The CR929 is a wide-body, long-range commercial aircraft jointly developed by the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (COMAC) and the Russian United Aircraft Corporation (UAC). Announced in 2014, the CR929 represents a collaboration between China and Russia to create a competitive offering in the wide-body aircraft market, challenging the dominance of Boeing and Airbus. The CR929 aims to accommodate approximately 280 to 300 passengers and has a projected range of around 12,000 kilometers. This twin-aisle aircraft is designed to incorporate advanced aerodynamics, fuel efficiency, and passenger comfort features. The CR929 program brings together the expertise and resources of both countries, leveraging their manufacturing capabilities and technological prowess. It symbolizes the strategic partnership between China and Russia in the aerospace industry, promoting international cooperation and mutual development. With the CR929, COMAC and UAC aim to cater to the increasing demand for long-haul travel, offering a reliable and technologically advanced aircraft that meets the evolving needs of airlines and passengers worldwide.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ37 | |
| 2 | Ṁ14 | |
| 3 | Ṁ2 | |
| 4 | Ṁ1 | |
| 5 | Ṁ0 |
Name changed to C929, resolving NO in accordance with comments below. I will make new markets soon.
There's a lot of chatter these days about a full or partial Russian withdrawal from the CR929 programme.
It raises the question of what would happen to this market if that happens.
I'm open to discussion, but I think as a guiding principle: if the project retains the CR prefix I will keep this market open, whereas if it changes to C929 I would resolve this 'no' and create a new version, on the basis that the presence or absence of the R in the name is a strong signal about Russian involvement in the programme.
The risk with the above approach is of course the scenario where the name doesn't change but there is a total absence of Russian participation. In that case my instinct is also to resolve NO, but I'd apply a high burden of evidence that Russia had indeed withdrawn.
@JoshuaWilkes I agree with your thoughts. Maybe we could use the press releases or celebration event as a concrete measure of participation. If some Russian official participates, it resolves yes, no matter how much Russia contributed concretely.
@MaxPayne I think if China is somehow pretending that Russia is still involved (which includes your criteria), it will remain eligible for yes. I hope it is clarified though. I would like to make more markets and it currently feels hard to.
