3 ms·

A good friend worked at Bombardier until recently and I got the full sales pitch and walkthrough of a model of one of these planes a couple of years ago at an o

A good friend worked at Bombardier until recently and I got the full sales pitch and walkthrough of a model of one of these planes a couple of years ago at an overseas airshow. They were really nice and had some innovative features. Unfortunately, this was a big bet by Bombardier and it failed. "They are fucked" were his words, when I asked him about it today. Not sure where people discussing this as a US vs CA or that this is somehow a win are getting those ideas from.

ajross 9y ago
Is it too much just to ask why anyone cares so much? I mean, this was a "big bet" by Bombardier to enter a market dominated by an aircraft designed 49 years ago. I mean... it's a mature market. You don't make plays for a mature market unless you have a clear value advantage, and I don't see that Bombardier does in any real sense. No one gets upset when agricultural products (many of them, frankly, more high tech than these things) get caught up in similar trade disputes, which happens regularly too. I can't help but think this is driven in large part by a perception of this as a US assault on Canadian innovation, when it's really just another corn war.
- caf 9y ago
  The CSeries is a regional jet. The market it's aimed at is serviced by aircraft like Boeing 717, BAe 146, Embraer E-jet, Fokker F100 and Bombardier's own CRJ700. Most of those are now out of production or nearing the end of their production run, which is why new, cheaper to operate designs for this category are being developed (Embraer and Mitsubishi are also developing new regional jets). The funny thing is that Boeing doesn't even have a competing product in this market!
  - peckrob 9y ago
    Boeing isn’t fighting the CSeries for what it currently is. The CS100 and 300 in themselves don’t directly complete against any Boeing planes. Their worry is that a successful CSeries could spawn a stretch CS500 that would be begin moving in on the 737. Boeing underestimated Airbus in the 70s and 80s, and they’re trying not to make the same mistake again. They were trying to head this off before it gets that far.
- arethuza 9y ago
  "Is it too much just to ask why anyone cares so much?" It was also a huge issue in the UK as Bombardier is the largest private sector employer in Northern Ireland which is politically critical to the current UK Conservative government as they are a minority and depend on support from one of the unionist NI parties to function. I'm sure the UK government desperately wanted a solution to this crisis - having a government collapse in the middle of Brexit negotiations would have been a disaster.
- skgoa 9y ago
  Thing is, science and technology marches on. Advances in engine tech, aerodynamics, composite materials, electronics etc. make the CSeries much cheaper to operate than the 737. Airlines across the globe have seen this value advantage. Hence Boeing resorting to effectively getting the CSeries banned in the US by having Congress slap a massive tarif on it.
  - ajross 9y ago
    That's just refuting my point by stating the opposite. In fact jetliners don't really improve like you posit. Boeing's own high tech superplane (in a different market segment) is in fact only a "mildly significant" improvement over the 767 that it most directly replaces. In fact the 767 remains in production because existing operators don't want to switch to the 787 yet: the cost of running a mixed fleet is higher than the efficiency savings of the new jet. That's the kind of market Bombardier was aiming at. And it's a bad bet, protectionism or no. It's very likely this plane would have failed regardless.
tomarr 9y ago
Share price says otherwise!

ajross 9y ago

Is it too much just to ask why anyone cares so much? I mean, this was a "big bet" by Bombardier to enter a market dominated by an aircraft designed 49 years ago. I mean... it's a mature market. You don't make plays for a mature market unless you have a clear value advantage, and I don't see that Bombardier does in any real sense. No one gets upset when agricultural products (many of them, frankly, more high tech than these things) get caught up in similar trade disputes, which happens regularly too. I can't help but think this is driven in large part by a perception of this as a US assault on Canadian innovation, when it's really just another corn war.

caf 9y ago
The CSeries is a regional jet. The market it's aimed at is serviced by aircraft like Boeing 717, BAe 146, Embraer E-jet, Fokker F100 and Bombardier's own CRJ700. Most of those are now out of production or nearing the end of their production run, which is why new, cheaper to operate designs for this category are being developed (Embraer and Mitsubishi are also developing new regional jets). The funny thing is that Boeing doesn't even have a competing product in this market!
- peckrob 9y ago
  Boeing isn’t fighting the CSeries for what it currently is. The CS100 and 300 in themselves don’t directly complete against any Boeing planes. Their worry is that a successful CSeries could spawn a stretch CS500 that would be begin moving in on the 737. Boeing underestimated Airbus in the 70s and 80s, and they’re trying not to make the same mistake again. They were trying to head this off before it gets that far.
arethuza 9y ago
"Is it too much just to ask why anyone cares so much?" It was also a huge issue in the UK as Bombardier is the largest private sector employer in Northern Ireland which is politically critical to the current UK Conservative government as they are a minority and depend on support from one of the unionist NI parties to function. I'm sure the UK government desperately wanted a solution to this crisis - having a government collapse in the middle of Brexit negotiations would have been a disaster.
skgoa 9y ago
Thing is, science and technology marches on. Advances in engine tech, aerodynamics, composite materials, electronics etc. make the CSeries much cheaper to operate than the 737. Airlines across the globe have seen this value advantage. Hence Boeing resorting to effectively getting the CSeries banned in the US by having Congress slap a massive tarif on it.
- ajross 9y ago
  That's just refuting my point by stating the opposite. In fact jetliners don't really improve like you posit. Boeing's own high tech superplane (in a different market segment) is in fact only a "mildly significant" improvement over the 767 that it most directly replaces. In fact the 767 remains in production because existing operators don't want to switch to the 787 yet: the cost of running a mixed fleet is higher than the efficiency savings of the new jet. That's the kind of market Bombardier was aiming at. And it's a bad bet, protectionism or no. It's very likely this plane would have failed regardless.

tomarr 9y ago

Share price says otherwise!