Quoting planemaker (Reply 205):

Quoting planemaker (Reply 205): In fact, I said that Swiss would be the logical first operator. It was Swiss that repeatedly said that they would not be the first operator.

Precisely!  
That is a great example of quoting news articles as facts! We really don't know what the facts were, but articles in the WSJ and others would report on PR spin from the Companies involved, and it is consumed by the general public as fact, especially when we keep repeating it over and over. It has been reported, ....therefore it must be true that.....?? So many times we have heard "facts" reported only to learn later on, that the facts were indeed fiction!   

It is kind of fun, and funny to read older online articles, even ones that aren't that old, good for a chuckle at least!

Quoting airnorth (Reply 204):

Well said Airnorth...finally a reasonable display of diplomacy in this forum.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 205):

Please - as a number of people keep trying to remind you; go set up the "CSeries will fail because of xyz reasons thread". We've all had a go at you because you seem like a troll who enjoys inciting a response from others and it's not really in the spirit of what the airlines.net forum is all about; it's petty and you seem like an aviation nerd as well so I'm not sure what fun you get out of this??

Looking forward to seeing this plane and many more of them in the skies and getting the chance to fly it myself one day!

Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 207): Please - as a number of people keep trying to remind you; go set up the "CSeries will fail because of xyz reasons thread". We've all had a go at you because you seem like a troll who enjoys inciting a response from others and it's not really in the spirit of what the airlines.net forum is all about; it's petty and you seem like an aviation nerd as well so I'm not sure what fun you get out of this??

Hear hear! Thank you YXXMIKE!

Quoting airnorth (Reply 206): Precisely!   That is a great example of quoting news articles as facts! We really don't know what the facts were,

It is precisely a fact that Swiss publically and repeatedly said that they didn't want to be the first operator.

Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 207): as a number of people keep trying to remind you;

And as I keep reminding people, if people didn't post items that were off topic I wouldn't have anything to post. Moreover, I have been factual (and civil) in my responses even when people resort to saying that I am bashing and/or trolling instead of addressing the counterpoints I raise. Anet is not a fan site that censors posts just because some members only want to hear "good news".  

Hi everybody,

I think (and hope) that the CSeries will be a great success. A brand new design, not a refresh. It should, IMHO, get a significant number of orders and allow Bombardier to recoup the significant amounts of cash they invested in the project.

Future will tell, of course, but I keep my fingers crossed. It does take a lot of "guts" for a company like BBD to venture into that market sector. They earned all my respect and I wish them well.

Regards,

Richard

Can we get back to topic please?...So, can anyone tell us any up-dates on the testing of the C-Series aircraft? How many hours have the a/c flown, whats left to be done etc....

Bombardier released a somewhat general press release last week(didn't see it posted) with a couple interesting things:

-Testing is in its final stretch, with over 85% complete and next up is function & reliability tests with FTV1
-FTV5 went to their site in Toronto for meet & greet with employees and Porter (looks strong)
-Testing shows that CS100 is "quietest in-production commercial jet in its class"

It also cites some other numbers we've seen but I wanted to put them up anyways:
-added 350nm to range = 3300nm
-20% better fuel burn vs. in-production a/c; 10% vs re-engineered a/c

link:
http://news.commercialaircraft.bomba...etest-commercial-jet-in-its-class/


Also on 8/20 they stated they were 80% complete = 5% in 21 days = could be done by halfway thru November (the 12th at 5%/21 days but probably won't till Dec.). Looks like they're on track to get it done this year congrats!

Quoting Polot (Reply 199): Quoting AirbusCanada (Reply 193): 1. Please elaborate how A340-600 was non competitive basically every metric vs. B773ER (Do not forget the most important one: Pricing). The 77W weighed less and was more capable. The A346 is only better in two metrics: price and hot and high operations. Keep in mind part of the reason for the former was because interest in the A346 was so low and the 77W so high- simple supply versus demand. Quoting AirbusCanada (Reply 193): 2. IF 773ER is better than 346 in every metric , how come it secured only two new customers (EVA, PIA) before service entry. All other (eight in total) pre EIS 773ER order were from existing 777 operator. Because before both aircraft's EISs the A346 was actually suppose to perform better than the 77W. But the A346 failed to meet expectations and the 77W exceeded expectations. And the rest is history as evidenced by the order books...I notice you failed to comment on how several A346 customers switched to the 77W before they even received their first A346 (AC, EK) and how many A346 operators moved on to the 77W.

