Maverick

Donating Member
  • Content count

    2,575
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Everything posted by Maverick

  1. Why is AC.TO price tanking?

    I'm thinking he's implying that with the increased availability of marijuana will also have a proportionate increase of people with the munchies!
  2. Swoop - Apply now

    How many times have you said that now?
  3. Q400 line sold too?

    Bombardier SOLD The Q400 Division - Fliegerfaust Exclusive Q400 is No More a Bombardier Product 15:45 - October 20, 2017 - Quebec, Montreal by Sylvain Faust According to sources very close the Q400 division, Bombardier Inc. should be announcing very soon the sale of its Q400 business. After the major transaction involving its 50% ownership in the CSeries Holding, Bombardier was left with only the CRJ and Q400 part of its Commercial Aircraft business. Could ATR which is owned 50% by AIRBUS be the buyer? Remember, the Learjet, Challenger and Global aircraft are part of the Bombardier Business Aircraft division, not Bombardier Commercial Aircraft. To help you understand, the commercial aircraft business is selling "buses" to airlines so they can carry large amount of paying passengers, i.e you! Business aircraft are sport cars sold mainly to individuals or corporations for VIP and VVIP. Not the same business, not the same clientele at all. Bombardier Commercial Aircraft covers the CSeries (via ownership in its holding), the CRJ and Q400 aircraft. The CRJ would be the only aircraft left in Bombardier Commercial Aircraft division 100% own by Bombardier. Could it be next in line to be liquidated? Bombardier CEO Bellemare told the CSeries employees during a presentation Tuesday at the Mirabel factory that the company was losing money with each Q400 delivery. Stay tuned to Fliegerfaust for more... Stay in the know and Subscribe to the FREE Fliegerfaust Free Newsletter. Sylvain Faust http://www.fliegerfaust.com http://www.fliegerfaust.com/bombardier-sold-the-q400-division-2499101163.html
  4. Not a 100% sure but the right engine is in the water and the reverser looks like it might be open.
  5. Tarmac accident at YYZ

    The "shroud" in a 737NG is the compartment itself. There is no separate shroud around the APU like there was on the 737-100 to -500. Once the wing punctured the containment area it allowed the fire to break out. All-in-all I think that both airplanes dodged a bullet. Good job by the fire department!
  6. Seasonal Whining

    Good point, I assumed it was AC because Moeman works there. I don't think it's Porter because the Dash8 doesn't have a sliding window... Whoever it was, it's a great story and what we all probably endeavour to do.
  7. Seasonal Whining

    There's no reference to any other airtlines in the story. Just the normal whinging from that guy ^. Gets a bit tiresome Kip but, whatever... That's a great story and good on AC for doing that for her!
  8. Airbus buys into CSeries

    That's a lot of animal cliches!
  9. Airbus buys into CSeries

    Opinion: Why Boeing’s C Series Concerns Are Justified Dec 15, 2017 Loren Thompson | Aviation Week & Space Technology Next week, the U.S. International Trade Commission will hear arguments concerning whether the importation of Bombardier C Series jetliners into the U.S. could cause material damage to American companies. If the commission rules early in 2018 that the answer is “yes,” then duties already calculated by the Commerce Department will quadruple the cost of every C Series aircraft sold within U.S. borders. Such a ruling would effectively preclude C Series sales to U.S. carriers, and potentially doom the whole project since Bombardier’s own forecasts indicate that penetrating the American market is essential to its profitability. Boeing, the sole surviving producer of commercial transports in the U.S., has been widely criticized for initiating the trade action that has brought the C Series to this precipice. Critics allege that the world’s biggest aerospace company is trying to strangle an innovative alternative to its products while it is still in the crib. The one thing these critics all have in common is that they are not responsible to Boeing’s shareholders and stakeholders. Boeing’s management is, and what it sees in the C Series is a government-subsidized attempt to subvert its most important product line: the single-aisle 737 jetliner that has dominated commercial air travel for half a century. In fact, 737s are so ubiquitous that on average, one takes off every 5 sec. around the clock. Boeing would like to keep it that way by continuously improving the product. Airbus A320neo: Credit: A. Doumenjou/Airbus But one challenge that is beyond its capacity to deal with internally is the willingness of foreign governments to subsidize homegrown aircraft-makers so they can get into the trillion-dollar market for narrowbody jets. Canada is not the first country to mount such a challenge. That honor belongs to the four European governments that founded Airbus. The latest version of the Airbus A320, known as the neo—for new engine option—got a head start over Boeing’s 737 MAX in the marketplace, and has accumulated more orders. This is arguably the biggest threat to 737 market dominance that Boeing has ever faced. However, what tends to get lost in the noise of daily news coverage is that the A320 probably would not exist at all had it not been for illegal subsidies from those European governments. In fact, the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruled in 2010 that Airbus itself might not exist in the absence of this chronic illegality, because every transport it has ever brought to market was supported by billions of dollars in improper “launch aid.” See Also Opinion: Enough With The Hypocrisy, Boeing The WTO has repeatedly rebuffed appeals from Europe to rethink that ruling. With the appeals process now exhausted, Europe faces the prospect early in 2018 that billions of dollars in retaliatory tariffs will be imposed on exports to the U.S. The purpose of these tariffs is not to punish Europe for destroying tens of thousands of U.S. aerospace jobs, but to force compliance with the WTO’s ruling that illegal subsidies to aircraft-makers must end. The U.S. has long since eliminated any program that might be construed as improper assistance to Boeing (although one minor program remains in appeal). Obviously, the issue of illegal subsidies extends far beyond the latest version of the Airbus A320, but it is through the lens of this earlier experience that Boeing views Bombardier’s C Series— a product line begun with the explicit aim of challenging the Boeing-Airbus “duopoly” in single-aisle jetliners. Like the A320, the C Series has received massive illegal subsidies from Canadian federal and provincial governments. Most of these subsidies came about because Bombardier was facing bankruptcy in 2015 due to chronic mismanagement. To avert the collapse of Canada’s biggest aerospace enterprise, local governments stepped in with infusions of cash aimed at keeping the C Series and other programs on track. That plan prevented thousands of aerospace jobs from disappearing in Canada, but only because the C Series was expected to take market share from Boeing. In other words, Ottawa and Quebec’s provincial government aimed to save Canadian jobs by destroying American jobs. And if their plan succeeded, they would undermine the most important franchise Boeing has, the 737 jetliner. The 737 is the only single-aisle transport Boeing makes, and the company’s market forecasts estimate that nearly three-quarters of the jetliners ordered worldwide over the next 20 years will be single-aisle aircraft. So what seems to critics like the efforts of an aerospace behemoth to crush an upstart competitor looks to Boeing’s managers like something very different. They think the long-term survival of their enterprise is at stake. If Airbus, and then Bombardier, and then who knows what other companies can take market share by relying on illegal subsidies from their home governments, then it will just be a matter of time before Boeing loses its ability to innovate and price its products competitively. Bombardier C Series (left) and Boeing 737 MAX: Credit: Bombardier and Boeing When Boeing had to cut the list price of its 737s by 70% to beat a competing offer from Bombardier in the United Airlines competition last year, it knew it had a problem. And when Bombardier then offered the C Series in the Delta Air Lines competition for over $10 million below the cost of production, Boeing decided it had to act. There is no way a company like Boeing can match the price of a foreign competitor that is subsidized unless government steps in. So Boeing did what it had to do to protect its workers, its retirees, its shareholders and its future. None of this is changed by the recent agreement of Airbus to partner with Bombardier in building and marketing the C Series. Bombardier will not be able to escape the tariffs coming its way by setting up shop in Alabama, because keeping jobs in Canada is central to Canadian government support for the deal. The Alabama move is thus a transparent attempt by two recipients of illegal subsidies to circumvent U.S. regulation. If and when the deal is consummated and the Alabama site is opened, there should be a follow-on action by Washington to assure the playing field remains level for America’s biggest exporter. Aerospace analyst Loren Thompson is chief operating officer at the Lexington Institute, which receives funding from a number of aerospace companies, including Boeing. The views expressed are not necessarily those of Aviation Week. http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/opinion-why-boeing-s-c-series-concerns-are-justified?page=1#comment-986671
  10. Airbus buys into CSeries

    So much for Boeing dropping the lawsuit... Delta Air Lines buys 100 Airbus planes, a loss for Boeing Delta Air Lines is buying 100 Airbus narrow-body jets. Agreement includes option for 100 additional A321neo airplanes. The buy comes amid an ongoing trade dispute in which Boeing alleges Bombardier sold planes to Delta below the cost of production. Leslie Josephs | @lesliejosephs Published 1 Hour Ago Updated 1 Hour Ago CNBC.com Delta-Airbus order value exceeds $12.7 billion 15 Hours Ago | 02:35 Delta Air Lines on Thursday confirmed an order for 100 Airbus A321neo narrow-body jets, a major win for the European plane-maker as one of the largest airlines revitalizes its fleet. The airline has options for up to 100 additional jets, Delta said, ahead of its investor day presentation. The deal is a loss for rival airplane maker Boeing whose new 737 planes compete with the Airbus model. It is also a win for United Technologies unit Pratt & Whitney as Delta had selected the engine maker to power its new planes. "This is the right transaction at the right time for our customers, our employees and our shareholders," said Delta CEO Ed Bastian. Delta will start taking deliveries of the plane in 2020, the airline said. The decision, which was reported Wednesday, comes as Delta is in the middle of a snowballing trade dispute between Boeing and Canadian plane maker Bombardier, which Boeing alleges sold planes to Delta below the cost of production. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/14/delta-air-lines-buys-100-airbus-jets-upping-the-ante-against-boeing.html
  11. Canada Buys USED fighters

