Has BOEING met its MATCH?!

Get 35% off a Ground News subscription until December 21 by visiting ground.news/me...
COMAC’s C919 will soon enter service in China, but could this aircraft really compete with the Boeing 737 and the Airbus A320? Is China about to destroy the Boeing - Airbus duopoly? Stay tuned.
If you want to support the work I do on the channel, join my Patreon crew and get awesome perks and help me move the channel forward! 👇
👉🏻 / mentourpilot
👉🏻 Check out our other channel here: / mentournow
Get the Mentour Aviation app and discuss what You think about this! Download the app for FREE using the link below 👇
📲
📲 Join the Mentour Pilot Discord server here! 👉🏻 / discord
I have also created an Amazon page with Aviation books, material and flight simulator stuff that I think you will enjoy!
👉🏻 www.amazon.com...
Follow my life on instagram and get awesome pictures from the cockpit!
📲 / mentour_pilot
To find the right HEADSET for YOU, check out BOSE Aviation 👉🏻 boseaviation-e...
Get some Awesome Mentour Pilot merch 👉🏻 mentour-crew.c...
Sources
• Can Comac’s C919 Compe...
• China’s Comac Aims to ...
• First C919 jet deliver...
• Hello, C919
• Birth of the world’s f...
• Fly with C919 from PVG...
• Boeing to set up two 7...
• Welcome ARJ21！
• COMAC ARJ21 Introducin...
• Meet the general assem...
• La Chine livre enfin s...
• China May Reduce Boein...
• Over 1,000 Aircraft Or...
• Irkut MC-21-300 makes ...
• SSJ100 Production Video
• InFocus: Comac C919 re...
Sources:
www.bloomberg....
www.reuters.co...
www.reuters.co...
www.industrywe...
www.zdnet.com/...
www.computerwe...

[@MentourNow]

Get 35% off a Ground News subscription until December 21 by visiting ground.news/mentournow

[@fredashay]

No way am I ever flying on an aircraft made by a Chinese company!!! But I guess this means that Russia and North Korea will be able to buy brand new passenger jets now...

[@sailaab]

Really love the carefully balanced script, verbiage you always use.. while discussing geopolitical or sensitive issues. . Because after-all anything on the internet blows up really fast. . Your timely stories and productions on current events is a boon👌🏽🤍👍🏼

[@MrCaiobrz]

A plane that is not even a direct competitor for the A320 or B737 should not raise the question proposed in this video. The C919 is more of a proof of concept that covers a very niche market, and it is more likely that future COMAC airplanes might go after the A320/B737 range. Nobody in the industry is remotely worried by COMAC at this time, and truth be told, the C191 is closer to the A318/A319/A320 legacy then the B737, so it would be more likely to compare it with Airbus, not Boeing.

[@laosasean8482]

If they can built the own space station from the scrap, aircraft components is not impossible for them and they already has proven that on Y-20 and J-20

[@seriouscat2231]

Please remove the apostrophe from the title.

[@StoutProper]

Boeing doesn’t need cormac to destroy it, it’s doing a fine job of that all by itself

[@irwantrahmat9441]

737 max the flying coffins Do you still want to travel with boeing???

[@akalksander9184]

Well naysayer, Boeing just landed a historic order for 737s, hahaha

[@StoutProper]

@@irwantrahmat9441 I will never fly one one of those death traps, and I will choose airlines that fly airbus whenever possible

[@StoutProper]

@@akalksander9184 and what? You can sell anything if it’s cheap enough. Boeing are losing money on the deal but it’s fine because US tax dollars will bail them out. Great use of taxes, give it to a failing multibillion dollar corporation. It’s corporate communism and people like you who support it are communists and traitors. How’s it feel being a commie traitor?

[@PrivateWalker]

​@@StoutProper Yes! You're absolutely right 👍

[@neues3691]

China's switch to domestic suppliers only in the longterm seems inevitable given current political developments.

[@MentourNow]

It is a likely long-term development, yes. Providing they can actually do it

[@o0o-jd-o0o95]

yes ... they are trying to isolate themselves and not rely on any imports because they are going to piss off the world soon. mark my words , china is the next hitler germany

[@rbarnes8169]

@@MentourNow they can absolutely do it, and they are.

[@TheEDFLegacy]

@@MentourNow Considering how much production China does for the West, combined with they're successful hacking attempts against some major corporations with the goal of corporate espionage, it wouldn't surprise me if they have the original plans for the 737 and a320, and use them to develop their own variant. They've already done this with Lockheed-Martin's aircraft such as the F-35, which was used to develop the J-31.

[@seymorefact4333]

🇺🇸 China is selling to growing market is SE Asia, Latin America, Africa, eastern Europe, Russia, middleast! Which is 85% of the globe. USA France has a monopoly in the west. The USA France will pump billions in scare propoganda and might even do the unthinkable. Profits before lives is USA. Btw, 🇺🇸 Facebook, Twitter, Google, AWS, Microsoft, Qualcomm, Cisco, Intel, and 99.99% of all USA, UK, ISRAEL tech Corp are funded by CIA, FBI, NSA, mi6, mosaad to spy on its own and the world! USA tech Corp are protected by deep state because their function is to SPY. THESE CORP are finance by deep state banks.

[@praveengupta9114]

Underestimating the competition and basking in past glory is the fastest way of becoming the past.

[@SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648]

Chinese glory is still kind of rickety. We don't buy airplanes at Walmart. Now if the attempt pushes China, or even "regions of China" to be more Western minded, it will not have been an utterly bad thing. There are some arenas in which being Keystone Kops just won't do.

[@samdoidge1054]

@@SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648 Can you explain what you mean by 'more Western minded' here?

[@Shermos]

@@samdoidge1054 It's a racist dog whistle.

[@daniel11111]

@@samdoidge1054 everyone has to fall in line and pander to white people, that’s what ‘western minded’ is.

[@yellowboeing6030]

Do you want to fly in one? Thought so…

[@1MinuteFlipDoc]

the key is not whether COMAC will be a success internationally, but that it will take sales in China away from Boeing and Airbus.

[@danharold3087]

We know it will do that at 25 a year. Not saying they will not scale up.

[@nickl5658]

US government will take Boeing and Airbus sales out of China by implementing various sanction, tariffs and bans. COMAC success within China is assured, and soon Russia and South East Asia. The US government is tearing the world into two..and into the void that Western companies once dominant in Asia.. Asian companies will quickly move in.

[@danharold3087]

@@nickl5658 US government has no say with AIrbus. COMAC success in China is a given regardless of what the US or the west does.

[@Kpoole35]

Russia is also in the market for COMAC

[@Fal-t8w]

Airbus when they launched their first airplane everyone was laughing at them and everyone was like if not Boeing I’m not going, when they released A320 everyone was like NO WAY and today everyone happily flying Airbus 😂.

[@stenyethanmathews945]

Shows you how ignorant and narrow minded human nature is. Kind of comical almost. As time goes on there will be other companies that innovate or produce better. It's just the nature of life. People should not be preoccupied with brands except for safety/reliability.

