Second that. It is interesting to watch. Also interesting to see it from the Local persepctive. I was curious on how the Unions were taking this aircraft. It is nt just a hub buster but could be a union job killer. Progress in technology is good, but some people loose out. (I am for some reason reminded of Star Trek 6: the Undiscovered Country)
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21313 posts, RR: 60 Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2631 times:
Very typical of the tv news media in the USA, especially local.
Pretty pictures, superficial information, and then they ask the viewers to make a judgment despite not preparing them to do so. And they give the machinist union rep the last word regarding "trust the union, not your suppliers." Of course, I doubt the union sings the same tune when they represent workers for suppliers, but hey, hypocrisy never bothered tv journalism before...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Planemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 5730 posts, RR: 35 Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2451 times:
Quoting Centrair (Reply 2): I was curious on how the Unions were taking this aircraft. It is nt just a hub buster but could be a union job killer. Progress in technology is good, but some people loose out.
Quoting T773ER (Reply 6): It makes you wonder how many people will be working for BCA in 20 or 30 years.
For the first time in Western commercial aviation history, the system integration launch
process has been structured in a fashion that gives foreign partners the control over
design, manufacturing, sub tier supplier selection and, ultimately, the financial muscle to
undermine the Western commercial aircraft industry. Will there be any corporate social
responsibility from Boeing, Airbus, or Bombardier to their home countries that have
spent countless billions of dollars in supporting and developing the technologies and
innovation which they possess today? Instead, will they take short-term financial gains
for their current shareholders at the cost of losing the long-term strategic value of their
proprietary assets? There seems to be no turning back for these aircraft manufacturers.
The cost of launching a new aircraft can run into the tens of billions dollars, and with the
reluctance of the two who can self-fund their programs compared to the one that is
financially unable, the new system integration business model is here to stay.
From a policy perspective, there is probably little room for corrective action in terms of
regional employment protection or the maximization of value-added at the local scale – at
least not for those localities that house systems integrators such as Boeing or Airbus.
Subsidies granted to these major corporations appear to be void of clawback provisions,
if only because affected regions or communities are invariably desperate to retain as
many aerospace-related jobs as they can.
A final and perhaps curious twist in this unfolding story of corporate change is that
outsourcing under systems integration is not driven by a strategic interest in the
minimization of total costs for any given aircraft launch. Rather, a more important goal is
to cut unit costs for the systems integrator and spread financial risk across the supply
chain. Hickie (2006) shows that systems integration in the aircraft industry tends to
inflate total costs for a new product launch. Airlines and passengers do not absorb these
extra costs, at least not directly. Instead, large chunks of these extra costs are paid by
public agencies that fund their subsidy programs from tax dollars.
From a global welfare perspective, what might look like a free meal is anything but.
Somebody has to pay, right?
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein