Porter To Get C Series

[boestar]

Interesting...... Q400 Performance. The Q400 needs a longer field length than the C series? The performance numbers look suspect for the CSeries.

PERFoRMANCE

Range (225 lb. / 102 kg per pax., LRC, iFR reserves)

Q400 NextGen EHGW (74 pax. @ 31” pitch) 1,014 NM 1,167 SM 1,878 km

speed

Maximum Cruise speed 360 kts 414 mph 667 km/h

High speed Cruise 349 kts 402 mph 646 km/h

Long-Range Cruise speed 287 kts 330 mph 532 km/h

Takeoff Field Length (isA, sL, MToW, EHGW)

4,819 ft. 1,468 m

Landing Field Length (isA, sL, MLW)

4,232 ft. 1,290 m

[inchman]

I've never understood the argument.

If I make an offer to the gov't to get them some revenue on their land after it has sat idle for years, isn't it reasonable that in exchange they give me some protection for the investment I'm going to commit, especially from competitors whose main intention would be to make the land idle again?.

It was't sitting idle, but it was a piece of crap terminal with crappy access. It's nice that Porter "volunteered" to build a nice terminal on it, but if I asked to build a nice hotel on a piece of Crown Land, and offer to give the government some money for it I'm thinking the answer would be no.

(at least in the last 30 years) No private airline (or for-profit company) has had the opportunity to build a private terminal at any publicly owned airport in the country except BBTCCA. Like every other airport in the country, a non-profit Airport Authority should have built a terminal and made access available to all airlines equitably. I have no problem with private ownership, but if private ownership is desired, then it should apply at all airports across the country. Air Canada or Westjet should have the right to build their own terminal at Pearson, and avoid GTAA fees, if they wish.

Finally, it is a bit presumptuous of you to know of any competitors intentions. Corporations follow the money. If there's money to be be made at The Island (which has yet to be proven), then airlines will stay, regardless as to what happens to the others.

[rudder]

Well, the game plan is starting to reveal itself. It would appear that some type of preliminary discussions (perhaps off the record) were held with representatives of each of the 3 parties to the tripartite agreement. Both the Feds and the TPA have preliminarily deferred any position on the anticipated request to the results from the City of Toronto decision on the matter. One can reasonably presume these parties will follow the city's lead. And it may be that the Ford team will try to see if they can act independently of a vote of full council (perhaps settle the matter in an already stacked committee). Porter has even said that he matter must be dealt with within the term of the Ford mandate (within 2013) even though first delivery might not occur before late 2016.

Kudos to the puppeteers.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/porters-plan-faces-turbulence-on-the-runway/article11044379/

[Lakelad]

.

Tenacious Porter founder prevailed in the airline industry against all odds


Thursday Apr 11, 2013 - Financial Post
Theresa Tedesco

Max Ward was eating a quiet lunch with his wife Marjorie at his Edmonton home when Robert Deluce stood at a podium in Toronto to unveil plans designed to transform upstart airline Porter Airlines Inc. into Canada’s third national airline.

The 91-year-old former bush pilot, entrepreneur and founder of Wardair knew little of Porter’s plans to order 12 new longer-distance planes, widen runways or increase its travel routes. He’s put the Canadian airline business behind him — and with little regret.

The pioneering aviator, who formed Wardair in 1953 and turned it into the third-largest carrier by the mid-1980s, also dismissed the suggestion that Porter was the protégé of his airline, saying they “are different in size and temperament.”

Crippling losses and relentless competition eventually proved too much and Wardair was reluctantly sold in 1989 to PWA International, which was later absorbed by Canadian Airlines.

“Times were different and our problems were different,” Mr. Ward told the National Post on Wednesday. “I wish [Deluce] good luck.”

He may be right, but the challenges of carving out a niche as a new entrant in a tough industry with established players remain the same. Their airlines may serve a different crowd, but Mr. Ward and Mr. Deluce are two mavericks who propelled their carriers on the sheer strength and tenacity of their personalities. If Mr. Ward was cantankerous, 62-year-old Mr. Deluce has been equally pugilistic in getting his way. An unwavering optimist who relishes playing spoiler in any combative situation, Porter’s founder and chief executive has prevailed in an industry where few gave his airline any decent odds of surviving.

'The company’s investors are behind Mr. Deluce and his $2-billion proposal.'

.

[Kip Powick]

This is the mock-up of the new C100 that was on display at Porters briefing..

Really quite nice if you want 8 "J" seats and 25 "Y" class seats......in a single aircraft....certainly not showing what the actual seat config will even be close to......

[Specs]

It was't sitting idle, but it was a piece of crap terminal with crappy access. It's nice that Porter "volunteered" to build a nice terminal on it, but if I asked to build a nice hotel on a piece of Crown Land, and offer to give the government some money for it I'm thinking the answer would be no.

(at least in the last 30 years) No private airline (or for-profit company) has had the opportunity to build a private terminal at any publicly owned airport in the country except BBTCCA. Like every other airport in the country, a non-profit Airport Authority should have built a terminal and made access available to all airlines equitably. I have no problem with private ownership, but if private ownership is desired, then it should apply at all airports across the country. Air Canada or Westjet should have the right to build their own terminal at Pearson, and avoid GTAA fees, if they wish.

Finally, it is a bit presumptuous of you to know of any competitors intentions. Corporations follow the money. If there's money to be be made at The Island (which has yet to be proven), then airlines will stay, regardless as to what happens to the others.

For all intents and purposes it was sitting relatively idle. If Porter didn't move in the thing would likely be parkland by now or a condo or a ...Just like they're starting to do with Downsview.

And maybe I'm wrong but I thought the crown gives does out exclusivity rights to private sector businesses - isn't that commonplace in mining and and forestry. I'll bet there's even a few hotel deals out there.

Regardless, the deal was good for the Island and the taxpayers and it was available to anybody for the asking. Porter asked.

[Kip Powick]

Quebec offers up to $1 billion in loans to Bombardier’s CSeries customers

The Quebec government has committed $1 billion (U.S.) in loans to customers interested in buying Bombardier’s new CSeries aircraft

http://www.thestar.com/business/2013/04/04/quebec_offers_up_to_1_billion_in_loans_to_bombardiers_cseries_customers.html

[rudder]

Really quite nice if you want 8 "J" seats and 25 "Y" class seats......in a single aircraft....certainly not showing what the actual seat config will even be close to......

Porter news release says plan is for 107. Given that the tube can hold 125 in high density config, it certainly would appear that there will be lots of leg room even if Porter does not opt for a J-class config. Another consideration of course is GTOW from a planned 5000' runway. No way that it will be close to MGTOW. And just imagine if it is raining or reduced CRFI.......will have to leave half of the pax behind

I would assign the likelihood of Porter eventually flying the CS100 out of YTZ at about 25%. And the odds of doing it profitably? Zero.

[flybye]

I love the constant referrences to "whisperjet". Behold, the original "Whisperjet"....

[blues deville]

This is the mock-up of the new C100 that was on display at Porters briefing..

Really quite nice if you want 8 "J" seats and 25 "Y" class seats......in a single aircraft....certainly not showing what the actual seat config will even be close to......

Generally a mock up is only a section of the aircraft cabin. Quite common at Farnborough and Paris air shows. Bombardier doesn't need a full 100' fuselage to show potential customers how the C series cabins will look to passengers.

[moeman]

And just imagine if it is raining or reduced CRFI.......will have to leave half of the pax behind

They only fill the planes half full anyway.

[blues deville]

I love the constant referrences to "whisperjet". Behold, the original "Whisperjet"....

jpg]

Did you ever hear one of those Whisper jets? Growing up in the between the approach paths of YUL's runway 06L and 10 it was a daily sight and sound. One winter night YUL was using the ILS 10 and circling to land on 06R. The circling part was directly over our house at about 500'. Eastern's 727 wasn't whispering when it scared the crap out me as I shovelled out our driveway.

[flybye]

Did you ever hear one of those Whisper jets? Growing up in the between the approach paths of YUL's runway 06L and 10 it was a daily site and sound. One winter night YUL was using the ILS 10 and circling to land on 06R. The circling part was directly over our house at about 500'. Eastern's 727 wasn't whispering when it scared the crap out me as I shovelled out our driveway.

Blues: I thought it was obvious.... it was humour (insert Star Trek referrence to Spock or Data not "getting it").

[Moon The Loon]

I love the constant referrences to "whisperjet". Behold, the original "Whisperjet"....

The Whisper was a reference to the first class seating and how much engine noise was present, not the noise cacophony that followed a hot 'n high takeoff from underneath the departure path! Noise surpassed only by the VC-10. Now THAT was loud!

[blues deville]

Blues: I thought it was obvious.... it was humour (insert Star Trek referrence to Spock or Data not "getting it").

Oh I see. You're hilarious.

[rudder]

Did you ever hear one of those Whisper jets? Growing up in the between the approach paths of YUL's runway 06L and 10 it was a daily site and sound. One winter night YUL was using the ILS 10 and circling to land on 06R. The circling part was directly over our house at about 500'. Eastern's 727 wasn't whispering when it scared the crap out me as I shovelled out our driveway.

For me it was the approach path of 06R at YUL but my memories are of Viscounts, Vanguards, and then DC-8/DC-9............must be an age thing

Back to the whole noise debate. The ban at YTZ is db level and jets, not just db level. And there is a ban on modifying the runways for a very specific purpose - to preclude YTZ from becoming a mega hub with ever increasing commercial aircraft and associated passenger movements. The advance of technology that has already assisted Porter is the development of a 70 seat turboprop that can operate reliably (most of the time) in and out of YTZ. Now they want more even though it is clearly in violation of the prevailing conditions of operation at YTZ.

There is much much more to this debate than semantics and detail. What Porter is looking for will significantly change YTZ and the surrounding area. That is why the City of Toronto takes the matter so seriously.

There is an excellent article in a local Toronto newspaper that argues that Porter is overreaching as far as YTZ is concerned. It makes for a good read even if you do not agree.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/04/11/no_safe_landing_for_porter_purchase_of_bombardier_c_series_jets_hume.html

[Thebean]

I've never understood the argument.

If I make an offer to the gov't to get them some revenue on their land after it has sat idle for years, isn't it reasonable that in exchange they give me some protection for the investment I'm going to commit, especially from competitors whose main intention would be to make the land idle again?.

From a passenger perspective, both Hamilton and Abbotsford sat idle for years.

WestJet never asked for, nor was it offered a sweatheart, and stunningly anti-competitive arrangement where they controlled 85% of all sched aircraft movements now, and basically in perpetuity at those two airports. Within a year or two, competition arrived at both airports and the rest is history. The open market sorted it all out.

There is absolutely nothing to stop Porter operating at YHM, YXX, YUL, YYZ, YYC, YVR, or any other airport in Canada they choose. The reverse is not true. It's a monopolists dream.

It is amusing to see Porter spout off about the value of new competition to various other markets in Canada when they have done everything in their power to ensure that they themselves don't have to compete openly in the marketplace.

If the business is solid, it can withstand normal competitive pressures. Their need for protection pretty much says it all. To fill in and pave over at least 165,000 square feet of Lake Ontario for what amounts to the sole commercial benefit of Porter and its shareholders is an obscenity. It is going to be quite a battle and I doubt it'll be settled overnight....or any time soon.

By the way, I'm thinking of launching a commercial helicopter service on the waterfront in Halifax adjacent to the Lower Deck, and I want guarantees that 85% of the commercial operations there are exclusively mine. Do you think anyone would object if I filled in and paved over a couple of hundred thousand square feet of waterfront for my benefit? The Navy already has paved over a ton of the waterfront a couple of miles south so what's the difference? It's no big deal, really....

[rudder]

Here is 1 outspoken 'yes' vote on council. I guess if you add his brother then there are 2.

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2013/04/11/mayor_rob_ford_backs_jets_at_torontos_island_airport.html

[Fido]

Thanks Boestar

That suggests that from a 5,000 foot runway the C series can reach to the West Coast or the southern Caribbean.

Can the E-190 do the same?.

[Guest rozar s'macco]

5000 feet is way too short for transport jets. The next shortest rwys at airports that I can think of in Canada that have even occasional jet service are 6000' and they don't have water at both ends, or either end.

[blues deville]

From a passenger perspective, both Hamilton and Abbotsford sat idle for years.

WestJet never asked for, nor was it offered a sweatheart, and stunningly anti-competitive arrangement where they controlled 85% of all sched aircraft movements now, and basically in perpetuity at those two airports. Within a year or two, competition arrived at both airports and the rest is history. The open market sorted it all out.

Sometimes you do what you have to in this business. Westjet learned their lesson the hard way.

http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=6138fbd4-c3db-44ca-83a7-bfb6bcc0cbdb

[Super 80]

From a passenger perspective, both Hamilton and Abbotsford sat idle for years.

WestJet never asked for, nor was it offered a sweatheart, and stunningly anti-competitive arrangement where they controlled 85% of all sched aircraft movements now, and basically in perpetuity at those two airports. Within a year or two, competition arrived at both airports and the rest is history. The open market sorted it all out.

There is absolutely nothing to stop Porter operating at YHM, YXX, YUL, YYZ, YYC, YVR, or any other airport in Canada they choose. The reverse is not true. It's a monopolists dream.

But they were Porter's for the taking and from the time that the TPA proactively took itself to the competition bureau for their blessing till Air Canada finally ceased their ridiculous litigation nobody else actually seriously pursued any slots. US Airways and Continental requested slots and upon being granted them took no further action. This was presumably part of the circus Air Canada took to the USDOT.

But here is the thing, the TPA is obligated to allocate slots on the basis of use it or lose it. Had Air Canada chosen to have Jazz operate on the terms offered in the summer of 2006 they could have later moved to secure slots allocated to Porter that were obviously not being operated and Porter then had no ability to operate. By the time Sky Regional commenced Porter had already secured further slots. It was Air Canada's actions that rendered themselves irrelevant as Porter ramped up. Jazz could have made the launch of Porter a bloodbath, instead they sat on the sidelines as Air Canada commenced ridiculous litigation.

Jealously guarding slots that aren't immediately being put to the best use isn't unique to Porter.

[blues deville]

5000 feet is way too short for transport jets. The next shortest rwys at airports that I can think of in Canada that have even occasional jet service are 6000' and they don't have water at both ends, or either end.

Are you considering running for Toronto city council? Sounds like you're fully qualified.

[Airband]

There is an excellent article in a local Toronto newspaper that argues that Porter is overreaching as far as YTZ is concerned. It makes for a good read even if you do not agree.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/04/11/no_safe_landing_for_porter_purchase_of_bombardier_c_series_jets_hume.html

"At Billy Bishop, getting through U.S. customs is a breeze compared with Pearson, where the queue never ends"

Hard to argue with a writer who does such in-depth research.

[blues deville]

The monopoly argument makes me laugh. If you're flying anywhere across Canada today you have a choice of AC or WS. Reminds me of a trip to England as a kid in 1968. One downtown London hotel room had a radio mounted on the wall with two switches on the front.

On/off/volume and another marked BBC1/BBC2.

We've certainly come a long way.