Luis Indepels
@luis-indepels.bsky.social
Geo-politics, Renewable Energy in SE Asia, Anti-fascist, Researcher, Facts, Science, Evolutionary Biology, Atheist, Supporter of FC Juinen
English
Español
Nederlands
English
Español
Nederlands
"Mass data collection" is already done by these platforms for massive (and often misleading) commercial- and political purposes.
Despite existing regulations in many of the countries they operate in.
I am all for putting some limits on these platforms' actions.
Despite existing regulations in many of the countries they operate in.
I am all for putting some limits on these platforms' actions.
February 6, 2026 at 5:51 AM
"Mass data collection" is already done by these platforms for massive (and often misleading) commercial- and political purposes.
Despite existing regulations in many of the countries they operate in.
I am all for putting some limits on these platforms' actions.
Despite existing regulations in many of the countries they operate in.
I am all for putting some limits on these platforms' actions.
And their NHS is still underfunded.
February 3, 2026 at 10:11 AM
And their NHS is still underfunded.
Powerful argument!
February 1, 2026 at 9:06 AM
Powerful argument!
Trump has even managed to piss off dozens of extreme rightwing EU groups with his comments, the very same groups which his administration has been cosying up to recently.
February 1, 2026 at 1:51 AM
Trump has even managed to piss off dozens of extreme rightwing EU groups with his comments, the very same groups which his administration has been cosying up to recently.
But is it enough?
Europe is still too divided when it comes to taking decisive (military/economical) action. What is needed is a (new?) EU agreement where an attack on one automatically equals to an attack on all, to avoid our infamous foot-dragging on urgent issues.
Europe is still too divided when it comes to taking decisive (military/economical) action. What is needed is a (new?) EU agreement where an attack on one automatically equals to an attack on all, to avoid our infamous foot-dragging on urgent issues.
February 1, 2026 at 1:46 AM
But is it enough?
Europe is still too divided when it comes to taking decisive (military/economical) action. What is needed is a (new?) EU agreement where an attack on one automatically equals to an attack on all, to avoid our infamous foot-dragging on urgent issues.
Europe is still too divided when it comes to taking decisive (military/economical) action. What is needed is a (new?) EU agreement where an attack on one automatically equals to an attack on all, to avoid our infamous foot-dragging on urgent issues.
They must be thinking "If the President does it while in the White House AND GET AWAY WITH IT, why shouldn't I?"
January 31, 2026 at 2:44 AM
They must be thinking "If the President does it while in the White House AND GET AWAY WITH IT, why shouldn't I?"
The US FAA provided a 3 year exemption to Gulfstream (until end of this year) to fix this.
Their Canadian counterpart, likely due to the peculiar climate conditions in Canada, has not granted such an exemption.
All in all, I reckon that the total number of planes affected is less than 30.
Their Canadian counterpart, likely due to the peculiar climate conditions in Canada, has not granted such an exemption.
All in all, I reckon that the total number of planes affected is less than 30.
January 30, 2026 at 2:36 PM
The US FAA provided a 3 year exemption to Gulfstream (until end of this year) to fix this.
Their Canadian counterpart, likely due to the peculiar climate conditions in Canada, has not granted such an exemption.
All in all, I reckon that the total number of planes affected is less than 30.
Their Canadian counterpart, likely due to the peculiar climate conditions in Canada, has not granted such an exemption.
All in all, I reckon that the total number of planes affected is less than 30.
It appears they re-designed the wings of the G500 and 600 model making the jet faster. The G700 and 800 use a similar wing but are much more recent.
This new wing affects the fuel de-icing system capabilities, and there are recorded incidents where the particular system (FSIPS) failed.
This new wing affects the fuel de-icing system capabilities, and there are recorded incidents where the particular system (FSIPS) failed.
January 30, 2026 at 2:36 PM
It appears they re-designed the wings of the G500 and 600 model making the jet faster. The G700 and 800 use a similar wing but are much more recent.
