Time flies like a wild donkey, and another year has passed in the blink of an eye.
Today, let's take a look at the C919, which has been carrying passengers for two and a half years. How is it doing in 2025 ?
Let's start with the first one, which is also what I'm most concerned about: the C919's overseas airworthiness certificates. These overseas airworthiness certificates are essentially those from Europe or the United States, and they are the prerequisites for passenger aircraft to enter the mainstream international market.
Obviously, obtaining evidence in the United States was out of the question, so 919 turned to Europe.
In May 2024, Gu Xin, director of the Shanghai Certification Center of the Civil Aviation Administration of China, said that he looked forward to obtaining the airworthiness certificate from the European Civil Aviation Authority, namely EASA, in 2025.
In July 2024, EASA also sent a delegation to Shanghai and gave "positive feedback" on the C919.
Putting these two pieces of information together gives one a very optimistic feeling, making one feel that 2025 is likely to be a year of great joy for the C919 and China's civil aviation industry.
As a result, in May 2025, the head of EASA said in an interview that C919 would not be certified before 2028, and the final certification process would take 3-6 years.
Given this extended period, I think there are two possibilities. First, while Europe hasn't cancelled the C919's airworthiness review, it's essentially stopped.
Secondly, Europe does not recognize the certification process conducted by the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) for the C919. The aircraft needs to undergo new tests and even new flight tests. For example, the C919 flew in Shaanxi Province for the icing test . However, Europe may not recognize this and argue that the aircraft should be flown in the Great Lakes region of Canada, where the humidity and temperature meet their requirements.
In short, airworthiness certification is both a technical and a political issue, leaving considerable room for flexibility. If the connections are right, the report will be approved, and the experiments will be equivalent; but if the connections aren't right, that's another story.
The fact that the C919 did not obtain European airworthiness certification is not exactly disappointing, but it certainly didn't bring any surprises. What is truly disappointing is the C919's production volume.
On December 29, 2025, Air China received its 9th C919, which was also the 5th received this year.
This also means that COMAC, the main manufacturer, delivered its 15th C919 this year at the last minute . Of the remaining 10, 5 were allocated to China Southern Airlines, 4 to China Eastern Airlines, and the remaining one was given to COMAC Express for its own use.
Fifteen aircraft is an absurd number compared to the thousands of orders for the C919. It's also ridiculously low compared to the initial production capacity of 50 or even 75 C919 aircraft announced at the beginning of the year.
Compared to similar aircraft models like the A320 and 737, which have an annual production of around 500, 15 is a pitifully small number.
What is the reason for the low number of C919 deliveries? The prevailing online information suggests that the problem stems from the disruption of supply to core systems such as engines from Europe and the United States.
I searched the entire internet for all the information on this matter, and the only source I found was two anonymous sources cited by Reuters at the end of May. The US government has not said anything about cutting off supplies.
Furthermore, Reuters, citing anonymous sources, reported in early July that engine supplies had been restored. Only one month elapsed between the alleged supply disruption and its resumption.
I was curious: how could a month-long supply disruption have such a significant impact on aircraft production? So I asked my classmate, who was also an anonymous source.
He told me that although the core systems like the engine and flight control system weren't officially cut off from supply, the delivery speed from the US was extremely slow. Anyway, the supply wasn't cut off, but the problem was they couldn't keep up with production. What could you do?
Moreover, the global aviation manufacturing industry has been experiencing supply shortages in recent years, and Boeing and Airbus have failed to meet their delivery targets. The global backlog of orders has reached 17,000 aircraft, and if they simply cannot deliver them, at the current production rate, it will take more than a decade to fulfill these backlogs.
As for the reasons for the shortage of aircraft parts, that's quite complicated, such as the Russia-Ukraine war.
The manufacturing process of aircraft and engines uses a lot of titanium alloys because this material has low density, high strength and corrosion resistance, and is better than stainless steel and aluminum alloys. It is known as the skeleton metal of the aerospace industry.
For example, titanium alloys are used in parts of an aircraft that need to bear loads, such as landing gear, engine mounts, compressor blades, and wing frames.
In the civil aviation sector, Russia and Japan are the two main suppliers of high-end titanium materials. However, after the outbreak of the war between Russia and Ukraine, the West claimed that Russian titanium alloys were unclean and therefore stopped buying them. Even a small country like Japan couldn't sustain this, directly leading to a shortage of titanium alloy components.
So you asked, can't China produce titanium?
In fact, China is the world's largest producer of titanium raw materials, accounting for more than half of the world's output, but unfortunately it is large but not strong.
