China Civil Aviation, AVIC (MA600) & COMAC (ARJ21/C919/C929)

Han Patriot · May 27, 2019

ozranger said:
Just replace them with Chinese designed and made parts. Using foreign parts is for certification with FAA and EASA. For example, avionics are supplied by joint ventures with American companies But if you compare them with those on Y-20, there is no major difference.

COMAC used ARJ-21 to learn the FAA certification process and then threw it away after FAA refused to certify ARJ-21.

The trade war itself can only further stimulate them to build completely independent R&D capability and supply chains.

Actually FAA certified the ARJ21, now China flight bodies can certify planes based on FAA standards, it took us 10 years to meet a their requirements. We patiently went along, and now EU also recognizes Chinese certification.

GiantPanda · May 27, 2019

Han Patriot said:
Actually FAA certified the ARJ21, now China flight bodies can certify planes based on FAA standards, it took us 10 years to meet a their requirements. We patiently went along, and now EU also recognizes Chinese certification.

Not true, there is no certification for the ARJ-21 by the FAA. The ARJ-21 cannot fly in the US. Pure and simple.

The CAAC signed a MOU with the FAA to certify the ARJ-21 with the same steps that the FAA uses. But there was and is no movement by the US to "certify" the ARJ-21.

gambit · May 28, 2019

ZeEa5KPul said:
That's because you're a victim of American propaganda. I can't really fault you that much, American propaganda is very effective.

A proven record is even more effective.

Here is a sample of US domestic aircraft manufacturers...

https://www.bjtonline.com/business-jet-news/the-major-airplane-manufacturers-at-a-glance

Your China have no comparison simply because of its political structure -- the sky is owned by the Party, not by the people. The result is that it requires a national effort to create just ONE Chinese aircraft manufacturer and ONE aircraft.

Here is a list of past and current US aircraft manufacturers and associated aviation related industries...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Aircraft_manufacturers_of_the_United_States

We -- meaning the US and the rest of the world -- do not need propaganda. On the other hand, the Chinese citizenry needs Chinese propaganda about the ONE Chinese aircraft that half of its components came from offshore sources.

When -- not if -- there is a Class A mishap that involves a C919 by a non-Western airline, you will know what it is like to be under intense technical and political pressure. Most likely, the Party will censor all Chinese internal Internet info about that mishap and bombard the Chinese citizenry with propaganda the kind that no American or European citizen can understand.

055_destroyer · May 28, 2019

gambit said:
A proven record is even more effective.

Here is a sample of US domestic aircraft manufacturers...

https://www.bjtonline.com/business-jet-news/the-major-airplane-manufacturers-at-a-glance

Your China have no comparison simply because of its political structure -- the sky is owned by the Party, not by the people. The result is that it requires a national effort to create just ONE Chinese aircraft manufacturer and ONE aircraft.

Here is a list of past and current US aircraft manufacturers and associated aviation related industries...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Aircraft_manufacturers_of_the_United_States

We -- meaning the US and the rest of the world -- do not need propaganda. On the other hand, the Chinese citizenry needs Chinese propaganda about the ONE Chinese aircraft that half of its components came from offshore sources.

When -- not if -- there is a Class A mishap that involves a C919 by a non-Western airline, you will know what it is like to be under intense technical and political pressure. Most likely, the Party will censor all Chinese internal Internet info about that mishap and bombard the Chinese citizenry with propaganda the kind that no American or European citizen can understand.

State is better. Collective effort and easy mobilise of resources and manpower.

ZeEa5KPul · May 28, 2019

gambit said:
Your China have no comparison simply because of its political structure -- the sky is owned by the Party, not by the people.

That you can, without a trace of irony, say something as laughable and nonsensical as "America's sky is owned by the people" makes my point about American propaganda and brainwashing exactly. Thank you.

I'd discuss the actual reasons that China's aviation sector is backward - like the fact that China remains a developing country that very recently got out of grinding poverty - but that discussion is above your pay-grade.

gambit · May 28, 2019

ZeEa5KPul said:
I'd discuss the actual reasons that China's aviation sector is backward - like the fact that China remains a developing country that very recently got out of grinding poverty - but that discussion is above your pay-grade.

Why is China considered a 'developing' country in the first place? Because the Party decided it should owns everything and severely mismanaged the country and the people. The results are plenty regarding backward -- from aviation to cars to even household appliances. No wonder you needed propaganda more than we do. Perfectly within everyone's pay grade. :enjoy:

Han Patriot · May 28, 2019

GiantPanda said:
Not true, there is no certification for the ARJ-21 by the FAA. The ARJ-21 cannot fly in the US. Pure and simple.

The CAAC signed a MOU with the FAA to certify the ARJ-21 with the same steps that the FAA uses. But there was and is no movement by the US to "certify" the ARJ-21.

I am not sure, but FAA recognizes Chinese certification, so in essence ARJ21 can fly in US.

GiantPanda · May 28, 2019

Han Patriot said:
I am not sure, but FAA recognizes Chinese certification, so in essence ARJ21 can fly in US.

