Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CSeries Poor Sales Disappoints P&W President  
User currently offlineTangowhisky From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 931 posts, RR: 7
Posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 15436 times:

Reuters: Pratt & Whitney President David Hess is disappointed by the poor sales made by the CSeries.

At a conference on Boeing and Airbus re-engine options, he touched on the CSeries. Here is an excerpt of the article:

Hess said he was disappointed at the surprisingly low number of orders for Bombardier's C-Series aircraft for which Pratt provides the engine. Bombardier blamed a lack of orders for the plane at the Farnborough Air Show in July on issues related to a support plan for the engine. At the Reuters summit, Hess shrugged off the complaint, calling it a "misunderstanding."
He said he expects more C-Series orders to be announced soon.


Here is the article: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68751P20100909


Only the paranoid survive
97 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13551 posts, RR: 100
Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 15171 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter):
He said he expects more C-Series orders to be announced soon.

I can only hope.

Lightsaber is disappointed by the poor sales (to date) of the C-series.   



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5794 posts, RR: 28
Reply 2, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 15024 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 1):
Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter):
He said he expects more C-Series orders to be announced soon.

I can only hope.

Lightsaber is disappointed by the poor sales (to date) of the C-series.

As others have mentioned, I really think a 150-seater would be an important option to get more carriers onboard. Otherwise, sticking to sub-100 seaters (contracted) and the ubiquitous 737/320 series for mainline seems hard to change. As it is, these are mainline aircraft for most carriers I'd think. Who needs a 73G/319 replacement when they'll still need the larger variants as well? It would seem to be an orphan. 110 seats doesn't seem well-positioned to me, either, given the proximity of the E190/CRJ1000. Again, it'd be easy to just stick with the lower end E/C jets and the higher end A/B jets.

Unless there is a 150 seater stretch OR a hugely compelling cost savings justifying adding a new type.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4409 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 15003 times:

A good partnership between an aircraft OEM and the engine maker sounds different I'm afraid...

User currently offlineTSS From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 3070 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 14995 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 1):
Lightsaber is disappointed by the poor sales (to date) of the C-series.    

As is TSS.
Of course, there are several reasons why this might be so, beginning with:
1. Bombardier has (as far as I know) no experience designing an aircraft from scratch;
2. The CSeries is powered by a revolutionary new engine that is as yet unproven in service, and that engine is being provided by a manufacturer that does not have the best record of late on new engine introductions.
Both of these points make purchasing the CSeries something of an expensive gamble for airlines, and I suspect that most airlines are waiting until the aircraft enters service, or at least begins flight testing, before signing the order book and laying down a deposit.
However, the fact that the CSeries has been mentioned by name in press releases from Boeing regarding possible 737 enhancements/replacements means that Boeing at least is taking the CSeries seriously as competition.



Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 14989 times:

I think the PW used the word dissapointed in the same sentence he expressed confidence in soon upcoming orders. A GLG analyst took out the word "dissapointed" and wrote his own opinion around it.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 2):
I really think a 150-seater would be an important option to get more carriers onboard

I think a stretch is engineerd in. The wing, engine and ldg are made to carry the CS300ER. Still it would take yrs and a billion to launch it.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 2):
110 seats doesn't seem well-positioned to me, either, given the proximity of the E190/CRJ1000. Again, it'd be easy to just stick with the lower end E/C jets and the higher end A/B jets.

On the plus I think Boeing going for 737NG+ and Embraer struggling with a reengining seems encouraging for Bombardier. Hopefully they can bring it into service in time and realize a quick production ramp up.


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5794 posts, RR: 28
Reply 6, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 14904 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 5):
On the plus I think Boeing going for 737NG+ and Embraer struggling with a reengining seems encouraging for Bombardier. Hopefully they can bring it into service in time and realize a quick production ramp up.

It may indeed be a plus, but it is still introducing a third family when the two existing (EJet and 737 in your example) might suffice.

