Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

US Dept of Commerce slaps 220% tax on Bombardier c series

Wikiposts
Search
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

US Dept of Commerce slaps 220% tax on Bombardier c series

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 29th Sep 2017, 06:08
  #81 (permalink)  
ImageGear
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
So if , as is suggested, the C-Series are a step change in aircraft design, they will sell across the world, and once again the US domestic carriers will carry on with outdated 75 and 76 clones.

Irrespective of the funding issue, C-Series are simply technologically ahead of anything Bubba can produce hence the angst up in Seattle and on the hill.

Perhaps Bombardier should undertake a few more demo trips around the US and get more airlines to push for change. It makes more sense than trying to overcome the corruption and vested interests involved.

It took something similar with Airbus to make it happen for them, it just took a while.
 
Old 29th Sep 2017, 09:32
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Could you tell me which specific technology on the CSeries is ahead of anything Boeing can produce please?
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2017, 09:55
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,816
Received 201 Likes on 93 Posts
Here's one for starters, that Boeing ruled out: Boeing hints at GTF 737 re-engining study
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2017, 11:38
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Near St Lawrence River
Age: 53
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Before entering production stage, a brand new B737 replacement has to be designed to the 21st century technology (FBW, better aerodynamics, larger windows, lighter materials, designed for modern process&tooling) and also to be certified to all new safety requirements introduced meanwhile, therefore multiple billions and years behind.

C Series | Technology - Commercial aircraft - Bombardier
_Phoenix is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2017, 13:17
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Maine USA
Age: 82
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by spargazer
...The US built civil airliners during WW2 and dumped 1000s of DC3s (C47) on the civil market afterwards,
the US has been supporting Boeing since the 1930s, its a way of life out there.
The DC-3/C-47 was produced by Douglas (interestingly, and Lisunov, and Nakajima), not Boeing; dumping thousands of them on the civil market after the War only depressed the market for Boeing products.
PersonFromPorlock is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2017, 14:19
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Could you tell me which specific technology on the CSeries is ahead of anything Boeing can produce please?
Until you have had dump in the cruise in a CS toilet you really won't know how different the pax experience is. Cabin is lovely and comfy as well.

My mate that was flying said machine while I was enjoying the aft bog informed me that we were burning 1600kg per hour while doing so.
tescoapp is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2017, 15:21
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canadian Shield
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So, Methane-power! Whatever next?
er340790 is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2017, 15:30
  #88 (permalink)  
ImageGear
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I'm late to the party today gentlemen, but since my case has been rested by people in the know before I arrived, I will leave it at that.
 
Old 29th Sep 2017, 15:32
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Now this was a passing comment which I may have wrong...

Apparently they have made the bogs negative pressure zones and the air is taken separately back to the dump valve area to be dumped so it doesn't go into the recirc air.

The cabin overhead bins are massive as well and seem to have a sensible realistic weight limit on them.
tescoapp is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2017, 19:54
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 58
Posts: 1,907
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
FWIW just had my first SLF CS130 experience today and I can vouch for the various comments posted above. Definitely a nice aircraft passenger wise.
atakacs is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2017, 23:48
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So what's the EU doing about it? We're fully paid-up members. Question asked some pages back but conspicuously not answered other than to be diverted to an irrelevant debate on which parts of UK voted for Brexit.

Last edited by ShotOne; 30th Sep 2017 at 06:07.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2017, 06:41
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 68
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just because you don't see anything in the press doesn't mean they are not doing anything. Negotiations through the media are a fool's game.
ExXB is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2017, 07:22
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: n/a
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by ShotOne
So what's the EU doing about it?

Probably viewing this as a test of NAFTA see how Canada react. It is thanks to a United Europe that Boeing has to share half the market with Airbus. On the regional jet end of the spectrum, one of the original launch customers for the RJX was badly let down when the project was cancelled. Next port of call was Bombardier. Personnel were already training on the CRJ when that deal fell through. Reason? Embraer had made that European airline an offer they couldn’t refuse.
sfm818 is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2017, 09:04
  #94 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,651
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes on 15 Posts
Originally Posted by PersonFromPorlock
The DC-3/C-47 was produced by Douglas (interestingly, and Lisunov, and Nakajima), not Boeing; dumping thousands of them on the civil market after the War only depressed the market for Boeing products.
That's a complete misrepresentation. The US industry moved straight to producing large numbers of airliners immediately post-war, in plants and with tools and skills which had been government funded for wartime production.

The Lockheed Constellation, Convair 240 series, Martin 404, DC4 and DC6 all made substantial (for the time) sales, and swept round the world. Only the UK had any other volume production of airliners at the time.

Boeing only produced small numbers of airliners between 1940 and the 707 in 1958, concentrating on military in that time.
WHBM is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2017, 11:46
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 120
Received 25 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by ShotOne
So what's the EU doing about it? We're fully paid-up members. Question asked some pages back but conspicuously not answered other than to be diverted to an irrelevant debate on which parts of UK voted for Brexit.
As we are in the process of leaving would you expect them to go all out. I would not, they will keep their firepower for member states
DroneDog is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2017, 11:56
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As the CS is just as much competition to airbus as it is to Boeing and they have enough issues with what to do after Brexit I suspect they will do absolutely nothing.

I doubt very much if the headline amount will occur....


great advertising though for the CS series. I am sure boeing getting its knickers in a twist over it will actually generate sales because people will look at it seriously now instead of just looking at the A or B options.
tescoapp is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2017, 13:03
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by tescoapp
Now this was a passing comment which I may have wrong...

Apparently they have made the bogs negative pressure zones and the air is taken separately back to the dump valve area to be dumped so it doesn't go into the recirc air.

The cabin overhead bins are massive as well and seem to have a sensible realistic weight limit on them.
"negative pressure zones" is meaningless nonsense. They are ventilated along with the ebays into the underfloor area by the outflow valve exactly like the Ejets 15 years earlier.

Nothing new here.
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2017, 13:05
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
Here's one for starters, that Boeing ruled out: Boeing hints at GTF 737 re-engining study
The tech belongs to the engine manufacturer not the airframer. This doesn't answer my question.
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2017, 13:06
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by _Phoenix
Before entering production stage, a brand new B737 replacement has to be designed to the 21st century technology (FBW, better aerodynamics, larger windows, lighter materials, designed for modern process&tooling) and also to be certified to all new safety requirements introduced meanwhile, therefore multiple billions and years behind.

C Series | Technology - Commercial aircraft - Bombardier
787 does all of this.

Nothing Beoing couldn't do on a smaller airframe.
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2017, 13:25
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,816
Received 201 Likes on 93 Posts
Originally Posted by FE Hoppy
787 does all of this.

Nothing Boeing couldn't do on a smaller airframe.
True.

But we're talking about what the CSeries competes with today, not 5 years and 8-10 billion dollars down the line.

Originally Posted by FE Hoppy
The tech belongs to the engine manufacturer not the airframer. This doesn't answer my question.
You don't think engine technology and economics matters as much to the market as the airframes that they hang off ?
DaveReidUK is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.