中國人認(rèn)為美國飛機(jī)和汽車的制造質(zhì)量差嗎？美國網(wǎng)友：美國仍然擁有龐大的制造業(yè)，高端制造業(yè)仍由美國主導(dǎo)，它是全球第二大制造商。

Alexexy·3d ago
Im Chinese American and the overall consensus is that most American car manufacturers are some combination of overpriced or poor in quality. Most of the cars my family purchased were either of German or Japanese brands.
我是華裔美國人，總體而言大多數(shù)美國汽車制造商都是價(jià)格高或質(zhì)量差的代名詞。我買的汽車大多數(shù)都是德國或日本的品牌。
With that said, I do like Chevys
話雖如此，我確實(shí)喜歡雪佛蘭

Law-of-Poe·3d ago
As an American I agree with your statement on cars.
作為一個(gè)美國人，我同意你關(guān)于汽車的說法。
Despite some high profile incidents though, the airplanes have a strong safety record.
盡管發(fā)生了一些引人注目的事件，但這些飛機(jī)擁有良好的安全記錄。
Boeing is doing a horrible job of maintaining it but I wouldn’t generalize the entire aviation industry based on a few incidents.
波音在維護(hù)它方面做得很糟糕，但我不會根據(jù)一些事件來概括整個(gè)航空業(yè)。

Alexexy·3d ago
I didn't even bring up the Boeing planes because I don't really have an opportunity to pick the plane I'm riding on. The lack of safety is really concerning but there's very little an average person can do to pick the actual planes they fly on
我甚至沒有提到波音飛機(jī)，因?yàn)槲艺娴臎]有機(jī)會選擇我乘坐的飛機(jī)。缺乏安全性確實(shí)令人擔(dān)憂，但普通人幾乎無法選擇他們實(shí)際乘坐的飛機(jī)

Naive_Ad7923·3d ago
I know a lot of people actively trying to avoid the MAX planes when they book their flights.
我知道很多人在預(yù)訂航班時(shí)積極嘗試避免乘坐 MAX 飛機(jī)。

Complex-Fluids-334·2d ago
Iirc, air travel is still the safest option for trafficking, it’s just every time something fails the consequences are devastating.
IIRC，航空旅行仍然是人口販運(yùn)最安全的選擇，只是每次出現(xiàn)問題都會造成毀滅性的后果。

UrRightMyDude·2d ago
German cars are the epitome of overpriced and poor in quality. I’ve been a car enthusiast for decades and even the niche that loves them admits this. The people that buy them new are the type that cycle through cars too quickly to even care. The most expensive thing you can buy is a used German car.
德國汽車是價(jià)格高、質(zhì)量差的縮影。我?guī)资陙硪恢笔瞧噽酆谜?，即使是喜愛德國車的小眾群體也承認(rèn)這一點(diǎn)。購買新車的人都是那種換車太快，根本不在乎的人。你能買到的最貴的東西就是德國二手車。
Meanwhile the US puts out some of the best engine platforms that can be bought.
與此同時(shí)，美國推出了一些可以購買的最好的發(fā)動機(jī)平臺。

David_88888888·23h ago
I'm Chinese-Australian, it's the same with us as well.
我是澳大利亞華裔，我們也是一樣。
But those in Mainland China seem to have more favorable views towards American cars & less favorable views towards Japanese cars. Granted a good chunk of American cars sold in China are produced locally, and Teslas are cheaper in China than a lot of other markets.
但是中國大陸的人似乎對美國汽車的看法更樂觀，而對日本汽車的看法則較差。誠然，在中國銷售的美國汽車中有很大一部分是本地生產(chǎn)的，而特斯拉在中國比許多其他國家市場的價(jià)格要便宜。

Competent_Finance·3d ago
Made in the USA, almost never means made in the USA.
在美國制造，幾乎從來不意味著在美國制造。
American car manufacturers are a perfect example of capitalistic failure, parts are all manufactured by the lowest bidder in China, India, Taiwan, etc… but assembled in the US and then sold for top dollar as if the whole process wasn’t a grotesquely inefficient cost cutting effort.
美國汽車制造商是資本主義失敗的完美典范，零部件都是由中國、印度、臺灣（地區(qū)）等地的低價(jià)競標(biāo)者生產(chǎn)的，但在美國組裝，然后以高價(jià)出售，好像整個(gè)過程并不是一種怪異的低效削減成本的努力。

