CSeries - Flight Testing And Production Thread (Part 2)

EK413 · Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:04 am

Hi All,

The previous discussion had 200+ response's & slow to load for some users so Part 2 has been created to continue the conversation.

The previous thread can be found here:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=562921

Enjoy the journey!

EK413

jalarner · Wed Jul 16, 2014 12:02 pm

http://www.bombardier.com/en/media-c...ndexistingcomme.bombardiercom.html

5 CSeries LOI for Africa, airline is un identified but an existing BBD operator.

So who is it? South African Express, Mozambique Airlines, Ethiopian, Buraq Air or Arik Air?

Paolo92 · Wed Jul 16, 2014 12:58 pm

Quoting jalarner (Reply 1):

During the media briefing Mike Arcamone revealed it is a Bombardier customer that operates CRJ and Q400 aircraft.
So the choice is among Rwandair, SA Express and Arik Air.
All three expressed interest in the past.

Reportedly another conditional order was firmed today from an undisclosed customer, adding 7 CSeries with 6 purchase rights to the books: Bombardier Inc tops 500 deals for Q400 and for CSeries at Farnborough Air Show

Edit: confirmed by Bombardier press release
Existing Customer Signs Conditional Purchase Agreement for up to 13 Bombardier CS300 Aircraft

[Edited 2014-07-16 06:11:07]

DTWPurserBoy · Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:54 pm

I am still patiently waiting for the large DL order to materialize.

YXwatcherMKE · Wed Jul 16, 2014 9:17 pm

I have a feeling that it will be AA that will be the 1st customer in the USA. Possibly DL they both need to replace a lot of DC9's but I've got a funny gut feeling that it will be AA and it will be the C-300's and a very large order and it will come just before to C-300 get Certified.

queb · Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:49 pm

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 4):
I have a feeling that it will be AA that will be the 1st customer in the USA.

At this time, there's already a US customer in the backlog, Republic Airways.

opethfan · Thu Jul 17, 2014 4:40 am

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 3):

Are DL not using A319s to replace their MD80s?

BlueSky1976 · Thu Jul 17, 2014 5:38 am

Quoting queb (Reply 5):
there's already a US customer in the backlog, Republic Airways.

"They will never be delivered" comment from Planemaker coming up in 3... 2... 1...

YXwatcherMKE · Thu Jul 17, 2014 7:20 am

Quoting Opethfan (Reply 6):
Are DL not using A319s to replace their MD80s?

The DL A319 are already in service yet they don't have any new A319 on order from Airbus according to Airbus's websites spread sheet (I did see 15 321's on order but no 319's). So they have both the MD-88's and 90's to replace. the MD88's have 149 seat the C-300 would be a perfect fit to replace the MD-88's. The MD-90's might be more difficult with the a/c having 160 seat's but maybe that would be the push BBD needs to do the C-500? The 717 will be around for a while but they could replace the a/c with the C-300 as well. it my

opethfan · Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:45 am

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 8):

Self-correction, it was AA replacing their MD80s with A319s.

DTWPurserBoy · Thu Jul 17, 2014 12:32 pm

Quoting Opethfan (Reply 6):
Are DL not using A319s to replace their MD80s?

They are different mission aircraft. The A319 has longer legs and a seating capacity of about 125. The MD88 seats about 150. They fill different needs.

planemaker · Thu Jul 17, 2014 2:57 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 10):
The MD88 seats about 150.

The interesting question is when will DL replace the 88s (the 90s might have another +10 years to run). A big chunk of the fleet is fully paid for (I believe they own ~70 and lease ~45) and DL is updating all the 88 & 90 cockpits to look like this...
.

.
... plus DL has a HUGE and CHEAP MD parts bin... so there is no reason pressing need to re-fleet, especially if Pilarski is anywhere near right with his fuel bet.

davs5032 · Fri Jul 18, 2014 6:04 am

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 8):
The DL A319 are already in service yet they don't have any new A319 on order from Airbus according to Airbus's websites spread sheet (I did see 15 321's on order but no 319's). So they have both the MD-88's and 90's to replace. the MD88's have 149 seat the C-300 would be a perfect fit to replace the MD-88's. The MD-90's might be more difficult with the a/c having 160 seat's but maybe that would be the push BBD needs to do the C-500? The 717 will be around for a while but they could replace the a/c with the C-300 as well. it my

There were/are several U.S. fleets to which the CS-300 seemed to be a good fit. DL is one of those, as the MD88's are similarly sized and can't last them forever, plus their small sub-fleet of A319's as you mentioned. Covering the MD90's wouldn't be an issue, b/c IMO, the CS-500 is an inevitability down the line. However, DL's current preference towards older, paid-off frames makes me question whether they'd realistically go the riskier C-series route. I'd thought the Cseries was a perfect fit to replace UAs 100+ 735/73G/319's, but they may opt for commonality to their ever-growing 737 fleet.

KarelXWB · Fri Jul 18, 2014 2:55 pm

Seems that Macquarie Airfinance is going to order 50 CS300 aircraft.

http://twitter.com/sylvainfaust/status/490144596576317441

rikkus67 · Fri Jul 18, 2014 3:44 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 13):
Seems that Macquarie Airfinance is going to order 50 CS300 aircraft.

If this is true, congrats to both BBD, and Macquarie Airfinance. Does this now put the number of firm orders over the 300 benchmark?

...Nothing like some good "maker(of)planes" news to start the day here in Western Canada.

Quantos · Fri Jul 18, 2014 4:35 pm

Quoting rikkus67 (Reply 14):
Does this now put the number of firm orders over the 300 benchmark?

Assuming that this is a firm order, the total of orders would be at 253 frames. The rest are 152 options and 17 purchase rights associated to those firm orders, 88 commitments, 40 optional commitments and 6 purchase rights commitments, for a total of 556.

INFINITI329 · Fri Jul 18, 2014 8:09 pm

What's the magic break even number?

KarelXWB · Thu Jul 31, 2014 2:00 pm

An update on the program:

Quote:
Bombardier boss says CSeries FTV2 has updated engines installed; fixing FTV1 progressing though no timeline for when job is done

http://twitter.com/R_Wall/status/494827432386379778

FTV5 should join the fleet before the end of the year.

http://twitter.com/sylvainfaust/status/494834985208008705

[Edited 2014-07-31 07:02:39]

KarelXWB · Thu Jul 31, 2014 3:50 pm

Bombardier may seek more information before accepting Pratt & Whitney's proposed solution to the engine malfunction that has kept the CSeries flight test fleet grounded for two months, executives say.

In addition, the first of the two flight-test vehicles assigned to the CS300 programme has been assembled and will be delivered to the flight test team "soon".

Full story:
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...ampw-on-cseries-engine-fix-402254/

[Edited 2014-07-31 08:51:44]

jalarner · Thu Jul 31, 2014 7:49 pm

So if Bombardier has to pay penalties to customers for late deliveries, I assume that they would have the same or similar contracts in place with their suppliers? How would an incident like the engine failure and slow down work itself into the grand scheme of things in regards to penalties?

How much simulator work can be conducted based on recorded data, in addition to the ground testing they are doing?

I have read (can't find the source now) that the issue on the CSeries engine version has not been found on the other engine models? Ay thoughts on this? I don't work in the industry, but I find that hard to believe based on similarities in what I do.

planemaker · Tue Aug 12, 2014 4:36 pm

Minor jursidictional spat...?

Bombardier workers accused of falsely calling themselves engineers

Quote:
At least four of the employees worked on the company’s CSeries aircraft. They’re being accused of having prepared a report titled CSeries FTV Configuration Requirements for aeronautics work without actually being members of the Quebec Order of Engineers.

It reminds me of a news story many years back (before the work was moved to Mexico) where BBD was taking people "off the street" (i.e. had no vocational training) and after a brief in-house training session had jobs putting together aircraft electrical wiring looms. A few unions really got upset about that one.

eaglepower83 · Tue Aug 12, 2014 4:44 pm

Quoting jalarner (Reply 19):

I worked on all these GTF variants and while they are very similar as a family....many have different components or similar components, but different revisions of those.
There are so many parts in an engine, just like a car.....where you could have issues with a Ford F150 truck, but the F250 and F350 could be fine. Even though they're both closely related.