Quoting keesje (Reply 5):
I think the PW used the word dissapointed in the same sentence he expressed confidence in soon upcoming orders.

Like when Boeing announces another 787 delay but says in the same sentence that they believe this will get them on track? Or when no one orders the 748i, but there are "a couple" of customers in serious negotiations?

Doesn't sound overly convincing to me, but it is hopeful.

Quoting keesje (Reply 5):
I think a stretch is engineerd in. The wing, engine and ldg are made to carry the CS300ER. Still it would take yrs and a billion to launch it.

Bummer. At that price and timeline, it isn't a compelling reason to consider the family.....yet. I guess in my mind I picture carriers going for a CSeries order if it can wedge in well between the turbo-props and sub-100 seats on the low end, and the next-generation narrowbody on the high end. To me, that would dictate a 100-150 seat family - short of that, it seems (to me) a little too "niche" to go for.....yet.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineTangowhisky From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 931 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 14104 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 6):
I picture carriers going for a CSeries order if it can wedge in well between the turbo-props and sub-100 seats on the low end, and the next-generation narrowbody on the high end. To me, that would dictate a 100-150 seat family - short of that, it seems (to me) a little too "niche" to go for.....yet.

The longer A&B stretch it out and not announce their exact plans, the more unsure it will be to the airlines where the CSeries will fit in the future. A&B know this.

Quoting keesje (Reply 5):
I think a stretch is engineered in. The wing, engine and ldg are made to carry the CS300ER. Still it would take yrs and a billion to launch it.

And they will need 3000 nautical miles cross country range. It is a very expensive change as you have said.

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 3):
A good partnership between an aircraft OEM and the engine maker sounds different I'm afraid...

I am not sure if it was right for Bombardier to say during Farnborough: don't ask us, ask Pratt about Qatar. I realize it was not those exact words by Gary Scott, nevertheless one gets the feeling that there are tensions between the two. It seems to me that Pratt is not willing to step to the plate in closing the deals as BBD expects or have been used dealing with GE in the past (with a more sure CF34 family and a confident GE).

[Edited 2010-09-13 07:16:11]


Only the paranoid survive
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 13356 times:

UA has mentioned interest in the C Series, anyone think this might develop into an order for the new United. It would fill the gap left vacant by CO and UA's retirement of the 737-300s as well as the 737-500s.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7718 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 12926 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 1):
Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter):
He said he expects more C-Series orders to be announced soon.

I can only hope.

Lightsaber is disappointed by the poor sales (to date) of the C-series.

I have my doubts about the Republic order. The way it was positioned as having no cash progress payments on the horizon makes me think it is a speculative order...meaning that Bombardier can bump it if they get a "real" customer. Conversely, Republic (or Bombardier) can probably walk away from the order if they choose to. Bombardier also has to take a number of current aircraft as part of that deal for remarketing including the A318s. The market for A318s was bad before MX died. Now it's on life support. They better hope BA starts stacking up A318s at LCY or the cost of the Republic order to Bombardier may be prohibitive.


User currently offlinemrocktor From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1672 posts, RR: 49
Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 12775 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 5):
On the plus I think Boeing going for 737NG+ and Embraer struggling with a reengining seems encouraging for Bombardier.

No one is struggling with anything. This is a huge game of chicken, no one wants to go first - that is all. Ah yes, BBD actually did go first. Sorta. Quite half-heartedly. And this is where it has gotten them (thus far).

If they had gone and designed a real narrowbody (140-180 seats), and managed to get RR on board with a proper size GTF, they would have the market cornered for 10 years (Boeing and Airbus being tied up in their own 787, A380 issues for the time being). But they didn't have the guts to make the BRJ ten years ago and they didn't have the guts to make an up front narrowbody 5 years ago. Losing the 100 seat market to Embraer and this situation with the CSeries is what their vascillation has bought them in each of those cases.

They may make the CSeries program pay for itself eventually. It has kept the business alive thus far (and this is, really, its major function). The CSeries is not (now, or ever) going to reshape the market. That plane has yet to be announced (and thus, the game of chicken).


