[palemonk]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/china-unveils-flying-phoenix/2007/12/24/1198344924200.html

Looks like a reversed engineered MD-95/717 with CRJ engines to me. What do you guys think about this?

[Busy Bee]

You couldn't get me on that thing. There's probably lead in the mini sodas.

[Daquan13]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/china-unveils-flying-phoenix/2007/12/24/1198344924200.html

Looks like a reversed engineered MD-95/717 with CRJ engines to me. What do you guys think about this?



Yeah, I was about to say that myself! Only difference is the wiinglets which the MD-95/717 don't have.

Everything else seems to be there, including the bladed tail cone.

[Dalreg]

Cheap knock off. Won't catch me on one anytime soon.

[arbeiter]

All nations must work their way up in industralization, so I appreciate the effort. But this just seems like a Geely of the skies.

[Lexy]

All nations must work their way up in industralization, so I appreciate the effort. But this just seems like a Geely of the skies.

I agree. It should come as no surprise that this resembles something from the west. I could show you all the Russian knock-offs of Boeings that are still flying to this day.

[k1052]

Early this year, the nation announced plans to build a 150-seat passenger aircraft, which could eventually compete against planes made by the world's two dominant commercial jet makers, Boeing and Airbus.

Thanks to Airbus who decided to let China have the wing assembly on the new A320 line there. Boeing declined similar demands knowing it would really amount to a massive ripoff of their R&D for China's domestic aircraft manufacturers.

Airbus is actively trying to nail itself into its own coffin.

[Jeeper]

The wings are a new Russian Antonov design, not Airbus. The engines will be General Electric.

McDonnell Douglas gave the Chinese a license to build MD-80s in the mid 1980s.

SOURCE (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9806E1DE1138F931A25752C0A962948260)


MD allowed them to keep the tooling and manufacturing equipment after production had ceased, so it should be no surprise that China's first aircraft closely resembles a MD-80/DC-9/717 series aircraft.



I'm not so sure how they'll sell internationally, but hell, even if the only customers are Chinese airlines, that'll keep production going for a couple decades.

[WonderlandPark]

Both Airbus and MD/Boeing gave away the store. Both are making tens of billions off China sales. Seems fair enough.

I flew on Chinese airlines in 1986 that were using Russian hand-me-downs. I am sure this this is leagues safer than those AN* whatever CAAC was flying back then. Strangest engine sounds I have ever heard in my life were on the Guangzhou-Guilin flight I made back then. I half joked back then that the "gift" folding Chinese fans they handed out were for the passengers to stick out the window and help the engines at take-off. Not far from the truth.





*the DC-9 knockoff that required the Russians to put 4 engines on the tail instead of two due to their pathetic thrust. AN, IL or whatever it was.

[SFUVancouver]

I am sure it is airworthy but quotes like this should give one pause:

"In recent years, the comrades on the front lines of the aviation industry have placed customer satisfaction and international safety standards as priorities ... and made new breakthroughs." In the past not so much..?

[sammyk]

*the DC-9 knockoff that required the Russians to put 4 engines on the tail instead of two due to their pathetic thrust. AN, IL or whatever it was.

That is an Il-62 you are describing, a VC-10 "knockoff" and the VC-10 also had four tail mounted engines. Neither were the size of a DC-9, they were bigger and basically competed with the 707 and DC-8...both of which were also 4 engined.