👟 Check out Vessis Memorial Day sale and Vessi styles at www.vessi.com/cobyexplanes. If you missed the sale, Use code COBYEXPLANES for 15% off your order. Free shipping for CA, US, AU, JP, TW, KR, SGP
Good timing. My everyday walking shoes are getting worn out. But these at 20% off are about double the price of the Merrell shoes I normally buy. Are they worth the premium?
The US aerospace company develops the systems and components for C919. My team have been working on this plane for years and those parts may have some of the commonality to Airbus and Boeing however C919 also have the unique sub systems. Believe it or not the commonalities between the plane is about 10% between the direct competitor models. 99.99% of the people rarely understand that recycle components from one plane to another May ended up costing more than developed new.
Very informative. I have a question. When I read Chinese medias, they complained about USA intentionally gave them the C variant of the Leap engine which is weaker than the B and A version to keep Boeing and Airbus to have big advantages. Is this true?
@@lilunchengsmiles I don't believe that the company would give the customer less or more because of the Chinese vs Western customers. 1C engine has less thrust may be due to different requirements in the region where it will be operating the most. If there is a certain variable such as fuel quality, environmental pollution, and FOD susceptibility, are known then the engine maker will have to decrease the performance so that the flight hour reliability promise is met. The engines are the most expensive subsystem as well as flight safety so they cannot fail during flight.
True, remember Japan many many moons ago, tried for years and poured billions and billions of Yen into an F16 project and simply threw in the towel. They couldn't get it to work and wound up buying customer versions from Lockheed-Martin.
compromise safety and quality to meet schedule...You don't change your quality process for schedule. You make quality happen in the schedule-- thanks boeing
Pretty sure C919 is safe to fly since Chinese government don’t have the same privilege to get away with a fail like when the FAA of US giving Boeing a pass on the 737 max.
Both companies know every single thing they do is being watch and will be copied over time. That is a given. Also, while China is watching Airbus and Boeing - Boeing and Airbus ARE ALSO watching China. The knowledge transfer is not only one way.
I think it’s crucial to remember that Airbus and Boeing are producing/furnishing the A320 and 737 in China, especially because the short-hall market is dominant and key to Chinese aviation. Both of these aircraft have been updated but are older and built upon established technologies and production techniques, so despite the spying concerns neither Airbus or Boeing are giving away their big secrets about their new long haul jets like the A350/787, and as you said Coby, Comac still have a very long way to go to produce high quality planes consistently
Every countries spied. USA is the greatest culprit of all. China didnt put a gun on the heads of Boeing and Airbus to have factories in China. It the other way around. What about the international space station which US banned China from it? China Tiangong will be the only one left in a couple of years. Hahaha, USA is down the drain, loser.
Still China has the advances to see how to build modern airplanes. China doesn’t invent anything .. they copy ( steal ) it around the world. Or buying companies to get the technology and the costumer.
@@andrewlim7751 I would disagree … because this airplanes are longtime on the market and all “ secrets “ are already in the open. Secrets like the material of the body frame, or the wiring there are so many secrets. And of course also the production process is a “ secret “. And after ( for example ) Airbus open up a production line in China they got almost everything. And what is NOT a secret is that China steal all this stuff! And without western technology China would be nothing! Period!
This video has many false information. China doesn’t need to steal foreign technologies if foreign companies decide to build assembly lines in China. When foreign companies want to build assembly in China, they have to reach agreements with China to give up certain IPs to gain privileges to slides of vast Chinese market shares. Most companies have been practicing that except Tesla. That is one of the points which triggered the trade war between US and China. One of the main reason westerners pick China is due to Chinese infrastructure build efficiency. Took Tesla 168 days to build Shanghai mega factory vs 300 days of German mega factory.
The American way to think is in short terms. The chinese think and work and plan in very long terms. For them is just the first step, they dont care if they are 20 years behind , they know that in 20 years from now they will be were Airbus and Boing are , or even better.
I've seen an interesting case where China sells four kinds of shoes for $1, $10, $100, and even $1000, and a guy bought $1 shoes, found the quality bad, and started attacking all Chinese shoes, but no Found out it was because he could only afford $1.
The payoff matrix was pretty silly and not really applicable to this situation in my opinion. You’re assuming a simultaneous game which really doesn’t make sense here unless you posit that Boeing/Airbus would build a factory in China in complete secrecy and only announce it once completed. More realistically Boeing/Airbus would know the other party is building a facility in China and respond in kind. This is a lot different of a scenario than a simultaneous, one-shot game like what you describe. It’s more of an iterative game spaced out over a long time.
I hardly feel that the author of this video actually knows just how many components Boeing/Airbus parts are actually made in China, especially those of the engine. Someone from a supplier revealed in the Chinese equivalent Quora that there are few components of the engine that are actually not made in China. Sometimes, business is business. It is not entirely following the line drew by politicians.
I think it's a BIG mistake! Just remember what happened to US when started to move US factorys to China by 80's 90's and look where this got us today... Now Boeing and Airbus are doing the same, but with planes.
Embraer is honestly china’s biggest competition. Not Boeing or Airbus. Not likely they will be competing with them for a while. Embraer is huge and they have the cleanest safety record of all manufacturers. The E-jets more specifically are awesome jets. And with the E2’s out, I don’t see how the C919 beats the E-jets.
Video-report like this one should inform its audience that it was a citizen born,bred and educated in China who designed and manufactured the first aircraft for Mr Boeing!
Strange that you haven't mentioned the case COMAC ARJ21, an aircraft with, shall we say, striking resemblance to MD-80/MD-90 which were produced _under the license_ (that is, with full design transfer, but nor necessarily production knowledge transfer) in China. Despite of having the all details of these aircraft design at their disposal, it took 14 years from the start of ARJ21 design work to entry into service (8 years after its first flight). It takes more than "paper knowledge" to build efficiently such a complex product.
Those 14years were actually time taken for the Comac to learn how to become a commercial manufacturer, and develop their Chinese suppliers. To be honest it's acceptable regardless of which country that is outside EU/US
@@bazoo513 should be, but my guess is the production rate won't increase for the coming 5 years. Expect China Eastern to give a lot of feedbacks to Comac for improvement in later batches.
Bombardier Inc had planned to develop a mid-size passenger jet, called the C Series, aimed at competing with Boeing and Airbus. The program began in 2004 with an investment of more than $5 billion, but the project suffered multiple delays and cost overruns due to technical and financial problems, leading the company into financial trouble. In 2015, Bombardier signed a C $1.3 billion agreement with the Quebec provincial and federal governments, receiving financial assistance from the government to support the project. In 2017, the C Series development completed the acquisition of a large number of US airline orders, Boeing filed an anti-dumping complaint against Bombardier, accusing the C Series program of improper government subsidies, resulting in a major blow to the program. In January 2018, the US Department of Commerce announced the imposition of anti-dumping duties of up to 292% on the C Series project, because the profit margin of Bombardier C Series project itself is not high, the price after sanctions can not recover the huge order before, the US government's anti-dumping sanctions and Bombardier company can not obtain profits When the CSeries was in crisis, Bombardier even wanted to move production to low-cost regions and discussed cooperation with ComAC and Shenyang Aircraft Corporation In 2018, under pressure from the U.S. and Canadian governments, Bombardier continued to sell shares, but it was difficult to sustain, and finally, unable to obtain cash flow, Bombardier sold the C Series project to Airbus Canada Limited Partnership, a unit of Europe's Airbus, for 1 Canadian dollar. The C Series was renamed the A220. Airbus has a factory in Tianjin, China, which mainly produces parts and assembly work for the A320 family of passenger aircraft, as well as parts for the A220. The plant began production of A220 components in 2017 and is now an important part of the A220 supply chain.