User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12598 posts, RR: 34
Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 12326 times:

Various successful aircraft have started slowly; in 1978, after about ten years, the total number of 737 sales was around the 4-500 mark; no one could possibly have expected it to do so well; of course, the 737NG is greatly different from the 732, but the C-series will undoubtedly have plenty of growth potential built into it. Likewise the 757 was stuck around the 250 for quite a while, until UA and AA ordered it, followed by the Chinese and things started to look a lot better.

Why was the 757 so slow in getting off the ground, in sales terms? Arguably its time hadn't come. One might say the same of the C-series. It's very early days yet, but I feel confident that its time will come.


User currently offlineTangowhisky From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 931 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 12262 times:

Quoting mrocktor (Reply 10):
No one is struggling with anything.

Correct. There is no real threat to the E-jets to rush for the re-engine option. The tweak NextGen launch in 2007 was the last ill attempt by Bombardier to stay in the 70-100 seat market, this product line is no longer a strong threat to Embraer to consider significant re-investment on the E-Jets for a while.

Quoting mrocktor (Reply 10):
But they didn't have the guts to make the BRJ ten years ago and they didn't have the guts to make an up front narrowbody 5 years ago.

I think that they got cocky in thinking they can protect the sub 100 seat market with a sub 100 par plane (the CRJ900 ++) when it was obvious what Embraer had in the bag. They should have stayed in this market and give the full benefit of the doubt to the E-Jets and realize that Embraer had a real weapon to take over BBD's turf. They should have launched an all new 4 abreast clean sheet aircraft for the 90 to 120 seats and keep crew commonality with the CRJ700.

There is no longer a market for a 100-140 seat plane given A, B, and E's product line and airliner true needs. Bombardier is looking back 30 years with DC-9s, B737-200s in thinking that the world needs a 100-140 seat plane (for the next 20 years) when they should be looking at how that market has been reshaped and shaping.

In summary, I think it has less to do with guts and more to do with continually misreading the market.



Only the paranoid survive
User currently offlineTangowhisky From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 931 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 12146 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 11):
Why was the 757 so slow in getting off the ground, in sales terms? Arguably its time hadn't come.

The B757 was targeted to be a B727 replacement pure and simple. Airbus creamed Boeing by signing up B727 operator by operator with the A320 because the 757 was too big and the 737-400 to small and not enough range. The 757 ended up being a niche market of its own, and without the commonality with the B767, it would have suffered even more sales. Boeing finally realized that the 757 was not doing its job (other than pleasing BA) and launched the 737NG and eventually had an equally strong weapon against the A320.

From Bombardier's perspective, the CSeries is supposed to do the same by replacing old (100-140 seat) aircraft. But the airlines in this case are sizing up by replacing older B737s and MD80s with 150 seats and above.



Only the paranoid survive
User currently offlinefaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1632 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 11788 times:

Quoting Tangowhisky (Thread starter):
Bombardier blamed a lack of orders for the plane at the Farnborough Air Show in July on issues related to a support plan for the engine.

The real risk is that the problem is not "a support plan" for the GTF but demonstrated in-service reliability. If would be a pity if carriers were waiting for the CSeries's first couple of operators to demonstrate 2-3 years of reliable, trouble-free GTF operation before contemplating becoming customers.

Faro



The chalice not my son
User currently offlinepnwtraveler From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 2296 posts, RR: 12
Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 11575 times:

Quoting TSS (Reply 4):
1. Bombardier has (as far as I know) no experience designing an aircraft from scratch;

This ignores all the divisions who have launched dozens of aircraft prior to and since Bombardier purchased them. Canadair all the Challengers, CRJ's in various forms, and Global Express. De havilland with the long history of aircraft up to the Dash 7 and 8 especially the recent 400 version. LearJet and all its business Jets and the recent offerings since Bombardier took over. This is all part of Bombardier. All that knowledge base to one extent or another resides in the company. Quite the history and skill levels and hardly can be classified as no experience.


