Thread: China's First Large Homemade Passenger Jet to Fly in 2017

Originally Posted by BaitongBoy

It makes sense to compete in the "market"... Quote: Originally Posted by misskit Industry experts say China faces a tough slog capturing a significant share of that market, even with government support. Well, let's see how the experts fare...Seems like government support is "necessary" for a lot of countries...Not good management, to say the least...

One presumes the Chinese market is maybe large enough for them to saturate and learn the ropes of quality and long term reliability.

After that will China restrict itself, as Airbus and Boeing have, to ameristani approved customers? Then there is the market from the OROB family, the EEU plus the news ones to replace the defunct TTIP and TPPA.

Originally Posted by BKKBanger

So why has Airbus got a plant in Tianjing if the Chinese are going to make an aircraft which is very similar?

A % of everyone goes to the Airbus partners I presume somebody thought of such a clause prior to opening up itself to China? They also make Boeing wings I believe. They will certainly make components.

humm ... some thoughts immediately come to mind.

• I'd rather wish I was up there, then, mid flight, hear that deadening bang, lights out, oxy masks dropping down and being 'up there' wishing I was down there ... in one piece, and that piece not being a body bag.

• It's amazing how 3D printers have come along.

• Is the glue dry on the Balsa wood?

On a more serious note, any info on where they source their Engines from?

It's a significant part of the total Aircraft solution.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Probably because there weren't any. The sanctions on Iran came from the UN and were lifted under agreement between Iran and the P5+1.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Utter fucking nonsense.

he administration has not officially objected to the Boeing-Iran deal at this stage. State Department spokesman John Kirby said last month the sale and any possible future deals depend on Iran's good behavior and said the U.S. could revoke the license for the deal if planes, parts or services are "used for purposes other than exclusively civil aviation end-use" or if aircraft are transferred to individuals or companies on a U.S. terrorism blacklist. Any suggestion "that we would or will turn a blind eye to Iran's state sponsorship of terrorism or their terrorist-supporting activities is completely without merit," Kirby said. Boeing did not immediately respond to a request for comment from FoxNews.com. The company issued a statement to The Associated Press after the agreement was signed last month, saying it went ahead "under authorizations from the U.S. government following a determination that Iran had met its obligations under the nuclear accord reached last summer." Roskam, though, warned the aircraft could be used by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. "To give these types of planes to the Iranian regime, which still is the world's largest state sponsor of terror, is to give them a product that can be used for a military purpose," Roskam said, claiming the aircraft could be reconfigured to carry 100 ballistic missiles or 15,000 rocket-propelled grenades.

House moves to block Boeing-Iran deal | Fox News



Boeing Airbus Deal With Iran Puts Strain on Iran Nuclear Deal


Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg (L) speaks with the press after a meeting with US President-elect Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, on December 21, 2016.


Though every Republican in Congress voted against the Iran nuclear deal, "Tearing it up . . . is not going to happen," says Sen. Bob Corker, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. Hopefully, the chairman speaks for the president-elect.

During the campaign, Donald Trump indicated as much, saying that, though the U.S. got jobbed in the negotiations — "We have a horrible contract, but we do have a contract" — he might not walk away.

To Trump, a deal's a deal, even a bad one. And we did get taken. In 2007 and 2011, all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies assured us, "with high confidence," that Iran did not have an atomic bomb program.

Yet our folks forked over $50 billion for an Iranian show and tell to prove they were not doing what our 17 intelligence agencies told us, again and again, they were not doing. Why did we disbelieve our own intelligence, and buy into the "Chicken Little" chatter about Iran being "only months away from a bomb"?

Corker also administered a cold shower to those who darkly warn of a secret Iranian program to produce a bomb: "In spite of all the flaws in the agreement, nothing bad is going to happen relative to nuclear development in Iran in the next few years. It's just not."

Under the deal, Iran has put two-thirds of the 19,000 centrifuges at Natanz in storage, ceased enriching uranium to 20 percent at Fordow, poured concrete into the core of its heavy water reactor at Arak, and shipped 97 percent of its enriched uranium out of the country. Cameras and United Nations inspectors are all over the place.

Even should Iran decide on a crash program to create enough fissile material for a single A-bomb test, this would take a year, and we would know about it. But why would they? After all, there are sound reasons of state why Iran decided over a decade ago to forego nuclear weapons.

Discovery of a bomb program could bring the same U.S. shock and awe as was visited on Iraq for its nonexistent WMD. Discovery would risk a pre-emptive strike by an Israel with scores of nuclear weapons. Saudi Arabia and Turkey would have a powerful inducement to build their own bombs. Acquiring a nuclear weapon would almost surely make Iran, a Persian nation on the edge of a sea of Arabs, less secure.

If, however, in the absence of a violation of the treaty by Iran, we tore up the deal, we could find ourselves isolated. For Britain, France and Germany also signed, and they believe the agreement is a good one. Do we really want to force these NATO allies to choose between the deal they agreed to and a break with the United States?

If the War Party is confident Iran is going to cheat, why not wait until they do. Then make our case with evidence, so our allies can go with us on principle, and not from pressure.

Also at issue is the deal signed by Boeing to sell Iran 80 jetliners. Airbus has contracted to sell Iran 100 planes, and begun delivery. List price for the two deals: $34.5 billion. Tens of thousands of U.S. jobs are at stake. Is a Republican Congress prepared to blow up the Boeing deal and force the Europeans to cancel the Airbus deal?

Why? Some contend the planes can be used to transport the Iranian Republican Guard. But are the Iranians, who are looking to tourism, trade and investment to rescue their economy, so stupid as to spend $35 billion for troop transports they could buy from Vladimir Putin?

