Jan 16, 2020, 9:30 pm
Airbus A220 (ex CSeries) Master Thread
Feb 19, 2016, 2:49 pm
#152
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Spatially speaking or metaphysically speaking?
Programs: Aeropain: Zirconia Status; Altitude: Marianas Trench Status; UA MP: 1 Kick to the curb status
Posts: 623
My only memory of flying that type of plane with AC was getting stuck in the middle seat on the '3' side after IIROPS with a CO EWR-YYZ flight.
Feb 19, 2016, 4:06 pm
#154
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,002
ATW magazine editor things this is a good deal for all airlines.
http://atwonline.com/blog/why-air-ca...s-all-airlines
http://atwonline.com/blog/why-air-ca...s-all-airlines
Feb 19, 2016, 4:36 pm
#155
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 812
The government did not blackmail Air Canada but I bet that Air Canada whispered to the government what they could do if the government helped out on the ACPPA.
Do note that the 'buying' of aircraft by Air Canada is just a Letter of Inntent so if the government does not act quickly the Letter can be cancelled even quicker.
Do note that the 'buying' of aircraft by Air Canada is just a Letter of Inntent so if the government does not act quickly the Letter can be cancelled even quicker.
Feb 20, 2016, 5:50 am
#156
Suspended
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 557
That's a pretty serious allegation. What's "fundamentally flawed" about the C-Series?
Sure, it showed up in the market at the wrong time. But so did the 747. The L-1011. And even the 737's sales weren't very hot for its first decade of being an offering.
As for YTZ, don't know why people are beating a dead horse. The airfield isn't, and never will be suitable for jets. YYZ is just a short train or TTC ride away. YTZ is inconvenient for most in the GTA with the exception of the downtown crowd. And having multiple airports fragmenting the YYZ hub damages the connectivity that connecting passengers expect.
Sure, it showed up in the market at the wrong time. But so did the 747. The L-1011. And even the 737's sales weren't very hot for its first decade of being an offering.
As for YTZ, don't know why people are beating a dead horse. The airfield isn't, and never will be suitable for jets. YYZ is just a short train or TTC ride away. YTZ is inconvenient for most in the GTA with the exception of the downtown crowd. And having multiple airports fragmenting the YYZ hub damages the connectivity that connecting passengers expect.
Calling it "fundamentally flawed" is absurd to say the least.
Last edited by tcook052; Feb 20, 2016 at 7:07 am Reason: merge separate posts
Feb 20, 2016, 7:52 am
#157
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ottawa
Programs: AC SE*MM/S100K; HHonors Diamond; a bunch of others at various levels!
Posts: 1,580
The facility at Mirabel is a Pratt&Whitney Canada (PWC) facility. Both PWC and Pratt&Whitney (P&W) are subsidiaries of United Technologies Corporation. The PW1500G is made (partially) by PWC at Mirabel. It is certainly not the complete manufacture of the engine, as is done for PWC engines at its facilities in Mississauga and Longeuil. PWC Mirabel is an assembly plant, similar to automotive manufacture (the parts are made elsewhere and assembled at the final stage in an assembly plant). Interestingly, while the engine is listed as a P&W engine (not PWC), it was certified (in Feb 2013) by Transport Canada, not the FAA (see Wikipedia).
The PW1500G was certified by TCCA because the first (non experimental) in service use of that motor will be on a Canadian airframe and not a US airframe.
Had the PW1500G entered service on a US airframe, then the initial certification would have been done by the FAA and TCCA would most likely have had a LOI (level of involvement) of "accept" in the certification process.
Had the PW1500G entered service on a US airframe, then the initial certification would have been done by the FAA and TCCA would most likely have had a LOI (level of involvement) of "accept" in the certification process.
I mentioned the certification in Canada to emphasize the Canadian aspects of these engines, as others were suggesting minimal Canadian content.
Feb 20, 2016, 12:33 pm
#158
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: YUL
Programs: AC SE (*A Gold), Bonvoy Platinum Elite, Hilton Gold, Amex Platinum / AP Reserve, NEXUS, Global Entry
Posts: 5,691
What Canadian content is being minimized or marginalized? The only reason this is even part of the discussion is because I stressed the distinction between "made in Quebec" and "assembled in Mirabel" as an influence of AC's decision. I have no doubt that skilled workers put the engine together and I'd much rather have those assembly workers employed in Quebec than elsewhere, of course. But the "Canadian content" is limited to putting the engine together and precious little else.
Feb 22, 2016, 7:15 am
#159
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Calgary
Programs: Altitude E50K, WS Gold (status match)
Posts: 1,211
Not sure if someone mentioned this already, but maybe AC could make the left (right depending on which way you are looking) side of the cabin with the 2 as opposed to the 3 config all preferred seating in Y :P
Feb 22, 2016, 10:13 am
#160
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: YYC
Programs: AC E35, Marriott, National
Posts: 71
Feb 22, 2016, 10:16 am
#161
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: YTZ
Programs: Hertz & Avis PC; National EE; SPG & Hilton Gold; AC 35K (yawn)
Posts: 5,921
DC-9 and F.28 / F.70 / F.100 are 2+3 in Y. As are the BAe 146 and Avro 75-100 series jets, unless they are not.
Feb 22, 2016, 10:53 am
#162
Join Date: Jun 2009
Programs: Air Canada Aeroplan
Posts: 1,748
Feb 22, 2016, 12:24 pm
#163
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,665
The DC-9 was the old reliable with noise in the back end and seats with no windows there as well. When they ran out of food, at the back row, they offered free alcohol as compensation. If you are recalling JetsGo (RIP), they were all MD-80s, which are renamed DC-9-80s. These have 3-2 seating and are still used by American in their original state, presumably because they've exhausted every other way to make their flights uncomfortable for passengers and crew.
Feb 22, 2016, 8:48 pm
#165
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,804
Regionals had BAe146, I believe with Garrett engines with a radial compressor, not the later models renamed Avro. I believe 2-3 in the back, although some airlines had them set up as 3-3.
I don't believe AC ever operated Fokker jets; but CP did, or their regional.