Having been in the making for years, a startup regional carrier——Genghis Khan Airlines——has finally gained CAAC's approval for its establishment, and is preparing to launch ops in early 2019 by utilizing China's own ARJ21 jets manufactured by COMAC, per this Xinhua report 内蒙古首家支线航空公司获筹建认可批复 计划明年初首飞Inner Mongolia gains official approval for establishment of its 1st regional airline

Domiciled in Hohhot, capital of northern China's Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Genghis Khan Airlines is the 1st regional airline for the vast region, and plans to establish a fleet consisting of 25 ARJ21s in five years, forging a regional route network with 40 destinations and 60 routes that will cover all of Inner Mongolia. Longer term, its planned ARJ21 fleet would double to 50 in eight years, flying to 80 destinations on 150 routes that cover China's major cities with an eye to international service to Mongolia and Russia

It's reported that Genghis Khan Airlines and COMAC have forged wide-ranging cooperation deals in aviation education, aircraft maintenance, pilot training etc

Currently, Inner Mongolia has 28 civilian airports including 20 ones running transport service, the highest number among all regions of China, paving the way for the sound development of regional flying whose commercial potential is yet to be tapped fully across the autonomous region

It'll be definitely interesting to watch how well this unusually-named carrier Genghis Khan Airlines is going to fare on the regional flying scene of China, with its extraordinary all-ARJ21 fleet——at least seemingly so by far

I fear a bloodbath in China...………………….

This whole thing sounds doomed from the get go.

Would COMAC even be able to ramp up the production rate for 25 in 5 years and another 25 in the following 4 years?

Air Caligula is acquiring two A320NEO.

OlafW wrote:

Would COMAC even be able to ramp up the production rate for 25 in 5 years and another 25 in the following 4 years?

Arby's that blistering rate they might be able to generate up to 15 sorties a day I need 5 years.

/not holding my breath

Best airline name EVER.

a horde of people will be galloping to book their flights with this airline.

BlueberryWheats wrote:

An all ARJ121 fleet? Is this program doing better now? As far as I last heard, only two had been delivered to an airline and haven't exactly been flying busy schedules.

Five delivered. Those 5 are flown as intensely as Winderoe flies one E2-190.

The schedules are never busy. It is a new plane lacking last generation maintenance diagnostics. Forget about what is available in the MAX, NEO, E2s, A220, and soon MRJ that are a generation ahead.

Lightsaber

I'm kind of failing to see how this can be a serious proposition when COMAC seems to either be unable or unwilling to build ARJ21s at a reasonable pace. They have a backlog of about 300 or so orders (although I'm sure some of them are not serious and will/already have fallen through) and have only managed to build about 10 or so in ~3 years.

Just curious. Are/were there any other airlines named after very famous historical figures?

I found this very nice video of a Chengdu Airlines ARJ-21 flying CSX-SHA where pax get a 2-year anniversary plane model and cake! Nice takeoff and landing..i'd dare say the ARJ-21 is a bit quieter than its american "sister" B717..Chinese or not it's a beautiful little jet, reminder of the good old days of the MD's/DC9s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZ9nBcMJ3dY

First livery to honor the "best" Genghis Khan portrayal ever, by John Wayne in The Conquerer.

"KHAAAAAN!" - Passenger on this airline when his flight gets delayed, probably

They should have gone for the CS300/A220

I'm going to have to watch that John Wayne movie.

Slash787 wrote:

They should have gone for the CS300/A220

Concur. The A220-100 has amazing field performance. The range would allow future route expansion.

Lightsaber

ScottB wrote:

So at current ARJ21 utilization rates, that's roughly weekly round-trip service on each route?

lightsaber wrote:

Five delivered. Those 5 are flown as intensely as Winderoe flies one E2-190.

The schedules are never busy. It is a new plane lacking last generation maintenance diagnostics. Forget about what is available in the MAX, NEO, E2s, A220, and soon MRJ that are a generation ahead.

