As a former Xerox employee this is 100% factual. Xerox didn't take the competition seriously.

India has launched Cheapest jet liner in the World

Talking about aeroplanes here my friend ,not photo copier,s

Especially when said competition is state-funded 😐

@@topiasr628 NASA theoretically can help Boeing out, being the US's National Aeronautics Administration. But the government would need to stop cutting NASA's funding.

If a Chinese plane ever lands safely 😥😥🇬🇧✈️🙏👩‍✈️👨‍✈️👎

@@elaineblackhurst1509 didn’t the video shows several landings🧐

@@elaineblackhurst1509 like you've ever been on one..don't know what you are talking about...just a sheep copying others opinions.

@폴란드제2공화국 What's 1+1 mate?

You're on point. Global aviation industry needs to be much more comparative and expand; a little more than Boeing & Airbus as today. Just like European aviation cooperation, namely among Germany France Britain etc; there should be Asian aviation cooperation, among China Japan Korea Taiwan Singapore etc. A website with 4 million views says it all at, blog.chinadaily.com.cn/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1795128

The FAA had been corrupt for years before that receiving half of it's funding from the very companies it was supposed to be regulating. So a disaster like the MAX was only a matter of time. FAA approval meant nothing in reality. It means even less now.

@@Sabundy I don't think it's right to say it means nothing, just that it's literally impossible for any regulator to stay on top of every piece of software in a commercial jet. No one anywhere does that. Getting things FAA approved is still extremely difficult and expensive, which is why all small airplanes are either left over from the 60s, or cost a million dollars for Toyota Corolla level engineering. $50k for the plane, $950k for compliance and liability.

@@JETZcorp my point was that if an organization is corrupt and receiving a significant amount of it's funding from the very companies it's supposed to be regulating then how can said organization be trusted? Do you think any of the families of the hundred of people who died in those two horrible crashes think the FAA certification of the Max means anything?

@@Sabundy Appeals to emotion don't belong in aviation investigations. Those families would happily forfeit travel itself and return humanity to walking in order to get their loved ones back. That's no basis for policy. The fact is that modern air travel is the safest way to move over the planet. Even at it's worst, if nothing had been done about it's issues, the Max was still as safe as trains or ships on a per-mile basis, and hundreds of times safer than any car. And while people are quick to criticize the FAA, they inevitably fail to nsme some other authority that does better. EASA didn't catch the MCAS issue, they don't even PRETEND to get that granular until after a crash happens. The world has the FAA and it has a bunch of me-too bodies that just follow along and occasionally play games to score deals for THEIR local manufacturing. It's also worth observing that the 2 Max accidents happened in countries where the FAA has no direct authority, particularly over the negligent maintenance and poor pilot training. The Lion Air aircraft was squawked for the faulty AoA sensor, their maintenance DIDN'T replace it, but reported that they did and then put the plane back in service. Then another Lion Air crew encountered the MCAS anomaly and correctly performed the standard runaway trim procedures which have been in place on 737s since the old -200 days. After landing safely, they reported the issue and were ignored by the airline. Lion Air continued to fly the airplane with the fault until it found a crew that couldn't handle it. For some reason no one is making a fuss about that, but if that all happened in FAA jurisdiction, Lion Air would be erased from existence. To be clear, I am absolutely not saying that Boeing or the FAA are innocent. Everyone involved failed badly at what they're supposed to do. What I have a problem with are all the double standards and stones thrown from glass houses. If everyone else isn't satisfied with the FAA now, they'll want to start actually regulating planes themselves rather than letting the Americans do all of it for free. Let EASA send a thousand guys to Seattle and look over the shoulders of every engineer as he makes every decision, if it's just that easy. By the way. When you say the FAA gets half it's money from the manufacturers, let's be clear about what that means. Boeing does not donate money to the FAA. Boeing (and Airbus and Embraer and everyone else) pays fees to the FAA for certification. The same way you have to pay to renew your driver's license or a restaurant has to pay a health inspector. It's not voluntary and it's not an exchange, it's a targeted tax for certification. Boeing would definitely prefer if the FAA got all their money from the taxpayers and Boeing got certified for free.

