Go to ground.news/mentournow to get worldwide coverage on Boeing, aviation safety and more. Subscribe through my link for 40% off unlimited access this month.

@ordenmanvrn7685

Ай бұрын

Any chance of you covering the new, recently announced plans for a japanese short haul hydro/electro plane they want to make after Mitsubishi gave up on the MRJ?

@RWBHere

Ай бұрын

Thanks Petter.

@ShonMardani

Ай бұрын

Arabs are supplying the aviation fuel to Europeans and Americans, they do not get paid in cash and they need to buy airplanes and cars in return. Unfortunately Boeing and Airbus are competening over the Arab orders at any cost, including crime, bribery and sabotage. Arabs do not sell fuel to Russia so they do buy Russian planes. In the case of Japan, they trade cars for avgas and did not want to endanger their car market in the US and Europe. Japan made the airliner as a proof of their capabilities, they are not financially broken or they did not fail.

@rdbchase

Ай бұрын

Boeing's dynamic corporate leadership is working hard on turning the duopoly into an Airbus monopoly.

@ShonMardani

Ай бұрын

Maybe Airbus is working hard to bring Boeing down and they have inside help. @@rdbchase

Can anyone break the Airbus-Boeing duopoly? Yea, Boeing can make it an Airbus monopoly if they carry on the way they are going!

@jimrobertson6959

Ай бұрын

Damn it, I was too slow. Great one-liner there mate. 😁

@elitegaming4262

Ай бұрын

what is the scope of building paper airplanes for saving the environment 💀

@drevil2675

Ай бұрын

🤣

@kazi1

Ай бұрын

😂

@gergister

Ай бұрын

Nobody in his right mind or well informed in Europe will board an Boeing. That's why those are rotting grounded. In fact I have bought tickets for my family in May with Lufthansa and just in case they decided to unground the Boeing - I am not boarding my family

First time I've seen someone point out how similar the current Boeing logo is to the old MC logo

@toms1348

Ай бұрын

That's because it is the MDD logo

@cuscoothriyas5163

Ай бұрын

Also MDD management which REALLY explains why Boeing is falling. MDD made some absolutely horrendous aircraft

@PaulSteMarie

Ай бұрын

McDonnell ran Douglas straight into the ground. They appear to be on target for doing the same to Boeing.

@larrybremer4930

Ай бұрын

@@cuscoothriyas5163 Honestly MD made some excellent commercial aircraft and the Lockheed Tristar was a simply amazing but expensive aircraft. MD (DC-10 specifically) got killed by a few very high profile accidents (and one of them was actually the airline maintenance that was really at fault) and by some horrible mismanagement decisions. Sadly the second one is the issue at Boeing today because those MD managers effectively took over at Boeing and made the same moves that undid MD mainly selling off and farming out much of their assembly - sound familiar? But back on point the MD-80/90 family and DC-10/MD-11 all had safety and dispatch rates equivalent to Boeing aircraft of the same era so their engineering and manufacturing prowess was not really their problem. Since DC-10s and MD-11s are still in service with a plethora of cargo airlines shows there is nothing wrong with it.

@cuscoothriyas5163

Ай бұрын

@@larrybremer4930 The design is sound, quality control and testing were not. Which is precisely the same problems plaguing Boeing today

I'm not even Brazilian, I'm Colombian, and is absolutely great that Boeing didn't take over Embraer. The Brazilian company can grow if they dare to make a big commercial plane, because on the regional commercial and military transport market, they are already thriving.

@drumjedi5301

Ай бұрын

I've flown on a few Embraers, and they're fantastic aircraft. I'd love to see them and Bombardier enter the "big jet" market. I kinda hate what happened with Bombardier and the C-series, but Boeing forced their hand with their BS, which is one more reason it's so hard to break the Airbus/Boeing duopoly.

@Sm0keyX5

Ай бұрын

would be great for the industry.

@Dr_Do-Little

Ай бұрын

Saw what happened when Bombardier made the C-series? Don't get your expectations too high.

@TheBooban

Ай бұрын

Embraer will do the foolish thing and co operate with the Chinese and then everyone will be destroyed by them. Like EVs and every other product.

@dknowles60

Ай бұрын

@@Dr_Do-Little now the Airbus A220.

just after WWII, british overseas airlines corporation (BOAC) launched a call for tenders for a new long-haul quad-engine airliner, mostly for connections between Britain and its empire. TEN british manufacturers were interested in the call. Five made detailed proposals, and finally Bristol won the contract, with what became the Bristol Britannia. It's crazy when you think about it. In 1946, there were ten companies that could make a long haul airliner, just in the united kingdom.

@jeebusk

Ай бұрын

for every 1 engineer now you need 2 in hr, 3 in accounting and 4 in management. and the engineer can barely get anything done.

@fw1421

Ай бұрын

Yea,there were hundreds of airlines in the 50’s and 60’s but they went out of business after Jimmy Carter de-regulated the airline industry. They competed them to death or gobbled them up in mergers and acquisitions. Building airliners takes Billions of dollars to develop new planes and there’s just not enough investment money for more manufacturers to get in the game.

@nunyabidness3075

Ай бұрын

@@jeebuskYep. Regulation and taxation are amazing job programs. My fave is how the people doing the actual job of the company end up working for the support personnel who create problems which inevitably are still the responsibility of the actual doers.

@TheGodpharma

Ай бұрын

@@nunyabidness3075 I would MUCH rather fly in an aircraft built under proper regulation than without. Just look at Boeing now to see what happens when they pay lip service to the regulators.

@dknowles60

Ай бұрын

if so good why did the 707 and Dc 8 win out

Mentour is every time getting better and better, technically, visually, analytically, and even on English pronunciation and vocabulary. Thank you.

@alexandredavid8654

Ай бұрын

His videos are way better tham most tv shows !!!!!

@geoffhemmings6546

Ай бұрын

I agree, needs to work on which/who 😅

@Tom-xy9yy

Ай бұрын

And on the J and Y :) @@geoffhemmings6546

@bernhardecklin7005

Ай бұрын

Could not agree more. If he drops from time to time his incessant "air-craaaaoahft" for "airplane" he'll be my hero.

@ruth9734

Ай бұрын

...and the "if" and "would" thingy....​@@alexandredavid8654

Most of the rivals to Boeing and Airbus were put out of business or absorbed by Boeing. They are the reason we're in a defacto duopoly.

@Dr_Do-Little

Ай бұрын

Or by Airbus like the C-Series/ A-220 program. It's not a fair competition and the various governments are cheating the dices.

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

Most American rivals (McDonnell, Convair) were indeed absorbed into Boeing at some point, while others, like Lockheed, simply left the civil market to focus on military aviation. In Europe, it was similar - pretty much all good European aviation companies were concentrated under Airbus or now at least work together with Airbus, while others, like BAE, pulled out of the civil aviation market to focus on military aviation or other things.

