Re: "Boeing" DC-9?? (was Re: Douglas DC-5)

Date:         29 Nov 97 03:24:25 
From:         jf mezei <"[non-spam]jfmezei">
Organization: VTL
References:   1 2 3 4 5
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

Steve Lacker wrote:
> What is the official deal with that anyway? I've heard some airlines
> have started referring to MD-80/90's as "Boeing" airplanes. Does this
> mean that we should call it a "Boeing" DC-5? "Boeing" DC-7c? I think
> not! Chrysler bought AMC, but if you call someone's 1969 AMX a "Dodge"
> you'd better prepare for an argument... (both from Dodge *and* AMX
> drivers, actually... :-)

The Dash-8 by DeHavilland changed hands a few times in recent times.
The government owned it for a while, then it became the Boeing Dash-8.
(Qantas still has posters etc showing a BOEING Dash-8.).

But now Bombardier owns deHavilland and you'll often see the Bombardier
logo on existing Dash-8s. I suspect that part of the maintenance
involves putting up the bombardier logo :-)

In the case of McD, I think that the anti-trust rules do prevent Boeing
from really merging operations. Bombardier was able to join the various
manufacturers (Canadair, Shorts, Learjet, deHavilland) in juch a way
that they each have their own identities but they also share a lot of
infrastructure.  (For instance, flight testing is done at Learjet's
facilities in Kansas if I remember correctly).  An interesting twist is
that the Global Express business jet is an actual BOMBARDIER product
instead of bearing the name of the division which built it.

I suspect that in the longer term, it will be a Boeing DC-9 (or
MD80-88-95) I suspect that in the longer term, it will be Boeing who
will sign the maintenance and sale contracts with customers etc. Thsi
will happen the day you get a customer who places an order for an MD-xxx
product at the same time as a Bxxx product.