Space / Aerospace / Aircraft

[IFG]

2 hours ago, Kip Powick said:

.... Anyhow.... rant over, just one voice screaming into the wind....

Well, Kip, some of us are nodding our heads. A key point in support of the exploration aspect is that that's one endeavor clearly better done with robots, at about 10% cost and 0% risk of lost lives. 

Boestar - Your economics applies equally if we give all those high-paid folks a shovel and get some pot-holes filled 

Cheers, IFG - 

[boestar]

13 hours ago, IFG said:

Well, Kip, some of us are nodding our heads. A key point in support of the exploration aspect is that that's one endeavor clearly better done with robots, at about 10% cost and 0% risk of lost lives. 

Boestar - Your economics applies equally if we give all those high-paid folks a shovel and get some pot-holes filled 

Cheers, IFG - 

agreed it does.  But where is the "glory" in filling a pot hole.  Heck we cannot even find young people to work a farm for the summer because its actual work

People want the glory job not the actual work job

 

[Guest1]

X-59 gets its tail in Quesst for super quiet super fast planes A side view shot of NASA's X-59 tail after its recent installation of the lower empennage, or tail section, in late March at Lockheed Martin Skunk Works in Palmdale, California. 

 X-59 gets its tail in Quesst for super quiet super fast planes
by Staff Writers
Palmdale CA (SPX) Apr 12, 2023
NASA's X-59 has undergone final installation of its lower empennage, better known as the tail assembly. This series of images was taken at Lockheed Martin Skunk Works in Palmdale, California.

This installation allows the team to continue final wiring and system checkouts on the aircraft as it prepares for integrated ground testing, which will include engine runs and taxi tests.

Once complete, the X-59 aircraft is designed to demonstrate the ability to fly supersonic while reducing the loud sonic boom to a quiet sonic thump. This aircraft is the centerpiece of NASA's Quesst mission.

NASA's X-59 program is making significant progress towards developing a supersonic aircraft that can fly without generating a loud sonic boom. The program aims to develop the next generation of supersonic aircraft, which could revolutionize the way we travel by reducing the noise pollution that has traditionally accompanied supersonic flight. The X-59 aircraft is currently being constructed at the Lockheed Martin Skunk Works facility in Palmdale, California.

The X-59 program has been in development for several years, with NASA partnering with a number of private companies, including Lockheed Martin, to develop the aircraft. The project has been funded by NASA's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, with the goal of developing a supersonic aircraft that can be used for commercial travel, as well as military and scientific missions.

The X-59 is designed to fly at supersonic speeds, but with a much quieter sonic boom. This is achieved through a number of advanced technologies, including a uniquely shaped airframe and a powerful engine that is specifically designed to reduce noise. The aircraft is also equipped with advanced sensors that allow it to fly at supersonic speeds while avoiding obstacles and other aircraft.

One of the most important goals of the X-59 program is to gather data on human responses to the sound generated during supersonic flight. This data will be used to inform U.S. and international regulators, who will determine the rules and regulations surrounding supersonic flight. The Quesst mission will fly the X-59 over several U.S. communities, gathering data on human response to the sound generated during supersonic flight. This data will be analyzed and used to inform regulations surrounding supersonic flight, with the goal of opening up supersonic travel to the public.

The X-59 program is an important step towards developing the next generation of supersonic aircraft, and NASA's partnership with private companies such as Lockheed Martin is a testament to the importance of public-private partnerships in driving innovation in aerospace. The program has already achieved significant milestones, and with the installation of its lower empennage, or tail section, the X-59 is one step closer to completing its first flight.

Overall, the X-59 program is a critical component of NASA's efforts to advance the field of aeronautics, and its success could pave the way for a new era of supersonic flight. By reducing the noise pollution associated with supersonic flight, the X-59 has the potential to revolutionize the way we travel, while also opening up new opportunities for scientific research and military operations. As the program continues to move forward, it will be exciting to see what new milestones are achieved and what impact the X-59 will have on the future of aviation.