@simonschneider5913

Ай бұрын

anybody ever heard of china, india, russia, or iran..? guess not...and dont tell me that they cant build planes, because they do..turkiye has its own fighter jet soon...wake up and smell the coffee...!!! EU/US supremacy is now left to funny dollar-denominated statistics....and thats about it.

@wenling3487

Ай бұрын

you are right. But that's NOT because of Boeing, it is because US hegemon. SO COMAC and Russian counterpart should have the chance. the problem of Russia is that it does NOT have a huge domestic market. COMAC is certainly taking the current Boeing crisis as serious opportunity. Boeing will NEVER be able to take over COMAC!

@33moneyball

Ай бұрын

That’s because the euro companies couldn’t individually compete with American aerospace firms….Airbus is literally dozens of German, French, Italian, Spanish aero concerns combined into one. Essentially every WW2 German aircraft manufacturer is now Airbus.

"AND OUT OF NOWHERE, ITS FOKKER WITH THE STEEL CHAIR!"

@TacticaLLR

Ай бұрын

Fokker is a dead company already?

@10OZDuster

Ай бұрын

COMAC

@user-uc8kr1pl6b

Ай бұрын

🤣not the 1st yet, but still a good un !

@Skullair313

Ай бұрын

Fokker will make Boeing look good again in comparisson

@apveening

Ай бұрын

@@TacticaLLR Very dead and has been since 1996.

Love the "Don't cal me shirley" reference.🤣🤣🤣🤣

@ProuvaireJean

Ай бұрын

Wait till he starts speaking jive. 😊

@jaws848

Ай бұрын

@@ProuvaireJean 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣i see what you did there.lol🤣🤣🤣

@CAHSR2020

Ай бұрын

It was great until the editor shoved the clip in there as if we'd have no other way of knowing where it came from.

@danielabackstrom

Ай бұрын

@@CAHSR2020 I didn't know where it came from sooo

@ilc-nl3yy

Ай бұрын

​@@ProuvaireJeanHa!

"And don't call me Shirley " we need more of these lines in the upcoming videos😂😂

@MakerInMotion

Ай бұрын

I think all pilots have seen that movie. When Qantas Airways Flight 72 had problems with glitchy flight controls, the pilot said "I picked a heck of a day to stop sniffing glue."

20 years ago people might have asked whether it would ever be possible to break the Yahoo hegemony. In aviation we talk about the Boeing-Airbus duopoly, but the Airbus project was only launched 40 years ago. In other words, of course it is possible to break the current duopoly. Comac for example will get financial support from the Chinese government. They will also design new airplanes, learn the trade, and upscale so they can build more aircraft in less time. It is not because they cannot catch up with Boeing and Airbus within the next 10 years, that they can't do it within 20 or 30 years. The same goes for Embraer.

@MattMcIrvin

Ай бұрын

In the 1990s it seemed like Microsoft was the dominant titan of the computing world and nothing would ever break them. What happened was interesting. They *still* dominate the market for PC operating systems and office productivity suites. But that's no longer the most important thing, and they failed to parlay that into capturing most of the sectors that did become important--mobile computing and communications, web search, online commerce, etc. (Their old rival Apple actually won some of these; entirely new companies like Google and Amazon conquered others.) They're still huge, still in the game, but no longer the monopoly hanging over everything. The thing that breaks the duopoly may not be someone else entering the sectors where they dominate, but the whole market changing to other models of transportation.

@IainShepherd1

Ай бұрын

Not sure how much of a moat Yahoo ever had. But agreed on Comac. They will get there. China will get it there, through fair-ish means ($billions & patience) and unfair means (industrial espionage)

@virgilioanlupas1459

Ай бұрын

the other problem are the engines ! If the Chineses manage to build one competitive they will be there ! See the problem risk to face COMAC because the politics

@William2512

Ай бұрын

Comac C919 is beautiful aircraft

@ZweiZwolf

Ай бұрын

@@MattMcIrvin Remember when everybody used Blackberry? Yeah.

I’m fond of the Embraer product, comfortable and a great ride for shorter hauls. I was a huge fan of the CRJ, but where did they go? Now I understand why they disappeared. Thanks. Your videos are very informative and high quality, I encourage all your viewers to support your channel on Patreon.

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Thank you!

@thecaynuck

Ай бұрын

Really, you don't see many CRJ's? They're still everywhere in the US and Canada. Fortunately there's less of the CRJ-200 and more of the CRJ-700 or -900, which are more improved.

@jakeschutz6342

Ай бұрын

The E2s are really nice planes. Porter has been flying them on longer haul flights in Canada for about a year now (Porter has primarily been a regional airline that flew turboprops since their inception). Flew from Vancouver to Toronto in one in March, really nice planes. The Pratt and Whitney engines they use were super quiet when they spooled up on take off.

@XIIchiron78

Ай бұрын

Not just for the passengers but for the pilots, too. Very modern and well reasoned cockpit. And remarkably few technical issues given how prolific they are now. I live in one of the so called flyover states, so Embraer is basically my main option for going anywhere else. I never realized just how nice they were til I accidentally booked a CRJ 900. Man, it's only a few inches narrower in theory, but it sure makes a difference.

@JamesMason888

24 күн бұрын

@@jakeschutz6342 Absolutely. My first tide on the E195-E2 (C-GKQK -- it may not fit *American* scope rules, but that doesn't stop Porter...) was such a comfortable and smooth ride. And yes, those GTFs are quiet and powerful. When the pilots started the takeoff roll, is *seriously* hauled add, and needed less than half the runway length at SFO to take off. While waiting for ground crew to finish loading baggage, the Pilot in Command even invited families to bring children up to see the cockpit. Makes me wish I was young again, because I was really curious how the displays and controls are laid out. We see so many videos here showing Boeings and Airbusses...

I am South African and I started watching your videos on the other channel about 3 months ago and I must say that your content has made me realize my love for aviation.thank you.

Yes! Boeing for example is currently in the process of breaking the duopoly and transforming it into a monopoly.

@Samir-dy6le

Ай бұрын

If you really think that, then you really don't understand the sheer size and market share Boeing holds.

@AtomicBuffalo

Ай бұрын

Not quite. Boeing is in the process of becoming a state-supported company because the US cannot afford to have it fold or have its planes banned from overseas operation.

@KevinMitchell1963

Ай бұрын

Maybe I'm crazy but I suspect that Boeing is one bad accident away from extinction. I think that the loss of one plane with all passengers where it's obviously a quality-control issue.... Will lead to a widespread refusal to get on their planes. I would like to think Boeing is capable of turning itself around.... But I see no signs that it will. No matter how big or how vital, a builder of planes cannot survive if the general public refuses to get on their planes.

@BlueSkyUp_EU

Ай бұрын

Boeing is not in a good place and they've already lost some of their customer to Airbus. Contrary to popular belief, Airbus is not in such great place either. I'm having hard times trying to guess which of them will be in the spotlight for the next big aviation accident.