The FAA does not recognize Chinese certification. The ARJ-21 cannot fly in the US.

In fact, there were scare stories that China would try to tie the 737 Max 8 re-instatement to certification of the ARJ-21.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-12/china-said-to-link-737-max-approval-to-support-for-its-own-jets

samsara · May 28, 2019

ozranger said:
I bet you can see many of them out of China. The C919 and CR929 are meant to be replacing imported aircraft at first as China now has a total fleet size of more than 3000 aircraft and the airlines normally only run a new aircraft for 10 years. So the fleet recycling is going very frequently. This market is already way too big for them.

Eight years by CAAC Regulation!

And what really matters is the confidence and support of the Chinese people! Within 5 years of commercial production, there will be many tens even over hundreds of C919 flying in the Chinese sky carrying hundreds of thousands passenger within the domestic China. If the aircraft proceed flawlessly in safety record no serious mishap, then such record itself gives the highest testimony on the safety matters, more than any regulator certification!

But by the 10 years of the commercial production run, the COMAC is still far away from fulfilling all the on hand orders as many as 1,005 units (June 2018).

I really don't grasp why some hype the effect of the confidence of foreigners on C919 knowing this situation ... That C919 will have been serving China's own domestic demand for decades before it can deliver any to foreign entity... and many hundreds of the airplane will be flying in the China's airspace ... What one needs further as the safety testimony ???

Unlike other manufacturers of small nations or small market size, COMAC well-being does not rely on the external demand. Just the Chinese own demand will provide ample of orders !!

At least COMAC will have the special leeway of decades-long of commercial services of C919 in domestic China before the foreign concerns ever come into calculation. But when hundreds of the C919 are already in operation and many hundreds of thousands of passengers are moving safely in such a vast and very complex territory as China for so many years, then tell me, what safety concern still remains an issue for any other country with goodwill ???

waja2000 · May 28, 2019

samsara said:
Eight years by CAAC Regulation!

And what really matters is the confidence and support of the Chinese people! Within 5 years of commercial production, there will be many tens even over hundreds of C919 flying in the Chinese sky carrying hundreds of thousands passenger within the domestic China. If the aircraft proceed flawlessly in safety record no serious mishap, then such record itself gives the highest testimony on the safety matters, more than any regulator certification!

But by the 10 years of the commercial production run, the COMAC is still far away from fulfilling all the on hand orders as many as 1,005 units (June 2018).

I really don't grasp why some hype the effect of the confidence of foreigners on C919 knowing this situation ... That C919 will have been serving China's own domestic demand for decades before it can deliver any to foreign entity... and many hundreds of the airplane will be flying in the China's airspace ... What one needs further as the safety testimony ???

Unlike other manufacturers of small nations or small market size, COMAC well-being does not rely on the external demand. Just the Chinese own demand will provide ample of orders !!

At least COMAC will have the special leeway of decades-long of commercial services of C919 in domestic China before the foreign concerns ever come into calculation. But when hundreds of the C919 are already in operation and many hundreds of thousands of passengers are moving safely in such a vast and very complex territory as China for so many years, then tell me, what safety concern still remains an issue for any other country with goodwill ???

By logic Yes as your said.
But most country Civic Aviation Authorities still need follow there law, rule and regulation, and they need FAA or EASA certification for type approval before Aircraft get register in there country, or even fly to there airspace.
China CAAC certification still new (not acceptance in most country) and i think china gov can start talking to other country to accept & recognition CAAC certification so can fly and register the aircraft with safety record in ARJ21.

ozranger · May 28, 2019

samsara said:
Eight years by CAAC Regulation!

And what really matters is the confidence and support of the Chinese people! Within 5 years of commercial production, there will be many tens even over hundreds of C919 flying in the Chinese sky carrying hundreds of thousands passenger within the domestic China. If the aircraft proceed flawlessly in safety record no serious mishap, then such record itself gives the highest testimony on the safety matters, more than any regulator certification!

But by the 10 years of the commercial production run, the COMAC is still far away from fulfilling all the on hand orders as many as 1,005 units (June 2018).

I really don't grasp why some hype the effect of the confidence of foreigners on C919 knowing this situation ... That C919 will have been serving China's own domestic demand for decades before it can deliver any to foreign entity... and many hundreds of the airplane will be flying in the China's airspace ... What one needs further as the safety testimony ???

Unlike other manufacturers of small nations or small market size, COMAC well-being does not rely on the external demand. Just the Chinese own demand will provide ample of orders !!

At least COMAC will have the special leeway of decades-long of commercial services of C919 in domestic China before the foreign concerns ever come into calculation. But when hundreds of the C919 are already in operation and many hundreds of thousands of passengers are moving safely in such a vast and very complex territory as China for so many years, then tell me, what safety concern still remains an issue for any other country with goodwill ???

Although what you said is right, priority needs to be identified. I believe the priority is to fill the domestic market first with some portion goes to Airbus and other non American aircraft makers, just like what they did in telecommunication market.

The domestic market is already a huge cake to them. First thing first, get rid of Boeing.