WEST PALM BEACH -- Two weeks ago when Bomabardier Commercial Aircraft President Gary Scott emphatically denied his company was pursuing a stretched CS500, pushing the CSeries into direct competition with the 737-800 and A320, many in the industry wondered why the Canadian airframer would rule out such a possibility. Within the context of the newly-signed Comac partnership, Scott's comments are now fully explained.
With no intention to compete or overlap products with Comac, Bombardier is cultivating a partner with seemingly limitless access to capital (and patience) to establish itself in both domestic and export markets.
"We're not privy to the conversations between Comac and Bombardier, but clearly there could be opportunity for collaboration on all the platforms," says Hess.
Hess says Comac is studying applications of the PW1000G on the C919, ARJ21 as well as potential new designs.
"They're very excited about a geared turbofan," says Hess. "They know where we are in development, they've seen the engine. In fact, we've had Comac people down here at test stands. So they're pretty excited about it. Certainly their initial selection was Leap-X, they'll start a flight test program with Leap-X, but they seem to be very interested in flying the next generation product family, either on derivatives of the C919, the ARJ21 - they are studying possible applications for ARJ21 - and for and certainly clean sheet paper airplanes."
In the near term, Bombardier and Comac are set to begin commonality studies to find overlap between the 110 to 149-seat CSeries and 156-seat C919, opportunities exists where the same suppliers cover both aircraft, including, but not limited to, the aircraft's Rockwell CollinsPro Line Fusion avionics navigation and communication systems, Liebherr landing gear and Honeywell auxiliary power unit.
While the P&W may have a chance to add itself to that list of common suppliers, the opportunities created by the tie up is just one of the many questions that will begin to define the emergent strategic partnership and its potential to re-shape the global aerospace landscape.
With no intention to compete or overlap products with Comac, Bombardier is cultivating a partner with seemingly limitless access to capital (and patience) to establish itself in both domestic and export markets.
If the duopoly wasn't dead before, the last nail in its coffin was hammered in on March 24.
The Sino-Canadian agreement opens the door beyond just Bombardier and Comac, with Pratt & Whitney CEO David Hess seeing opportunity to accelerate his company's "on-going discussion" with the Chinese airframer to offer its PW1000G on the C919, placing it in direct competition with the A320neo, on which the engine is also an option.
"We're not privy to the conversations between Comac and Bombardier, but clearly there could be opportunity for collaboration on all the platforms," says Hess.
Hess says Comac is studying applications of the PW1000G on the C919, ARJ21 as well as potential new designs.
"They're very excited about a geared turbofan," says Hess. "They know where we are in development, they've seen the engine. In fact, we've had Comac people down here at test stands. So they're pretty excited about it. Certainly their initial selection was Leap-X, they'll start a flight test program with Leap-X, but they seem to be very interested in flying the next generation product family, either on derivatives of the C919, the ARJ21 - they are studying possible applications for ARJ21 - and for and certainly clean sheet paper airplanes."
In the near term, Bombardier and Comac are set to begin commonality studies to find overlap between the 110 to 149-seat CSeries and 156-seat C919, opportunities exists where the same suppliers cover both aircraft, including, but not limited to, the aircraft's Rockwell Collins
While the P&W may have a chance to add itself to that list of common suppliers, the opportunities created by the tie up is just one of the many questions that will begin to define the emergent strategic partnership and its potential to re-shape the global aerospace landscape.
Benjamin Boehm, Bombardier's vice president for international business, was instrumental in bringing this partnership to the fore. Having quietly left his post as vice president of commercial aircraft programs in November, the new role has his guiding the strategic machinations on an partnership that could crack the duopoly in a way Bombardier never could on its own.
The language of the press release points to significantly more than an "arms-length" partnership between the two companies, but the fundamental question for both partners in this deal is whether or not the actions reflect a long-term or short-term link up.
In the context of Piepenbrock's Red-Blue, is the partnership meant for the betterment and improvement of both OEMs with a stake in either's success? Or is this tie up a way to extract expertise and market access in the near term? The push toward commonality and part procurement would suggest that incremental technological and supply chain integration of the C919 and CSeries brings the two closer together in a way that the industry has never before seen.