@skyweasel1

Ай бұрын

What good is a monopoly for anybody? It's the worst business state possible for consumers. Also the US depends heavily on Boeing for military aircraft so people spouting hyperbole about how it's about to die are just full of b.s.

It's about time Embraer kicks it up a bit.

@jeebusk

Ай бұрын

Some useful Textron planes would be cool,

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

Now that the E2 is selling poorly as the trend goes to bigger planes, it would be indeed the perfect time for Embarer to develop a midsize 737/A320 rival. Unlike COMAC, they already have an established presence and a good image as a capable airliner maunfacturer worldwide.

@quagengineer1877

Ай бұрын

Embraer will not enter o the widebody soon. They are focusing on improving the E2 production, where the model have a comparative advantage, and in the 2026 eVtol.

@CoSmicGoesRacing

Ай бұрын

@@quagengineer1877exactly. They could try with developing a plane similar in size to the 757-200 and A321XLR. That way, they could still focus on narrowbodies but still try something bold. (And also expand their market reach beyond) Embraer needs to step up a bit. I don’t think sticking with just regional commercial aircraft would do them any favours.

@JulianSortland

Ай бұрын

Embraers are great, we have some in Australia, and they are comfortable, including for wide-bodied passengers. Pity airlines can't better negotiate aircraft sizes.

E175 - best plane i've ever wrenched on. Absolute sweetheart of a bird.

-The cockpit? What is it? -Its a little room in front of the plane.

@TheBooban

Ай бұрын

Amazing that name still exists. Can’t even call the master bedroom the master bedroom anymore.

@pattimaeda6097

Ай бұрын

@@TheBoobanI think you didn’t get the reference ✈️

@TheBooban

Ай бұрын

@@pattimaeda6097 Airplane movie?

@jimcabezola3051

Ай бұрын

Surely, you jest!

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

@@jimcabezola3051 I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.

I was just thinking about how the last plane I flew in was neither a Boeing nor an Airbus--it was a JetBlue Embraer E190. Looked like it was getting long in the tooth though. When I was a kid, it felt like Boeing and McDonnell Douglas were the effective duopoly, with other players at the margins. So the landscape can shift.

@jeebusk

Ай бұрын

were you in row 7?

@dmitripogosian5084

Ай бұрын

When I was a kid I thought Tupolev and Ilyushin are the only aircrafts :) (well, ok, I had plastic models of some others)

@MattMcIrvin

Ай бұрын

@@jeebusk The exit row is further back on the E190 and, yeah, I was there.

@MattMcIrvin

Ай бұрын

@@dmitripogosian5084 I actually had a model B737-200 (in PSA livery) hanging from my bedroom ceiling. Seems like a portent of the future now. I had a Lockheed Connie and a Space Shuttle too.

@jeebusk

Ай бұрын

@@MattMcIrvin from the seating chart they appear to have skipped rows 6-9,

How about the Irkut MC-21, a newly developed Russian single aisle plane. When staying away from the political situation that causes difficulties at the moment. I saw something about that it is also quite a challenging plane.

If I were a gambler, I would be happy to take a risk on Embraer. The E2 is modern, and unlike most other manufacturers, they are set up to modify the wings for each model. They are not averse to changing the fuselage diameter either, with outwardy similar aircraft being only 3 seats, rather than 4 accross. I wouldn't class the E2 as a large regional, but rather a smaller version of the class above, which just happens to perform very well as a regional jet. Given all that, I would expect that Embraer is probably the best placed manufacturer to change the fuselage diameter with the minimum development cost when compared to their competition. I would suspect that it should be relatively easy to have the same rating for a six abreast E-Jet (E3?) as for the current E2 Not only would this increase capacity substantially (+50% for the same cabin length), but avoid the increased potential for tail strikes, which usually accompany any 'stretch'. Let's be realistic. It is highly unlikely that any 4 abreast single aisle will ever compete with the A321 - the cabin would need to be at least 15m longer than that of the A321, or to put it another way, several metres longer than even a 757-300! 15m is greater than the difference in length between an A318 and an A321

@thecaynuck

Ай бұрын

Brazil is a corrupt country, not sure how confident I'd be in fostering that.

@jeebusk

Ай бұрын

with rear mounted engines you can move the wings back, and the landing gear. kinda more like the md90/717

@neilpickup237

Ай бұрын

@jeebusk The problem with rear-mounted engines, especially as they increase in weight, is the strengthening along with the associated disproportionate extra weight. Yes, we had big engines on the DC10 and L1011, but this additional weight was offset by only having three, rather than the otherwise required four engines for overflying oceans. Of course, the other two engines were mounted under the wings. There was a reason why Bombardier, a proponent of rear-mounted engines, chose underwing mounted engunes for the C-Series.

@jeebusk

Ай бұрын

@@neilpickup237 it's not an efficient use of internal space, and it's bad for acoustics (noisier cabin). the structure in the rear i don't think is worse (more weight) than structure in the wing. I was just saying that moving the gear back does help for the tail strike consideration you mentioned.

@thecaynuck

Ай бұрын

@@neilpickup237 The real benefit of rear-mounted engines is to prevent gravel and other debris from entering the engines, as business jets and some regional jets like the CRJ or ERJ were meant to fly into smaller airports.

I found your channel last month and i think ive watched over 200 of your videos, im absolutely in love with your content and will become a patreon member asap!

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Thank you so much!!

@jjkanal640

Ай бұрын

@@MentourNow varsågod bästa KZreadr

I'm still salty that bombardier folded.

@raymondkwan5646

Ай бұрын

You can thank Boeing for that. Boeing sued bombardier to stop them from selling the new C series aircraft that would compete with Boeing’s own smaller planes. It forced Bombardier to sell itself to Airbus

@CAHSR2020

Ай бұрын

@@raymondkwan5646Bombardier also over-leveraged themselves and lost other divisions in the process.

@thecaynuck

Ай бұрын

The silver lining is that the whole thing resulted in De Havilland Canada rising back from the grave. The company that created the Dash 8 series, the Dash 6 Twin Otter, the DHC-2 Beaver and other legendary planes. Mostly they've been focusing on their fire fighting aircraft and continuing to manufacture the modernized Twin Otter with Viking Air and I believe they've overtaken any Dash 8 production and part supply. Would love if they either make new models or create updated models of the planes they've already made to fit the demands of the industry. Wideroe refurbished and extended the lifespan of all of their Q400's because its such an important plane to them with no suitable replacement.

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

Bombardier didn't fold, they just pulled out of the Cseries project to focus on the business jet segment, as well as other areas that made losses, like the train-making divission.

@brunost-denis4914

Ай бұрын

​@@torstenscholz6243 Bombardier sold their train division to Alstom, a French manufacturer in 2021.