The Ayatollah's regime may define itself by its hatred of the Great Satan. Still, in 2009, even our War Party was urging President Obama to publicly back the Green Movement uprising against the disputed victory of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

In 2013, moderates voted Hassan Rouhani into the presidency, where he began secret negotiations with the U.S. New elections will be held this year. And while the death of ex-President Rafsanjani this weekend has removed the powerful patron of Rouhani and strengthened the hard-liners, Ayatollah Khamenei is suffering from cancer, and the nation's future remains undetermined.

Iran's young seek to engage with the West. But if they are spurned, by the cancellation of the Boeing deal and the reimposition of U.S. sanctions, they will be disillusioned and discredited, and the mullahs will own the future. How would that serve U.S. interests?

We still have sanctions on Iran for its missile tests in violation of Security Council resolutions, for its human rights violations, and for its support of groups like Hezbollah. But we also have in common with Iran an enmity for the Sunni terrorists of al-Qaida and ISIS.

Boeing Airbus Deal With Iran Puts Strain on Iran Nuclear Deal

The deal covers the sale of 15 777-300ER long-haul jets and 15 of the newer 777X widebody aricraft which is currently under development. Apart from this, the deal also includes the sale of about 50 737MAX single-aisle jets.
Airbus's contract has also been affected similarly. Late last week, the French airplane manufacturer had finalised a deal to sell 100 planes to Iran Air in a deal valued to be around $18 to $20 billion at list prices. However, a spokesperson from Iran Air recently confirmed that the deal will not exceed $10 billion. Further, Iran Air has decided not to buy the A380 wide-body aircraft.
These deals have been a topic of intense debate in the U.S. over this past year. Since the deal was announced earlier in the year, most Republicans have opposed it calling it un-American. It is their belief that Iran is the biggest sponsor of terrorism and that the country will use its commercial aircraft to propagate terror further. Back in 2011, it was noted, Iran used commercial airplanes to transport military vehicles and weapons to Syria in a covert operation to supply Hezbollah active in the region. It is of their opinion that the monetary trade-off is just not worth the risk.
As a further deterrent, by a 243-174 vote, lawmakers (mostly Republicans) introduced legislation that would prohibit the Treasury Department from issuing any licenses U.S. banks would need to complete the transactions with Iran. However, it seems that despite all these problems, Boeing and Airbus managed to finalise the deals without much of a hassle, but likely at a hefty cost.Boeing-Iran Deal: Desperate Times Call For Desperate Measures


Some background


https://www.treasury.gov/press-cente...es/tg1217.aspx


https://www.treasury.gov/resource-ce...s/iran_gli.pdf


You maybe aware that many countries sell a license to use their products. Many if the user breaks the license have ti right to turn the product off or request delivery back.


As we know that certain aircraft are capable of being "managed" from afar. The right to turn of an airplane full of passengers legally is not what airlines like.


The license from the ameristani Department of the Treasury can be revoked, possibly by an EO most certainly by government.


Buy you obviously will present your case to the TD Trial of Tossers.


More likely a few 3 or 4 letter words will come my way.



Your shout harry.

Originally Posted by BKKBanger

A 737 commuter aircraft is a lonnnngggggggggg way from a military aircraft, no matter what paint you put on it.

It's colour is irrelevant. If the amerstanis consider the commercial plane has been used to convey even a 1kg spare part for a "military" object the license and any agreements can be voided.

Originally Posted by BKKBanger

As to banking licences, that is something else. You may or may not be aware that Iran sends fund to terrorist organisations and have generally been prevented from using US Dollars because no respondent bank in the US will deal with them unless a special license is given by Treasury.

One presumes the treasury has no qualms about ameirstani government agencies payments of cash, or it's commercial aircraft delivering of weapons, supplying "intelligence, Feeding, Training and hospitalisation/interrogation of terrorists.

Originally Posted by BobR

but that's what Airbus gets for outsourcing high paying manufacturing jobs to China.

I won't bring up again the Audi investment in China. I personally can confirm Audi make excellent cars.

Oh dear.

The Boeing Aircraft (BA) Corporation web site announced, some time ago the following. I suppose the website could have been hacked by the Nigerians, they know a lot about that sort of thing, or the Russians, the Iranians or god forbid, the Chinks.

"Boeing Tianjin Composites, a joint venture with AVIC, unveils energy-efficient facility TIANJIN, April 18, 2011 – Boeing [NYSE: BA] and Aviation Industries Corporation of China (AVIC) today celebrated the opening of a new factory that doubles the footprint of their joint venture, Boeing Tianjin Composites Co., Ltd.


The new facility will increase Boeing Tianjin Composites’ production capacity by 60 percent and company employment is expected to rise from 700 to more than 1,000 by 2013, the target date for full production. Boeing Tianjin Composites produces components for all of Boeing’s in-production programs including the 737, 747-8, 767, 777 and 787. Boeing invested $21 million to develop the new factory, which was built next to the existing factory in the New Binhai Area of Tianjin.

“Boeing Tianjin’s new factory is an example of win-win collaboration between China and Boeing,” said Ray Conner, vice president and general manager, Supply Chain Management & Operations, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. “We rely on our Chinese partners to produce high-quality components for Boeing airplanes, and we are excited to expand this successful joint venture to increase production and employment.”

MediaRoom - News Releases/Statements

Note it's not just the odd unstressed washer, bolt or some pieces of plastic moulding, but the new stuff, the composites.More probably it helped the share price/management and owners pockets/bonuses somewhat. Reducing costs by substituting ameristani employees with Chinese. But hey the quality is good, according to Boeing management.