@@JETZcorp but you are making a whole bunch of assumptions. I never mentioned any other regulatory body nor insinuated that any of them do or would do any better. Nor did I say air travel was unsafe. The Max is but one model of airplane. I simply pointed out that if the FAA can allow a company like Boeing to effectively safety certify a plane themselves (which they effectively did) a plane that there were known problems with.... basically rubber stamp it.....then the gaurantee of said organization no longer carries a lot of weight. And the entire world now no longer accepts FAA safety certification blindly. Though as you basically argue ....they never should have done so in the first place. So I'm not absolving them of not having done any work whatsoever. No regulatory body of any kind in any industry should have such a close relationship to a manufacturer. That all being said.....the issues at Boeing regarding their merger with MCD and the company's leadership focus on stock prices and shareholders over building the best product are well documented and correctly criticized. And the fact remains that negligence by Boeing and the FAA are a large part of why the crashes occured no matter how much you try to deflect blame onto the other countries. At the end of the day they didn't build the planes, nor design the software that caused the problem. That buck stops with Boeing. And to a degree the FAA.

and zero sanctions

Classic capitalism

Except the 737 max

♐

More competition = lower price for consumers

Funny that, cos now it’s “ If it’s Boeing I ain’t going”.

Airbus is safer Actually Airbus can save itself its the same reason that saved Sully and the people inside its hard to explain but I can send* a link

@@brapa1190 That's why I'm glad that Alaska Airlines isn't all-Boeing anymore. I love the Pacific Northwest, but brand loyalty is stupid.

Okay the 737 MAX aside, the 787 was massively innovative, it made Airbus step up its game with the A350. Are Boeing really non-innovative? That said, I think Airbus have more intelligent flight and cockpit systems.

Not anymore, cuz of 737 max. If those crashes had happened in the US, Boeing wouldve been sued out of existence. The fact is, ever since they moved to Carolina, their planes are now crap.

All what you mentioned They going to modification circles Plus already to fly Like iL 76 And iL 96 They fly to different airport Snd ready to fly with new look and comfortable

...plus U$ has declared trade wars on China and will stifle / limit sales of aircraft to China, it will do anything to slow china down, how weird they think sanctions and smears are real strategies. But I think China should thank U$, for one it spurs domestic innovations and self sufficiency, and China's COMAC will become a major player/competitor, and China can afford to price their new aircraft competitively due to cheaper labour costs. U$ is basically committing economic suicide, by forcing China to create its own solution and thus creating a new market player in all key technologies.

Also the main reason Beoing and Airbus are worried is because China is their biggest market. The middle class in China is so big and the account for more spending and travelling than US and Europe. The West hates China primarily because of this. The Chinese government works to protect its people from exploitative capitalists, which means less profit for them.

@Tsephe Letseka Really? DIdn't they just renamed it to SpaceJet and the program is paused since COVID happened?

clearly this is not about that aircraft also russia has quite some models like sukhoi superjet 100 thats already in production but no this is about russia and china working together.

This video is about Russian and Chinese aircraft. Mitsubishi is Japanese.

This video is about larger planes - from 737/A320 size and upwards.

I was a bit surprised to learn that Comac was primarily having delays due to the CFM engines.

Very stupid-China gets all the info free.

😂😂😂😂

damn!

But aren't all the stuff are made in China now?

@@namesbinge3073 yes, but not all of them are made by Chinese companies now are they? Name one chinese brand thsts known for quality and durability.

Good go and take a flight with Boing 737 Max

@@chiangchengkooi9791 only if u fly on a chinese made jet first. Btw, the MAX had started back flying

@@RandomTrinidadian for only a while, and now being grounded again for electronic problems.

Americans as struggle and doing everything for this planes stay on the ground that say everything....

@@cte4dota i have no idea what u just said

@@barackobama3698 i said they put sanctions on those planes? Engines composite materials etc... That's why they are delayed so much, and they sell planes in China and Russia now these will change that...

@Samson Yuen I’m not jealous, I just didn’t understand what he said, I’m glad the aviation market is becoming more unique

Personally, I hope they succeed. Years of market control have made Boeing and Airbus complacent, it’s about time some new competitors comes up to kick them back into gear.

The il-96-400 is no longer possible. Uzbekistan Railways took control of Tashkent Mechanical Plant on 1 May 2015.

@@mrrolandlawrence The Il-96-400 is build in the Voronezh plant...

@@evivox yes

@@evivox but it will be produced literally by the

Il-96-400? You're saying that Ilyushin is making a updated edition of their Il-96 aircraft? That's freaking epic! Finally!

one can also look at a330 and think of 777 or 767. Plane shapes start from the wind tunnel, and its a more modern design.