Lightsaber

If FR24 is correct, seems like there are 3 active ARJ: B-3386, B-3388, B-3322. There may have been a 4th active one flying out of HRB, though (FR24 doesn't have any data for those).

Using FR24 data:
EU6679/6680 CTU-HFE-WNZ 1357 (Although FR24 shown this flown by A319/A320)
EU6665/6666 CTU-CSX-SHA 246
EU6673/6674 CTU-SQD-HSN Daily

EU6673/6674 used 1 planes, EU6665/6666/6679/6680 should used up another one. They're usually ~12 hours rotation in the middle of the day (i.e. leave CTU around 0900 and arrive back at 2100).

EU2239/2240 CTU-TNA-HRB 1357 (Maybe...again shown as A320/A319 on FR24)
EU2789/2790 HRB-DTU 1357
EU2795/2796 HRB-HEK Daily

It's VERY hard to verify the data, though. Either way, it's not as bad as "five ARJ fly the same amount as 1 Wideroe E2" (Which is false, air time between the two are comparable). The oldest ARJ haven't fly for awhile AFAIK, though.

The CEO of the new Chilean startup Augusto Pinochet Airlines could not be reached for comment.

Zoedyn wrote:

plans to establish a fleet consisting of 25 ARJ21s in five years,

That would be the minimal amount of aircraft needed for a regional airlines to become a mainline airlines in the modified current rule.
And as expected they picked the local regional jet instead of foreign production which some other manufacturer sales office/analysts hoped
Do we know who's behind the airlines? Is there any affiliation between them and maybe HNA?

zakuivcustom wrote:

I was doing some random Google search, and realized that initially they planned to use CRJ900 instead of ARJ. Maybe COMAC is paying quite a bit of money for any airline to fly their planes?

http://www.caac.gov.cn/XXGK/XXGK/TZTG/2 ... 49460.html

Anyway, same news as Zoedyn posted, in English:
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-0 ... 410386.htm

If the way I am reading the news is correct then they'll probably aim at becoming a mainline airlines in the future.
Using domestic jet will probably give them a greater chance to success
If it is related to HNA then they could also take up some of those aircrafts signed from previous MoU although I am not sure.

aerorobnz wrote:

That's certainly on for the type chasers filling their logbooks. strange to fly an airline named after one of the most bloodthirsty, violent leaders in history. Perhaps in Germany, they might like to start Hitlerflug, Cambodia to start flyPolpot.com or Khalid air in Syria?

It is funny that the Chinese name of the airline (天骄航空 aka "Pride of Sky Airlines") has nothing to do with Genghis Khan

I guess the English name use Genghis Khan bc he is by far the most well known Mongol? ULN (Ulaanbataar Airport) is also named after him. I believe there are "Mongolian BBQ" (which is not Mongolian btw) restaurants that used the name Genghis Khan also.

Final note - I sort of echo what some Chinese netizens are saying about the airline - sooner or later there will be 1 airline per province, then one airrline for every large cities, all of them ambitious (i.e. 50+ planes, 80+ destinations) but without state subsidies, won't ever survive. Yes, PRC has tons of people, but spliting air traffic 10-way is certainly not how you grow a bunch of airlines.

Perhaps the Chinese name was also meant to be the shortened form of the expression "the prided child of the heaven" which is commonly being used to refer to people with great achievement and Genghis Khan certainly fit the expression.

lightsaber wrote:

I'm going to have to watch that John Wayne movie.

Slash787 wrote:

They should have gone for the CS300/A220

Concur. The A220-100 has amazing field performance. The range would allow future route expansion.

Lightsaber

A220 is not considered regional aircraft in China and Chinese airlines will need to pass through more strict application process to use them so it won't work in this case.

Aesma wrote:

I would certainly not call any kind of business Genghis Khan.

