Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bombardier: Re-engined A320/737 Can’t Beat CSeries  
User currently offlineaviationbuff From India, joined Mar 2008, 1428 posts, RR: 3
Posted (4 years 7 months 21 hours ago) and read 18353 times:

Bombardier: re-engined A320/737 still can’t beat the CSeries

http://atwonline.com/aircraft-engine...wn-against-re-engined-a320737-0525

Quote:
Bombardier pushed back against the notion that a re-engined A320 or 737 would severely damage the viability of its CSeries, questioning whether Airbus or Boeing could deliver equivalent fuel-burn improvements without making major and costly aircraft design modifications.

Bombardier VP-Marketing-Commercial Aircraft Phillippe Poutissou said the CSeries' promised "15% cash operating advantage" over today's narrowbodies is based on aircraft design as a whole, "not a simple engine plug-and-play.

He added, "The only way to achieve a step-change in economics is to look at the entire package and the engine is only 50% of the package." He explained that airframe and wing "size dimension" was designed on the CSeries to optimize fully the PW1000G's 12:1 bypass ratio. "In order to take full advantage of that, you need to give yourself a clean sheet," he said.

He also mentions that CSeries will be on time in 2013.

Bombardier is forecasting
6,300 commercial aircraft deliveries in the 100/149-seat range through 2028 (60% of which will be replacements)
5,800 deliveries in the 60/90-seat range through 2028, (40% of which will be turboprops)

Airbus A320 NEO with GTF ‘still can’t beat the CSeries’: Bombardier

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...f-still-cant-beat-the-cseries.html

Quote:
A re-engined Airbus narrowbody "still can't beat the CSeries" even if the European airframer picks the same Pratt & Whitney geared turbofan (GTF) technology for re-engining, a top Bombardier executive said today.

Bombardier believes it can destroy the business case for the the A320 NEO with the CSeries.
Quote:
Asked if Bombardier will bring a larger-capacity CSeries to market, Poutissou says: "At this point our programme is really the two models. We're really focused on delivering the two models [CS100 and CS300]."


64 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1578 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 20 hours ago) and read 18211 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Interesting stuff! Any chance airbus will think they cannot make this gap and go for somthing more radical? Maybe an A320 rewing? Maybe a smaller wing for shorter routes? Exciting times ahead for the cash cows!

Fred


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31420 posts, RR: 85
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 16 hours ago) and read 17740 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 1):
Any chance airbus will think they cannot make this gap and go for somthing more radical?

That they are increasing production of the A320 makes me think they feel their backs are not against a wall.  

(Same with Boeing, who are increasing 737 production.)

[Edited 2010-05-26 08:25:30]

User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15833 posts, RR: 27
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 16 hours ago) and read 17708 times:

Quoting aviationbuff (Thread starter):
Bombardier: re-engined A320/737 still can’t beat the CSeries

Well, the CSeries isn't beating the A320 or 737 in any guise. Did Bombardier forget to tell the airlines?



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineplanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6441 posts, RR: 34
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 11 hours ago) and read 17104 times:

Quoting aviationbuff (Thread starter):
Quote:
Bombardier pushed back against the notion that a re-engined A320 or 737 would severely damage the viability of its CSeries, questioning whether Airbus or Boeing could deliver equivalent fuel-burn improvements without making major and costly aircraft design modifications.

Bombardier VP-Marketing-Commercial Aircraft Phillippe Poutissou said the CSeries' promised "15% cash operating advantage" over today's narrowbodies is based on aircraft design as a whole, "not a simple engine plug-and-play.

He added, "The only way to achieve a step-change in economics is to look at the entire package and the engine is only 50% of the package." He explained that airframe and wing "size dimension" was designed on the CSeries to optimize fully the PW1000G's 12:1 bypass ratio. "In order to take full advantage of that, you need to give yourself a clean sheet," he said.

This kind of "push back" might fly with A.netters but it doesn't even leave the ground with airlines... the ones that obviously matter. When an airline plugs in their "real world" costs data the CSeries "advantage" simply doesn't add up.

The "15% cash operation advantage" (which, BTW, BBD was claiming even BEFORE P&W said they would develop a model for for the CSeries - so go figure the accuracy of their claims) is misleading to the average "Joe" since the COCs take into account weight related charges (the CSeries is lighter than a 737 mainly because it is smaller and doesn't fly as far as the 737) and maintenance costs (which BBD obviously choses the most expensive cost data for the 737), etc.