Fit_Number_6623·2d ago
Typical Americunt. Uts always everyone elses fault. It the fault of Mexico they have too much land. Let me steal some of that. Its the fault of central american farmers. They want more than a peasants wahes. Let me kill those reformers and install puppet dictators. Its the fault of filipinos. They are not christian (catholics) or educated (university of sto. Tomas older than Harvard), let me annex and civilize them. Its the fault of Vietnamese, they should let our fellow white the French exploit them. Its the fault of the iranians, they have too much oil. Let me install a dictator king. Oh they rebelled and have mullahs instead. Lets try to impoverish and starve the iranians. Fuck americunts
典型的美國人。Uts 總是別人的錯(cuò)。這是墨西哥的錯(cuò)，他們有太多的土地。讓我偷走一些。這是中美洲農(nóng)民的錯(cuò)。他們想要的不僅僅是農(nóng)民的錯(cuò)。讓我殺死那些改革者，扶植傀儡獨(dú)裁者。這是菲律賓人的錯(cuò)。他們不是基督教徒（天主教徒），也不是受過教育的（斯托大學(xué)。比哈佛大學(xué)還老的托馬斯），讓我吞并他們并使其文明化。這是越南人的錯(cuò)，他們應(yīng)該讓我們的白人同胞法國人剝削他們。這是伊朗人的錯(cuò)，他們有太多的石油。讓我扶植一個(gè)獨(dú)裁者國王。哦，他們造反了，取而代之的是毛拉。讓我們試著讓伊朗人貧窮和饑餓。去他媽的美國人

Competent_Finance·2d ago
LMao, victim complex much?
LMao，受害者情結(jié)很多？
The fault falls squarely on the heads of the executives and accountants looking to cut costs and they then choose inferior means of production to pad the bottom line.
這完全歸咎于那些希望降低成本的管理者和會計(jì)師，他們選擇了低劣的生產(chǎn)手段來墊底。
Not saying great quality production doesn’t exist in China. It absolutely does. No one better at reproducing existing technologies… but to say that the corporate executives are paying for anything but mediocre foreign production would be laughable.
我并不是說中國不存在高質(zhì)量的產(chǎn)品。絕對存在。在復(fù)制現(xiàn)有技術(shù)方面，中國無人能出其右......但如果說企業(yè)高管只為平庸的外國產(chǎn)品買單，那就太可笑了。
You get what you pay for though ?.
不過，一分價(jià)錢一分貨

Prudent_Concept·2d ago
They’re well beyond just reproducing. Your stereotypical view of China is about 15 years behind.
他們遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超出了僅僅復(fù)制。你對中國的刻板印象落后了大約 15 年。

CCCPhungus·2d ago
Just built the world's first molten thorium reactor.
剛剛建造了世界上第一個(gè)熔融釷反應(yīng)堆。

BenchBeginning8086·3d ago
In 2024 Boeing planes had 4348 accidents (and this means ANY kind of accident, not just crashes) in the United States. And Airbus had 1481 accidents. In other words, Boeing had 2.9 times as many accidents.
2024 年，波音飛機(jī)在美國發(fā)生了 4348 起事故（這意味著任何類型的事故，而不僅僅是墜機(jī)）。空客發(fā)生了 1481 起事故。換句話說，波音的事故數(shù)量是空客的 2.9 倍。
The United States has 6701 Boeing planes and 2283 Airbus planes. In other words they have 2.9 times more Boeing planes.
美國有 6701 架波音飛機(jī)和 2283 架空客飛機(jī)。換句話說，他們的波音飛機(jī)數(shù)量是他們的 2.9 倍。
In other words. No. Boeing planes aren't poor quality.
換句話說。 不。 波音飛機(jī)的質(zhì)量并不差。
If you use numbers for how many accidents are caused by malfunctions the numbers are so low they don't reach statistical significance. It's in the single digits. But those do suggest Boeing to be slightly worse.
如果你用數(shù)字來表示故障造成的事故數(shù)量，這些數(shù)字太低了，以至于沒有達(dá)到統(tǒng)計(jì)意義。它是個(gè)位數(shù)。但這些確實(shí)表明波音的情況要差一些。