The owners of the many Genghis Khan restaurants around the world, for one, will never agree with you.
Perhaps you are very much smarter than them but they are laughing all the way to their banks.

Aesma wrote:

I'm not going to judge him from the 21st century but I would certainly not call any kind of business Genghis Khan. What next, Adolf Hitler airline ?

All the Genghis Khan (or Genghis) restaurants, vodka, Airport (in ULN), and of course, the specialty dish of Sapporo would disagree with you.

Now, Genghis Khan Airlines is not necessarily the best name IMO, Genghis Air(lines) sounds better.

Apparantly one in every 200 people is related to Ghenghis Khan. Maybe they should have gotten Fokkers.

zakuivcustom wrote:

ScottB wrote:

So at current ARJ21 utilization rates, that's roughly weekly round-trip service on each route?

lightsaber wrote:

Five delivered. Those 5 are flown as intensely as Winderoe flies one E2-190.

The schedules are never busy. It is a new plane lacking last generation maintenance diagnostics. Forget about what is available in the MAX, NEO, E2s, A220, and soon MRJ that are a generation ahead.

Lightsaber

If FR24 is correct, seems like there are 3 active ARJ: B-3386, B-3388, B-3322. There may have been a 4th active one flying out of HRB, though (FR24 doesn't have any data for those).

Using FR24 data:
EU6679/6680 CTU-HFE-WNZ 1357 (Although FR24 shown this flown by A319/A320)
EU6665/6666 CTU-CSX-SHA 246
EU6673/6674 CTU-SQD-HSN Daily

EU6673/6674 used 1 planes, EU6665/6666/6679/6680 should used up another one. They're usually ~12 hours rotation in the middle of the day (i.e. leave CTU around 0900 and arrive back at 2100).

EU2239/2240 CTU-TNA-HRB 1357 (Maybe...again shown as A320/A319 on FR24)
EU2789/2790 HRB-DTU 1357
EU2795/2796 HRB-HEK Daily

It's VERY hard to verify the data, though. Either way, it's not as bad as "five ARJ fly the same amount as 1 Wideroe E2" (Which is false, air time between the two are comparable). The oldest ARJ haven't fly for awhile AFAIK, though.

Each Winderoe E2-190 is flying about 8 cycles and 10 hours per day. I didn't see 8 cycles and 10 hours with A320 substitution. Correct me if I'm wrong.

And they have 5 aircraft. If one or two are not flying, scrap them. A first c-check shouldn't take even a week.

Flight time counts, not being 12 hours away from station.

So actually... I believe my statement stands from the data you provided, for there are 5 in the fleet and that is only 3 active, that is a problem.

I count 10 attempted segments, but as you note, A320 substitution.

3 planes, with A320 backup, should be attempting 24+ segments of those lenths per day and successful 99%+ of the time.

lightsaber wrote:

I'm going to have to watch that John Wayne movie.

Hmm... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conqueror_(1956_film) says:

Despite the stature of the cast and a respectable box office performance, the film was a critical flop; it is often ranked as one of the worst films of the 1950s and one of the worst ever.[4] Wayne, who was at the height of his career, had lobbied for the role after reading the script and was widely believed to have been grossly miscast.[5] The Conqueror was listed in the 1978 book The Fifty Worst Films of All Time. Wayne was posthumously named a "winner" of a Golden Turkey Award for his performance in the film.

Might be appropriate for IFE on this airline, though.

lightsaber wrote:

I'm going to have to watch that John Wayne movie.

Slash787 wrote:

They should have gone for the CS300/A220

Concur. The A220-100 has amazing field performance. The range would allow future route expansion.

Lightsaber

Save yourself the agony of watching the movie. It was not among John Wayne's better roles. I would however watch it over the Sharknado films.

lightsaber wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

ScottB wrote:

So at current ARJ21 utilization rates, that's roughly weekly round-trip service on each route?

lightsaber wrote:

Five delivered. Those 5 are flown as intensely as Winderoe flies one E2-190.