Hey Petter. I got hooked to this channel because nobody else can have me get so interested listening about airlines industry like you do, and break it down in detail time and time again with passion in your eyes. Keep up the great work, and just to add to that I’ll still say if it ain’t Boeing I’m not going, even with all their problems lately.

COMAC is the only real challenger for 2 reasons: having a strong backing from its government and a huge supportive domestic market.

@atochagv

Ай бұрын

China does not have design engineers, just spies. Therefore, they will always be a generation behind, and will never be more than a (China) regional airplane.

@VicTor-gi7so

Ай бұрын

just like their EVs😂

@truthful3777

Ай бұрын

Yup.. a lot of Asian countries are planning to use ARJ21 and C919. Indonesia already use ARJ21 with sucess and Malaysia Sarawak also I looking at ARJ21 for their domestic airline..

@nickl5658

Ай бұрын

You forget China massive international foot print in the tourism industry. The whole of SEA is dependent on Chinese tourist. When their planes come, they will need servicing and spare parts. Means SEA will be buying spare parts from COMAC. Means the new guys fixing the airplanes will be more familiar with COMAC, young pilot who want to fly, know the major employee with be chinese airlines... which means flying COMAC. So they will train to fly COMAC. And once most of the new pilots have their type rating in the c919 or subsequent COMAC airplanes, then the local airlines will change to COMAC. This is a lot bigger than you realize.

@madsam0320

Ай бұрын

Brunei is also interested in c919s, China is a major customer for the little oil rich country.

Peter, I posted this comment to yesterday's Mentour pilot video, but it was several hours after you posted.. I'm reposting here in the hope you'll see it. Peter, you rock !! Your professionalism and level of detail along with the most excellent video demonstrations you provide with these narratives leave all the others in the dust.. You've spoiled me in that regard.. You really do take things to the next level. Thanks so much for all you do ! Now, regarding this video. I tend to concur with your reservations regarding the improbable rise of a competitive vendor, for the reasons you stated. This is a difficult industry to enter, and the price of entry is astronomical. Profitability potential is huge, but so is the risk.

1:28 In my eyes, that is not a "kind of" adoption of their old logo, that is "you can copy my homework, but you need to change something" level of adoption. Feels like McDonnell Douglas ex-employees wanted to make a statement that the name might have changed, but they're still the ones steering the ship and making the decisions.

Those EMB 175’s and 190’s are pretty darn nice. I could see them easily developing them into a larger model.

@thecaynuck

Ай бұрын

The already did, the E2 series. They're not selling very well though. Overshadowed by the C-series (now Airbus A220). A few airlines like Porter has already invested in the E2 though.

I flew on the last Dornier commercial aircraft, the 328 jet, around 20 years ago. The airline is still doing the same routes in and out of Copenhagen with them today.

@thecaynuck

Ай бұрын

I think there's some plan to use the Dornier 328 design to host new turboprop engines. Deutsche Aircraft leading the initiative.

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

@@thecaynuck Yeah, but I can't see how that would greatly affect the airliner market. Turboprop airliners have almost no relevance today. I would love to see them restart development/production of the 728, that was a great design that would have had a lot of market potential, considering how well the A220 is doing now. It really was a tragic story that the 728 was so close to realization but never made it.

You really are active in the effort you put into publishing new content on this channel. You earned the soon to be 360K followers here on KZread. Congratulations

Amazing content as always

There are about 4000 narrowbody twins in the big 3 Chinese airlines alone. If/when COMAC can increase production to Airbus/Boeing rates, they've got one of the hugest guaranteed markets in the world.

@VicTor-gi7so

Ай бұрын

highly doubt they will succeed.

@sfjava6239

Ай бұрын

@@VicTor-gi7sooh they will, due to its market size.

@izangomso

Ай бұрын

They will. Comac operates entirely outside of market forces with basically unlimited funding and a government that will simply force the big 3 airlines to buy their jet. The c919 and c929 are not commercial jet projects but national security projects for China.

@Juanguar

Ай бұрын

@@VicTor-gi7sothey probably will Just not in the US

@chrismckellar9350

Ай бұрын

It is the current global geopolitical policies will prevent COMAC becoming a major threat to Boeing and Airbus. If it does, COMAC will be more of threat to Boeing than Airbus, as Airbus is a more player in the 5 and 6 abreast narrow body global market.

I love how comprehensive you are in your analyses of aviation issues. Keep up the good work!

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Thank you, will do!

Amazing video Petter!

One of the "moats" your forgot is the conversion fro building prototypes to iindustrialized production. Airbus had to spend a lot of money for that step on the 380, and this is one of the big challenges still for the A220. In the case of C-Series, this came at a time when Bombardier was forced to liquidated its assets to pay debts and had to pull out of its remaining 30% share in the C-Series because it could not provide its share of capital needed to productize the plane. Being able to ramp up production is key to increasing revenues to help make programe cash positive. You may have 2000 orders but if you can only built 12 planes per year, you only get revenue for those 12. The other moat you forgot is "delays". In the case of C-Series, one of the crippling delays was the P&W engine failure which stalled the porgramme testing for quite some time and thus delayed entry into service. If accountants had planned to to start seeing revenues by year X but that is delayed by 2 years or more, then where do they find the cash to continue to pay for the aircraft debugginG/development during those 2 years when cash has already runned out? This is where being a giant like Airbus or Boeing helps because they have deep pockets and longer staying power when things don't go so well. (In case of Bombardier, they not only undertook their largest project ever (C-Series), but also stupidly launched the Lear 85 and Global 7500 business jets at same time which drained all cash from all the divisions (such that the train division couldn't invest to deliver orders, had such late deliveries that they started to lose money and orders (and Alstom who bought "Transportation" is still losing money due to this).

@ivarwind

Ай бұрын

That was all mentioned in the first "moat."

@joesutherland225

Ай бұрын

They were going to buy the bombardier until American govt put 300 percent tariffs on them forcing bombardier to sell to airbus and build assembly facility in the states

@KannabisMajoris

Ай бұрын

This is just further breaking down the first moat. Interesting info though.

@pabloherrera8964

Ай бұрын

@@ivarwind nevertheless it's interesting info with concrete examples. Much appreciated.

@motovick

Ай бұрын

The Global 7500 was a necessity, but the Lear 85 was the biggest mistake, thanks to the inexperience and cockiness of Pierre Beaudoin.

isn't the bigger oligopoly GE, Pratt & Whitney and Rolls Royce, the 3 biggest engine manufacturers? The engine is allegedly the most expensive part of the plane.

@aal3x706

Ай бұрын

Mtu and Safran are big Players in this market

@TheBooban

Ай бұрын

@@aal3x706but Safran and GE co operate on a major engine. Pratt, I wonder if they can get enough business. RR seems to be doing good now.

@mateuspereira1360

Ай бұрын

Yeah, but the engine market has more players in the business and military aviation. Honeywell for example is very famous in the bussiness class

@thecaynuck

Ай бұрын

There's Honeywell that also does business craft and military engines, and then a number of consortiums that have created engines under a joint program. IAE, CFM, etc.

