3 ms·

The C919 is not a large airliner. The capacity of 160 people is smaller than the most sold single-aisle aircrafts (A320/B737-8). It's a large regional aircraft,

by dx034 10y ago

The C919 is not a large airliner. The capacity of 160 people is smaller than the most sold single-aisle aircrafts (A320/B737-8). It's a large regional aircraft, competing with the C300 and will mainly be used for feeder or to serve small cities. I don't want to downplay the importance of the release, but this aircraft is not a competitor for the duopoly between Airbus and Boeing for passenger aircrafts >200 pax. The market this aircraft operates in has far more competitors. The real revolution could begin if they are able to deliver a real competitor for the A320/B737-8, which seem to be the cheapest to fly <6hrs, considering all costs.

Arnt 10y ago
What's the difference between this and a large airliner? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A320_family#Variants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A320_family#Variants says the A320 exists in 100-220 seat variants. The A330 starts at 250 or so. Is there a technology gap around that size, is that what you're saying?
- nolok 10y ago
  > Is there a technology gap around that size, is that what you're saying? Yes, both a technological cap and a manufacturing gap. It's not just the size that's the issue, but the fact that the resulting plane must be fuel efficient. That's a very important factor that made a lot of damage to the A380 for example; it wasn't fuel efficient enough and many of its customers (middle east airlines) told Airbus they won't buy more until Airbus update it with better engines. Given that proper Engines manufacturing are also the issue for their fighter jets, it's easy to understand why China tries to get its end on any tech it can tech in that field (see: the old Tupolev and its tech they're buying from Ukraine, all the russian airframe they keep buying in small numbers, ...)
rchowe 10y ago
Compared to other manufacturers (Bombardier, Embraer) that tend to make regional jets which max out at 2x2 seating, this is a large jet for a non-Airbus/Boeing(/Tupolev) manufacturer. Only the longest stretched fuselages on the newest 737/A320s can carry more than 200 passengers, and there are a lot of 737-800s still flying that carry 160 or so people. China could very well build a stretched fuselage C919 if the project ends up being a success.
dingaling 10y ago
It absolutely is a competitor for the A320 / 737 over medium-range routes, in fact it uses the same engines as the latest A320Neo. Yes, its notional capacity is 25 - 30 less than the maxed-out all-coach configuration mid-tier variants from Airbus and Boeing, but that's just five seat-rows. The list price is about $30 million cheaper, though, which goes a long way to balancing slightly higher seat-mile costs. It does have shorter range than the equivalent models from A & B, but that's perfectly fine for many airlines. Hauling around that extra structure and tankage for un-needed extra range actually costs money. > and will mainly be used for feeder or to serve small cities. An aircraft that can carry 168 passengers over 4,000km ( baseline ) or 5,500km ( ER variant ) will not be operating feed.

by dx034 10y ago

Arnt 10y ago

What's the difference between this and a large airliner? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A320_family#Variants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A320_family#Variants says the A320 exists in 100-220 seat variants. The A330 starts at 250 or so. Is there a technology gap around that size, is that what you're saying?

nolok 10y ago
> Is there a technology gap around that size, is that what you're saying? Yes, both a technological cap and a manufacturing gap. It's not just the size that's the issue, but the fact that the resulting plane must be fuel efficient. That's a very important factor that made a lot of damage to the A380 for example; it wasn't fuel efficient enough and many of its customers (middle east airlines) told Airbus they won't buy more until Airbus update it with better engines. Given that proper Engines manufacturing are also the issue for their fighter jets, it's easy to understand why China tries to get its end on any tech it can tech in that field (see: the old Tupolev and its tech they're buying from Ukraine, all the russian airframe they keep buying in small numbers, ...)

rchowe 10y ago

Compared to other manufacturers (Bombardier, Embraer) that tend to make regional jets which max out at 2x2 seating, this is a large jet for a non-Airbus/Boeing(/Tupolev) manufacturer. Only the longest stretched fuselages on the newest 737/A320s can carry more than 200 passengers, and there are a lot of 737-800s still flying that carry 160 or so people. China could very well build a stretched fuselage C919 if the project ends up being a success.

dingaling 10y ago

It absolutely is a competitor for the A320 / 737 over medium-range routes, in fact it uses the same engines as the latest A320Neo. Yes, its notional capacity is 25 - 30 less than the maxed-out all-coach configuration mid-tier variants from Airbus and Boeing, but that's just five seat-rows. The list price is about $30 million cheaper, though, which goes a long way to balancing slightly higher seat-mile costs. It does have shorter range than the equivalent models from A & B, but that's perfectly fine for many airlines. Hauling around that extra structure and tankage for un-needed extra range actually costs money. > and will mainly be used for feeder or to serve small cities. An aircraft that can carry 168 passengers over 4,000km ( baseline ) or 5,500km ( ER variant ) will not be operating feed.