[@martindindos9009]

You got the history backwards. Airbus first plane was A300/310. They had to give it away nearly for free, but managed somehow to get it into AA. The model never sold that much. However, they got some positive reputation out of it. So when they proposed A320 they've managed soem pretty good pre-sales to NA market like Northwest airlines. With A320 they took a masive risk by introducing FBW system into civilian airplanes but it proved popular and created an opening for them. Back to C919. It has nothing going fo it. The preceding model is ARJ21 which got essentially no sales even in China, was incredibly delayed in development and when it finally got done it was already hopelesly outdated. So does C919 bring any innovation Airbus or Boeing do not do? No. It's just a clasics airframe with western avionics and engines. So it will be OK economically on fuel costs, unknown on reliability and ease of use. It will thus sell in China and perhaps to few China's "best buddies" like Pakistan. That's that.

[@chnet968]

Also, for this C919 plane only the fuselage is made in China. All other parts are bought from other countries. With chips ban from U.S. I doubt how many of these can be produced. (Comac is currently on U.S. DOD's Sanctions List) Changing the computer systems being used will obviously need recertification, which the Chinese government will probably permit to skip. I will not test whether I would die by flying in one of these.

[@wonderlander]

@@chnet968yes, yes, U.S is god, chips made by U.S. is made by god so human cannot produce.

[@wonderlander]

@@chnet968 20 years ago U.S. won't even think China could be its peer competitors today, so keep sleeping don't look up.

[@freddiesflightreviews]

I'm all for more competition in the aviation industry, but something tells me this won't sell well outside China.

[@MentourNow]

I think you are right but it’s a HUGE step up from their earlier designs. Next type might be the true competitor

[@bigmungus4864]

It doesn’t have to sell out of china and Asia but the Asian carriers are buying these not to mention Asian carriers are buying Boeing now they can buy Chinese just like the reason why America doesn’t have a airbus AF1 it’s doesn’t look good but using American made does just like in for Asian carriers it looks good

[@realthoprivate]

@@MentourNow Also, as most Chinese industry enjoy enormous illegal gov. subsidies (I have lost count of how many cases against China filed in WTO), they can run the "business" with huge losses for decades - while copying competitor's designs.

[@Max-kw2hp]

@@MentourNow I concur. They are getting a foot in and will only improve form analysing performance and any issues. I think it can find a market outside of China with other Asian countries like India.

[@Hans-gb4mv]

Depends on how well subsidized it will be by the Chinese government. Hell, even Ryanair has shown an interest, even if it is just to put some pressure on Boeing.

[@izzieb]

While I don't think this specific aircraft will see many international sales, I would not underestimate companies like COMAC. One only has to look at other industries to see the speed of progression - a good equivalent would be trains. Their first homegrown products were rather lackluster, but within a few years companies like CSR Corporation were successfully winning tenders abroad for rolling stock and continue to do so.

[@rais1953]

Yes. Some years ago cheap Chinese cars entered the Australian market. They were not very bad but not good enough and they failed. After a couple of false starts some pretty good Chinese cars are selling well here and more every year.

[@robertgittings8662]

@@rais1953 *Government Motor and Boeing 737 Skydiver said the same thing when Toyota and Airbus entered the market*

[@rais1953]

@Lex Beaf Sorry bro I was unable to translate your reply. Are you able to copy it into Google Translate and then repost in English or Indonesian?

[@fcukrealmadrid]

none international sales

[@professorgrimm4602]

@@rais1953 Exactely. Today, companies like BYD make quite good cars that could well compete internetionally (and are starting too already). And CRRC is already making some of the best trains worldwide. COMAC could very well have a similar path ahead.

[@ThatBoomerDude56]

Seriously? They have the thing done already? Their development was so fast!! *It's only been 20 years.* (I was involved in part of the setup of their A320 final assembly in Tianjin.)

[@MentourNow]

Yeah, I mention that in the video

[@ThatBoomerDude56]

@@MentourNow Yeah. I just had to comment because I've been kinda following the thing for the whole time.

[@JackdeDuCoeur]

James Fallows did a nice analysis of China's air transportation industry circa 2008.

[@idanceforpennies281]

Exactly. The China-only certification has taken a ridiculously long time, and I don't think the plane is certified by the FAA or EASA either.

[@SecretSauce8]

20 years is fast?

[@TonyM132]

Mentour, I don't understand what you mean at 7:08 when you mention the ARJ21 and then the "comparable MD-90". They both have the same fuselage width, but the MD-90 at 153 ft long is a much longer airplane than ARJ21 at only 110 or 119 ft. You said that the ARJ21 is heavier than MD-90, but I don't see that either when looking up specs. I see weights for MD-90 at 88K lb empty and 156-166K lb max take off, while ARJ21 is only 55-59K lb empty and 89-104K lb MTOW. That difference is as I'd expect since MD-90 is a much larger airplane... Even the smaller MD-95 (B717) is still both longer and heavier than either ARJ21 variant, although it is close enough to call comparable, especially to the ARJ21-900 variant. In 737 Next Gen terms, MD-90 is very comparable to 737-800, while the ARJ21 even as stretched -900 variant still has less capacity than a 737-600. Did you perhaps misread the specs on these models, or..?

[@qiyuxuan9437]

C919 being heavier is also expected, it is slighty wider than A320, which improve the economy class comfort. The Leap-1C engine being 800kg heavier is probably due to the thrust reverser. Unlike other model of leap-1 engine, the leap-1-C and its reverser came as a single unit. So, the weight on leap-1a probably didnt include the reverser.

[@seventh-hydra]

Comac, like Airbus and Lockheed, has leadership with _actual experience_ in aviation. Boeing has a CEO who was an accountant at an equity firm, and a president who was chief financial officer at a bank. It will be better than Boeing's offerings. Depressing to say, as someone who used to be a die-hard Boeing fan. Maybe one day they'll go back to their roots.

[@philmastman2490]

It may be some time before Comac is competitive worldwide, but always keep in mind that China is in it for the long haul, and they are very patient.

[@paulhargreaves1497]

Exactly. And they look to have leapfrogged their northern rival in a short period too.

[@ausriusdidziokas6771]

The political leadership aren’t. All they care is staying in power even it means slowing economic to have more state control of economy. Like USSR ccp is obsessed with control and that can hampers companies but if any business owner can still survive I am sure they will look long term. In senior management in a big it is important to look years head from business strategy to technical development and many want to do that so nothing unusual.

[@Phunny]

@@ausriusdidziokas6771 Except the history of the Communist Party from 1949 to present has clearly proven your conjecture to be incorrect.

[@alexevansuk]

Years being used as the sweatshop of the world. They'd be daft not to have learnt a few tricks along the way.

[@GUITARTIME2024]

The long haul is a rapidly graying population with a huge lack of replacement workers and foreign companies looking elsewhere.

[@samposyreeni]

I totally like how on the level and neutral and knowledgeable you are in your analysis. You can even deal with the "Yellow Threat" on an even keel. This is just rare and precious; keep up the good work. (Hailing from Finland, and not a pilot.)

