SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Just after 06:00 GMT, the first C919 rolled down and off a runway at Shanghai Pudong airport, to the sounds of applause of onlookers and plenty of senior officials who showed up to celebrate a milestone for Chinese industry.It touched down 75 minutes later after a successful flight.
The C919 is a competitor for Airbus' A320 and Boeing's 737 and will offer configurations of between 158 and 172 seats. The single-aisle twin jet will have a range of up to 5,500 km.
Built by the state-owned Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC), the plane has taken nine years to get off the drawing board and into the air. COMAC's secured 99 firm orders for the plane, which is expected to enter service in the year 2020.
[...] There's nothing revolutionary about the C919 that you won't find in other airliners. But China's always keen to show it can match anyone when it comes to high technology, if only because politics and national pride demands that the nation be able to show it can meet its own needs.
[...] Plenty of nations worry that China's state-owned enterprises don't have to worry about little things like making a profit, which is felt to give them an unfair advantage. A story today in state-owned organ Xinhua headlined "China-made C919 no challenge to Boeing, Airbus dominance" therefore looks like a deliberate attempt to douse such worries.
But plane-makers everywhere will know that if the C919 proves a worthy rival, it will win orders because demand for this class of plane is high. Boeing and Airbus each have backlogs of thousands of their own single-aisle planes and struggle to increase production. Demand for C919-class planes is also expected to just keep climbing as flying becomes more affordable and more people around the world become prosperous enough to afford air travel, so a new entrant has a chance to cash in.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday May 08 2017, @10:20AM (16 children)
Now we really got something.. "Made in China". They got a quality and reliability reputation issue and in too many cases it's real.
Any data on time before failure (MTBF etc) will also be interesting.
Their market is likely halfway industrialized countries that wants a cheap airplane.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Monday May 08 2017, @11:42AM (3 children)
> They got a quality and reliability reputation issue and in too many cases it's real.
Largely because of shoddy Western specifications, I contest.
Data will tell us whether their planes are really reliable... (and marketing will spin it regardless)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @03:44PM (2 children)
I agree, but:
1) As an engineer I take issue with your use of the word "specifications". That word should only refer to engineering specifications, not corporate buyers and MBAs who scream "make it cheaper still".
2) I'm disappointed with how crappy the Chinese are willing to make things.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:58PM (1 child)
Pride in their work just isn't part of their culture.
Can you think of anything made in China that is quality? The Chinese themselves will buy the cheapest thing EVERY DAMN TIME even if it's just 10 cents less. They are super cheap. Contrast this with the Japanese...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:17PM
I beg to differ. Read Liang Qichao's speech "Respect your job and enjoy your job".
https://www.douban.com/note/146201826/ [douban.com]
In short, he says to respect your job because it is worth doing well, and in doing it well will give you enjoyment for your life.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday May 08 2017, @11:53AM (3 children)
At least, it doesn't have windows with square corners [wikipedia.org]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday May 08 2017, @01:59PM (2 children)
For all we know, the aircraft skin is fried wonton wrappers and the hydraulic fluid is sweet and sour sauce.
Somewhat more seriously I'd worry about the walmart effect where stuff that falls off the assembly line and fails QA/QC gets sent to walmart, now what happens when some AN4-10 bolt (which is vaguely like a home depot 1/4 dia 1 inch long bolt... kinda) fails heat treat and gets kicked off the line and into some Chinese plane? I mean you know thats what they do with food and clothes...
Something I find slightly amusing although off topic is people like to claim aerospace stuff is expensive but big box retailers have mastered screwing (ahem) over retail customers such that a single aerospace qualified AN4-10 cad plate undrilled from AS&S is precisely 23 cents qty 1. Vs Home depot selling a 1/4x2 zinc plate (not cad) bolt made of mystery metal for 20 cents qty 1. Mythology would have you believe aerospace bolts cost $5 each and hardware store is 5 cents and the only difference is insurance but it turns out there's a lot more different than insurance but the costs are surprisingly similar and the quality is infinitely higher for aerospace hardware. So I have a AN4-10 helping hold my kids basketball hoop together replacing a missing bolt and I don't feel all that guilty about it. I've gotten to the point in my life where torquing off the head of home depot bolts is no longer entertaining and I don't mind paying an extra 3 cents on a 30 minute repair job.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @03:52PM
The failed bolts only go into the exported planes.
