The COMAC C919

The Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China Ltd. (COMAC) looks to compete with major aircraft manufacturers Boeing and Airbus. On November 2, 2015 COMAC rolled out its first narrow body aircraft the C919. Chinese aviation is on a huge rise. According to Alberto Riva, Boeing is estimating "Chinese airlines will need to buy more than 6,000 airplanes between 2014 and 2034, worth almost $1 trillion (2015).” Simply looking at these figures it isn't hard to understand why China is looking to produce aircraft within their own country. At the same time, they are forced to battle with manufacturing titans, Airbus and Boeing. 

I think that the C919 will be able to get FAA certification in the future. However, it certainly won't be an easy task. This is shown through COMAC's other production jet which is a regional jet called ARJ-21. COMAC has stated they built a spinoff of the original ARJ-21 to comply with FAA certification standards (Gavindasamy & Miller, 2015). However, it has been a five-year process of the FAA shadowing the certification process (Gavindasamy & Miller, 2015). With its current specifications, the ARJ-21 failed to receive FAA certification which severely limits its markets as it can't be flown in the U.S. Some believe that the FAA is taking their time in the certification process because of political and economic issues between the FAA and the Civil Aviation Administration of China (Gavindasamy & Miller, 2015). According to Siva Govindasamy and Matthew Miller, the FAA has stated in an email to Reuters News Agency, "The FAA enjoys a good working relationship with CAAC and we continue to work together to develop a path to work towards certification of the derivative model of the ARJ-21 and, possibly, the C919... (2015)." In my opinion, I think the C919 has potential to get FAA certification. Due to that fact that COMAC is a Chinese manufacturer and that it doesn't have a reputable name currently, I think the certification process is due to be lengthy. 

If the COMAC C919 becomes FAA certified, it could definitely be considered among air carriers due to its price tag. The China National Radio predicted the price of the C919 to be 30% less than the B737 and A320 (AeroTime 2015). It can be assumed that this lower cost can be associated with the lower cost of pay to employees. However, I do foresee a number of challenges with integrating the C919 in U.S. air carriers. The first problem I can think of would deal with training challenges. The contract to build a full flight simulator for the C919 was given to Rockwell Collins in Cedar Rapids, Iowa (McHale 2011). The question that comes to mind is would pilots have to initially travel to China to receive training in this simulator. Customer support on the aircraft is another issue. Providing product support infrastructure is a task that might be very hard for COMAC to integrate in the U.S. (Michaels 2014). Therefore, with reduced costs to buy the aircraft, the air carriers could face problems with product support with possibly more aircraft down time. Another issue at hand is production delays in the C919. The projected buyers are scheduled to receive their order in 2018, however those following COMAC believe it may be even later than 2018 (Gavindasamy 2016). Therefore, by the time COMAC starts delivering their product, it will already be more outdated than the current production of planes like the A320 neo and 737 Max (Gavindasamy 2016). In other words, the C919 will already be beat in performance by the newer Airbus and Boeing models. Better performance and efficiency equates to lower cost which is one reason a U.S. carrier may opt to stay with Airbus or Boeing. Perception is an issue at hand also. COMAC doesn’t have a built up reputation like Airbus or Boeing in Europe and the United States. The fact that it is “made in China’ may create a negative stigma until the company can show its safety and efficiency. At the same time, I think that passengers who fly on aircraft of this type generally have no idea what type of aircraft they are flying on unless they have some knowledge on the industry or are told. Due to this reason, I don’t think that general public perception is an issue. The air carriers will be the ones where perception may be an issue simply due to COMAC’s lack of reputation at this point in time.

The Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, otherwise known as COMAC, is a state owned limited liability company (COMAC n.d.).  Being state owned is an advantage for COMAC as they are heavily funded by the Chinese government. Many Chinese air carriers have political pressures in buying products from COMAC as COMAC is largely government funded (Matha 2015). This can be seen in the order numbers for the C919. Bernie Leighton states that COMAC has around 450 orders for the C919 and the vast majority of them are carriers in China (2015). According to COMAC’s website (n.d.), their overall mission is “to build the large aircraft program into a symbol for the reform and opening up policy in the new era and for creating an innovative nation, and to build COMAC into a world class aviation enterprise.” As stated previously, COMAC does have another aircraft out which is the ARJ-21. The ARJ-21 is a regional type aircraft that fits up to 90 passengers (Gavindasamy & Miller, 2015). Similar to the C919, the ARJ-21 has yet to receive FAA certification and is unable to fly in the U.S.

