Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

China seeks European approval of C919

Wikiposts
Search
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

China seeks European approval of C919

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 17th Jan 2024, 16:34
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Seattle
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The C919 has been certified since September 2022 and is in service. I’d be perfectly happy flying on it.

I’m unsure why you say it isn’t?
BoeingDriver99 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2024, 16:54
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: England
Posts: 401
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Hm.
Will a C919 start if it's not connected over the internet to a server in China?
Can the Chinese goverment, if it wishes, disable all C919s in a country it doesn't like?

Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get me.
OldLurker is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2024, 17:05
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,464
Received 364 Likes on 213 Posts
well if the Chinese can so can the USA - and you'r really better worry about any Apple products you have................
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2024, 17:14
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Canada
Age: 63
Posts: 5,209
Received 134 Likes on 61 Posts
Originally Posted by BoeingDriver99
I agree with you on that point; even if COMAC wanted to compete with Boeing or Airbus it will take decades to become a significant player.

I wonder if their strategic aim is actually to just provide for their domestic carriers needs alone?
A report I read somewhere said the potential NB Chinese requirements for just domestic short haul was over 1000 airframes. Satisfying even half of that is enough airplanes to make the program viable. In any case I expect that Chinese airlines will be “encouraged” to replace their 737’s and A320’s with new C919’s.

As for its chances outside of China, It’s low and getting lower. The supply of Western technology is going to dry up as a result of US anti China policies and so I think this is as far as the Chinese airliner program goes.

They will still probably be able to sell a few to vassal states but an inability to operate within a Western airline regulatory environment, is crippling.
Big Pistons Forever is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2024, 17:53
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hughenden, UK
Age: 75
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The West's prejuduce angainst the East

Reading some of the comments reminds me about an article I read in Autocar - British car magazine - many moons ago. It was about the arrival on our shores of the first Honda Civic and its like. While begrudgingly accepting the qualities of the car the article went on to say pompously "But of course Japan will never produce a luxury car". Hah! The West always seems to doubt the ability of the East.

So regards the C-919 situation, is China still behind in technology? Yes. Is it going to stay behind? Nope. Will it challenge the duopoly of Boeing and Airbus? Almost certainly.

Never forget that it was an admiral in the US Navy who first announced that the totally-indigenously-produced DongFeng 21 missile was an absolute carrier-buster against which the said Navy had no defence. Do not underestimate the determination of CHina and remember that they work to much longer timescales than the West. (And no, I'm not a Chinese propagandist: just a well-travelled Brit)
Flyingmole is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2024, 21:34
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,228
Received 414 Likes on 258 Posts
Originally Posted by BoeingDriver99
The C919 has been certified since September 2022 and is in service. I’d be perfectly happy flying on it.

I’m unsure why you say it isn’t?
Good question. Not sure where I got that. Sorry.
Originally Posted by BoeingDriver9
The C919 will eventually be certified in the rest of the world. It’s just a matter of time.
But you did mention that ...and EASA seem to be taking their time.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2024, 05:48
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,076
Received 66 Likes on 40 Posts
Originally Posted by Lord Bracken
"Build" isn't quite accurate. There is a final assembly line (FAL) in Tianjin which bolts together large pieces of aircraft shipped in from the rest of the world. Mobile in Alabama, USA has the same facility. The wings of the A321 are all made in Broughton UK, and then shipped to the FALs.



This is a world away from locating design, production, assembly, test flight and certification in China.
AFAIK China is manufacturing the wings of the Tianjin assembled Airbus aircraft itself by now. The point is they have a long history of building and assembling aircraft accepted by western authorities.
Less Hair is online now  
Old 18th Jan 2024, 18:10
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2024
Location: Ldn
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A little competition is always a good thing.
TCASfan2001 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2024, 18:24
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Canada
Age: 63
Posts: 5,209
Received 134 Likes on 61 Posts
Originally Posted by Less Hair
AFAIK China is manufacturing the wings of the Tianjin assembled Airbus aircraft itself by now. The point is they have a long history of building and assembling aircraft accepted by western authorities.
Are the those airplanes eligible for a Certificate of Airworthiness from a Western Regulator ? A friend told me that he thought certain serial number range Airbus aircraft can only be issued a Chinese C of A.
Big Pistons Forever is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2024, 19:29
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,076
Received 66 Likes on 40 Posts
They formally get handed over to the customer by Airbus (not by the joint venture) at Tianjin with unrestricted certification and full guarantees.
Less Hair is online now  
Old 18th Jan 2024, 20:12
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 753
Received 24 Likes on 19 Posts
Originally Posted by Less Hair
The point is they have a long history of building and assembling aircraft accepted by western authorities.
True. However, in these cases it is done under "western" management of the oversight and quality systems. The disconnect with the 919 as with other "inhouse" Chinese built aircraft and parts is all the oversight and quality control is done to an internal national standard. But keep in mind China is not the only country that has these issues. Even some mainstream aircraft or parts built under license in other countries do not enjoy the same international certification status as those same items built by the original OEM due to the same policies and procedures that China faces. And one part China also has a long history of are substandard traceability and quality control systems which are foundational for any international aviation certification approval and acceptance.
wrench1 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2024, 21:14
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,076
Received 66 Likes on 40 Posts
I'd say building aircraft is not their big challenge but providing western style services and spare parts might be. At least until they have some global distribution network.
Less Hair is online now  
Old 18th Jan 2024, 22:50
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: Uk
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by Asturias56
well if the Chinese can so can the USA - and you'r really better worry about any Apple products you have................
No. Even the US government has taken Apple to court to get them to give access… they lost. Apple is pretty airtight.
Flyhighfirst is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2024, 02:39
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 3,071
Received 138 Likes on 63 Posts
Reading some of the comments reminds me about an article I read in Autocar - British car magazine - many moons ago. It was about the arrival on our shores of the first Honda Civic and its like. While begrudgingly accepting the qualities of the car the article went on to say pompously "But of course Japan will never produce a luxury car". Hah! The West always seems to doubt the ability of the East.