Yet the key element Bombardier brings to the table may be less tangible, but no less useful for Comac. Creating discreet aircraft systems is far from a simple process, but integrating all those systems together into a self-sufficient airframe is the 'secret sauce' to building aircraft and Bombardier has this in spades. Tactically, the partnership allows an OEM-level of systems integration expertise to flow into the C919, one element missing from Chinese commercial aerospace.
"I think it will certainly give Bombardier access to the Chinese market place, and maybe some Chinese capital, and vice versa it will give the Chinese access to Bomardier's great technical and development capabilities," says Hess.
What remains to be seen is how Boeing and Airbus react to the partnership and whether or not the extensive efforts of both will remain sufficiently recognized by those in the central government as aircraft purchasing decisions are made with the 13th five year plan just beginning to take shape now.
Airbus was previously seen as having the biggest manufacturing presence in China with its Tianjin A320 final assembly line, while Boeing used selected structural component suppliers for all of its commercial programs. Bombardier has stepped beyond both, likely delivering access to the world's single fastest growing market.
No doubt with yesterday's publication of the WTO ruling, Boeing and Airbus have to be eyeing the Sino-Canadian partnership with great interest. How funds - if any - flow between the companies and their two governments, may spark a new chapter in the battle on research and development subsidies.
As the incumbent duopolists, any threat to Boeing and Airbus's status is sure to be met with fierce resistance, but does the tie up actually begin to tie the hands of the US and Europe who want the same access to China as they do today? With a strong desire to continue to sell their respective products in China, does any swipe at CSeries become an indirect swipe at the Chinese? Does a tie-up start to look more like a growing political alliance as the Airbus and Boeing - as mature players - fight to hold their industrial status?
The duopoly is dead, long live the duopoly.
The language of the press release points to significantly more than an "arms-length" partnership between the two companies, but the fundamental question for both partners in this deal is whether or not the actions reflect a long-term or short-term link up.
In the context of Piepenbrock's Red-Blue, is the partnership meant for the betterment and improvement of both OEMs with a stake in either's success? Or is this tie up a way to extract expertise and market access in the near term? The push toward commonality and part procurement would suggest that incremental technological and supply chain integration of the C919 and CSeries brings the two closer together in a way that the industry has never before seen.
Yet the key element Bombardier brings to the table may be less tangible, but no less useful for Comac. Creating discreet aircraft systems is far from a simple process, but integrating all those systems together into a self-sufficient airframe is the 'secret sauce' to building aircraft and Bombardier has this in spades. Tactically, the partnership allows an OEM-level of systems integration expertise to flow into the C919, one element missing from Chinese commercial aerospace.
"I think it will certainly give Bombardier access to the Chinese market place, and maybe some Chinese capital, and vice versa it will give the Chinese access to Bomardier's great technical and development capabilities," says Hess.
What remains to be seen is how Boeing and Airbus react to the partnership and whether or not the extensive efforts of both will remain sufficiently recognized by those in the central government as aircraft purchasing decisions are made with the 13th five year plan just beginning to take shape now.
Airbus was previously seen as having the biggest manufacturing presence in China with its Tianjin A320 final assembly line, while Boeing used selected structural component suppliers for all of its commercial programs. Bombardier has stepped beyond both, likely delivering access to the world's single fastest growing market.
No doubt with yesterday's publication of the WTO ruling, Boeing and Airbus have to be eyeing the Sino-Canadian partnership with great interest. How funds - if any - flow between the companies and their two governments, may spark a new chapter in the battle on research and development subsidies.
As the incumbent duopolists, any threat to Boeing and Airbus's status is sure to be met with fierce resistance, but does the tie up actually begin to tie the hands of the US and Europe who want the same access to China as they do today? With a strong desire to continue to sell their respective products in China, does any swipe at CSeries become an indirect swipe at the Chinese? Does a tie-up start to look more like a growing political alliance as the Airbus and Boeing - as mature players - fight to hold their industrial status?
The duopoly is dead, long live the duopoly.
Recent Comments