I've had the bolt problem since the '70s when Japanese cars started to proliferate. My reference is to say the bolts are made of butter. The bigger frustration was in trying to find a metric bolt to replace it. No matter- SAE bolts would work, and would withstand the extra torque needed to make them fit. :-}
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday May 08 2017, @04:57PM
So it's just to head of to AS&S and get quality?
(Score: 3, Funny) by driverless on Monday May 08 2017, @01:26PM (2 children)
COMAC's secured 99 firm orders for the plane, which is expected to enter service in the year 2020
The clients have been announced as Air China, China Southwest Airlines, China Eastern Airlines, China Northwest Airlines, China Nor'Norwest Airlines, China Southern Airlines, China Northern Airlines, China North-n-South Airlines, China East'NorEast Airlines, China [...], and Air Zimbabwe.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:50PM (1 child)
Here's a shock - hardly anyone owns an American car in Japan, either.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @07:03PM
Mostly due (based on past reading) to thinly disguised import restrictions. US cars don't quite meet the Japanese requirements on many small counts. All these changes are required to import cars into Japan and the US companies don't put in the effort to make their cars compliant. Also, Japan is right hand drive (like UK) and not too many US cars are designed to be made with steering on either side.
(Score: 2) by richtopia on Monday May 08 2017, @03:53PM
They already have over 500 orders for this plane. However almost all of them are domestic Chinese orders. The two other sources are a few going to a Thai airline, and a few going to GE Aviation for demonstration.
They currently are not 100% domestic, although that is the long term goal. Namely, the avionics are from Honeywell, and the engines are from GE. I think even the tyres are from Michelin.
http://www.popsci.com/blog-network/eastern-arsenal/new-twin-engined-chinese-jet-liner-c919-moves-forward#page-2 [popsci.com]
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Monday May 08 2017, @04:27PM (3 children)
As someone who works in the aerospace industry, half of the flight critical parts in a plane are already made in India, China, or Mexico with final assembly done here in the USA.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday May 08 2017, @05:31PM (2 children)
Yes, but is the QA control of the manufacturing done by Chinese people?
And is the QA pass before delivery done by Chinese?
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Monday May 08 2017, @07:18PM (1 child)
The QA is usually done here in the USA. The bulk of the "dirty work", e.g. metal part fabrication and sub assemblies, is done outside the USA for cost cutting reasons.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday May 08 2017, @08:35PM
From what I read. Corporations that care about quality usually have their own "man" over in China to check quality before it ships.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @10:56AM (2 children)
With lots of government subsidies?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @11:26AM
Shhhh don't ruin the dream
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:09PM
Capitalism GOOD! As long as the profits are privatized, it's GOOD! If the risks are socialized, so what! That's outside of the scope of the Capitalism Religion. Unless it's solar panels but hey.
However, modern China doesn't seem to have worked its way into OMG Socialism! Hitler! Stalin! Mao*! Pol Pot! Venezuela!
* I find anticipating the positions of right-wing authoritarians onerous. Does Mao count as modern China? Who knows. Ask Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday May 08 2017, @06:49PM
China invests billions into stealing Western tech, gotta show all that money bought em something, right? Now that Chinese Communism has added profit and loss statements (also stolen Western tech) to the mix even the intel services have to justify their existence.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Monday May 08 2017, @07:49PM (1 child)
I think it's telling that nearly all the interested buyers are Chinese. It's like the Russian Tu-204. It's cheap to buy and a reliable workhorse, but no one outside of Russia and North Korea wants to fly it. Will the C919 suffer a similar fate? Well, the Chinese have more money to throw at the problem of creating a desirable airliner. Maybe they will succeed.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday May 08 2017, @08:43PM
I suspect it may get the same fate as the Shanghai Y-10 [wikipedia.org] that first flew in 1980. Asfair the problem is that it cost too much to build, uses too much fuel and was built on a design already 30 years old at the time for the first flight.
(Score: 1) by pinchy on Tuesday May 09 2017, @12:07AM
I wonder if they use metric sized fasteners on the aircraft? Thats one thing unusual about all of aviation that ive been exposed to is the use of standard size fasteners. I remember Airbus would have all the dimensions in drawings with metric notation but still use standard fasteners exclusively.