[@samposyreeni]

As a followup question, how would you recover from a one sided structural failure of an airframe? Perhaps not quite a full loss of a wing, but a bent one or so?

[@Chris.Davies]

Little English protip for you; the word "it's" *always* means "it is" in English. There are no exceptions. The possessive form of "it" is *always* "its".

[@MrLuhuazhao]

Comac won’t export C919 for a while, they need to focus on building the service capacity, but it just exported one ARJ to Indonesia.

[@p6x2]

Comac will remain local; or at least for decades to come. They are not yet ready to get the C919 out in the international playground. The main issue is that before they can do that, they will need to extend the infrastructure worldwide. If an Airbus, or a Boeing has a technical problem anywhere in the world, there are technicians and spares readily available. So Comac needs to set foot everywhere. Do you remember the Dassault Mercure? it never sold outside of France.

[@shakiMiki]

This fits China's stage of economic development, as well as change in political direction. They're turning inwards & moving away from the previous export lead strategy.

[@PhycoKrusk]

There still remains the question of how much of the design was copied from Boeing or Airbus. It's entirely possible (even probable, I would say), that spare Boeing or Airbus parts will fit and work just fine for the C919 because it's already using those parts, or copies of those parts. Technicians probably won't port quite as well because even with standardization, every model is going to have its particular quirks that only really get solutions developed from experience, but some of it will likely still apply. Not really apt to compare it to the Mercure; the Mercure was so highly optimized for short-haul flights that it couldn't actually do anything else, whereas both the 737 and the A320 could (and still can) do short- or medium-haul. That was fine in France where almost every airport was within 1,000 miles of its destination airports (or could make due with a stopover somewhere that people wanted to go), but as soon as they left France, they were either dealing with distances that were too great to make short-haul sensible, or with domestic producers they could compete with, or (in the case of the United States and Soviet Union) both. The C919 was developed for a market where they have to compete with two dinosaurs that are big but can be outmaneuvered; the Mercure was developed for a market that didn't exist.

[@pastorjerrykliner3162]

But the Chinese sector of commercial aviation is HUGE...and used to be dominated solely by Boeing. A "local" dominance is gigantic. Also factor in the Russian market with the Western/European blockade...

[@waynearrington6727]

@@PhycoKrusk Getting approval for use of those other manufacturers parts just won't happen.

[@dfuher968]

@@waynearrington6727 Agreed. If they try that, they will find their nice shiny plane banned from most of the worlds airspace.

[@laure.arbogast]

Very interesting video, well explained as always! I'd never heard of Comac 😳

[@Underwatergoat1]

Nor had I.

[@g.tucker8682]

Commercial success for this aircraft is secondary to its role as a test case. It will be the foundation of a complete and self-sufficient aviation industry. The subsequent generations of aircraft will be the profit makers. As always, the Chinese take the (very) long view.

[@alfaeco15]

Self sufficiency is inefficiency

[@thecrazyswede2495]

@@alfaeco15 Could be, depending on what you want. "Good enough" as opposed to "Perfect" is sometimes good enough.

[@alfaeco15]

@@thecrazyswede2495 Fair enough 😏

[@tigading2177]

@@mmm-mmm in that case U$ should be your concern, the entire north american continent was stolen, its native near total genocided.

[@hongkongpong5588]

Comac 919..is in it infancy stage.. Need time to establish its status overseas.. Also the Boeing n Airbus would not like a share taken by it.

[@der.Schtefan]

I always find it trippy to see the MC-21, knowing that they market it as MC-21 in the west, while the MC-21 is actually Cyryllic for MS-21.

[@paulhargreaves1497]

Market in west........but no one has actually ordered any lol

[@henson2k]

Neither C919 or MC-21 are globally necessary. They are subject of local pride, that's all.

[@seymorefact4333]

🇺🇸 China is selling to growing market is SE Asia, Latin America, Africa, eastern Europe, Russia, middleast! Which is 85% of the globe. USA France has a monopoly in the west. The USA France will pump billions in scare propoganda and might even do the unthinkable. Profits before lives is USA. Btw, 🇺🇸 Facebook, Twitter, Google, AWS, Microsoft, Qualcomm, Cisco, Intel, and 99.99% of all USA, UK, ISRAEL tech Corp are funded by CIA, FBI, NSA, mi6, mosaad to spy on its own and the world! USA tech Corp are protected by deep state because their function is to SPY. THESE CORP are finance by deep state banks.

[@tomasg4623]

@@henson2k local pride? Well, both countries will eventually be fully cut from the western countries, not by their own choice, so domestic aircrafts will be useful.

[@MetaView7]

@@tomasg4623 Boeing is dead.

[@mehmetalidemir9372]

In long term, it will definitely be competitor of both Boeing and Airbus. In the medium term, can dominate Chinese domestic market. In short term it is a good youtube video topic 😅

[@NicolaW72]

Exactly.

[@acegarcia3719]

While I don't see many sales outside China and their geopolitical friends, those nations alone have a big enough aviation market to hamper Boeing and Airbus long-term

[@josephsamoto2408]

Ace, right! C-929 and C-939 are coming too.

[@denisrichu5697]

Considering China's population, Comac's priority will be to meet local demand. According to a report by Boeing, China will need around 8700 commercial planes by 2041,,, which means that Comac must be ready to manufacture around 50% of these. With recent conflict between Russia and the west, China will get a large order from Russia, Belarus and other nations like Cuba, Indonesia so i doubt China will need to penetrate western market any soon

[@I-like-tech]

Well it won’t help the Russians to order planes that rely on western engines. Thus, there is not even a market in Russia for this jet.

[@jimmyzach5907]

If China can challenge the already-dominated jet airliner market by Airbus and Boeing then it shows its determination to take a bite out of the market pie and perhaps a large one when its supply chain is well-established. The Chinese cannot be underrated, these guys have their own space station and also a presence on fkn Mars.

[@70newlife]

Not to speak about the biggest high speed rail network.

[@donhuang9855]

Our friends help us to make small progress, our eneimes will force us to make great achievements.

[@yojimbo3681]

That's what blows my mind, the fact that they already landed a drone on Mars. Only the 2nd country to do so.

[@theoracle9873]

@@yojimbo3681 and by a month different , in one fell swoop which the US did in 3 stages

[@willengel2458]

1. China has more engineers than anybody else. 2. China is the world's biggest market. its domestic market alone can sustain the plane maker. 3. China has the most complete supply chain on earth. the most important task is to maintain an unblemished safety record in the next five to ten years to buildup its reputation.

[@aseanaguy7062]

No, of course. To be fair to COMAC, the C919 has still to prove its worth while the B737 is an industry-tested plane - there's no competition in this aspect. COMAC is what Airbus was in the 1970s, hoping that the A300 would be successful, which it did. Would it happen to the C919? Let's see. I think C919 is designed for the airlines of underdeveloped and several developing countries that can't either afford the B737 or the A320.