KarelXWB · Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:28 pm

We're nearing the end of the month and it remains very quiet at Bombardier's HQ. Almost three months since the grounding and the only thing they keep saying is "the fleet should fly in the coming weeks". The longer it takes the more difficult it will become to remain on track for EIS next year.

aerolimani · Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:35 pm

At this point, I'm so curious for news, I'd be happy reading unsubstantiated quotes from unidentified sources. The silence is deafening.

KarelXWB · Tue Aug 19, 2014 8:53 pm

There's really nothing new to report. Per Flightglobal today:

Quote:
Bombardier is still in discussion with P&W about the engine design changes, a spokesman says. The timeline for return to flight is still described by Bombardier as the “coming weeks”, a refrain that has been repeated almost since the grounding began on 29 May.

See http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...series-marketing-executive-402849/

CXH · Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:23 pm

As KarelXWB said, there's nothing new.

The Fliegerfaust website often has new information - plus rumors and speculation.

http://www.fliegerfaust.com/

Interesting note here:
http://www.fliegerfaust.com/bombardi...cseries-engine-upda-672668218.html

Apparently the engines were started up on FTV2 on August 8th. And have since been removed. The website doesn't know why, except it jokes about not doing test runs when the engines are attached to a wing.

[Edited 2014-08-19 14:26:02]

KarelXWB · Mon Aug 25, 2014 8:04 pm

Pratt & Whitney has completed a design repair for the Pure Power 1500G used on the Bombardier CSeries Flight Test Vehicles (FTVs) and is re-delivering the engines.

Flight tests are expected to resume in September.

http://leehamnews.com/2014/08/25/pw-...irborne-program-likely-next-month/

lightsaber · Tue Aug 26, 2014 1:41 am

Quoting planemaker (Reply 11):
The interesting question is when will DL replace the 88s (the 90s might have another +10 years to run). A big chunk of the fleet is fully paid for (I believe they own ~70 and lease ~45) and DL is updating all the 88 & 90 cockpits to look like this...

DL's replacement of the MD-88s will be as facinating (to myself) as the NW DC-9s.

I expect the following:
1. Nothing for a few years. DL is in no hurry.
2. Perhaps in 2016 or 2017 DL will quietly seek bids. But if the offers are not excellent, they'll wait. If offers are accepted, they will 'slow roll' in new aircraft to replace the MD-80s using older narrowbodies (depreciated) to replace them in their lower daily utilization service.
3. If no good bids arrive in 2016 and 2017, I fully expect DL to place an order in 2018 as they will be running out of spare parts. (They 'batch bought' and will run out by my estimate in 2021 unless MD-88s are partially phased out earlier.) In a 2018 order scenario, I expect a fast transition out of the fleet (with older narrowbodies actually taking over the MD-88 duty).

In other words, DL has time on their side. Market conditions are not right in 2014. If there is a 'system shock' in 2015, DL could order that early, but I really doubt they will even 'test the waters' before 2016 unless there is a sweetheart deal they just cannot refuse.

Note: I tend to quote you as you post interesting stuff.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 18):

Bombardier may seek more information before accepting Pratt & Whitney's proposed solution to the engine malfunction that has kept the CSeries flight test fleet grounded for two months, executives say.

"My rumor mill" is stating Bombardier is stalling to fix their own issues. However, your link seem to indicate they are speaking more from pride than fact.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 26):
Flight tests are expected to resume in September.

I hope so. As always, the links are appreciated.

Lightsaber

pugman211 · Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:23 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 26):

Interesting to see that in the leeham news link that PW have applied the same engine repair to the GTF engine for the A320 NEO.

mad99 · Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:20 am

BBD have resumed ac assembly in the new building.

r2rho · Tue Aug 26, 2014 11:32 am

Quoting aerolimani (Reply 23):
The silence is deafening.

Not only the silence, also tha fact that, when they speak, does not sound honest or credible. How long have they been repeating that flight test will resume "in the coming weeks"? Or when 2 years ago they waited until the last second to delay first flight, even though the delay was obvious to anyone in the industry. Etc etc. BBD CSeries communications are not credible anymore, and this is a big issue for a program that, above all, needs to build credibility and confidence to get orders. Don't get me wrong, I see a market for the CSeries and would like it to succeed, but BBD is not doing this right.
The difference to Airbus's open and transparent communication on A350 flight tests is huge - although reporting good news is always easier.

