• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane

MarkOttawa

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
112
Points
710
Will there still be a Bombardier to spend defence $$ on? A post:

COVID-19 to Bury Bombardier without more Bailouts from Governments?
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/03/24/covid-19-to-bury-bombardier-without-more-bailouts-from-governments/

Mark
Ottawa
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,302
Points
1,010
Czech_pivo said:
"Maybe it’s the problem of always looking for a bargain."


As I've said previously on here, Canadians are by far the cheapest SOB's in the world.  Why would our companies be any different?

Our poor record when looking for new kit is a product of our history. In the early days we had the British Empire, who, like all empires, withdrew from North America.
In WWI political cronies (at least early in the war) were awarded contracts - the Ross rifle comes to mind.

When it comes to defence matters, the average Canadian could care less. The USA is just to the south so I think a lot of Canadians take it for granted the Americans will leap to our defence.

As to new hi tech kit (F-35 and ships etc) the political parties always look for industrial benefits.

 

MilEME09

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,251
Points
1,090
Hamish Seggie said:
Our poor record when looking for new kit is a product of our history. In the early days we had the British Empire, who, like all empires, withdrew from North America.
In WWI political cronies (at least early in the war) were awarded contracts - the Ross rifle comes to mind.

When it comes to defence matters, the average Canadian could care less. The USA is just to the south so I think a lot of Canadians take it for granted the Americans will leap to our defence.

As to new hi tech kit (F-35 and ships etc) the political parties always look for industrial benefits.

As long as politicians are allowed to have a hand in defense procurement we will always be screwed, but no one, even if they say they will, is actually going to take the politics out of defense procurement
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
6,844
Points
1,360
MilEME09 said:
As long as politicians are allowed to have a hand in defense procurement we will always be screwed, but no one, even if they say they will, is actually going to take the politics out of defense procurement

Agreed.  Once one accepts that Defence Procurement is inherently political, and that the operational capability often (always? In major programmes) becomes a secondary or tertiary consideration, it all makes sense (well, at least ‘correlates to reality’).

Regards
G2G
 

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
30
Points
530
As if there is no politics in US defence procurement.  What Congress has, and Parliament lacks, are very powerful defence and security lobbies, backed up by large defence contractors. We have both of these elements, but few Parliamentary champions to listen and apply sound advice over political deviancy.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,271
Points
1,260
Hamish Seggie said:
As to new hi tech kit (F-35 and ships etc) the political parties always look for industrial benefits.

Industrial and Technological Benefits (formerly Industrial Regional Benefits) is a whole-of-government policy for Defence procurement.  It's been going on, regardless of party, for...well, a long time. 

https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/086.nsf/eng/home
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,515
Points
990
CloudCover said:
As if there is no politics in US defence procurement.

The F35 program was designed not for an efficient supply chain, but one distributed so widely across the USA that it becomes politically impossible to oppose it, as every congresscritter has constituents benefitting from the program.

It would be interesting to see the cost impact of that politicization of the supply chain...
 

Uzlu

Full Member
Reaction score
98
Points
380
dapaterson said:
The F35 program was designed not for an efficient supply chain, but one distributed so widely across the USA that it becomes politically impossible to oppose it, as every congresscritter has constituents benefitting from the program.
That is standard procedure for every major US weapons program.  Lockheed Martin Canada and its partners are doing the same thing with the Canadian surface combatants.  http://www.canadascombatshipteam.com/team/
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,251
Points
1,090
Now here me out, crazy idea, but what if we simply let bombardier fail, buy up the remains, rename it Canadair, federal government now owes it, gets licences productions for aircraft, etc... would solve IP concerns if it was the Canadian government owning it, not a 3rd party.
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,141
Points
1,110
MilEME09 said:
Now here me out, crazy idea, but what if we simply let bombardier fail, buy up the remains, rename it Canadair, federal government now owes it, gets licences productions for aircraft, etc... would solve IP concerns if it was the Canadian government owning it, not a 3rd party.

A Freudian slip?  ;)
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,515
Points
990
MilEME09 said:
Now here me out, crazy idea, but what if we simply let bombardier fail, buy up the remains, rename it Canadair, federal government now owes it, gets licences productions for aircraft, etc... would solve IP concerns if it was the Canadian government owning it, not a 3rd party.

Except Bombardier has sold off its stake in thew A2XX series, its ownership of the CRJ series, its ownership the DH series (Q400), its IP for water bombers... all they make now are business jets.  Their major production facilities were transferred out when they sold their ownership.
 

Dale Denton

Full Member
Reaction score
122
Points
580
Because in order for it to fail it would have already laid off more people, sold off portions of itself, and accumulated more debt...

 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,515
Points
990
LoboCanada said:
Because in order for it to fail it would have already laid off more people, sold off portions of itself, and accumulated more debt...

Bailout money = Executive bonus money!
 

Spencer100

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
390
Points
980
MilEME09 said:
Now here me out, crazy idea, but what if we simply let bombardier fail, buy up the remains, rename it Canadair, federal government now owes it, gets licences productions for aircraft, etc... would solve IP concerns if it was the Canadian government owning it, not a 3rd party.

There is not much left.  Just biz jets.

Water Bombers to Viking
DASH8 to Viking
Short Brothers to Spirit aerosystems
CRJ to Mitusitubi
C-Series to Airbus

Plus Downsview manufacturing plant to Public Sector Pension Investment Board.
Earlier Bombardier has sold the Dash 1-7 production rights to Viking
The pilot training to CAE


 

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
30
Points
530
Apparently they are tooling up the Thunder Bay rail car plant to manufacture what most assuredly will be the most expensive ventilators in the world next year.
 

suffolkowner

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
606
Points
1,060
Looks like they pulled the trigger on a partial Challenger replacement

https://globalnews.ca/news/7034536/bombardier-challenger-jets/
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,515
Points
990
My understanding is that the current fleet is two different types (from a crew perspective); the two new aircraft mean it will be a single type, making for easier crew management, training, and sparing. 
 

Mick

Member
Reaction score
123
Points
530
The new CL-650s will replace the older two Challenger CL601 aircraft.  While the relatively newer two 604s will continue to operate, they do not have the same cockpit layout, avionics or FMS that the 650s have.  The flight decks are somewhat different, although there is more commonality between 604/650 than between 601/604.

From a civilian regulatory standpoint, 604s, 605s, and 650s are all the same type (CL604-2B16, vice the older CL601 type), and will only require a short 1 day "differences" course between the 604 and 605/650).  Differences between the 605 and 650 are minimal and can be covered in less than 1 hour of e-learning.
 
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Royal Canadian Air Force to buy two Challenger 650s from Bombardier

https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/royal-canadian-air-force-to-buy-two-challenger-650s-from-bombardier/138733.article
 

MarkOttawa

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
112
Points
710
Start and end of a post:

Bombardier to Go A-Begging again?

Further to this post,

COVID-19 to Bury Bombardier without more Bailouts from Governments?

will no-one put this vainglorious company out of its independent misery, one way or another?

Bombardier in contact with government should it need aid, but faces anger over executive compensation
...

How long can this go on? How could a Justin Trudeau-led, progessive, climate change-fighting government justify giving special help to a company that makes CO2-spewing bizjets for the rich and for wealthy companies?..
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/06/19/bombardier-to-go-a-begging-again/

Mark
Ottawa
 
Top