User currently offlineTSS From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 3070 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 11331 times:

Quoting pnwtraveler (Reply 15):
Quoting TSS (Reply 4):
1. Bombardier has (as far as I know) no experience designing an aircraft from scratch;

This ignores all the divisions who have launched dozens of aircraft prior to and since Bombardier purchased them. Canadair all the Challengers, CRJ's in various forms, and Global Express. De havilland with the long history of aircraft up to the Dash 7 and 8 especially the recent 400 version. LearJet and all its business Jets and the recent offerings since Bombardier took over. This is all part of Bombardier. All that knowledge base to one extent or another resides in the company. Quite the history and skill levels and hardly can be classified as no experience.

I did qualify that statement with "as far as I know", but touche' nonetheless. I should have included "in this size class" as an additional qualifier as well.
So the knowledge and experience is there within various divisions, but it remains to be seen how well and to what extent Bombardier utilizes this in-house know-how.



Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13551 posts, RR: 100
Reply 17, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 10779 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting faro (Reply 14):
The real risk is that the problem is not "a support plan" for the GTF but demonstrated in-service reliability.

With Pratt, why would anyone have a question.      (Please don't post the tales, I've posted them before... I know... I know.)

I've also posted before the requirements many airlines have before purchasing:
1. 18+ months of service data*
2. A backlog so that the type will be in service 5+ years after first delivery (so if they decide to 'top off' the order, frames are still coming off the line).
3. 20+ customers and 300+ orders

This is why launch customers are given discounts (in addition to launch 'teething' issues).

* I've posted this before as 1 to 2 years of service data before.

Quoting enilria (Reply 9):
The market for A318s was bad before MX died. Now it's on life support.

You are being kind. The used A318 market is a veggie breathing thanks to a machine. A318's right now are part/engine donors for the remainder of the A320 fleet.  
Quoting mrocktor (Reply 10):
The CSeries is not (now, or ever) going to reshape the market.

This I disagree with. But as I posted before, I fear it might be the next L1011: Not the market but the plane that reshapes the market.   

Quoting faro (Reply 14):
If would be a pity if carriers were waiting for the CSeries's first couple of operators to demonstrate 2-3 years of reliable, trouble-free GTF operation before contemplating becoming customers.

This scenario is I fear part of what killed off the 717. The BMR-715 never attained the cycle life certain customers wanted.   Even at 10+ cycles per day (some FL, HA, and a few others), it will take years to prove the GTF's reliability.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21589 posts, RR: 59
Reply 18, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 10604 times:

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 13):
The B757 was targeted to be a B727 replacement pure and simple.

Hardly so simple.

The 757 was the replacement model in the Boeing lineup for the 727, but it was a replacement (along with the 767) for the 707, DC8, L1011 and DC10. It was larger and more capable than the 727. But as a 757/767 family, as Boeing touted them, they were solid replacements for those tris and quads. They could take over transatlantic and transcon/transeurope/interasia routes of all sizes, with two engines and two crew who could easily be up to date on flying both aircraft with minimal extra training. And while it took a while to convince most airlines to take BOTH models into their fleets, it did work out this way. DL, TW, UA, AA, CO, (and even to a small extent, BA) all went the 757+767 route to replace mid-range tris and quads. All while the 727s kept flying with AA, CO, TW and DL...

And considering the vast majority of 727As were quite young when the 757 entered service, it would be 10-15 years before the 757 would or even could act as a "replacement" for the 727.

The 757 to the 727 is like the 787 to the 767. Some 787s will replace 767s, but it's not a direct replacement.

The direct 727 replacement is the 738. Same size, same missions. A320 was also a decent 727 replacement, though a bit smaller and slightly less capable, it also did the job for many airlines. But if you look at large 727-200A airlines like CO, AA and DL, it was the 738 that replaced the 727.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineYXXMIKE From Canada, joined Apr 2008, 310 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 10553 times:

I've banged this drum before but I really think if Bombardier puts their nose to the grindstone they can make this little machine work! If they can build a reliable 110 seat plane which lives up to the expectations they'll turn heads, mark my words but if they can stretch that machine out to 150+ they'll have MOL knocking on the door to speak with them. As mentioned in another thread he's changing his mind his own business model, it has to change and if something like a 150+ seat plane can provide the economics for it then he'll find a way to make it work. Just my two cents but I think they are onto something here, this isn't going to be a failure but a very long term investment for them. Remember Boeing isn't going to have a 737 replacement for another 10 years by the sounds of it, so even if a 150-200 seat C-Series is 6 years away they'll still have interest.

IMO BBD isn't the issue here, it's P&W. If they don't step up to the plate on this one then they have not only shot themselves in the foot they'll have shot BBD as well.


User currently offlinebravo1six From Canada, joined Dec 2007, 399 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 9550 times:

Quoting enilria (Reply 9):
Bombardier also has to take a number of current aircraft as part of that deal for remarketing including the A318s.

And the source for this is?


User currently offlinevirgin747 From Canada, joined Oct 1999, 319 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 9299 times:

Whining about C-Series sales!! I'm surprised he didnt open his trap about the Mitsubishi Regional Jet... The thing only has 2 customers if I recall? PW supplies the same engine to that plane also...

User currently offlineplanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6443 posts, RR: 34
Reply 22, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 9077 times:

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 18):
Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 13):
The B757 was targeted to be a B727 replacement pure and simple.

Hardly so simple.

He is correct. The 738 didn't EIS until 1998... some 16 years after 757 EIS... and some 14 years after the last 727 delivery. That the 738 ended up replacing many domestic 727s was by happenstance... no A320 success, no 737NG response from Boeing.



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlinemiller22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 9025 times:

Quoting TSS (Reply 4):
1. Bombardier has (as far as I know) no experience designing an aircraft from scratch;

I have a major problem with this. Bombardier is full of clean sheet designs. Remember that Bombardier is Canadair, DeHavilland, and Lear. Those legacies, and more importantly the years of expertise are still there. Nobody claimed Pratt had no experience building engines once United Technologies bought them.

A name is a name, but the experience, leaders, and engineers of Lear, DeHavilland, and Canadair are still there. In fact, those are three companies with an extremely rich history of clean sheet designs.


User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21589 posts, RR: 59
Reply 24, posted (4 years 3 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 8876 times:

Quoting planemaker (Reply 22):
He is correct. The 738 didn't EIS until 1998... some 16 years after 757 EIS... and some 14 years after the last 727 delivery. That the 738 ended up replacing many domestic 727s was by happenstance... no A320 success, no 737NG response from Boeing.

No he's not correct. You are using "if only something else didn't happen" logic to negate what actually happened, but it's still not even logically correct.

What HAPPENED is that the 757 did not replace many 727s worldwide, because the closest model to the 757, the 727-200Adv, was far too new to be replaced at that time. The 757 was one of two models that supplanted the 727 in the Boeing product lineup, but that is not the same thing at all as actually being bought to replace 727-200Advs. While customers who still wanted 727s could buy a 757 instead, few really did. The 757 was too busy being used to replace 707s and DC8s, aircraft aging quickly, and stifling the sales of DC10s and L1011s (along with the 767 and the Airbus offerings).

At the time, the other model added to the lineup to supplant the 727, of course, was the 737 CLASSIC that was meant to take over sales of both 737-100/200 and 727-100 replacement as well as new orders for airlines who were using the 727-200A under it's ability. And 737-300s did replace early smaller 727s, and they did sell to 727 customers. And the subsequent 737-400 was Boeing's initial response to the A320 and larger MD80s. The 737NG was a response to customer feedback, the aging 737 Classic lineup, and the need for a real 727A replacement by the mid-90s.

