C919 Chinese Airliner

            I do not believe that the C919 will receive FAA certification because of the political consequences.  According to CNN “During President Xi Jinping's recent state visit to the United States, China signed a deal with Boeing to purchase 300 airliners worth $38 billion at list prices” (Jiang 2015). And “When German Chancellor Angela Merkel visited Beijing last week, China also announced that it would buy 130 Airbus jets valued at $17 billion” (Jiang 2015).  These orders in itself will cause a political uproar if China does not follow through with them.  I don’t see China making these signed deals with Boeing and Airbus while claiming “The C919 has received 517 orders, mostly from Chinese carriers, leasing firms” (Jiang 2015).  According to CNN, of 17 aircraft systems the C919 is made up of 11 American systems, 3 French and 4 Chinese.  Boeing and Airbus do not want the competition of this new aircraft because “Already the world's second largest air travel market after the United States, China will need more than 6,300 new planes over the next two decades, according to a recent Boeing forecast” (Jiang 2015).  China and the United States are each trying to hold their ground on their aviation footprint.  The United States has been around in the aviation industry longer, they have more experience, more catastrophes, more crashes and a significant amount of safety measures in place based on these trials.  Just to put a stamp on a certification for political aspects is not worth it to the flying public.  The aviation industry owes that much to those who died for these hard lessons learned just to throw away an endorsement for political ties.
            I believe the challenges would come down to making the aircraft manufactures competitive.  The average U.S. traveler is looking for a good deal to travel and good customer service.  If the C919 was marketed well, it would create a pretty picture for the flying public.  With the fluctuating cost between competitors of air travel, passengers looking for a quick and cheap getaway would fly the C919 without a second thought.  The average person is not researching the aircraft they fly with.  Their main concerns are to arrive on time, to have a cheap price tag and for their luggage to arrive when they do.  Other than that, I doubt the public will care because they are not aircraft enthusiasts, they are just passengers.
            With Boeing and Airbus needing to compete with a third aircraft competitor, I believe Boeing and Airbus, both established companies, would prove their reliability and quality compared to the Chinese’s short history in aviation.  The U. S. regulations have been written in blood and high standards have been set forth by the FAA to ensure safety for all air travelers.  The Boeing and Airbus aircrafts have proven their ability to change and adjust to new safety regulations.  It is more critical that an aircraft be dependable and reliable in the air.  Yet, the Chinese have not proven that their aircraft can safely fly.  All they have proven is that they can make an airplane.  Are the Chinese willing to accept the FAA requirements in order to receive certification?
            The COMAC has a regional aircraft, the ARJ121 that has not been FAA certified at this time.  The aircraft was limited to its destinations. The Chinese have been dragging their feet to get the ARJ-21 delivered to Chinese airlines and the first one was delivered this year to Chengdu Airlines.  The ARJ21 has not been endorsed or certified through the FAA, and it is a much smaller 94 passenger aircraft and has been cleared to fly since 2014.  A society that does not conform to the needs of the people nor protects the people does not seem to be a government that will conform to the demands of the aviation industry.  The FAA requires specific standards to ensure safety for all travelers in order to fly into the United States or that flies under the FAA guidelines.  At this time, this Chinese aircraft can only be flown into Asian based airports and other countries that acknowledge the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) certificate(Coonan 2016). 
            There are many companies that are currently making small regional aircraft, but not narrow-body aircraft like the Boeing 737 or A320.  Companies like Embraer, Bombardier and Golfstream to name a few have not ventured into the narrow-body industry but a new aircraft entering the market could open the possibility for other companies to make a new aircraft to be competitive.
            At this time, I am not aware of any business plans.  I feel that these two companies are strong enough in their product that they will be able to take on any competitor.

Reference
Coonan, C. (2016, January 5). China’s Comac delivers first homegrown ARJ-21 jet to Chengdu Airlines. Retrieved March 29, 2016, from http://www.irishtimes.com/business/manufacturing/china-s-comac-delivers-first-homegrown-arj-21-jet-to-chengdu-airlines-1.2484566

Jiang, S. (2015, November 2). China takes on Boeing, Airbus with new passenger jet. Retrieved March 29, 2016, from http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/02/asia/china-new-c919-passenger-jet/

