US slaps huge duty on C Series
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Transport Canada has NOTHING to do with commercial trade disputes because it is not part of their mandate. By law they couldn't do anything even if they wanted to. Read the Aeronatics Act to learn more about what TC is authorized to do, ..... and NOT DO.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Canada
Age: 65
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the US Department of Commerce is suppose to use fact to make a ruling but that didn't stop them so why would it Stop Transport Canada???
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot speak to why the US Department of Commerce did, or did not, use facts in coming to their decision. In Canada we generally use Rule of Law.
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Escaped the sandpit 53° 32′ 9.19″ N, 9° 50′ 13.29″ E
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus and Bombardier Announce C Series Partnership
I'd love to have a webcam in the next Boeing exec. meeting
· Airbus to acquire majority stake in the C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership
· Partnership brings together two complementary product lines, with 100-150 seat market segment expected to represent more than 6,000 new aircraft over the next 20 years
· Combination of Airbus’ global reach and scale with Bombardier’s newest aircraft family to create significant value for customers, suppliers, employees and shareholders
· Significant C Series production costs savings anticipated by leveraging Airbus’ supply chain expertise
· Commitment to Québec: C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership headquarters and primary assembly to remain in Québec, with the support of both companies’ global supply chains
· Airbus’ global industrial footprint expands with the C Series Final Assembly Line in Canada, resulting in a positive impact on operations in Québec and across the country
· Growing market for C Series results in second Final Assembly Line in Mobile, Alabama, serving U.S. customers
· Partnership brings together two complementary product lines, with 100-150 seat market segment expected to represent more than 6,000 new aircraft over the next 20 years
· Combination of Airbus’ global reach and scale with Bombardier’s newest aircraft family to create significant value for customers, suppliers, employees and shareholders
· Significant C Series production costs savings anticipated by leveraging Airbus’ supply chain expertise
· Commitment to Québec: C Series Aircraft Limited Partnership headquarters and primary assembly to remain in Québec, with the support of both companies’ global supply chains
· Airbus’ global industrial footprint expands with the C Series Final Assembly Line in Canada, resulting in a positive impact on operations in Québec and across the country
· Growing market for C Series results in second Final Assembly Line in Mobile, Alabama, serving U.S. customers
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, this pissing contest just got a little more interesting.
Airbus buying 50.01% of the C Series program. Smart move.
And to think Boeing once had DeHavilland right in the palm of their hand. They could have Soooooo...had Bombardier for a song back in the early 90s.
This should prove to be an interesting move for Boeing execs to chew on.
Airbus buying 50.01% of the C Series program. Smart move.
And to think Boeing once had DeHavilland right in the palm of their hand. They could have Soooooo...had Bombardier for a song back in the early 90s.
This should prove to be an interesting move for Boeing execs to chew on.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Dog house
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no reason to think this is a reason for bombardier to celebrate.... they gave away control of a $6 billion program for FREE! There is no way they will ever come close to recouping their investment on 30% of profits of a plane no body wants.
You can blame Boeing all you want but nobody was buying it... they only had two significant orders... air Canada did it to get the laws changed so they could pull heavy maintenance out of Montreal... delta only bought it because the Canadian government gave Bombardier $1 billion to absorb the loss of selling them for $19 million each!
And to top it off, if the c series program is so amazing why couldn't they get more than $0 for a controlling stake!
Don't forget Airbus won't push the cs300 too hard as it indirectly competes with their product line.... Both Boeing and airbus push the upgauging idea. It's why the 100-130 seat market is dead, just use a 320neo or Max8.
Maybe airbus will push the cs100 but it is at a disadvantage against the Embraer seeing as the 190e2 is just as efficient at a much lower cost.
And the biggest loser.... Canada... we have now subsidized an American company, one of the most profitable airlines in the world, as well as a multi-billion dollar European manufacturer..... that will employee workers in the US.
You can blame Boeing all you want but nobody was buying it... they only had two significant orders... air Canada did it to get the laws changed so they could pull heavy maintenance out of Montreal... delta only bought it because the Canadian government gave Bombardier $1 billion to absorb the loss of selling them for $19 million each!
