By Gp Capt AK Sachdev
02 Nov , 2015
Reaching the leading edge in technological regimes is an objective purposefully being pursued by China and the velocity of development in some technologies has been astonishing. However, the means employed for this pursuit of technology may not have been above board and there are frequent references to theft of design and documents by Chinese personnel working in industrial establishments in developed nations. This is euphemistically referred to as “Transfer of Technology”. Reverse engineering, with or without license, has been another route followed by China. However, the means employed do not detract from the results manifest. One of the areas where China has made significant strides is that of aerospace technology.
Much like India, the Chinese political scene is replete with symbolic slogans. Chinese President Xi Jinping coined the term “Chinese Dream” a little over two years ago and expounded on it during the 12th National Peoples’ Congress in March 2013. The Chinese Dream, much like the Indian “Acchhe Din” slogan, visualises better conditions for the Chinese people in the domestic context while in foreign relations, it stands for peace, development and cooperation. Since its initiation, Xi Jinping has helped nurture the slogan through constant expounding including by way of his Op-Ed diplomacy wherein he authors pieces of prose for Op-Ed pages of newspapers in countries he visits (see The Hindu dated September 17, 2014 for Xi Jinping’s write-up for Indian audiences). He has made the Chinese Dream a centrepiece of his agenda and the ultimate objective appears to be making China the axis of Asia. Industry and technology, wherein China still lags behind some developed nations as far as capability and research are concerned, is naturally a focal point of the Chinese Dream.
Reaching the leading edge in technological regimes is an objective purposefully being pursued by China and the velocity of development in some technologies has been astonishing. However, the means employed for this pursuit of technology may not have been above board and there are frequent references to theft of design and documents by Chinese personnel working in industrial establishments in developed nations. This is euphemistically referred to as “Transfer of Technology”. Reverse engineering, with or without license, has been another route followed by China. However, the means employed do not detract from the results manifest. One of the areas where China has made significant strides is that of aerospace technology.
The general feeling is that a ten per cent improvement over the A320/ Boeing 737 is an over-ambitious target…
Civil Transport Aircraft
Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC), a Shanghai-based state-owned company, was formed in 2008, and functions as the main aircraft manufacturer implementing large civil passenger aircraft programmes in China. It is engaged in the research and development, manufacture and flight tests of civil aircraft. The company also handles related businesses such as marketing, servicing, leasing and operations of civil aircraft. The COMAC internet site claims that it adheres to the principle of “development with Chinese characteristics”, a typical, euphemistic, oblique reference aimed at projecting China’s claims of self-reliant technological progress. Notwithstanding many sceptical views about the ‘indigenous’ content of China’s civil commercial aircraft development programme, the fact remains that COMAC appears set to produce civil airliners in more than one class of size and All Up Weight.
The C919
Some media wit pointed out that the ‘A’ of Airbus and the ‘B’ of Boeing are now going to be joined by the ‘C’ of COMAC in the narrow-body regime with the introduction of the C919 (short for COMAC 919). Chinese sources refer to the C919 as a “trunk liner” and COMAC itself terms it as “a short-medium range commercial trunk liner”. It is designed to provide a competitively priced aircraft in the class of Airbus A320 and the Boeing 737, both holding sway in the global, commercial single-aisle segment. The C919 is expected to have two cabin options – a 168-seat all-economy version and a 156-seat business and economy class mix version.
Although some media reports speak of a 180-seat all-economy, high density version, COMAC itself has never made such a projection. The basic version is designed to have a range of 4,075 km, while a later, extended range version is claimed to have a range of 5,555 km. According to COMAC, the economic life of the C919 is designed to be 90,000 flying hours/30 calendar years. COMAC claims that the fuel consumption and direct operating cost per-seat per-kilometre would be lower than those of “similar existing airplanes”. The obvious reference is to the Airbus A320 and the Boeing 737. There are plans to produce a basic version, an extended version, a shortened version, a cargo version, a special version possibly for military/police roles and a corporate version.
