015 - Japan Airlines - 32 Firm orders according to https://www.flightglobal.com/jal-firms- ... 42.article .
ANA has 15 on order too.
This plane has swept the market ;) as its closest competitor (175E2) has no orders. :stirthepot:


This is for M90.
Apples to apples.
Oranges to oranges.

Just to remind that on April 30th., Embraer has delivered 637 E175-E1, plus 163 units on firm backlog, plus 293 options.
Source: https://daflwcl3bnxyt.cloudfront.net/m/ ... l/1Q20.pdf

And, for the E175-E2, even if they don´t sell no one single plane, it´s a real prototype flying with a second to follow in few weeks.
A real plane.
Not a paper plane. :stirthepot:
Or even a plane with ten prototypes, none certified, and still on development more than 10 years since launched ...

Impossible as people do not see the obvious here, that the issue is not just about funds, it is about technical competence.
Their learning curve should have been achieved some time ago ...


Our old friend "Inconvenient Truth".
 
User avatar
ADent
Posts: 1123
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:11 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:36 am

EMBSPBR wrote:
And, for the E175-E2, even if they don´t sell no one single plane, it´s a real prototype flying with a second to follow in few weeks.
6 prototypes for the MRJ-90!! Over 3,000 flight test hours. :weightlifter:

Or even a plane with ten prototypes, none certified, and still on development more than 10 years since launched ...
Ouch. You got the MRJ covered there. :melting:

Impossible as people do not see the obvious here, that the issue is not just about funds, it is about technical competence.
Their learning curve should have been achieved some time ago ...
You got that correct. :white:
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 6:03 am

lightsaber wrote:
Revelation wrote:
airhansa wrote:
I know this is considered one of the greatest evil sins of western geopolitics, but has anyone ever considered the idea of a tie-up with a Chinese aviation giant? China would love to have more diversity in terms of manufacturers, and Japan can sell its planes on the Chinese market to consumers who would enjoy Japanese safety-quality. From there, brand recognition can help Mitsubishi to sell in other third world markets and eventually the West as well.

Some things to consider:

Japan Inc has had the goal of being able to build its own airliners for decades now, MH90 was supposed to be a big step in that direction

Sino-Japanese politics are quite complicated

Intellectual property theft is rampant in China

Whomever partners in China takes a risk of IP theft.

The program has been a major learning curve on the difference between certified design and production and automotive production.



As to the question on the last order, 5 September 2019 by Mesa. I assume they differed. Wikipedia has a nice list.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_SpaceJet

Now obviously the SkyWest order needs renegotiation

Obviously more orders are required as is true of the potential competitor. It takes 300+ aircraft in service to perform annual overhauls on the components. The 717 survives because Boeing paid vendors to overhaul when demand was sufficient. It cost Boeing cash to modify contracts.

There will be no demand for 3+ years. I consider cutting the spend wise.

Lightsaber


Just to be clear, the MRJ/Spacejet program has very little to do with the automotive manufacturer Mitsubishi Motors, which is now part of the Nissan-Renault alliance. They only share the logo and thr Mitsubishi name due to legacy reasons.
Toyota has a share in the MRJ/Spacejet program, but it's not like they share a pool of engineers with the automotive branch of Toyota.

Most design engineers in the program have a background of aerospace design engineering from other programs that MHI was involved in. Think military or tier 1 supplier of larger OEM's.
The expertise is there at the engineering level, what they lacked is program management expertise.

I think that I'm going to shock a few people: the Spacejet program manager is actually a Chinese guy.
Don't know if he was brought in to remedy the lack of project management expertise, nor do I know if he is doing a good job in this role, but the results are not there so far and one could say that putting a Chinese individual in that position is at the very least very controversial.
Again, don't know the guy or his backgroumd, so he could well be the best thing that happened to the program.

By the way, there are also some ex-Embraer, ex-EADS guys walking the Spacejet hallways and many guys involved in certification are ex-Boeing.

One could wonder if all those guys don't have double agenda's. It's a billion dollar industry after all, and the big OEM's are cozy with the regulators too.