And to top it off, if the c series program is so amazing why couldn't they get more than $0 for a controlling stake!
Don't forget Airbus won't push the cs300 too hard as it indirectly competes with their product line.... Both Boeing and airbus push the upgauging idea. It's why the 100-130 seat market is dead, just use a 320neo or Max8.
Maybe airbus will push the cs100 but it is at a disadvantage against the Embraer seeing as the 190e2 is just as efficient at a much lower cost.
And the biggest loser.... Canada... we have now subsidized an American company, one of the most profitable airlines in the world, as well as a multi-billion dollar European manufacturer..... that will employee workers in the US.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Earth
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the move from Airbus is very strategic. Boeing today isn't the same Boeing that brought us the 707 and 747. But like all things Canadian, we always seem to bend to our 'neighborly' brother down south (Avro Arrow) and forget of our European heritage.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Proxima
Seriously?
E Jet (motor cycle handlebars, really) over the C series.
Then you mustn't know squat about the C series with a statement like that.
Not in this scoped out environment will the E jet ever get much traction with the regional airlines. Not until the scope clauses are relaxed, Embraers own words. When will that happen? I'd guess the 12th of Never, you?
C Series is superior to the E190, simple as that. Just ask Swiss, Air Baltic, Delta or Korean. C series is not a regional jet like the E jet and therein lies Airbus interest, they have their A318 replacement.
A plane nobody wants? You think no one is interested in the C series? Stay tuned bucko.
Airbus's stated goal is 100% ownership of the CSeries over the next few years. It is going to take 6-12 months for this deal to be approved by all parties. No one is taking money out of their pocket today, but if Airbus intend to buy out the remaining investors, it will involve currency, not Cheesies.
At 100% ownership Airbus will have bought out the Caisse investment, the Gouv de Quebec, and the Bombardier investment. Meaning the Quebec government taxpayer will be repaid and the Caisse will see a ROI. The loser in all of this is likely the Canadian taxpayer who invested in an amazing aeroplane, a highly skilled work force that will surely be reduced in number and a quality, high tech, state-of-the-art aeroplane will be handed over to foreign interests. Which is marginally a better deal for all Canadian taxpayers than compared to what we got with the Arrow.
We're giving up the baby instead of raising it ourselves.
Maybe Andrew Coyne is right, why is Canada in aerospace in the first place?
Seriously?
E Jet (motor cycle handlebars, really) over the C series.
Then you mustn't know squat about the C series with a statement like that.
Not in this scoped out environment will the E jet ever get much traction with the regional airlines. Not until the scope clauses are relaxed, Embraers own words. When will that happen? I'd guess the 12th of Never, you?
C Series is superior to the E190, simple as that. Just ask Swiss, Air Baltic, Delta or Korean. C series is not a regional jet like the E jet and therein lies Airbus interest, they have their A318 replacement.
A plane nobody wants? You think no one is interested in the C series? Stay tuned bucko.
Airbus's stated goal is 100% ownership of the CSeries over the next few years. It is going to take 6-12 months for this deal to be approved by all parties. No one is taking money out of their pocket today, but if Airbus intend to buy out the remaining investors, it will involve currency, not Cheesies.
At 100% ownership Airbus will have bought out the Caisse investment, the Gouv de Quebec, and the Bombardier investment. Meaning the Quebec government taxpayer will be repaid and the Caisse will see a ROI. The loser in all of this is likely the Canadian taxpayer who invested in an amazing aeroplane, a highly skilled work force that will surely be reduced in number and a quality, high tech, state-of-the-art aeroplane will be handed over to foreign interests. Which is marginally a better deal for all Canadian taxpayers than compared to what we got with the Arrow.
We're giving up the baby instead of raising it ourselves.
Maybe Andrew Coyne is right, why is Canada in aerospace in the first place?
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: 60 north
Age: 59
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think all considering this is a great day for Canada and Canadian aviation.
Boeings irrational act was clearly to kill off the C-Series and possibly Bombardier in the process.
Not fair.
Now the aircraft has a bright future.
Remember You also have UK and the whole of EU behind You.
You are on the offensive, now run with it.
Score one for the new team, Eh.
