For the most part, Boeing and Airbus don't produce equivalent airplanes because they aren't involved in regional jet business. The direct competitors include Bombardier CRJ900, Embraer E175-E2 or Mitsubishi MRJ90, according to Wikie[1]. However, with sale of CS 100 by Bombardier to Airbus as Airbus 220, competition is more direct, especially if future extensions of ARJ21 are realized. ARJ21 bears some resemblance to McDonnel Douglas MD-90, which China assembled under license last century, but they are not really in the same class, with MD-90 competing directly with B737.
A few things about Comac ARJ21 that make it unlikely that the aircraft will ever fly in the West. First, it is only certified by CAAC in China and there is no plan to try certification by FAA or EASA. Second, the aircraft is designed for hot climate and high altitude airports in Tibet. As a result, it is overweight and expensive to operate elsewhere. Third, there was a multi-year delay to certification, so the aircraft is now considered obsolete.
Although China owns IP rights to the aircraft design, engines and avionics are supplied by Western companies. Western parts suppliers had to shoulder more design work than normal for subcontractors. This aircraft is considered a learning experience for Comac, which is now designing C919, a competitor of B737 and A320; and C929, a wide-body aircraft in the same class as B787 and C330. Because of Western components, it is unlikely to be converted into military aircraft, which along with limited international sales means Comac will lose money with ARJ21.
Regarding your second, I think South-America around the Andes would have some use for something like that, also around Phoenix, AZ and similar places in the CONUS. And finally China can play the certification game too, and simply deny anything which it doesn't like landing rights, or just entering their ADIZ for "safety reasons". I mean, 737-Max anyone? Show us the effing source code for your avionics, or FO. Could happen, don't you think so?
It won’t get adopted in the West. Because of protectionism.
What countries like America will do, is to turn up their media FUD to the max. They’ll accuse the Comac airplanes of spying on you while you fly, or having hidden cameras and microphones all over the plane, to record your private conversations, and to watch you take a piss in the lavatory.
Examples:
1. American politicians accuse Chinese train makers of spying.
2. American politicians accuse Chinese bus makers of spying.
3. American politicians accuse Huawei of spying. Then continues to neuter their semiconductor business, their cell phone business, and their 5G business.
4. American politicians accuse TiKTok of spying, and forcing Bytedance to sell their very profitable business to American companies for pennies on the dollar. (Still pending)
5. American politicians accuse ZTE of spying, or violating American sanctions by conducting business with Iran, and fines them $1.4 billion dollars USD. This was so easy, and these Chinese companies are so full of cash, that it was like taking candy from a baby. Expect more shenanigans like this in the future, as all these Chinese companies are ready for the reaping by American politicians.
Interestingly enough, in the 1980s, American politicians accused Japanese semiconductor makers, like Toshiba, of playing unfair, and prevented their semiconductor CPUs and memory chips from being used in America. Thus, eviscerating their business, and allowed Intel and other American companies to dominate the industry.
This sounds exactly like what America is doing now with Huawei’s 5G.
So, expect them to do the same thing with Comac’s C919.
This is American Exceptionalism. But they prefer to call it “Free market capitalism”.
I don't know that I would throw that paint on the entire West.
Is there a completely justifiable reluctance to give blanket credence to answers to technical questions given by American authorities? Absolutely, and as an intellectually honest American I'm big enough to admit that we earned that skepticism all by ourselves. The decision making apparatus of the US and its major industrial sectors have been saturated with so many ideological type people that it can no longer be depended upon to reliably answer certain questions in general.
That does not necessarily mean that EU authorities are not reliable. European regulatory authorities still have their acts together for the most part. Technical responses free of political influence can be found given technical questions. Are there issues in the EU? Yes, but in my experience, the issues are nothing like what you see in the US or China.
Safety: as safe as safety culture allows, which in terms of Chinese aviation and national prestige projects is extremely. High chance of disaster if exported in current state. Much heavier maintenance burden that penny pinching carriers from developing countries would skimp on. West would probably not adopt these planes ever.
east2west|5 years ago
A few things about Comac ARJ21 that make it unlikely that the aircraft will ever fly in the West. First, it is only certified by CAAC in China and there is no plan to try certification by FAA or EASA. Second, the aircraft is designed for hot climate and high altitude airports in Tibet. As a result, it is overweight and expensive to operate elsewhere. Third, there was a multi-year delay to certification, so the aircraft is now considered obsolete.
Although China owns IP rights to the aircraft design, engines and avionics are supplied by Western companies. Western parts suppliers had to shoulder more design work than normal for subcontractors. This aircraft is considered a learning experience for Comac, which is now designing C919, a competitor of B737 and A320; and C929, a wide-body aircraft in the same class as B787 and C330. Because of Western components, it is unlikely to be converted into military aircraft, which along with limited international sales means Comac will lose money with ARJ21.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comac_ARJ21
LargoLasskhyfv|5 years ago
/me giggles
blackrock|5 years ago
What countries like America will do, is to turn up their media FUD to the max. They’ll accuse the Comac airplanes of spying on you while you fly, or having hidden cameras and microphones all over the plane, to record your private conversations, and to watch you take a piss in the lavatory.
Examples:
1. American politicians accuse Chinese train makers of spying.
2. American politicians accuse Chinese bus makers of spying.
3. American politicians accuse Huawei of spying. Then continues to neuter their semiconductor business, their cell phone business, and their 5G business.
4. American politicians accuse TiKTok of spying, and forcing Bytedance to sell their very profitable business to American companies for pennies on the dollar. (Still pending)
5. American politicians accuse ZTE of spying, or violating American sanctions by conducting business with Iran, and fines them $1.4 billion dollars USD. This was so easy, and these Chinese companies are so full of cash, that it was like taking candy from a baby. Expect more shenanigans like this in the future, as all these Chinese companies are ready for the reaping by American politicians.
Interestingly enough, in the 1980s, American politicians accused Japanese semiconductor makers, like Toshiba, of playing unfair, and prevented their semiconductor CPUs and memory chips from being used in America. Thus, eviscerating their business, and allowed Intel and other American companies to dominate the industry.
This sounds exactly like what America is doing now with Huawei’s 5G.
So, expect them to do the same thing with Comac’s C919.
This is American Exceptionalism. But they prefer to call it “Free market capitalism”.
benhurmarcel|5 years ago
fny|5 years ago
bilbo0s|5 years ago
Is there a completely justifiable reluctance to give blanket credence to answers to technical questions given by American authorities? Absolutely, and as an intellectually honest American I'm big enough to admit that we earned that skepticism all by ourselves. The decision making apparatus of the US and its major industrial sectors have been saturated with so many ideological type people that it can no longer be depended upon to reliably answer certain questions in general.
That does not necessarily mean that EU authorities are not reliable. European regulatory authorities still have their acts together for the most part. Technical responses free of political influence can be found given technical questions. Are there issues in the EU? Yes, but in my experience, the issues are nothing like what you see in the US or China.
mhh__|5 years ago
tjpnz|5 years ago
That's a rather peculiar argument. Most people wouldn't think twice about boarding an Airbus or any non-MAX plane from Boeing.
88840-8855|5 years ago
Shitty bias is shitty.
dirtyid|5 years ago
Safety: as safe as safety culture allows, which in terms of Chinese aviation and national prestige projects is extremely. High chance of disaster if exported in current state. Much heavier maintenance burden that penny pinching carriers from developing countries would skimp on. West would probably not adopt these planes ever.