China and Russia challenging the commercial aircraft incumbents

Comments (6)

• 

  Alex

  says:

  June 29, 2019 at 9:03 pm

  Good read, thank you.

• 

  Chris

  says:

  June 30, 2019 at 9:33 am

  If I was Boeing, I would be concerned by the C919 and MC-21 as I struggle to get a 53 year old air frame design operational. With regards to Airbus, they wouldn’t see either aircraft as a major threat to the A220 and A320/A321neo programmes. Until Chinese and Russian aircraft manufacturers have global spares and engineering infrastructures in place, neither C919 and MC-21 programmes would be be a major threat to Boeing and Airbus. If there was a threat it would be in Asia under Chinese BRI and lessor extent in Russia.

  • 

    Frank

    says:

    July 1, 2019 at 9:11 pm

    I would have to agree with your assessment;

    The Comac ARJ21 is similar to the A220 in that it has wings, engines and carries passengers – but that is about it. The author has really reached when he compares the two aircraft as ‘essentially competitors’. The A320 has a decade long backlog and they only way you can get into the production line is to hope someone upgrades to an A321XLR after work has started on an A320 and they need to get rid of an order error.

    As well, Airbus has a ready made aircraft-in-waiting with the A220-500, which they will hold off on launching so as not to cannibalise the A320 order book. It seems that Airbus has perfected the art of the stretch and has been gifted the follow on to the A320 by Boeing, who forced Bombardier into a marriage with Airbus. Unintended consequences, indeed.

    With the ever unfolding 737 Max fiasco playing out right before our eyes and costing Boeing upwards of $5 billion a quarter, the Superjet and it’s Roman Candle landing, airlines are once again realising that you get what you pay for.

• 

  sgfj

  says:

  June 30, 2019 at 10:41 am

  Since when has the issue of not dumping fuel come up in the SSJ fire investigation? Surely the SSJ100 doesn’t have the ability to dump fuel? No other plane in that segment has it including bigger planes like the 737 & A320.

  • 

    Hein Vandenbergh

    says:

    July 2, 2019 at 4:38 pm

    Sure, but there is no question the a/c was overweight. Add this some fluctuating tailwind components and it came in heavy and fast, causing the u/carriage to collapse and making the 3rd touchdown a belly landing rupturing fuel tanks. The root cause leading to this sequence, however, is far from established.

• 

  Mike

  says:

  July 2, 2019 at 9:42 am

  Agree with the earlier comment, Investigators should already know that a Sukhoi Superjet doesn’t have the facility to jettison fuel! Surely mention of “dumping fuel” was an error on the part of the author of this article, not that of Investigators. If not I would be very concerned about the calibre of the investigation.

Comments are closed.