The C919 is going to be powered by the CFM Leap 1C engine which, like the Leap X for the A320 NEO, is attributed with a 15 per cent fuel saving over other CFM engines of comparable thrust. The Leap 1C is due to be certified in June 2015 and enter service in 2016. However, it is possible that the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) may permit C919 flight testing with Leap 1C even before the engine is formally certified. CFM is expected to deliver a complete LEAP-1C Integrated Propulsion System (IPS) for C919 programme in partnership with Nexcelle, a 50-50 joint venture between Middle River Aircraft System, a US-based, thrust reverser expert company and Aircelle, a Safran Group nacelle producer. CFM will provide the engine while Nexcelle will be in-charge of the nacelle and the thrust reverser. There was speculation about a Leap 1C assembly line being set up in China but CFM International is still discussing the matter with Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC). CFM is said to have apprehensions on related intellectual property rights.
The Xian MA60 preceded the ARJ21 to enter production as an airliner…
The C919 programme is projected as providing a ten per cent reduction in operating costs in comparison to Airbus A320 and Boeing 737. Obviously, that target relates to these two types as they existed when the target was set in 2008. Since then, Airbus and Boeing have both announced improved designs, the A320 NEO and Boeing 737 MAX, both narrow-body aircraft. The improvement claimed being 10 to 15 per cent reduction in fuel consumption on account of better airframe design and more fuel efficient engines. As the C919 is the first COMAC design of this size, the general feeling is that a ten per cent improvement over the A320/ Boeing 737 is an over-ambitious target and that even a match would be a notable achievement.
One of the reasons for this assessment is the significant, mid-stream change of material for the wing section. Earlier, COMAC had announced that the centre wing box section would be constructed of composite carbon material but later on, a change was made to conventional aluminium which is the material being used for the rest of the wing. The main reasons appear to be the certification by CAAC and the fact that composite materials would have cost much more than traditional ones. There was also the consideration that use of composites would have delayed the programme further due to the additional tests involved for certification. The tail and the movable structures are expected to be largely composite materials. Bombardier was reported last year of having plans to help COMAC get overseas approval for the C919 as it had two decades of experience in obtaining approvals for regional and business aircraft globally. The two companies jointly said in March 2012 that the C919 and Bombardier CSeries aircraft would share a common cockpit design. They also committed to cooperation in other related areas.
According to Xinhua, assembly of the first C919 is nearing completion and the first flight is expected at the end of 2015. The first commercial delivery is expected in 2018. Meanwhile, COMAC has received orders for 450 C919 airliners from 18 customers, mainly Chinese carriers and leasing companies. However, there is an interrogation mark over the certification by FAA and EASA who have not been involved in the development or testing. Should FAA/ EASA certification not be forthcoming, sales outside China would be impossible while even domestic sales would be dampened by the lack of American or European endorsement.
ARJ21
The ARJ21-700, advertised as China’s first indigenously designed regional jet airliner, obtained its type certification from CAAC on December 30, 2014. The programme was launched in 2002 but was dogged by delays and the prototype first flew at the end of 2008. Since then it has flown around 5,000 hours of test flights and achieved CAAC certification. FAA/ EASA certification may take a couple of years more. The ARJ21 is designed to compete against the Bombardier CS100, Embraer 190 and Sukhoi SSJ100 and is listed at a price of $30 million, a tag much lower than its competitors.
The first Chinese-assembled An-24T had its maiden flight on December 25, 1970…
The ARJ21-700 seats 78 passengers in a dual-class configuration and has 90 seats in a full economy class arrangement. Thus its seating capacity is lower than that of its competitors by 10 to 20 seats and has a shorter range. However, a second version, the yet-to-be-launched ARJ21-900, is expected to seat 115 and have an extended range. Its economic life is designed for 60,000 flying hours or 20 years.
To date, 278 firm orders have been notched up by COMAC, who, in the coming weeks, intend to deliver their first aircraft to the Chinese company Chengdu Airlines, which specialises in domestic flights from Chengdu. This would be important from the perspective of COMAC attaining revenue earning capacity after years of development. However, from the point of view of after sales experience, it would be an anxious clamber over the learning curve for COMAC.
The ARJ21 could well create problems with its initial clients that may prove to be a big headache for COMAC, with its lack of experience in the past to manage and grow up with. The absence of certification by FAA/EASA could well prove to be a blessing in disguise as it would mean that the launch clients would perforce be Chinese beginning with Chengdu Airlines.
