PPRuNe Forums


Canada The great white north. A BIG country with few people and LOTS of aviation.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 19th Dec 2015, 01:40   #41 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 754
To correct some inaccuracies.... if I may?

Only 1 engine failure. Not plural, singular. Testing has a purpose.
(You're welcome Airbus NEO, Boeing MAX, and Embraer Ejets)

243 firm orders before certification of ANY aircraft is nowhere near "bottom of the barrel" by any stretch. History shows us firm orders at certification is no measure of future orders or success. In-service realities determines that.

Yes. Years late. 2 to be precise. Ask A or B how long it takes to clean sheet design an aeroplane from conception through to certification? They'll likely rhetorically ask you how long is a piece of string, because such a prediction is nothing more than a hopeful best guess.

Such drama! Such negativity!

Congratulations to Bombardier, f**k the naysayers!

Willie
Willie Everlearn is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2015, 19:10   #42 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,243
Willie, yes it would be nice if the C Series are a runaway seller, but the hard fact is it will only do so if the "Bean Counters" say so, and that will only happen if its the cheapest airframe out there in all respects,{ Purchase price, DOC,Maint ect} Technical merit no longer counts in our "new world",on top of this Bombardier needs to get its act together as Joe Public is fed up with the eighty handouts in fifty years from the taxpayes of Canada, time will tell!

Last edited by clunckdriver; 19th Dec 2015 at 19:38.
clunckdriver is online now  
Old 19th Dec 2015, 20:50   #43 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CYUL
Posts: 524
@ clunckdriver...

Although I agree with some of your comments I cannot agree with the one about the Canadian government subsidies...

The government needed then and needs to continue to help a company like Bombardier if it wants to keep some sort of aviation/aerospace industry viable in this country. What I will agree to is that it shouldn't be just hands out with no strings attached; they should be in form of very low interest loans, payable back to the government in due time.

Let us not kid ourselves here, In Europe they do it for Airbus and other high tech aviation companies. Embraer too gets some help from its government and in the USA without huge military contracts Boeing couldn't possibly do it on its own.
Jet Jockey A4 is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2015, 22:47   #44 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 754
clunck

You'll get no argument from me regarding your assessment of BBD or the present state of the industry, they certainly have benefitted from government 'assistance' in whatever form you'd like to highlight. I would also agree with Jet that aerospace in Canada would suffer a gigantic blow (my words, not his) if BBD were to collapse and I'd say many in government know that. Too many aerospace companies and jobs at stake because of the way things are all tied in and networked. The Feds should step up, but they should also think about a return as a risk sharing partner. One thing is for sure and certain, the Canadian government is a not-for-profit organization, so it's unlikely, if they decide to give BBD assistance, there will be any strings attached.

I'm leary of those who blow it off as "corporate welfare". Too easy to say without further examination. The so-called 'handouts' don't all meet the welfare definition. (not sayin' that's what yer sayin') While I'd agree they've had numerous handouts, they've also benefitted from investment capital and tax free loans. Quebec has invested in the company. I wouldn't point to that money as a handout because the pension fund will get a return if, and, or when the CSeries turns a profit.

The Business Development Bank hands out all kinds of dough to all kinds of entrepreneurs with no expectation of a return. None. Not one cent.
Pizza joints, B&Bs, Sports bars, you name it. The number of failures wouldn't likely surprise either one of you. For me, unlike dozens of these other businesses, I think BBD has a reasonable chance to succeed with their new aircraft.

I also understand the pressure they're under regarding pricing. But IMHO, A & B are under the same pressure to 'fire sale' product because of the threat BBD poses. Otherwise, there'd be no Max or NEO.

Good luck to them.

Willie
Willie Everlearn is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2015, 04:58   #45 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,020
Quote:
The Business Development Bank hands out all kinds of dough to all kinds of entrepreneurs with no expectation of a return. None. Not one cent.
Pizza joints, B&Bs, Sports bars, you name it. The number of failures wouldn't likely surprise either one of you.
BDB is a bank. It doesn't "hand out" anything (it does not give out grants). BDB expects profits, and is profitable overall.
peekay4 is online now  
Old 20th Dec 2015, 15:45   #46 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 754
Not my experience, but I stand corrected.
Thanks for that.