[@uncaringbear]

For a first attempt at a clean sheet design, it's hard to fault the C919, even though it falls short of Airbus and Boeing's offerings. The C919 will a learning platform for the Chinese aviation industry and there's sure to be bumps along the way, but they're in it for the long run. More competition is always good and I've long since stopped cheering for Boeing and their anti-competitive practices.

[@garybulwinkle82]

I will never fly on anything made in China!!! I've purchased a lot of things made in China, and I can say without a doubt, that everything made there is just a step above JUNK!!! We'll see what their success rate is, and if I'm right there will be a lot of dead!!!

[@kaushikthaker9666]

Be to be first to buy 20 aircraft from China and park keep watching but want be able to fly after 6 month's as realibleity factor will depress you.

[@grantbuchanan7295]

@@kaushikthaker9666?

[@kaushikthaker9666]

Just like j20, jf17 they build engine but didn't work out, the art is in making engineering and engine works everything depends on that, the rest is easy to copy from scrapped aircraft, Germany would sell avionics from seimen and land gears, We will see, we all saw Boeing 737 with accident hope don't experience such faults because c919 could go down fast.

[@BlurpGooDiJabba]

You stopped cheering on american technology but started cheering for the chinese? this is all wrong.

[@peacefullifetv5065]

Definitely the world must be more and more competitive in air carrier business!

[@cst6554]

If China can surprise the world in space exploration, AI, HSR, computer, etc. then don't be surprise if it can repeat those feats again within the time frame that surprises everybody.

[@jchanmcse]

Yes. Definitely!

[@sh230968]

Thanks for a great all around view of the situation and giving your audience the ability to think beyond dramatic simplifications like Boeing and Airbus days are over or Comac can never succeed in securing a market share of its own.

[@saltyskunk381]

I'm curious: do you think all the work in your videos makes you a better, more prepared pilot as you have seen such a vast number of issues? Or do you think it could possibly cause some sort of paralysis from over analysis due to the massive number of potential issues you are aware of ? I'm just curious what you 🤔

[@thesushifiend]

@Mentour Now! Has Boeing met it is match? It should be "Has Boeing met ITS match". There's no apostrophe when using "it" in the possessive form because "it's" means it is.

[@byloyuripka9624]

mentour: "bore a striking resemblance to the md90" them: increase his social credit score by 10 points

[@lachen7]

I'll bet that the internationalisation of the C919 shall be much faster than one would expect. Meanwhile, the demand be so high that they will find it difficult to just meet their internal market itself in the immediate future. That would be enough to carry them through. Anyway, that's the number that Boeing would be selling to China.

[@waynemausbach2831]

In 2008 I was in Germany to run off our 5 axis maching center. The machine tool builder also makes special machines to machine wing spars for Boeing and Airbus. As we we going through the plant the German host said that 3/4 of their production was going to China. He paused and said "China wants to make their own planes". This video is his verification that it is clear where China is going.

[@mikelola1926]

I like those unique red decorations 13:09

[@Games_and_Music]

When so much of the manufacturing happening in China, it's only going to be a matter of time. Speaking of time, kinda funny to see the computer in the background go from normal screen, to screensaver, to sleep mode, imagine all the outtakes, haha.

[@danharold3087]

The bloom is off that rose. Wages are up and the politics are in top gear. This could pass idk but it is worth watching.

[@Fauxbourg]

Boeing already met its match with Airbus lol.

[@MentourNow]

True that

[@kurtolson1]

Boeing is building one piece carbon fiber fuselages...I dont see any other airliner doing that. They are way ahead of airbus

[@heidirabenau511]

@@kurtolson1 And Airbus has a backlog of 7,000 aircraft unlike Boeing who has a backlog of 3,500, Airbus is investing in hydrogen, Boeing is not, Airbus is investing in the middle of the market aircraft, Boeing is not, Airbus is investing in smaller, regional aircraft like the A220, Boeing is not, is Boeing still ahead now?

[@TheMrFishnDucks]

It will definitely be around in Asia like the ARJ-21 going to an Indonesian airline. It could also go to Africa some places are running Soviet era Chinese planes.

[@amirhalgal]

There are no Indonesian airlines using ARJ-21 nor want to buy one

[@sudhakarswain8241]

@@amirhalgal check latest news bro

[@rais1953]

@@amirhalgal Apparently a small low cost airline called TransNusa has just taken delivery of the first exported ARJ-21, which it will be leasing. Its three other aircraft are also leased. I was surprised too, hadn't heard of this airline.

[@amirhalgal]

@@sudhakarswain8241 yeah my bad, never knew that Transnusa order 30 ARJ21s (first delivered literally yesterday)

[@TheBurzhuy]

In the world where US can ban any country, it is vital for China to have a home-grown airplanes, for now on foreign components. Having something is better than nothing. Japan, for example, learnt how to build warships in europe, but then developed their own unique fleet.

[@MetaView7]

If China can build fighter jets and Space Station, a civil jetliner is not an insurmountable challenge.

[@paranoya733]

The thing is commercial aircraft industry were more regulated than fighter jets & space station

[@Chris.Davies]

Betteridge's Law of Headlines states that all headlines and titles which contain closed question always have the answer of "NO!" There are no exceptions. Because if this Chinese outfit would be capable of doing over Boeing, you would say so in the title! Now you can save yourself a LOT of time, by not reading any article or watching any video which has a closed question in the title. We can thank the producers for saving us from wasting our time! I didn't watch the video - just came to comment. I watch videos when I don't know the answer to the question. So, I would have watched it if it were titled "What impact will this have on Boeing? - because it's an open question.

[@rais1953]

Then you misunderstood the title and missed a good explanation. I suggest you listen to it.

[@ashtonmascarenhas2583]

An Indonesian airlines just received their first ARJ

[@aggeloskonsoulas8485]

i would really love to see videos with boeing vs airbus compare by each model aircraft. the topgear of aircrafts, it would be really exciting. i don t expect drug races of course but exterior and interior compare as well as specifications and reasons its plane is better in different sectors

[@joseph_wei]

ARJ-21 (MTOW 20 ~ 30 tons) is a regional jet, while MD-80 and MD-90 (MTOW between 65 ~ 70 tons) are in the same class of Boeing 737 and A320, so they are not comparable aircraft, and when you say ARJ-21 is heavier than MD-90, that is kind of becoming ridiculous.

[@wingyu7696]

Come and get it💪💪💪From TEXAS with love!!!

[@kenbrown2808]

China doesn't have the same qualms about violating intellectual property rights as the western world does, so I wouldn't be surprised if it was a knockoff of the airbus. but one think most Americans don't quite get about china is that their high quality products are as good as western high quality products - we just don't see the high quality stuff in the west because that would cut into our importers' profit margins.

[@farhorizons3901]

China takes the long view with these industries, look at how they've done with high-speed trains and now electric vehicles. Having said that, it'll be interesting how the C919 safety record develops...

[@mytech6779]

Their trains derail and electric bikes are constantly incinerating themselves on the side of the road. There is a lot of news that doesn't get through the censorship.

[@mikelloyd520]

Better than the max……. I hope.