The schedules are never busy. It is a new plane lacking last generation maintenance diagnostics. Forget about what is available in the MAX, NEO, E2s, A220, and soon MRJ that are a generation ahead.

Lightsaber

If FR24 is correct, seems like there are 3 active ARJ: B-3386, B-3388, B-3322. There may have been a 4th active one flying out of HRB, though (FR24 doesn't have any data for those).

Using FR24 data:
EU6679/6680 CTU-HFE-WNZ 1357 (Although FR24 shown this flown by A319/A320)
EU6665/6666 CTU-CSX-SHA 246
EU6673/6674 CTU-SQD-HSN Daily

EU6673/6674 used 1 planes, EU6665/6666/6679/6680 should used up another one. They're usually ~12 hours rotation in the middle of the day (i.e. leave CTU around 0900 and arrive back at 2100).

EU2239/2240 CTU-TNA-HRB 1357 (Maybe...again shown as A320/A319 on FR24)
EU2789/2790 HRB-DTU 1357
EU2795/2796 HRB-HEK Daily

It's VERY hard to verify the data, though. Either way, it's not as bad as "five ARJ fly the same amount as 1 Wideroe E2" (Which is false, air time between the two are comparable). The oldest ARJ haven't fly for awhile AFAIK, though.

Each Winderoe E2-190 is flying about 8 cycles and 10 hours per day. I didn't see 8 cycles and 10 hours with A320 substitution. Correct me if I'm wrong.

And they have 5 aircraft. If one or two are not flying, scrap them. A first c-check shouldn't take even a week.

Flight time counts, not being 12 hours away from station.

So actually... I believe my statement stands from the data you provided, for there are 5 in the fleet and that is only 3 active, that is a problem.

I count 10 attempted segments, but as you note, A320 substitution.

3 planes, with A320 backup, should be attempting 24+ segments of those lenths per day and successful 99%+ of the time.

Now that I am able to double check on Chengdu's website:
EU6679/6680 is shown as 320 even on their own website when I try to dummy book.

EU2239/2240 is actually a daily flight...on A320.

So, essentially, we have:
EU6673/6674 CTU-SQD-HSN, which runs everyday.
EU6665/6666 CTU-CSX-SHA, running Tu/Th/Sa
EU2789/2790 HRB-DTU, running Mo/We/Fr/Su
EU2795/2796 HRB-HEK, running daily

So...
1 ARJ fly 4 segments (EU6673/6674) every day.
1 ARJ fly 4 segments (EU6665/6666) 3 times a week (or ~1.7 segments every day on average)
1 ARJ fly 2 segments (EU2795/2796) every day, plus 2 segments (EU2789/2790) 4 times a week, or ~3.14 segments per day.

It's actually closer than I thought. Yes, sector length is somewhat longer on the ARJ, but on the flilp side, their utilization are just, well, awful.

zakuivcustom wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

If FR24 is correct, seems like there are 3 active ARJ: B-3386, B-3388, B-3322. There may have been a 4th active one flying out of HRB, though (FR24 doesn't have any data for those).

Using FR24 data:
EU6679/6680 CTU-HFE-WNZ 1357 (Although FR24 shown this flown by A319/A320)
EU6665/6666 CTU-CSX-SHA 246
EU6673/6674 CTU-SQD-HSN Daily

EU6673/6674 used 1 planes, EU6665/6666/6679/6680 should used up another one. They're usually ~12 hours rotation in the middle of the day (i.e. leave CTU around 0900 and arrive back at 2100).

EU2239/2240 CTU-TNA-HRB 1357 (Maybe...again shown as A320/A319 on FR24)
EU2789/2790 HRB-DTU 1357
EU2795/2796 HRB-HEK Daily

It's VERY hard to verify the data, though. Either way, it's not as bad as "five ARJ fly the same amount as 1 Wideroe E2" (Which is false, air time between the two are comparable). The oldest ARJ haven't fly for awhile AFAIK, though.