What you don't see, is whats happened to manufacturing across the West as China has flooded it with its cheap manufacturing. But as was seen during Covid masks and equipment were largely unavailable due to the fact, that western manufacturing managements had surrendered their outputs to the Chinese at the behest of fat profits. So giving over all the market to one Strident country on the basis of price is foolhardy, as we now can all see.

@Σ At one time there was only Boeing & when Airbus came into the market, the dynamics of the aircraft market changed with new technologies, competitive pricing, innovation.

Not if U$ can help it, there'll be more sanctions or national security issue when it comes to anything from China. U$ is not in the business to compete, they are there to dominate and destroy others in order for it to be profitable, you see it in local politics, geopolitics, wars, coups, regime changes, corruption and so on. There will be lot of co-ercive pressures applied to any nations who trade with China, as Bush used to say "if you're not with us, you're against us"...U$ operates only 1 policy, domination.

I’m receptive to a Russian or Chinese-made aircraft tbh. Even if it will flop or even if it’ll only sell in China and Russia, I’m pretty certain it will be a slap in the face for Boeing and Airbus to at least TRY and invent new aircraft. Western imagination has stagnated lately. From my perspective, the advent of the A321XLR and 737 Max aircraft are a major sign that variation in aircraft types is needed. While the A321XLR has not crashed and definitely will be a good mid-market plane, it’s also a sign that Western aircraft manufacturers are unwilling to spend time and resources (even before COVID) to draft up new and more efficient designs of airplanes. The A321XLR is a stretch of a 30 year old design, the MAX 10 traces it’s roots to a 1960s-era design.

Competition? It's not like they're gonna sell at all in the majority of markets. It's not gonna pose a threat.

Vladimir Lenin Even if it won’t sell well internationally, it will still be a slap in the face for boeing and airbus to innovate new designs more.

C means commercial

@@playknight5409 No, the C is for COMAC

The cost of production in Russia and China is very low - they can drop the price as much as they want. For example, always keep the cost 20% lower than Boeing with the same characteristics or better. Europe and the United States will not be able to do this - they will not be able to lower the price below any limit. In general, I am not an economist, but I have long been concerned about the issue of pricing within the country. Why in Russia absolutely everything is 3-8 times cheaper than in the USA, but the standard of living is excellent - I have been there several times and have a business. Similar work in China or Russia is several times lower than exactly the same work in the United States. Who came up with such overheated salaries?

That's why we and the rest of the civilized (non-communist) world should keep anything Made In communist China, leave it in communist China.

Also but NOT building it in CHINA!!!!

This will put any manufacturing bases in China owned by Airbus or Boeing at risk. In that China will just nationalise the lot. Steal all the know how and money in one move. I have always said the both BOEING AND AIRBUS WERE SHORT SIGHTED IN BUILDING PLANTS IN CHINA.

A executive dominated by managers will try to do that since they don't want to cut back on dividends.

Both manufacturers have too much fat in their profit margin. Boeing Max series run into problem because of cutting corners and abuse of safety certification. Competition promotes efficiency and quality products. Boeing and Airbus would have to work much harder ever before without a semi cartel business frameworks. For past40 years, China invariably brings down prices of goods for the benefits of the West. Plane making however infringes western monopoly and eats into their core industry huge profits. On safety concern, China has had much fewer failures in launching its space rockets than US. As most of the planes would be sold in the domestic market, there is no reason to suggest that China will compromise on quality and safety assurance. Isn’t lowering cost one of the ways to fight inflation????

@@sktan3743 737 max and 787 are in high demand now, no one sane would fly in Chinese not Russia airliner, no matter how cheap.🤣😂☢️🌎☢️🇨🇳🇷🇺

they already did, THAT is what capitalism is all about, maximum profitability human lives are just collateral damage, same in wars, weapons, and aircraft industry, in fact all U$ corporations have nothing to do with improving lives and everything to do with corporate profits.

Because us sanctions only Now mc-21 mase made by russian components

People fly on Airlines they trust. Which comes from full disclosure with any aircrashes. Would China be honest? Russia if tied to China in development, it to would be tarnished.

🤔

I bet you $1 billion dollars, idiot.

No. We own the round wheel. It's ours. The Chinese must use square wheels or they're COPYING!

Stole great designs from McDonnell Douglas.

And yet you have so much stuff in your house that is made in China. The phone or computer you wrote that comment on for example. How well something is made depends on how much you are willing to pay for it.

@@Hans-gb4mv which should worry you greatly when it comes to aircraft! Why are they so cheap: unskilled labour? Quality Control? China IS The ruling country when it comes to cut-price, but for a reason, none of them good.

