Good for you Mike Wyss. They may be less fuel efficient, but my wife and I like the 767 because of its 232. Much better than the mile long 757 whic is basically the same aircraft. Air Canada shuttles 767 from Momtreal, Toronto, to Fort Lauderdale and it works.

(Written on 2019/04/12)(Permalink)

99.999% of Canadian over taxed taxpayers who fund this company will never fly on it. Also well more than half of Bombadier's production of aircraft is offshore. Their LRT product purchased by Toronto is over two years behind schedule and now they all have defects thus have to be returned for repairs. This company is a net loss to Canada.

(Written on 2018/08/03)(Permalink)

The 767 is our favourite aircraft. We like twin aisles and the 2-3-2 seating especially the 2 on the sides for a couple; no stranger to climb over or to climb over you. The 330 and 340,s also have two on the side but the 767 is much more common for us here in Ontario.

(Written on 2018/08/03)(Permalink)

I have made similar comments to Jim Lynch in the past about Bombadier and he has it right. The family has prferred shares which enable them to out vote major shareholders. When people try to defend the amount of taxpayer funding (but we have no shares) by referring to Airbus or any other aircraft maker they don't realize that Canada has a population of only 35 million. The C series now the AB220 should never have been developed. I am glad that I have an ally in Jim Lynch.

(Written on 2018/07/28)(Permalink)

This company has relied on the Canadian taxpayer since it was founded. Government funding for anything is simply taxpayer dollars. Governments have no money. However this is a Quebec company and that province gets way more per capita than any other province: reason, they do strategic voting to make sure they control our Federal government. The rest of us aren't smart enough to do this. I am an 80 year old Ontario resident.

(Written on 2018/07/06)(Permalink)

The Canadair (Bombadier) CL-415 is by far the world's best waterbomber. It doesn't need to land to refill and adds retardent dependent on the fire type. The EU has several which thay move around where neede but the two countries with the worst brush and forest fires; USA and Australia don't have any. (at least I don't think they have. As sor the US I guess because it is Canadian they won't buy it. The US wants every one in the world to buy their commercial and military aircraft; and everything else as well but seem to be on a perennial "buy America" kick. Free trade folks; if you don't make the best product for the job; buy it from those who do.

(Written on 2017/12/17)(Permalink)

Dave: Do you work for ACA? None of your sites deal with what has happened to this crew. My wife and I taught at #1 fighter wing in Marville France from 65 to 67. We were members of the officer's mess and most of our friends from those years are now retired airline pilots; most with Air Canada. These guys were up front about everything thatb goes on in the industry; no BS. These guys as the editorial says flew out the next day and I guess are still flying. This crew screwed up plain and simple. I hope you are not related to Dale Fisher who flew Bristol Freighters out of our base in those years.

(Written on 2017/08/18)(Permalink)

My wife and I flew on A Qantas Avro from Perth OZ to Darwin with a turnaround in Alice Springs. With the high wing the view was wonderful. The aircrt is quiet anf lifts off with quickly. I once overheard a pilot when he saw one say that it looks like a miniature Starlifter. A nice trip for us.

(Written on 2017/08/18)(Permalink)

I am Canadian and I posted a comment on this 'near miss' and I said that Air Canada would blame everyone but the flight crew for this; ATC lights etc. There has been nothing in any media here about this. These guys as I mentioned should have been fired, or a least demoted and retrained. A friend of mine a now retired ACA 340 captain commented to be following the Air France over shoot at Toronto several years ago was a 'no brainer' pilot error after AF tried to blame ATC for the almost disaster. All airlines seem to choose to deny pilot error to protect themselves from law suits. In the Air France incident they landed on third down the runway took 6 seconds to activate the reversers and then wondered why the run out of runway especially when it was wet.

(Written on 2017/08/18)(Permalink)

I am a Canadian and fly Air Canada fairly often. I hope this crew will not fly when I am aboard on future flights. They probably won't be fired but should at least be demoted and retrained. I have a feeling that ACA will try to blame ATC or the airport lighting or any other excuse but the fact that the crew screwed up. So far I have seen nothing from ACA in our papers or in other news.

(Written on 2017/07/21)(Permalink)