Flying-Tiger From Germany, joined Aug 1999, 4179 posts, RR: 35 Posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4681 times:
Quote: The ambitious goal of State-owned China Aviation Industry Corporation I (AVIC I) was revealed on a day when the company made a breakthrough in the regional plane market by selling 60 MA60 turboprop and 30 ARJ21 turbofan jets for regional flights.
ChinaClipper40 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 191 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4390 times:
Goodness! I had not realized how awfully close to the Boeing 717 in design and performance specifications the ARJ21 seems to be. As noted by previous posters, it's clearly a DC9/MD80/MD90/MD95 conceptual derivative, albeit with GE engines and a new Antonov-designed wing. Especially the proposed ARJ21-900 stretched version, with an 1800 nm range and room for roughly 100 passengers. And look at the passenger comfort level - 18 inch seat widths, 32 inch pitch, and good-sized overhead baggage compartments - even in all-economy configuration. Am I naive to think that this could sell well in the west? For those airlines that wished Boeing had kept the 717 line going? And for those European airlines that seem to be snapping up used Fokker 100s? Could this plane give the Embraer 170/175/190/195 line a run for its money? After all, the estimated market during the 2006-2025 time-period for passenger jetliners in the 61-120 seat range is roughly 6,000 frames. Admittedly that's Embraer's own estimate, so it should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt. But even if the market were only 50% of that, would not the ARJ21 (assuming good operating economics and reliability) take a significant share? While most people are looking at the Russian and Ukranian entrants into this market (Sukoi RRJ and Antonov AN-148), could it be that the Chinese will actually grab a large piece of the market? Am I not correct that they are already in construction, and have 35 firm orders plus additional options? Thoughts and/or corrections would be welcome. Thanks.