    Couldn't disagree more. We undoubtedly have the ability but we've never had the kind of leadership to stomach how much it would cost. The Navy boats are a prime example. What we need is for military procurement to be carried out by the end users. Give them a budget and hold them accountable for the decisions they make. Develop a new fighter? Why would you do that when there are plenty of options? The Brits would love to sell Canada the Typhoon. It would be a symbolic post-Brexit win and the industrial offsets they need more than we do. Theresa May needs something to bring to the voters.
  12. Swoop??

    Hmm? Norwegian, JetStar, Scoot?
  13. Canada Buys USED fighters

    I believe L3 has also done the fuselage barrel replacement on some of the Australian F-18's so they should have a reasonably good idea of the airframes condition.
  14. Airbus buys into CSeries

    I've said it for a while but if they can get the CS500 to market it will kill the 737-7 and -8 along with A320 NEO. I think Airbus would take that deal because without the smaller Boeing narrow bodies they effectively end the whole line.
  15. Airbus buys into CSeries

    Opinion: Enough With The Hypocrisy, Boeing Dec 8, 2017 Anthony L Velocci, Jr. | Aviation Week & Space Technology International rebuke of Boeing’s recent petition seeking a tariff on Bombardier C Series aircraft sold in the U.S.—quickly followed by a proposed 300% duty to be imposed by the U.S. Commerce Department—has been both deafening and seemingly universal. We may never know for sure whether Boeing was emboldened by the protectionist agenda in Washington. Nevertheless, the Trump administration’s shadow looms over the company’s ill-conceived initiative, which is both breathtaking in its audacity and disingenuous in its arguments. To briefly recap, Boeing claims Bombardier in 2016 was able to sell Delta Air Lines 75 of its new C Series passenger jets at a price below its cost of production as a result of unfair government assistance. Never mind that Boeing for decades has benefited from local, state and federal subsidies to advance its own competitive advantage. The legal process is continuing, with final rulings by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) expected in early 2018. Meanwhile, Bombardier agreed in October to give Airbus majority control of the C Series program and to build the aircraft sold in the U.S. at an additional plant in Mobile, Alabama. All but lost in the clamor are the substantial benefits the U.S., the aviation community as a whole and travelers will derive from the Bombardier-Airbus partnership. For starters, the new C Series plant in Mobile will support American manufacturing through the creation of jobs and direct investment in the U.S. Construction of the C Series facility, which would be adjacent to the existing A320 plant, will cost an estimated $300 million. The deal could create about 2,000 permanent U.S. aerospace jobs and support thousands more as the new production facility is constructed. Credit: Bombardier Another major beneficiary will be U.S. suppliers, who provide 52% of the content for the C Series and account for more than 22,500 existing jobs. More aerospace companies across the country will have the opportunity to work on the aircraft once production of C Series jets bound for U.S. airlines transitions to the Mobile assembly line, boosting U.S. content even higher and effectively making the C Series a bona fide American-made product. Moreover, the whole lot of C Series work will be additive to the furious pace of commercial aircraft construction at Boeing, which is “oversold on its production line capacity,” Boeing Chairman and CEO Dennis Muilenburg recently told aerospace analysts. In other words, Bombardier’s and Airbus’ gain would involve no corresponding loss for Boeing, so disregard any bogus suggestion of a zero-sum game insofar as Boeing is concerned. Indeed, it is widely recognized in the aviation industry that the real competition for the C Series is the Embraer E2 series of regional jets. All of these benefits—particularly job creation and work volume—will expand as more of the aircraft are sold. The U.S. is the single largest airliner market, and with the C Series a part of Airbus’ global network, the stage is set for strong sales growth. Worldwide, the demand for aircraft in the C Series market segment is projected to be about 6,000 during the next 20 years, according to Airbus. Let’s not forget pilots, travelers and airlines, who also will benefit. Although still in limited revenue service, Swiss International Air Lines and AirBaltic have logged enough flight hours for the lightweight-construction C Series to earn favorable reviews. The appeal: the airplane’s roomy cabin—aisles, windows and overhead bins are larger and seats are roomier than on other single-aisle passenger jets—and its state-of-the-art cockpit, reliability, lower emissions, fuel economy that meets or exceeds expectations and the fact that it is about 50% quieter than comparable aircraft. The C Series also offers longer range. This is especially important, because a robust commercial air transportation system has an astounding multiplier effect. This new passenger aircraft, designed specifically for the 100-150-seat market, can make domestic tertiary markets viable, similar to what Boeing’s 787 did internationally. The C Series offers the ability to link disparate small-to-medium-size routes with nonstop flights while reducing the number of connections for weary passengers. Sharply critical of Boeing and the Commerce Department has been the European Union, perhaps paving the way for action by the World Trade Organization. Even Delta, a Boeing customer, harshly disputed the complaint’s validity, accusing Boeing of “pure hypocrisy” and trying to “manipulate U.S. trade laws.” British Prime Minister Theresa May denounced Boeing’s actions, and Canada has canceled plans to buy new F/A-18E/F aircraft from Boeing and instead purchase F/A-18A/Bs from Australia. Even aerospace industry insiders would be hard-pressed to recall a similar instance in which a company has risked alienating so many of its customers for so little perceived gain. Boeing’s bald mindset of entitlement also has not gone unnoticed both inside and outside the industry. The caustic opinions voiced by think tanks and news organizations around the country have been unsparing. “Boeing’s complaint . . . refuses to acknowledge the fact that Boeing does not compete with the same market segment that Bombardier is attempting to enter with the C Series” and “seeks to punish Bombardier for engaging in precisely the same pricing practices it uses itself,” declared The Washington Times. Curiously, some industry observers have compared Airbus’ decision to take control of the C Series program with the MD-95, which Boeing acquired and shut down following its merger with McDonnell Douglas in 1997. However, this is a case where history is unlikely to repeat itself. When Boeing phased out production of the 106-to-129-seat aircraft in 2006, having provided little or no sales and marketing support, there were a paltry 155 on order, according to Teal Group, a Washington-based independent market intelligence, analysis and forecasting firm. In contrast, the C Series—which is listed as seating between 108 and 160 passengers in its two models—already has accumulated three times as many firm orders. Moreover, Airbus has made it very clear that it is fully behind the C Series and sees a strong market for a 100-seat aircraft. Supporting this view is the strong demand for used MD-95s (now called Boeing 717s) even today. This is because the 100-seat category is the ideal bridge between regional jets like CRJs and E2s and standard single-aisles like the Airbus A320 and Boeing 737. For reasons that do not add up, Boeing is seeking to prevent airlines and travelers from reaping the benefits that the C Series offers to an underserved segment of the industry. The only plausible explanation is that the aircraft is up against commercial aviation’s version of the bully-on-the-block, abetted by a Commerce Department that seems ready to rubber-stamp Boeing’s request that simply does not square with the facts surrounding its complaint. Boeing is a great company and has been a leader in the aerospace industry for more than 100 years. Its legacy of disruptive innovation, connecting the world and contributing enormously to the U.S. economy is unsurpassed—implying a responsibility to uphold the highest standards of fairness and thoughtful moves, both tactical and strategic. It has been painful and disappointing to watch the company’s fair-trade complaint against Bombardier unfold over the past year. How it could possibly advance Boeing’s long-term game is unfathomable. If Boeing prevails, it will not be just Bombardier that loses, but also the aviation community, passengers and the U.S. That is why it is imperative that the ITC in its final determination does what is fair and in the best interests for all stakeholders. Anthony L. Velocci, Jr. was editor-in-chief of Aviation Week & Space Technology from 2003 to 2012. He consults for a number of leading aerospace companies, including Bombardier. The views expressed are not necessarily those of Aviation Week. http://aviationweek.com/new-civil-aircraft/opinion-enough-hypocrisy-boeing?page=1
  16. Swoop??

    I do not believe WJ is presently in any peril at all. All the whinging about WJ becoming CAIL is just silly. CAIL was never a profitable entity, it was run as a sexy, full-service airline where image was more important than profitability. And before everyone everyone gets all revisionist on me, I was there for 3/4 of the time they existed. I left because I could see that it was not going to last. Yes, we were as loyal an employee group as there ever was but in the end it mattered not at all.
  17. Swoop??

    A bit premature I think? The bottom line is this, AC for the first time in a generation seems to really have their sh!t together and I applaud them, I sincerely do. WestJet has to change. This is not the 1990's, air travel is wildly different and much more commonplace. Both WJ and AC are profitable entities and I wish continued success to both.
  18. WestJet Catering

    The new seats are marginally wider but I get the sentiment.
  19. Turn it up.

    What is the twin at :57 seconds?
  20. I guess you're not a fan of "Trailer Park Boys" but I think conehead is!
  21. It's not rocket surgery...
  22. Big Aircraft

    This was the standard nose.
  23. Big Aircraft

    Not to pick nits but that is the NB-36 which has a much different those than a standard B-36.