@lizz2819

Ай бұрын

Extremely complex manufacturing, not just anyone can just start building jet engines. These guys have been doing it since ww2. Not like a pop up women’s league demanding equal pay.

😂😂😂 don’t call me Shelley!!😂 That was a nice touch, beautifully placed!! 👍

Nit pick: At the time Bombardier sold the CRJ to MHI, there were a few planes remaining to be built. These underlivered planes were not part of the transaction and were built/delivered by Bombardier. MHI did not buy the production hangars, but did get some of the tooling to make spare parts. (production hangars were set to go to CSALP/Airbus Canada LP to increase A220 production). Since the transation, MHI has built a couple of MROs in the USA to provide mainetance to CRJs and as a result, I beleive at least one of USA regionals re-intrduced CRJs that had been semi-retired due to uncertainty about their maintanibility with disappearance of Bombardier Commercial Aviation. Having a network of service centres/parts distribution is very important to airlines. And if you cater to regionals, your network of service centres may not match the needs of the parent mainline. For instance, in heydays of the CRJ200, Comair (delta) was hubbed in Cincinatti. After the NW merger, Comair disappeared and hub moved to Detroit, which means a change of maintencane needs. But if you wish to sell to Delta instead of its regionals, then you likely need a presence in Atlanta or other large city instead. So just because you have a presence in a country to serve regionals doesn't instantly make it easy for you to bid on mainline contracts.

@thecaynuck

Ай бұрын

I still am not on board calling those Bombardier CRJ's "Mitsubishi CRJ." It just sounds so weird considering how short of a time they've owned the program for.

@jfmezei

Ай бұрын

Not even the descendanst pf the foundator (the Beaudoin family) were allowed to use the "Bombaardier" trademark when they bailed out the company by buying the recreational products division in 2003. Only the business jet division now has the right to use the trademark as that is all that is left of the company. MHI cannot use that trademark. And since they are "Canadair Regional jets (CRJ), the use of "Bombardier" is redundant. @@thecaynuck

Lockheed where always interested in the long haul aircraft the Constellation and Super Constellation ruled the trans Atlantic market in the 50s but the L-1011 never scratched the 747 or the DC-10 and L-1011-50 came too late 😢

@CAHSR2020

Ай бұрын

You can blame Rolls Royce for the delayed entry and slow uptake of the L-1011.

Like AIRBUS, which is a cooperation of several European manufacturers, a new multi-national cooperation between Russian, Chinese and Brazilian (to name a few) companies could be setup to produce rival aircraft.

@ZweiZwolf

Ай бұрын

The various Russian manufacturers are already merged, but the size of the Russian market is too small, especially without former Soviet countries to sell to. Brasil is also much too small, even with the rest of LatAm as its market, due to American regional dominance. China, OTOH, has a huge market that reasonably includes all of central & southeast Asia along with Africa, along with the technical talent to keep things moving. I wouldn't be surprised to see Embraer using Chinese engines in a decade or so.

@twitmoe4004

Ай бұрын

@@ZweiZwolf An Ilyushin(Irkut), Tupolev, Sukhoi, COMAC and Embraer consortium could be a formidable competitor to the duopoly.

@ZweiZwolf

Ай бұрын

@@twitmoe4004 Yeah, I think it'll happen organically over time. China has the talent and incentive to develop and manufacture all of the components. Once Chinese engines and avionics are proven up to snuff, then Comac, Irkut, Embraer, etc. will partner up.

What a mention for those classics - Vickers Viscount, Tristar, Hawker Sidley Trident, BAC1-11.... awesome aeroplanes and have flown in each.

Interesting topic and a great video as usual!

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it! 💕💕

Also Irkut MC-21.

I want Lockheed to reenter the commercial aviation sector. The L1011 was a fantastic plane when it was made and in my mind the best 3 engine commercial plane ever made. With their wicked good engineering department they could do it. But realistically I want to see Embraer start making larger jets that fall into the slot of the 757 or A321.

@kutto5017

Ай бұрын

Problem is now it would take 20 years. You would only get 30 planes and they would cost $1 billion each.... The military contract style...

@alexroselle

19 сағат бұрын

@@kutto5017yeah but in return we get a low-observable airliner that can’t be tracked on old radars and is safe to fly through airspace bordering Russia

Brilliant as usual.❤

Chinese market will be happy with Comac. Russian small market will be happy with MS-21 with PD-14 engines.

@jimpad5608

Ай бұрын

While the MS-21 will probably just have the small Russian market and will do no major harm to Boeing or Airbus, COMAC is a whole different matter. While the market for most of the world is somewhat static, the market in Asia and China is huge and growing and COMAC could get a HUGE share, drastically lowering profits for Boeing and Airbus, especially Boeing.

@ursodermatt8809

Ай бұрын

@@jimpad5608 comac will only get a share in the countries that are chinese vassals. and there are not that many of them.

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

Russian domestic market is too small to be profitable and on the verge of collapsing. Following the sanctions, airlines don't have the money to buy new planes in large amounts, and aircraft manufacturers have a hard time to replace Western parts with Russian ones. In recent years, Russian manufacturers have hardly built any new planes at all.

@jimpad5608

Ай бұрын

@@ursodermatt8809 you vastly underestimate COMAC and China. Throughout Asia COMAC has some major advantages.. The purchase price of the C919 will be significantly less than any Boeing or Airbus aircraft and Chinese financing will be very favorable. Most aircraft in Asia never leave Asia so they do not need USA or EU certification. If the C919 can avoid the massive quality problems that Boeing can not seem to fix, it will be a reasonable safe choice. Plus with the buyers bring close to China the maintenance and training supply chains are much easier to set up.. You appear to have a major anti China bias that blinds you to the current state of Chinese industry. I see this very, very often especially with Americans. BTW Chinese companies are OK with this bias because it allows them to walk in and take business from Americans that are complacent.

@ursodermatt8809

Ай бұрын

@@jimpad5608 yes, that is possible. i underestimate the capability of the CCP to implode china. china will not get business whilst threatening other countries with nukes and intimidating . stealing and lying. now china the CCP is crying because foreign investment is drying up.

In South Africa AIRLINK uses Embraer E170s and E190s and there are i think 2 Mitsubishi aircrafts flying

@davidwright7193

Ай бұрын

The Embraers used to be competitive in the regional jet market and we’re becoming very popular in smaller markets like Africa but new sales have been wiped out by the A220.

@plektosgaming

Ай бұрын

@@davidwright7193 In theory... The issue is that Embraer is building aircraft and Bombardier is barely making a trickle of A220s. Huge orders but obvious issues with scale.

Few or no American carriers purchased the Comet, Trident, 1-11 , Concorde etc. Boeing however prospered from the pioneering research attained from all these British ventures which resulted in the demise of the UK aviation industry. Maybe a coalition might be a way forward.