Either way, the Japanese are failing to set a course and push forward, so they only have themselves to blame.
 
airhansa
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 7:33 am

Waterbomber2 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Some things to consider:

Japan Inc has had the goal of being able to build its own airliners for decades now, MH90 was supposed to be a big step in that direction

Sino-Japanese politics are quite complicated

Intellectual property theft is rampant in China

Whomever partners in China takes a risk of IP theft.

The program has been a major learning curve on the difference between certified design and production and automotive production.



As to the question on the last order, 5 September 2019 by Mesa. I assume they differed. Wikipedia has a nice list.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_SpaceJet

Now obviously the SkyWest order needs renegotiation

Obviously more orders are required as is true of the potential competitor. It takes 300+ aircraft in service to perform annual overhauls on the components. The 717 survives because Boeing paid vendors to overhaul when demand was sufficient. It cost Boeing cash to modify contracts.

There will be no demand for 3+ years. I consider cutting the spend wise.

Lightsaber


Just to be clear, the MRJ/Spacejet program has very little to do with the automotive manufacturer Mitsubishi Motors, which is now part of the Nissan-Renault alliance. They only share the logo and thr Mitsubishi name due to legacy reasons.
Toyota has a share in the MRJ/Spacejet program, but it's not like they share a pool of engineers with the automotive branch of Toyota.

Most design engineers in the program have a background of aerospace design engineering from other programs that MHI was involved in. Think military or tier 1 supplier of larger OEM's.
The expertise is there at the engineering level, what they lacked is program management expertise.

I think that I'm going to shock a few people: the Spacejet program manager is actually a Chinese guy.
Don't know if he was brought in to remedy the lack of project management expertise, nor do I know if he is doing a good job in this role, but the results are not there so far and one could say that putting a Chinese individual in that position is at the very least very controversial.
Again, don't know the guy or his backgroumd, so he could well be the best thing that happened to the program.

By the way, there are also some ex-Embraer, ex-EADS guys walking the Spacejet hallways and many guys involved in certification are ex-Boeing.

One could wonder if all those guys don't have double agenda's. It's a billion dollar industry after all, and the big OEM's are cozy with the regulators too.

Either way, the Japanese are failing to set a course and push forward, so they only have themselves to blame.


Japanese conglomerates are similar to how venture funds work in the US. The central nexus is a bank or fund, which often passes its name onto any subsidiary that it has a share in, and has a somewhat "arms length" control over the subsidiary. Mitsubishi still has control and influence over the Motors subsidiary, along with Nissan.
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 1343
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 1:13 pm

EMBSPBR wrote:
ADent wrote:
28 January 2015 - Japan Airlines - 32 Firm orders according to https://www.flightglobal.com/jal-firms- ... 42.article .
ANA has 15 on order too.
This plane has swept the market ;) as its closest competitor (175E2) has no orders. :stirthepot:


This is for M90.
Apples to apples.
Oranges to oranges.

Just to remind that on April 30th., Embraer has delivered 637 E175-E1, plus 163 units on firm backlog, plus 293 options.
Source: https://daflwcl3bnxyt.cloudfront.net/m/ ... l/1Q20.pdf

And, for the E175-E2, even if they don´t sell no one single plane, it´s a real prototype flying with a second to follow in few weeks.
A real plane.
Not a paper plane. :stirthepot:
Or even a plane with ten prototypes, none certified, and still on development more than 10 years since launched ...

Impossible as people do not see the obvious here, that the issue is not just about funds, it is about technical competence.
Their learning curve should have been achieved some time ago ...


I think that Embraer should do more to capitalise on the Spacejet's delays and termination of the CRJ program.

If there is ever a time to push the Spacejet over the edge of the cliff, it's now.

If I were Embraer, I would be selling E175's at firesale prices, as many as I could. Keeps them in business by covering fixed expenses and keeps competitors out of the business.

I would also look into developping new variants such as QC.

The Spacejet program had a lot of promise, but at this moment in time, it's doomed.
 
bkmbr
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:27 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 2:49 pm

airhansa wrote:
Japanese conglomerates are similar to how venture funds work in the US. The central nexus is a bank or fund, which often passes its name onto any subsidiary that it has a share in, and has a somewhat "arms length" control over the subsidiary. Mitsubishi still has control and influence over the Motors subsidiary, along with Nissan.