So regards the C-919 situation, is China still behind in technology? Yes. Is it going to stay behind? Nope. Will it challenge the duopoly of Boeing and Airbus? Almost certainly.
The issue with the C-919 and certification will be the integrity of the IP. It has been widely reported that the C919 has stolen alot of IP to make it work from western sources. Now they will get away with that in China but the Europeans and the USA won't be letting them certify this thing with stolen IP in it.

www.zdnet.com/article/building-chinas-comac-c919-airplane-involved-a-lot-of-hacking-report-says/


A report published today shines a light on one of China's most ambitious hacking operations known to date, one that involved Ministry of State Security officers, the country's underground hacking scene, legitimate security researchers, and insiders at companies all over the world.

The aim of this hacking operation was to acquire intellectual property to narrow China's technological gap in the aviation industry, and especially to help Comac, a Chinese state-owned aerospace manufacturer, build its own airliner, the C919 airplane, to compete with industry rivals like Airbus and Boeing.

A Crowdstrike report published today shows how this coordinated multi-year hacking campaign systematically went after the foreign companies that supplied components for the C919 airplane.

The end goal, Crowdstrike claims, was to acquire the needed intellectual property to manufacture all of the C919's components inside China.

Crowdstrike claims that the Ministry of State Security (MSS) tasked the Jiangsu Bureau (MSS JSSD) to carry out these attacks.

The Jiangsu Bureau, in turn, tasked two lead officers to coordinate these efforts. One was in charge of the actual hacking team, while the second was tasked with recruiting insiders working at aviation and aerospace companies

The hacking team targeted companies between 2010 and 2015, and successfully breached C919 suppliers like Ametek, Honeywell, Safran, Capstone Turbine, GE, and others.

But unlike in other Chinese hacks, where China used cyber-operatives from military units, for these hacks, the MSS took another approach, recruiting local hackers and security researchers.
According to Crowdstrike and a Department of Justice indictment, responsible for carrying out the actual intrusions were hackers that the MSS JSSD recruited from China's local underground hacking scene. Crowdstrike says that some of the team members had a shady history going back as far as 2004.These hackers were tasked with finding a way inside target networks, where they'd usually deploy malware such as Sakula, PlugX, and Winnti, which they'd use to search for proprietary information and exfiltrate it to remote servers.

In the vast majority of cases, the hackers used a custom piece of malware that was specifically developed for these intrusions. Named Sakula, this malware was developed by a legitimate security researcher named Yu Pingan.

In the rare occasions when the hacking team couldn't find a way inside a target, a second MSS JSSD officer would intervene and recruit a Chinese national working for the target company, and use him to plant Sakula on the victim's network, usually via USB drives.

The group, which Crowdstrike said it tracked as Turbine Panda, was extremely successful. The US cyber-security firm points out that in 2016, after almost six years of non-stop hacking of foreign aviation companies, the Aero Engine Corporation of China (AECC) launched the CJ-1000AX engine, which was set to be used in the upcoming C919 airplane, and replace an engine that had been previously manufactured by a foreign contractor.

Industry reporting points out that the CJ-1000AX displays multiple similarities [[url=https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/china-completes-assembly-of-first-high-bypass-turbof-444526/]1, 2] to the LEAP-1C and LEAP-X engines produced by CFM International, a joint venture between US-based GE Aviation and French aerospace firm Safran, and the foreign contractor that supplied turbine engines for the C919.

US crackdown

But while the MSS JSSD's hacking efforts might have gone unnoticed, hackers made a mistake when they overstepped and went after targets a little too big -- such as healthcare provider Anthem and the US Office of Personnel Management.

Those intrusions yielded a lot of useful information for recruiting future insiders, but they also brought the full attention of the US government bearing down on their operation. It didn't take too long after that for the US to start piecing the puzzle together.

The first ones to go were the insiders since they were the easiest ones to track down and had no protection from the Chinese government since they were operating on foreign soil.

After that came Yu, the creator of the Sakula malware, who was arrested while attending at a security conference in Los Angeles, and subsequently charged for his involvement in the Anthem and OPM hacks.

