9,000 Views

It’s always exciting when the Pageviews Total has three zeros at the end of it, especially, I should point out, that my own page views are not computed.

This time, reflects a busy month.

Browsers:  Chrome 23%.  Firefox 18%.  Safari 7%.

Operating Systems:  Mac 53%.  Windows 22%.  Linux 16%.

Viewers:  1st Canada.  2nd U.S.  3rd Russia.  With interestingly lone viewers in Poland and China.

Titles:  Religion 8 - Religion or Cult.

         Immigration 4 - Assimilation.

         Aerospace 11 - Great News.

Of Note;  Percentage Formula has, finally, lost its popularity.

8,000 Pageviews

We're at 8,000 page views, with a few changes to show.

Firefox leads the browsers, followed by Google Chrome, and then Microsoft Explorer.

Operating systems were lead by Linux, followed by Macintosh, and then other Linux systems.

Canadian, US, and UK viewers were most common, with an interesting number from Australia and France.  Not to mention a couple of agents from Poland and Ukraine.

Titles that gained the most 'hits' since my last report were:

• World Domination - An Essay (June, 2015)
• Aerospace 10 - Bombardier CS300 (February, 2015)
• Bottles Of Water (June, 2015)
• Religion 2 - Are You Religious? (August, 2011)

Comments were concentrated at:  

• Politics 2 - Multiculturalism (August, 2011)
• Politics 8 - Percentage Formula (August, 2013)
• Education 10 - A Ticking Time Bomb (November 2014)
• Politics 10 - Vladimir Putin, A Question (January, 2015)
• 
  

I have a feeling that 'Percentage Formula' has an irresistible title ... and may be relegated to the penalty box next time.

Aerospace 10 - Bombardier CS300

The latest Bombardier CSeries aircraft, the larger CS300 variant made a successful flight from the Mirabel airfield in Quebec today.

http://cseries.com/#/category/videos

The flight lasted five hours and reached an altitude of 41,000 feet at a speed of 255 knots (470 km/h). “It was an absolute privilege to fly the first flight of the CS300 airliner and I’m absolutely ecstatic with how well it handled. It’s a pilot’s aircraft and handled exactly as predicted by simulation,” said Capt. Litavniks. “Pilots will find it easy to transition from the CS100 to the CS300 aircraft or vice versa, which will greatly reduce training costs for operators using both models”.

Bombardier is creating the future with its CSeries aircraft — the only 100% new family of airliners specifically designed for the 100- to 149-seat, single-aisle market.  Benefitting from a clean-sheet design that includes leading-edge technology and systems integration, advanced materials and latest generation aerodynamics, the CSeries aircraft offer a 15% cash operating cost advantage, a 20% fuel burn advantage, exceptional operational flexibility, widebody comfort and an unmatched environmental and noise footprint.

Bombardier has booked orders and commitments for 563 CSeries aircraft, which includes firm orders for 243.

The following link to a FlightGlobal magazine article is well-worth reading:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/analysis-is-air-show-debut-a-make-or-break-moment-for-412630/

Aerospace 8 - Flight Tracking

I read the following in an aerospace journal this morning:

"An International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) working group is recommending that new aircraft delivered after 2020 come equipped with a tracking data broadcast system that sends regular position updates to airline operators, a flight data recorder that automatically deploys (and floats) after a crash and a tamperproof distress reporting unit that will transmit aircraft position and identification to a global network of rescue coordination centers (sic) when unusual attitudes, speeds or accelerations or other triggered events occur." 

 Considering that this equipment is already available, do you believe that there is industry pressure against mandatory installation?

Aerospace 7 - Lockheed F-35 Fighter

I have decided to add my voice to the ever-increasing volume of public noise surrounding Canada’s continuing consideration to replace its excellent CF-18 fighter jets with the Lockheed F-35 aircraft. 

Although, obviously, a political decision, I have placed this post under an ‘Aerospace’ title because it is, or should be, of interest to all purchasers of the aircraft.

Rather than write an extended prose on the subject, I have decided to use a simple itemized format, with some text from Flight Global magazine, hoping that it will even better highlight my points of view ... and enable your discussion to take place.  I had also discussed this subject before (13 October, 2011) which only increases my amazement of the lack of action.

1.  Suddenly, a new Canadian government report suggests that other fighter jets are just as capable as the Lockheed Martin F-35A at fulfilling the nation’s most likely mission needs, potentially opening the door to a competitive acquisition process to replace a fleet of 77 Boeing CF-18s.

2.  But, Canada still intends to buy 65 F-35s beginning in 2020.  Its third annual report on the cost of potentially replacing its fleet of CF-18s with the jet, assumes an average per-unit cost of $ 88.9 million over the period of acquisition.  That tallies up to a total $ 45.8 billion over the life cycle of the fleet, a $ 141 million increase over the estimate in the 2013 report, not to mention reports before that.

3.   I've just read a report elsewhere describing a USAF purchase, that the cost does NOT include the engines, which are part of a separate deal with Pratt & Whitney!

4.  An analysis assumes that Canada will lose eleven F-35As over the fleet’s expected 30-year service life due to normal attrition.  "The cost to replace these lost aircraft could be about $ 1 billion," the report says.

5.  At present, the Canadian government has only $ 76 million set aside for programme contingencies, far short of the $ 1 billion estimate for replacement aircraft.  The report says that the contingency budget is “low for a project of this scope and size”.

6.  That could force Canada to lower the number of F-35s it buys, the report suggests.  That could affect the overall programme cost.  Lockheed has promised to bring the per-aircraft cost for the conventional takeoff and landing variant of the jet below $ 100 million by 2019, but that will require a dramatic ramp-up in production after 2016 that relies heavily on non-US purchases.

