COMAC C919

tphuang

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
test1979 said:
It may also be because there are so few qualified pilots that the number of flights is sparse. Generally, the ratio of passenger aircraft to pilots is at least 8 or more, and Air China’s is 12.5.
China Eastern Airlines 10.4, China Southern Airlines 10.8.
Click to expand...
I think MU and COMAC understand this is a new aircraft so they've been very careful over its handling. At this point, having enough maintenance team is more important than qualified pilots on it.
 
J

jli88

Junior Member
Registered Member
Sorry If I am reposting this.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I would hope that COMAC is really careful in deciding who they sell to. Countries/Operators with limited ability/experience in operating aircrafts must not be tolerated. Aviation is a safety and perception business, and even one mishap can have a decade long impact on reputation. Better to focus on domestic Chinese market than go and sell C919s with subsidies to unexperienced players where chances of mishaps are higher.
 
J

jli88

Junior Member
Registered Member
gelgoog said:
Nigeria has a huge population and is like the fastest growing country in the world. Plus they have oil. I would sell them C919 airplanes.
Click to expand...

It's not about Nigeria per se. It's about drawing the line. AVIC sold a lot of M60 in various poor places like Cambodia, Myanmar and a lot of them had incidents, many due to human errors, but the blame obviously comes on AVIC too.

The countries' population and economy shouldn't matter, only their track record and experience of actually maintaining and operating aircraft.

Maybe Nigeria is okay, maybe its not. But no need to rush. There's no benefit of selling these aircrafts at a cost (let's face it, it will require substantial subsidy in initial years to force someone to choose C919 over Boeing/Airbus) when these countries go out there and crash it as well. One incident and that will be featuring in the news with every C919 report for a decade. Not worth it.

For aviation, approach should be from top down. Go into premium markets first, obviously depending on certification and other things.

Chinese domestic market is more than enough to sustain C919 (and then C929) for over a decade. Then head out to friendly countries which have good rep --> Malaysia, Indonesia, Russia for instance.
 
lcloo

lcloo

Captain
Using C919 on South East Asia routes would be a good publicity and international exposure for the aircraft. China's airworthiness certificate has no problem of being accepted in this region.

Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand to Greater China (Mainland, Hongkong and Macau) are busy routes served mainly by narrow body jets like 737 and 320.
 
Rank Amateur

Rank Amateur

Junior Member
Registered Member
jli88 said:
It's not about Nigeria per se. It's about drawing the line. AVIC sold a lot of M60 in various poor places like Cambodia, Myanmar and a lot of them had incidents, many due to human errors, but the blame obviously comes on AVIC too.

The countries' population and economy shouldn't matter, only their track record and experience of actually maintaining and operating aircraft.

Maybe Nigeria is okay, maybe its not. But no need to rush. There's no benefit of selling these aircrafts at a cost (let's face it, it will require substantial subsidy in initial years to force someone to choose C919 over Boeing/Airbus) when these countries go out there and crash it as well. One incident and that will be featuring in the news with every C919 report for a decade. Not worth it.

For aviation, approach should be from top down. Go into premium markets first, obviously depending on certification and other things.

Chinese domestic market is more than enough to sustain C919 (and then C929) for over a decade. Then head out to friendly countries which have good rep --> Malaysia, Indonesia, Russia for instance.
Click to expand...

"Chinese domestic market is more than enough to sustain C919 (and then C929) for over a decade. Then head out to friendly countries which have good rep --> ... Indonesia ... for instance."

I spit out my baijiu when I saw this. Indonesia?! I've read/watched/listened-to quite a bit of content regarding airliner mishaps, and the statement that Indonesia has a good reputation for civil-aviation safety is inaccurate, to put it politely. Ridiculous, to put it bluntly.
 
Rank Amateur

Rank Amateur

Junior Member
Registered Member
jli88 said:
It's not about Nigeria per se. It's about drawing the line. AVIC sold a lot of M60 in various poor places like Cambodia, Myanmar and a lot of them had incidents, many due to human errors, but the blame obviously comes on AVIC too.

The countries' population and economy shouldn't matter, only their track record and experience of actually maintaining and operating aircraft.

Maybe Nigeria is okay, maybe its not. But no need to rush. There's no benefit of selling these aircrafts at a cost (let's face it, it will require substantial subsidy in initial years to force someone to choose C919 over Boeing/Airbus) when these countries go out there and crash it as well. One incident and that will be featuring in the news with every C919 report for a decade. Not worth it.

For aviation, approach should be from top down. Go into premium markets first, obviously depending on certification and other things.

Chinese domestic market is more than enough to sustain C919 (and then C929) for over a decade. Then head out to friendly countries which have good rep --> Malaysia, Indonesia, Russia for instance.
Click to expand...

"Chinese domestic market is more than enough to sustain C919 (and then C929) for over a decade. Then head out to friendly countries which have good rep --> ... Indonesia ... for instance."

My previous comment on your statement above might have come across as a bit rude. If so, I apologize. But it really is off the mark to say that Indonesia has a good air safety reputation. Here, for example, is a recent article from The Diplomat* on the topic:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


* Yes, it's The Diplomat, but they've published many in-depth pieces by Blitzo over the past few years, so they can't be all bad.
 
FairAndUnbiased

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
jli88 said:
It's not about Nigeria per se. It's about drawing the line. AVIC sold a lot of M60 in various poor places like Cambodia, Myanmar and a lot of them had incidents, many due to human errors, but the blame obviously comes on AVIC too.

The countries' population and economy shouldn't matter, only their track record and experience of actually maintaining and operating aircraft.

Maybe Nigeria is okay, maybe its not. But no need to rush. There's no benefit of selling these aircrafts at a cost (let's face it, it will require substantial subsidy in initial years to force someone to choose C919 over Boeing/Airbus) when these countries go out there and crash it as well. One incident and that will be featuring in the news with every C919 report for a decade. Not worth it.

For aviation, approach should be from top down. Go into premium markets first, obviously depending on certification and other things.

Chinese domestic market is more than enough to sustain C919 (and then C929) for over a decade. Then head out to friendly countries which have good rep --> Malaysia, Indonesia, Russia for instance.
Click to expand...
Not Indonesia lol.

I don't think Russians will buy too many C919, they have unusual requirements and will probably be best served by their own Tu-204 or upgrades, maybe using Chinese components.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top