Most of the Japanese conglomerates to this day are still linked to an old zaibatsu. Mitsubishi is no different, they are even considered one of the "Big Four" zaibatsu of Japan and other 2 of the Big Four (Sumitomo and Mitsui) are also linked to the MRJ project in a way or another. The Zaibatsu culture in Japan (just as the Chaebol culture in South Korea) is a very particular thing of those cultures, there's nothing quite similar to those organizations in the west.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20349
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 3:30 pm

Has Mitsubishi really delayed the NRJ/Spacejet? Unfortunately yes.

But the latest is certification within this fiscal year for the MR9, or by March 2021.

https://finance.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/ ... 00105.html

So while Mitsubishi deserves negative comments fir their past performance, the outright dismissal seems misplaced.

The above link notes they are finally getting a new chief engineer. A great chief engineer can turn around a program. I'm not saying the deadline will be met, but it looks like Mitsubishi will make it to market.

After flying with customers for 18+ months, then I expect new MR9 orders.

Mitsubishi has stated they will still develop the M100. It us a question of when, not if.

Now I'm posting as a user, but the E-jet/MRJ debate on scope has become old. I am not aware of any discussion to change scope among those who could influence scope. As an engineer, I design to requirements. The requirements are:
1. 76 pax
2. At least 1400nm still air range with reserves. (My best guess after reading a bunch on this topic).
3. Enough cabin volume for domestic first class and some Y+.
4. Enough baggage volume for the winter peak season.
5. Under the 86,000 lb MTOW.
7. Lower fuel burn than E-175 or CR9.
8. Lower maintenance costs (mostly engine, but airframe also).
9. Quieter cabin (not much, engines are enough).
10. 99.6%+ dispatch reliability

IMHO, Mitsubishi will not get new firm orders until they prove the MR9 has met efficiency and dispatch reliability.

I believe this plane will happen.
Within its range, it has every chance of being the most efficient.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
airhansa
Posts: 380
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:18 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:16 pm

bkmbr wrote:
airhansa wrote:
Japanese conglomerates are similar to how venture funds work in the US. The central nexus is a bank or fund, which often passes its name onto any subsidiary that it has a share in, and has a somewhat "arms length" control over the subsidiary. Mitsubishi still has control and influence over the Motors subsidiary, along with Nissan.


Most of the Japanese conglomerates to this day are still linked to an old zaibatsu. Mitsubishi is no different, they are even considered one of the "Big Four" zaibatsu of Japan and other 2 of the Big Four (Sumitomo and Mitsui) are also linked to the MRJ project in a way or another. The Zaibatsu culture in Japan (just as the Chaebol culture in South Korea) is a very particular thing of those cultures, there's nothing quite similar to those organizations in the west.


Not to stray too off topic, but similar structures exist in the West with fund-centrist institutional asset management companies. They have a large bank as the central nexus which makes investments into subsidiaries. The main difference is that western management companies don't usually pass their name onto subsidaries.
 
bkmbr
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:27 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:18 pm

M90 will have its certification soon or later and will gain some orders, specially operators within Japan, I never doubt that, but the timing for the plane is gone.
If the M90 had entered the market 5/10 years before 175E2 it would have a significant advantage over it by offering to the market something that the ERJ family did not have (the new generation of engines and their reduction in fuel consumption), but today it is clear that it will go into operation after the 175E2, and having to compete with the huge number of 175E1 frames already in market and the possibility of pilots flying the E2 using the same training as the E1 I do not see what kind of advantage the MRJ will have that would make an operator bet on the MRJ, which offers no significant advantage over what the ERJ already offers to the market today with the 175E1 and the 175E2, especially considering that both the E2 and the M90 are both out of scope clause.
MHI will be able to sell units of the M90 and it will eventually go into operation, but I doubt that the program will be able to reach the financial breakeven point necessary for the company to start making some profit from it. I already said here before and I repeat, the MRJ will be the YS-11 version 2.0.
 
TonyClifton
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 8:07 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Has Mitsubishi really delayed the NRJ/Spacejet? Unfortunately yes.

But the latest is certification within this fiscal year for the MR9, or by March 2021.

https://finance.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/ ... 00105.html

So while Mitsubishi deserves negative comments fir their past performance, the outright dismissal seems misplaced.