[@toonieven]

As long as the extra competition doesn't cause the corporate overlords of Airbus and Boeing to enforce the same kind of cost- and corner-cutting seen with the 737 Max development, I would be in favour of some market disruption to drive new development!

[@portcybertryx222]

More competition is always better for consumers. Aircraft manufacturing is a global interconnected trade so having more manufacturers benefits everyone

[@dipchakraborty1017]

one thing is sure that this aircraft design have mixture of b787 fusalage, a330 wings part, cockpit same as b737 and side stick like airbus a320..🙏🏻✈️

[@pengus2046]

It seems to many people that the fact the plane has two engines, one round fuselage and two big wings plus a tail rudder is sufficient evidence that it's a stolen design from Boeing. The amount of arrogance is suffocating.

[@wintersbattleofbands1144]

You mean in reference to the 717/MD80/90? If so, one only has to look at the very specific tail and nose design details to see the striking resemblance. The nose on the MD80/90/717 was nothing if not unique in appearance, and not as efficient as later designs, so how it ended up on a new aircraft leaves one scratching their head. China stealing IP is nothing new.

[@rais1953]

Yanks think they invented everything. If you make anything you stole it from them.

[@toms5996]

I'm all for the duopoly having competition but to me - from what I've read - it's strange that the plane itself is almost a carbon copy of A320 and almost all it's main systems are bought from the US. I would think the US would not be ok with this?

[@MentourNow]

I talk about that in the video 😉

[@realthoprivate]

Can't do anything about it as China normally ignores both IP violation cases and WTO cases on illegal government subsidies.

[@toms5996]

@@MentourNow What puzzles me are why mostly US companies selling ALL their technology to China.

[@JanBruunAndersen]

Would not be OK with it? What do you propose the US government do about it? Invade mainland China?

[@matsv201]

It was a real pity that the C series was not alowed to be the C series. While, yes, its a bit smaller than the A320 and 737. It could probobly nudged that market in the corner (and it still kind of does). Embraer E2 have also had decent sails after the pandemic. While they are nowhere near that of i airbus and boeing, its keeping them at work. And more importantly, most of the sales. well actually all of it post pandemic have been the largest 195 series that is nudging the A220-100 in the corner. The whole market is not 6 seat wide only. MC21 seams to me like a much better aircraft than the C919, but of cause, the Russian wars have sort of sealed there fait, at least for now. That still may change in the future. To me it looks like the first Russian airliner that i genuinely good

[@sanitman1488]

As a retired aircraft technician , I think the Russian MC21 is the better aircraft . Home grown , strong aviation history and experience! Communist China ? Not so much….. The world is realizing communist China is a threat to global stability with its social credit system , human rights violations , Taiwan / Hong Kong sovereignty issues and unnecessary covid restrictions. All these geopolitical issues will make this aircraft and sales outside China minimal !

[@Phidiasan]

Never underestimate the Chinese, when the US banned China from the "International" space station in 2012 China built its own state the art 10 years after...

[@lagrangewei]

C919 have domestic option for their equipment, they only use imported establish equipment to speed up certification. nothing that is produce overseas cannot be made in China. scaling up production is not the issue. the issue is still with the efficiency of the plane. anyway, the purpose of C919 isn't to conquer the market, it is to address the issue from not being able to build commercial grade narrowbody plane, to being able to do so. like the 737 and A320, new version of the C919 will come into production that would address their problem.

[@airliners6430]

Excited to watch! If only the Chinese reach was behind the MC-21, a much better plane than the C919, imho.

[@MentourNow]

Yeah, they are both interesting types

[@NicolaW72]

In opposite to the C 929 the MS-21 could have become a real competitor on the International Aviation Market, yes - Russia has a tradition of Aircraft Building, China not. But Putin finished this possibility on February 24th, 2022, and now Russia is planning to introduce the TU-214 because it can be built in opposite to the MS-21 solely with parts produced in Russia. It´s like Boeing would restart the building of the 757.

[@sailaab]

Really love the carefully balanced script, verbiage you always use.. while discussing geopolitical or sensitive issues. . Because after-all anything on the internet blows up really fast. . Your timely stories and productions on current events is a boon👌🏽🤍👍🏼

[@whogivesaflyingfock5401]

@Peter, do you believe we are at the point that it doesnt really matter what AC engine manufacturers do? Are we at/or approaching the point where we have to swich fuels and technology respectevely? I know both Airbus and Boeing are investing a shit load of money into new engine types, or at least thats what they call it? Will it be a new revolutionary engine type, or a type of transitional propulsional fuel first? You have done a video about certain prototypes last year, but (and i would image other people) would love if you can do a video specifically on future propulsions and your take on whether or not it is going to be gradual switch in technology/fuel or a straight reinvention of engine and relative power supply? Sorry for all the typos everyone, i believe everyone can get the point! P.S. Love your channel man, i've said it before, i'll say it again - youtube needs more of people like you, whether its aviation engineering, car engineering, building engineering, anything that helps us flat folk understand stuff from people inside relevant industries. Thank you for your efforts! **edit** only asking this, because anything future related to either engines of power supply (gas, electric, liquid) is probably going to render a lot of russian/chinese designs unusable and sort of last gen aircraft that nobody would actually want to buy. I dont really care of what the chinese or russians finally managed to do to get caught up with the so-called "west"; I care about the future.

[@trueriver1950]

As I've said elsewhere in these comments, I will not be surprised if we don't see China pull a carbon free jet out of the hat at some stage. My gut feeling is that will be first to get an intercontinental green jet, and that their cover plan right now is to work towards that by building up expertise in designing and building the large jet bodies like the C919. I won't be surprised if their next offering is designed with future fields in mind so that their green engines can be retro fitted.

[@whogivesaflyingfock5401]

@@trueriver1950 yup, theres another aspect. That would render AB and B pretty much 2000-and-late giving a massive boost to chinese-built aircraft. How would they cope with demand though, thats a different story. Would it matter if you got the best stuff on the market if no one can buy it?

[@trueriver1950]

@@whogivesaflyingfock5401 One thing the Chinese have been great at is rapid roll out once they get a process running, so while that's certainly important I don't think that will hold them back

[@Old_B52H_Gunner]

I really have a feeling that Boeing is leaning more and more towards military aircraft and systems and by the time the Chinese commercial aviation industry is a real threat, Boeing will only be manufacturing one or two commercial models making this much less damaging than it would be sooner.

[@chemech]

Boeing management does seem to be infected by a legacy culture from McDonnell...

[@noticiasinmundicias]

Which ironically would make Boeing a government subsidized company, like COMAC.

[@pilou5783]

Good career to the C919. The sole Chinese market might be enough for the moment. Don't dismiss the chances of sabotage by the usa. If it's about money, Boeing can count on big help from the us government agencies to foul up any play. UK is also willing to help...