But they all have large orders already?

They have large orders from Chinese domestic airlines. That market itself is enough to make a profit.

The reason China build is not depend on Boing and Airbus.

jealous much ???????

I just like the idea that it's a guy called Craig who's decided to create a cheap knock-off airliner in his shed. 12:00 "Craig plans to start construction in 2021" 😂😂

No. It doesn't crash all the time.

I don’t see Alaskan buying Chinese. Boeing or the A-220.

It is. COMAC was provided a license by McDonnel Douglas to build the MD-80. Based on the knowledge they acquired, they basically modernised it and called it ARJ-21. The prototype still had an MD cockpit too. Now it has an newly designed cockpit and new engines, so it's basically an illigitmate competitor to the Boeing 717 (AKA MD-95). The C919 on the other hand is completely indigenous and I am hoping to get to fly on one one day actually!

The MD 80/90 was manufactured in China. Some of the designs are from MD90 so that they can reuse the manufacturing equipment in the factory.

I prefer the Japanese, Brazilian and Canadian rather than Russians and Chinese.

@@nntflow7058 They still exist? I heard they're getting rolled into Boeing for the next MAX program...

There's 40 ppl left dead in a single accident with the russian plane superjet and that accident wasn't severe just hard landing..Planes made of plastic materials very flammable.. google that.. Another crash killing every man on board, the plane hit a mountain... No thanks, i'd rather stick with boeing airbus embraer

👍🏽

Same

Limited market for that joke. Beautiful

@@capnskiddies Amazing

Lol

None. The only Indonesian airline with an order with SMAC, a small airline in Sumatra, but they've gone bust. Given the state of the market vis a vis Covid, I doubt they'll be new orders soon.

I mean, when was the last time a Russian made engine failed? They still drive Ladas from the 60's

@@SovietLensReviews If you have less than one percent of the commercial airline engine market, you don't fail 😂😂😂

he will receive a European certificate only by the end of 2021, a Russian one - at the end of this year or the beginning of another

Russian names please read and call correctly: the plane is called MS-21 (in Russian - MС-21) !!! Regards from Russia !

I totally trusts Boeing and FAA certification is bullerproof

That plane was meant to test the waters. The C919 is their real attempt to end to end the duopoly

@@johndamian9197 good luck on that, many sales, very few built, and still testing. What a joke. Let's forget war criminal Putin and Chinese ambitions for world domination.

A similar list can be made with Russian inventors / developers of the helicopter, starting with Lomonosovs' helicopter model, 19th century theoretical designs, 1910ies inventions of the squash plate, first fully functional helicopter in 1930ies etc.

unless you're flying Airbus & Boeings that should long have been retired! Safety was important to Boeing but 500 people had to die to PROVE what was really going on! With extreme capitalism Boeing bought their own shares to jack up stock prices & dividends instead of investing in R&D, hence a plane with a link back to 1951 & 1961 is STILL flying...

@@hlim431 of course quality is king...but if Russia and china get their act together Boeing and airbus will be in serious trouble. china is able to control the cost of labor and would be able to undercut boeing and airbus

If only Boeing didn't screw up their upper management and have maintained transparency and real quality engineering work. Then the B-737 Max incidents wouldn't even happened.

I hope Airbus doesn't get overtaken, but I'd do anything to backtrack against Boeing after the absolute sin that was the 737 Max and completely moving the 787 operations to an already sucky state, South Carolina, as well as ignoring every defect in their 787's at the South Carolina facility because Boeing does not give a fuck about its customers and only cares about profits. Capitalism at its finest.

@@sygneg7348 Actually, its more like a flawed Capitalism because you have greed, ignorance, and arrogance attitude come into play.

I agree man🤝

All of them offshoots of the Boeing 787. Just in smaller forms. No wonder here. Besides, take a look at the CR929 final up to date presentation.

Looks don't matter and i like the look of the a320 nose

hell no

how people will recognise A320

*The problem with the SSJ-100 was that it initially relied on cooperation with Western partners, and it was on their part that there were problems with spare parts, the competitor does not need anyone, now there will be no such problem, since the SuperJet - New consists entirely of Russian components!* ukposts.info/have/v-deo/pH6naHxnoIKe0qM.html&ab_channel=%D0%92%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8.%D0%A5%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA

Likely more with C919

Nothing because there isn't much competition

Cheap labour and state own getting Huge benifit from government .

you can choose yourself once you decide to travel

It was a senator dumb ass.