The above link notes they are finally getting a new chief engineer. A great chief engineer can turn around a program. I'm not saying the deadline will be met, but it looks like Mitsubishi will make it to market.

After flying with customers for 18+ months, then I expect new MR9 orders.

Mitsubishi has stated they will still develop the M100. It us a question of when, not if.

Now I'm posting as a user, but the E-jet/MRJ debate on scope has become old. I am not aware of any discussion to change scope among those who could influence scope. As an engineer, I design to requirements. The requirements are:
1. 76 pax
2. At least 1400nm still air range with reserves. (My best guess after reading a bunch on this topic).
3. Enough cabin volume for domestic first class and some Y+.
4. Enough baggage volume for the winter peak season.
5. Under the 86,000 lb MTOW.
7. Lower fuel burn than E-175 or CR9.
8. Lower maintenance costs (mostly engine, but airframe also).
9. Quieter cabin (not much, engines are enough).
10. 99.6%+ dispatch reliability

IMHO, Mitsubishi will not get new firm orders until they prove the MR9 has met efficiency and dispatch reliability.

I believe this plane will happen.
Within its range, it has every chance of being the most efficient.

Lightsaber


Bingo! Does the MRJ have any underfloor baggage space? I know the fuselage is not as tall as the ERJ, but even the CRJ-700/900 managed to fit small holds. 900 usually puts excess carryons under the jet, and checked bags in the tail. Granted, bigger bins compared to the CRJ does mean fewer need to get yanked and tagged.

If M100 could throw some bags underneath, you might manage a slightly shorter rear fuselage and lighter jet.

I don’t have any burn data for the Pratt’s hanging under the wing here, but the numbers I’ve seen on the 320 and 220 are breathtaking. I’d easily expect M100 burns to be broadly comparable to a CRJ200/ERJ145 in cruise. Won’t need the fuel lift if the 900 or 175 to do the same routes. The 900 struggled from the northeast to Texas in the winter with winds and an alternate, tech stop not uncommon.

With aircraft like the A220 making mainline on previous RJ routes feasible, you could see the need for an RJ to have 1,000+ mile range reduced to a point. The A220 drove the RJs off most of the Delta Connection Texas flying. An MRJ doing actual “Regional Jet” flying seems to be more needed than stretching its legs down south. I expect 50 seaters to slowly wither and die, with upgauges to 70-76 seaters as needed. An M100 timed for 2025 and onwards could be the right jet at the right time.

No need to worry about now to 2022. The market is far too dynamic, and I don’t think we see much new growth relative to 2019 route maps until we start to reach the tail end of our 2022 calendars. Beyond that, ERJ-175 can roll off the press for patchwork new orders. Let Mitsubishi work the bugs out on the 90 between now and then.
 
bkmbr
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:27 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 8:33 pm

Let's just forget the M100, even Mitsubishi throw in the towel on him.

And as far as I know the MRJ doesn't have a underneath cargo compartment like the ERJ. As far as I remember the cargo compartment on the MRJ jets is behind the rear galley.
 
User avatar
EMBSPBR
Posts: 689
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:03 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 9:48 pm

TonyClifton wrote:

Bingo! Does the MRJ have any underfloor baggage space? I know the fuselage is not as tall as the ERJ, but even the CRJ-700/900 managed to fit small holds. 900 usually puts excess carryons under the jet, and checked bags in the tail. Granted, bigger bins compared to the CRJ does mean fewer need to get yanked and tagged.
If M100 could throw some bags underneath, you might manage a slightly shorter rear fuselage and lighter jet.


Nope:

Image
 
TonyClifton
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Wed Jun 17, 2020 10:06 pm

EMBSPBR wrote:
TonyClifton wrote:

Bingo! Does the MRJ have any underfloor baggage space? I know the fuselage is not as tall as the ERJ, but even the CRJ-700/900 managed to fit small holds. 900 usually puts excess carryons under the jet, and checked bags in the tail. Granted, bigger bins compared to the CRJ does mean fewer need to get yanked and tagged.
If M100 could throw some bags underneath, you might manage a slightly shorter rear fuselage and lighter jet.