How does Brazil Embraer Aircraft factor into this? Brazil is building their own A320 & 737 Equivalent. If the west has no problem with Embraer. Then there should be no problem with China.
Naiive comment. If people all over the world, resort to lying and smearing almost daily, as obviously evident in the media, you can expect that it is the case in commercial business competitive environment. Whatever a more advanced nation accuses a less advanced nation, you know that it is like the saying: "a lady who blushes obviously knows so much to blush about." ps. I am not a sexist, but just how the saying goes. In future, perhaps to avoid being accused for misogyny, the saying ought to be worded: "the accuser is often using "projection" as the basis for the suspicion." BTW, I am not trying to troll Ed Snowdon, nor Angela Merkel.
As an Asian I will always try to buy Asian products and I will gladly fly on a Chinese plane. Look at the 400 odd people that died in American 737 Max? Dont American planes crash?
Isn’t Airbus’ move to build their planes in the US similarly risky? We can’t naively ignore that there’s a lot of corporate espionage in the US as well.
yeah but anti-chinese propaganda is built in to every part of our existence in NA, so thats ok but when the chinese do it, theyre being sneaky and evil
China has educated labor at a much lower cost, why not? And the C919 anyway won't compete in the European and North American market any time soon. It's not a big risk letting people know how to assemble the fuselage and wing sections. COMAC eventually has to rely on its own aviation engineers to actually design a modern commercial airliner.
I think Michael O'Leary said that he (i.e. Ryanair) would shift the B73M orders to C919 in wake of the groundings. Don't know how relevant that is today now that the MAX is flying again.
@@johannessamuelsson6578 I believe he's happy about C919 mainly because Chinese airlines will probably leave the queue at Boeing and Airbus, so Ryanair get their 737s delivered earlier😆
@@sunnyuutinn EXACTLY. Aviation engineers wouldn't need so many years of painful education if a plane can be COPIED, like just put a pair of wings on the fuselage and some engines.
@@yangguzheng3544 those white and part white part jews & full jews keep saying "copy " "steal" on asians BECAUSE THEY ARE RACISTS they think far eastern / non -white people are stupid !
I disagree with your narrative that China 🇨🇳 will steal technology ,mind you China is only doing what they know how to do better and that is working very hard with perseverance and dedication not stealing from any body.. God bless The Great People's Republic of China 🇨🇳 Amen ❤❤❤❤
It will not affect Boeing and Airbus too bad. The planes that may get reverse-engineered there are the A320 family (which the lower variants will get cannibalized by the A220 family), and the 737 family (which is expected to get replaced by a clean sheet after MAX). But if they were to build newer families like A350, A220, 777, and 787, then that would be a concern.
As an economist I can assure, you don't understand how game theory or duopolies work. This is a long term game played out repeatedly. If A did not build but B did, A can still chose to build in the next round, nullifying B's gains. B knows this so they abstain from building. This is still extremely simplified but at least more applicable than your eco 101 version. Also neither Boeing nor Airbus actually build any engines and the Chinese do have access to modern engines so the fact that domestic manufacturers are 20 years behind is no draw on Comac. Sorry I really enjoy watching your videos but this one is full of errors (more than just the ones I mention here). Please improve your quality control.
Many people around the globe still remember the two Boeing 737 Max jetliner that nose dived and crashed within a period of 5 months which killed 346 people (one was a Lion Air flight 610 on October 29, 2018 and the other was an Ethiopian Airlines flight 302 on March 10, 2019) Also, in April 2018, a Boeing 737 NG flight 1380 was forced to make an emergency landing in Philadelphia after an engine failure that resulted in the death of a female passenger, she was partially sucked out of a window when the engine fan blades break, the debris cowl parts hit the fuselage of the aircraft causing a window to shatter. And recently in Feb 2024, the door panel on an Alaska Airlines flight 1282 Boeing 737 Max fell off midair had no bolts installed on the door plug. This is to shows that Boeing has many different safely issues on most of their Boeing commerical jetliners. Beside Airbus, isn't that good for another option which is the Comac aircraft C919 and C929 commerical jetliner in competition, its fair game for everybody. Frankly, my family and i are now trying to avoid flying in a Boeing plane if possible, we don't mind it another Airline company as long it an Airbus plane and 🤞 hopefully, pretty soon we can get to fly in one of the Comac C919 and C929 jetliner.
Well then. Airbus has had over 1000 fatalities, Boeing has made way more planes than airbus with some in an era where computer technology and safety features DIDN'T EXIST!!! They are in the wrong with MCAS, but the whole entire company is not made up of criminals. Also, the 747 was incredibly reliable, sure it had a few incidents before computers, but what about United 811? China 006? They sustained incredible damage and the structural integrity of the plane was so strong that the planes managed to land safely
Yes but if you can force ex workers to give their knowledge or rob the secrets you can cut the cost to get it to market and bypass competitors expensive investment
"Anyone can reverse engineer a plane with the right knowledge and access to a plane that they want to copy" That's not how it works. Most of what goes into making an airliner isn't something you can just examine. For example, by what process was the metal for a bearing heat treated in order to have the necessary hardness? What sort of vacuum process, applied how many times, was needed to make a fan hub impervious to fatigue cracks? There are many thousands more things like that involved in producing an airliner which aren't revealed by examining a sample.
I hope China succeeds because well duopolies are often just as bad as monopolies, In theory patents sound nice but in practice they are anti-competetive and limit technological progress and adoption
@@sunnyuutinn fool, 50 years ago china's economy was not what it was now, also U.S and west were developed after 2nd world war, and controlling world's economic policies
Indeed. Compare with their high speed railways. First they bought French and then Japanese, but then like magic they suddenly knew how to do it themselves.
It is quite odd coming from european settlers who practically stole the entire North Amarika and Oceania, took Guam, Hawaii, looted Irak, Syrian oil (even Trump admitted it), Libya, Columbia, Panama, Guatamala..... Interesting perspective, theft only applies to brown nations, when european steals, they call it "freedom and dem0cracy", what a great idea. Are you amarikan?
@@Avendesora So made in China then. The name of the authority in Taipei is the Republic of China, its main airline is China Airlines, its athletes compete as Chinese Taipei, they speak Chinese and the constitution of the Republic of China claims sovereignty over all of China including Taiwan.
What a cry in distress from a western person, whining about the new Chinese commercial jet being produced domestically & questioning about quality & allegations of property theft or commercial spying and all those negative connotations from the usual quarter in the west . The design & production of a short range commercial jet are no trade secrets anymore these days as this western guy had made it out to be.! What’s a commercial jet looks like nowadays, where the plane displays one large airframe, two big wings, tail wings, rudder , landing gears, etc, So what’s the big deal for a country like China with the aviation technology, resources, skilled manpower & management to produce a commercial aircraft from scratch.? The C919 domestically produced plane is an introductory model for the domestic market , as a supplemental asset for China commercial market. The foreign producers, Boeing, Airbus would face some competition from Comac Inc. for China’s domestic market,while the prospects for foreign markets may yet be seem far away for the C919 at this point. As a reminder , China is the only Asian nation to produce & operating its own space station now, there is nothing in aviation that China can’t do efficiently. That’s the scary part for the west.!
Not stealing but competing, whether the facility build in China or not they could always reverse engineer based on the acquisition of the existing product, but that's not the case here China has plenty experience of building plane from the military jet equipment itself and they are cooperate with commercial manufacturer airline with Russia, so therefore whether or not they are buying engines and other material parts from the West they can always get some of these parts from Russia if need be.