"As a botanist is unto a privet hedge, black in Thy sight, Oh Lord..." -Michael Palin of Monty Python's Flying Circus

looks like A350 little

The fuselage looks like a350

@@sarthsingh3271 But the nose and tail are 787

It’s based on il96, but now seems this project is gonna delay quite a bit

With A350 winglets and stolen cockpit tech

@@Al-hb2wo Well it looks too similar and still won’t match the efficiency of the 787 or A350 by the time it enters service as they are likely to get newer engines and a few other improvements

why? because its got wings and wheels??

@@polo-kf6yh Thats not the right counter argument if you hoped to convince me otherwise. I’m talking about looks which does include the wings but why put your pointless comment then? That’s all you Comac defenders say to claim CR 929 or ARJ-21 aren’t copied when they clearly are

@@filledwithvariousknowledge1065 wasn't replying to you..bit defensive?

Sure, if you ignore the fact the EU has forgiven nearly $100 billion in unpaid debts from Airbus related to development of the A380. Or the fact Comac and the UAC are literally government-owned agencies that currently run on subsidies. Countries like to prop up their domestic businesses. If it’s not wrong for the EU and China to do it, why is it wrong for America?

@@GintaPPE1000 Well said sir, people just love to comment on topics without knowing what they are talking about.

Have you forgotten their cars?!! Lol. How's the Russian car Industry doing these days.... Oh...

The US probably will use the same tactic it used to ban Huawei, citing all kinds of reasons, true or otherwise. But I think China has other fish to fry other than in USA. Besides, Americans probably are being snobbish about things that are not made in America, citing inferior quality etc. Price differentiation will most likely be the major selling point provided the Chinese planes could prove their safety and reliability.

They don't know how to design anything good

Because it turns out that those are the best shapes for planes, to almost no ones surprise

@@techhelpportalextras3007 Just look at TU-154 and IL-76.

Yeah, but how many are flying...?!

@@fha1885 122

@@user-ed3hc2vh2l so...with 22 needed to keep 5 operational, that means about 30- odd are actually flying... Thanks for the info.

@@fha1885 214 have been produced, 133 are in operation. After all Western parts of low quality are replaced, more will be in operation. Official info.

@@user-ed3hc2vh2l why did sukhoi put in low quality Western parts? Were the superior Russian products too expensive? How long before it will be all complete... A year? 5? 10? How many millions will it cost? Seems that buying a Russian aircraft comes with all sorts of problems....

Don't worry. Russian aircrafts are very safe

@@ahmedibrahim9082 thanks Stalin lol

Vodka will makes our pilot stay on shapes during flight

Why? Explain why Russian planes are better than Chinese ones.

@@HKChineseCanadian much more exprience building aircrafts.. Decades more

At least for the MC21 operators can choose between pratt&whitney pw1400g or the new Rosdvigatel PD14

With the world Airline industry going down the tubes, the Chinese should buy out Airbus and Boeing and build all planes in China. Cheap skilled labour, huge domestic mark with advanced technology can't be beat.

@@HKChineseCanadian profile name and pic checks out

Because if they build the wing properly, they don’t need winglet. Also if they are running short haul flight, the cost of fitting the winglet is too high compare to the fuel saved by those winglet

Because of the same reasons the E2 doesnt have winglets

Soviet collapsed. Next China.

Not really though.

Yeah china can plan it because they don’t have people who go on streets for any step government takes for the development of their nation. Very sad but a real fact and a drawback of democracy

@@arjunsavanur7242 Judging by the latest events, the next US will fall apart.

@@kshitijpatel7947 When people see the real development of their country, there is no need for them to take to the streets.

MiG-23 could have been the most unreliable plane ever. Soviet Air Force went as far as demanding to deliver them disassabled, as ground crews would need to take them apart anyway to fix all the crap that flying diaster had in it's design. Stil laround 1/3 of them were lost in accidents anyway.

@@TotalRookie_LV there are others like the MiG-15, -17, -19, -21, -25, -29 and -31. These are the jets that made MiG such a big brand name in military aviation during the Cold War and into the present day, in the way that the 747 made Boeing a major brand in civil aviation around that same period

@@spdfatomicstructure MiG-19 wasn't good either, that's why its production in USSR was so short - only a couple of years, most 19's anyone encountered were made in China or were given away by Soviets just to get rid of them. Even later model MiG-29s, while good in some aspects, had short lived engines (which plagues Russian planes to this day) and relatively weak frame and landing gear, which made developing carrier based variant impossible, unless they are completely redesigned.

