Your point, correct me if I'm wrong was: FAA regulations are about regulating safety to the max, but not taking into account business realities and not evolving, new ones are added but old are not reviewed. Therefore only established super-well capitalized companies can play.
What killed C-Series was Boeings shenanigans about 300% import duty. Abusing US laws for sure, but nothing to do with FAA killing it.
The plane was ready, so they had already done it. So whatever you say about not being impossible is directly contradicted.
Would Bombardier have made it with a more cooperative FAA? Maybe. Same question could also be asked about whether a different airline industry in the US would have helped. We don't know and never will.
In general tho, I am not arguing against the overarching point of your original comment, regulations tend to come in and it rarely happens that they are being refactored or cleaned up.
A lot of paper is being pushed around and rigidly enforced without looking at the big picture. The friction of complexity I guess.
But the specific claim, even though it sounds about right is not strictly correct.
What killed C-Series was Boeings shenanigans about 300% import duty. Abusing US laws for sure, but nothing to do with FAA killing it.
The plane was ready, so they had already done it. So whatever you say about not being impossible is directly contradicted.
Would Bombardier have made it with a more cooperative FAA? Maybe. Same question could also be asked about whether a different airline industry in the US would have helped. We don't know and never will.
In general tho, I am not arguing against the overarching point of your original comment, regulations tend to come in and it rarely happens that they are being refactored or cleaned up.
A lot of paper is being pushed around and rigidly enforced without looking at the big picture. The friction of complexity I guess.
But the specific claim, even though it sounds about right is not strictly correct.