[@TheBigExclusive]

If Chinese-made cars are any indication, then...no. Comac will remain local to China and certain Asian markets. The international market is especially cut throat and very competitive. The way China operates wouldn't work for sales of heavy machinery, cars, planes, etc. These are things where having a "public reputation" for reliability and performance cannot be compromised. It takes many years and even decades to build up a trustworthy reputation. One plane crash or engine failure is a huge blow to even Western companies (Boeing knows this) . Building consumer electronics is very different to building heavy machinery where people need to have absolute faith in the performance. China would need to change their design philosophy of they want to compete. Quality remains Supreme.

[@jacobbaumgardner3406]

Indeed, as you said, the domestic Chinese market it massive, and the C919 will get more than enough sales to mature the industry enough to spread into other areas of the market. We won’t see it internationally for a while and competitive wide-bodies for even longer. While I’ll admit I wouldn’t fly on one, it is also highly unlikely this will end in failure.

[@lupus7194]

Yes, play safe. Stick with the 737 max.

[@jacobbaumgardner3406]

@@lupus7194 the Max, -800, A320 series. All good options.

[@chdreturns]

@@jacobbaumgardner3406 Would not catch me flying a MAX

[@jacobbaumgardner3406]

@@chdreturns well I wouldn’t put it past to uninitiated to be uniformed.

[@paulkeith9680]

Tbh you'd likely have to be in China to fly on one. If you're an American I doubt you'll be going there anytime soon, not before Comac develop something better anyway.

[@vonduus]

Great video, thanks. By focusing on techical facts and ignoring political opinions you are actually doing the world a great service.

[@josephsamoto2408]

Duus, by jealousis, Washington regim try to blocus chinese progress. China wants to use Pratt & Whitney reactor engine from Canada, but seignor Washington order Canada to stop that sale. Who loss money ? Now chinese is building its own reactor engine and save money and create more jobs in own land China.

[@JAF30]

I love how you put the hype into real world perspective by outlining the hurdles that the subject has to overcome before it would meet the hype/expectations. Too many times we hear how this ____ will change the world, only for it never to really have the effect they hype said it would.

[@ViolentCabbage-ym7ko]

According to Simple Flying, COMAC publicly announced that it has over 1,200 orders for the C919 as of June 2023. This is a huge impact to Airbus and Boeing's profits.

[@guzilayerken5013]

The C919 does not use a large number of composite materials to reduce weight does not mean they do not have the technical strength, but cost control and safety considerations, C919 as China's first commercial narrow-body passenger aircraft, the Chinese design when the safety requirements are too high, leaving a large number of safety redundancies, and these redundancies eventually turned into weight. The head of COMAC said they will continue to reduce the weight of the aircraft.

[@Arag0n]

Well, given how US government can turn off supply and kill companies in china whenever they feel like as a way to "compete", it's just normal Chinese government feels is national security to make sure they have enough knowledge to replace critical suppliers if needed so. It is also most likely why they won't try to go global fast either, need to be independent of foreign components so as to stay under the radar until time is right.

[@Hans-gb4mv]

It will be interesting to see how this aircraft will evolve, but also how the company will evolve. Seeing how the C929 became the CR929 with the R standing for Russia, it will be interesting to see if that project will ever see the light of day. I also wouldn't be surprised that, if needed be, the Chinese can scale up production of the C919, as long as the supply chain can follow. But there's not much stopping the Chinese from properly entering the short to medium haul market with the 919.

[@Bywater70]

If I recall correctly, the China and Russia joint venture has collapsed since China wanted the name or manufactures in China or something along those lines. So last I heard that venture was scrapped.

[@Hans-gb4mv]

@@Bywater70 it is not, CRAIC still exists and as far as is known is still working on the CR929. Russia however might be considering to drop out of the program as China is claiming more and more control over it although as long as Russia does not drop out, the only way this aircraft can ever be built is if it does not contain western tech at the moment. So that will be interesting to see how that evolves.

[@tigerchuu2148]

I think it will be really difficult for Comac to make much of a dent in the duopoly for a while. Largely because of efficiency. Airbus is planning to have much more efficient aircraft, and maybe even completely green regional aircraft by ~2030. Meanwhile Comac already have so much they need to do for the already less efficient 919 that probably won’t be finished by mid 2030

[@trueriver1950]

I'm glad you mentioned completely green aircraft. My prediction, based in a gut feeling rather than evidence, is that China will win the race to get an intercontinental jet that burns carbon free fuel. Yes Airbus will win the race for regional coverage, but in the meantime China is building expertise in body designs and in engines. My gut feeling is that they are already working on green jet propulsion under a number of technologies at the early development stage. If I'm right we won't know till they're ready to go public, and they won't go public till they know it will work because of their cultural tendency to want to save face. Just my unsubstantiated opinions 🙂

[@johndoh5182]

@@trueriver1950 Both Airbus and Boeing have been working on multiple designs using battery and hydrogen as fuel sources. They MIGHT be a little closer than you think. That's just an educated opinion from a person who's watched the details about what they're working with. In the meantime Boeing and Airbus are moving to lighter airframes and are already in mass production for carbon fiber based planes and it saves about 25% on fuel and they can even deliver them for about the same cost as a traditional air frames. Then add in Boeing is putting out the 777X with more efficient engines. They don't have to worry about actually moving to another fuel source for about 25 years because in the grand scheme of things air travel is fuel efficient and a very small part of current emissions. But both Airbus and Boeing are already working with mockups, but they're not going to invest large amounts right now because there isn't the need now, there isn't the infrastructure, not even for hydrogen ONLY for aircraft if it came to that, and for considering battery, the next 15 years is going to bring about large advancements in battery tech. I fly a route where the most common plane, almost exclusively in fact even with Chinese airlines is the Boeing 777-300ER, from CA to E. Asia, different cities. The 777X will replace it because of the 15% fuel efficiency gains. BTW if you want to comment about the 787 not holding as many passengers as the 777 this is true, but it's also what airlines want because they have moved away or are still in the process of moving away from the hub and spoke model and passenger loads are smaller when moving almost completely to point to point. That's why United put in a large order of 100 787s from Boeing.

[@seymorefact4333]

🇺🇸 China is selling to growing market is SE Asia, Latin America, Africa, eastern Europe, Russia, middleast! Which is 85% of the globe. USA France has a monopoly in the west. The USA France will pump billions in scare propoganda and might even do the unthinkable. Profits before lives is USA. Btw, 🇺🇸 Facebook, Twitter, Google, AWS, Microsoft, Qualcomm, Cisco, Intel, and 99.99% of all USA, UK, ISRAEL tech Corp are funded by CIA, FBI, NSA, mi6, mosaad to spy on its own and the world! USA tech Corp are protected by deep state because their function is to SPY. THESE CORP are finance by deep state banks.

[@trueriver1950]

@@seymorefact4333 oh dear! You started off so well. Yes if you ignore the sea, or if you count people not land area, China is indeed selling to the majority of the globe. I'd even accept your claim that USA France [and the rest of the West, in my opinion] will run scary propaganda, because they already are. Comparing profits during Covid with lives lost during Covid in China and the US supports your claim about USA seeking profits before lives. With you so far. Had you stopped there I'd have supported your post. Then you spoilt it with everything you say following "Btw". Those companies are indeed worrying, but there is no evidence they are actually funded by the security agencies. Indeed, US law demands access without paying fees to any data they hold (whenever the govt agency includes the words "national security") so why should the agencies pay a single cent towards those companies to get info they can demand for free? Being a source of surveillance for the federal state is more of an tax-in-kind on US IT companies than a means of financial support for them. Don't spoil a nearly convincing post by trying to sex it up with added extras. Don't "seymore facts" than are really there, in other words

[@franziskani]

And who wants to be responsible when the first machine crashes. Even IF this will be comparable to other crashes - be sure the media will go crazy and that would be very negative for the brand. Boeing really damaged their brand - but they are descending from a great brand, so some room. And they will - it is complex and the advances in the West were made with lots of people dying. Why would an airline shop for trouble, even more so when they do not have the infrastructure to service the machines.

[@n2201]

Let us hope this prompts Boing to create some huge technological innovation! More power to the consumers!

[@t5ruxlee210]

Funny story. Back in the day, PRC's first American airliner buy was a fleet of Douglas DC8s. Mindful of their sad spares experiences in keeping their previous Soviet sourced airliners serviceable and the possible future volatility of their new USA relationship, the buy included a massive additional purchase of spare engines. The years passed with engines performing just as they normally would at any western airline company and when the time came to modernize and sell off their old planes and spares, there were still brand new, never used, "original buy engines still in their in their undisturbed, from the factory, crates. Each of those "new" engines now had a market valuation in excess of the original unit cost paid for one of their DC8s when they were new...

[@Alex55555]

Overall, I think more competition is a good thing.

[@kevinmueller5284]

Does it have MCAS? No, OK great I’ll take it!

[@ytfanlingeric]

It is a new design, so MCAS which is patch solution is not needed.

[@DZegers13]

I would love to see a video detailing the current situation with certification of the 737-7 and 737-10 variants.

[@heidirabenau511]

He has already done one!

[@kz65g9]

I guess the new definition for the verb" to compete " is now " to threat".

[@panther7748]

When the Airbus A300 was introduced in the 1970s, everyone (including Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas) thought that it would turn out to be a failure, that only a few european airlines would buy it and that this government-sponsored venture would remain a footnote in aviation history. Nowadays, Airbus is part of a duopoly. That doesn't mean that COMAC will become the next Airbus, but we shouldn't just laugh this off. This may be just the first step. The A300 was hard to sell initially as well. We should be careful, not arrogant.

[@fanjin]

As a traveler, I'm concerned about safety. Being certified doesn't mean no unknown safety issues. It seems more risk to me to fly a new model compared to 737 or A320 that's been there for decades with many fatal accidents in its early age.

[@danharold3087]

I am not picking on airbus but this is the one that come to mind. My point is that regulatory agencies not just manufactures do fly planes with safety issues. A team of 60 engineers are on their way to Emirates Airline to fix wing cracks on several A380s. Nothing new as Airbus and EASA knew this was happening. EASA more or less it is OK to keep them in service but keep an eye on them. Not saying this is the right or wrong decision. Just pointing out that your putting too much faith in certification. When it comes to airplanes economics are always a factor. Even our regulators need to be sensitive to this.

[@djlondon7956]

Its match. Not it's match. 🙏🏻

[@txkflier]

Otto Korrect..

[@digitalscribbler68]

Less than 20 years transpired from the time when the A300 captured significant acceptance in the industry to the time when Airbus delivered its 1000th A320-family airplane. And now look where they are. China has the same kind of government-sponsored drive and industrial motivation to develop airplane technology. The C919 doesn't appear to be as innovative as the A300 was, but given the Chinese motivation and the large numbers of civil airplanes produced these days, we can probably expect to see much more from COMAC 20 years from now. The C919 is likely only the beginning.

[@otm646]

What you're not understanding is the politics of the CCP. They are going to continue to be a pariah on the world stage, that'll limit their market to China and the middle east. Not a small segment but not enough to threaten the duopoly.

[@SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648]

@@otm646 Sounds likely, not to mention that making something reliable to Western standards in a Chinese factory requires heavy Western supervision. Maybe that could happen with Comac, who knows. But if the MAX was a kerfuffle, imagine the Comac.

[@jonseilim4321]

@@otm646 The west is not the world stage, China will be fine. Like their highspeed trains and ARJ airplanes being sold here in Indonesia

[@gungadinn]

@@jonseilim4321 how many ARJ-21’s have COMAC built and delivered? The ARJ-21 was supposed to be certified and flying for the 2008 Olympics. China is the great copy cat nation. Name one or two Chinese companies that manufacture commercial turbofan engines. What they know was stolen from General Electric. There isn’t a worldwide airline that is going to invest in Chinese made and powered aircraft. China retaliates by dragging out the recertification of the 737MAX. Airbus is next in the barrel.

[@otm646]

@@SeekingTheLoveThatGodMeans7648 even if you totally ignore the potential quality concerns, you're going to be hard pressed for major airline US or EU airline to sign up for a 20 or 30 year parts and service commitment. We've seen how these tariffs work, we've seen how these sanctions go. One step against Taiwan and Western governments aren't going to be letting these Chinese produced parts into their markets. You're going to have all these orphaned airframes just like what Russia is dealing with now.

[@MrCaiobrz]

Good to see a video without a VPN sponsor, I like this video by this fact alone =p

[@cellevangiel5973]

Boeing has met its match : Boeing itself. Why worry about the Chinese ?

[@xuankunli9437]

This is just the first step, the evolution of C919 will be fast, like their electronic stuffs, EV cars, jet fighters, aircraft carriers, space station..

[@foxtraner]

China is the single biggest commercial airlines market in the world, China has completed its very own space station. domestically manufactured passenger aircrafts just seems to be the logical and feasible way

[@fToo]

I remember hearing a US diplomat say that they tried to bring up industrial espionage with their counterparts in China ... but it kept being removed from the agenda of their meetings ... eventually it was explained to the US guy that there is no separation between industrial espionage and state spying in China !

[@RS-ls7mm]

I used to work for Boeing. There was hardly a month going by that we didn't fire a chinese person for selling company secrets. Anyone who puts these people in a position of trust is just fooling themselves.

[@dmitripogosian5084]

Well, US started its industrial revolution in North East with stealing British trade secrets for weaving machinery, why would you think others would not do it

[@rais1953]

For a new competitor in commercial aviation what could be better than guaranteed access to the biggest domestic aviation market in the world? The initial production of the C919 doesn't need to be 100% as good as its Airbus and Boeing rivals. It just needs to be safe and reliable and serve as a basis for further development.

[@MBGA123]

First Mentour video and I'm already hooked

[@UncleKennysPlace]

At least at the beginning they will be powered by CFM LEAP engines (my day job involves those beasties!) I think they won't really want to spend the money finishing up their own engines (which will no doubt involve technology they've, um, observed in other engines.) CFM is a joint venture of GE Aerospace and Safran.

[@danharold3087]

10:15 China is stealing the IP, GE and Saffran were mentioned. That seems to say they are.

[@himoffthequakeroatbox4320]

No doubt they're already working on cribbing those too.