This new wing affects the fuel de-icing system capabilities, and there are recorded incidents where the particular system (FSIPS) failed.
This new wing affects the fuel de-icing system capabilities, and there are recorded incidents where the particular system (FSIPS) failed.
As you state, such a condition will rarely be met in the US market but Canada is different.
This is a safety issue, something which Trump has not grasped (and likely never will).
This is a safety issue, something which Trump has not grasped (and likely never will).
January 30, 2026 at 1:56 PM
As you state, such a condition will rarely be met in the US market but Canada is different.
This is a safety issue, something which Trump has not grasped (and likely never will).
This is a safety issue, something which Trump has not grasped (and likely never will).
I understand that the latest models in the 500-800 range have a redesigned wing which no longer incorporates leading edge slats allowing it to fly faster.
The down-side is that this affects the temperatures in the wing fuel tanks, particularly in cold climates.
The down-side is that this affects the temperatures in the wing fuel tanks, particularly in cold climates.
January 30, 2026 at 1:56 PM
I understand that the latest models in the 500-800 range have a redesigned wing which no longer incorporates leading edge slats allowing it to fly faster.
The down-side is that this affects the temperatures in the wing fuel tanks, particularly in cold climates.
The down-side is that this affects the temperatures in the wing fuel tanks, particularly in cold climates.
My understanding is that, as the 700 and 800 are more recent, they were upgraded during their construction.
Though it is possible that Canada does not accept/follow FAA's exemption with regard to the related (but different) cockpit display issue for these 2 models.
Though it is possible that Canada does not accept/follow FAA's exemption with regard to the related (but different) cockpit display issue for these 2 models.
January 30, 2026 at 12:40 PM
My understanding is that, as the 700 and 800 are more recent, they were upgraded during their construction.
Though it is possible that Canada does not accept/follow FAA's exemption with regard to the related (but different) cockpit display issue for these 2 models.
Though it is possible that Canada does not accept/follow FAA's exemption with regard to the related (but different) cockpit display issue for these 2 models.
There's about 20 such models affected in Canada, IMO.
January 30, 2026 at 12:29 PM
There's about 20 such models affected in Canada, IMO.
I think they have been certifified by the FAA (though they got an exemption for the FALP cockpit display fix until Jan 2027).
The issue is that Canada has not yet re-certified the 500 and 600 models which were fixed after there was an issue with the FSIPS fuel de-icing system.
The issue is that Canada has not yet re-certified the 500 and 600 models which were fixed after there was an issue with the FSIPS fuel de-icing system.
January 30, 2026 at 12:29 PM
I think they have been certifified by the FAA (though they got an exemption for the FALP cockpit display fix until Jan 2027).
The issue is that Canada has not yet re-certified the 500 and 600 models which were fixed after there was an issue with the FSIPS fuel de-icing system.
The issue is that Canada has not yet re-certified the 500 and 600 models which were fixed after there was an issue with the FSIPS fuel de-icing system.
Trump had to get back at Carney after Canada's trade deal with China, show him who's"boss".
This certification (actually, re-certification) affects less than 20 airframes, IMO.
Yet Trump uses it as an excuse, utterly misusing aircraft safety for political games, something never seen before.
This certification (actually, re-certification) affects less than 20 airframes, IMO.
Yet Trump uses it as an excuse, utterly misusing aircraft safety for political games, something never seen before.
January 30, 2026 at 12:21 PM
Trump had to get back at Carney after Canada's trade deal with China, show him who's"boss".
This certification (actually, re-certification) affects less than 20 airframes, IMO.
Yet Trump uses it as an excuse, utterly misusing aircraft safety for political games, something never seen before.
This certification (actually, re-certification) affects less than 20 airframes, IMO.
Yet Trump uses it as an excuse, utterly misusing aircraft safety for political games, something never seen before.
Gulfstream heeft FSIPS aangepast. Transport Canada test en heeft de toestellen nog niet opnieuw gecertificeerd.
Naar schatting zijn er minder dan 20 in Canada.