Thank you very much for agreeing with me. Let me reiterate my point, with the 773ER vs A346 Schnario, only to change the aircraft type ot B737Max and CSeries respectively.

Because before both aircraft's EISs the B737Max was actually supposed to perform better or at least equal to CSeries. But the B737MAX may fail to meet expectations (Thanks to problems with leap engine) and the CSereis already exceeded expectations (better than advertised fuel burn). It is entirely possible to for the history to repeat itself again.....

In addition, If the above scenario is true, it is very likely that several B737Max customers may switch to the CSeries before they even received their first B737Max and few B737Max operators may move on to the Csreis.

Is there a status on second CS300 FTV?

Quoting yyztpa (Reply 214): Is there a status on second CS300 FTV?

I know for sure FTV8 is in final assembly and should be out soon, as well as a CS100(not sure if its msn50006 or msn50007, but most likely an a/c for Swiss)

I reposting my last post due to formatting errors.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 205): The "TERMS" are based on the creditworthiness of the airline

Quoting planemaker (Reply 205): In fact, when aircraft delivery is not for 2+ years aircraft financing is often not even lined up when the order is announced.

You want to come across as someone knowledgeable on aircraft transactions, but it it is obvious you have never come remotely close to know what goes on during the months leading to closure. The credit worthiness can play zero if Ex-Imp bank will backstop and guarantee the deal. That guarantee can lock in attractive rates and terms whiuch the commercial bank would not need to worryabout. That's just for beginners. Like I said a more expensive aircraft can still be cheaper on a CASM basis for the routes it is destined to fly by the lease or financing terms that the supplier can put together as part of their proposal even after the operator takes delivery 3 years down the line. The OEM is on the hook to deliver that. One can pick up a 20 year old 747-400 for less than a CS300. So by your reasoning one should not buy a CS300 when one can pick up a 744 with 3 times the seats for $40 million. After all price is the most important factor. Right?

Quoting planemaker (Reply 205): You did not illustrate any levers that BBD has... but A&B certainly have all the levers.

I brought up one novel lever that Bombardier can present with a CS500 but you did not catch it. The way the weights are growing on the A & B neos, their optimal points are sliding way past 160 seats. BBD would have the opportunity to illustrate to the airlines when the next round of pilot negotiations come to work on a new and much lower payscale for the 110-160 seats with the CSeries family, but compromise on a higher for the 160 plus seats with the neos. Neither A or B can dispute that no matter how low they set their prices as airlines evaluate the whole sale package over 10 years. The price (again) gets to be a small factor when it is amortized over 10 years and millions RASMs.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 205): But you are ignore the A&B facts that trump those "facts".

It is a fact that gravity exists and by your approach (always being factual), manned flight would never be possible. After all it was attempted so many times and failed. Therefore a CS500 is a doomed idea because you have so many analyst reports to back that up with, and A&B are 800 pound gorillas, the incumbents that will not allow BBD get 5-10% of the market.

http://montrealgazette.com/news/loca...-cseries-order-from-chinese-lessor


I found this an interesting statement, but take it how you will.

Jamie

Community noise testing in Oregon, I must say I am impressed didn't hear much

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVYnscMlwOA

Quoting AirbusCanada (Reply 213): ...In addition, If the above scenario is true, it is very likely that several B737Max customers may switch to the CSeries before they even received their first B737Max and few B737Max operators may move on to the Csreis..

737MAX defectors who go to the C-series would be the ones to push BBD for a CS500. especially if they are satisfied with the performance of the CS100/300.

[Edited 2015-09-17 11:14:09]

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 2): 737MAX defectors who go to the C-series would be the ones to push BBD for a CS500. especially if they are satisfied with the performance of the CS100/300.

Indeed. I look at some airlines like WS and I don't see the point of continuing with the 737MAX when the MAX7 isn't seling all that well. They'd be better off with a mixed fleet.

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 2): 737MAX defectors who go to the C-series would be the ones to push BBD for a CS500. especially if they are satisfied with the performance of the CS100/300.

Any defectors won't actually defect until BBD has a CS500, with some firm specifications behind it. They are not going to move from the 737-8Max to the CS100/300 in hopes that Bombardier one day builds a CS500.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 3): Indeed. I look at some airlines like WS and I don't see the point of continuing with the 737MAX when the MAX7 isn't seling all that well. They'd be better off with a mixed fleet.

It doesn't really matter to WS if the 73GMax doesn't sell all that well, it will still have full commonality with the 40 738Maxes they also have on order. I see WS moving away from the ~130 seaters and more towards 150+ seaters especially as they build towards a more traditional network with intercontinental flights (and start to add "Plus" seats to their narrowbodies like in their 767s).

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 2): Community noise testing in Oregon, I must say I am impressed didn't hear much

I saw somewhere that the CSeries did several approaches to YTZ, as part of the Toronto visit last week... on a day when I was not in my office and out of the downtown core    Did anyone on here happen to see or hear anything?

This got me thinking - given the recent performance improvements announced, will that affect the runway length requirements? I'm not sure if the two might be related or not

Quoting yyzyyt (Reply 5):

BBD sent the Cseries to YZD (Downsview)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBEqhvWwBJ0

I'm pretty sure noone heard anything. They flew it in for employees and "local stakeholders". PDs CEO can be seen in the video.

BBD should overfly YTZ at night with lights temporarily off just see if anyone notices and then use it as evidence at their town hall meeting with the city and residents. just my   

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 6): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBEqhvWwBJ0

The first bit of that Video clearly shows the C-Series landing at YTZ. YZD isn't on an island.

Also YTZ has a curfew.

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 6):

For those who like clickable links...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBEqhvWwBJ0

Quoting Neromancer (Reply 7): The first bit of that Video clearly shows the C-Series landing at YTZ. YZD isn't on an island.

No. it shows them landing at Downsview. The first shot is of the low and over at YTZ. It did not land on the island.

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 9): No. it shows them landing at Downsview. The first shot is of the low and over at YTZ. It did not land on the island.

Yes you are correct. The video sequence threw me off. It shows an approach to YTZ and then landing at YZD.

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 2):

Quoting YTZ (Reply 3):

dfads

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 2): 37MAX defectors who go to the C-series would be the ones to push BBD for a CS500. especially if they are satisfied with the performance of the CS100/300.

Quoting YTZ (Reply 3): Indeed. I look at some airlines like WS and I don't see the point of continuing with the 737MAX when the MAX7 isn't seling all that well. They'd be better off with a mixed fleet.

Quoting Polot (Reply 4): Any defectors won't actually defect until BBD has a CS500, with some firm specifications behind it. They are not going to move from the 737-8Max to the CS100/300 in hopes that Bombardier one day builds a CS500.

Any defection from the 737Max to Cseries will depend on either of the following scenarios becoming true:

1. Max will miss their performance target by at lest 5%.
2. Max production ramp up will be delayed by at least 12 months.

There is a possibility of either of the two scenarios happening given the Leap engine trouble rumours and also significant slowdown in Max order in 2015(compared to A320NEO).

IF and that is a big IF, the above mentioned scenario become a reality , significant number of 737Max customers should switch to CS300 and Emb195E2 platform, given the limited slot availability of A320NEO.

Bombardier should immediately launch both CS500 and CS700, before Boeing/GE has a chance to fix any problems with their Max platform and secure their place a a firm player in the Narrow-body market.

Quoting AirbusCanada (Reply 11): Bombardier should immediately launch both CS500 and CS700, before Boeing/GE has a chance to fix any problems with their Max platform and secure their place a a firm player in the Narrow-body market.