Each Winderoe E2-190 is flying about 8 cycles and 10 hours per day. I didn't see 8 cycles and 10 hours with A320 substitution. Correct me if I'm wrong.

And they have 5 aircraft. If one or two are not flying, scrap them. A first c-check shouldn't take even a week.

Flight time counts, not being 12 hours away from station.

So actually... I believe my statement stands from the data you provided, for there are 5 in the fleet and that is only 3 active, that is a problem.

I count 10 attempted segments, but as you note, A320 substitution.

3 planes, with A320 backup, should be attempting 24+ segments of those lenths per day and successful 99%+ of the time.

Now that I am able to double check on Chengdu's website:
EU6679/6680 is shown as 320 even on their own website when I try to dummy book.

EU2239/2240 is actually a daily flight...on A320.

So, essentially, we have:
EU6673/6674 CTU-SQD-HSN, which runs everyday.
EU6665/6666 CTU-CSX-SHA, running Tu/Th/Sa
EU2789/2790 HRB-DTU, running Mo/We/Fr/Su
EU2795/2796 HRB-HEK, running daily

So...
1 ARJ fly 4 segments (EU6673/6674) every day.
1 ARJ fly 4 segments (EU6665/6666) 3 times a week (or ~1.7 segments every day on average)
1 ARJ fly 2 segments (EU2795/2796) every day, plus 2 segments (EU2789/2790) 4 times a week, or ~3.14 segments per day.

It's actually closer than I thought. Yes, sector length is somewhat longer on the ARJ, but on the flilp side, their utilization are just, well, awful.

First, thank you for the numbers.
Huh... It is scheduled just over ~8.85 segments per day. But what is flown?

It doesn't matter if we are talking 3 or 5 airframes. That is poor utilization of 2 and you could push one E2 to that level (I wouldn't recommend it, but an airline could).

That is a lot of value in GE engines and Western subsystems sitting every day.

But I still see substitutions. So still at about one E2-190.

Found and old (monthish) article on the ARJ21:
2 years in service
5 airplanes in service
100,000 passengers (137 per day on average).

http://africa.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20180 ... dfcd3.html

Ummm... Not so good for 5 planes in service. If two planes somehow do not count, return them to the vendor.

So per above, 8.85 segments per day. Horrible for 5 aircraft. Poor for two. It could be done by a single aircraft (but is too much IMHO,).

5 RJ aircraft should be doing 32+ segments per day. Not 8.85.

Stuff to make a plane is expensive. Lease payments add up. Only when an aircraft is 12+ years old (paid off) can an airline use them at such a low rate economically.

I work a career where we expect no buyers for use under 10 hours per day for the first 7 years.

Anyone with such low utilization needs to consider used CRJs or E-170s (lower used price than E-175s) or even used E-190s. (JetBlue has them specially priced after taking their charge off).

Lightsaber

This is just suicide. Might as well put some snake into the cabin and make movie about it.

Slash787 wrote:

They should have gone for the CS300/A220

You say that as if they had the choice.

"This is your captain speaking. We have several aircraft ahead of us awaiting departure. We'll just violently take them over, kill them all, and burn the aircraft, and we'll be airborne in no time"

“Genghis Khan Airlines” just naturally rolls off the tongue doesn’t it.

lightsaber wrote:

Found and old (monthish) article on the ARJ21:
2 years in service
5 airplanes in service
100,000 passengers (137 per day on average).

http://africa.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20180 ... dfcd3.html

Ummm... Not so good for 5 planes in service. If two planes somehow do not count, return them to the vendor.

So per above, 8.85 segments per day. Horrible for 5 aircraft. Poor for two. It could be done by a single aircraft (but is too much IMHO,).