[Edited 2014-08-26 04:34:34]

eaglepower83 · Tue Aug 26, 2014 2:56 pm

Quoting pugman211 (Reply 28):
Interesting to see that in the leeham news link that PW have applied the same engine repair to the GTF engine for the A320 NEO.

Well sure. Why not?
If there's an improvement that can be added to other family engines? Might as well.

lightsaber · Tue Aug 26, 2014 5:58 pm

Quoting r2rho (Reply 30):
Not only the silence, also tha fact that, when they speak, does not sound honest or credible.

Sadly, per my rumor mill, it seems Bombardier is dragging out the engine fix to mask delays of their own. Why doesn't Bombardier get fly by wire?!?

Quoting r2rho (Reply 30):
The difference to Airbus's open and transparent communication on A350 flight tests is huge - although reporting good news is always easier.

Airbus set up a system that if a manager didn't ask for help early... they would be in the public spotlight (in a negative way). Airbus also pre-tested to eliminate problems early.

Lightsaber

Quantos · Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:26 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 32):

Airbus set up a system that if a manager didn't ask for help early... they would be in the public spotlight (in a negative way). Airbus also pre-tested to eliminate problems early.

And as we all know, BBD simply took the engine from the factory, slapped it on an aircraft, started it for the first time and flew off.

YXwatcherMKE · Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:27 pm

I am very happy to see that PW has "fixed" the 1500 GTF engine. Lets hope that BBD has had time to "Fix" their own problems and get the C-Series back in the air and get the program testing completed. As to comments made by r2rho in post 30 I think he is right. They really have to clean up their act on the communications to the public. It really does not instill confidence in the program with these ambiguous press releases that basically say nothing more than "You'll have to just wait and see when we will start up the flight tests again." That is basically what they are saying to the public and to potential customers of their product.

JoeCanuck · Tue Aug 26, 2014 10:09 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 32):

To play the devil's advocate, while I don't doubt BBD is taking advantage of the engine delay, they couldn't be dragging it out too long since they either just got, or are just getting, the modded engines. I don't see how BBD could prevent Pratt from delivering the engines if they were flight ready.

There's not much else they could say but, "in the coming weeks", since they really didn't have much say in the fix...that was pretty much all up to Pratt and the regulators. Since the fix also is going into the other engines in the GTF family, it definitely was a pretty big deal.

There are no small, on wing, catestrophic engine failures in a flight test program.

I also can't blame them from being a bit extra cautious since the engine did damage the airframe and could have easily have failed in the air, with potentially catastrophic consequences. Look how many hours the engines had on them before they failed, and imagine the consequences of rushing this fix.

Worse than any delay would be an accident with the test aircraft. If the engines were ready to fly and BBD was stalling, we wouldn't have needed any sources to hear about it...there are plenty of people dying to broadcast any CSeries bad news.

BBD has plenty of homemade problems getting the CSeries to market, (and their communications department does seriously suck), but it's hard to fault them on this one.

This is one time customers will forgive them for taking their time.

Okie · Tue Aug 26, 2014 11:04 pm

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 35):
To play the devil's advocate, while I don't doubt BBD is taking advantage of the engine delay, they couldn't be dragging it out too long since they either just got, or are just getting, the modded engines. I don't see how BBD could prevent Pratt from delivering the engines if they were flight ready.

While I understand your point, BBD has to accept the new turbines along with regulating agencies blessing, BBD has been bitten once.

I suspect BBD wanted some cell testing time on a modified example before installing them on an airframe. The failure was on a turbine with about only 200 hours the best I recall. That is a very short period of time to have a catastrophic failure in relation to on wing times for turbines these days.
No doubt BBD would use the time to handle their demons.

Off topic but it was not to long ago MRJ got their GTF P & W's, I wonder if this will effect them as well?

Okie

planemaker · Tue Aug 26, 2014 11:24 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 27):
DL's replacement of the MD-88s will be as facinating (to myself) as the NW DC-9s.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 27):
If no good bids arrive in 2016 and 2017, I fully expect DL to place an order in 2018 as they will be running out of spare parts.

I think that 2018 could be very interesting!

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 27):
"My rumor mill" is stating Bombardier is stalling to fix their own issues. However, your link seem to indicate they are speaking more from pride than fact.

