Author Topic: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane  (Read 73113 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,775
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,163
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #150 on: February 13, 2020, 15:01:48 »
The fast goodbye continues, another post:

Quote
Bombardier Bombing Out of Airliners–Rail too?
https://mark3ds.wordpress.com/2020/02/13/bombardier-bombing-out-of-airliners-rail-too/

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Spencer100

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 16,275
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 645
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #151 on: February 13, 2020, 15:22:56 »
It is sounding more like an asset sale then a restructuring.

Best news is that we will no longer have to hear about Bombardier get government handouts!

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,775
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,163
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #152 on: February 13, 2020, 15:47:32 »
Spener100: No, but Airbus, Textron, Alstom might be putting the screws on--Textron-owned Bell Helicopters gets lots of gov't money as does PWC.

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Online CBH99

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 49,390
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,268
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #153 on: February 13, 2020, 16:12:20 »
I know this may sound groundless, and this truly is my own personal opinion.

The CEO & senior management of Bombardier, in my opinion, should be metaphorically burned at the stake.  Screw them for taking what was once a Canadian icon, and driving it into the ground.


There's a ton of examples, too many to list here.  But how can you manage to drive a company to near bankruptcy, multiple times - only to be bailed out by massive government bailouts - and still drive it into the ground??


How hard is it to build rail cars?  This shouldn't be a troubled division.  This should be a streamlined division & a well oiled machine at this point.  We aren't asking them to build flying subway trains using negative gravity...we're asking them to build technology from the 1960's, on tracks that were laid around the same time.  How can it be this challenging after 60yrs?


I realize the Canadian government isn't a huge buyer of aircraft.  16 SAR planes here, 4 Twin Otters there, etc etc.  Occassionally, a decently big guy of F-18's or C-130's - but overall, the CAF isn't a huge or consistent customer of aircraft.

That being said...one of the nice things about our complete inability to purchase anything quickly outside of a UOR is that industry has LOTS OF LEAD TIME, and know exactly what we are looking for when we do decide to purchase.  (Relatively speaking.)

 Again...how hard is it to take an aircraft that meets the performance specs, and modify it with a rear ramp & SAR features?  Since Brazil, Spain, Ireland, and a few other countries are purchasing the C-295 -- that's an aircraft Bombardier could have had a competitor for, but couldn't be bothered. 


Just frustrates me as a Canadian to see a Canadian icon managed so poorly that it's dying an unnecessary death...and the management of the company don't seem to be held accountable, despite our tax dollars bailing them out repeatedly.  (Tax dollars they also used to give themselves bonuses...  :pullhair: )
Fortune Favours the Bold...and the Smart.

Wouldn't it be nice to have some Boondock Saints kicking around?

Offline YZT580

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 31,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 862
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #154 on: February 13, 2020, 16:49:19 »
They did have a competitive aircraft: the buffalo but they left it in the 60's and then sold the whole thing to what was basically an airframe restoration company. 

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Myth
  • *****
  • 315,290
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,249
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #155 on: February 13, 2020, 17:28:40 »

“Success isn’t guaranteed, but failure is certain if you aren’t truly emotionally invested in your work.”

— Biz Stone
“To stand on the firing parapet and expose yourself to danger; to stand and fight a thousand miles from home when you're all alone and outnumbered and probably beaten; to spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary.”
— Jerry Pournelle —

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,775
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,163
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #156 on: February 14, 2020, 10:46:58 »
The fast goodbye continues, another post:

Mark
Ottawa

Demise of Bombardier nicely summed up:

Quote
Bombardier drama may be coming to a close
...
The problem with Bombardier is that it was always more of a wannabe success than a real success. Canadians loved the story of the scrappy inventor from rural Quebec starting off making snowmobiles and his heirs turning the firm into a multinational making jet aircraft, water-bombers, subway trains etc.

Much of that growth came through opportunistic buying of companies nobody else wanted — Canadair in Montreal, de Havilland in Toronto, Short Brothers in Belfast, Adtranz in Germany — usually combined with Bombardier management’s unparalleled ability to extract money from governments desperate to maintain jobs and get under-performing assets off their books.

Yet seldom during its history, did Bombardier really manage to turn these disparate,  individual assets into a cohesive, consistently profitable company. Maybe it’s the problem of always looking for a bargain. The whole never ended up being greater than the sum of its parts.