All these hi-tech were largely available in West but never shared openly with developing countries and people-in-need. Now with China in the lead, such technologies and collaborations help world towards a shared and prosperous future.
Why should USA and Western nations give away trade secrets to a likely hostile and a nation that has threatened war and is an ally of war criminal Putin? Regardless, Chinese will never be able to produce any jet engines that the West has developed now.
the entire western existence is based on keeping global south poor, either using financial instruments, trade, sanctions or war and looting. Hands down western powers are the most innovative is theft and looting.
"never shared openly with developing countries and people-in-need" ... except that's not how history actually happened. In the early 1980s the USA Reagan administration's desire to reduce the hefty US trade deficit resulted in US companies such as McDonnell Douglas being encouraged to open factories in China for things like airliner final assembly. China was picking up a lot of know-how from those arrangements, though not enough to become competitive in such a highly-specialized industry. "Now with China in the lead, such technologies and collaborations help world towards a shared and prosperous future" In the decades since, China has done little to close that gap -- the C919 is perhaps competitve with airliners the West was producing in the 1990s? Hard to be more precise with only basic specs to work from, and no reliability data (since none even existed before today's first revenue flight). But "in the lead" is nothing more than CCP propaganda. They are still a few decades behind, despite so much of the new aircraft consisting of Western systems.
This video is flawed in so many ways. Having the knowledge and testing facilities in the West is not the same thing as owning the capability for final industrial production for global export. These companies move to China because there are numerous low tech parts that they simply cannot get from anywhere else. Even the Japanese/Koreans failed at cutting off China and they really tried as China is in their backyard. I predict in 20 years, there will be very few things that the West makes whereby China/Eastern Asian countries cannot produce at better quality and lower cost. Even though they are hostile against each other, they will probably collaborate for mutual benefits.
You cannot learn how to build an airplane by watching how the components are assembled. I find your naive assumptions very interesting, given how you seem to be an expert about aviations and planes in general.
Sure, Boeing and Airbus are making a mistake manufacturing in China, for exactly the reason you stated, they don't want to lose market share there, but risking losing their IP. But they also can make cheaper planes there that can be sent to other places outside of China (maybe not to the US), so it's not exactly a bad strategy. As for whether I'd fly on a Comac plane? Sure why not? It can't be any less safe than a 737 Max, we found out how badly the FAA screwed up their scrutiny of Boeing during those dark days. A better question to ask is whether you trust that the 737 Max is actually being better monitored now than it was before? So would you fly on a Max yet?
Airlines require that airplanes must both have US FAA and EU EASA approvals in order to fly over the 5 continents. [Search:"regulator says more testing needed to certify C919 aircraft - Reuters"] Yang Zhenmei, Director General, Department of Aircraft Airworthiness Certification CAAC, told reporters, the C919, China's attempt to rival Airbus and Boeing, has completed(not passed) only 34 certification tests out of 276. No update so far. [Search:"C919 a great leap forward? Royal Aeronautical Society"] Only the radar cover, wings and tail are made in China. The tires are made by the U.S. Michelin; screws & nuts are made in Japan. All subsystems have to be assembled, calibrated by dozens of original manufacturers' "certified" engineers.
I see it as minimal risk for IP. Most things on a plane can be reverse engineered once the product is physically delivered. Pros heavily outweigh this possible con. The bigger risk is that the government can just take anything that's inside the boarders if they desire. Automakers know this from experience, not necessarily with the PRC, but other countries with no limits on government power over the economy for sure - see the GM plant in Venezuela. As long as the economy remains relatively stable though, the CCP is not likely to do this.
China isn't the enemy the West makes it out to be. The flying public have a right for safe affordable travel. Both Airbus and Boeing have decades of orders on the books
Your Chinese accent is too bad, the pronunciation of Tianjin and Zhoushan is completely wrong, and the location of Tianjin and Zhoushan on the map is also wrong.
In order to answer the question if an AC is "Safe" you will have to answer yourself if you judge the capability of the Chinese Aviation Authority to be on par with e.g. EASA, FAA, CAA, etc. COMAC achieving type certification also outside of China may be a strong support for that assuming the same standards apply to all COMAC AC. So I will wait for that to happen.
It probably won't happen. since I think the aircraft is banned from even flying into those respective airspaces. Their only market gonna be domestic, its allies, and possibly some developing countries.
@@jiaqilin1939 It probably won't happen anytime soon. since I think the aircraft has so many orders, COMAC has no hurry to seek certification from those authorities. Maybe they will do it for the C929?
the plane is already flying with passengers. It's funny that while they criticize that the plane is not built in China because 60% of its components are manufactured outside China, they criticize the plane for being Chinese and not being reliable. I think that after the 737 I would rather fly a c919 than a 737, especially when I know that boeing knew that the new system would cause problems if the pilots were not informed of the changes made to the new variant and that could lead to accidents and preferred to continue just to keep the profit margin. The Leon Air flight the pilots didn't know what to do because the plane didn't respond the way they were used to. Hundreds of people killed just for profit
When the Chinese aircraft was successful, they said that the domestic production rate was only 60%, and this is not a Chinese aircraft. When something goes wrong, they will say that Chinese planes really suck. Even if the parts that caused the accident were produced in the West.
As for hopping on a COMAC jet, I would without hesitation. It's surely safer than general aviation aircraft, and would hop right on one of those planes without hesitation as well. Has nothing to do with my safety impression though, that's just how I am. Biggest concern would be hull integrity for depressurization and related loss of control. Less of an issue is software bugs, as even Boeing has shown they are capable of making "mistakes" on this front.
@@horacewonghy I said, safer than general aviation aircraft. Do you know what this means or are you just unaware of the different magnitudes of safety between them and commercial airliners?
Let me just say that monopolies (and oligopolies) are bad from the standpoint of consumers. Two relevant airliner manufacturers are far too few - I would prefer at least four. And I don't care for American protectionism masquerading as "ideological differences" when all other excuses fail. We are already seeing the beneficial influence of Chinese agility and low labor cost in the battery electric car market, in the way Japan had several decades ago in ICE car market. The more, the merrier!
@@marcmcreynolds2827 In a more competitive market somebody would fill the gap(s) created by Boeing blunders. Airbus has monumental backlog in their most successful program, so A320 series was unable to fill the 737 MAX gap, for example. There is no need for every manufacturer to fill every niche. True, new aircraft model development is now orders of magnitude more expensive than in the golden age of aircraft industry, although, frankly, I don't understand why, especially for airliners, where the technological advancements are _very_ incremental. The only radical advancement in the last several decades was glass cockpit and fly-by-wire (lifted from military programs; the former is now practically commodity) and materials (GLARE, carbon composite). OK, engines have also advanced quite radically. As for Chinese protectionism, sure, but they don't espouse the virtues of global free market, do they?
"The more, the merrier!" As long as the market can support multiple providers. There wasn't enough money in mid-sized widebodies to support both Douglas Aircraft and Lockheed, for example. As for protectionism, China's home-market protections are legendary.
I actually do not think that it is necessary to assemble airplanes in China when there are viable alternatives in places such as Mexico and India where the cost of Labor is lower. The manufacturing sector in China is also expected to shrink because the population is aging and people are retiring and many young people, especially the ones with college degrees, do not want to work in factories. The age of the average Chinese person is 38 years of age to while the age of the average Indian is 28 years of age. This difference suggests that India's population will grow and China's will shrink. India is already currently able to provide more labor support and at a lower cost. It has more people of working age. I'm also pretty sure that China lies about their total population. Their population had actually been shrinking for 20 years and their government is not going to tell you about the hundreds of millions of people whose lives were lost during COVID-19. Some experts estimate that China's real population is only between 800 million and 1 billion.The Chinese economy is simply not as mighty as the Chinese government makes it out to be. In reality, India had been the more viable option for many years now. Apple is already trying to leave China and I think Airbus and Boeing should follow suit.