I imagine that you are just refering to their management issues.

.
Bombardier revamps itself amid CSeries challenges

Quote:
The post of president of Bombardier Aerospace, which included commercial and business aircraft and which was held by Guy Hachey for six years before he left abruptly on July 23, has been abolished. Presidents of both aerospace divisions will now report directly to Bombardier president Pierre Beaudoin.

Hachey’s departure was divulged by the company but Bombardier made no announcement last week when Philippe Poutissou, the executive vice-president of marketing for the CSeries, also left suddenly.

Neither departure was expected.

BTW, I always enjoy your posts... even when we on occasion lock "lightsabers".

JoeCanuck · Wed Aug 27, 2014 12:09 am

Quoting okie (Reply 36):

BBD has fully deserved much of the criticism they've received, but they get a pass on this one. Even if they are stretching return to service a bit, few will blame them.

One thing I wish BBD would open up about, are the processes going into repairing FTV1.

Tangowhisky · Wed Aug 27, 2014 12:46 am

Quoting Quantos (Reply 33):
And as we all know, BBD simply took the engine from the factory, slapped it on an aircraft, started it for the first time and flew off.

I know you are being sarcastic, but ligthsabar is trying to make a very valid point.

It is the OEMs responsibility to scrutinize and take apart piece by piece every suppliers work.
Did the OEM tear apart their design plans to make sure the supplier is covering all aspects?
Did the OEM thoroughly review the suppliers rig testing plans?
Did the OEM just look at the reports or sent engineers to witness the testing?
How much experience is there in the OEM and supplier team?
Are communications open during the whole design and testing process?

Boeing's 787 battery problems and very likely BBD's engine problems are likely attributed to faults in the above listed criteria. If the OEM creates a rubber stamps / check mark engineering culture, then these types of problems will occur and lessons will never be learned. So yes, Airbus seems to have learned as it went along.

queb · Wed Aug 27, 2014 1:52 am

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 39):
It is the OEMs responsibility to scrutinize and take apart piece by piece every suppliers work.

Do you really think Boeing and Airbus inspect each part of each 737/A320 ?

lightsaber · Wed Aug 27, 2014 1:57 am

Quoting planemaker (Reply 37):
I think that 2018 could be very interesting!

With the MD-80 it will be fascinating! In particular as DL is still operating enough to go back to the vendors and buy another 5 years of parts (no less, as it wouldn't be worth it for the vendors to bid low for less).

Quoting planemaker (Reply 37):
I imagine that you are just refering to their management issues.

Bombardier always takes longer to get certain features e.g., fly by wire with them seems to be their Achilles heal. They really need to hire a team from Northrop (IMHO best in the industry in FBW) to revamp their development processes.

Quoting Quantos (Reply 33):
And as we all know, BBD simply took the engine from the factory, slapped it on an aircraft, started it for the first time and flew off.

Probably. The whole C-series program it has been a fight for Pratt to get certain definition from Bombardier and some of my 'rumor mill' was surprised at how late Bombardier asked for certain information. In fact, Pratt forced into the contract the hand over of certain interface details earlier than Bombardier wanted them as that is when Pratt's design practices created the information (per Boeing and Airbus standard practice which borrows HUGELY from Douglas and McDonell and no, that isn't a typo. I'm a bit of a history buff and am talking about an era long gone when the best practices were initiated...).

Lightsaber

Tangowhisky · Wed Aug 27, 2014 2:20 am

Quoting queb (Reply 40):
Do you really think Boeing and Airbus inspect each part of each 737/A320 ?

I am referring to the certification and development phase of the program

r2rho · Wed Aug 27, 2014 11:21 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 32):
it seems Bombardier is dragging out the engine fix to mask delays of their own. Why doesn't Bombardier get fly by wire?!?

Unfortunately, I tend to agree with you. And a proof of that would be - assuming commonality of this problem with the A320NEO engine - that the NEO FAL seemingly hasn't been interrupted for this.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 35):
I don't see how BBD could prevent Pratt from delivering the engines if they were flight ready.