[Kip Powick]

This  will be good news for the providers of aircraft fuel....he said sarcastically 

 

The analysis suggests that a representative commercial SST could burn 5 to 7 times as much fuel per passenger as comparable subsonic aircraft on common routes.

[Guest1]

2 hours ago, Kip Powick said:

This  will be good news for the providers of aircraft fuel....he said sarcastically 

 

The analysis suggests that a representative commercial SST could burn 5 to 7 times as much fuel per passenger as comparable subsonic aircraft on common routes.

Environmentalists are opposed to the mission. Quiet supersonic technology would reduce noise pollution, but supersonic travel still burns more jet fuel than a typical commercial flight.

 

A 2022 report from The International Council on Clean Transportation found that supersonic aircraft use seven to nine times more fuel per seat-kilometer. “Supersonic transport is like putting Humvees in the sky,” said Jeff Ruch of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. The advocacy group sent a letter to NASA in January arguing that supersonic aviation would prevent the industry from achieving carbon neutrality by its self-imposed goal of 2050. NASA’s X-59 Supersonic Jet Is Designed to Minimize Sonic Booms – Robb Report

[deicer]

Well, Starship just went 'BOOM'....

[deicer]

Fun starts at 25 minute mark...

 

Edited April 20, 2023 by deicer

[conehead]

Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly (RUD)... 

[Falken]

Its one thing to lose an engine, but, to lose six is something else! 

[JL]

I wonder if occurred at "max q"...maximum dynamic pressure resulting in loss of stability. I am sure we will find out at some point. Will the NTSB do an investigation?

[JL]

The NTSB only investigates if people or injured or killed.

[JL]

Booster failed to separate and launch control initiated the self destruction.

https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/live-updates/live-updates/spacex-launch/spacex-confirms-it-triggered-flight-termination-system-98734245?id=98720716

 

[conehead]

16 hours ago, JL said:

I wonder if occurred at "max q"...maximum dynamic pressure resulting in loss of stability. I am sure we will find out at some point. Will the NTSB do an investigation?

I'm pretty sure this happened quite a ways past max q...

[J.O.]

At least two minutes past Max Q.

Interesting statement from the woman commentating - “Everything past the tower is a bonus”. 

[Guest1]

Moon shot: Japan firm to attempt historic lunar landing

 Moon shot: Japan firm to attempt historic lunar landing
By Sara HUSSEIN
Tokyo (AFP) April 25, 2023  
A Japanese space start-up will attempt Tuesday to become the first private company to put a lander on the Moon.

If all goes to plan, ispace's Hakuto-R Mission 1 lander will start its descent towards the lunar surface at around 1540 GMT.

It will slow its orbit some 100 kilometres above the Moon, then adjust its speed and altitude to make a "soft landing" around an hour later.

Success is far from guaranteed. In April 2019, Israeli organisation SpaceIL watched their lander crash into the Moon's surface.

ispace has announced three alternative landing sites and could shift the lunar descent date to April 26, May 1 or May 3, depending on conditions.

"What we have accomplished so far is already a great achievement, and we are already applying lessons learned from this flight to our future missions," ispace founder and CEO Takeshi Hakamada said earlier this month.

"The stage is set. I am looking forward to witnessing this historic day, marking the beginning of a new era of commercial lunar missions."

The lander, standing just over two metres tall and weighing 340 kilogrammes, has been in lunar orbit since last month.

It was launched from Earth in December on one of SpaceX's Falcon 9 rockets after several delays.

So far only the United States, Russia and China have managed to put a robot on the lunar surface, all through government-sponsored programmes.

However, Japan and the United States announced last year that they would cooperate on a plan to put a Japanese astronaut on the Moon by the end of the decade.

The lander is carrying several lunar rovers, including a miniature Japanese model of just eight centimetres that was jointly developed by Japan's space agency with toy manufacturer Takara Tomy.

The mission is also being closely watched by the United Arab Emirates, whose Rashid rover is aboard the lander as part of the nation's expanding space programme.

The Gulf country is a newcomer to the space race but sent a probe into Mars' orbit in 2021. If its rover successfully lands, it will be the Arab world's first Moon mission.

Hakuto means "white rabbit" in Japanese and references Japanese folklore that a white rabbit lives on the Moon.

The project was one of five finalists in Google's Lunar X Prize competition to land a rover on the Moon before a 2018 deadline, which passed without a winner.

With just 200 employees, ispace has said it "aims to extend the sphere of human life into space and create a sustainable world by providing high-frequency, low-cost transportation services to the Moon."

Hakamada has touted the mission as laying "the groundwork for unleashing the Moon's potential and transforming it into a robust and vibrant economic system."

The firm believes the Moon will support a population of 1,000 people by 2040, with 10,000 more visiting each year.

It plans a second mission, tentatively scheduled for next year, involving both a lunar landing and the deployment of its own rover.

Related Links

[Guest1]

 

A mission to the moon has apparently ended in failure

Story by Trevor Mogg • Yesterday 7:20 p.m.

A Japanese startup appears to have failed in its effort to become the first to achieve a privately funded moon landing.

A mission to the moon has apparently ended in failure© Provided by Digital Trends

Tokyo-based ispace was attempting to land the Hakuto-R Series 1 lander on the surface of the moon at 9:40 p.m. PT on Tuesday, April 25 (1:40 a.m. on Wednesday, April 26, Tokyo time), but it lost contact with the vehicle at around that time.

“At this time, our Mission Control Center in Tokyo has not been able to confirm the success of the lander,” ispace tweeted about 90 minutes after it had hoped to set down the lander.

It added: “Our engineers and mission operations specialists in our Mission Control Center are currently working to confirm the current status of the lander.”

 

Related video: Japan's Ispace Loses Contact With Lander Targeting Moon (Bloomberg)

We could not complete the landing on the lunar surface.

Loaded: 37.11%

 

 

Play

Current Time 0:01

/

Duration 1:37

 

QualitySettings

Captions

Fullscreen

 

Bloomberg

Japan's Ispace Loses Contact With Lander Targeting Moon

Unmute

0

 

View on Watch

 

While the comments offered a glimmer of hope that the team may be able to establish contact with the lander, ispace founder and CEO Takeshi Hakamada said during a webcast that “we have to assume that we could not complete the landing on the lunar surface.”

 

The mission, which began with a launch from Cape Canaveral in Florida in December, had planned to deploy two small rovers on the lunar surface: the Sora-Q for the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency, and the Rashid, built by the United Arab Emirates’ space agency.

But the main purpose of the effort was so that ispace could demonstrate its ability to successfully deliver a lander to the moon. Now, though, it looks as if it’ll have to return to the drawing board.

Successfully putting a lander on the moon would not only have marked the first time for a privately funded effort to achieve such a feat, but would also have put Japan alongside only three other countries in achieving a successful lunar landing, with only the U.S., China, and the former Soviet Union have already done so.

NASA has inked a deal with ispace to help it land commercial payloads on the moon in future missions, and another that includes collecting a sample of lunar soil.

The U.S. space agency has yet to comment on the apparent failure of the Hakuto-R mission, and if it will have any impact on the planned missions with ispace.

Ispace was founded in 2010 and later became a finalist in the Google-sponsored Lunar X Prize, a contest that encouraged participants to become the first privately funded team to put a robot on the moon.

[Guest1]

Partners Extend International Space Station for Benefit of Humanity

FacebookTwitterPinterestTumblrMyspaceBlogger

The International Space Station was pictured Oct. 4, 2018, from the departing Expedition 56 crew during a flyaround aboard the Soyuz MS-08 spacecraft. Credit: Roscosmos/NASA

The International Space Station partners have committed to extending the operations of this unique platform in low Earth orbit where, for more than 22 years, humans have lived and worked for the benefit of humanity, conducting cutting-edge science and research in microgravity. The United States, Japan, Canada, and the participating countries of ESA (European Space Agency) have confirmed they will support continued space station operations through 2030 and Russia has confirmed it will support continued station operations through 2028. NASA will continue to work with its partner agencies to ensure an uninterrupted presence in low Earth orbit, as well as a safe and orderly transition from the space station to commercial platforms in the future.

“The International Space Station is an incredible partnership with a common goal to advance science and exploration,” said Robyn Gatens, director of the International Space Station Division at NASA Headquarters in Washington. “Extending our time aboard this amazing platform allows us to reap the benefits of more than two decades of experiments and technology demonstrations, as well as continue to materialize even greater discovery to come.”

Since its launch in 1998, the International Space Station has been visited by 266 individuals from 20 countries. The space station is a unique scientific platform where crew members conduct experiments across multiple disciplines of research, including Earth and space science, biology, human physiology, physical sciences and technology demonstrations that could not be done on Earth. The crew living aboard the station are the hands of thousands of researchers on the ground conducting more than 3,300 experiments in microgravity. Now, in its third decade of operations, the station is in the decade of results when the platform can maximize its scientific return. Results are compounding, new benefits are materializing, and innovative research and technology demonstrations are building on previous work.

The space station is one of the most complex international collaborations ever attempted. It was designed to be interdependent, relies on contributions from across the partnership to function, and no partner currently has the capability to operate the space station without the other.

With a continued foothold in low Earth orbit, NASA’s Artemis missions are underway, setting up a long-term presence at the Moon for science and exploration.

---

Read more about the International Space Station benefits for humanity: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/news/benefits-2022-book

Learn more about station activities by following the space station blog, @space_station and @ISS_Research on Twitter, as well as the ISS Facebook and ISS Instagram accounts.

[Airband]

Airbus Bets on a Stretched A220 Jet to Beat Boeing’s 737

Altering an existing plane could save the company billions of dollars compared with developing a new one—but it risks cannibalizing sales of its mainstay A320

Airbus has added production space at its A220 plant in Mirabel, Quebec, as it ramps up production.

Fri May 5, 2023 - Bloomberg News
By Julie Johnsson and Siddharth Vikram Philip

Quote

“Frankly, today is when the A220-500 should have been entering service to have a shot at good market penetration,”

The Airbus A320 set its manufacturer on the path to becoming the world’s largest aircraft producer. Crisscrossing continents since the late 1980s, the single-aisle jet boasts advanced aviation controls such as joystick steering and a choice of engines from competing manufacturers that have made it an industry favorite alongside the Boeing 737, bringing in the bulk of orders and profit at the European aerospace giant.

Now, Airbus SE is studying a new airliner that could eclipse the three-decade-old A320. A stretched version of its smaller A220 jet, the model would accommodate about the same number of passengers as the 170-capacity A320, but with better fuel economy and more modern design specifications, while allowing the company to sidestep the huge investments needed for an all-new aircraft. 

Pushing into the niche occupied by the A320 and the 737, the A220-500 would give Airbus an opportunity to take market share at a time when Boeing Co. has said it won’t come out with an all-new jet model for the rest of this decade. Boeing will wait until there’s a “generational leap” in technology that would provide fuel savings of 20% to 30% versus current narrowbody jets, Chief Executive Officer Dave Calhoun said at its April 18 annual meeting. That timeline might give Airbus a chance to build sales momentum for a stretched A220 version in the next few years. “Whereas Boeing may be forced to develop something new, Airbus can keep harvesting its current offering,” says Addison Schonland, an analyst at aviation consultant AirInsight. “They lose nothing.”

Airlines already flying the existing A220 variants—including Air France-KLM, Air Baltic, Delta and JetBlue —are interested in the European planemaker building a larger version, say people close to the discussions, who asked not to be named speaking about private deliberations. Other potential buyers include Air Canada, British Airways parent IAG SA and even Lufthansa, Boeing’s first customer for the 737, one of the people says.

Airbus has said it’s not a question of if, but when, it will start making the A220-500. The Paris Air Show in June will provide a chance for it to gauge interest from customers and seek their input. “They need to talk to airline customers and aircraft-leasing companies to get the exact specifications,” says Michael Weiss, chief commercial officer at aircraft financier ABL Aviation.

Airbus and Boeing have focused in recent years on tweaking existing aircraft rather than designing brand-new models, whose development costs can reach $15 billion. But the cheaper route of stretching a tried-and-tested plane still bears considerable financial and strategic risk. It could sap billions of dollars of much-needed cash flow if Airbus leaders are wrong about airlines’ appetite for a possible successor to the 737 and the A320, today’s workhorses of the skies.

Number of seats a stretched A220 is expected to have, about 50 more than its smallest model: 170

To be commercially viable, the larger A220 would need the range to fly cross-country in the US, meaning it would probably need a more powerful engine than the two current versions. The turbofan that powers Boeing’s 737 Max, built by the CFM joint venture between General Electric Co. and France’s Safran SA, would be a good fit—if Airbus could modify the current deal that makes Raytheon Technologies Corp.’s Pratt & Whitney unit the exclusive engine maker for the A220.

But that would also necessitate a redesign of the wing and the pylons from which the turbines hang—investments that could quickly run into the billions of dollars for Airbus and its suppliers. And the company needs to increase A220 production to start earning a profit on the jet. It churns out about 50 A320-type aircraft each month, compared with only about half a dozen A220s.

As Airbus studies the stretched A220, management is weighing a series of complex trade-offs. There’s the risk of cannibalizing its biggest cash cow, the A320, with a lower-priced plane that’s costlier to make. “They’re absolutely under no compulsion to do it, because the A320 competes well with the Max 8,” George Dimitroff, head of valuations for consultant Ascend by Cirium said of the stretched A220. “Yes, it would boost sales, but it would eat into the A320 market.”

Executives must also figure out their engine strategy after technical issues on the Pratt engine grounded a substantial part of the current A220 fleet in recent years. Pratt won’t be in a position to invest in an upgraded version until it sorts out its own supply chain strains, which could take a year or two, says one of the people close to the discussions. Raytheon Chief Financial Officer Neil Mitchill declined to comment on whether the company is in talks about the A220-500 with Airbus. “I don’t want to get ahead of our customer,” he says.

Rival CFM might be tempted to develop an engine for Airbus’s new plane, but only if it could provide them for all three A220 models and not just the stretched version, giving it enough potential sales to justify the investment, says ABL Aviation’s Weiss. A second engine option could also create a commercial complication by reducing the new plane’s commonality with the smaller A220 models. Airlines typically prefer maintaining as much interchangeability as possible within their fleets, making it easier to handle spare parts and employee training. Otherwise “it’s a standalone product, and that’s not attractive,” says Dimitroff.

Airbus inherited the engineering studies for a third A220 model when it took control of the jetliner family from cash-strapped Bombardier Inc. in 2018. Bombardier designed the aircraft then called the C-Series but struggled to build sufficient sales. Executives have become increasingly intrigued as they study the market for a roomier aircraft offering seating similar to that of the 737 Max 8— Boeing’s only hot seller in the single-aisle category—but with a newer design and better fuel economy.

With the A220-500, Airbus could divide its narrowbody lineup into six models across two families. The three A220 models would span the lower end of the narrowbody market to complement the three versions of the company’s larger A321—itself a stretch version of the original A320 that’s become its bestselling single-aisle model.

Airbus CEO Guillaume Faury says he can afford to take some time before pulling the trigger on a stretched A220. “We don’t need the plane today, but we believe it will make a lot of sense when the A320 family have gone more to the A321,” Faury said in an interview in November, days after Boeing’s Calhoun had ruled out designing a new midsize plane.

Still, Airbus risks its window of opportunity. If the new jet doesn’t begin flying commercially until the early 2030s, it would chance being leapfrogged by Boeing’s next narrowbody. Some even think launching the plane now might be too late. “Frankly, today is when the A220-500 should have been entering service to have a shot at good market penetration,” says Scott Hamilton, a consultant with Leeham Co.

[Airband]

Smarties part of the MBA toolkit...

 

 

[Airband]

US pilots shun promotion to captain’s chair over quality-of-life concerns

Union leaders insist on scheduling changes in contract talks with United Airlines

Tue May 23, 2023 - The Financial Times
by Claire Bushey in Chicago and Taylor Nicole Rogers in New York 

Quote

“What I’m reluctant to do is put myself back in the bottom of any seniority pile at this point in my life. I’ve got ageing parents. I’ve got school-aged kids.”

Winning a lucrative promotion to captain might seem like an easy choice for an airline pilot. But at United Airlines, members of the pilots’ labour union engaged in drawn-out contract talks say the higher pay and status that come with the rank are not worth the personal cost.

Captains share cockpits with first officers, the second-in-command pilots who assist them with navigation and scheduling. But more first officers are reluctant to become captains because it could require longer flying assignments on short notice and more hours on call, union officials say.

“The pandemic changed the way a lot of workers feel about work-life balance, and it certainly took place with our pilot group,” said Garth Thompson, a captain and chair of the United unit of the Air Line Pilots Association union. “It’s going to start snowballing and affect the company’s pretty aggressive growth plans.” 

The quality-of-life concerns are wrapped up in negotiations between United, one of the largest US airlines, and its pilots’ union. They reflect a broader shift in the pandemic as workers seek better working conditions in addition to higher pay.

United has 5,900 captains and 7,500 first officers flying planes, according to Thompson. A first officer who has flown wide-body jets at the airline for six years makes about $210,000 a year, while a captain flying narrow-bodies for six years would earn about 22 per cent more if they fly the same number of hours, according to aviation consultant Kit Darby.

Yet rising from senior first officer to junior captain entails sacrificing some control over when and where they fly, pilots say. For some, the pay improvement is not worth the added disruption to their home life.

Quincy Fleming, a United first officer who flies Boeing 777s out of San Francisco, said a promotion to captain would make it more likely that she would be denied some holiday requests and be forced to fly on a day off.

“What I’m reluctant to do is put myself back in the bottom of any seniority pile at this point in my life,” Fleming said. “I’ve got ageing parents. I’ve got school-aged kids.” 

United plans to add 470 aircraft in the coming years. Joseph Rohlena, a Fitch Ratings analyst, said that United had historically not struggled to fill its captain ranks. He dismissed any threats from a captain shortage to the airline’s growth, saying that it would be able to “source pilots [so] that they can grow to the extent that they’re planning to”.

Contract negotiations with United’s pilots began in 2019, and the membership voted against a proposed contract in November by 94 per cent to 6 per cent. Among the union’s priorities are rules giving on-call pilots more time to arrive at airports and relieving them of being forced to wait at airports on standby service, in addition to a pay boost.

United said it continued “to work with the Air Line Pilots Association on the industry-leading deal we have put on the table”. 

Concerns over scheduling and workplace conditions have been at the centre of the surge in union activity since the start of the Covid-19 crisis. A labour shortage has empowered unions to demand better working conditions, in addition to higher wages, from employers.

Freight railway workers nearly went on strike last year over attendance policies that required them to come to work with as little as 90 minutes’ notice, and penalised sick days. Hospital administrators were forced to recruit more nurses after 7,000 in New York City walked out in January, citing burnout from heavy patient loads.

“Workers want some degree of control over their time, and then they want better wages and benefits,” said Rebecca Givan, a labour relations professor at Rutgers university.

The heavily unionised airline industry typically engages in pattern bargaining for pilots, where standards for pay and working conditions established at one carrier set the standard for the rest. The pilots at Delta Air Lines ratified a contract in March that, in addition to a pay rise of 34 per cent over four years, partly limited the airline’s ability to assign some pilots to longer trips.

At American Airlines, pilots reached an agreement in principle on Friday after four years of negotiations. The deal included pay to at least match Delta’s, as well as scheduling improvements, said Dennis Tajer, an American captain and spokesman for the Allied Pilots Association.

American’s pilots wanted to limit the number of four- and five-day trips they were assigned because they dislike being away from their families. In the past, trips were shorter, but scheduling software introduced since 2020 has increased the number of long assignments. The hours pilots fly monthly has risen from about 75 per month to 85 or more, Tajer said.

“This meets the new standard, not only for compensation, but also, almost more importantly, for work-life balance,” he said.

At United, first officer John Young said he was reluctant to jump to the captain’s seat because the move might disrupt his work-life balance. He said the move was likely to leave him with more time on call, with just two and a half hours to report to work.

“Unless you’re right next door to the airport, you’re sitting there with your shoes on,” he said. “You burn people out.”

[Airband]

Bombardier Challenges Boeing for Canadian Military Jet Contract

Bombardier business jet is being adapted for military use

Bombardier wants the Canadian military to consider an adapted version of its Global 6500 business jet

Wed May 31, 2023 - Bloomberg News
By Mathieu Dion

Quote

'The problem is that the Bombardier alternative exists only on paper.'

A Canadian order for military surveillance aircraft that was expected to go to Boeing Co. is facing a late challenge from home-grown private-jet maker Bombardier Inc., which has summoned nationalism to press its case for a rival model. 

Bombardier is pushing the Canadian Department of National Defence to consider an adapted version of its Global 6500 business jet instead of going with up to 16 Boeing P-8A Poseidon multi-mission aircraft to replace the government’s 40-year-old fleet of CP-140 Aurora planes. The problem is that the Bombardier alternative exists only on paper.

Bombardier, which builds jets for billionaires and charter operators, called for an open procurement process as it tries to jumpstart a new defense business. This month, the Montreal-based company announced a collaboration with General Dynamics Corp. to develop military systems on the Global 6500 platform.

“Our government has been led to believe there is undue urgency to purchase now,” Mark Masluch, a Bombardier spokesman, said in an email. “This is simply a fallacy designed to sell an end-of-the-line product. Bombardier is putting forward a modern, next-generation platform, made in Canada by Canadians.”

Boeing is hitting back. The P-8 — itself a modified version of Boeing’s 737 commerical jetliner — has “unmatched” command, control and communications, as well as anti-submarine warfare capabilities, Ted Colbert, chief executive officer of Boeing’s Defense, Space and Security unit, said in an interview. 

It’s widely used by the US and its allies to monitor submarines and other activity. The aircraft is in service or contracted with eight countries, including the UK and Germany.

The 6500 “is not a matched rival,” Colbert said. “The P-8 is the most affordable solution available to Canada because it is truly a non-developmental off-the-shelf solution.”

In an hour-long event in Ottawa on Tuesday, the US planemaker and its suppliers, including CAE Inc., General Electric Co. and Honeywell International Inc., defended the P-8 and extolled the economic benefits for the country. Every P-8 aircraft contains more than C$11 million ($8.1 million) of Canadian content, according to Boeing. 

So far, the Canadian government has shown little interest in Bombardier’s proposal. Still, an analysis is underway.

“The government has determined that the P-8A Poseidon is the only currently available aircraft that meets all of the Canadian multi-mission aircraft operational requirements,” it said. 

[conehead]

3 hours ago, Airband said:

“The government has determined that the P-8A Poseidon is the only currently available aircraft that meets all of the Canadian multi-mission aircraft operational requirements,” it said. 

Good. Let's keep it that way.

[Specs]

59 minutes ago, conehead said:

Good. Let's keep it that way.

Why should the Americans have the monopoly on Military and NATO equipment.  Except for a couple of advisors in Ottawa such policies do not serve us well.  

And Boeing needs to feel some serious sting for screwing Canada on the C Series like they did. 

[conehead]

16 hours ago, Specs said:

Why should the Americans have the monopoly on Military and NATO equipment.  Except for a couple of advisors in Ottawa such policies do not serve us well.  

And Boeing needs to feel some serious sting for screwing Canada on the C Series like they did. 

They don’t have a monopoly. The RCAF is in the process of building a fleet of tankers with the A330 MRTT. Because it’s a good product. I do support “buy Canadian”, but let’s buy a good product. In this case, the Boeing is a proven machine with a real service record at a known cost, while the Bombardier is not.

[Specs]

3 hours ago, conehead said:

.... but let’s buy a good product. In this case, the Boeing is a proven machine with a real service record at a known cost, while the Bombardier is not.

By that logic we'd all still be flying DC-3s    

(Hmmm)

Edited June 1, 2023 by Specs