I don't really see a CS700 without some significant changes- that is where the fact that the C-series is 5 abreast starts to become an issue. The CS300 is already the size (in terms of exterior dimensions) of an A320. I'm guessing the CS500 would be about 739 size (again, exterior dimensions), so the CS700 would be slightly larger than the A321 at minimum but at an awkward place in terms of seat count with respect to the A320/738 and A321/739. Actual exterior scale is something that fancy graphic showing the CS100-CS900 really doesn't take into account.

I would also argue that despite whatever problems Boeing/GE may or may not be having they likely are still secure in their place as a firm player in the narrow-body market. BBD is not going to be knocking out 50 or whatever C-series a month anytime soon.

[Edited 2015-09-18 14:17:16]

Quoting Polot (Reply 12): I don't really see a CS700 without some significant changes- that is where the fact that the C-series is 5 abreast starts to become an issue. The CS300 is already the size (in terms of exterior dimensions) of an A320. I'm guessing the CS500 would be about 739 size (again, exterior dimensions), so the CS700 would be slightly larger than the A321 at minimum but at an awkward place in terms of seat count with respect to the A320/738 and A321/739.

IF the C-Series could go to a CS700, I don't see it being done without going to a wider cabin(6 abreast) and bigger wing and power plant thus changing the a/c a great deal and then CS900 could be a possibility. But would it really be a C-Series aircraft at that point? Because it would be an all new plane, right?

[Edited 2015-09-18 22:19:12]

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 9):

Exactly.

Did not have to look at a video, or radar data, or anything else, to know that a CSeries did not land at YTZ.

Why? Because jets can't land at YTZ. Period. Not until something changes.

Quoting SwissCanuck (Reply 14): Because jets can't land at YTZ. Period. Not until something changes.

Incorrect. Medevac jets are permitted to land at CYTZ.

Quoting YVRtoYYZ (Reply 15): Incorrect. Medevac jets are permitted to land at CYTZ.

And as a rule....medivac jets haven't been known to be the quietest of machines flying around! Not to sure what's flying in Ontario but from memory the Lear 35's that where flying out of YVR aren't exactly whisper jets...

When is Toronto City Council meant to be making a decision on this? Given the struggles which the Canadian economy is going through at the moment a vote against jobs isn't going to go down well. However NIMBYism is alive and well in downtown Toronto so should be interesting when the vote does happen.

Back on topic. A CS500 isn't going to happen unless there are a couple of big orders which anchor it but...I believe if there are a couple of big orders waiting there then it would bring a great deal of stability to the programme as whole.

Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 16): Not to sure what's flying in Ontario but from memory the Lear 35's that where flying out of YVR aren't exactly whisper jets..

Lear T/O distance wouldn't permit it to use the Island Airport anyway.  

Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 16): Back on topic. A CS500 isn't going to happen unless there are a couple of big orders

Realistically, where are the "big orders" going to come from.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 17): Realistically, where are the "big orders" going to come from.

it would be a poached 737 or A320 customer in my opinion

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 18): it would be a poached 737 or A320 customer in my opinion

Poached from which airlines? And why?

According to this poster on twitter, as of Sept 13, since Sept 1, there have been 50 test flights and a total of 89 hrs, 38 mins added to the program.

CS Fan ‏@bouroux Sep 13
CSeries FTV4 0h22 Salina http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/c-gwxk/#768c568 … FTV1 1h22 http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/c-fbcs/#76959af … Total 1h44 cette semaine 41h Depuis 1 sept:50 vols 89h38
Translated from French by Bing Wrong translation?
CSeries FTV4 0 h 22 Salina http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/c-gwxk/#768c568 … FTV1 1 h 22 http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/c-fbcs/#76959af … Total 1 h 44 this week 41: since 1 sept: 50 flights 89 h 38

He seems to keep a close eye on the testing program, so thanks for that!

Also has the Aug totals posted on twitter.

