CRJ900X From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 208 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 35963 times:
An interesting article from the Financial Post regarding the testing for the Bombardier CSeries. The article also discusses the change in forecast of delivery of airliners for the next twenty years from Bombardier.
It appears that the CSeries program is progressing quite well so far, but a lot can change as the plane starts to take shape.
Hopefully the first flight will take place at the end of 2012 as planned.
I am also hoping that at least some of the LOI's (Atlasjet & IFC) firm up their options by/at the Farnborough Air Show. As others have previously stated on the forum, airlines seem to be taking a wait-and-see approach and holding off ordering the plane to see if it delivers on all promises.
r2rho From Spain, joined Feb 2007, 3571 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 34634 times:
Quoting mad99 (Reply 2): I think you'll see a roll out by the end of the year but no flight.
Agree. If their CIASTA test facility has not started testing yet, no way there's a first flight in 2012. Unless all the system suppliers have done an extraordinarily good job to deliver everything at the right maturity level and have been managed by BBD in a significantly better way than A&B do with theirs. And even then, it's unlikely. But roll out in 2012 and first flight Q1 2013 seems possible if system testing does indeed start in july.
A year ago I would have suggested get rid of 1:1 wook mock-ups. But after solving an issue where precision in the wood mock-up allowed a team to *really* understand how the issue arose (coupled with CATIA on our laptops as we inspected the wood model) really helped.
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
I can so easily see the value in this mock up. Excellent tool I am sure. I am in a completely different industry, and work in 3D modeling software all the time. But, when it comes time to explain things and to get people's heads wrapped around it, there are times where a physical model is just so useful. In the bad old days, there would be a 1:120 (1 inch = 10 feet) or 1:600 model in the conference room or lobby that was kept up to date by the local woodcarver / retired employee / high school shop teacher or whoever, and that model would be used regularly by planners and techies to explain to everyone what was going to be done. Now that I am one of the techies, there are days where I really wish we had such models, as it is usually more work to get the message accross using a printout or screen than it would be on a model. Some places are even using virtual immersive 3D or the 3D TV technology which help, but is still not quite the same as the model.
Based on what? Not on the article quoted, as far as I can tell.
Quoting ADent (Reply 17): Don't forget that the CRJ-1000 was a year late.
That is true. I believe it was almost solely because of one problem with the rudder FBW, and I don't think they were putting nearly the resources into it that they would be for the CSeries, but that just goes to show how easily these things can slip.
I think it will be interesting to see. I can't bring myself to believe that it will fly in 2012, but these days it seems that if it's anything less than a year later, that would still be amazing!
Rheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1973 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 27537 times:
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 9): But after solving an issue where precision in the wood mock-up allowed a team to *really* understand how the issue arose (coupled with CATIA on our laptops as we inspected the wood model) really helped.
Not much precision in the mock-up, so probably not aimed at resolving DMU clashes.
ferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2809 posts, RR: 60
Reply 21, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 27126 times:
Quoting queb (Reply 19): Picture of fwd fuse assembly line (Saint-Laurent facility in Montreal). Three already assembled:
I just don't get it, for the C series we see barebone forward fuselages, empty jigs and a wooden mockup + a system rig and this frame shall fly before end of year. For the A350 we see a 2/3 system equipped MSN001 forward section, we know where all other MSN001 sections are, we've seen then being produced and they are in system equipping since 4 months and this frame will fly next summer .
Whatever Bombardier is saying it does not jive with me.