kemb0·3d ago
I'd argue your use of statistics could be seen as not giving a fair picture. You state this covers any kind of accident, so presumably not specific to the aircraft flown. In other words, in terms of an aircraft's safety, we're not concerned about things like, say, minor pilot errors that will get logged as "accidents" but will tell us nothing about an aircraft's safey.
我認(rèn)為，你使用的統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)可能并不公平。你說這涵蓋了任何類型的事故，所以應(yīng)該不是針對特定的飛機(jī)。換句話說，就飛機(jī)的安全性而言，我們并不關(guān)心諸如飛行員的小失誤之類的事情，這些失誤會被記錄為 "事故"，但對飛機(jī)的安全性沒有任何影響。
Let's make up some statistics to show what I mean:
讓我們假設(shè)一些統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)來說明我的意思：
Boeing aircraft: 10 fatal disasters leading to 1,000 passenger deaths. 4338 other minor accidents leading to no fatalities.
波音飛機(jī)：10 起致命災(zāi)難，導(dǎo)致 1,000 名乘客死亡。4338 起其他輕微事故，無人員傷亡。
Airbus: 0 fatal disasters. 1481 other minor accidents
空客：0 起致命災(zāi)難。1481 起其他輕微事故
These statistics fit within your "explanation" above of why no aircraft manufacturer is better than the other, yet the figures here clearly show that one is way worse than the other. But your way of explaining this conveniently covers that up by merging the fatal accidents with the far more frequent and essentially meaningless figure of "minor accidents".
這些統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字符合你上面的 "解釋"，即為什么沒有一家飛機(jī)制造商比另一家好，但這里的數(shù)字清楚地表明，一家比另一家差得多。但你的解釋方式很方便地掩蓋了這一點(diǎn)，將致命事故與更頻繁但本質(zhì)上毫無意義的 "輕微事故 "數(shù)字合并在一起。
Now I don't actually know the fatalities of either manfucaturer in the US, so maybe that would paint the same picture, but the point is we DO need to see that picutre and not the one you're presenting.
現(xiàn)在，我并不清楚這兩個(gè)人在美國的死亡人數(shù)，所以也許這也能描繪出同樣的畫面，但問題是我們確實(shí)需要看到那張照片，而不是你展示的那張。
And furthermore, we need to see the global picture too, since America isn't the only place in the world where an aircraft accident can oocur and isn't the only place in the world where people fly.
此外，我們還需要放眼全球，因?yàn)槊绹⒉皇鞘澜缟衔ㄒ豢赡馨l(fā)生飛機(jī)事故的地方，也不是世界上唯一有人乘坐飛機(jī)的地方。

BenchBeginning8086·3d ago
I agree that it doesn't give the full picture, giving the full picture would require a LOT of research which is why I used accidents in general.
我同意這并不能說明全部情況，要說明全部情況需要大量的研究，這也是我使用一般事故的原因。
My reasoning for why it's still relevant is just that a poor quality plane, logically would still have a higher proportion of "general" accidents. It'd be higher in both categories. Having a plane be higher in fatalities but identical in general accidents seems.... statistically unlikely.
我的理由是，從邏輯上講，質(zhì)量差的飛機(jī)發(fā)生 "一般 "事故的比例仍然會更高。兩類事故的比例都會更高。如果一架飛機(jī)的死亡事故比例較高，但在一般事故中的比例相同，這在統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)上似乎....，不太可能。
I think it's reasonable to say that to make the claim that a plane is meaningfully "low quality" it would certainly have more frequent accidents in general.
我認(rèn)為有理由說，要聲稱一架飛機(jī)是有意義的 "低質(zhì)量"，它肯定會在總體上發(fā)生更頻繁的事故。
Also, I chose to use just the US because that way maintenance standards were consistent. At least more consistent than they would be across the whole globe anyways.
此外，我選擇只使用美國，因?yàn)檫@樣維護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是一致的。至少比他們在全球范圍內(nèi)的一致性更高。

YouthOtherwise3833·3d ago
I think fatal accidents must count along.
我認(rèn)為致命事故必須計(jì)算在內(nèi)。

IwishIwasaballer__·3d ago
The Boeing accidents that have had a deadly outcome the last years has all been deemed pilot error. The only one we cannot say for sure is the one that happened in China as they don't release the investigation but from the leaks it seems like pilot suicide.
過去幾年發(fā)生的波音致命事故都被認(rèn)定為飛行員失誤。唯一不能確定的是發(fā)生在中國的事故，因?yàn)樗麄儧]有公布調(diào)查結(jié)果，但從泄露的信息來看，似乎像是飛行員自殺。