CS Fan ‏@bouroux Aug 31 View translation
Août 2015 CSeries temps de vol: FTV1 28=59h52, FTV2 13=25h25, FTV3 16=36h09, FTV4 54=19h12, FTV5 12=28:15, FTV7 16=43h34 Total 139vol=212h27

139 flights, 212 hrs, 27 mins.

Not sure if this is good or bad, or even accurate, but found it all really interesting.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 17): Lear T/O distance wouldn't permit it to use the Island Airport anyway.

I used to work Lear's (24's, 25's, 35's, 31's, 60's etc.) into 3,900ft runways all the time. Piece of cake.

atct

Quoting planemaker (Reply 19): Poached from which airlines? And why?

If C-series delivers as promised, they can potentially poach current MAX and/or NEO customers, especially those who won't be getting those frames for a long while.

What would CS300 + Rio Santos Dumont do ?
Nice ?

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter): This thread is about CSeries production. Therefore I suggest we leave any CS500 discussion out of this topic.

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 2): CS500

That didn't take long   

Quoting airnorth (Reply 20): 139 flights, 212 hrs, 27 mins. Not sure if this is good or bad, or even accurate, but found it all really interesting.

212 hours is a good figure. AirInsight has these monthly updates and it seems 200+ hours is above average.

http://airinsight.com/2015/09/01/c-series-flight-test-update-august/

http://www.bnn.ca/Video/player.aspx?vid=702237

"A report by Walter Spracklin, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets, says there is a "high likelihood" Air Canada will order 25 CSeries planes in the medium term. BNN's Paige Ellis explains the renewed interest in the jets, and why shares of Bombardier are surging this week."

Well that's interesting!

Quoting Polot (Reply 12): I don't really see a CS700 without some significant changes- that is where the fact that the C-series is 5 abreast starts to become an issue. The CS300 is already the size (in terms of exterior dimensions) of an A320. I'm guessing the CS500 would be about 739 size (again, exterior dimensions), so the CS700 would be slightly larger than the A321 at minimum but at an awkward place in terms of seat count with respect to the A320/738 and A321/739. Actual exterior scale is something that fancy graphic showing the CS100-CS900 really doesn't take into account.

Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 13): IF the C-Series could go to a CS700, I don't see it being done without going to a wider cabin(6 abreast) and bigger wing and power plant thus changing the a/c a great deal and then CS900 could be a possibility. But would it really be a C-Series aircraft at that point? Because it would be an all new plane, right?

If bbd can turn the he original Challenger 600/604 fuselage into CRJ1000, I am sure bbd can build the CS500 and possibly even the CS700 without changing the original diameter.

Quoting AirbusCanada (Reply 27): Quoting Polot (Reply 12):I don't really see a CS700 without some significant changes- that is where the fact that the C-series is 5 abreast starts to become an issue. The CS300 is already the size (in terms of exterior dimensions) of an A320. I'm guessing the CS500 would be about 739 size (again, exterior dimensions), so the CS700 would be slightly larger than the A321 at minimum but at an awkward place in terms of seat count with respect to the A320/738 and A321/739. Actual exterior scale is something that fancy graphic showing the CS100-CS900 really doesn't take into account.Quoting YXwatcherMKE (Reply 13):IF the C-Series could go to a CS700, I don't see it being done without going to a wider cabin(6 abreast) and bigger wing and power plant thus changing the a/c a great deal and then CS900 could be a possibility. But would it really be a C-Series aircraft at that point? Because it would be an all new plane, right?If bbd can turn the he original Challenger 600/604 fuselage into CRJ1000, I am sure bbd can build the CS500 and possibly even the CS700 without changing the original diameter.

And all of this pertains to the current flight test program how?

I don't have much to add to this conversation except that I'm watching one doing touch and go's at ICT at this very moment. Since I haven't been following this thread at all I wasn't aware testing was being done in Kansas. My first thought was an A320 but on the second pass I could make out the company logo on the tail. I apologize for the crappy picture but my iPhone is all I have.

Quoting FlyingJHawk (Reply 29):

What's your impression on the aircraft's noise?