I agree, India has proven they can produce very technical products and Mexico can also, but would require billions to build infrastructure to actually build a complete jetliner. Why doesn't Canada build bigger plants to finish or completely build an existing AB or Boeing design? The stolen secrets and reverse engineering threats are non existent.
I'm no Fortune 500 CEO, but all you have to do is look at the rapid modernization of the Chinese Economy, military and ship building to see that Boeing and AirBus' current advantage over Comac is a point-in-time statement only. Yes, they may gain favor with the CCP today, but the CCP plays the long game and you can bet that by giving access to their intellectual property, processes and procedures today, they are potentially sacrificing part of their business a decade or two from now.
COMAC can make plane bodies at a lower cost for China at the moment. Makes a lot of sense to co-operate. Well, C919 is merely a Boeing737/Airbus 320 copy. Once they can dominate domestically, the market for this narrow body plane, they can move on to make 777 or 787 copies in the future. One day, not long in the future, COMAC will market C919 to the rest of Asia as a viable alternatives to Boeing 737 or Airbus 320.
china doesn't care that their tech is 20 years behind airbus and boeing. this won't matter if the planes end up being much cheaper than similar ones produced in the west. they'll sell. china needs airbus and boeing to teach them how to build planes fast. the moment they think that goal has been achieved the western manufacturers will immediately get the boot. this scenario has played many times over the past 20 years.
you include a clip of a China Airlines 777 in this video but China Airlines is Taiwanese. Air China is the mainland PRC airline. I'm sure China Airlines would prefer not to be inferred as being from the PRC or confused with Air China.
I rarely see anyone clarify this fact underneath a video about the appalling safety record of China Airlines. I am sure many people would prefer China Airlines to be associated with China in situations like this.
@@ruemignon Last year, a Taiwanese killed 6 Taiwaneses in America, the news title is "Chinese killed Taiwanese". It's right because Taiwanese is also Chinese, but the title's intention...
There's no such thing as Taiwanese. The real taiwanese is ABORIGINAL TRIBE who lives in the island for tens thousand of years Small eye lip, yellow-white pale people is Chinese. They're Chinese who born in Taiwan island. That's it
Coby, I sincerely hope that whereever you moved to, that you do NOT vote as Californians do.. after all you ran away from high crime, ridiculous homelessness, super high taxes, and grossly overpriced living expenses, to name a few problems most impactful (though not unique) in CA.
Something's overpriced if people aren't willing to pay for it. California costs more (the coastal areas, anyway) because people who have money would rather have less of it and live in California than hang on to it and be stuck somewhere that's got boring terrain and often-dangerous (or just miserable) weather. Which explains a lot of the "ridiculous homelessness" as well: If you're going to be stuck living under a tarp one way or the other, where would you want to be stuck? Hurricane alley? The frozen north?
👟 Check out Vessis Memorial Day sale and Vessi styles at www.vessi.com/cobyexplanes. If you missed the sale, Use code COBYEXPLANES for 15% off your order. Free shipping for CA, US, AU, JP, TW, KR, SGP
Good timing. My everyday walking shoes are getting worn out. But these at 20% off are about double the price of the Merrell shoes I normally buy. Are they worth the premium?
@@FameyFamous depends if you want give premium for americans or china
Y'all don't respect Africa so you won't see the connection 😞 you will though✌🏾
That’s not a dog… 😉
#Labradors
China steals everything
The answer to this is simple, if it was easy to make airplanes by reverse engineering, then there wouldn't be just two giants in the world.
The US aerospace company develops the systems and components for C919. My team have been working on this plane for years and those parts may have some of the commonality to Airbus and Boeing however C919 also have the unique sub systems. Believe it or not the commonalities between the plane is about 10% between the direct competitor models. 99.99% of the people rarely understand that recycle components from one plane to another May ended up costing more than developed new.
People don't get it. But a country that has a space station will and can build planes. All the hoo haa about stealing is just cope
ye, all good stuffs was designed by u. got it
doesnt matter, it's easier to run with the rhetoric comac 919 copied from boeing and airbus
Very informative. I have a question. When I read Chinese medias, they complained about USA intentionally gave them the C variant of the Leap engine which is weaker than the B and A version to keep Boeing and Airbus to have big advantages. Is this true?
@@lilunchengsmiles
I don't believe that the company would give the customer less or more because of the Chinese vs Western customers. 1C engine has less thrust may be due to different requirements in the region where it will be operating the most. If there is a certain variable such as fuel quality, environmental pollution, and FOD susceptibility, are known then the engine maker will have to decrease the performance so that the flight hour reliability promise is met. The engines are the most expensive subsystem as well as flight safety so they cannot fail during flight.
If reverse engineering is so easy, then explain why Japan failed again and again.
True, remember Japan many many moons ago, tried for years and poured billions and billions of Yen into an F16 project and simply threw in the towel. They couldn't get it to work and wound up buying customer versions from Lockheed-Martin.
Because USA don't allow them to.
@@largol33t12What about the F2?
WELL Red Emperor made space station which is 10 times more complex than a plane .
Good question. Well Japanese are now used to blaming USA for all its failures
Competition is always good. Airbus brought many changes for the better when it entered the market dominated by Boeing.
I totally concur.
You must be drunk if you are thinking you can beat China ? Good luck, ask your govt to heavily subsides your shipping and transport industry first
Look at the rapid expansion of CR and its HSR, who would have thought it would be possible in the first place? Aeroplane wise it is the same.
Boeing 737?? The FAMOUS FLYING COFFIN!!!
compromise safety and quality to meet schedule...You don't change your quality process for schedule. You make quality happen in the schedule-- thanks boeing
Given the cost of flights these days, I think the new Chinese made COMAX has a large share of the market to take
good fit for LCC
comac
Hope so
if they can win 50% of the local market, that would be more than enough for them
even if they only end up with a market share in domestic or developing country, its better than no share at all.
Pretty sure C919 is safe to fly since Chinese government don’t have the same privilege to get away with a fail like when the FAA of US giving Boeing a pass on the 737 max.
Both companies know every single thing they do is being watch and will be copied over time. That is a given. Also, while China is watching Airbus and Boeing - Boeing and Airbus ARE ALSO watching China. The knowledge transfer is not only one way.
Why nobody watches Embraer? Are they too stupid to make good flying machines ?
China has woken up..They believed in themselves and got self motivation.China is not stealing from Boeing and Airbus
steal? lol, all countries have rights to build anything they want, if they are capable
I think it’s crucial to remember that Airbus and Boeing are producing/furnishing the A320 and 737 in China, especially because the short-hall market is dominant and key to Chinese aviation. Both of these aircraft have been updated but are older and built upon established technologies and production techniques, so despite the spying concerns neither Airbus or Boeing are giving away their big secrets about their new long haul jets like the A350/787, and as you said Coby, Comac still have a very long way to go to produce high quality planes consistently
Every countries spied. USA is the greatest culprit of all.
China didnt put a gun on the heads of Boeing and Airbus to have factories in China. It the other way around.
What about the international space station which US banned China from it? China Tiangong will be the only one left in a couple of years.
Hahaha, USA is down the drain, loser.