Nope:

Image

At least unlike the CRJ, it won’t be excessively tail heavy, so as long as the volume is there it’s fine. Really would be interesting to see what they can learn from the M90 to pivot into a more clean sheet M100 design. Maybe I’m just an optimist, but I could see them righting any design wrongs and timing it well to capture the purchase market. Make no mistake, there will be demand for hundreds by the end of this decade.
 
User avatar
novarupta
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:32 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Thu Jun 18, 2020 2:33 am

TonyClifton wrote:
EMBSPBR wrote:
TonyClifton wrote:

Bingo! Does the MRJ have any underfloor baggage space? I know the fuselage is not as tall as the ERJ, but even the CRJ-700/900 managed to fit small holds. 900 usually puts excess carryons under the jet, and checked bags in the tail. Granted, bigger bins compared to the CRJ does mean fewer need to get yanked and tagged.
If M100 could throw some bags underneath, you might manage a slightly shorter rear fuselage and lighter jet.


Nope:

Image

At least unlike the CRJ, it won’t be excessively tail heavy, so as long as the volume is there it’s fine. Really would be interesting to see what they can learn from the M90 to pivot into a more clean sheet M100 design. Maybe I’m just an optimist, but I could see them righting any design wrongs and timing it well to capture the purchase market. Make no mistake, there will be demand for hundreds by the end of this decade.


You’d think some here in this forum would be happy that they’re actually correcting design issues the airplane had BEFORE entering service - especially those that potentially would have an impact on safety and operational reliability.

But some instead choose to derail the discussion repeatedly with their bashing on the company - some even claiming “technical incompetence” (given the company has a decent portfolio of airplanes over several decades, even if it’s not many in the civil arena...).

Personally I believe the airplane will sell okay once it’s sorted - it’s not the first all new design to have had delays and gone on to sell in decent numbers, won’t be the last.
 
bkmbr
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:27 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Thu Jun 18, 2020 4:18 am

novarupta wrote:
You’d think some here in this forum would be happy that they’re actually correcting design issues the airplane had BEFORE entering service - especially those that potentially would have an impact on safety and operational reliability.

But some instead choose to derail the discussion repeatedly with their bashing on the company - some even claiming “technical incompetence” (given the company has a decent portfolio of airplanes over several decades, even if it’s not many in the civil arena...).

Personally I believe the airplane will sell okay once it’s sorted - it’s not the first all new design to have had delays and gone on to sell in decent numbers, won’t be the last.


I can guarantee that, from my point of view, I never saw MRJ as a problem of "technical incompetence", but as a huge managerial incompetence on the part of the project directors. The MRJ is a project that was born committed to an unrealistic schedule and a completely unrealistic budget, that's the main problem of the model so far. MRJ was in 2007 (when the model was presented in the Paris Air Show) a 3-year, $ 1.275 billion project, something that for a company like Bombardier or Embraer this would be realistic (Embraer for example designed and put the E1 into operation in just over a few years - introduced in 1999 and started operations in 2002 - but it was a company that had enormous experience thanks to the long development cycle of the ERJ-145 project, which took more than 10 years to be created even having experience in developing commercial airplanes) but for a new player in the market it was an extremely ambitious plan and without any margin for error, and this proved with the successive delays, changes in design, certification difficulties and budget overflow. Learning how to make an entire plane from scratch without anybody's help is not easy for anyone, no matter the origin of the company or the money you have, COMAC is another example of this in China and the Indians are having a similar problem with the Indian Regional Jet (IRJ) program.
I have no doubt that the M90 will eventually go into operation, and probably those who operate the plane will praise it as a good plane, but it is a plane that has lost the right timing to enter the market. If it had gone into operation in 2010 as originally planned, or in 2012 as it was later announced, it would be a plane with the potential to be revolutionary for the regional jet segment, imagine entering such a highly competitive segment at least 6 years before the first E2 to go into operation, but taking into account that Embraer has had the luxury of postponing the development of the 175E2 due to the lack of competitors in the segment and it will still have a plane ready to be delivered in 2021 before the first M90 goes into operation we have to agree that the project is born with a uphill battle against its main competitor.
 
User avatar
novarupta
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:32 am

Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:41 pm

Hard to really call the situation “bad/wrong timing” given that its closest (same-generation) competitor doesn’t exactly have any orders itself - and given all the possible deferrals coming down the line due to this pandemic it may actually work out in their favour.