Other companies are already making attempts in making strides on the global scene to challenge Boeing and Airbus. A good example of this is the Russian MC-21 produced by the Irkut Corporation which is owned by the United Aircraft Company (Russia Today 2016).  The company has stated that they plan to be producing 20 aircraft a year by the year 2020 (Russia Today 2016). China and Russia are both in their infancy in building these narrow body aircraft compared to Airbus and Boeing. Both the Chinese C919 and Russian MC-21 haven’t made it passed initial testing stages. It will definitely take some time to be fair competitors with Boeing and Airbus. The fact that these countries have created aircrafts of this feat are in no doubt an accomplishment. It takes a great deal of resources such as man power, money and time. Companies like Boeing and Airbus have had their fair share of success and loss. It was only a matter of time other countries would join the competition. Even if the governments helps support and foster the development of a production aircraft like the COMAC C919, it was a huge feat for China.

In my opinion, Boeing and Airbus haven’t really responded to COMAC’s introduction of the C919. Both manufacturers have been on top of the game for quite some time and have credibility that COMAC has yet to receive. On top of that, both manufacturers have their own projects which include the A320neo and 737 MAX (Chang 2012). Boeing is continuing its reign with the acceptance to build a plant in China in 2015 for their contract to build 300 jets for China (Cahill 2015). Overall, Airbus and Boeing will continue to be on top. However, in the long term it may be possible to see COMAC in there.

AeroTime. (2015, November 20). Made in China: Why C919 can hardly be called Chinese. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from http://www.aerotime.aero/en/people/people-news/editorial/20413-made-in-china-why-c919-can-hardly-be-called-chinese

Cahill on Business, J. (2015, November 4). Boeing has a new big challenge: China. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20151104/BLOGS10/151109968/boeing-has-a-new-big-challenge-china

Chang, G. G. (2012, November 25). Chinese aviation ABC's: Airbus, Boeing and COMAC. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonchang/2012/11/25/chinas-aviation-abcs-airbus-boeing-and-comac/#31d0c3351048

COMAC. (n.d.). Company profile Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, Ltd. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from http://english.comac.cc/aboutus/introduction/

Govindasamy, S. (2016, February 23). China's COMAC aims for first C919 flight by early 2017: Sources. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from http://www.reuters.com/article/us-coma-china-c-idUSKCN0VW110

Govindasamy, S., & Miller, M. (2015, October 21). Exclusive: China-made regional jet set for delivery, but no U.S. certification. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-aircraft-arj21-exclusive-idUSKCN0SF2XN20151021#ij0P11gFChwoyzBM.97

Leighton, B. (2015, March 18). A Closer Look at the COMAC C919 - Why does it exist? Retrieved October 27, 2016, from http://www.airlinereporter.com/2015/03/closer-look-comac-c919-exist/

Matha, M. (2015, December 18). 5 Reasons why Chinese aircraft manufacturer will become a global contender. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/5-reasons-why-chinese-aircraft-manufacturer-become-global-matha

McHale, J. (2011, January 7). COMAC C919 simulator program awarded to Rockwell Collins by XASC. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from http://www.intelligent-aerospace.com/articles/2011/01/comac-c919-simulator.html

Michaels, K. (2014, June 24). Opinion: COMAC tie-up with Bombardier a win-win. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/opinion-comac-tie-bombardier-win-win

Powell, S. (2015, November 9). China’s COMAC C919 aircraft running behind schedule – First commercial flight not before 2019. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from http://loyaltylobby.com/2015/11/09/chinas-comac-c919-aircraft-running-behind-schedule-first-commercial-flight-not-before-2019/#disqus_thread

Riva, A. (2016, June 28). China just flew its first passenger jet - and it's a clunker. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from https://news.vice.com/article/china-just-flew-its-first-passenger-jetand-its-a-clunker

Russia Today. (2016, June 8). MC-21: Russian high-tech plane rolls out to challenge Airbus 320. Retrieved October 27, 2016, from https://www.rt.com/news/345823-mc-21-aircraft-presentation-irkut/