Still China has the advances to see how to build modern airplanes. China doesn’t invent anything .. they copy ( steal ) it around the world. Or buying companies to get the technology and the costumer.
From 0 to 1 is the hardest step, you got to start from somewhere.
Besides jet engines, nothing about A320 and 737 is a secret.
@@andrewlim7751 I would disagree … because this airplanes are longtime on the market and all “ secrets “ are already in the open. Secrets like the material of the body frame, or the wiring there are so many secrets. And of course also the production process is a “ secret “. And after ( for example ) Airbus open up a production line in China they got almost everything. And what is NOT a secret is that China steal all this stuff! And without western technology China would be nothing! Period!
This video has many false information. China doesn’t need to steal foreign technologies if foreign companies decide to build assembly lines in China. When foreign companies want to build assembly in China, they have to reach agreements with China to give up certain IPs to gain privileges to slides of vast Chinese market shares. Most companies have been practicing that except Tesla. That is one of the points which triggered the trade war between US and China. One of the main reason westerners pick China is due to Chinese infrastructure build efficiency. Took Tesla 168 days to build Shanghai mega factory vs 300 days of German mega factory.
The American way to think is in short terms. The chinese think and work and plan in very long terms. For them is just the first step, they dont care if they are 20 years behind , they know that in 20 years from now they will be were Airbus and Boing are , or even better.
I've seen an interesting case where China sells four kinds of shoes for $1, $10, $100, and even $1000, and a guy bought $1 shoes, found the quality bad, and started attacking all Chinese shoes, but no Found out it was because he could only afford $1.
lol
true
There are many such dumb mofos globally
It’s the Middle Men who procured cheap items to sell, you get what you pay.
😂 you literally hurt their feeling !
😂😂😂😂 a dollar for 1ooo dollar's product ?😂😂😂😅
Listening to this guy explaining things is like listening to Peter Griffin explaining things
😂😂😂😂
The payoff matrix was pretty silly and not really applicable to this situation in my opinion. You’re assuming a simultaneous game which really doesn’t make sense here unless you posit that Boeing/Airbus would build a factory in China in complete secrecy and only announce it once completed. More realistically Boeing/Airbus would know the other party is building a facility in China and respond in kind. This is a lot different of a scenario than a simultaneous, one-shot game like what you describe. It’s more of an iterative game spaced out over a long time.
NO COPY,---------------if the making of a plane can be copied , then C919 would have come out 50 years ago
I hardly feel that the author of this video actually knows just how many components Boeing/Airbus parts are actually made in China, especially those of the engine. Someone from a supplier revealed in the Chinese equivalent Quora that there are few components of the engine that are actually not made in China. Sometimes, business is business. It is not entirely following the line drew by politicians.
👍👍👍👍👍
I think it's a BIG mistake! Just remember what happened to US when started to move US factorys to China by 80's 90's and look where this got us today... Now Boeing and Airbus are doing the same, but with planes.
Care to elaborate?
Boeing hasn't built a single aircraft in China, Airbus has though, and that has its risks, other mfg like COMAC may "steal" that tech.
It’s already too late by all means, because for China it’s already enough to have a sample in order to copy
Profits Uber ales.
It's capitalism prize goes to the best manufacture for cost efficiency logistics. It's socialism to make those companies stay in the us
Embraer is honestly china’s biggest competition. Not Boeing or Airbus. Not likely they will be competing with them for a while. Embraer is huge and they have the cleanest safety record of all manufacturers. The E-jets more specifically are awesome jets. And with the E2’s out, I don’t see how the C919 beats the E-jets.
oh give me a break, the planes are already in their backyard for decades, what point are you trying to make???
The world needs more options.. good wishes to China.. hope other nations build too..
C919's first commercial flight was yesterday.
Video-report like this one should inform its audience that it was a citizen born,bred and educated in China who designed and manufactured the first aircraft for Mr Boeing!
Luthansa is bringing back the Air Bus 380. Why, because Boeing is having trouble shipping 787 and Max 8 due to quality problems.
Strange that you haven't mentioned the case COMAC ARJ21, an aircraft with, shall we say, striking resemblance to MD-80/MD-90 which were produced _under the license_ (that is, with full design transfer, but nor necessarily production knowledge transfer) in China. Despite of having the all details of these aircraft design at their disposal, it took 14 years from the start of ARJ21 design work to entry into service (8 years after its first flight). It takes more than "paper knowledge" to build efficiently such a complex product.
Those 14years were actually time taken for the Comac to learn how to become a commercial manufacturer, and develop their Chinese suppliers. To be honest it's acceptable regardless of which country that is outside EU/US
@@zegzbrutal And with that initial step now out of the way, things are expected to move more rapidly? Possible...
@@bazoo513 should be, but my guess is the production rate won't increase for the coming 5 years. Expect China Eastern to give a lot of feedbacks to Comac for improvement in later batches.
NO COPY -------if the making of a plane can be copied , then this C919 would have come out 50 years ago !
Bombardier Inc had planned to develop a mid-size passenger jet, called the C Series, aimed at competing with Boeing and Airbus. The program began in 2004 with an investment of more than $5 billion, but the project suffered multiple delays and cost overruns due to technical and financial problems, leading the company into financial trouble. In 2015, Bombardier signed a C $1.3 billion agreement with the Quebec provincial and federal governments, receiving financial assistance from the government to support the project.
In 2017, the C Series development completed the acquisition of a large number of US airline orders, Boeing filed an anti-dumping complaint against Bombardier, accusing the C Series program of improper government subsidies, resulting in a major blow to the program. In January 2018, the US Department of Commerce announced the imposition of anti-dumping duties of up to 292% on the C Series project, because the profit margin of Bombardier C Series project itself is not high, the price after sanctions can not recover the huge order before, the US government's anti-dumping sanctions and Bombardier company can not obtain profits
When the CSeries was in crisis, Bombardier even wanted to move production to low-cost regions and discussed cooperation with ComAC and Shenyang Aircraft Corporation
In 2018, under pressure from the U.S. and Canadian governments, Bombardier continued to sell shares, but it was difficult to sustain, and finally, unable to obtain cash flow, Bombardier sold the C Series project to Airbus Canada Limited Partnership, a unit of Europe's Airbus, for 1 Canadian dollar. The C Series was renamed the A220. Airbus has a factory in Tianjin, China, which mainly produces parts and assembly work for the A320 family of passenger aircraft, as well as parts for the A220. The plant began production of A220 components in 2017 and is now an important part of the A220 supply chain.
China Airlines isn't from China though, it's from Taiwan.
Have you studied economics? That was literally a perfect explanation of basic game theory
How does Brazil Embraer Aircraft factor into this?
Brazil is building their own A320 & 737 Equivalent.
If the west has no problem with Embraer.
Then there should be no problem with China.
Naiive comment. If people all over the world, resort to lying and smearing almost daily, as obviously evident in the media, you can expect that it is the case in commercial business competitive environment. Whatever a more advanced nation accuses a less advanced nation, you know that it is like the saying:
"a lady who blushes obviously knows so much to blush about."
ps. I am not a sexist, but just how the saying goes. In future, perhaps to avoid being accused for misogyny, the saying ought to be worded: "the accuser is often using "projection" as the basis for the suspicion." BTW, I am not trying to troll Ed Snowdon, nor Angela Merkel.
As an Asian I will always try to buy Asian products and I will gladly fly on a Chinese plane. Look at the 400 odd people that died in American 737 Max? Dont American planes crash?
Isn’t Airbus’ move to build their planes in the US similarly risky? We can’t naively ignore that there’s a lot of corporate espionage in the US as well.