Either way they just announced a management shakeup so it’s a step in the right direction. They’re not the first nor the only company who’s had major delays in a new project.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20349
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:58 pm

novarupta wrote:
Hard to really call the situation “bad/wrong timing” given that its closest (same-generation) competitor doesn’t exactly have any orders itself - and given all the possible deferrals coming down the line due to this pandemic it may actually work out in their favour.

Either way they just announced a management shakeup so it’s a step in the right direction. They’re not the first nor the only company who’s had major delays in a new project.

The management shakeup was needed. A new chief engineer helps.

Good news the problems will be fixed. I hope the M90 timeline holds (or something close). I believe there will be an M100. The reality is, the CF-34-8 was out of date at EIS. That is the weak link of prior jets.

My experience on the PW1200G was a long time ago. Mitsubishi didn't know how to write an ICD gor engines. Pratt countered with a new requirements document: e.g., proper anti-ice, climb, flight idle, cruise variation, thrust response curves, nacelle drag allowance, line maintenance.

There are details done right. The backup engine start is unique. I laughed when I first designed in some requirements. Then I asked, why isn't that the standard? The quick summary is the MRJ has weight added to reduce the need for tools for daily checks or opperations, including backup (manual) engine start. Operation is much simpler than any other engine despite the same parts doing the operation.

Mitsubishi patented a lot of their ideas, so Embraer must have a very different nacelle.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
AndoAv8R
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2020 4:29 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Thu Jun 18, 2020 2:03 pm

Could you elaborate on the backup engine start procedure (if its allowed)?
 
bkmbr
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:27 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Thu Jun 18, 2020 2:33 pm

novarupta wrote:
Hard to really call the situation “bad/wrong timing” given that its closest (same-generation) competitor doesn’t exactly have any orders itself - and given all the possible deferrals coming down the line due to this pandemic it may actually work out in their favour.

Either way they just announced a management shakeup so it’s a step in the right direction. They’re not the first nor the only company who’s had major delays in a new project.


To be honest the only real orders of the MRJ are the ones from the Japanese carriers, the SkyWest and Mesa orders have the same "problem" of the 175E2 in regard the Scope Clause. I sincerely hope that MRJ is successful, at least to some extend, it is good for Embraer to have a real competitor for its products, otherwise there is a risk that the company will accommodate in its position as market leader and no one will gain anything from it, not even Embraer.
 
User avatar
novarupta
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:32 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:27 pm

lightsaber wrote:
novarupta wrote:
Hard to really call the situation “bad/wrong timing” given that its closest (same-generation) competitor doesn’t exactly have any orders itself - and given all the possible deferrals coming down the line due to this pandemic it may actually work out in their favour.

Either way they just announced a management shakeup so it’s a step in the right direction. They’re not the first nor the only company who’s had major delays in a new project.

The management shakeup was needed. A new chief engineer helps.

Good news the problems will be fixed. I hope the M90 timeline holds (or something close). I believe there will be an M100. The reality is, the CF-34-8 was out of date at EIS. That is the weak link of prior jets.

My experience on the PW1200G was a long time ago. Mitsubishi didn't know how to write an ICD gor engines. Pratt countered with a new requirements document: e.g., proper anti-ice, climb, flight idle, cruise variation, thrust response curves, nacelle drag allowance, line maintenance.

There are details done right. The backup engine start is unique. I laughed when I first designed in some requirements. Then I asked, why isn't that the standard? The quick summary is the MRJ has weight added to reduce the need for tools for daily checks or opperations, including backup (manual) engine start. Operation is much simpler than any other engine despite the same parts doing the operation.

Mitsubishi patented a lot of their ideas, so Embraer must have a very different nacelle.

Lightsaber


How I see this is, the Japanese are using this as a learning experience - hence I cut them some slack as it’s a first for them in a sense - the only thing prior for them was the MU-2 and the Diamond if I remember right. They’re acknowledging mistakes and working on them in earnest - which is probably why I haven’t really seen any major outright cancellations for the airplane (unless I missed any?). It’ll be a sorry mistake for anyone to underestimate them at this stage.

The CF-34 is effectively the same engine used on the A-10 correct?
 