Quoting LSZH34 (Reply 30): What's your impression on the aircraft's noise?

It sounded a lot like CNN. I'm kidding. I took that picture from inside my hotel room. It's hard to compare to other a/c but if I had to guess based on the touch and go's only I'd say very quiet. And I don't mean that just because I was inside. I can hear every single departure inside the room and it's very easy to distinguish between a corporate jet (which there are many at ICT), regionals and mainline a/c.

So compared to other mainline traffic very quiet. And so I guess for those living quite close to an airport that's a good thing.

I've seen plenty of pictures of the CSseries but in person it's much larger than I anticipated. Then again, I wasn't really anticipating seeing it this morning at all - hence my initial thought was an A320. Except for the nose, the silhouette, is strikingly similar. Given the corporate logo on the tail and I remembered that Airbus does (or did) have an engineering office led to my initial confusion.

Breaking News: BBD announces that flight testing for the certification program will be finished by the week of November 23:

http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCAKCN0RO2C720150924

Quoting yyzyyt (Reply 32): Breaking News: BBD announces that flight testing for the certification program will be finished by the week of November 23:

Excellent news for the program! I see BBD has tweeted the same - https://twitter.com/intent/[email protected]_Aircraft

Rumours of a 25 aircraft order from AC are also still kicking around so there certainly appears to be some momentum building over at BBD.

Quoting FlyingJHawk (Reply 31):

Yeah, I agree. I was there when the Cseries visited Zurich to present the aircraft to Swiss. They did a fly-by with a wing wave and it was extremely quiet compared to an A320/B737 even when spooling up for climbing. Lovely aircraft.

Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 33): Rumours of a 25 aircraft order from AC are also still kicking around so there certainly appears to be some momentum building over at BBD.

It wouldn't surprise me if AC personnel were present in YZD for the Toronto demonstration

Quoting YXXMIKE (Reply 33): Excellent news for the program!

Absolutely! I'm looking forward to EIS of the CSeries.

Quoting AirbusCanada (Reply 11): Any defection from the 737Max to Cseries will depend on either of the following scenarios becoming true: 1. Max will miss their performance target by at lest 5%. 2. Max production ramp up will be delayed by at least 12 months.

It depends on what you consider defections. If it is small sub-fleet orders, I think it would take less due to the *long* backlogs for the LEAPx. If you mean a full defection (cancel MAX orders and go with the C-series), I think it would take more than what you wrote.

Quoting rbrunner (Reply 36): Absolutely! I'm looking forward to EIS of the CSeries.

That we can agree on.

Quoting yyzyyt (Reply 32): Breaking News: BBD announces that flight testing for the certification program will be finished by the week of November 23:

Excellent news. Once the flight testing is complete, I look forward at comparing the certified noise, emissions, and fuel burn. The question is sales. I've never been that excited about the CS100. So while I'm going to enjoy seeing GTFs in service, I will wait for the CS300.

Lightsaber

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37): Excellent news. Once the flight testing is complete, I look forward at comparing the certified noise, emissions, and fuel burn. The question is sales. I've never been that excited about the CS100. So while I'm going to enjoy seeing GTFs in service, I will wait for the CS300.

Can't agree with you more here; I'm not a technical expert like yourself Lightsaber but having followed the program since the beginning I'm excited about seeing how this plane actually performs in comparison to those early numbers. We do now that those fuel burn numbers are lower than anticipated but if noise and emissions are also winners it will certainly set a new benchmark for the industry.

I've never done a first flight but I may just see what I can do about getting on the LX one!

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37): It depends on what you consider defections. If it is small sub-fleet orders, I think it would take less due to the *long* backlogs for the LEAPx.

Appropriate qualifying comment. The view on here, for the most part, has been simply "build it and they will come" (well, "order"). If that was the case, Fokker would still be around.  
.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 37): The question is sales. I've never been that excited about the CS100.

What is interesting in hindsight is that in initial marketing the CS100 was projected to get the majority of sales. Of course, the airline industry has changed in the intervening years but it is illustrative nonetheless.