Chinese Aviation Industry

S

Schumacher

Senior Member
Pointblank said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


And there is still lingering doubt that SAC will be a dependable partner when production ramps up.
Click to expand...

Looks like a Canadian newspaper reporting on a Canadian business, who obviously lost business to SAC, blowing their own trumpet about how they 'saved the day'.
So Bombardier doesn't blame SAC for delays if any & analysts who visited SAC said they're not the culprit for any slip in the C-series but of course we have a western media who managed to find an insider who insists SAC is the cause, how convenient.
Looks like the usual western media habit of trying to blame foreign suppliers instead of their own firms incompetence, remember B787 ?
 
P

Pointblank

Senior Member
Schumacher said:
Looks like a Canadian newspaper reporting on a Canadian business, who obviously lost business to SAC, blowing their own trumpet about how they 'saved the day'.
So Bombardier doesn't blame SAC for delays if any & analysts who visited SAC said they're not the culprit for any slip in the C-series but of course we have a western media who managed to find an insider who insists SAC is the cause, how convenient.
Looks like the usual western media habit of trying to blame foreign suppliers instead of their own firms incompetence, remember B787 ?
Click to expand...

Then explain why Bombardier didn't assign fuselage work for their upcoming Global 7000 and 8000 jets to SAC? And why did Bombardier have to send outside firms and experts to SAC to help them straighten out their work when their components didn't meet spec?
 
H

hmmwv

Junior Member
Pointblank said:
And it is compounded by distrust of Chinese suppliers in supplying major fuselage components for Western aircraft; take the Bombardier C-Series; Bombardier has already repatriated the mid-fuselage work for the CSeries from SAC Commercial Aircraft to its plant in Belfast, a move it said was necessary to meet the demands of its program.
Click to expand...

Bombardier only reassigned the fuselage work back to Canada so the certification process is easier, you almost want to build your prototype entirely in house in order to mitigate risks. Boeing did the opposite with the 787 and had to live with its consequences.
 
H

hardware

Banned Idiot
ws-15? few day before the opening of 2012 zhuhai airshow, russian aviation magazine report WS-15 is undergoing test fire.
 
L

lostsoul

Junior Member
Pointblank said:
Then explain why Bombardier didn't assign fuselage work for their upcoming Global 7000 and 8000 jets to SAC? And why did Bombardier have to send outside firms and experts to SAC to help them straighten out their work when their components didn't meet spec?
Click to expand...

Cameron Doerksen of National Bank Financial said Bombardier (TSX:BBD.B) moved the mid-fuselage work in-house because SACC took on more work than it could handle and slow development progress, but intends to shift the work back for full production because of its lower costs.

“The SACC building is largely empty currently, but appears to be large enough to support the originally intended work volume on the CSeries,” he wrote.

The Chinese have been ramping up the complexity of parts it has delivered of the past five years for the Q400 fuselage and tail section. Doerksen expects Bombardier will pursue a similar strategy for the CSeries program.

“When the work was shifted to SACC from Mitsubishi in 2007 there some initial production issues, but these were quickly resolved and SACC is now a reliable supplier on the Q400.”
Advertisement

Doerksen said Bombardier indicated again that the first test flight of the CSeries remains on track. The schedule remains “very tight” and the analyst said the first test flight vehicle will have is rolled out by early to mid-November for the program to remain on time.
Click to expand...

Its not as negative (for SACC) as your initial quote suggested.
 
P

Pointblank

Senior Member
hmmwv said:
Bombardier only reassigned the fuselage work back to Canada so the certification process is easier, you almost want to build your prototype entirely in house in order to mitigate risks. Boeing did the opposite with the 787 and had to live with its consequences.
Click to expand...

And they did it because SAC wasn't meeting deadlines and spec, and could not figure out how to meet their deadlines and the spec. You don't pull work from subcontractors unless they have failed. I've work in procurement, and I've pulled jobs from suppliers and reassigned if they had no hope of meeting requirements before. I've rather that a supplier under-promise and over deliver rather than over promise and under deliver.

lostsoul said:
Its not as negative (for SACC) as your initial quote suggested.
Click to expand...

Remains to be seen if SACC is reassigned the work in the future, or if Bombardier ever decides to send major component work back. They sent the work on the Bombardier Global 7000 and 8000 sections to Aerolia, Shorts Belfast, and Mitsubishi; SACC doesn't even have any workshare in the Global series aircraft. What they intend to do will depend on the work done by SACC.
 
H

hmmwv

Junior Member
Pointblank said:
And they did it because SAC wasn't meeting deadlines and spec, and could not figure out how to meet their deadlines and the spec. You don't pull work from subcontractors unless they have failed. I've work in procurement, and I've pulled jobs from suppliers and reassigned if they had no hope of meeting requirements before. I've rather that a supplier under-promise and over deliver rather than over promise and under deliver.
Click to expand...

Almost no one will meet deadline and specs on a brand new prototype, that's why air framers always keep the prototype work in house. I was initially puzzled when Bombardier assigned fuselage work to SAC straight away because they are taking a huge, huge risk. In other words there is nothing negative about this news, Bombardier just came to its senses and reverted back to standard industrial practices.

BTW, just curious, are you ThePointBlank from airliners.net?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top