Willie
Willie Everlearn is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2015, 16:06   #47 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: On the lake
Age: 75
Posts: 591
Quote:
Canadian taxpayers will fall about $3.5-billion short of breaking even on the money the federal and Ontario governments invested in the bailouts of Chrysler Group LLC and General Motors Co. in 2009.
Canadian taxpayers lose $3.5-billion on 2009 bailout of auto firms - The Globe and Mail

Canadian governments threw $13.7 billion at the two US owned auto companies in 2009, of which they have lost $3.5 billion of taxpayers money (so far) yet there was barely a whimper from Canadian taxpayers, the Canadian press or the governments themselves.

"It had to be done, because the Americans were doing it".

Now, an entrepreneurial Canadian company finds itself in a bind (partly its own fault, for sure) many Canadians get all uptight, even though most of the Intellectual Property resides in Canada and many of the highly skilled, high value jobs are Canadian. The Canadian aerospace industry (a large proportion of which is Bombardier related) is at least as important to Canada as the auto companies.

And, oh yes, GM will not confirm it will keep any auto assembly plants in Canada after 2017: GM Canada's Steve Carlisle concerned about competitiveness in Canada - Business - CBC News

Yes, there is huge risk in creating a brand new, clean sheet commercial aircraft product, including the engine, and Pratt & Whitney historically receives more Canadian government support than Bombardier.

Wake up and smell the roses, Canada. Even a sixty cent Loonie will not make us competitive against world competition while all we agree to do is subsidise butter and cheese through centralised market management and control, at the expense of the Canadian consumer.

The C Series is a technical 'tour de force', for sure, but not for technology's sake. The technology addresses all the drivers Clunck talks about: purchase price, Direct Operating Costs, maintenance cost, not to mention cabin comfort, payload range, airfield performance, low emissions, etc, etc, where it is miles ahead of its competitors.

In my opinion, it absolutely will sell very well. Cream always rises to the top eventually!
twochai is offline  
Old 22nd Dec 2015, 05:11   #48 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 6
Quote:
In my opinion, it absolutely will sell very well. Cream always rises to the top eventually!
I completely agree with this.
CSeries is really a marvel, sooner or later the operators and people will see this. The rumors spread fast, hundreds of orders could come overnight.
_Phoenix is offline  
Old 22nd Dec 2015, 16:29   #49 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canadian Shield
Posts: 424
Quote:
In my opinion, it absolutely will sell very well. Cream always rises to the top eventually!
Just beware - dog turds float too!

er340790 is offline  
Old 22nd Dec 2015, 17:33   #50 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Escaped the sandpit 53 32′ 9.19″ N, 9 50′ 13.29″ E
Posts: 468
Quote:
The C Series is a technical 'tour de force', for sure, but not for technology's sake. The technology addresses all the drivers Clunck talks about: purchase price, Direct Operating Costs, maintenance cost, not to mention cabin comfort, payload range, airfield performance, low emissions, etc, etc, where it is miles ahead of its competitors.
We will see it..... Frankly I do have some doubts. First issue is the purchase price. As long as BBD is not able to compete with the rest of the market, the will have problems. That point was covered in an interview with an city jet executive. They decided to purchase the Suchoi Superjet 100. Second point are the Operating cost. Adding a new manufacturer to the fleet means increasing overall costs. Training of the maintenance crew, spare parts, crew training etc. Another issue is the wramp up of the production. The rumor is that BBD will reach break even with 800 firm orders. BBD will lose 32 Million USD on every C-Series which the will deliver during the next 2 years. Critical analyst predict that this number will be more in the range of 45 Mio. USD/Aircraft.

Airbus and Boeing will try to kick BBD out in every project where they compete. That means, the price of the aircraft is the crucial point. Also we should not forget that there are also other players in the market which will fight for every aircraft. As we all know, BBD isn't a cash cow at the moment. Unfortunate their other products do not contribute enough cash to subsidize the C-Series. As a matter of fact, the need to invest a bunch of bucks and R&D time into the CRJ series which is not longer competitive against the Embraers E-Series. Also on the Global-front the lost the market to Gulfstream.

BBD lost control on the C-Series timing and cost. Now they have to deal with weak revenues, a significant R&D backlog and high program cost on the C-Series.

At least an interesting challenge for the CEO......
ExDubai is online now  
Old 23rd Dec 2015, 01:21   #51 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 754
er340790
Merry Christmas

exDubai

Just a suggestion, if I may?
You might want to research your topic a little more and it would help if you ran a spellcheck before you typed something. Your posts are uninformed, biased opinions and nothing more. Here's another suggestion for you, try reading some industry magazines. They might help.
I think you'll find out a lot more about Bombardiers competitiveness if you did. But, you continue to roll out those 'rumours' if you think they're valid, accurate, or of any use to anyone.
Sukhoi? That's competition for CSeries?
Gimme a f**kin break.

Do you even know the purchase price of a CS100 or CS300 or the exchange rate difference between the CAD and USD currency? Any idea which currency they sell these units in ?????

Willie

Last edited by Willie Everlearn; 23rd Dec 2015 at 18:49.
Willie Everlearn is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2015, 05:15   #52 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,020
Willy, you might owe exDubai an apology.

CityJet did choose the Sukhoi SSJ100 over the CS100. CityJet supposed to be a "shoo-in" for the CSeries because they were going to buy CRJ900s for SAS and Bombardier could put together a "package deal".

In fact last year there was open speculation that CityJet might fly an all-Bombardier fleet:

Bloomberg: Bombardier CSeries Order Stoked by London City Specialist

This was a "head-to-head" competition between the CSeries and the SSJ, and even though the CSeries was favored, the Sukhoi won. CityJet ordered 15 SSJs, with an option for 10 more. Then just this week they converted those 10 options into firm orders, and added another 6 options.

The CS100 can take on more passengers and fly further, but the SSJ100 was likely offered at near half the price. The CSeries simply could not compete with that kind of pricing, with little chance of making up the difference from operational savings due to falling oil prices.

Even with the weak Canadian dollar, the CSeries is still not competitive. That's why yesterday Bombardier publicly signaled that they are now willing to offer the CSeries at heavy discount:

FP: Bombardier sees ‘aggressive’ CSeries pricing for new customers amid 15-month order drought

Rumors say this time they are having a tough time competing against the Embraer E2 for a possible United order. I mentioned on the other thread months ago that Bombardier should consider selling even at an initial loss, and if you read Fred Comer's comments in the above article, it appears they are now prepared to do so.
peekay4 is online now  
Old 23rd Dec 2015, 06:41   #53 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Escaped the sandpit 53 32′ 9.19″ N, 9 50′ 13.29″ E
Posts: 468
Quote:
This was a "head-to-head" competition between the CSeries and the SSJ, and even though the CSeries was favored, the Sukhoi won. CityJet ordered 15 SSJs, with an option for 10 more. Then just this week they converted those 10 options into firm orders, and added another 6 options.
@peekay And I know for sure that they are talking about another 30 aircraft
ExDubai is online now  
Old 23rd Dec 2015, 07:24   #54 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 44
To keep it in perspective

Discussions on the CS by CityJet were only to get a better deal from SSJ. SSJ100 and CS100 are not the same aircraft at all! Just below than 100 seats (98) for the SSJ and more than 130 for the CS100. And around 10 tons more MTOW for the CS100, range of the CS100 is double than for the SSJ. To make it short, the SSJ is a regional aircraft - and CityJet a regional carrier - and the CS is a narrowbody whose competitors are B737 and A320 families.
Bidule is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2015, 07:32   #55 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Escaped the sandpit 53 32′ 9.19″ N, 9 50′ 13.29″ E
Posts: 468
Quote:
and the CS is a narrowbody whose competitors are B737 and A320 families.
And both companies will not lose a deal against the CS because of prizing issues.

Willie: Try to read this That might help a little bit
ExDubai is online now  
Old 23rd Dec 2015, 19:36   #56 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 754
Ex

Sorry mate, my perception, due to many of your past remarks (and others) regarding the CSeries, is that you (they) seem to enjoy re-quoting sources who are doing nothing more than reading tea leaves and best guessing second guessers. One thing is for sure and certain, many writers of these articles write from the perspective of an outsider with nothing more to go on than speculation and wonder.

I've read the FT drivel. Sorry, but I doubt their's anything wrong with BBD's dream that they haven't or can't address. Your only repeating a perception you may have gleaned when referring to recent articles. Consider this, you may be one of those 'distant' analysts.
I read the article on Monday but thanks for it just the same. I too thought, BBD have had a rough road to certification but the aircraft is certified. Things should only get better. And they are. It's a nothing statement to say BBD have some serious competition. Of course they do. It's preposterous to say others will bury them when we can never know or be certain until there is a history. Right now there is only a possible future for this company and its CSeries. Till now it's only been speculation on the future, which we are both doing whilst waiting for it to unfold.

Car sales are easy, we buy what we can afford. Airlines are no different. They get their best deal and buy what they can afford. Explain to us if you will the smooth road Sukhoi have had with their Superjet, which by the way, is no competitor to the CSeries from any perspective you'd like to take. We might look at other types, like the A380 or B787. BBD experiences a similar track record with less delay than the others and you want (along with others) to tell the world the CSeries is dead. Only a matter of time and BBD will be history?

United may be in the market to buy some new aeroplanes. But to this point in time, I'm unaware that there is any clear leader in that competition. Despite what I've read. Unless we go with what some speculator thinks he believes is the likely winner? United simply haven't said yet who gets what for an order.

We'll just have to wait and see.

Thanks for engaging. Have a very Happy Christmas, enjoy your time with your loved ones and all the best in the New Year.

Willie
Willie Everlearn is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2015, 03:57   #57 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,020
Quote:
Discussions on the CS by CityJet were only to get a better deal from SSJ.
Sure... try go get a discount from a vendor by threatening to buy a competitor's product twice the cost... that's sounds like a winning negotiation strategy.

If anything, they were bringing E2 and SSJ into the equation to try to extract lower price from Bombardier -- the most expensive vendor at the table -- not the other way around.

My own belief -- CityJet tried to make the CS100 work -- configured for ~110 passengers -- but the economics just weren't there. For new longer routes it would make sense to fly a larger aircraft, at least a CS300. For shorter routes CityJet currently serves, the CS100 is twice the cost but offer marginal operational improvements vs the E2 or the SSJ, especially with low oil prices.

So the CS100 was not competitive and lost out. CityJet might take a second look at the CS300 when it becomes available. They'd sacrifice commonality but the bottom dollar line is what counts for the bean counters.
peekay4 is online now  
Old 25th Dec 2015, 17:21   #58 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 754
I don't recall City Jet dealing with Bombardier regarding CRJs. They may have gotten them elsewhere (current or past owner, maybe?). I'll have to look into that. The C series, I believe is what they were originally interested in. I doubt a "package" is anything more than a suggestion by the author of the Bloomberg article.
Fuel burns on shorter legs with the CSeries are incredible not to mention lower charges for landing fees compared to A & B, etc. There shouldn't be much difference between fuel burn on an equivalent CRJ sector compared to th C.
The C series isn't certified for steep approaches yet and a company like City Jet might have to wait too long for a C series to fit into their business plan.

The bottom line for bean counters is the ROI. They need something in service or investors get nervous. If money were no object, no one would buy the Super Jet if they could get a C Series. I recommend you take a close look at the SJ then go look at a C series. If you know anything about quality of investment the SJ won't even be in the conversation.

MRJ now officially delayed 3 and a half years. Oh oh. Mitsubishi in danger of going out of business?? Let's see what the experts say. Personally, I doubt it.

Season' Greetings
Willie
Willie Everlearn is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2015, 19:54   #59 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,020
CityJet purchased 8 CRJ900s. These 8 were originally firm orders to another customer which declined to take delivery, so there were negotiations for CityJet to take over the position, in addition to potential purchase of both CS100 and CS300.
peekay4 is online now  
Old 25th Dec 2015, 21:49   #60 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 754
I checked on the Bombardier website, you're correct concerning the 8 firm orders for the 900 Next Gen with 6 options. Off to SAS services once delivered. A few customers dealing with BBD at present for CS100s and 300s. I have to speculate there are sure to be more C series sales in the weeks ahead despite competition with cheaper airframes on offer but I highly doubt predictions that this aircraft is a loser is anywhere near the mark.
Prospective buyers are likely to come and go and for sure some will walk away, but the ones who buy will be the winners. The reference "game changer" is being thrown round like leaves in the wind. The C Series IS a game changer and when we begin to witness the legacy carriers reclaiming the flying they gave away to the Regionals in the mid 80s by buying this aeroplane, only then will we begin to understand the concept of game changer.

Willie
Willie Everlearn is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 00:22.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1