MA60
The Xian MA60 preceded the ARJ21 to enter production as an airliner. It is a turboprop-powered commercial aircraft made by China Aviation Industry Corporation (CAVIC). The aircraft first flew in 1993 and was inducted into operations in 2004. It is produced by China’s Xi’an Aircraft Industrial Corporation under CAVIC. The MA60 is a stretched version of the Xian Y7-200A which was based on the Russian design Antonov An-24. It can operate in rugged conditions with limited ground support and has Short Take-Off and Landing (STOL) capability. It received its type certificate from the CAAC in June 2000 but is not certified by FAA or EASA yet.
The Y20 is hailed by Chinese media as a landmark in Chinese aviation history…
The aircraft is in use by a dozen airlines and air forces around the world despite the lack of certification but has had problems keeping an encouraging safety record. The New Zealand government, in fact, issued an advisory to its citizens that if they flew in the Real Tonga Airlines MA60 while in Tonga, they did so at their own risk as it was not certified by acceptable regulators outside of China. The MA60 was a free gift to Real Tonga from the Chinese government. On February 10, 2015, with Tonga civil aviation authorities enacting legislation to align its regulations with New Zealand, the MA60 has been grounded subject to recertification. An updated version of the MA60, called MA600, made its maiden flight in September 2008. The aircraft is equipped with new avionics, passenger cabin and engines with higher thrust rating.
MA700
CAVIC is working on a design touted to be a new one, the MA700, to be produced at Xian. The design is expected to have modern turboprop engine technology and to provide a better option than the ATR72 and Bombardier Q400. It is expected to seat 78 passengers with a possible stretched version with 90 seats as also a shorter version with just 50 seats. CAVIC and its development partners are expected to produce the detailed design and work out the development responsibilities by mid-2015. The first prototype is expected to fly in June 2017. With 24 to 30 months kept aside for flight testing, entry into service is expected by 2019. Certification by FAA/EASA should be easier for the MA700 as by the time it is ready to fly, China expects that the ARJ21 certification by FAA/ EASA would have been achieved, thus paving the way for MA700 certification.
Future Plans
According to a report in Aviation Week and Space Technology, Russia’s United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) and China’s COMAC, signed a memorandum on cooperation in May 2014 for a joint manufacturing programme for a 250-280-seat wide-body airliner. A joint feasibility study has been completed and the two have begun preliminary design of the aircraft which is expected to enter service in 2025. The preliminary design is expected to be completed by July 2015, according to UAC President Yury Slyusar. Russian Industry and Trade Minister Denis Manturov suggests that full-scale development will begin next year. Russian industry is keen to work with the Chinese since Beijing can provide to the programme adequate funding which is unlikely to come from the Russian government. However, COMAC is not raving about the programme as the Chinese government is more likely to fund the development of C929, a purely Chinese venture as a logical sequence to the narrow body C-919.
The LCA project has taken three decades for the HAL to produce a half-hearted design…
Military Aircraft
The Y5 - The Antonov An-2 was a Soviet era single-engine bi-plane utility/agricultural aircraft of 1946 vintage. It could carry up to 12 passengers and had an empty weight of 3.3 tonnes and a Maximum Take-off Weight of 5.4 tonnes. The Chinese version of An-2, called Nanchang Y5, was initially built from Soviet blueprints and with supervision by Soviet advisors. Subsequently, several variants including an amphibian version were produced in China.
The Xian Y7 – This is a transport aircraft designed and built in China but based on the Soviet-designed Antonov An-24 series. In 1966, Xi’an aircraft factory started producing the An-24 locally. The first Chinese-assembled An-24T had its maiden flight on December 25, 1970. Production was launched in 1977 at the Xi’an aircraft factory but progress was slow and the first pre-production aircraft was displayed to the public at Nan Yuan near Beijing on April 17, 1982. The WJ-5A1 turboprop engine was chosen as the Y7’s power plant. The first production aircraft was not flown until February 1984, illustrating the slow progress as eighteen years elapsed between licence to production. The Chinese version was closest to the An-24RV and the majority of deliveries were to the Peoples’ Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF), with a few in 52-seat civil airliner configuration for the CAAC. After the initial licensed production run, the Y7 was developed separately from the An-24 with a succession of upgrades culminating in the Xian MA60 mentioned earlier. A tactical transport derivative was copied from the Antonov An-26 design and emerged as the Y7H, incorporating the cargo ramp door and military equipment of the An-26.