5 RJ aircraft should be doing 32+ segments per day. Not 8.85.

Stuff to make a plane is expensive. Lease payments add up. Only when an aircraft is 12+ years old (paid off) can an airline use them at such a low rate economically.

I work a career where we expect no buyers for use under 10 hours per day for the first 7 years.

Anyone with such low utilization needs to consider used CRJs or E-170s (lower used price than E-175s) or even used E-190s. (JetBlue has them specially priced after taking their charge off).

Lightsaber

Meh, even if they run a single 1-stop round-trip both way (so 4 segments, i.e. something like CTU-CSX-SHA that they had been running the ARJ21 on), I would be happy. Right now there are ARJ that literally park on the ground the whole day doing nothiing. Talk about great utilization.

6 segments sounds about right anyway - i.e. a CTU-CSX-SHA RT then a shorter round-trip out of CTU. Or, up in HRB, 3 roundtrips to/from HEK or DTU or FUY or those tiny airports in Heilongjiang. Hack, throw them out to URC and do CTU-INC-URC-(Kashgar or Korla or Aksu) and back (or CTU-XIY-URC, and the stop in the middle only b/c I'm not even sure if ARJ can fly from CTU non-stop to URC, just how bad the plane is).

Revelation wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

I'm going to have to watch that John Wayne movie.

Hmm... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conqueror_(1956_film) says:

Despite the stature of the cast and a respectable box office performance, the film was a critical flop; it is often ranked as one of the worst films of the 1950s and one of the worst ever.[4] Wayne, who was at the height of his career, had lobbied for the role after reading the script and was widely believed to have been grossly miscast.[5] The Conqueror was listed in the 1978 book The Fifty Worst Films of All Time. Wayne was posthumously named a "winner" of a Golden Turkey Award for his performance in the film.

Might be appropriate for IFE on this airline, though.

Don't forget about the fact that a number of the cast developed cancer, possibly due to the fact that it was filmed close to a then-active nuclear test site

https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/02/19/the-conqueror-film/

zakuivcustom wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Found and old (monthish) article on the ARJ21:
2 years in service
5 airplanes in service
100,000 passengers (137 per day on average).

http://africa.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20180 ... dfcd3.html

Ummm... Not so good for 5 planes in service. If two planes somehow do not count, return them to the vendor.

So per above, 8.85 segments per day. Horrible for 5 aircraft. Poor for two. It could be done by a single aircraft (but is too much IMHO,).

5 RJ aircraft should be doing 32+ segments per day. Not 8.85.

Stuff to make a plane is expensive. Lease payments add up. Only when an aircraft is 12+ years old (paid off) can an airline use them at such a low rate economically.

I work a career where we expect no buyers for use under 10 hours per day for the first 7 years.

Anyone with such low utilization needs to consider used CRJs or E-170s (lower used price than E-175s) or even used E-190s. (JetBlue has them specially priced after taking their charge off).

Lightsaber

Meh, even if they run a single 1-stop round-trip both way (so 4 segments, i.e. something like CTU-CSX-SHA that they had been running the ARJ21 on), I would be happy. Right now there are ARJ that literally park on the ground the whole day doing nothiing. Talk about great utilization.

6 segments sounds about right anyway - i.e. a CTU-CSX-SHA RT then a shorter round-trip out of CTU. Or, up in HRB, 3 roundtrips to/from HEK or DTU or FUY or those tiny airports in Heilongjiang. Hack, throw them out to URC and do CTU-INC-URC-(Kashgar or Korla or Aksu) and back (or CTU-XIY-URC, and the stop in the middle only b/c I'm not even sure if ARJ can fly from CTU non-stop to URC, just how bad the plane is).

The 6 cycles you propose are about 7 hours of flight time.

Considering Winderoe was flying the E2-190 10 hours... We still are underutilized for new aircraft. 7 hours is just a wee bit more than what G4 buys 14 to 17 year old aircraft for. Sadly, we remain in the should buy used category.

