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

[jhungary]

IMO that comparison is off since You cannot compare the largest version of each type but the C919 with the A320 and the B737-MAX-8 !

That is my point all along, C919 does not have a largest version a la A321neo or Boeing 737 MAX-9

Large version of short haul jet is the selling point of both Boeing 737 MAX and A320neo series, without it, it is very hard for C919 to compete in.

And even with C919 and A320, C919 still underperform wrt A320.......

 

[cirr]

MA700

http://mt.sohu.com/20170106/n477918618.shtml

 

[Deino]

Wasn't posted here if I'm not wrong !?

 

[Akasa]

That is my point all along, C919 does not have a largest version a la A321neo or Boeing 737 MAX-9

Large version of short haul jet is the selling point of both Boeing 737 MAX and A320neo series, without it, it is very hard for C919 to compete in.

And even with C919 and A320, C919 still underperform wrt A320.......

This may be true of the 737/737-MAX series (although the discrepancy may very easily be attributed to something other than mere fuselage capacity), but sales data isn't reflective of this trend when it comes to the A320. Of the original A320 variants, roughly 22% of the sales/orders were of the A321, as opposed to 59% for the A320. Within the A320neo family, roughly 70% of sales thus far has been of the A320neo and 29% for the stretched A321.

The C919 is still in its nascent stages of prototype testing and further development, so it's a tad premature to rule out a planned stretched version or to claim that the program is merely a stepping stone to the C929.

 

[jhungary]

This may be true of the 737/737-MAX series (although the discrepancy may very easily be attributed to something other than mere fuselage capacity), but sales data isn't reflective of this trend when it comes to the A320. Of the original A320 variants, roughly 22% of the sales/orders were of the A321, as opposed to 59% for the A320. Within the A320neo family, roughly 70% of sales thus far has been of the A320neo and 29% for the stretched A321.

The C919 is still in its nascent stages of prototype testing and further development, so it's a tad premature to rule out a planned stretched version or to claim that the program is merely a stepping stone to the C929.

Actually, the reason why A320 does not reflect the Sale of Larger or Stretch Version of A320 series is not the same reasson why C919 will not sell.

I am afriad this post will be deleted if I start talking about A320 and why A320neo have more order than A321neo, so instead of talk about it indetail, I will just say this, A320neo are a favourite amongst low cost airline, and these airline have one concern in common, overhead cost.

As for C919, i am not ruling out anything, I simply say the lacking of Frieght Version, Stretch Version of C919 will make this aircraft less competitive than the Boeing and Airbus. To be fair, no one, even COMAC included would have thought they can really challenge the big 2 with C919. In fact, I don't think anyone sane enough will say that. The fact that C919 retain 500 order (half of them are firm) is not something of a milestone, considering COMAC project to sell over 2500 orders domestically and internationally.and most aircraft depends on pre-order to survive, this is not a very good sign for COMAC which offered C919 on sale for almost 7 years now.

Of course they can make Stretch Version or Frieght version in the future, but then wouldn't what I said is ture then? For which the original C919 is just a steepping stone project for soemthing else. just that time time it's the improved version of C919.

 

[Akasa]

Actually, the reason why A320 does not reflect the Sale of Larger or Stretch Version of A320 series is not the same reasson why C919 will not sell.

I am afriad this post will be deleted if I start talking about A320 and why A320neo have more order than A321neo, so instead of talk about it indetail, I will just say this, A320neo are a favourite amongst low cost airline, and these airline have one concern in common, overhead cost.

As for C919, i am not ruling out anything, I simply say the lacking of Frieght Version, Stretch Version of C919 will make this aircraft less competitive than the Boeing and Airbus. To be fair, no one, even COMAC included would have thought they can really challenge the big 2 with C919. In fact, I don't think anyone sane enough will say that. The fact that C919 retain 500 order (half of them are firm) is not something of a milestone, considering COMAC project to sell over 2500 orders domestically and internationally.and most aircraft depends on pre-order to survive, this is not a very good sign for COMAC which offered C919 on sale for almost 7 years now.

Of course they can make Stretch Version or Frieght version in the future, but then wouldn't what I said is ture then? For which the original C919 is just a steepping stone project for soemthing else. just that time time it's the improved version of C919.

I couldn't find a complete listing of the operating costs of 737-8, A321neo, etc. However, the 737-800 series costs $5300-5600 per hour to operate, which is even lower than that of the A320 ($7000 per hour) much less the stretched variants. Reports from JetBlue also claim that the operating costs for their A321 are actually less than that of the A320 fleet.

Back on topic... My point was that, at least according to the data above, price isn't the likely factor behind the A320's success over the A321, or the notion that stretched variants of short-haul aircraft are always preferred over the original.

I've no doubt that the C919 isn't going to break any decades-old duopoly, nor am I saying that the current iteration of the C919 will be the company's greatest product. But the pattern from Airbus & Boeing demonstrate that the unstretched models of a particular family still tend to sell well irregardless of how well their enlarged counterparts do.

