Irkut MC-21 * Irkut MS-21

>>1076476
Just like the Comac C919, it will never sell in volume globally.

What is that thing coming down off the bottom of the tail cone?

File: 40664_1381189426.jpg (340KB, 1024x701px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1024x701px

>>1076578
In the west, they stick those on test planes for tailstrike testing

Then again, slavshit plane designed for slavshit pilots, so it's probably a permanent part of the design

Looks pretty nice desu.

>>1076573
>Airbus builds its (slightly older generation) A319-20s in China
>WAuw here's our "C919" we didn't steal shit

Just glad that Airbus builds their older shit there, keeping those criminals a couple of steps behind

>>1076664
Boeing does the same thing with their 737 finishing plant in China.

What's nuts is that the MC-21 and C919, based on what is publicly available, are not even as efficient as the A320 and 737NG, let alone the neo and MAX respectively. By the time they are ready for full scale production, the market for that segment of aircraft will already be dried up and in the production pipeline for the neo and MAX.

>>1076573
>500 orders
>not in volume

>>1076689
> globally
Learn to read you dumb cunt.90% of firm orders are to Chinese airlines and lessors. The other 10% of firm orders are to foreign lessors who intend to lease them back to Chinese airlines. Only 6.6% of optional orders are to non-Chinese airlines/lessors. And taken in total, only 5.3% of any order type are to non-Chinese airlines or lessors.

That means the chances of the aircraft establishing a global maintenance network are damn near zero.

File: MS-21_cockpit_HUD.jpg (618KB, 1279x853px) Image search: [Google]

618KB, 1279x853px

>>1076573
>>1076691
Wishful thinking...

>>1077324
Are you delusional? The burden of sale and proof lies with those companies and you. Neither has happened or come close to being provided, and that's not to even mention the historical observations stacked against you.

>>1077324
Congratulations. You made a completely pointless statement without any supporting facts or evidence.

>>1077340
You did the same thing. Congratulations.

>>1077337
Bombardier, Comac & Irkut will take large portion of market so far dominated by Airbus & Boeing. Deal with it. Chinese & Russian markets are very important and big parts of global market.

>>1077507
So you're oply denying publily available facts about C919 sales and logistics. Get fucked.

>>1077511
This is a mathematical falsehood. The Russian market is borderline irrelevant. The Chinese market currently and in the firseeable future will purchase Airbus and Boeing for the overwhelming majority of their orders. Bombardier is only competing at the high end of regional Jets and at the low end of narrowbodies (737-700/A319).

It's like you don't even bother to spend less than 5 minutes researching basic facts before running your mouth and proving you have no idea what you're talking about.

>>1076689
>>1077324
>>1077507
>>1077511
>Firm orders
>LOI/MOU
>Orders
Do the math before you do more fake numbers.

>>1077536
>>1077538
CPC and PRC nationals are skilled labor in the wumao business, paid or self-employed.

>>1076664
The Airbus factory in China is only responsible for installing internal decorations into airplanes, like seats and cabin lighting.

Given ARJ21 vs SSJ's market performance and reception, I think we can safely assume that MC-21 will be much better than C919

File: YyphMFs.jpg (79KB, 1100x620px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 1100x620px

>>1077951
While china do deserve credits for their first domestic airliner, they owe plenty of technical assistance from boeing, airbus and even bombardier in all manufacturing process

Also, there are plenty of foreign made parts in C919.

Also, there are plenty of no name airlines that still use second (sometimes even third) hand 727 and 737 in south asia and asia pacific. If C919 could deliver roughly similar performance as 737 or A320 at about 70% or the price, they could have a winner here.

Also, MA60, chinese-made prop airliners, is actually quite popular as short haul airliners.

>>1077993
Except the C919's public specs so far show that it's less efficient than the current (non MAX/neo) 737/A320. And a used aircraft from one of those families will be cheaper than a new C919.

>>1078000
How do we determine efficiency anyway? passengership? speed? It's all relative between aircraft.

>>1077990
Foreign made parts mean nothing, both countries can made most parts themselves perfectly fine, the challenge to make a new aircraft is to manage the entire design process.
>>1077993
I believe there are barely any 727 left.. And when you said 70% their price did you take into account that Boeing usually offer 50% or more deeper discount to their customers?
>>1078007
A commonly used metric to determine efficiency is cost per available seat miles

>>1078088
>As of July 2016, there were 64 Boeing 727s (4 Boeing 727-100s and 60 727-200s) in commercial operation with 26 airlines.

That's a surprisingly large number.

>>1078096
64.. that's just about as much as DC-8s remaining...

>>1076691
>foreign lessors
you mean foreign branches of Chinese corp, and other parties involved in the project
Also, even for those firm orders, they don't need to pay any money for firming up them, with the official reason being price still not fixed yet. That mean those fixed orders can still be cancelled at no cost

>>1076688
MC-21 should be able to compete against 320neo and 737max in term of efficiency ..

>>1076689
>what is "globally"

>>1078214
Blatantly false on a cost per seat-mile basis.

>>1078233
Same engine and lighter frame with wing of better aerodynamic how would that be false?

>>1078240
Same number of seats, but shorter max range with the same engine. That's BY DEFINITION less efficient.

>>1078250
That would only be true if it had the same fuel capacity. Might have more cargo space. Might be optimized for efficiency at lower altitudes and shorter flights.

>>1078250
What you are describing, is the versatility and flexibility of the aircraft. Efficiency is some other things. It's not like they can't nake the aircraft fly for 10000km which they have already planned, but the problem is would the market want to have a marrow body with such a long range.

>>1078400
What a bunch of fucking nonsense.

>>1078406
>Facts are nonsense
You need a better brain to understand reality

File: thyking.jpg (6KB, 210x230px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 210x230px

>>1078233
>>1078250
>>1078406

Tell me this, friend

does an a320neo or 737max become less efficient when the fuel tank is half full