Very true… The USA 🇺🇸 is also pretty well known for espionage and spying/ sabotaging other countries companies or their projects!
yeah but anti-chinese propaganda is built in to every part of our existence in NA, so thats ok but when the chinese do it, theyre being sneaky and evil
the US isn't dirty. we don't violate intelectual property. we are NOT CHINA.
@@Calebs_Aviation America isn't dirty like CHINA CHINA CHINA. CHINA IS EVIL
Then airbus can sue boeing
Greed breeds stupidity!
China has educated labor at a much lower cost, why not? And the C919 anyway won't compete in the European and North American market any time soon. It's not a big risk letting people know how to assemble the fuselage and wing sections. COMAC eventually has to rely on its own aviation engineers to actually design a modern commercial airliner.
I think Michael O'Leary said that he (i.e. Ryanair) would shift the B73M orders to C919 in wake of the groundings. Don't know how relevant that is today now that the MAX is flying again.
@@johannessamuelsson6578 I believe he's happy about C919 mainly because Chinese airlines will probably leave the queue at Boeing and Airbus, so Ryanair get their 737s delivered earlier😆
NO COPY-----------if making of a plane can be copied , then C919 would have come out 50 years ago
@@sunnyuutinn EXACTLY. Aviation engineers wouldn't need so many years of painful education if a plane can be COPIED, like just put a pair of wings on the fuselage and some engines.
@@yangguzheng3544 those white and part white part jews & full jews keep saying "copy " "steal" on asians BECAUSE THEY ARE RACISTS they think far eastern / non -white people are stupid !
I think ERJ is in more danger than BOE or EADSF in the near term.
I disagree with your narrative that China 🇨🇳 will steal technology ,mind you China is only doing what they know how to do better and that is working very hard with perseverance and dedication not stealing from any body.. God bless The Great People's Republic of China 🇨🇳 Amen ❤❤❤❤
I hit up a head hunter link for aviation professionals interested in flying in China. Would love to score a free trip there. I love chinese food.
Slavery, Colonialism and Colonization are evil things done by evildoers.
It will not affect Boeing and Airbus too bad. The planes that may get reverse-engineered there are the A320 family (which the lower variants will get cannibalized by the A220 family), and the 737 family (which is expected to get replaced by a clean sheet after MAX). But if they were to build newer families like A350, A220, 777, and 787, then that would be a concern.
it will take a time to go to that stage, you recheck how airbus developed its areplanes
Based on my understanding of the Chinese people, they will do this sooner or later
Stealing ,copying , if you built and fly that's great achievement .
NO COPY----------------if the making of a plane can be copied ,then C919 would have come out 50 years ago
The C929 is already here !
As an economist I can assure, you don't understand how game theory or duopolies work. This is a long term game played out repeatedly. If A did not build but B did, A can still chose to build in the next round, nullifying B's gains. B knows this so they abstain from building. This is still extremely simplified but at least more applicable than your eco 101 version. Also neither Boeing nor Airbus actually build any engines and the Chinese do have access to modern engines so the fact that domestic manufacturers are 20 years behind is no draw on Comac. Sorry I really enjoy watching your videos but this one is full of errors (more than just the ones I mention here). Please improve your quality control.
Many people around the globe still remember the two Boeing 737 Max jetliner that nose dived and crashed within a period of 5 months which killed 346 people (one was a Lion Air flight 610 on October 29, 2018 and the other was an Ethiopian Airlines flight 302 on March 10, 2019) Also, in April 2018, a Boeing 737 NG flight 1380 was forced to make an emergency landing in Philadelphia after an engine failure that resulted in the death of a female passenger, she was partially sucked out of a window when the engine fan blades break, the debris cowl parts hit the fuselage of the aircraft causing a window to shatter. And recently in Feb 2024, the door panel on an Alaska Airlines flight 1282 Boeing 737 Max fell off midair had no bolts installed on the door plug. This is to shows that Boeing has many different safely issues on most of their Boeing commerical jetliners. Beside Airbus, isn't that good for another option which is the Comac aircraft C919 and C929 commerical jetliner in competition, its fair game for everybody. Frankly, my family and i are now trying to avoid flying in a Boeing plane if possible, we don't mind it another Airline company as long it an Airbus plane and 🤞 hopefully, pretty soon we can get to fly in one of the Comac C919 and C929 jetliner.
Well then. Airbus has had over 1000 fatalities, Boeing has made way more planes than airbus with some in an era where computer technology and safety features DIDN'T EXIST!!! They are in the wrong with MCAS, but the whole entire company is not made up of criminals. Also, the 747 was incredibly reliable, sure it had a few incidents before computers, but what about United 811? China 006? They sustained incredible damage and the structural integrity of the plane was so strong that the planes managed to land safely
Of course they are just like Russia stole the shuttle among other things
Why did you put a China Airlines plane in? China Airlines is the flag carrier of Taiwan not China.
0:40 Another youtuber who mixed up Air China (CA) and China Airlines (CI) 🤣
Everything China made better than the west always will be call stolen technology never China achievment.
general population at large is welcoming the new player which can provide some more choice for all .....
Anyone can reverse engineer a plane with the right knowledge and access to a plane that they want to copy; it’s not just China
Yes but if you can force ex workers to give their knowledge or rob the secrets you can cut the cost to get it to market and bypass competitors expensive investment
Why didn't the chinese buy bombardier and presto chinese A220
And this is a country that has a space station.
@@TsLeng western powers are slowly losing the competitive edge and that's why there's constant smear and hate going on.
"Anyone can reverse engineer a plane with the right knowledge and access to a plane that they want to copy" That's not how it works. Most of what goes into making an airliner isn't something you can just examine. For example, by what process was the metal for a bearing heat treated in order to have the necessary hardness? What sort of vacuum process, applied how many times, was needed to make a fan hub impervious to fatigue cracks? There are many thousands more things like that involved in producing an airliner which aren't revealed by examining a sample.
I hope China succeeds because well duopolies are often just as bad as monopolies,
In theory patents sound nice but in practice they are anti-competetive and limit technological progress and adoption
Slavery, Colonialism and Colonization are evil things done by evildoers.. Just sayin'.
NO COPY----------------------if making of a plane can be copied, then C919 would have come out 50 years ago
@@sunnyuutinn fool, 50 years ago china's economy was not what it was now, also U.S and west were developed after 2nd world war, and controlling world's economic policies
Actually the reverse engineering is not that impossible. The example for that is B-29/ TU-4
TU 4, is that the new Russian passenger plane? 😂
NO COPY---------------if the making of a plane can be copied, then C919 would have come out 50 years ago
COMAC in the long terms will breakthroughs of many important components of aviations system's and subsystems.
Considering the Chinese history of IP theft, I would be shocked if they didn't steal from Boeing and Airbus.
Indeed. Compare with their high speed railways. First they bought French and then Japanese, but then like magic they suddenly knew how to do it themselves.
It is quite odd coming from european settlers who practically stole the entire North Amarika and Oceania, took Guam, Hawaii, looted Irak, Syrian oil (even Trump admitted it), Libya, Columbia, Panama, Guatamala.....
Interesting perspective, theft only applies to brown nations, when european steals, they call it "freedom and dem0cracy", what a great idea.
Are you amarikan?
Yea just like International space station.. China went to iss and steal the technology😂😂😂
@@denson179 More like Mir (1986-2001) than ISS.
I think China will just buy both the companies eventually and save themselves the heartache
I rather fly a Chinese plane than a Boeing any day of the week.
Coby! Are Vessi shoes made in China? :)
Nope! They're made in Taiwan.
