Canada to Spend $5.0Bil on AEW Aircraft

[GK .Dundas]

I do not understand why people think this helps Saab specifically.

1) The Globaleye can't use roof mounted boom receiver.

2) The Globaleye would have to recertify the entire aircraft (and all emitters) to the new baseline type with AAR.

The biggest help is to the L3 Phoenix which also uses the Global 6500. And doesn't have any obstacles on the roof for a receptacle.

Not worry , it's only taxpayer's money.
I'm beginning to see why Bombardier and Saab seem to be such close fit .

 

[ytz]

Not worry , it's only taxpayer's money.
I'm beginning to see why Bombardier and Saab seem to be such close fit .

Do you think LockMart and Boeing do things out of patriotism in the US?

Welcome to having a defence industrial base.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Do you think LockMart and Boeing do things out of patriotism in the US?

Welcome to having a defence industrial base.

The diff Lockhart and Bombardier in the stick market is the Bombardier has 2 classes of shares - one for the family and one for the general public. Which do you think consistently lost money?

 

[Nvlgzr]

I do not understand why people think this helps Saab specifically.

1) The Globaleye can't use roof mounted boom receiver.

2) The Globaleye would have to recertify the entire aircraft (and all emitters) to the new baseline type with AAR.

The biggest help is to the L3 Phoenix which also uses the Global 6500. And doesn't have any obstacles on the roof for a receptacle.

It helps both SAAB & L3 , but SAAB has been bending over backwards to get Canadas attention. L3 Phoenix system will be a harder sell to Canada or Europe since it’s Israeli and American. Not sure why you believe that the roof (upper fuselage) is the only place for a “receptacle’ unless you’re only considering the USAF boom system. FYI India installed a probe on the ‘roof’ of their Embraer J145 which is fitted with a radar that is a dead ringer for the SAAB Erieye. It might be possible to extend a ‘probe’ along the mid/lower fuselage as has been done to a number of helicopters although this setup may conflict with the L3 forward radar. I’ll let the engineers figure it out since the Canadian taxpayer will be funding this effort.

 

[ytz]

The diff Lockhart and Bombardier in the stick market is the Bombardier has 2 classes of shares - one for the family and one for the general public. Which do you think consistently lost money?

You're acting like the public can't buy Bombardier's preferred shares. I've had them in my portfolio at different times. No different than the banks having preferred shares.

Not sure why you believe that the roof (upper fuselage) is the only place for a “receptacle’ unless you’re only considering the USAF boom system.

There's not too many aircraft that have a boom receptacle installed elsewhere.

FYI India installed a probe on the ‘roof’ of their Embraer J145 which is fitted with a radar that is a dead ringer for the SAAB Erieye. It might be possible to extend a ‘probe’ along the mid/lower fuselage as has been done to a number of helicopters although this setup may conflict with the L3 forward radar. I’ll let the engineers figure it out since the Canadian taxpayer will be funding this effort.

They are installing the system that will help Bombardier sell the most planes. Not the system that will help Saab sell the Globaleye. Given that the vast majority of Global 6500 militarized sales are ISR platforms that don't have obstacles to having a receptacle on the roof, and given that booms have higher fuel transfer rates and better safety records that's going to be preferred. Also helps that everything in the RCAF inventory that can refuel will use booms after 2032 (C-17, C-130J, F-35).

 

[Czech_pivo]

You're acting like the public can't buy Bombardier's preferred shares. I've had them in my portfolio at different times. No different than the banks having preferred shares.



There's not too many aircraft that have a boom receptacle installed elsewhere.



They are installing the system that will help Bombardier sell the most planes. Not the system that will help Saab sell the Globaleye. Given that the vast majority of Global 6500 militarized sales are ISR platforms that don't have obstacles to having a receptacle on the roof, and given that booms have higher fuel transfer rates and better safety records that's going to be preferred. Also helps that everything in the RCAF inventory that can refuel will use booms after 2032 (C-17, C-130J,

In the case of Bomber B shares, that structure was created solely for the controlling of the voting rights of the company by the extended family that founded Bombardier in order to ensure that they always got their monthly/quarterly dividend cheque paid to them.
That money could have been better utilized in growing the company, innovation and debt reduction. But no, the Class A shares were the cash cow for the family to milk and live off of.
That share structure was a major reason why that company was run into the ground 7-8yrs ago and a shell of its former self.
A single share class structure, with no preferred treatment to the founding family and their need for the dividend payments and Bombardier could have been in a completely different situation today.

 

[Nvlgzr]

Given that the vast majority of Global 6500 militarized sales are ISR platforms that don't have obstacles to having a receptacle on the roof, and given that booms have higher fuel transfer rates and better safety records that's going to be preferred. Also helps that everything in the RCAF inventory that can refuel will use booms after 2032 (C-17, C-130J, F-35).

The advantage of our new tankers is that they can transfer fuel using both methods and thus support a broader selection of aircraft making them useful for both NORAD and NATO. And the A330 booms work unlike the KC46.

 

[ytz]

In the case of Bomber B shares, that structure was created solely for the controlling of the voting rights of the company by the extended family that founded Bombardier in order to ensure that they always got their monthly/quarterly dividend cheque paid to them.
That money could have been better utilized in growing the company, innovation and debt reduction. But no, the Class A shares were the cash cow for the family to milk and live off of.
That share structure was a major reason why that company was run into the ground 7-8yrs ago and a shell of its former self.
A single share class structure, with no preferred treatment to the founding family and their need for the dividend payments and Bombardier could have been in a completely different situation today.

Again. You're acting like this is somehow unique to Canada. Boeing has preferred stock too.

What is unique to Canada? The utter crab's in a bucket mentality where folks like you think any moderately large Canadian company needs to be destroyed. Canada doesn't defend Bombarider nearly as much as the US Government defends Boeing or France and Germany defend Airbus. How we're supposed to have an industrial base with manufacturing jobs by doing that is beyond me.

And beyond that, I honestly don't see why the public will support higher defence spending if basically all of it is just a giant money funnel to the US, because of politics like we're discussing here.

 

[ytz]

The advantage of our new tankers is that they can transfer fuel using both methods and thus support a broader selection of aircraft making them useful for both NORAD and NATO. And the A330 booms work unlike the KC46.

Well aware. Not sure what any of that has to do with what the optimal AAR method is for the Global 6500. The largest military customer for the Global 6500 is still the US (USAF and US Army specifically). As such, their preferred fueling method is going to be driving the conversation for modifying the Global.