The Shaanxi Y8 - This is a medium size medium-range transport aircraft based on the Soviet Antonov An-12 produced by Shaanxi Aircraft Company in China. In the 1960s, China purchased several An-12 aircraft from the Soviet Union along with licence to assemble the aircraft locally. However, due to the Sino-Soviet split, the Soviet Union withdrew technical assistance. The Xi’an Aircraft Company and Xi’an Aircraft Design Institute worked to reverse engineer the An-12 for local production. Design of the aircraft was completed by February 1972 and the aircraft entered serial production in 1982.
The C919 programme is projected as providing a ten per cent reduction in operating costs in comparison to Airbus A320 and Boeing 737…
Major features of the Y8 include a glazed nose and tail turret derived from that of the H6 bomber, a roller-type palletised-cargo-handling device instead of the overhead conveyor and a gaseous oxygen system as opposed to a liquid oxygen system. The original Y8 inherited the An-12’s twin 23 mm cannon tail turret, but this was removed on subsequent variants. The Y8 is capable of carrying troops, dropping supplies, parachute drops and functioning as an air ambulance. It also can be used for commercial role as a freighter. It is capable of hauling 20 tonnes of cargo, 96 troops or 82 paratroopers.
It has become one of China’s most popular military and civilian transport aircraft, with several variants produced and exported. Although the An-12 is no longer made in Ukraine, the Chinese Y8 continues to be upgraded and produced. Y8s have been used by the PLAAF and PLANAF in a wide variety of roles and some have been supplied to civilian operators.
The Shaanxi Y9 - This is a medium-sized, medium-range transport aircraft produced by Shaanxi Aircraft Company in China. The aircraft was developed as a stretched version of the Shaanxi Y-8F with greater payload and range originating from the Soviet Antonov An-12. The Y9 is considered China’s effort to build a C130J class transport aircraft. Originally known as the Y8X project, the development of the Y9 began in 2001 to replace the older Y8. The first flight of the new aircraft could take place only in 2011 and it became operational with the PLAAF in 2012. The aircraft is capable of transporting 25 tonnes of cargo or configured with 106 troop seats in the troop transport role or 72 stretchers for the medical evacuation role or up to 132 armed paratroopers in the para-drop role.
The Y10 - During the 1970s, China made efforts to develop a commercial aircraft labelled the Y10. Development work began in August 1970 and the aircraft was intended to serve as a demonstrator and help the Chinese industry obtain experience in large aircraft design and flight testing. It was a four-engine narrow-body jet airliner developed by the Shanghai Aircraft Research Institute. Due to non-availability of the intended turbofan engines the prototype aircraft used Pratt & Whitney JT3D-7 turbofan engines, acquired as spare engines for CAAC’s fleet of Boeing 707 aircraft. The cabin could be configured to seat 178 in high-density, 149 in economy, or 124 in mixed-class. The Chinese government prided itself on the programme but had to be shelved due to political and economic factors.
Three aircraft were built by the Shanghai Aircraft Factory, now known as Shanghai Aviation Industrial Company (SAIC). The first prototype was used for static testing, the second for flight testing and the third for fatigue testing. The plane first flew on September 26, 1980, making 130 flights with 170 hours of flying time. While the Y10 resembled the Boeing 707, its dimensions are closer to the Boeing 720. The project was scrapped because of economic and political factors. One Y10 developmental airframe still stands in COMAC’s factory at Shanghai bearing witness to the abandoned programme.
Russian industry is keen to work with the Chinese since Beijing can provide to the programme adequate funding…
The Y10 was followed by a succession of projects including the UHB jet developed with Boeing, the ATFA jet jointly developed with McDonnell Douglas, the AE100 developed with Airbus and the domestically developed NRJ aircraft. None of these designs could be brought to fruition due to either lack of money or just a breakup of partnership. However, the experience gained was valuable in the ARJ21 and the C919 projects. The ‘Y’ suffix of the Y10 is possibly an indication that the design may have been meant primarily for military use as it conforms to the suffix system used by the PLAAF.