@@Avendesora So made in China then. The name of the authority in Taipei is the Republic of China, its main airline is China Airlines, its athletes compete as Chinese Taipei, they speak Chinese and the constitution of the Republic of China claims sovereignty over all of China including Taiwan.
@@rais1953 Nah, but I can see why it's important to you to hold on to that belief as tightly as possible.
@@rais1953 There is a world of difference between Tawain and China
@@stevesmoneypit6137 the pollution and lack of air quality are not that much different.
Nothing to steal lol, every part can be bought from different supplies in the supply chain
What a cry in distress from a western person, whining about the new Chinese commercial jet being produced domestically & questioning about quality & allegations of property theft or commercial spying and all those negative connotations from the usual quarter in the west . The design & production of a short range commercial jet are no trade secrets anymore these days as this western guy had made it out to be.! What’s a commercial jet looks like nowadays, where the plane displays one large airframe, two big wings, tail wings, rudder , landing gears, etc, So what’s the big deal for a country like China with the aviation technology, resources, skilled manpower & management to produce a commercial aircraft from scratch.? The C919 domestically produced plane is an introductory model for the domestic market , as a supplemental asset for China commercial market. The foreign producers, Boeing, Airbus would face some competition from Comac Inc. for China’s domestic market,while the prospects for foreign markets may yet be seem far away for the C919 at this point. As a reminder , China is the only Asian nation to produce & operating its own space station now, there is nothing in aviation that China can’t do efficiently. That’s the scary part for the west.!
ip protection is vital to creativity but overprotection is exployment and negative to creativity for sure
Not stealing but competing, whether the facility build in China or not they could always reverse engineer based on the acquisition of the existing product, but that's not the case here China has plenty experience of building plane from the military jet equipment itself and they are cooperate with commercial manufacturer airline with Russia, so therefore whether or not they are buying engines and other material parts from the West they can always get some of these parts from Russia if need be.
All these hi-tech were largely available in West but never shared openly with developing countries and people-in-need. Now with China in the lead, such technologies and collaborations help world towards a shared and prosperous future.
Why should USA and Western nations give away trade secrets to a likely hostile and a nation that has threatened war and is an ally of war criminal Putin? Regardless, Chinese will never be able to produce any jet engines that the West has developed now.
the entire western existence is based on keeping global south poor, either using financial instruments, trade, sanctions or war and looting.
Hands down western powers are the most innovative is theft and looting.
😂😂😂😂
"never shared openly with developing countries and people-in-need" ... except that's not how history actually happened. In the early 1980s the USA Reagan administration's desire to reduce the hefty US trade deficit resulted in US companies such as McDonnell Douglas being encouraged to open factories in China for things like airliner final assembly. China was picking up a lot of know-how from those arrangements, though not enough to become competitive in such a highly-specialized industry.
"Now with China in the lead, such technologies and collaborations help world towards a shared and prosperous future" In the decades since, China has done little to close that gap -- the C919 is perhaps competitve with airliners the West was producing in the 1990s? Hard to be more precise with only basic specs to work from, and no reliability data (since none even existed before today's first revenue flight). But "in the lead" is nothing more than CCP propaganda. They are still a few decades behind, despite so much of the new aircraft consisting of Western systems.
NO COPY---------------if making of a plane can be copied, then C919 would have come out 50 years ago
This video is flawed in so many ways. Having the knowledge and testing facilities in the West is not the same thing as owning the capability for final industrial production for global export. These companies move to China because there are numerous low tech parts that they simply cannot get from anywhere else. Even the Japanese/Koreans failed at cutting off China and they really tried as China is in their backyard. I predict in 20 years, there will be very few things that the West makes whereby China/Eastern Asian countries cannot produce at better quality and lower cost. Even though they are hostile against each other, they will probably collaborate for mutual benefits.
You should make interesting airplanes news movie. Not this kind of political and propaganda fueled bullshit..
You cannot learn how to build an airplane by watching how the components are assembled. I find your naive assumptions very interesting, given how you seem to be an expert about aviations and planes in general.
Hello Sir, It's CPC instead of CCP. If you don't understand, then ask your American Regime FJB crew !
Well, if in the west you continue to say that flying is not good for the planet and you should reduce it, why should you care about aviation? 😆
THIS NOT STEALING, SHOULD BE CALLED FAIR COMPETITIONS ! MORE SURPRISES ALREADIED ON IT WAYS ! CHINA 🇨🇳 👍
Sure, Boeing and Airbus are making a mistake manufacturing in China, for exactly the reason you stated, they don't want to lose market share there, but risking losing their IP. But they also can make cheaper planes there that can be sent to other places outside of China (maybe not to the US), so it's not exactly a bad strategy. As for whether I'd fly on a Comac plane? Sure why not? It can't be any less safe than a 737 Max, we found out how badly the FAA screwed up their scrutiny of Boeing during those dark days. A better question to ask is whether you trust that the 737 Max is actually being better monitored now than it was before? So would you fly on a Max yet?
"It can't be any less safe than a 737 Max" Sure it can.
Agree 💯 %
NO COPY------------------if making a plane can be copied, then C919 would have come out 50 years ago
The Cockpit is a mix of Boeing and Airbus
Airlines require that airplanes must both have US FAA and EU EASA approvals in order to fly over the 5 continents.
[Search:"regulator says more testing needed to certify C919 aircraft - Reuters"] Yang Zhenmei, Director General, Department of Aircraft Airworthiness Certification CAAC, told reporters, the C919, China's attempt to rival Airbus and Boeing, has completed(not passed) only 34 certification tests out of 276. No update so far.
[Search:"C919 a great leap forward? Royal Aeronautical Society"] Only the radar cover, wings and tail are made in China. The tires are made by the U.S. Michelin; screws & nuts are made in Japan. All subsystems have to be assembled, calibrated by dozens of original manufacturers' "certified" engineers.
5:55 What croc !
You have already said that Boeing and AIrbus do not make the engines !
Another one leaves southern California!
I see it as minimal risk for IP. Most things on a plane can be reverse engineered once the product is physically delivered. Pros heavily outweigh this possible con.
The bigger risk is that the government can just take anything that's inside the boarders if they desire. Automakers know this from experience, not necessarily with the PRC, but other countries with no limits on government power over the economy for sure - see the GM plant in Venezuela. As long as the economy remains relatively stable though, the CCP is not likely to do this.
funny that they showed a China airlines plane. (China Airlines is from Taiwan, not mainland China)
China isn't the enemy the West makes it out to be. The flying public have a right for safe affordable travel. Both Airbus and Boeing have decades of orders on the books
BS. Do you know how old 737 is? 67 years!
Chinese people are smart and in 10 years they will manage it with AI.
Your Chinese accent is too bad, the pronunciation of Tianjin and Zhoushan is completely wrong, and the location of Tianjin and Zhoushan on the map is also wrong.
They copy everything. Absolutely disgusting.
7:47 „but thats just a theory, A GAME THEORY“
In order to answer the question if an AC is "Safe" you will have to answer yourself if you judge the capability of the Chinese Aviation Authority to be on par with e.g. EASA, FAA, CAA, etc. COMAC achieving type certification also outside of China may be a strong support for that assuming the same standards apply to all COMAC AC. So I will wait for that to happen.
It probably won't happen. since I think the aircraft is banned from even flying into those respective airspaces. Their only market gonna be domestic, its allies, and possibly some developing countries.
@@jiaqilin1939 It probably won't happen anytime soon. since I think the aircraft has so many orders, COMAC has no hurry to seek certification from those authorities. Maybe they will do it for the C929?