Yes, I realize many countries have a 20 year cap on the age of aircraft. UA, AA, DL, and G4 thank you.

Lightsaber

First ARJ21 in Genghis Khan livery. That was pretty fast.



Link: https://kucinta-setia.blogspot.com/2018 ... first.html

Boair wrote:

First ARJ21 in Genghis Khan livery. That was pretty fast.



Link: https://kucinta-setia.blogspot.com/2018 ... first.html

Wait, Eurowhite liveries are to preserve 2nd hand value for leasing companies. There needs to be 20+ airlines flying a type (or similar airframe a la A330/A340) for a resale market and 400+ examples (again, similar aircraft count such as 733 to 738)...

So why the Eurowhite with Chinese characters?!?

Newark727 wrote:

"KHAAAAAN!" - Passenger on this airline when his flight gets delayed, probably

Boair wrote:

First ARJ21 in Genghis Khan livery. That was pretty fast.



Link: https://kucinta-setia.blogspot.com/2018 ... first.html

Man, did a B717 coupled got married recently and made a baby? That sure looks like shortened 717 with winglet.....

juliuswong wrote:

Boair wrote:

First ARJ21 in Genghis Khan livery. That was pretty fast.



Link: https://kucinta-setia.blogspot.com/2018 ... first.html

Man, did a B717 coupled got married recently and made a baby? That sure looks like shortened 717 with winglet.....

I assume you know it borrowed the MD-90 cross section, nose, and much of the tail. Wing is new.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

juliuswong wrote:

Boair wrote:

First ARJ21 in Genghis Khan livery. That was pretty fast.



Link: https://kucinta-setia.blogspot.com/2018 ... first.html

Man, did a B717 coupled got married recently and made a baby? That sure looks like shortened 717 with winglet.....

I assume you know it borrowed the MD-90 cross section, nose, and much of the tail. Wing is new.

Lightsaber

For all we know, it could be an actual MD-90 with blended winglets.

Boair wrote:

First ARJ21 in Genghis Khan livery. That was pretty fast.



Link: https://kucinta-setia.blogspot.com/2018 ... first.html

It wasn't very hard to paint. The wing looks really small.

ewt340 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

juliuswong wrote:

Man, did a B717 coupled got married recently and made a baby? That sure looks like shortened 717 with winglet.....

I assume you know it borrowed the MD-90 cross section, nose, and much of the tail. Wing is new.

Lightsaber

For all we know, it could be an actual MD-90 with blended winglets.

The wing is new. Developed by Antonov in Ukraine. It even developed problems during testing, when the wings started cracking prematurely in the static tests.

VSMUT wrote:

ewt340 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

I assume you know it borrowed the MD-90 cross section, nose, and much of the tail. Wing is new.

Lightsaber

For all we know, it could be an actual MD-90 with blended winglets.

The wing is new. Developed by Antonov in Ukraine. It even developed problems during testing, when the wings started cracking prematurely in the static tests.

Ok, now that's more assuring

ewt340 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

ewt340 wrote:

For all we know, it could be an actual MD-90 with blended winglets.

The wing is new. Developed by Antonov in Ukraine. It even developed problems during testing, when the wings started cracking prematurely in the static tests.

Ok, now that's more assuring

It was also fixed.

FWIW, western manufacturers fail these tests from time to time too. Wasn't it the 777 that initially failed the static wing tests? And the 787 had some notorious wing-cracking problems too.

VSMUT wrote:

ewt340 wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

The wing is new. Developed by Antonov in Ukraine. It even developed problems during testing, when the wings started cracking prematurely in the static tests.

Ok, now that's more assuring

It was also fixed.

FWIW, western manufacturers fail these tests from time to time too. Wasn't it the 777 that initially failed the static wing tests? And the 787 had some notorious wing-cracking problems too.

Not sure about B777 but B787 has some problem in 2014.