Bombardier did manage to stretch the Canadair Challenger business jet into a passenger aircraft and create a whole class of regional aircraft. But like RIM’s invention of the Blackberry, one product was not enough to build a company with long-term success.

Bombardier always managed to promise more than it could actually deliver. It wasn’t enough to bet the future of its commercial aviation business on the brand-new C Series, it did so at the same time that it was developing a new Global 7500 business jet and the smaller Learjet 85. The C Series was 2 ½ years late and way over budget. The Global Express was also late. And the Learjet 85 had to be dropped entirely.

Back on earth, the company has been no better in its transportation unit, consistently angering clients at Toronto Transit Commission, Swiss Railways, Deutsche Bahn and New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority for delivering rolling stock that was late and full of bugs. Great to land the contracts and have an impressive order backlog but if you can’t deliver the merchandise, maybe you’re in the wrong business...
https://ipolitics.ca/2020/02/14/bombardier-drama-may-be-coming-to-a-close/

Mark Collins
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Czech_pivo

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 5,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 332
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #157 on: February 14, 2020, 10:57:51 »
"Maybe it’s the problem of always looking for a bargain."

But isn't this the typical Canadian modis operandi?

Constantly nickel and dime someone to buy/deliver the bare bones product and then run that product into the ground over 35-50+yrs, constantly bringing it back from the dead with numerous 'enhancements' and 'extended refits'.

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?

Offline Dolphin_Hunter

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 19,850
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,418
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #158 on: February 14, 2020, 11:57:41 »
I don’t think we are cheap.  We continually over spend on projects for the sake of “jobs”.

If we were cheap we’d be buying ships made in Korea.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 177,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,569
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,775
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,163
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #160 on: March 24, 2020, 10:38:42 »
Will there still be a Bombardier to spend defence $$ on? A post:

Quote
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
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Hamish Seggie

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 251,597
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,088
  • This is my son Michael, KIA Afghanistan 3 Sep 08
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #161 on: March 24, 2020, 10:49:14 »
"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.

Freedom Isn't Free   "Never Shall I Fail My Brothers"

“Do everything that is necessary and nothing that is not".

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,324
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #162 on: March 24, 2020, 11:03:24 »
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
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Online Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 270,310
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,271
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #163 on: March 24, 2020, 11:19:04 »
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

Offline CloudCover

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 57,405
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,644
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #164 on: March 24, 2020, 12:57:28 »
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.
... Move!! ...

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 219,165
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,296
  • Living the staff life
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #165 on: March 24, 2020, 13:35:10 »
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
“If you run into an a-hole in the morning, you ran into an a-hole. If you run into a-holes all day, you're the a-hole.”

- Raylan Givens, Justified (cleaned up for content)

Offline dapaterson

    Halfway to being an idiot-savant.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 539,630
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,426
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #166 on: March 24, 2020, 15:05:59 »


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...
Putting the *** in acerbic.

Offline Uzlu

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 4,285
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 280
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #167 on: March 24, 2020, 15:49:32 »
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/

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 51,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,324
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #168 on: April 21, 2020, 21:49:25 »
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.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Weinie

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 30,425
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 699
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #169 on: April 22, 2020, 08:53:59 »
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?  ;)
“In the absence of orders, go find something and kill it.”
– Field Marshal Erwin Rommel

Offline dapaterson

    Halfway to being an idiot-savant.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 539,630
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,426
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #170 on: April 22, 2020, 08:59:05 »
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.
Putting the *** in acerbic.

Offline LoboCanada

  • Member
  • ****
  • 4,875
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 219
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #171 on: April 22, 2020, 09:20:16 »
Because in order for it to fail it would have already laid off more people, sold off portions of itself, and accumulated more debt...


Offline dapaterson

    Halfway to being an idiot-savant.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 539,630
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,426
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #172 on: April 22, 2020, 10:09:58 »
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!
Putting the *** in acerbic.

Offline Spencer100

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 16,275
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 645
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #173 on: April 22, 2020, 10:10:13 »
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



Offline CloudCover

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 57,405
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,644
Re: Seeking an excuse to spend Defence $$ on a Bombardier plane
« Reply #174 on: April 22, 2020, 12:13:16 »
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.
... Move!! ...