Arran Rice

I'm looking for a transport, infrastructure, aviation or rail expert for a 30-45 minute recorded interview for my YouTube channel. The video is a documentary-style deep dive into why Australia never built high-speed rail, working angle: Why Australia's Busiest Route Has No Train. Sydney-Melbourne is one of the world's busiest air corridors, comparable to Tokyo-Osaka and Madrid-Barcelona, both transformed by high-speed rail decades ago. The east coast is denser than Spain. Governments have studied a line since the 1980s. Yet the first stage actually funded runs Newcastle to Sydney, a commuter corridor airlines don't serve, with a construction decision not due until 2028 and Sydney-Melbourne still decades away. The video is not for or against rail. It's about why the numbers that worked in Japan, Spain and Italy keep failing in Australia, what that has meant for Qantas and domestic aviation, and whether the Newcastle line is the start of something real or another study that goes nowhere. I'd like someone who can explain: Why every Australian HSR proposal since the 1980s has stalled How geography, city spacing and population distribution change the economics versus Europe and Japan Why the first funded stage is Newcastle-Sydney, not Sydney-Melbourne or Sydney-Canberra The real cost drivers (tunnelling, land, the Hawkesbury crossing) and why estimates keep climbing How the Sydney-Melbourne air market evolved without rail, and whether Qantas and Virgin benefited structurally The rail-versus-air tipping point, and where Sydney-Melbourne and Sydney-Canberra would sit What happened to airlines in Spain, Italy and Japan when HSR arrived on trunk routes Whether airlines ever lobbied against rail, or that's a myth What the 2028 decision really means: hype versus funded, planned or under construction Ideal sources: rail and transport analysts, infrastructure economists, aviation analysts, transport planners, academics, former airline or rail executives, and anyone who worked on earlier Australian HSR studies. The interview takes 30-45 minutes over Zoom or similar, recorded and used in a long-form aviation/travel/business documentary with full name/title/company attribution. I'm after clear, accessible commentary that helps a broad international audience understand why Australia skipped high-speed rail, and whether that is finally about to change.

I'm looking for an aviation, aerospace supply-chain, or China industrial-policy expert for a 30-45 minute recorded interview for my YouTube channel. The video is a documentary-style deep dive into the Comac C919, working angle: Why China Built The World's Most American Airliner. The C919 is China's answer to Boeing and Airbus. It took seventeen years and tens of billions of dollars, and it is meant to end China's dependence on Western aircraft. Yet the engines are CFM LEAP-1C from GE and Safran, and the avionics, flight controls, landing gear, APU and most major systems come from American and European suppliers. When US engine export approvals paused in 2025, the production line stalled. China built an airframe and bought almost everything else from the companies it is trying to replace. The video is not a "Boeing killer" story or a "copy that can't fly without Western permission" story. It's about why China accepted that dependence, what the C919 is actually for, and whether a fully Chinese version is realistic within a decade. I'd like someone who can explain: Why Comac chose Western suppliers rather than domestic ones, and whether it had a choice What the C919 actually is: how much is Chinese by value, and which systems matter most The CJ-1000A engine programme and how far it realistically is from certification How the 2025 export-licence pause affected production, and what it revealed about leverage What the C919 is really for: domestic market capture, industrial learning, bargaining power with Boeing and Airbus, or all three Why China's domestic airlines are ordering it, and on what terms Whether EASA or FAA certification is achievable, and whether it matters How this compares with Japan's failed SpaceJet and Russia's MC-21 What a "fully Chinese" C919 would take, and by when Whether Boeing and Airbus should be worried, and on what timescale Ideal sources: aerospace analysts, aircraft supply-chain specialists, engine industry experts, former Boeing, Airbus, GE, Safran or Comac-supplier staff, China industrial-policy academics, and journalists who have covered Comac closely. The interview takes 30-45 minutes over Zoom or similar, recorded and used in a long-form aviation/business documentary with full name/title/company attribution. I'm after clear, accessible commentary that helps a broad international audience understand why China built a plane it can't build alone, and what happens next.