22_Yossarian_22·3d ago
That’s not looking at the full narrative.
那不是在看待完整的故事。
The original 737 entered service in the late 60s, the original Airbus A319/320/321 (737s direct competitor) took flight in the 80s. 
最初的波音 737 于 60 年代末投入服務(wù)，而最初的空客 A319/320/321（737 的直接競爭對手）則是在 80 年代開始飛行。
At the time Airbus announced their newest generation of A320s, Boeing was planning a clean sheet design, but faced market pressure to continue the 737 because for 737 operators they wouldn’t have to incur the costs of a different fleet type (crew training, pilot pools (pilots only fly 1 type), maintenance, etc).  So they took shortcuts to keep the 737 going which led to MCAS which they hid from pilots and was flawed and led to the crash of two brand new planes.  Which led to a multi-year global grounding, which combined with manufacturing delays led to a massive problem for airlines that planned on Maxs for their fleets.
當(dāng)時(shí)，空客宣布其最新一代 A320 系列飛機(jī)，而波音當(dāng)時(shí)正在計(jì)劃一款全新的設(shè)計(jì)，但面臨市場壓力繼續(xù)生產(chǎn) 737，因?yàn)閷τ?737 運(yùn)營商來說，他們不需要承擔(dān)不同機(jī)隊(duì)類型的成本（如機(jī)組人員培訓(xùn)、飛行員庫（飛行員只駕駛一種機(jī)型）、維護(hù)等）。因此，他們采取了捷徑來維持 737 的生產(chǎn)，這導(dǎo)致了 MCAS 系統(tǒng)，他們向飛行員隱瞞了該系統(tǒng)，并且存在缺陷，最終導(dǎo)致了兩架全新飛機(jī)的墜毀。這導(dǎo)致了數(shù)年的全球停飛，再加上制造延誤，給那些計(jì)劃將 737 Max 納入機(jī)隊(duì)的航空公司帶來了巨大的問題。
Not to mention that the 787 was also grounded for about 6 months early in its career due to frequent on board fires, and luckily non of them happened 30K over an ocean 2 hours from an airport.
更不用說，波音 787 在其早期職業(yè)生涯中也因頻繁的機(jī)艙火災(zāi)停飛了大約 6 個(gè)月，幸運(yùn)的是，這些事故都沒有發(fā)生在距離機(jī)場兩小時(shí)、三萬英尺高空的海面上。
And the whistle blowers at the 787 factory.
還有 787 工廠的吹哨人。
737 Max door blow out due to poor standards of manufacturing.
737 Max 的門因制造標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差而爆開。
The 737-7 Max can’t get certified by the FAA and there a number of 737-7s built years ago sitting in the desert waiting to be certified before they can be delivered to the airline that bought them.
737-7 Max 無法獲得 FAA 認(rèn)證，有許多多年前建造的 737-7 停放在沙漠中，等待認(rèn)證后才能交付給購買它們的航空公司。
And now, the newest variant of the Boeing 777 (777-X) is years behind schedule.
現(xiàn)在，波音 777 的最新型號（777-X）已經(jīng)多年延期。
I tell you, I am in no hurry to take the 777X over an ocean.  
我告訴你，我不著急乘坐 777X 跨越海洋。

BenchBeginning8086·3d ago
I can't find a source that's done the research on that.
我找不到對此進(jìn)行研究的來源。
And if I were to research it myself, I would want to look into the investigations for each one to weed out "freak accidents". Things that clearly were not the plane's fault. That'd take a little longer than I want to invest into a reddit comment so I'm not sure what you'd find.
如果我自己來研究，我想調(diào)查每一起事故的調(diào)查情況，以排除 "怪胎事故"。這顯然不是飛機(jī)的錯(cuò)。這比我在 reddit 上發(fā)表評論要花費(fèi)更多時(shí)間，所以我不確定你能找到什么。