The 737NG was conceived because the 737 classic was getting old in comparison to the constant improvements and changes Airbus had been making to the A320 family, so Boeing was losing customers to the A320 family, and because by the mid-90s, the bulk of 727s were finally due for replacement and airlines didn't actually want to use the 757 (supposedly designed for this) for this purpose and the 734 was underwhelming as a 727 replacement (too small, underpowered).

By your logic a 757NG or -B or similar would have been the right aircraft to replace 727s in the mid-90s, not a 737NG. After all, the 757 was the 727 replacement aircraft, right? But this didn't happen because the 757 was not a direct 727 replacement (again, it was a 707/DC8/DC10/L1011 replacement, and it did just that). The 738 was designed as that replacement (exactly the same size and range as the 727-200Adv) and delivered at the right time: roughly 20-22 years since the bulk of 727-200Adv deliveries began.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
25 Post contains images pnwtraveler : Like Airbus with the A380. Or further back Boeing who had massive troubles when the 747 was launched and was decidely a massive leap than anything be
26 Tangowhisky : Ikramerica, I guess one can argue about the B757s market positioning, etc. on other threads. But I would like to come back to the subject and further
27 tdscanuck : Lufthansa shouldn't be dismissed so lightly...this is how the 737 got started. Tom.
28 Tangowhisky : LH is in no way acting like a champion of the CSeries. A champion drives the specs, is vocal and visible in the program, and care about keeping the p
29 TSS : Okay, so I was wrong. Bombardier has, via their various subsidiaries, a vast well of knowledge of and experience with clean sheet designs from which
30 planemaker : I'm interested, who are the engineers that are still at the subs that worked on the "extremely rich history of clean sheet designs"? And what is the
31 Post contains links keesje : Currently in production: Learjet, Challenger, Global, CRJ, Qseries, 415? The same claims are made about Airbus starting from nothing. Non sense. It s
32 planemaker : They do not represent an "extremely rich history" of clean sheets (other than the 15 year old GX and the upcoming Lear 85... two biz jets, the others
33 parapente : Whining about C-Series sales!! I'm surprised he didnt open his trap about the Mitsubishi Regional Jet... The thing only has 2 customers if I recall? P
34 Post contains links keesje : Similar to Airbus (and Boeing) we could add the Canadair, Short Brothers, Learjet and de Havilland Aircraft heritages of aircraft design. Apart from
35 Post contains images mrocktor : This might seem to be the case but aircraft design requires not only having the knowledge somewhere in the company but actually bringing it together
36 parapente : Quoting parapente (Reply 33): Nope this is just P&W using smoke and mirrors to deflect attention from the real problem - them! This is possible. W
37 Post contains images AirbusA6 : The real replacement of the 727 was going to be the UDF powered 7J7, the 734 was a short term move until that plane came into service. If the 7J7 had
38 lightsaber : That is what I fear...
39 PresRDC : So, P&W did not offer performance guarantees to Qatar? What year did UTC buy P&W? It's really the same engine? What, specifically, has P&
40 planemaker : You are migrating from the point again... which you often do, and not relevant.
41 pnwtraveler : Tell that to the engineers that work on the two most recent aircraft for LearJet that are brand new designs, those of the Q400, CRJ900,1000 and NG ai
42 RoseFlyer : I think you both have points. The question I ask is, how many people working on and managing the Cseries development have worked on a clean sheet des
43 mrocktor : You do realize that of all those only the Lear 85 is a clean sheet design and not something derived from something else designed 20 (or more) years a
44 bravo1six : Just a quick factual correction - It's a Bombardier Global 5000 and Bombardier Global Express. Both were developed after Canadair was merged into Bom
45 multimark : Really? I wonder what your assesmment would have been when they launched the 50 seat CRJ? Who would have predicted its success (a fact despite the su
46 RoseFlyer : And that shows how difficult a clean sheet design is to execute.