Naar schatting zijn er minder dan 20 in Canada.
January 30, 2026 at 12:15 PM
Gulfstream heeft FSIPS aangepast. Transport Canada test en heeft de toestellen nog niet opnieuw gecertificeerd.
Naar schatting zijn er minder dan 20 in Canada.
Naar schatting zijn er minder dan 20 in Canada.
Volgens mijn info gaat het vooral om de G500 en G600. Het betreft twee aparte (maar gerelateerde) systemen: het Fuel System Icing Protection System (FSIPS) en de Fuel Air Low Pressure (FALP) waarschuwing. Voor FALP gaf de FAA vrijstelling tot 2027.
..
..
January 30, 2026 at 12:15 PM
Volgens mijn info gaat het vooral om de G500 en G600. Het betreft twee aparte (maar gerelateerde) systemen: het Fuel System Icing Protection System (FSIPS) en de Fuel Air Low Pressure (FALP) waarschuwing. Voor FALP gaf de FAA vrijstelling tot 2027.
..
..
A parte de ser Canada un mercado muy reducido para Gulfstream, está el hecho de que se trata de un tema de seguridad aérea conocido en esos modelos.
Despues del fiasco de la FAA con el Boeing Max, Canada ya no automáticamente aprueba cambios y reparaciones. Y con razón.
Despues del fiasco de la FAA con el Boeing Max, Canada ya no automáticamente aprueba cambios y reparaciones. Y con razón.
January 30, 2026 at 11:52 AM
A parte de ser Canada un mercado muy reducido para Gulfstream, está el hecho de que se trata de un tema de seguridad aérea conocido en esos modelos.
Despues del fiasco de la FAA con el Boeing Max, Canada ya no automáticamente aprueba cambios y reparaciones. Y con razón.
Despues del fiasco de la FAA con el Boeing Max, Canada ya no automáticamente aprueba cambios y reparaciones. Y con razón.
Durante su primér mandato aún habia gente que le controlaban. Eso ya no es el caso y el tio ( que puede lanzar un ataque nuclear en cualquier momento), ahora puede hacer (y tuitear) lo que le dé la gana sin consultarlo antes con nadie.
January 30, 2026 at 11:48 AM
Durante su primér mandato aún habia gente que le controlaban. Eso ya no es el caso y el tio ( que puede lanzar un ataque nuclear en cualquier momento), ahora puede hacer (y tuitear) lo que le dé la gana sin consultarlo antes con nadie.
Lo más grave (o cachondo, según se mira), es que el número estimado de modelos vendidos a Canada está entre 7 y 15 unidades.
O sea, Trump monta todo ésto por menos de 20 aviones.
Para mi, Trump queria hacer algo para mostrar a Carney ¨quien manda¨. Lo ha hecho socavando su propia economia.
O sea, Trump monta todo ésto por menos de 20 aviones.
Para mi, Trump queria hacer algo para mostrar a Carney ¨quien manda¨. Lo ha hecho socavando su propia economia.
January 30, 2026 at 11:25 AM
Lo más grave (o cachondo, según se mira), es que el número estimado de modelos vendidos a Canada está entre 7 y 15 unidades.
O sea, Trump monta todo ésto por menos de 20 aviones.
Para mi, Trump queria hacer algo para mostrar a Carney ¨quien manda¨. Lo ha hecho socavando su propia economia.
O sea, Trump monta todo ésto por menos de 20 aviones.
Para mi, Trump queria hacer algo para mostrar a Carney ¨quien manda¨. Lo ha hecho socavando su propia economia.
Según he podido averiguar, no se trata de ninguna certificación rechazada sino de una re-certificación de sus modelos G500 y G600 después de que hubo un fallo en el sistema anti-ice de los depositos de combustible.
Gulfstream lo ha rectificado y la FAA ya lo aprobó pero Canada aún no.
Gulfstream lo ha rectificado y la FAA ya lo aprobó pero Canada aún no.
January 30, 2026 at 11:21 AM
Según he podido averiguar, no se trata de ninguna certificación rechazada sino de una re-certificación de sus modelos G500 y G600 después de que hubo un fallo en el sistema anti-ice de los depositos de combustible.
Gulfstream lo ha rectificado y la FAA ya lo aprobó pero Canada aún no.
Gulfstream lo ha rectificado y la FAA ya lo aprobó pero Canada aún no.
Absolutely.
And as has been the case before, he is only undermining US operators of Canada-made aircraft, of which there are plenty. Plus there's the approx 3,000 Americans working in the US for Bombardier aircraft.
And all that over max 20x G500 and G600s taking a bit longer to re-certify.
And as has been the case before, he is only undermining US operators of Canada-made aircraft, of which there are plenty. Plus there's the approx 3,000 Americans working in the US for Bombardier aircraft.
And all that over max 20x G500 and G600s taking a bit longer to re-certify.
January 30, 2026 at 11:16 AM
Absolutely.
And as has been the case before, he is only undermining US operators of Canada-made aircraft, of which there are plenty. Plus there's the approx 3,000 Americans working in the US for Bombardier aircraft.
And all that over max 20x G500 and G600s taking a bit longer to re-certify.
And as has been the case before, he is only undermining US operators of Canada-made aircraft, of which there are plenty. Plus there's the approx 3,000 Americans working in the US for Bombardier aircraft.
And all that over max 20x G500 and G600s taking a bit longer to re-certify.
There are no certification issues in Canada affecting Gulfstream. There's only a re-certification issue regarding a known fuel de-icing system failure which was fixed and Canada is now evaluating (G500 &G600).
This affects between 7 and 15 planes sold to Canada, hardly worth Trump's tantrum.
This affects between 7 and 15 planes sold to Canada, hardly worth Trump's tantrum.
January 30, 2026 at 11:06 AM
There are no certification issues in Canada affecting Gulfstream. There's only a re-certification issue regarding a known fuel de-icing system failure which was fixed and Canada is now evaluating (G500 &G600).
This affects between 7 and 15 planes sold to Canada, hardly worth Trump's tantrum.
This affects between 7 and 15 planes sold to Canada, hardly worth Trump's tantrum.
I believe this concerns the G500 and G600 models only, of which an estimated <20 units were sold to Canada.
It concerns an Airworthiness Directive related to a known failure in the Fuel System Icing Protection (FSIP) unit which was fixed.
Transport Canada very likely wants to make sure it works.
It concerns an Airworthiness Directive related to a known failure in the Fuel System Icing Protection (FSIP) unit which was fixed.
Transport Canada very likely wants to make sure it works.
January 30, 2026 at 10:54 AM
I believe this concerns the G500 and G600 models only, of which an estimated <20 units were sold to Canada.
It concerns an Airworthiness Directive related to a known failure in the Fuel System Icing Protection (FSIP) unit which was fixed.
Transport Canada very likely wants to make sure it works.
It concerns an Airworthiness Directive related to a known failure in the Fuel System Icing Protection (FSIP) unit which was fixed.
Transport Canada very likely wants to make sure it works.
After FAA'S disaster with the Boeing MAX, TC no longer copy/pastes FAA decisions.
But the total number of affected Gulfstream models sold to Canada is extremely small: between 7 and 15.
Ergo, this is another Trump Tantrum which does more harm to the US economy than good.
But the total number of affected Gulfstream models sold to Canada is extremely small: between 7 and 15.
Ergo, this is another Trump Tantrum which does more harm to the US economy than good.
January 30, 2026 at 10:44 AM
After FAA'S disaster with the Boeing MAX, TC no longer copy/pastes FAA decisions.
But the total number of affected Gulfstream models sold to Canada is extremely small: between 7 and 15.
Ergo, this is another Trump Tantrum which does more harm to the US economy than good.
But the total number of affected Gulfstream models sold to Canada is extremely small: between 7 and 15.
Ergo, this is another Trump Tantrum which does more harm to the US economy than good.