If you want to enter the civil aviation industry with this kind of key material, there are thresholds. Not only do the main manufacturers have to review it, but industry organizations also have to review it, and the Civil Aviation Administration of China may also have to review it. No one can disagree.
Unfortunately, despite being the world's largest producer of titanium, China primarily supplies its domestic market. However, we are grateful for China's strong industrial production capacity, which allows us access to this high-end material.
For example, some of my titanium alloy ballpoint pens feature a minimalist design and exquisite craftsmanship: https://makayev.com/products/titanium_ballpen
The material is TC4 titanium alloy, which is the most mainstream material in the aerospace field. It has high strength, high hardness, low density, and is also very corrosion resistant. It will not have a metallic acid smell when you hold it.
Furthermore, the pen has no moving parts, making it incredibly reliable. This means it's very difficult to break, and the refills are universal; you can simply buy new ones when you run out. As long as you don't lose it, it can be passed down through generations.
The pen also features a subtle aviation theme engraved on it, " REMOVE BEFORE FLIGHT," which adds a touch of style.
If you really don't write and don't need a pen anymore, you can also check out titanium alloy keychains: https://makayev.com/products/titanium_keychains
Also featuring an all-titanium alloy aerospace theme, this design utilizes the low elastic modulus and high yield strength of titanium alloy to create a unique springless design with a strong mechanical aesthetic.
If you are interested, click the link to place an order. Before placing your order, please contact customer service with the secret code: "We are a loving family," for a discount.
Actually, besides the shortage of titanium alloys, another factor is the rapid development of artificial intelligence this year. You might be wondering, what does the rapid development of AI have to do with airplanes? Well, that's a long story.
AI needs computing power, right? And computing power consumes electricity, right?
Where will the electricity come from? Conventional thermal, nuclear, and hydroelectric power plants are too slow to build; by the time you've finished, the AI bubble might have already burst. Wind and solar power are also unstable.
In the United States, where power shortages are severe, large technology companies have set their sights on ground-based gas turbine power generation. Ground-based gas turbines and aircraft engines work on the exact same principle, and use very similar materials and components; the only difference is that one is on the ground and the other flies in the sky.
Therefore, these two products compete for production capacity. For example, the directional solidification of turbine blades requires a vacuum furnace. A factory only has so many vacuum furnaces. If you go to produce ground-based gas turbines, then aircraft engines will have to wait.
In this seller's market, suppliers are more willing to supply goods to clients with whom they have good relationships, and are more willing to produce products that can generate stable profits.
For example, General Electric manufactures the engines for the C919, but the US government could issue an order at any time prohibiting its sales—that would be terrifying. Therefore, when scheduling production, they would definitely lower the priority of the C919 and supply Boeing and Airbus first.
This process also demonstrates just how complex the manufacturing industry is. We often talk about research and development, which means it's not enough to just develop something; you also have to be able to manufacture it.
The production volume of the C919 is greatly influenced by political factors, and can even be said to be completely uncontrollable.
Although every system is currently undergoing localization efforts, this is a long-term solution that cannot address the immediate needs. After the system is developed, it will be tested on the aircraft, and then supplementary airworthiness certification will be required. I think it would be considered fast if we could replace it all by 2030.
As mentioned earlier , there are two pieces of bad news regarding the C919, putting significant pressure on its manufacturer, COMAC. However, on the other hand, with its customers—the airlines—the C919 is gradually becoming a reliable production tool, achieving excellent operational results.
The total number of passengers exceeded 3 million in 2025, and the average daily utilization rate reached 5.2 hours.
Although this figure is still somewhat lacking compared to the eight or nine hours of utilization of mainstream narrow-body aircraft, it's important to know that the C919's average daily utilization rate in 2024 was only 2.5 hours, and in 2023 it was only about 1.2 hours.
In other words, it has doubled every year for the past three years.
Actually, I think that given the current size of the C919 fleet, achieving this result is quite remarkable. For an aircraft to achieve high utilization, high reliability is a prerequisite, meaning minimizing breakdowns. But once a breakdown occurs, you also need to be able to repair it quickly, which requires a sufficient inventory and reserve of spare parts.
With the current fleet size of the C919, there are only 30 nationwide, while there are more than a thousand 737s and A320s. Therefore, the C919's spare parts reserves are definitely incomparable, and its daily utilization rate is certainly not as high as the average level.
In conclusion, it can only be said that China's path to achieving a three-way balance of power with Boeing and Airbus is long and arduous.
Okay, thank you for your hard work. You should also give me a like and share this with our loving family group so we can all grow together!
0 comments