Boeings irrational act was clearly to kill off the C-Series and possibly Bombardier in the process.
Not fair.
Now the aircraft has a bright future.
Remember You also have UK and the whole of EU behind You.
You are on the offensive, now run with it.
Score one for the new team, Eh.
Good Afternoon J.O.
Jeff I hope that was not a "Freudian slip" on your part regarding "Trump Card" as I LMAO when I read that one...
Will be interesting when the orange cowbell tweets about that one...........
Jeff I hope that was not a "Freudian slip" on your part regarding "Trump Card" as I LMAO when I read that one...
Will be interesting when the orange cowbell tweets about that one...........
Maybe airbus will push the cs100 but it is at a disadvantage against the Embraer seeing as the 190e2 is just as efficient at a much lower cost.
Point 1: The E190 is a nice airplane, but with 2X2 seating configuration compared with the 2X3 seating of the C Series it cannot be stretched to mirror the maximum seating potential of the C Series
Point 2: The E-Jets fall within pilot scope clause limitations and is therefore constrained to operation by the regional airlines of the legacy carriers. Conversely, the C Series is a 'proper' mainliner, from the narrow perspective of scope clauses and will only be operated as a mainline aircraft.
Boeing screwed up badly when they decided to produce a warmed-over aircraft with 50 year old technology and now they're wondering why they're losing share to Airbus with a 40/60 split of the market.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Dog house
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Willie and twochai
I clearly said the E2 line.... look it up. It has pretty much the same operating cost as the cs100 but at a much cheaper acquisition cost... this is fact not just the Bombardier propaganda saying it's the greatest plane out there.
Both the 190E2 and 195E2 offer an option that is cheaper and just as efficient as the Cs100. The 190e2 offering slightly less capacity but at a cheaper operating cost or the 195e2 carrying more despite having basically the same weight. The only advantage of the cs100 is the range. Embraer intentionally left out gains in range to keep costs down since very few cases would require the added range.
Embraer could have over designed their E2 line and made something even superior to the cs100 but it would have come at an increased cost.... real companies take development and production cost into the equation.
Don't forget before Bombardier illegally subsidized the cs100 to delta for $19 million using government funds Delta was looking to buying the old Air Canada 190s from Boeing as a transition for a likely 190/195E2 purchase from embraer.. the more economic choice.. but hey if you get th chance to buy a plane for $19 million hell yeah take it.... but functional companies like Embraer, Airbus and Boeing won't sell below production cost because most companies business plan is to actually make money.
I don't understand this obsession with Bombardier, what is exactly so innovative about the c series?
That it uses composites? Sorry it's been done before.
That it uses PW1000G engines? Sorry that's Pratt & Whitney not Bombardier.
There has not been anything truley innovative in commercial aircraft design since the 707/dc8/comet.... metal/composite tube with jet/turbofan engines..
Boeing and Airbus were originally planning on waiting until the next decade to develop a new design when technology would allow a true revolution in design.. that was until the clowns at Bombardier came along building a same old narrow body design.
You're kidding yourself if you think that Boeing and Airbus got out engineered by Bombardier.
It's easy to design a jet if you don't take cost into the equation. It's capitalism, if you build a product it has to be economical to produce and sale. Sure you can develop something for $6 billion but can you sale it at a price to recoup the development costs.... the answer for the c series is a resounding NO!
For Airbus however they got a plane for free that they could sell at production cost if they want... no skin off their back, just bankrupt Bombardier in the process.
I clearly said the E2 line.... look it up. It has pretty much the same operating cost as the cs100 but at a much cheaper acquisition cost... this is fact not just the Bombardier propaganda saying it's the greatest plane out there.
Both the 190E2 and 195E2 offer an option that is cheaper and just as efficient as the Cs100. The 190e2 offering slightly less capacity but at a cheaper operating cost or the 195e2 carrying more despite having basically the same weight. The only advantage of the cs100 is the range. Embraer intentionally left out gains in range to keep costs down since very few cases would require the added range.
Embraer could have over designed their E2 line and made something even superior to the cs100 but it would have come at an increased cost.... real companies take development and production cost into the equation.
