Connect With Us
Aviation Week & Space Technology

Discuss this Gallery 23

on May 5, 2017

Forgive me for being a bit cynical but can somebody please explain to me the visual differences between this plane and the A320? I'm guessing it's not the B737 that will lose out, since we are not looking at its doppelganger here.

on May 5, 2017

It would be fair just to congratulate COMAC on the achievement, wouldn't it ?

Is it really too difficult to do that ?

on May 5, 2017

Other than the US/European avionics, etc., what part of this plane isn't intellectual property that was stolen by Great Wall?

on May 6, 2017

Boeing and Airbus will be in trouble when the Chinese government orders all the airlines to buy the Comac C-series for their narrow body fleets.
Big market for them gone.

on May 11, 2017

Chinese airlines still need to fly Boeing and Airbus for international routes, since C919 is uncertified by FAA/EASA and cannot fly on international routes.

on May 6, 2017

Chinas second rate copy of an A320 is a disgrace but won't stop them from continuing to develop their aeronautical industry

on May 8, 2017

Well, even if your charge is that it is a disgrace, .... the "Leap" engine-maker seems to have been undeterred by that !

on May 8, 2017

Well, your charge is that it is a disgrace.

Would you have preferred it to be a copy of some B737 ?

Which, then, would have been the "better class of copy" ?

Now that you have attributed the "second rate", are you going for "first rate" or "third rate" .

Just asking.

on May 8, 2017

The down side is loosing jobs, the upside is the competition will offer cheaper prices and hopefully humane passenger accommodations.

on May 8, 2017

I don't think you need to copy the A320 in order to put better rest rooms and more comfortable seat spacing into it. You just need an airline that wants to offer those things and a customer who will pay $30 more to fly on it.

on May 8, 2017

Well, it might help to get rid of the medieval measurements the US forced on the metric aeronautic world! Good on China, it doesn't use that crap!!!

on May 8, 2017

The Imperial/SAE Measurement system is as accurate a way of dimensioning anything as using the SI (Metric) units. Perhaps if one had used the Imperial/SAE system one's experience would be less negative??

on May 8, 2017

Looks like another lovely, sunny day in Shanghai.

on May 8, 2017

There is another Aviation Week article with the title : "Global Market Opens For C919 As EASA Works On Certification".

That is the reality. It has to be accepted. The world will get used to it.

There is no point in stumbling around with "eyes wide shut" and pretending that Comac C919 never happened.

on May 8, 2017

For SSterno: from other articles, I believe there is much more "Western" equipment used than "just" engines and avionics. Their challenge is pulling it all together (integrating?), and just as important, "proving" it to anyone who asks. The EASA will run into same problems as regards "proving" the entire path from raw material to the integrated product as did the FAA on the ARJ, I believe.

on May 8, 2017

Thanks, ExDACer.

No criticism (just an observation). You write, because you believe (but that is not a fact) : "The EASA will run into same problems as regards "proving" the entire path from raw material to the integrated product as did the FAA on the ARJ, I believe."

Maybe. But "running into a problem" does NOT mean "being unable to solve it".

For the types of "bodies" involved, it does, however, imply a duty to persist in order to try to solve it.

on May 8, 2017

@Spylaw, let me guess, you were hired by Comac to troll this thread, yes??

on May 9, 2017

Congrats to China! We wish them the best of success with their new narrow-body!

on May 9, 2017

Congrats to China! We wish them the best of success with their new narrow-body!

on May 9, 2017

Thanks, captainjimgreen !
Join the club. You are showing that congratulations are in order for this achievement.

Thanks, too, m_5teve, but not for the same reasons. Nothing really personal, … but are you, perchance, just another undiscerning, “ad-hominem” merchant ? Or another “band-wagon, mono-, follow-the-herd, sheep-mode thinker” ?

Please do not try to second-guess me ! Evidence to date suggests that you won’t make it.

I am not alone in refusing to get into knee-jerk mono-think, and sheep-mode following .

For those who actually do know how to think, and have or develop their own ways of reflecting, it is not trolling, to show that there is more than a little sense in challenging the conventional “wisdom” of the band-wagon !

on May 9, 2017

does Boeing makes the engines ? or Airbus ?

on May 9, 2017

does Boeing or Airbus makes their avionics ? what's the big fuss about China's C919 doing the same thing.

on May 9, 2017

Thanks, jym5 !

Good thinking ! Pertinent questions !

Please or Register to post comments.

Penton Corporate

Sponsored Introduction Continue on to (or wait seconds) ×