7.  Officials have also said (for example) that the essential Electrical Optical Targeting System, which is used to track a target, continues to fail.  Just another example of a project plagued with problems.

8.  The F-35 first flew nine (9) years ago, after many years of flight development with the X-35 research aircraft!  Did I say development?

9.  Each aircraft costs $ 90 million ± $ 20 million, and we could upgrade our CF-18's (all of them) to last until 2025 for $ 100 million!  By which time we'll be flying drones.

10.  If you have a wish for more information, go to Wikipedia, use keywords, 'Lockheed F-35'.  Don't read the article (You just don't have time) scroll down to References, there are nearly 600 references.  A historic number for Wikipedia, I believe.

Words, such as;  immoral, discreditable, and outrageous behaviour, come to mind, you could probably add a few more ... couldn’t you?

Aerospace 3 - Fighter Confrontation

I always find the aerospace industry interesting, and military aerospace more so.  By definition, everything related to the military is political and I am, very much, a political individual.

Therefore, I should like to comment on two ongoing global stories relating to fighter aircraft.

Firstly, the Lockheed Martin F-16 (Flying Falcon) fighter aircraft that is flown by pilots of 26 different countries and, although first flown in 1978, remains a formidable aircraft today ... albeit with some modifications.

One country that has enjoyed being equipped with this aircraft is Taiwan, assisted by the U.S. by virtue of the Taiwan Relations act.  But the earlier purchase F-16 A/B aircraft are in urgent need of refurbishment or a new purchase upgrade to the latest F-16 C/D version.  Of course, that appears to be a problem for the Obama administration who, it seems, do not wish to enrage the Chinese Communist Party in Beijing who will, again, display their sabre rattling posture.  Nevertheless, the U.S. has, now, agreed to a refurbishment contract for the older aircraft, which is interesting because it seems that refurbishment will take longer to facilitate compared to buying the new F-16 C/D version.  Perhaps, that is expected, but unlikely, to appease Beijing.

Thus, there we have it, politics.  Although I am sure that the U.S. is also wary about espionage, considering the improving relationship between Taiwan and the mainland, and Russia's recent display of anger at China’s recent copying of Russian aircraft.

Personally, I would approve the immediate sale of the F-16 C/D to Taiwan (the order was placed 6 years ago) ... and let the arms of the CCP tire as they rattle their sabres.

Secondly, the Lockheed Martin F-35 (Lightning) stealth fighter is also coveted by Taiwan, but it seems an unlikely purchase at the present time.  Personally, I would be happy if Canada transferred its order of F-35s to Taiwan ... and I do not mean to appear flippant.

The F-35 remains in an extraordinarily problematical pre-production/testing phase, even though some examples have been delivered to the USAF as training aircraft.  The delivery dates to various countries have been extraordinarily delayed and costs have risen to a unit cost of $133 million.

Early models missed performance requirements because they weighed too much, and extensive redesign was required to reduce the weight;  Recently, it was reported that only 50% of the aircraft’s software had been written and would take another six years and 110 additional software engineers to complete the software;  There has been a long list of design failures;  Many pilots have commented on the comparatively short range, and studies have shown that it could cost as much as 40% more to maintain than previous aircraft.

Australia has reduced some of its original options to purchase and, instead, has ordered the new Boeing F-18F (Super Hornet) aircraft to supplement its existing F-18A squadrons, and replace the GE F-111.

Canada, which is increasing its presence in the Arctic territories, continues to argue, unintelligently, that the single engine, shorter range, F-35 is the ideal aircraft to replace the twin engine CF-18 A/B, even though an engine failure over Arctic territories is not conducive to enthusiastic pilots.

Once again ... politics.

I have been deliberately brief with these comments (really) in the hope that it may encourage continuing participation in the discussion — F-16 C/Ds for Taiwan and a cancellation of F-35s for Canada.

Aerospace 1 - Bombardier CSeries

My profile indicates that aerospace is a favorite subject of mine and, therefore, during this week of the Paris Air Show, it seems quite natural to write on this subject.

As we struggle to emerge from the recent recession, the aircraft industry is very cautious about predictions that attempt to balance future airline quantity requirements with related research into improving usage costs. Analysts predict that airlines will need $4 trillion worth of new aircraft during the next 20 years and, although there is an emphasis on eco-friendly aircraft, airlines focus on the financial bottom line. Thus, the two giants of the aircraft industry, Airbus and Boeing, should be concerned about the quiet ascendance of Bombardier into third place.

I have always been impressed by Bombardier’s innovation since visiting their early manufacturing facility at Cartierville in Montreal in the 1980’s (Originally, a small airfield used by Canadair). Their use of giant milling machines to produce fuselage side panels for the Challenger which did not require the conventional ribs and framing and, thus, reducing weight, together with laminar-flow wing surfaces for improved aerodynamics, was something that, being a sailplane pilot, impressed me quite a lot.

Thirty years of quiet innovation has brought Bombardier into serious competition with Airbus and Boeing, and the new CSeries aircraft is, in my opinion, bound to be a success. Not only is its composite airframe more advanced in design, but the new geared turbofan engine designed by Pratt & Whitney is causing the competition to swiftly play ‘catch up’. Airbus developing the new-engined A320neo compromise, and Boeing considering a whole new B-737 replacement (The new engine seems too large for the existing wing-to-ground clearance). Thus, it will be difficult for both companies to deliver ahead of the CSeries.

Finally, it is delightful to read that, on the first day, Bombardier has disclosed firm orders for ten of the CSeries at the Paris Air Show, with options for a further six. It is also noteworthy that Qatar Airlines CEO Akbar Al Baker, said, when asked whether he was considering another jet of similar size “The CSeries is a class above others in that category”.

It will be inspiring to dream of the industry’s ‘Big Three’.