@mancubwwa

Ай бұрын

Echh, the coalition was a way forward and at first the British were on board, only to pull back for some stupid political reasons.

@shenghan9385

Ай бұрын

A coalition? Are you talking about the Airbus?

@pabloherrera8964

Ай бұрын

@@shenghan9385so funny as 'European' for some in Airbus stands for one country :)))))))

@Karibanu

5 күн бұрын

Concorde was literally the start of Airbus ( there's bits of it in the A300 even ). BAe flogged off their share in Airbus & handed over all the civil plants, which is why Airbus UK exists as a fairly large entity. The only independent British constructors are Britten-Norman and that civil helicopter startup, so they're not going to be challenging anytime soon... If BAe had got hold of Fokker when it was folding & merged it's regional airliner business in with them, they might have owned the market by now.

Excellent info. Also loved the Airplane! reference 😅

hello Peter, I discovered your channel (sorry, your channels) a few weeks ago. I'm a retired computer scientist (French..., sorry for my english), passionate about aviation and I discovered with you a very educational speaker. Thanks to you I understand a lot of things and I really appreciate your work; My congratulations.

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Thank you, welcome aboard!

I was in the industry when the MRJ was proposed. It was super exciting, we were supposed to be one of the launch customers (they loved this deal, because it meant cheap aircraft). I was kind of excited to see their return to the industry. Then they realized the MRJ would be SLOWER than the competition to save fuel, and even though the overall flight time wouldn't be terribly impacted. Idk, but between that waning overall excitement and the constant early changes and delays (yes I know this happens, but this was their breakout product) and I just figured it would be vaporware. Sure enough, my feelings ended up being right. Too bad.

@TheBooban

Ай бұрын

Basically, they couldn’t make it good enough.

@adamlesandrini312

Ай бұрын

They overpromised the innovation, realized they basically had no idea what they were doing, and wasted a bunch of money figuring that out. Right.

@abarratt8869

Ай бұрын

A pity indeed. The whole project was a bit timid I felt. They avoided taking on the 737/A320 sector. They tarried too long. Etc. If Mitsubishi had just set out to clone an A320 in every conceivable way (literally, just copy it, like the Chinese have), they'd now have a respectable slice of the market. I think there were enough signs as early as 2012 that there was likely room for a third manufacturer, and the MAX crashes sealed it. But no; they didn't want to be that radical. Opportunity missed.

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

The MRJ is a good example of what happens when a nation, no matter how technologically advanced it may be (and Japan surely is), has little to no experience in building airliners and is overambitious to do it but has no clue how to do it right. The project certainly had promise at the beginning, but after many years of delays, it lost all market potential and became a financial disaster, and the Corona crisis was the final nail in the coffin.

Nice report, Petter! Thanks!

you have no idea of how much I LOVE seeing my two main interests (business managment and aviation) applied on the same video. great content peter, keep it up! ❤

Bottom line is it takes about a billion dollars and at least 7 years to develop a new airliner from scratch, and an additional 300-500 million to develop a new engine, if needed. So no publicly traded company is going to take that risk. You would need government money and a guaranteed customer base, like COMAC.

@TheObsesedAnimeFreaks

Ай бұрын

or... deregulation so that the cost is much reduced as the majority of that cost is in regulatory compliance, testing and certifications. it's the one industry that is regulated to the point that it's hard to get a cable tie on an aircraft. because for some reason, that specific part needs to be certified as "air worthy." like every part used on the aircraft needs to be certified to fly. and that costs a lot of money. think 20 bucks for a single zip tie, that's physically no different any other zip tie on the market.

Flying on an Alaska 737 Max 9 on Tuesday.....wish me luck!

@pauloziliani260

Ай бұрын

You will need.

@mysteryshrimp

Ай бұрын

Don't sit by the door. Or the engines. And make sure the pilot is a body builder. You know, you should just sit inside the black box.

great video. But the biggest barrier to entry (I did a lot of research and calculations in university) are certainly learning effects, the first airplane is so much more expensive in production. You need big pockets to get these huge quantities needed. So economies of scale are so big not only because of r/d but because of learning in production of the manufactures and the suppliers

As a Canadian I’d like to see bombardier continue to develop medium haul aircraft larger than the A220

@ 16:45 wow i didn't realise how powerful the pilots union is. (The union tells the airlines what size planes they are 'allowed' to use in regional airlines.) Aahh, and now i understand why modern digital cockpit voice recorders mysteriously only record 30min. As if they are still analogue magnetic tapes.

@andrasbiro3007

Ай бұрын

And that's exactly the problem with unions in general.

@ShonMardani

Ай бұрын

In a corrupt system competitions are labeled as enemies. It has nothing to do with unions, they have no power.

@Allan_son

Ай бұрын

The unions are powerful because pilots are in short supply. Pilots are in short supply because the airlines counted on an infinite supply of ex-military pilots. So they under invested in pilot training programs. In a sense commercial aviation has been cheap because tax dollars paid for so many pilots. Now demand has outstripped that supply.

@ShonMardani

Ай бұрын

The flight schools are closing, they want to replace the pilots with remote controls.@@Allan_son

Isn't Boeing just transforming this duopoly into an Airbus monopoly?😂

Very interesting and instructive video. Like always....

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Thank you! Cheers!

Very interesting as always Peter, Happy Easter! 😊

Wouldn't a new airplane manufacturer just simply need to be able to provide shorter delivery times to instantly be extremely competitive? Without any other advantages at all?

Having worked at MDD in Toronto in the early 80s, looking at Boeing now, I'd say they adopted MDD's work ethic too.

One of the best videos you have ever done! Excellent job. I'm sure this type of thinking is on the minds of many people.

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Wow, thank you!

You always mention your team but I don't see any names on your webside. Why don't you show us the people behind the Mentour network?

I have begun flying RC Cessnas with cardboard cutouts of one or two passengers. This is my first step and I have planned within this summer to fly this plane a route from Malmö to Copenhagen. If this is successful I will scale up and purchase a drone where one passenger can hang on! These steps will take 10 years until I have created a new manufacturing giant. I tell this now and if there are interest like this comment and hopefully in 10 years I will have a prototype passenger jet made out of cardboard. Like below!😂

@slartybarfastb3648

Ай бұрын

Maybe we could colaborate? I could produce the wings and tail section constructed of foam which is more durable than cardboard. I'll then ship these components halfway around the world to you for final assembly. If any failures occur, we can conveniently blame each other.

@Wintermute909

Ай бұрын

Save me a VIP Platinum Lounge membership!

@johnbeans2000

Ай бұрын

@@Wintermute909 ofc, early investors receive perks such as these.

@fanta6285

Ай бұрын

@@slartybarfastb3648I will supply door plugs for this aircraft that are made using 3D printed PLA material

@fanta6285

Ай бұрын

@@slartybarfastb3648I’ll supply the door plugs made using 3D printed material

Great review!