Your perception of Chinese tech is 20 years behind.
the plane is already flying with passengers. It's funny that while they criticize that the plane is not built in China because 60% of its components are manufactured outside China, they criticize the plane for being Chinese and not being reliable. I think that after the 737 I would rather fly a c919 than a 737, especially when I know that boeing knew that the new system would cause problems if the pilots were not informed of the changes made to the new variant and that could lead to accidents and preferred to continue just to keep the profit margin. The Leon Air flight the pilots didn't know what to do because the plane didn't respond the way they were used to. Hundreds of people killed just for profit
When the Chinese aircraft was successful, they said that the domestic production rate was only 60%, and this is not a Chinese aircraft. When something goes wrong, they will say that Chinese planes really suck. Even if the parts that caused the accident were produced in the West.
"Is china stealing (insert anything you want here)?"
"Yes."
~ 7:50 - you could have just said "Prisoner's dilemma" - I suppose that most people watching this kind of content know about it.
As for hopping on a COMAC jet, I would without hesitation. It's surely safer than general aviation aircraft, and would hop right on one of those planes without hesitation as well. Has nothing to do with my safety impression though, that's just how I am. Biggest concern would be hull integrity for depressurization and related loss of control. Less of an issue is software bugs, as even Boeing has shown they are capable of making "mistakes" on this front.
Safer? You better wait incident first just like HSR in China.
@@horacewonghy I said, safer than general aviation aircraft. Do you know what this means or are you just unaware of the different magnitudes of safety between them and commercial airliners?
NO COPY,---------------if the making of a plane is possible, then C919 would have come out 50 years ago
@@horacewonghy do you know whats the cause of that first HSR incident ??
@@tweedy4sg
Defect + weather
Let me just say that monopolies (and oligopolies) are bad from the standpoint of consumers. Two relevant airliner manufacturers are far too few - I would prefer at least four. And I don't care for American protectionism masquerading as "ideological differences" when all other excuses fail. We are already seeing the beneficial influence of Chinese agility and low labor cost in the battery electric car market, in the way Japan had several decades ago in ICE car market. The more, the merrier!
@@marcmcreynolds2827 In a more competitive market somebody would fill the gap(s) created by Boeing blunders. Airbus has monumental backlog in their most successful program, so A320 series was unable to fill the 737 MAX gap, for example. There is no need for every manufacturer to fill every niche.
True, new aircraft model development is now orders of magnitude more expensive than in the golden age of aircraft industry, although, frankly, I don't understand why, especially for airliners, where the technological advancements are _very_ incremental. The only radical advancement in the last several decades was glass cockpit and fly-by-wire (lifted from military programs; the former is now practically commodity) and materials (GLARE, carbon composite). OK, engines have also advanced quite radically.
As for Chinese protectionism, sure, but they don't espouse the virtues of global free market, do they?
"The more, the merrier!" As long as the market can support multiple providers. There wasn't enough money in mid-sized widebodies to support both Douglas Aircraft and Lockheed, for example.
As for protectionism, China's home-market protections are legendary.
I would never, ever, fly on anything made be the Chinese.
Nor would I
你沒有機會乘坐任何中國製造的飛機 因為你快死了🤣
Condescending attitude. GI Joe has already prohibited chip sales to China; same issue w/ airplanes
Reverse engineering guarantees you'll always be behind.
I actually do not think that it is necessary to assemble airplanes in China when there are viable alternatives in places such as Mexico and India where the cost of Labor is lower. The manufacturing sector in China is also expected to shrink because the population is aging and people are retiring and many young people, especially the ones with college degrees, do not want to work in factories. The age of the average Chinese person is 38 years of age to while the age of the average Indian is 28 years of age. This difference suggests that India's population will grow and China's will shrink. India is already currently able to provide more labor support and at a lower cost. It has more people of working age. I'm also pretty sure that China lies about their total population. Their population had actually been shrinking for 20 years and their government is not going to tell you about the hundreds of millions of people whose lives were lost during COVID-19. Some experts estimate that China's real population is only between 800 million and 1 billion.The Chinese economy is simply not as mighty as the Chinese government makes it out to be. In reality, India had been the more viable option for many years now. Apple is already trying to leave China and I think Airbus and Boeing should follow suit.
I agree, India has proven they can produce very technical products and Mexico can also, but would require billions to build infrastructure to actually build a complete jetliner. Why doesn't Canada build bigger plants to finish or completely build an existing AB or Boeing design? The stolen secrets and reverse engineering threats are non existent.
I'm no Fortune 500 CEO, but all you have to do is look at the rapid modernization of the Chinese Economy, military and ship building to see that Boeing and AirBus' current advantage over Comac is a point-in-time statement only. Yes, they may gain favor with the CCP today, but the CCP plays the long game and you can bet that by giving access to their intellectual property, processes and procedures today, they are potentially sacrificing part of their business a decade or two from now.
CCP是你爹啊？喊的那么亲切。
Another great video as always, Coby
COMAC can make plane bodies at a lower cost for China at the moment. Makes a lot of sense to co-operate. Well, C919 is merely a Boeing737/Airbus 320 copy. Once they can dominate domestically, the market for this narrow body plane, they can move on to make 777 or 787 copies in the future. One day, not long in the future, COMAC will market C919 to the rest of Asia as a viable alternatives to Boeing 737 or Airbus 320.
copy? They use different materials and technology on the wings and body, how do they copy?
C919 Copying Boeing? Copy planes that crash and explode ?
china doesn't care that their tech is 20 years behind airbus and boeing. this won't matter if the planes end up being much cheaper than similar ones produced in the west. they'll sell.
china needs airbus and boeing to teach them how to build planes fast. the moment they think that goal has been achieved the western manufacturers will immediately get the boot. this scenario has played many times over the past 20 years.
Assumption is the mother of all fxxk ups!
Conceited and closed English environment
you include a clip of a China Airlines 777 in this video but China Airlines is Taiwanese. Air China is the mainland PRC airline. I'm sure China Airlines would prefer not to be inferred as being from the PRC or confused with Air China.
I rarely see anyone clarify this fact underneath a video about the appalling safety record of China Airlines. I am sure many people would prefer China Airlines to be associated with China in situations like this.
@@ruemignon Last year, a Taiwanese killed 6 Taiwaneses in America, the news title is "Chinese killed Taiwanese". It's right because Taiwanese is also Chinese, but the title's intention...
There's no such thing as Taiwanese. The real taiwanese is ABORIGINAL TRIBE who lives in the island for tens thousand of years
Small eye lip, yellow-white pale people is Chinese. They're Chinese who born in Taiwan island. That's it
@@Flanker-L bruh source?
NO COPY-----------------if making of a plane can be copied, then C919 would have come out 50 years ago
for both it's a way to increase production capacity at a lower cost!
Coby,
I sincerely hope that whereever you moved to, that you do NOT vote as Californians do.. after all you ran away from high crime, ridiculous homelessness, super high taxes, and grossly overpriced living expenses, to name a few problems most impactful (though not unique) in CA.
Something's overpriced if people aren't willing to pay for it. California costs more (the coastal areas, anyway) because people who have money would rather have less of it and live in California than hang on to it and be stuck somewhere that's got boring terrain and often-dangerous (or just miserable) weather. Which explains a lot of the "ridiculous homelessness" as well: If you're going to be stuck living under a tarp one way or the other, where would you want to be stuck? Hurricane alley? The frozen north?
Of course they are! But greed has always had disastruous consequences.
I wont be surprised If they are. probably avionics & other key designs In order to be self reliant...
I watched the video and assumed that you probably didn’t know that many COMAC engineers were trained in Boeing Wichita.