Yup The C919 & C929 I will fly with them fa sure but not The ARJ's though.

@@karlossargeant3872 ye

There will be more after it enters mass production.

Antonov 225 came from Ukraine, not Russia. What Russia came up with after collapse of the USSR is Sukhoi Superjet (which the crews operating it called "shit" - говнолет). They've handed around 170 units to airlines (mainly Russian). By now all foreign airlines returned them back as the reliability and maintenance are dreadful. Those units that do fly spend only half of the Boeing or Airbus time in the air.

The fact is that Antonov 225 was developed during USSR regime. Manufacturing plant was shifted to Ukrain from Russian area as it was same country at that time. Antonov himself is from Russia not Ukrain. It was Russia who contributed the most in designing and manufacturing the aircraft. Ukrain is not in a position to complete even the 70% completed 2nd aircraft. We know what Ukrain is today. Soveignty sold to USA. Can't take any independent decision. Antov 225 is a Soviet aircraft not Ukrainanian.

CHINA learns by stealing, all the western aircraft companies with affiliations to CHINA will be over run with nationalisation.

@@johnchristmas7522 Once Charles Darwin had said that desire for man to fly came from the flying bird. China learns from others not necessary by copying. Western people feels pain to see China rising. It's their problem. USA stopped ASML, Netherland from exporting EUV Lethography machine but now China has made their own machine. Now china is developing carbon based semiconductor chip Graphene, world's first, for 6G. This is the answer, China given who always alleges, China copying.

Oh dear, a believer, lets hope you wake up before, like Hong Kong, its to late.

It will probably eject passengers into the terminal then board the new passengers into the plane with a vacuum

It’s pretend interest to drive the prices down at Boeing

I do love the constant America's first mentality, the obsessions that you're number 1 and everybody copies and steals from you, gimme a break. U$ the entire nation is founded on theft, enslavement, drug pushing, human trafficking, slave labour in your prisons is all in full view. U$ is number 1 in theft, looting, coups, regime changes, assassinations, black lynchings, now rebranded as black shootings, every few weeks or so. Please do a bit of self analysis okay.

@@tigading2177 Why don't you do a bit of self analysis yourself before commenting. The America you described was and is nothing like what you described. Looting, drug pushing, and human trafficking, are done by criminals, which Americans do not approve of. Those are the results of actions taken by a president who is not liked and I did not vote for. Black lynchings? Yes they occurred in the past but they are no longer a daily occurrence. "Black shootings" are done by criminals in large cities and they are often done by blacks shooting other blacks. Chicago is one example, and they are the results of elected officials that I would NEVER vote for. America's history is not perfect, then again no nation has ever had a perfect history.

@@tigading2177 This topic was originally about commercial aircraft that are manufactured in China and it has nothing to do with America's history and the problems the entire world is currently facing.

@@MagnumMike44 I do love the american perspective. I don't think the Iraqis, Syrians, Libyans, Yemenis, would agree with you. Your ignorance reminded me of the germans during WW2, they too, did not know what Hiitler was doing to the rest of the world.

It suffers from no support network though so few here in the West will buy unless Russia offers financing for it despite being better than neo and Max

@@filledwithvariousknowledge1065 we'll see

@@filledwithvariousknowledge1065 they claimed that they learned from Superjet support network problems so we will see

@@michalmilko8347 I sure hope so too so fingers crossed🤞

Russia isnt doing anything innovative. It's the slim of europe. Russia cant compete with boeing or airbus they have too much history and experience

@@emilioalvarez8010 ; Russia is giving west big shit, Russia is west nightmare, building new multilateral order. Without Russia, your balls will freeze soon, your industry and currency are collapsing, inflation taking-off exponentially, fuel out of reach etc..... You have one single option to save what is still savable: Push EU dangerously stupid decision makers to resign and restore healthy relationship with Russia!!!

They let it go because their country was totally ruined and robbed in the 90ies.

Russia have no money

@@peterleung8372 Sure they have.

SU 860 is crazy aswell.

@@themaus3847 It is, but unfortunately this project is cancelled.

I'm not sure about that. Purposely designing smaller fuel tanks doesn't make much sense. There may be situations where you need that extra fuel. Not even having the possibility of it eliminates so many customers.

你他妈整天bb有意思吗

希望你全家都下地狱

你出生你舅舅先知道的

Lol true

It needs more original external design

Ngl the nose of the CR929 looks more like it belongs to a 787

@@fab2896 The tail as well.

you expect them to make a box design