 

[jhungary]

I couldn't find a complete listing of the operating costs of 737-8, A321neo, etc. However, the 737-800 series costs $5300-5600 per hour to operate, which is even lower than that of the A320 ($7000 per hour) much less the stretched variants. Reports from JetBlue also claim that the operating costs for their A321 are actually less than that of the A320 fleet.

Back on topic... My point was that, at least according to the data above, price isn't the likely factor behind the A320's success over the A321, or the notion that stretched variants of short-haul aircraft are always preferred over the original.

I've no doubt that the C919 isn't going to break any decades-old duopoly, nor am I saying that the current iteration of the C919 will be the company's greatest product. But the pattern from Airbus & Boeing demonstrate that the unstretched models of a particular family still tend to sell well irregardless of how well their enlarged counterparts do.

Again, not going to say why A320 outsell A321 (By the way A321neo outsold A320neo in 2016) There have been endless discussion on the issue in Airliners.net, maybe you can go and read them youself. Otherwise very high chance our post will be deleted

The problem, for C919, I never said the smaller version of Narrow Body cannot sell, the fact that they are selling them mean they still have their market worth, I am saying the C919 lacking variety (Stretch version and Frieght version is a variety) and even if you compare the lower end version, C919 still offer a lot less than their counterpart does, when you can offer a lot to suit a client need, that will be better than a company just offer something on a give or take basis

The point is, if you cannot offer something other people won't or can't do, and what you are offering, other do too with a significantly cheaper cost with more ability, would you go for C919?

I don't see C919 will be of any success had they continue on with this original configuration. It's like Airbus is already offering New Engine Option, and Boeing offering MAX option, would you be going back and buy A320-200 or Boeing 737-800?

.

 

[Akasa]

Again, not going to say why A320 outsell A321 (By the way A321neo outsold A320neo in 2016) There have been endless discussion on the issue in Airliners.net, maybe you can go and read them youself. Otherwise very high chance our post will be deleted

The problem, for C919, I never said the smaller version of Narrow Body cannot sell, the fact that they are selling them mean they still have their market worth, I am saying the C919 lacking variety (Stretch version and Frieght version is a variety) and even if you compare the lower end version, C919 still offer a lot less than their counterpart does, when you can offer a lot to suit a client need, that will be better than a company just offer something on a give or take basis

The point is, if you cannot offer something other people won't or can't do, and what you are offering, other do too with a significantly cheaper cost with more ability, would you go for C919?

I don't see C919 will be of any success had they continue on with this original configuration. It's like Airbus is already offering New Engine Option, and Boeing offering MAX option, would you be going back and buy A320-200 or Boeing 737-800?

.

I don't think anyone expects the C919 program to remain as it is and rely on a single variant; very few civilian airliner projects follow that pattern. Ultimately, the success of the original C919 would hinge upon its price vis-a-vis that of any subsequent stretched or upgraded variants, not necessarily the fact that it's inherently smaller in comparison.

 

[grey boy 2]

Count down of C919 maiden flight has begun, 570 orders has been secured (中国商飞公司C919的首飞已经进入倒计时。
C919大型客机是我国拥有自主知识产权的中短程商用干线飞机。目前已获得全球23家用户的570架订单。)

 

[Deino]

The C919 with AShMs ????

 

[AlyxMS]

The C919 with AShMs ????

View attachment 370340

Saw that in Oedosoldier's twitter too.
Most likely a photoshop or the CG contractor making a joke?
Since it's makes no sense, the Chinese text surrounding the CG has nothing to do with military use(it's about the application of 3D printing in aerospace industries), the C919 is in civilian painting scheme, I doubt this will be the start of "Chinese P-8".

 

[Akasa]

The C919 with AShMs ????

View attachment 370340

Perfectly understandable; pilots have the right to worry about cruise ships taking over the transportation business.

 

[Deino]

By the way, do we have confirmed the number of orders for both the MA60 & MA600 ??

 

[艹艹艹]

C919 successfully completed 2.5g static test

 

[ahojunk]

China's large airliner expects maiden flight in first half of 2017
2017-02-06 15:42 Xinhua Editor: Gu Liping

Photo taken on Feb. 29, 2016 shows a test bench for C919 plane at its research base in Shanghai Aircraft Design And Research Institute of the Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China (COMAC), in Shanghai, east China. (Photo: Xinhua/Pei Xin)

China's first domestically-produced large passenger aircraft C919 is expected to take its maiden flight in the first half of 2017, the People's Daily reported Monday.

The Commercial Aircraft Corp. of China (COMAC), the Shanghai-based developer of the aircraft, has almost completed the onboard systems installation as well as major static and system integration tests, since it was built on Nov. 2, 2015.

The static test simulates the pressure of flight on the aircraft.

"We tested the whole aircraft, its key components and connecting parts," said Li Qiang, an expert at the Design and Research Center of COMAC.

The C919, with over 150 seats and standard range of 4,075 kilometers, is expected to compete with the updated Airbus 320 and Boeing's new-generation 737, which currently dominate the market.

By the end of 2016, 21 customers have placed orders for more than 500 C919 aircraft, and COMAC expects to sell at least 2,000.

China's first regional commercial aircraft, the ARJ21, began commercial operation in June 2016.