The same way QR is preventing Airbus from delivering their A380's - making up various findings here and there to buy time.

planemaker · Wed Aug 27, 2014 2:18 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 41):
With the MD-80 it will be fascinating! In particular as DL is still operating enough to go back to the vendors and buy another 5 years of parts (no less, as it wouldn't be worth it for the vendors to bid low for less).

Conceivably, the AA retirements could be a decent source of canablized parts as well. They currently have ~160. As we have discussed previously, if we even approach Pilarski's prediction we could see the MD-80's for a while yet.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 41):
They really need to hire a team from Northrop (IMHO best in the industry in FBW) to revamp their development processes.

I was being tongue in cheek with my comment.

I wholehearedly agree with you. As you know, I have been warning about BBD's shortcomings from the very beginning. For a while it seemed that it was just me and Aboulafia out there telling people not to swallow BBD's "dog & pony shows", but others are coming around...

Bombardier changes the messenger, but CSeries sales struggles to be a hard fix

Quote:
As Bombardier continues a management restructuring with the CSeries flight test program still grounded and CSeries sales stagnant, it’s fair to wonder whether the Canadian manufacturer’s much-hyped “all-new” aircraft has much bigger problems than who is delivering the message about it.

CSeries sackings reflect public relations realities

Quote:
By continuing to remove senior executives who were the face of completely inaccurate forecasts as to the progress of its CSeries regional jetliner, Canada’s Bombardier company is following sound public relations strategy.

Which is that when you screw up, you get rid of those media and industry relations figures who will get grilled over their prior delivery of dubious or failed guidance.

JoeCanuck · Wed Aug 27, 2014 3:49 pm

Quoting r2rho (Reply 43):
Unfortunately, I tend to agree with you. And a proof of that would be - assuming commonality of this problem with the A320NEO engine - that the NEO FAL seemingly hasn't been interrupted for this.

There's no reason for the NEO FAL to be affected at all. They haven't started their flight test program yet so there's nothing to delay.

Quoting r2rho (Reply 43):
The same way QR is preventing Airbus from delivering their A380's - making up various findings here and there to buy time.

In this case, BBD is on a different priority level than Al Baker. An engine suffering a catastrophic failure is a bit more serious than the carpet not matching the drapes.

golfradio · Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:13 pm

Pratt went public with the engine failure in accordance with SEC laws. If the assumption that BBD is stalling and hiding behind Pratt is true, why hasn't Pratt come out saying they are happy with the fixes, their work is done and they have handed over the fixed engines to BBD? Why would Pratt keep this information from it's own investors to help BBD?

JoeCanuck · Wed Aug 27, 2014 6:24 pm

Quoting golfradio (Reply 46):

Pratt wouldn't. BBD could ask for more testing time before engine delivery but the darn thing did blow up on wing and damage their aircraft so it would be hard to fault them.

How long did it take Rolls to get their 380 engine fix on to the planes? 3 months(ish) doesn't seem like a lot to me considering all of the flight test engines have to be done and the fix has to be slid into the production process.

Just consider the engine fix process; first, they have to figure out exactly which part(s) failed...then, how it, (they), failed. Whether or not it's a one off or all engines has to be decided. They have to discover whether the failure was because of a bad part, abuse, and whether or not another part caused this one to break. Then they have to design a fix...get some prototypes made...make whatever mods to the engine itself to accommodate the fix. The fix process has to be written and approved. Every step has to be tested and the final fix has to be tested...(and it takes a few prototype parts and processes to make the grade), all with regulators looking over their shoulders.

I have no doubt missed a few steps but to me, it seems like Pratt has done a lot in pretty quick order.

[Edited 2014-08-27 11:25:15]

MANYUL · Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:21 pm

Two engines to be delivered to YMX for FTV2 over the weekend

http://www.fliegerfaust.com/helene-v...n-693557761.html?xrs=RebelMouse_tw

planemaker · Fri Aug 29, 2014 7:47 pm

Change in who will be the first operator...

Bombardier CSeries suffers blow as first operator backs away

Quote:
Bombardier Inc. will have to find another CSeries jet buyer to become the plane’s first operator after Sweden’s Braathens Aviation AB said it’s seeking changes to its delivery schedule.

Also... announced in WSJ:

Porter Aviation Puts Billy Bishop Airport Terminal on Auction Block

[Edited 2014-08-29 13:50:42]

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net