Yu's arrest triggered a massive ripple in China's infosec scene. The Chinese government responded by prohibiting Chinese researchers from participating at foreign security conferences, fearing that US authorities might get their hands on other "assets."

Initially, this seemed an odd thing to do, but a subsequent Recorded Future investigation showed how the MSS had deep ties to the Chinese cyber-security research scene, and how the agency was secretly hoarding and delaying vulnerabilities found by Chinese security researchers, many of which were being weaponized by its hackers before being publicly disclosed.

But the biggest hit to Turbine Panda came in late 2018 when western officials arrested Xu Yanjun, the MSS JSSD officer in charge of recruiting insiders at foreign companies.

The arrest of a high-ranking Chinese intelligence officer was the first of its kind, and the biggest intelligence asset transfer since the Cold War, besides Snowden's flight to Russia. Now, US officials are hoping that Xu collaborates for a reduced sentence.

However, Crowdstrike points out that "the reality is that many of the other cyber operators that made up Turbine Panda operations will likely never see a jail cell."

China has yet to extradite any citizen charged with cyber-related crimes.

Hackers have continued to target the aviation industry

In the meantime, Turbine Panda appears to have seized most of its operations, most likely crippled due to the arrests, but other Chinese cyber-espionage groups have taken over, such as Emissary Panda, Nightshade Panda, Sneaky Panda, Gothic Panda, Anchor Panda, and many more.

Attacks on foreign aviation firms are expected to continue for the foreseeable future, mainly because Comac's C919 jet isn't the success that the Chinese government expected (see 07:20 mark in the video below), and a fully Chinese airliner is still years away. Efforts are currently underway for building the airliner's next iteration, the C929 model.

For years it's been reported that China has been building its economical might on the back of other countries and its foreign competitors.

The full Crowdstrike report gives a glimpse at how China has been using hackers to do so, although they are not the only component.

The Beijing government itself has played even a bigger role. Historically, they've dangled carrots in the face of foreign companies, promising access to China's booming internal market. Foreign companies have seen themselves forced into joint ventures, only to be forced out later by their former partners after local companies grew with the help of state subsidies and the know-how acquired from the partnership.

In this process, Chinese hackers often helped with "forced technology transfer," breaching business partners and stealing their intellectual property, allowing the Chinese state-owned companies to put out high-end competing products in record time and at very low prices.

And in all of this, the aviation industry has been only one part of the puzzle. Similar hacking efforts have also targeted many other industry verticals, from the maritime industry to hardware manufacturing, and from academic research to biotechnology.
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2024, 05:19
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: EDLB
Posts: 363
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
NSA would never do this. TU 144 anyone?
At the end is the shoddy production at Boeing only a trap to prevent the Chinese from success?
EDLB is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2024, 05:31
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 277
Received 226 Likes on 119 Posts
Originally Posted by neville_nobody
The issue with the C-919 and certification will be the integrity of the IP. It has been widely reported that the C919 has stolen alot of IP to make it work from western sources. Now they will get away with that in China but the Europeans and the USA won't be letting them certify this thing with stolen IP in it.

www.zdnet.com/article/building-chinas-comac-c919-airplane-involved-a-lot-of-hacking-report-says/
But surely (don't call me Shirley) it not the job of the FAA/EASA to rule on the IP's provenance.
artee is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2024, 13:28
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 753
Received 24 Likes on 19 Posts
Originally Posted by artee
But surely (don't call me Shirley) it not the job of the FAA/EASA to rule on the IP's provenance.
Can't speak for the EASA but for the FAA its not their job. Different agency, set of laws, and courts. There is nothing in the FARs that prevents you from "copying" an existing product or article and using it provided you obtain your own FAA approvals. However, if you do infringe on someone else's IP that would be a separate matter and you may be subject to other legal actions even though you received FAA approval for the item.

wrench1 is offline  
Old 23rd Jan 2024, 07:47
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2024
Location: TOKYO
Age: 28
Posts: 25
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by BoeingDriver99
I’d rather fly a C919 seeing how long they’ve been testing and developing it and knowing China’s attitude to risk than anything coming from Boeing in the last decade. So good for them and best of luck! Airbus needs a bit of decent competition these days.
Chinese technology still has low standards with a high rate of maintenance requirenent, though it tends to look flashy sometimes. I would worry about flying on a Chinese plane after some wear has settled in. But I agree that Boeing has lowered the standards sufficiently that China can compete.
JapanHanuma is offline  
Old 22nd Feb 2024, 17:06
  #39 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada/Malaysia
Age: 83
Posts: 273
Received 18 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by TCASfan2001
A little competition is always a good thing.
https://www.reuters.com/business/aer...ow-2024-02-22/

COMAC was able to seize a moment when the two dominant Western planemakers are dealing with supply chain issues that have frustrated airline customers and Boeing is wrestling with a series of crises, including a mid-air panel blow-out in January
If Boeing/Airbus can't meet demand...does COMAC then become an alternative?
BlankBox is offline  
Old 23rd Feb 2024, 09:19
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,464
Received 364 Likes on 213 Posts
Airlines can put up prices - reduces the number of customers but boy it improves their bottom line........................
Asturias56 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.