BenchBeginning8086·3d ago
If you want to argue that Russia shooting down the plane is actually Airbus's fault then go for it.
如果你想論證俄羅斯擊落飛機(jī)實(shí)際上是空客的過錯(cuò)，那就去做吧。
But that is what I'm referring to. Going through the incidents case by case and removing incidents that clearly were not the fault of the plane's manufacturing.
但這正是我指的是。逐個(gè)審查事件，并排除那些明顯不是飛機(jī)制造問題的案例。
If you believe doing this is fundamentally biased... I strongly suggest you never use published research. Because this is common practice.
如果你認(rèn)為這樣做從根本上是有偏見的……我強(qiáng)烈建議你永遠(yuǎn)不要使用已發(fā)表的研究。因?yàn)檫@是一種常見做法。

Gimme_Indomie·3d ago
Around a decade ago, there was a perception that American (or foreign) cars were more prestigious and better quality. Anyone who had money would buy a foreign car over a Chinese car.
大約十年前，人們普遍認(rèn)為美國（或外國）汽車更有聲望、質(zhì)量更好。任何有錢的人都會選擇購買外國汽車而不是中國汽車。
I think as the Chinese car market has matured, particularly with e-cars, this is changing. Chinese cars are no longer poor quality & people are even getting excited about Chinese cars (the xiaomi SU7 and the new SUV come to mind).
我認(rèn)為隨著中國汽車市場的成熟，特別是隨著電動汽車的發(fā)展，這種情況正在改變。中國汽車不再質(zhì)量差了，人們甚至開始對中國汽車感到興奮（小米 SU7 和新款 SUV 就是例子）。

Old_Hero_in_NanJing·3d ago
Not poo quality, but really expensive.
不是質(zhì)量差，而是真的貴。
For example, a Camry in China only costs about 10k usd. The insurance and other fees are also much higher.
例如，在中國，一輛凱美瑞只要大約 1 萬美元。保險(xiǎn)和其他費(fèi)用也高得多。

cyberthinking·3d ago
Tesla sells 60,000 units per month in China, good quality. The sales of other American brands of cars in China are shrinking. Traditionally, American cars are considered stronger than Japanese cars, but the fuel consumption is high.
特斯拉在中國每月銷售 6 萬輛，質(zhì)量很好。其他美國品牌汽車在中國的銷量正在萎縮。傳統(tǒng)上，美國汽車被認(rèn)為比日本汽車更強(qiáng)大，但油耗很高。
If I have a choice, I will try not to take Boeing planes. The technology of American fighter jets is still very good.
如果我有選擇，我會盡量不乘坐波音飛機(jī)。美國戰(zhàn)斗機(jī)的技術(shù)仍然非常好。

Fc1145141919810·3d ago
China was already looking to reduce reliance on the US and boost trade with Europe by buying more Airbus planes. Now Boeing’s incompetence just handed China the perfect excuse on a silver platter
中國本就在尋求減少對美國的依賴，通過購買更多空客飛機(jī)來加強(qiáng)與歐洲的貿(mào)易。如今波音的無能正好給了中國一個(gè)完美的借口。

Papapa_555·3d ago
there's a lot of BS against Boeing, as if Airbus is much better. They have just been better are not getting bad press when they have accidents.
針對波音的批評很多，好像空客就特別好。它們只是表現(xiàn)一直不錯(cuò)，在發(fā)生事故時(shí)沒有受到負(fù)面報(bào)道。
But in terms of automobiles? I wouldn't be caught dead driving an american car.
但在汽車方面？我絕不會開美國車。

moxiaoran2012·3d ago
American don’t make that much physicals good anymore, most of their sp500 asset are intangible now compare to 50 years ago. These days American most known for their software and social media giants
美國人現(xiàn)在不再生產(chǎn)那么多優(yōu)質(zhì)實(shí)體產(chǎn)品了，與 50 年前相比，他們的大多數(shù)標(biāo)普 500 資產(chǎn)都是無形的。如今，美國人最出名的就是他們的軟件和社交媒體巨頭。

UrRightMyDude·2d ago
The US still has a huge manufacturing industry. It’s the second largest manufacturer on the planet. Many consumer goods were outsourced a long time ago but higher end manufacturing is still dominated by the USA.
美國仍然擁有龐大的制造業(yè)。它是全球第二大制造商。許多消費(fèi)品早已外包，但高端制造業(yè)仍由美國主導(dǎo)。