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Thanks!

As always, a great video, and you got an Airplane gag in there too, I've give this video double likes if it were possible ! 😀

Bombardier inherited from Canadair the Challenger business het and the plans to turn it into 2*2 passenger jet. It also inherited the CL215 water bomber, as well as programme to upgrade engines. From de Haviland Canada (via Boeing who temporarily owned it) it inherited the Dash-8 (and all the other planes which Bombardier never leveraged). It inherited from Learjet its models. Bombardier executed the plans from Canadair to create the CRJ planes and eventually stretch them to the -700 and -900. It stretched the Dash-8 to the -300 and then -400. It never created a clean sheet new aircraft. When Airbus set out to build the A380, many argued it was taking too big a bite, having never made such a large plane. But when Bombardier started the C-Series project, it was even "bigger" step: -first clean sheet design for company who had never built a new plane. -largest aircraft ever built and in a different class (engines below wing, FBW, brand new state of art engines never used before etc) -establish relationship with mainline carriers AND compete against Boeing and Airbus while in past it had relationships only with regiuoanls. Ad that also meant changing where it had support locations since regionals had maintenance presence in different cities. So for Bombardier, even if you put the financial aspects aside, this gradutation was a very very risky project with so many "new" aspect where compay had no experience before. And, again, putting financials aside, mainline carriers who had no relationship with Bombardier were hard to convince to take the risk. And once Bombardier's financial woes became public, airlines were even harder to convice to buy the jet, especially as opposition politicians in canada wwere calling on federal government to let the company fail and stop bailing out a Québec company. (the federal govt had never bailed it out before though had given it some contracts). Had Bombardier not started the Lear 85 and Gobal 7500 project at same time, the story might have bene totally difefrent and Bombardier miight be a 3rd played in the mainline narrowbody market today.

@thecaynuck

Ай бұрын

De Havilland Canada has finally returned too, they're no longer defunct which will be fun to see what they do.

@Allan_son

Ай бұрын

​@@thecaynuckThe *name* has reappeared. We will see if the new company will do something really new or just modernize the existing designs. The existing designs were (still are?) best in class so just modernizing them might be a good business.

The US government could help Lockheed Martin reenter the civilian market.

@Glaucidius

Ай бұрын

Wouldn't that be a kind of socialism?

@bartsolari5035

Ай бұрын

@@Glaucidius EV rebates

@Glaucidius

Ай бұрын

​@@bartsolari5035Well, otherwise they'd give Diesel exhaust to everyone for free...😂

Very professional analysis. Keep up with the good work.

I've flown on an embraer with BA cityflyer. Was a tiny plane. 170 I think back in 2017/18.

The Mitsubishi space plane failed because the MTOW of 90,000 was too heavy for an aircraft for only 80 people compared with an aircraft like the Russian MC-21 with the same MTOW can carry 200 people!....

@rocketPower047

Ай бұрын

That was the least of the problems. That's just a marketing/efficiency issue

@rolmaxify

Ай бұрын

The Mitsubishi had an MTOW of around 39000kg.

The bigger Embraer E-195 E2 isn't that far from the 737 MAX-7 in capacity, sure it doesn't do the regional thing thanks to the pilots union, but why isn't it being considered for the same routes as the 737? With how folks feel about Boeing, and there being a years long wait for Airbus, why isn't Embraer selling more?

@deinedickemutter

Ай бұрын

Don't ask me, I would choose the E2 every time 😄

Yeah, I have had the privilege of flying on a Lockheed L-1011 from the States to Frankfort . And an MD11 back. Both were beautiful, wonderful, aircraft.

Very, very interesting episode. Thanks, Petter!

i see embraers everywhere these days but i'm not sure if they are interested in expanding outside of just the regional airliner market

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Time will tell.

Petter , you forgot to mention Boom supersonic!!!!!......only kidding, it will never happen.

@Skullair313

Ай бұрын

Aparrently, the Saudis are funding it, becuase it generates demand for oil

@atochagv

Ай бұрын

XB-1 flew for the first time about a week ago, they are building their factory, got their engine manufacturer sorted out (although that is still a bit of a mess). I'm not ready to write them off yet.

@CAHSR2020

Ай бұрын

@@atochagv I'll bet good money Boom never sells more than Concorde did.

Just aircraft buff, but with an engineering background in commercial satcom industry, I find your videos very interesting. Quality production value, clearly shows a lot of work goes into editing and recording these videos.

When I started flying there was a vast array of equipment in use. Liverpool was a fairly quiet airport back then, the busiest operator was Manx Air with multiple flights to the Isle of Man. They used the Shorts 360 and Fokker F27, they became part of British Midlands Airline. My R/T exam was interrupted by the F27 on the mail run, taxied and parked outside the flying club during my IFR flight comes. You could see 707, 727, 737, 747, MD10, MD80, L1011, Trident, 146, A300, Comet and that was just the jets. Most British companies were merged into BAe, the commercial side being absorbed by Airbus. That was a sad day for British commercial aircraft production, considering jet airliners started at De Havilland.

There's no mention of the new Irkut jet from Russia

Let's go, Embraer and Saab!

@TheBooban

Ай бұрын

I think SAAB stopped making any new planes. But they cooperate with Brazil with the Gripen. So, maybe.

@davidwild102

Ай бұрын

Sabb é sueca e vai deixar o brasil !

@gunnarthegumbootguy7909

Ай бұрын

@@TheBooban they do a lot of cooperation though, but i think it's mostly in the military sector, i've seen brazilian air force embraer plane fly in to be maintained or upgraded in linköping malmen, not the saab airport though it's just the other side of town (likely some type maintenance or upgrade of the military avionics, radar systems, elint systems), and of course one of the biggest clients for saab's gripen is the brazilian air force, and they probably have other less public and less easy to spot ways to cooperate... also Ericsson made the electronic intelligence and awacs system they use... so there's absolutely a three way Ericsson Embraer SAAB cooperation... but it's all very secretive, so except for people noticing some brazilian planes on sweedish air bases and maybe vice versa there's likely not much we in the civilian public will learn about this

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

@@TheBooban Saab at least hasn't made any civil planes since the end of the Saab 2000, which was built until 1999. Since then they only built military jets and manufacture parts for other aircraft manufacturers like Airbus.

@worawatli8952

Ай бұрын

Whenever I hear Saab, I'm sad that Saab car has gone, and I wish they make passenger jets, and hopefully not bankrupt themselves doing so. They put safety first in everything, it is their business now they sell "security and safety", not selling vehicles.

It's nice to see Petter and Co referencing 'Airplane'! I wonder if it plays a part in Petters' pilot training!? I think he would also appreciate a BBC Radio programme from a decade or more ago called 'Cabin Pressure'.

There is much to building airplanes. Not only all the partnerships for parts such as engines and contracts etc. But also regulations pilot training and type writing. Introducing a totally new player is not something done easy, even if you were building perfect planes.