47 flyorski : What axe is that? I do not mean to doubt you, but I am curious about why they are against a Canadian product. I am not aware of any political tension
48 Tangowhisky : The 50 seat jet concept was a flash in the pan. Both Embraer and Bombardier were lucky. If we ever get back to oil at $25 a barrel, high yields, then
49 YXXMIKE : There is certainly no direct political problems between the Arab states and Canada but as regards the business of EK trying to dominate the aviation
50 PresRDC : C-Series campaign activity has picked-up considerably post Farnborough.
51 BMI727 : I'm not sure I'd call it a flash in the pan as much as too much of a good thing. Airlines started putting RJs on routes where they really weren't the
52 pnwtraveler : I haven't once said that executing the C Series isn't a challenge, nor made excuses why it has taken so long to get into production through the shall
53 Tangowhisky : Anything to back that up with? We were living in the 90's. Everyone was making money. Almost any crazy idea worked. I am sure the Eclipse air taxi bu
54 PresRDC : Nope. Gonna have to trust that I'm positioned to know.
55 planemaker : You know, BBD was forecasting total CRJ sales of 200 when they launched the CRJ. As was said, it was a perfect storm that allowed all RJ sales to pus
56 Viscount724 : The Qseries is no longer a "series", just the Q400. Production of the Q200/300 ended in 2009.
57 multimark : The history of aviation moves so fast anything can be labelled a "flash in the pan": 4 engine piston airliners - a flash in the pan; transatlantic tu
58 mrocktor : I expect the action to begin for real when there is a prototype flying, no earlier. And the plane will really become a contender when it enters servi
59 Tangowhisky : And by that date, Mitsubishi will be flying its 90 seat RJ gaining its confidence. Bombardier will play it down like they did with the E-Jets. Bombar
60 Dash9 : I though the C EIS was supposed to be earlier than the MRJ?
61 Tangowhisky : The discussion was about first flight not EIS. Please read.
62 PlanesNTrains : Geez, I'm almost afraid to make a comment now. Anyhow, clearly the CSeries needs to get some momentum going. The question is, when and how? If A+B co
63 apodino : I think this issue has a lot to do with where the C series sits now. Part of the problem right now is the C series is on the in between range where i
64 PlanesNTrains : All the more reason to get a 150 seater going asap. 110/130 is just not going to be as popular as 110/130/150, especially when you are talking mainli
65 Tangowhisky : I doubt that unions will allow such a thing (especially after how they got burned as Planemaker has highlighted) nor is Bombardier banking on this. N
66 mrocktor : This is, and has always been, my take on the program. They are targetting a niche that does not actually exist.
67 planemaker : My take is that the niche does exist... but that it is a very narrow niche that will not provide a potentially satisfactory return on investment. I s
68 Post contains images lightsaber : I to doubt it. I'm not going to take an order with QR dropping out that seriously. They do not exactly 'play nice' in the press with their aircraft v
69 Post contains links virgin747 : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney_PW1000G In the first paragraph.... The Pratt & Whitney PW1000G is a high-bypass geared turbofan eng
70 Dash9 : OK I should have wrote 'I though the C first flight was supposed to be earlier than the MRJ? And thanks for being brutal in your answers. a.net is ge
71 planemaker : As I have posted before, time is not on the CSeries side. We are still 4 years away from a realistic EIS and perhaps even 5. Aside from all the OEM f
72 Tangowhisky : All I said was please read. How is it being brutal? I apologize that it came across the wrong way.
73 Post contains images planemaker : Because Putin just secured them some orders even though the MS21 was launched with the PW GTF only a short while ago.
74 Post contains links keesje : The engine for the MS21 is the bigger PW1400G. The MS21 will be a big, heavy machine/ http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...partnerships-for-ms-21-e
75 PresRDC : I wouldn't say that the MRJ sales have been impressive to date either. If you think the BBD sales effort for the CSeries has been dysfunctional, you s
