Bombardier....lost cause??

Campanola · Post by **Campanola** » Sat Sep 29, 2007 10:38 pm

I wonder how is going to be the sales for the Bombardier Spyder (3 wheels motorcycle). I personally don’t believe it’s a good concept. It’s like a motorcycle for retarded who can’t drive on 2 wheels. It’s not sexy. Of course it’s safer than 2 wheels, but I would prefer a convertible if I want something safe.

duplicate2 · Post by **duplicate2** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:02 am

Campanola wrote:I wonder how is going to be the sales for the Bombardier Spyder (3 wheels motorcycle). I personally don’t believe it’s a good concept. It’s like a motorcycle for retarded who can’t drive on 2 wheels. It’s not sexy. Of course it’s safer than 2 wheels, but I would prefer a convertible if I want something safe.

This isn't particularly relevant, everyone here is discussing Bombardier Inc (Aerospace and Transportation). Bombardier Recreational Products is a separate company that is involved in outboard motors, SeaDoos, Skidoos, ATVs, etc.

Campanola · Post by **Campanola** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:33 am

duplicate2 wrote: This isn't particularly relevant, everyone here is discussing Bombardier Inc (Aerospace and Transportation). Bombardier Recreational Products is a separate company that is involved in outboard motors, SeaDoos, Skidoos, ATVs, etc.

Yes mr the officer! I will not go out of your rectitude anymore.

By the way, I know it's a different division...

Dust Devil · Post by **Dust Devil** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:31 am

CID wrote:
That's a lame argument.
Why's that?

Well because you can't validate your argument that the RJ is a good product by claiming no one makes a perfect product. That argument could be used by any of the other aircraft manufacturers. There is nothing in your statement unique to the RJ that would support your cause. Thus it's a lame argument.

CID · Post by **CID** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:28 am

DD, try to follow along. I'm not claiming the CRJ is a great product. Originally I stated that for the most part, Bombardier makes a pretty good product. twotter responded with some negative comments about the CRJ, which is ONE of the Bombardier products.

I then asked him to show me a company that makes nothing but perfect airplanes that please everyone.

I am actually acknowledging that the RJ has problems. By the way, in my opinion the 700 and 900 series are much improved over the 100 series.

Having said that, the CRJ 100 was a compromise airplane based on the Challenger business jet that was quickly developed to meet market demands. At the time it had no equal and made Bombardier a pile of money.

The CRJ 100 certainly has its problems, in particular the flap system. However, the fleet has made it's owners alot of money.

THEICEMAN · Post by **THEICEMAN** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 1:10 pm

The CRJs are excllent airplanes! The 900 has an excellent CASM!
The Embraer 190 has a higher CASM since it weighs a lot more. Problem is that CRJ is too tight inside..

The Embraer are stil stage 1 aircraft! But wait a couple of years! They are gonna break down left and right within the AC fleet! It has already started a bit. AC management is really worried about the 175/190s.

Another Lost Cause....AC management! These guys have been running money loosing routes for years! YYZ-MAD, YYZ-BOg, YYZ-DEl lost soo much money!
Furthermore, they trade in A319s for E190s! How stupid can you possibly be???
The A319 has an excellent CASm and is a amazing A/C!
The E190 has a higher CASM, shorter range, lower load, etc....
Wait till they hit stage 2!!!! Going to be a lot more cancelled flights!

I choose Airbus over Embraer any day!

QFE · Post by **QFE** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 2:20 pm

To all of the experts with your negative remarks about the RJ.
You are now promoted to CEO of an airline with a very good balance sheet.
Sales have identified several routes of between 300-1000 nm that would produce 30-50 pax per flight. Which aircrafts would you now consider?

THEICEMAN · Post by **THEICEMAN** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 5:06 pm

What route would that be? Imagine if it was a route that sold cheap to normal price tickets.....you can have 50 pax + extra pax standing in the bathroom and you won't make money! That's the problem these days with having Jet with 30-50 pax.......that is why Q400, Dh8 and ATR is so attractive now. That is why companies are opting for the 900 now.
The CRJ 100/200 always made sense to fly @ 30/Barrel...now??

This CRJ-1000 project is so B.S! Sure, CASM will be great on that aircraft, but at the expense of packing 90+ like sardines!

I say Bombardier must do the following:

-Expedite & perfect the Cseries
-Fix up the Q400 with Menasco!
-Keep the CRJ 700/900 running (forget 1000)
-Keep Challenger, Lear and Global express sales strong
-GET RID OF A COUPLE OF PEOPLE IN MANAGEMENT!

conehead · Post by **conehead** » Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:27 pm

THEICEMAN wrote:According to a network planning manager at AC, the E jets are starting to break down a lot. The company is starting to get worried anout these aircraft. They are stage 1 and already having trouble.
Rumour has it that they want to bring the daily operations of the E-jets down to 10.5 hours from 12 +.

Don't believe everything you hear. I work on them every day, and this just isn't true.

THEICEMAN · Post by **THEICEMAN** » Mon Oct 01, 2007 2:35 pm

David Neelman before his stepped down as CEO of jetBlue
"We have had some operational issues with the airplane," he said. The plane certainly hasn't been up to what we thought we could do."

Of course Neelman's comment was made during the Jetblue breakdown last year...but you will see. Give it a couple of years.

It's selling. Well of course, because the E-jets are one of a kind! 70-105 seats on a regional and there's space inside.

C-FABH · Post by **C-FABH** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 7:29 am

conehead wrote:
THEICEMAN wrote:According to a network planning manager at AC, the E jets are starting to break down a lot. The company is starting to get worried anout these aircraft. They are stage 1 and already having trouble.
Rumour has it that they want to bring the daily operations of the E-jets down to 10.5 hours from 12 +.
Don't believe everything you hear. I work on them every day, and this just isn't true.

One of the contributing factors - the problem isn't as much with them breaking, it's that the MEL developed by Embraer is not very comprehensive at all. It seems like if one thing goes, the entire airplane does. Even the demonstrated cold weather minimums barely stand up to YEG in wintertime, sometimes coming within 1 degree of operational limitations.

Rubberbiscuit · Post by **Rubberbiscuit** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 12:28 pm

Scandinavian Airlines announced today that they are filing a lawsuit against Bombardier for 415 million Swedish Kroner. The majority of their Dash 8 fleet has been grounded for nearly 3 weeks following 2 separate gear collapses on landing, September 9th and 12th. Just what Bombardier needs. This whole Dash 8 thing is definetly tarnishing the name in a time where more fuel efficient turbo-props are becoming more popular again.

conehead · Post by **conehead** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 9:40 pm

C-FABH wrote:One of the contributing factors - the problem isn't as much with them breaking, it's that the MEL developed by Embraer is not very comprehensive at all. It seems like if one thing goes, the entire airplane does. Even the demonstrated cold weather minimums barely stand up to YEG in wintertime, sometimes coming within 1 degree of operational limitations.

That's complete bullshit.

conehead · Post by **conehead** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 9:44 pm

Rubberbiscuit wrote:Scandinavian Airlines announced today that they are filing a lawsuit against Bombardier for 415 million Swedish Kroner.

I remember shortly after SAS started operating these aircraft, they were having so many problems that their CEO halted delivery and told Bombardier they could have their crappy aircraft back. Obviously they worked things out at the time, but I'll bet the Scandinavians are sure sorry they selected this fleet type!

xsbank · Post by **xsbank** » Wed Oct 03, 2007 10:17 pm

When you certify an aircraft, you have to determine its limitations such as temperature, altitude, x-wind etc. If the strongest x-wind you can find in certification is 15 knots, you get "max. demonstrated x-wind 15 knots." Likewise temperature. When the Global Express was certified, the coldest temps they could find that winter were about -30 - ergo bingo, that becomes the min. temp. until they can find colder and change the limitations (paper, lawyers and tons of money).

The Jungle Jet is not going to implode operating in Winterpeg (it gets damn cold at FL410, or wherever it flies).

C-FABH · Post by **C-FABH** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 4:17 am

xsbank wrote:The Jungle Jet is not going to implode operating in Winterpeg (it gets damn cold at FL410, or wherever it flies).

No shit, but the paper says -40 for startup

conehead wrote:That's complete bullshit.

I don't know about the avionics, but the brake units are another story

conehead · Post by **conehead** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:28 am

C-FABH wrote:I don't know about the avionics, but the brake units are another story

No worse than any other aircraft type.

THEICEMAN · Post by **THEICEMAN** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 10:40 am

Anyways.....to get back on track.

Bombardier is in deep crap right now. They have to get this C-series program goin!

I've done my homework on the CRJ-1000. I dont know about you guys, but I just don't like it! Sure it will have an even better CASM then the 900.
But it's exactly what airlines don't want, unless your a low fare carrier like Myair. So far only 38 orders......I bet it won't even surpass 100 & that's not good!

The rock better get rolling on the Cseries. Soon many operators will be looking for a new A/C within that category.

NW has expressed their interest to use he Cseries to replace their DC9s........alone that can account for 50+ orders!
Hopefully they will start doing things right!
As it stands now, their reputation is not u to par.