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Exactly my point

There are also non-aviation issues. The way Boeing and Airbus removed support for aircraft flying in Russia will suggest to some countries that depending on these companies should if possible be avoided - to give one example.

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

The stop of support was due to sanctions, and wouldn't have been necessary if Russia hadn't started a terrible war that they can't win and will only ruin their economy.

@kenoliver8913

Ай бұрын

Yes, this is exactly why Comac is, at considerable time and expense, moving away from western suppliers for its C919. In the long run sanctions and other trade barriers usually hurt the sanctionees more than the sanctioned, something people keen to launch trade wars always forget.

@lroke2947

Ай бұрын

Luckily Russia has its own aerospace industry to help fill in the void. 😋 FWIW: sanctions depend on whatever country or countries decide that you're behaving like a dick - to explain one global rule.

It's a bit strange that you've mentioned COMAC C919, where only the airframe is original and everything else is outsourced, but haven't mentioned the MC21. In particular MC21-310, a completely original airliner not relying on any western components at all. Such aircraft, even if it turns out inferior to Airbus or Boeing, can still win over a huge market, giving the geopolitical situation at the moment.

@michaeldunham3385

Ай бұрын

The MC-21-300 isn't even operated in Russia yet you're predicting a huge market share for it? It's not going sell outside Russia. You actually believe it's completely Russian because? The Russian government isn't exactly known for telling the truth the fact that its not in service is highly likely due to sanctions meaning its unlikely to be 100% Russian

Fascinating video with some great analysis. Thanks

@MentourNow

Ай бұрын

Thank you, I'm glad you enjoyed it!

Embraer has so much potential. But recently lost a big customer (JetBlue) to airbus. At least per what I’ve read. JetBlue plans to retire their aging embraer fleet and replace it with airbus. That upset me slightly because embraer is the fleet that made JetBlue. And when I look at quality and incidents and accidents, embraer is above and beyond Boeing and airbus. But in my opinion i might be biased since I am Brazilian born. I’ve always loved flying on the embraer. Very nice planes. While the airbus typically tended to be louder in cabin with their older models. When it pressurize there was a loud engine noise that would fade away a bit when the flight reached cursing altitude. I’m hoping they one day jump into designing bigger planes. ✈️ I’m scared to fly on Boeing planes until they fix up their weaknesses. However back in the day I loved flying on the 747 to and from Brazil. Such smooth planes.

@VicTor-gi7so

Ай бұрын

insulation advances would help quiet planes down. the only roadblock is the FAA.

@idpro83

Ай бұрын

As somebody living in the EU I should be on Airbus's side but I'm with you on this one. I'd love to see a third competitor that is on par with Airbus and Boeing.

@leosthrivwithautism

Ай бұрын

@@VicTor-gi7so interesting I didn’t know that. Usually when I used to fly I chose JetBlue almost always exclusively. And I would notice that the embraer was whisper quiet on take off. The seats were just slightly smaller than airbus but overall not uncomfortable. On the other hand when I went into their airbus plan the take off was quite till the plane rotated and was airborne then this loud engine noise would come on and many times would worry passengers. I’d look over and see concerned passengers thinking something is wrong with plane so much so that they would have the pilot come on and reassure that it’s normal. It’s just how the plane operated. And sure enough as soon as it leveled off the plane noise would reduce alot. Both offered decent flight. Even though the airbus was just slightly bigger in space. Only reason I stopped flying is because when their management changed you could clearly see these folks didn’t take care of their planes as much as the previous management. I could see panels bulging and I could see frayed wires showing. I even pointed it out to the staff onboard. The planes went from looking beautiful to looking old and tired even though they weren’t really that old back then. But this is interesting though. I didn’t know FAA had this road block.

@leosthrivwithautism

Ай бұрын

@@idpro83 Don’t get me wrong Airbus makes some beautiful planes. And they are pretty comfortable. But yes a third competitor would make sure these two companies don’t fall into complacency. That’s how you start having issues. You get a little too comfortable and suddenly quality suffers.

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

Embraer certainly could do it. And now that the E2 is selling poorly while the A220 is really taking off, since the trend is now going to bigger regional planes, it would perhaps be the perfect time for Embraer to enter the midsize market and develop a B737/A320 competitor.

I would have thought that COMAC is the most likely competitor but I trust you more than my opinion.

@havencat9337

Ай бұрын

same here. im still not sure if he is biased or not. its a company that will have to succeed. money and talent won't be a problem

I'll be flying on an E175 in May. Alaska is using them as their primary regional, now (retiring the Dash-8 turboprop) and have 3 classes: first, main, and premium, which is a midpoint between the rich and the poor, giving more legroom, and reserved overhead storage. which leads to the thought that the biggest shakeup the aircraft industry could experience might be ending the rigid segregation between regional jets and full service jets. if that were to happen, the first company to develop a "flex fleet" platform that allowed an airline to have the flexibility to seamlessly switch between a "regional" size and a full size airframe as demand changed, would have an advantage.

Thank you for keeping “Airplane!” jokes flying.

@torstenscholz6243

Ай бұрын

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit making AIrplane! jokes.

Bombardier squandered all the bailouts they were given. The C-Series are excellent aircraft and far superior to their Brazilian counterparts. It's an absolute travesty what Boeing did to Bombardier with their lobbyists. Our spinless government didn't retaliate at all when they could have levied as tax on all Boeing aircraft coming into the country. The whole thing really soured me on Boeing.

That's what happens when you take somebody else's management as your own😅 what's even worse is that since they have harvesting resent for being taken over what do you think they're going to do😊

Wooow!!!! Amazing video sir

Thanks Shirley .. interesting stuff 😉👍

You missed the Russian MS-21 which is designed ground up and has now been fully indigenised !

@innelator6941

Ай бұрын

Не важно что говорят завистники, но самолёт хороший. Но есть нюанс-его не сертефицируют в Европе ибо они не хотят ломать это дуополию

They're called Mitsubishi HEAVY INDUSTRIES after all

Thanks, Petter 👍

Loved the Don't all me Shirey clip🤣🤣

One factor that encourages monopoly and duopoly is the regulatory process. At present any change no matter how minor requires extensive analysis and testing. If the regulations were tuned to a more modular approach, where more components could be replaced in the field with equivalent approved components without further regulatory approval. Modular design FTW. Also. As a McDonald Douglas executive once told me, the paperwork for each individual DC-10 weighed as much as the airplane, and all of that documentation of its construction and service life had to be kept essentially into perpetuity. While this no doubt has been replaced for newer planes by electronic data stores, it is still expensive.

At this point, the only current manufacturer that can realistically break the duopoly is Embraer. There's simply no one else, not COMAC for a while, if ever and certainly not any Russian manufacturers. If Lockheed comes back, then they could give Boeing a run for their money.

@Gustav_Kuriga

Ай бұрын

Have you ever looked at how large the Chinese market is before making that judgement?