Spacelines

The dream of going into space goes back many years and in the late 50’s and early 60’s did it seem to become more of a reality.  With the success of landing on the moon and space exploration the skies have opened up for many opportunities. “In 1996, a group of philanthropists and entrepreneurs began to change that by starting an international incentive prize competition, the Ansari XPRIZE.” (Virgin 2016).  On October 4, 2004 SpaceShipOne completed the requirements of the contest out of the 26 teams that entered the competition from around the world. Only one emerged as a winner and now Virgin Galactic is the first commercial spaceline. What helped to send the possibility of space tourism was on “April 28, 2001, American businessman Dennis Tito became history’s first space tourist, paying his own way to the International Space Station aboard a Russian Soyuz spacecraft. (Wall 2011).” Virgin Airlines’ Galactica Space Travel accomplishments include having a rocket and a transport ship.  The plans for SpaceShipTwo took five years to develop into the physical aircraft and its first successful test flight.  Many highly skilled engineers worked tirelessly to develop a feasible design. For Virgin Galactic on October 31, 2014 they suffered a major setback when SpaceShipTwo crashed because of pilot error.  According to Sir Richard Branson after the accident he said "Every new transformative technology requires risk, and we have seen the tragic and brave sacrifice of Mike and the recovery of injured surviving pilot Pete Siebold and Their tremendous efforts are not in vain and will serve to strengthen our resolve to make big dreams come true" (Malik 2015). 

Knowing all the possibilities cannot be foreseen, as for the Galactica incident in 2014 which was determine to be pilot error.  Regulations come as the envelope is tested or pressing the boundaries.  Restrictions are based on what is happening with this new frontier.  There are many unexplored circumstances that are unknown until an incident occurs.  The liability alone will be the most crucial factor for the space tourism industry to be successful.  If you consider other high risk extracurricular activities such as sky diving, this thrill seeking activity requires two hours of classroom training for tandem jumping and approximately six hours for a solo jump.  The training primarily consists of reading altitude, controlled free fall and operation of a parachute.  All of this is for a brief experience of a 3-4 minute free fall at up to 10,000 feet above ground.  In comparison, consider the training that astronauts need for all of the components of space mission including launch, living in space, the use of space suits, checking equipment, various emergency procedures and preparing for reentry.  The space tourists would need to have training that is comparable to astronauts in order to survive the flight to the edge of space and back to Earth.  This training would potentially costly and time consuming.  Aircrew per passengers, crew training, more crew equals less room on each flight, adding costs, trained qualified crew to attend to guests similar to a flight attendant.  If getting out of the seats to experience zero gravity is part of the spaceline experience passengers will need to be assisted to get back in their seat.  Also will the insurance liability allow passengers out their seats once in space?  How will the cabin be prepared for descent back to Earth?  If guests were uncooperative in space it could cause significant risks to the remaining passengers.  Also to consider are the maintenance practices and what type of inspections are needed? 

"My dream was to fly in space before I die," Tito said. "And I basically came up with that lifelong goal around the time of Yuri Gagarin's flight." (Wall 2011).  I see space tourism being a thing until the unthinkable happens.  The risks involved are greater than the first flight.  It will only be for the rich at first and until it becomes more affordable it will still be a dream for most.  I believe it will be just a one-time bucket list for at least 20 years, then it will slowly become a space resort type vacation, but first it needs to be proven and tested as long as it continues to be safe leading to the expansion of possibilities.  I don’t see space tourism taking off any time soon due to the lack of data to prove that this will be a safe and sustainable.  The engineer had difficulties designing nose gear and rudder play that changed the dynamics from flight configuration to landing configuration.  This is surprising to me considering the technology for landing gear and rudder systems have been around since the early 1920’s.  If this was a challenge how are they supposed to create a cabin design that differentiates between normal travel and space flight which is a more complex system.  If the industry is able to find insurance and liability coverage, it would yield huge costs for the consumer.  This will be an experience for the rich and those completing “bucket list” items.  This will not be a family vacation excursion or field trip type activity.  Participating in this experience will require additional travel an exclusive “space airport”, likely in California.  I imagine that only one airport will operate these flights due to limited availability of equipment and insurance/liability.  The high costs for rocket fuel will also add to the extreme cost for this activity and detract from the affordability of participation.

Reference

A Brief History of Human Spaceflight - Virgin Galactic. (n.d.). Retrieved March 15, 2016, from http://www.virgingalactic.com/human-spaceflight/history-of-human-spaceflight/

Malik, T. (2015, July 28). Deadly SpaceShipTwo Crash Caused by Co-Pilot Error: NTSB. Retrieved March 15, 2016, from http://www.space.com/30073-virgin-galactic-spaceshiptwo-crash-pilot-error.html

Wall, M. (2011, April 27). First Space Tourist: How a U.S. Millionaire Bought a Ticket to Orbit. Retrieved March 15, 2016, from http://www.space.com/11492-space-tourism-pioneer-dennis-tito.html