The Y20 - This is a large military transport aircraft with a Maximum Take Off Weight of 220 tonnes, being developed by Xi’an Aircraft Industrial Corporation. According to an October 2014 report by China’s Peoples’ Daily, the Y20 is likely to enter service with the PLAAF in the next two years. The design gives China the place of pride as the fourth nation in the world with the ability to develop 200-tonne transport aircraft after the US, Russia and Ukraine.
The project is being developed by Xi’an Aircraft Industrial Corporation and was officially launched in 2006. The official codename of the aircraft is Kunpeng, after the mythical bird of ancient China that can fly for thousands of kilometres. It was reported that the Y20 started ground testing from December 2012, including runway taxi tests. The aircraft made its maiden flight lasting one hour on January 26, 2013. The first Y20 prototype is powered by four Russian D-30 series turbofan engines and the production aircraft may be equipped with Chinese WS-20 engine, derived from the WS-10 turbofan engine currently powering the J-11B fighters in PLAAF. Cargo is loaded through a large aft ramp that accommodates rolling stock. The Y20 is hailed by Chinese media as a landmark in Chinese aviation history inasmuch as the aircraft is a brand new, entirely Chinese design unlike older transport aircraft such as the Y7 and Y8, which were based on Russian models.
The Y30 - This is another Chinese design that is expected to follow Y20 into service. The programme is at concept design stage and full-scale development is likely to start in about two years. A first flight may be possible by 2020. The Y30 would have almost the same gross weight as the Hercules C130 and the Embraer KC390, about 80 metric tonnes. However, the payload is intended to be 30 tonnes, compared with 19.6 tonnes for the Hercules. The high ratio of payload to gross weight represents a large increase in efficiency over the C130.
A model of the Y30 displayed at Air Show China at Zhuhai last year showed the aircraft with four turboprop engines but many conceptual designs are under consideration, some with turbofan propulsion. An option for the turboprop is the WJ-16 engine, which is a new engine at an unknown stage of development. If jet propulsion is chosen, there would be two engines with the WS-20 engine under development for the much larger Y20 heavy transport being the most likely candidate.
Conclusion
Chinese transport aircraft programmes may have borrowed or acquired through other means, the expertise and the technological knowledge to produce functional aircraft. However, aero engines to power them remain a weak area. It will be a decade before China can produce engines to suit their indigenous airframes in the transport category. Yet another problem is likely to remain i.e. the absence of FAA/EASA certification which may not come as a matter of course. That is so not only because of the obvious competitive aspect but also because Chinese safety record with the only aircraft flying commercially, the MA 60, is abysmal. The fact that the engine on the C919 is of Western origin and that a lot of avionics have come from outside China, may serve to weigh FAA/EASA’s decision to certify the aircraft on account of vested interests.
As a nation, the Chinese have long memories and would not like to repeat their humiliation of the past. Implicit to the “Chinese Dream” is the desire to modernise its defence forces and that aspect holds an ominous portent for India. As far as the military transport programmes are concerned, one disturbing concern for India is the possibility of the Y20 finding its way into Pakistani inventory in the near future.
Meanwhile, there is a lesson for Indian civil aviation manufacturing sector wherein the private sector has been denied opportunity and the public sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited has performed abysmally. It copied effortlessly to produce the HT2 and the HPT32 and is struggling with doing the same for HTT40 which, understandably, the IAF does not want to have anything to do with. The LCA project has taken three decades for the HAL to produce a half-hearted design although the IAF would be lumped with it despite what it may have to say.
In the arena of a passenger aircraft, HAL has produced nothing so far. The 14-seat Saras was designed by National Aeronautical Laboratory and was to be productionised by HAL at Kanpur but the second prototype crashed in 2009 and the programme suffered a serious setback. The third prototype is yet to take off. There are some hazy plans of building a 90-seat passenger aircraft. In contrast, COMAC started in 2008 and is well on its way to produce, if not a challenge, then at least a third best, to the A320 and the Boeing 737. Maybe the take-off of the first C919 will be a clarion call to the Indian aircraft industry.
© Copyright 2015 Indian Defence Review
No comments:
Post a Comment