[@ytfanlingeric]

It is not about how much money to spend finishing up China's own engine, it is about whether the engine will be available or not. Look at the chips that Huawei need and the ASML lithography machine. Also Space Station, Global Positioning System. All of these were developed because China was banned by America from using them. Therefore, not developing own engine is not an option. China has learnt the hard way.

[@danharold3087]

@@ytfanlingeric So we will hear no more complaints about the chip or other sanctions ? Everything is good right ?

[@majorcrime6067]

If you have ever brought items "made in China" would you want to fly on one of these, I wouldn't I have worked for companies who had Chinese suppliers, promised the earth at very low cost then cut corners and lied on QA and test reports.

[@grantchallinor5263]

What you described sounds like Boeing - not a Chinese company! People said the same about products "made in Japan" 60 years ago..... If you compare the build quality of a Tesla against a Japanese, Korean or Chinese electric car - the Tesla looks like it's been made by rock apes.....

[@majorcrime6067]

@@grantchallinor5263 agree with the Tesla point, EU and Australian model 3 and why are made in Shanghai

[@yangtianyi9563]

That’s exactly what Boeing did on the max

[@DaveNeve]

China now have a space program too. That must really get up your colonialist nose.

[@ณภัทรสุขแสง]

Not been all that long that Airbus really struggled to make a big impact on the Chinese market. Happy to see that they are now selling more than Boeing, a company that has been far too arrogant and complacent for far too long. and also has trust problems.

[@teomartini1105]

12:00 Wrong the CJ1000 has been spotted a few weeks ago

[@tildarusso]

Maiden flight has completed between Beijing and Shanghai of China. 737 will continue be grounded due to quality and safety issues. C919 currently suffers from production capacity. COMAC can only make around 50 each year, which is not even sufficient for the domestic market.

[@mwmentor]

Interesting. But it seems that until they are able to produce all of the components themselves, reduce the aircraft weight, and increase its range, it's going to be primarily a homegrown solution for home application for the Chinese. I am sure that they will sell them into some international markets, but it will be a big ask (and doubtless include some form of sweetener) to convince mostly struggling airlines to pick up yet another aircraft type with its associated flight and engineering crew training costs, local inventory costs, etc. to support an aircraft type that is somewhat inferior to that which they are already leasing or own. I would need to ask to what end any airline would want to do that? Anyway, we shall have to wait and see.... 🤔

[@MetaView7]

In an interview a few years back, a COMAC official (I've forgotten whether he was the CEO or Chief engineer, or someone else) said they designed the airplane using the industry's generally accepted methodology. ie sourcing the best-in-class components to build the plane. Just like Boeing or Airbus, the engine, the landing gear, the avionics, etc., are all sourced from different specialist companies. If COMAC were to succeed, I can see they will continue to use this methodology.

[@neolan2565]

So how did you come to the conclusion that this is a "somewhat inferior" aircraft?

[@SmileyEmoji42]

I'm surprised that you didn't bring up the issue of pilot training as a barrier to international sales. You've mentioned it before and it would seem to be a big factor against ANY new aircraft let alone with one with political issues hanging over it. Surely the pilots themselves would rather be qualified on a mainstream jet.

[@prabuddhaghosh7022]

Chinese aviation market is growing. Western market is saturated. So employment prospects would be better in the Chinese market for young pilots.

[@SmileyEmoji42]

@@prabuddhaghosh7022 I don't think many pilots are going to want to move to China

[@raymarshall6721]

@@prabuddhaghosh7022 yeah nobody is rushing to China to fly an untested airplane with questionable training and information on it. Looking forward to the episodes of air crash investigation involving them though.

[@prabuddhaghosh7022]

@@SmileyEmoji42 Not those with established careers and seniority in unions. But for young pilots if there are copilot jobs without 1500 hr requirement it makes total sense to go fly in China. I mean the C919 uses the same engine as the 737 and the A320 so experience on the C919 will be transferable to some extent to the other 2.

[@denisrichu5697]

@@SmileyEmoji42 China will priortize local pilots,,,already there are pilots trained on Boeing and Airbus,,,so the transition wont be hard

[@tomriley5790]

Difficult to say - I suspect China will be pretty protectionist to build up Comac - I have a feeling it won't do to well though, both Boeing and Airbus are excellent in general at what they do (Assuming that neither pulls another MCAS) will be interesting to see - it does mean that Boeings "we wont launch another aircraft for 10 years" if true is even more risky! It's also worth considering how many military aircraft are based on civilian airliners (tankers, AWACS etc.) so china really needs an indigenous aircraft on behalf of its military. The other thing is pilot training and differences between chinese and airbus/boeing - retraining an airlines pilots would be a nightmare not to mention completely different maintenance manuals and procedures - which may not be in english (or the support may not be) and world wide technicians etc are much more likely to speak english in aviation than chinese. It may happen eventually but likely to take a long time.

[@pavelrak8906]

1) China have big internal market. 2) Domestic airplane is quite resistant to US sanctions which can comme any time and due any reason. For example Taiwain. 3) in world are some countries under US sanctions which will be probably happy to buy new planes - Kuba, Iran.. 4) BRICKS aliance could be also market - almost half of world population. 5) China influence in Africa is increasing, also huge market. So if they can produce domestic engine it could be sucses. But probably have to show first some relialibility in time.

[@vladilenkalatschev4915]

The airliner must dominate on the domestic market first. Also developing countries might be customers in future, reasonable price and politics will play the leading role and not the weight or range of the aircraft.

[@jchanmcse]

Yes. AGREED!

[@JHNielson4851]

I would be very concerned of any increased in production, China seems to increase production but decrease quality in all they do. Any company that makes high tech components for any Chinese company should very seriously screen any employees with any Chinese connections.

[@trueriver1950]

Apple phones?

[@Phunny]

They should stop hiring Chinese employees, period, and drive all Chinese nationals in the West to return to China and improve China’s competitive edge instead 😂

[@tcm81]

"Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."

[@andysandys.6825]

919 = Descendant from Bombardier CS series. 919 & A 220 = brother in law " With Bombardier we"ll go Boarding"

[@Incidental104]

I don't think people nowadays understand how revolutionary the a320 was The a320 came out in the early 80s and to this day its systems are modern. Airbus didn't change a single button in the a320 NEO's cockpit Compare it to ANY plane from the 80s and you'll what a leap in technology it was. 737 classics (the most modern airliners at the time) looked like dinosaurs compared to the a320. For the industry it was like the birth of the iPhone. Like the iPhone similar technology existed and they didn't really invent anything new, but no one had done it as polished and elegantly as the a320. The C919 on the other hand is not the same as a320 was on its introduction....C919 is just an average plane by today's standards its only selling point is politcal, since that it's not Western.

[@ME-bw3rl]

In hindsight, it seems so stupid that we have been building the economies of non-democracies for decades. Western countries should have aggreed not outsource into those countries or make it dependent on democratization. One of the ugly faces of capitalism: Without political regulation, businesses will (of course) take the cheapest offer in the here and now. They do business, not politics.