AsterKando·3d ago
Cars, unquestionably. They’re perceived as generally bad quality because it generally holds true. I can’t think of any products I have IRL that are made in the US, but the few that I think of are grossly overpriced. 
毫無疑問是汽車。它們被認(rèn)為質(zhì)量普遍較差，因?yàn)榇_實(shí)如此。我無法想到我現(xiàn)實(shí)生活中有任何美國制造的產(chǎn)品，但我想起的那幾個(gè)都價(jià)格嚴(yán)重虛高。
Booing seems to suffer from the typical American corruption that seeps into monopolies. 
噓聲似乎遭受了典型的美國式腐敗，這種腐敗滲透到了壟斷企業(yè)中。

ExcellentRest5919·
3d agoSome think there's worthwhile while others don't.
有些人認(rèn)為有值得之處，而有些人則不這么認(rèn)為。
However, it's too early to blame who as the route cause has not been established. While the plane is a Boeing it doesn't maintain or pilot the plane itself.
然而，現(xiàn)在還為時(shí)過早來指責(zé)誰，因?yàn)楦驹蛏形创_定。雖然飛機(jī)是波音制造的，但它自己并不進(jìn)行維護(hù)或駕駛飛機(jī)。

Major_Shlongage·3d ago
I think you're being intentionally misleading here.
我認(rèn)為你在這里故意誤導(dǎo)。
You're associating this plane crash with poor quality of the plane. There is absolutely no evidence that this is the case.
你認(rèn)為這起空難與飛機(jī)質(zhì)量差有關(guān)。但完全沒有證據(jù)表明這是事實(shí)。
Also, from watching the video of the crash it appeared that the flaps were't even extended on the plane during takeoff. If I had to guess, my first guess was that he thought the flaps are extended, took off with a normal flight profile and stalled the wing, losing lift. You can see that the plane was level and controllable.
此外，從觀看的墜機(jī)視頻來看，飛機(jī)起飛時(shí)似乎機(jī)翼襟翼都沒有展開。如果我要猜測，我的第一個(gè)猜測是，他以為機(jī)翼襟翼已經(jīng)展開，正常起飛后機(jī)翼失速，失去升力。你可以看到飛機(jī)是平穩(wěn)且可控的。

Awkward_Willingness2·2d ago
Yes, US manufacturers spend all the money on military. That’s where you find the best engineers. The stuff that doesn’t kill people all very poorly made
是的，美國制造商把所有錢都花在軍事上了。在那里你能找到最好的工程師。那些不會殺死人的東西都做得非常差勁。

UrRightMyDude·2d ago
The US is the 2nd largest manufacturer on Earth and the bulk of that is high end products and machinery. You can find it all over the world as well.
美國是地球上第二大的制造商，其中大部分是高端產(chǎn)品和機(jī)械。你可以在世界各地找到它們。

random_walker_1·2d ago
For cars, the general consensus on quality was Japan > Europe >= U.S. >> domestic. At least when I was growing up.
對于汽車，關(guān)于質(zhì)量的普遍共識是日本 > 歐洲 >= 美國 >> 國內(nèi)。至少在我小時(shí)候是這樣。

Which-Technology8235·2d ago
Stuff in US is built for profit not longevity. It’s about how much you can squeeze from the consumers and reduce your manufacturing cost
美國的產(chǎn)品是為了利潤而非持久性而制造的。關(guān)鍵在于你能從消費(fèi)者身上榨取多少，以及如何降低制造成本。

No_Equal_9074·2d ago
American cars are junk, but Chinese still use alot of American plane parts like engines. Most foreign cars you see in China will be Japanese or German anyways. China still has a fleet of older Boeing jets that work just fine, but will probably be slowly phased out with domestic planes or Airbus given the direction Boeing's going.
美國汽車是垃圾，但中國人仍然大量使用美國飛機(jī)的零部件，比如發(fā)動機(jī)。你在中國看到的絕大多數(shù)外國汽車都是日本或德國的。中國仍然擁有一批性能良好的老式波音飛機(jī)，但鑒于波音的發(fā)展方向，這些飛機(jī)可能會逐漸被國產(chǎn)飛機(jī)或空客飛機(jī)取代。

Busy-Ad2193·1d ago
We look up to America brands for some reason, maybe not in terms of quality I would say, but they are seen as desirable nevertheless, people want to be seen with an iPhone or Tesla.
我們不知為何會仰慕美國品牌，也許不在于質(zhì)量，但它們?nèi)匀槐灰暈槔硐胫x，人們想要被看到使用 iPhone 或特斯拉。