TonyClifton
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:36 pm

novarupta wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
novarupta wrote:
Hard to really call the situation “bad/wrong timing” given that its closest (same-generation) competitor doesn’t exactly have any orders itself - and given all the possible deferrals coming down the line due to this pandemic it may actually work out in their favour.

Either way they just announced a management shakeup so it’s a step in the right direction. They’re not the first nor the only company who’s had major delays in a new project.

The management shakeup was needed. A new chief engineer helps.

Good news the problems will be fixed. I hope the M90 timeline holds (or something close). I believe there will be an M100. The reality is, the CF-34-8 was out of date at EIS. That is the weak link of prior jets.

My experience on the PW1200G was a long time ago. Mitsubishi didn't know how to write an ICD gor engines. Pratt countered with a new requirements document: e.g., proper anti-ice, climb, flight idle, cruise variation, thrust response curves, nacelle drag allowance, line maintenance.

There are details done right. The backup engine start is unique. I laughed when I first designed in some requirements. Then I asked, why isn't that the standard? The quick summary is the MRJ has weight added to reduce the need for tools for daily checks or opperations, including backup (manual) engine start. Operation is much simpler than any other engine despite the same parts doing the operation.

Mitsubishi patented a lot of their ideas, so Embraer must have a very different nacelle.

Lightsaber


How I see this is, the Japanese are using this as a learning experience - hence I cut them some slack as it’s a first for them in a sense - the only thing prior for them was the MU-2 and the Diamond if I remember right. They’re acknowledging mistakes and working on them in earnest - which is probably why I haven’t really seen any major outright cancellations for the airplane (unless I missed any?). It’ll be a sorry mistake for anyone to underestimate them at this stage.

The CF-34 is effectively the same engine used on the A-10 correct?

100% agree. This is a trial and error project. The M90 isn’t going to be profitable, but it will yield a goldmine of learning experiences.

Yes, the CF34 came from the TF34 family (A-10 and S-3). Say what you want, but the -3 and -8 models are pretty reliable little things. The -10 in my experience was the exception.
 
JA786A
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 11:11 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:58 pm

The newest SpaceJet (reg JQ7002, ex JA27MJ) was spotted in Nagoya last week after painting. This is the second aircraft with the new design. Image

Also, Chief Development Officer Alexander Bellamy left MITAC today and was replaced with Yasuhiko Kawaguchi. They justify this with the freezing of the M100 plans, the closure of Moses Lake test center and they want to bring the SpaceJet project back to "all Japanese" due to communication issues. https://mainichi.jp/premier/business/articles/20200626/biz/00m/020/006000c

Are they even serious about type certification? Bellamy has plenty of experience in certification as he was involved at Bombardier in certifying the CSeries.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20349
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:18 pm

TonyClifton wrote:
novarupta wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
The management shakeup was needed. A new chief engineer helps.

Good news the problems will be fixed. I hope the M90 timeline holds (or something close). I believe there will be an M100. The reality is, the CF-34-8 was out of date at EIS. That is the weak link of prior jets.

My experience on the PW1200G was a long time ago. Mitsubishi didn't know how to write an ICD gor engines. Pratt countered with a new requirements document: e.g., proper anti-ice, climb, flight idle, cruise variation, thrust response curves, nacelle drag allowance, line maintenance.

There are details done right. The backup engine start is unique. I laughed when I first designed in some requirements. Then I asked, why isn't that the standard? The quick summary is the MRJ has weight added to reduce the need for tools for daily checks or opperations, including backup (manual) engine start. Operation is much simpler than any other engine despite the same parts doing the operation.

Mitsubishi patented a lot of their ideas, so Embraer must have a very different nacelle.

Lightsaber


How I see this is, the Japanese are using this as a learning experience - hence I cut them some slack as it’s a first for them in a sense - the only thing prior for them was the MU-2 and the Diamond if I remember right. They’re acknowledging mistakes and working on them in earnest - which is probably why I haven’t really seen any major outright cancellations for the airplane (unless I missed any?). It’ll be a sorry mistake for anyone to underestimate them at this stage.

The CF-34 is effectively the same engine used on the A-10 correct?

100% agree. This is a trial and error project. The M90 isn’t going to be profitable, but it will yield a goldmine of learning experiences.