76 Tangowhisky : I think the consensus is about the viability of the CSeries not the marketing or sales efforts by BBD. Correct me if I am wrong, but no one has said
77 PresRDC : I'm not a technical guy and by the time I get involved in campaigns, the technical evaluation is by and large over. Airframe and engine deals are won
78 Tangowhisky : I am not following why you have thrown this in? Where did I say that it does not come to making the best deal at the end and that technical merit onl
79 mrocktor : A couple of orders of magnitude greater challenge, really. Getting into the civil aircraft business is not a small task. See the HondaJet - a (by all
80 rikkus67 : ...don't forget Shorts, also. What was the order numbers for the CRJ before EIS?
81 Tangowhisky : Agreed. Mitsubishi have a big challenge ahead of them no doubt about it. Even in the customer services area where they will likely need to partner up
82 Post contains links BMI727 : In this article from two years ago it says that they have gotten Boeing to help them out with that. http://www.industryweek.com/articles...ild_first_
83 OyKIE : But are they sizing up because they need larger planes, or because no airplane in the 100-150 seat sector is optimized for that size? If they hit the
84 planemaker : One can certainly argue that the E-Jets are optimized in the 100-seat sector. Not only do they offer two models in that range but they also offer com
85 Post contains images OyKIE : Indeed they are. The E-195 has sold relatively well compared to the heavier 736/73G. I believe that the E-195 would have sold even better if the rang
86 Tangowhisky : The CSeries are capable of flying 3000 nm like the 737 and A320 families. But the CSeries CS300 at 149 seats can not do that range therefore can no l
87 PlanesNTrains : Doubtful, though at least one carrier (F9) is poised to do so. Nonetheless, I stick to my assertion that at CS500 is a critical hole that would need
88 planemaker : Two problems: BBD would have a very difficult time getting CS500 R&D financed (the program is already at $3.6-billion), and EIS would be too clos
89 keesje : When will that EIS be?
90 Tangowhisky : Certainly, but they decided to optimize the CSeries below that seat range, a market segment with far less potential than 140 seats and above. Agreed.
91 Post contains links Tangowhisky : Here is an article desperately trying to make a point that Boeing and Airbus are tied up and that Bombardier will be first. http://www.montrealgazette
92 planemaker : FYI, your pretty pictures notwithstanding, there is no CS500.
93 keesje : There is no modern efficient product in the 120-150 seat range. Roughly inbetween the E190 and 739/A319. The 737-200, -300, DC9- MD80 series etc. used
94 Post contains images planemaker : Boyd isn't just circumventing... he's missing the boat all together. Even Keesje isn't as blatant in selectively picking data points. It is embarrass
95 Viscount724 : Following from company press releases: October 1992 (first delivery to LH Cityline) - roughly 35 firm orders plus a similar number of options. August
96 Tangowhisky : If the point you are trying to make is that the CRJs had a slow start, then I would say it sure had a fast finish. If you are also trying to imply th
97 mrocktor : I have to disagree. The concept was brilliant. The fact that the market was horribly distorted by scope clauses then, and is less horribly distorted
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Has Or Will AA Start Their Blanket Sales? posted Thu May 13 2010 14:07:22 by Aeroflot001
Rockwell Collins IFE - Why Such Poor Quality? posted Thu Apr 29 2010 10:53:36 by 1337Delta764
Airtrans And CSeries posted Tue Apr 20 2010 21:02:39 by 747400sp
Brother Of UAE President Missing After Plane Crash posted Fri Mar 26 2010 19:09:51 by QatarA340
Westjet President & CEO Quits posted Mon Mar 15 2010 18:25:10 by matthew11
CO To Start Food Sales On Selected Flights posted Mon Mar 15 2010 08:41:25 by dutchflyboi
President Obama Nominates New TSA Head posted Mon Mar 8 2010 14:07:49 by m11stephen
JAL Fearing F/A Uniform Sales To Fetishists. posted Thu Mar 4 2010 11:28:56 by PLANEGUY
President Obama's Mileage Plus Status posted Sun Feb 7 2010 06:31:57 by VC10er
Rome Airport’s Poor Security Exposed! posted Sat Feb 6 2010 17:37:42 by KL911