Don't forget before Bombardier illegally subsidized the cs100 to delta for $19 million using government funds Delta was looking to buying the old Air Canada 190s from Boeing as a transition for a likely 190/195E2 purchase from embraer.. the more economic choice.. but hey if you get th chance to buy a plane for $19 million hell yeah take it.... but functional companies like Embraer, Airbus and Boeing won't sell below production cost because most companies business plan is to actually make money.
I don't understand this obsession with Bombardier, what is exactly so innovative about the c series?
That it uses composites? Sorry it's been done before.
That it uses PW1000G engines? Sorry that's Pratt & Whitney not Bombardier.
There has not been anything truley innovative in commercial aircraft design since the 707/dc8/comet.... metal/composite tube with jet/turbofan engines..
Boeing and Airbus were originally planning on waiting until the next decade to develop a new design when technology would allow a true revolution in design.. that was until the clowns at Bombardier came along building a same old narrow body design.
You're kidding yourself if you think that Boeing and Airbus got out engineered by Bombardier.
It's easy to design a jet if you don't take cost into the equation. It's capitalism, if you build a product it has to be economical to produce and sale. Sure you can develop something for $6 billion but can you sale it at a price to recoup the development costs.... the answer for the c series is a resounding NO!
For Airbus however they got a plane for free that they could sell at production cost if they want... no skin off their back, just bankrupt Bombardier in the process.
There has not been anything truley innovative in commercial aircraft design since the 707/dc8/comet.... metal/composite tube with jet/turbofan engines..
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prox
Like the Max, E2 has nothing to offer but a new engine. Here's the thing, both Boeing and Embraer decided on minor adjustments to good products rather than invest in the present, never mind the future. Totally cosmetic and told the airline industry that's all that's needed. Plus, the E2 is scoped out. Embraer is gambling on scope clauses being relaxed. Would you make that gamble?
There's a reason Bombardier are considering the sale of the Q400 and CRJ product divisions.
Scoffing at C series shows more product ignorance than product knowledge. Bombardier used a clean sheet design to come up with a singular, specific market segment aircraft both Airbus and Boeing abandoned in the 80s that is a legitimate trans Atlantic capable and much, much more capable aircraft that the airlines actually want. With Airbus backing we should expect more sales of this aircraft.
Why? Because Regional Airlines are likely living on borrowed time if United signs for C series now that they won't necessarily have to take cheap B737-700s out of desert storage as Boeing's USITC ruling will now likely die of natural causes. C series feedback from Delta should steer them in the right direction if they want to seriously compete.
The EMB 170/190 and the E2 are nice jets, but if you want to call the C series a nice jet by comparison and nothing more, I'd suggest you do more research.
C series is way more modern and advanced than you're implying.
P.S. Just curious. Are you a professional pilot and do you or have you ever operated a civilian passenger aeroplane and which ones?
Like the Max, E2 has nothing to offer but a new engine. Here's the thing, both Boeing and Embraer decided on minor adjustments to good products rather than invest in the present, never mind the future. Totally cosmetic and told the airline industry that's all that's needed. Plus, the E2 is scoped out. Embraer is gambling on scope clauses being relaxed. Would you make that gamble?
There's a reason Bombardier are considering the sale of the Q400 and CRJ product divisions.
Scoffing at C series shows more product ignorance than product knowledge. Bombardier used a clean sheet design to come up with a singular, specific market segment aircraft both Airbus and Boeing abandoned in the 80s that is a legitimate trans Atlantic capable and much, much more capable aircraft that the airlines actually want. With Airbus backing we should expect more sales of this aircraft.
Why? Because Regional Airlines are likely living on borrowed time if United signs for C series now that they won't necessarily have to take cheap B737-700s out of desert storage as Boeing's USITC ruling will now likely die of natural causes. C series feedback from Delta should steer them in the right direction if they want to seriously compete.
The EMB 170/190 and the E2 are nice jets, but if you want to call the C series a nice jet by comparison and nothing more, I'd suggest you do more research.
C series is way more modern and advanced than you're implying.
P.S. Just curious. Are you a professional pilot and do you or have you ever operated a civilian passenger aeroplane and which ones?
Last edited by Willie Everlearn; 18th Oct 2017 at 21:36.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts