ICT
Having flown the B757 earlier in my career, I understand the interest in tail strike avoidance. I'd agree, tail strike should be possible in the C series, but likely far less likely with FBW protection than the B737-800 or 900 without it. I'm not comfortable guessing about the A320 series, long or short body. But, I'm guessing it's FBW would offer similar decreased possibilities.
FBW should recognize aggressive rotations beyond 3-5 degrees per second and limit rotation rates to reduce the likelihood.
I'm uncomfortable with any Canadian hi tech businesses, especially Aerospace, selling out to China just to wriggle into their market. Look how many OEMs are sleeping with the Chinese, including A and B. But I suspect you're C919 comment is right on as well, they likely have a "deal" with Beijing.
peekay4
Risk partners take on risk, right? I don't know that the Quebec Pension fund took on any more than 49% of the risk, so by my weak math skills, that's not 100% of the risk. Even at a discount, another sale like Delta would mean a combined potential for $15B income for BBD, following deliveries, despite, as you've correctly stated, their (previous) disastrous financial state. The Quebec Pension fund will get a ROI, which is not accounted for in your remarks. Bombardier have repeatedly said it would give the Feds a ROI for their investment as well. But JT wants to put 'his political appointees' on the Board, which is idiotic when you consider what he wants in return. Sorry, but I'd have to wonder what political appointees know about running an Aerospace company like Bombardier?
Don't get me wrong, I find your perspective thought provoking despite some disagreement. You've even changed my opinion on a couple of things. The new management team at bombardier are having a positive effect. Whether or not things continue in that direction is hard to know. Besides, it's early days.
It has been reported in the Gazette, Bombardier have copyrighted CS500 and are allowing for the 'possibility of a larger C series. Present day denial seems sensible to me so as not to scare off investors who still hold the belief this company is tenuous at best. Besides, I don't think they have the development money in hand to take it on. It also seems sensible to me they'd be eager to not show their hand to A and B.
One last point regarding the sensibility of deep discounting on the part of A and B. Yes. They have the clout and the sales to bully Bombardier or any other threat to their duopoly but, when price point and deliveries reach ridiculously into the future, prospective buyers will turn to an alternative with competitive pricing, newer technology, and better delivery dates. IF oil ever increases in price I suspect the CASM gap will make A and B even less attractive to buyers. Today the CASM spread is already significant as AC and DL figured out.
I stand to be corrected. Much more is to be written on the C series but I still think better things are ahead for BBD. Meanwhile, I'll go do more reading on the deal with the QC government.
Cheers,
Willie