Yes, the CF34 came from the TF34 family (A-10 and S-3). Say what you want, but the -3 and -8 models are pretty reliable little things. The -10 in my experience was the exception.

The CF-34-8/-10 are reliable and rugged. They are thirsty engines though and since I was paid to help fix durability issues, not perfect there.

The CF-34-10 has many problems. I have an NDA keeping me from typing details.

The Spacejet has been a learning excercise. The M-90 has great ideas, it is just heavy. The M100 is a great idea, just quite tardy.

But better than the ARJ-21. I know, not exactly a high threshold to compare.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
TonyClifton
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 3:19 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 30, 2020 4:57 pm

lightsaber wrote:
TonyClifton wrote:
novarupta wrote:

How I see this is, the Japanese are using this as a learning experience - hence I cut them some slack as it’s a first for them in a sense - the only thing prior for them was the MU-2 and the Diamond if I remember right. They’re acknowledging mistakes and working on them in earnest - which is probably why I haven’t really seen any major outright cancellations for the airplane (unless I missed any?). It’ll be a sorry mistake for anyone to underestimate them at this stage.

The CF-34 is effectively the same engine used on the A-10 correct?

100% agree. This is a trial and error project. The M90 isn’t going to be profitable, but it will yield a goldmine of learning experiences.

Yes, the CF34 came from the TF34 family (A-10 and S-3). Say what you want, but the -3 and -8 models are pretty reliable little things. The -10 in my experience was the exception.

The CF-34-8/-10 are reliable and rugged. They are thirsty engines though and since I was paid to help fix durability issues, not perfect there.

The CF-34-10 has many problems. I have an NDA keeping me from typing details.

The Spacejet has been a learning excercise. The M-90 has great ideas, it is just heavy. The M100 is a great idea, just quite tardy.

But better than the ARJ-21. I know, not exactly a high threshold to compare.

Lightsaber

Yes, I was quite amazed at the -10 burn at cruise. Over 2,200 lbs a side even at Econ (.78 or so). The -8 can be in the realm of 1,700 at .77 on day you get it up to say 350-370. For most of the basic RJ routes, the -8 being thirsty isn’t going to be a massive deal, but when you throw it on longer 2-3 hour routes it’ll be blown off the track by a GTF (as we’ve seen the A220 do at Delta). My experience with the CF34 family is much less technical than yours, I was only in the “push forward and go faster” seat. :)

M100 is both too late, and now too early. Maybe an M200 is up next...
 
mxaxai
Posts: 2011
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet — Flight Test & Production Thread

Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:18 pm

JA786A wrote:
... they want to bring the SpaceJet project back to "all Japanese" due to communication issues. https://mainichi.jp/premier/business/articles/20200626/biz/00m/020/006000c

Are they even serious about type certification? Bellamy has plenty of experience in certification as he was involved at Bombardier in certifying the CSeries.

How are they hoping to get a FAA / EASA / non-Japanese certification with an "all Japanese" team? Google Translate?

Frankly, one of the big advantages of Airbus, Boeing and several other 'western' manufacturers is their ability to integrate foreigners into their teams. Not every job perhaps, but they'll happily accept a skilled engineer or project manager who's fluent in English but not the native language.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 4534
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Mitsubishi SpaceJet (MRJ) development to become "effectively freezed"

Thu Oct 22, 2020 12:23 pm

https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=2020 ... ws-bus_all
The report from Kyodo News say, it is because of the novel coronavirus pandemic, that they cannot see the market recovering for now.
---
Hope it wouldn't kill the project.
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate. 求同存異. よく見て・よく聞いて・よく考える
(≧▽≦) Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
(≧▽≦) Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20349
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet (MRJ) development to become "effectively freezed"

Thu Oct 22, 2020 12:35 pm

Any link in English would be appreciated.

This is sad news. Considering the expected pace of recovery, I cannot say I'm surprised.
The MRJ really wasn't done as a regulated project. It was done too automotive and ran into issue after issue that exploded the costs.

I hope it starts back up. Since I personally do not believe scope will be modified (certainly not as pilots are losing jobs), this could mean a continually shrinking US regional market.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
Tokushima
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:06 am

Re: Mitsubishi SpaceJet (MRJ) development to become "effectively freezed"

Thu Oct 22, 2020 12:45 pm

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos