Page 355 of 422

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 26 Jun 2019, 20:44
by XanderCrews
arrow-nautics wrote:https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/26/business/bombardier-regional-jets/index.html?fbclid=IwAR38nu0391OdbrW-Sw6dbiArSBtkV9_F41hlGtft30jeM1vCwDuDVwTMw2g

Whoa

London - Bombardier has given up on commercial aviation, selling its regional jet business to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHVYF) for $550 million in cash.

The sale marks the end of an era for Montreal-based Bombardier, which has been forced to admit defeat in the face of heavy competition from the industry's entrenched duopoly, Boeing (BA) and Airbus (EADSY).

Bombardier (BDRAF) CEO Alain Bellemare said the deal "represents the completion of Bombardier's aerospace transformation." The company will now focus on trains and private planes.

The retreat comes less than two years after European aerospace group Airbus took control of Bombardier's C Series, which made planes with up to 130 seats. That jet is now called the Airbus A220.


Big thanks to the Canadian Taxpayers who helped Mitsu and Airbus development all these years 8)

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 26 Jun 2019, 20:46
by XanderCrews
mixelflick wrote: I'd say a bit of a step up from their current F-18A+ aircraft, but considerably less capable than well, everything else lol..


Avionics are better, nothing else is. When the Swiss did their evaluation the "baseline" was the F-18. Gripen NG came in well below what an F-18 can do. You're jumping out of a hornet into a gripen with roughly 33 percent less thrust :roll:

Break out a list of all the thrust of all the teen fighters and eurokanards and 5th gen, and then throw Russia onto the list for giggles. The only airplane with less thrust than Gripen E is Gripen.

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 06:35
by kimjongnumbaun
XanderCrews wrote:
mixelflick wrote: I'd say a bit of a step up from their current F-18A+ aircraft, but considerably less capable than well, everything else lol..


Avionics are better, nothing else is. When the Swiss did their evaluation the "baseline" was the F-18. Gripen NG came in well below what an F-18 can do. You're jumping out of a hornet into a gripen with roughly 33 percent less thrust :roll:

Break out a list of all the thrust of all the teen fighters and eurokanards and 5th gen, and then throw Russia onto the list for giggles. The only airplane with less thrust than Gripen E is Gripen.


You have that backwards. The Gripen E is heavier. The only thing with worse thrust than a Gripen is the "upgraded" Gripen E.

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 18:22
by arrow-nautics
No problem. Meanwhile Federal Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, Francois-Philippe Champagne encourages Ontario's Doug Ford to protect jobs at Thunder Bay Bombardier plant. So which is it? Garneau telling the truth or Philippe Champagne? Buzz Off! Stupid government can't even get their messaging straight!

Bombardier-Mitsubishi deal won’t hurt jobs: Garneau: https://globalnews.ca/video/5429169/bom ... 2XLw0_Wa8w

Federal minister encourages province to protect jobs at Thunder Bay Bombardier plant: https://www.tbnewswatch.com/local-news/ ... rRv1MWamrw

Image

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 19:14
by quicksilver
“Stupid government can't even get their messaging straight!”

I heard Baghdad Bob is still looking for work. He might be a step up for the Trudeau government.

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 28 Jun 2019, 10:18
by ricnunes
arrow-nautics wrote:Bombardier-Mitsubishi deal won’t hurt jobs: Garneau: https://globalnews.ca/video/5429169/bom ... 2XLw0_Wa8w


Yeah right (for Garneau), even because in all other 100% of similar cases that happened in the past there was absolutely no job losses, LoL :doh: :roll:

Anyway, the "funny part" of all this, is that Mitsubishi signed this deal because it wasn't able to develop their own Regional Jets and as such they decided to buy them (designs and manufacturing rights) from Bombardier.

So Mitsubishi wants to get into the Regional Jets business but since it doesn't have the capability then decided to purchase Bombardier but Bombardier who has all the capability to design, build and market Regional Jets and as such is currently on the business seems to desperately want to get out from the business to the point of almost giving this capability ($550 Million in IMO giving the capability almost rather then selling it), so what's the logic of this? :roll:

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 28 Jun 2019, 10:32
by spazsinbad

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 08 Jul 2019, 23:50
by citanon
Airbus and Boeing threatening to quit:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cana ... SKCN1U32EX

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2019, 03:04
by Corsair1963
citanon wrote:Airbus and Boeing threatening to quit:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cana ... SKCN1U32EX



Of course they don't stay what was "unfair" to the public. :?

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2019, 03:31
by spazsinbad
It is Unfair that the F-35 is so good (I'm going down to the bottom of the garden to eat worms) so they STAMP their feets.

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2019, 04:09
by Corsair1963
Airbus and Boeing are just hoping to get more favorable conditions in the competition. As they realize their odds of winning aren't so good....
:shock:

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2019, 07:10
by Corsair1963
The Canadian Fighter Competition is beginning to sound like the one in Belgium and we know how that turned out! :wink:


QUOTE:

Belgium’s decision finally brings an end to the winding tale of its Air Combat Capability Successor Program, which officially began in 2014 and originally called for a purchase of 40 aircraft. In 2017, Boeing and Saab had withdrawn their offers for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and Gripen E respectively.

Boeing complained that the competition was not “a truly level playing field” and Saab reportedly feared that the Belgian government's demands for significant support for the aircraft after purchase would violate Swedish neutrality. France’s Dassault had considered making a bid, but ultimately did not, though it did make an informal offer to purchase Rafale fighter jets.


https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... ghter-jets

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2019, 10:34
by ricnunes
citanon wrote:Airbus and Boeing threatening to quit:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cana ... SKCN1U32EX


What a wonderful news!
Boeing and Airbus, please do quit from the Canadian competition :wink:

And if it isn't asking too much, can I ask Saab to quit from the Canadian competition as well? Thanks in advance :mrgreen:

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2019, 12:20
by gc
Interesting when u have suppliers wanting to write requirements for buyers. Requesting to exclude the capability to conduct first strike operations.....Imagine a car dealer telling a buyer that his desire to buy a truck is unfairly excluding sedans from consideration.

Re: Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 pro

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2019, 16:13
by white_lightning35
Quote from Reuters article:
At least one firm has expressed unhappiness that the requirements emphasize the ability to carry out first strikes on targets abroad, a strength of the F-35, said the sources.

God forbid a country that wants to buy warplanes would emphasize the ability to use them in a war. Should they instead emphasize the ability to look pretty at airshows and on brochures to make it a "level playing field"?