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlinetimboflier215 From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 1344 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 10 hours ago) and read 16909 times:

BBD are bound to make claims about the CSeries' efficiency. A and B don't really have to beat it, in efficiency terms. They can be far more competitive on price, and after sales care, plus they have a far larger customer base. I want the CSeries to be a massive success, but BBD have an enormous mountain to climb...

User currently offlinemiller22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 10 hours ago) and read 16582 times:

What's the market share of CSeries sold vs. A318/A319 and 736/73G's over the past year? It's well over 50%.

This is the point they make in the article. They're not competing with the A320/738. Those are in a 180-seat all-Y aircraft class. The CSeries is 145 seats all-Y. That's like comparing the 737-900 to the 767.


User currently offlinetimboflier215 From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 1344 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 16505 times:

Quoting miller22 (Reply 6):
What's the market share of CSeries sold vs. A318/A319 and 736/73G's over the past year? It's well over 50%.

The trouble is, that's 50% of a very small market (compared to the A320/738). With the E-Jets entrenched and successful at the lower end, it doesn't leave much wiggle room for BBD.


User currently offlinejdevora From Spain, joined Aug 2006, 354 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 16338 times:

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 1):
Interesting stuff! Any chance airbus will think they cannot make this gap and go for somthing more radical? Maybe an A320 rewing? Maybe a smaller wing for shorter routes? Exciting times ahead for the cash cows

The re-engine has a small window of opportunity, if they miss it doing more changes they are better off doing a clean-sheet design:
From Airbus aims to 'keep it simple' with A320 NEO :

Quote:
Williams believes that Airbus and the engine makers have a "window of opportunity to exploit" with the A320 NEO, and moves to complicate the offering could cause the planned 2015 in-service date to slip and therefore jeopardise the business case for the aircraft.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
That they are increasing production of the A320 makes me think they feel their backs are not against a wall.

(Same with Boeing, who are increasing 737 production.)



I can't find the link right now, but a few days ago a Boeing executive suggested that the rate increase that they and Airbus are doing is for avoid under-supply that will "force" airlines to buy the CSeries

Cheers
JD


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 16298 times:

Quoting miller22 (Reply 6):
What's the market share of CSeries sold vs. A318/A319 and 736/73G's over the past year? It's well over 50%.

The past year? Hardly a trend....   

Boeing and Airbus entered into the recession with an incredibly strong backlog of 737NG and A320s. They had zero reason to offer rock-bottom prices to keep the orders coming. Most airlines would rather order nothing than mess with the C-Series.


User currently offlineFly2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 2 hours ago) and read 14121 times:

Quoting aviationbuff (Thread starter):
He also mentions that CSeries will be on time in 2013.

Considering the luck A and B have had lately, that's a bold statement. Then again, the C series isn't really revolutionary, not in the same terms as the 787 or A380 at least.


User currently offlinedw747400 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 1265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 1 hour ago) and read 13561 times:

Quoting planemaker (Reply 4):
When an airline plugs in their "real world" costs data the CSeries "advantage" simply doesn't add up.

Obviously the marketing hype isn't going to match the actual analysis being done by the airlines, but not having seen any "real" CSeries numbers myself. You seem very negative--have you had the opportunity to review data that makes the CSeries look that bad or are you just emphasizing the caution needed regarding these marketing numbers?

Quoting Fly2HMO (Reply 10):

Considering the luck A and B have had lately, that's a bold statement. Then again, the C series isn't really revolutionary, not in the same terms as the 787 or A380 at least.

Given the scope of the project vs. previous Bombardier commercial projects, it is a major step forward in complexity and scale. I have to agree with your first thought: it is a bold statement.



CFI--Certfied Freakin Idiot
User currently onlineolle From Sweden, joined Feb 2007, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 12700 times:

is the most important not that this success against the 145 all Y markets gives the cashflow and experience to make the next new aircraft right on target for an 180 Y aircraft. The conversation in this conversation is very similar to for 30 years ago when Airbus was the new actor and MD / Boeing had the strong position.

And honestly is it not good for all to have 3 competotors instead of 2?


User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 12616 times:

Airbus (Tom Williams) says the CSeries poses a threath, more then other new aircraft. They also think the Cseries will be stretched beyond the CS300.

I think the Cseries will be lighter and leaner then the older, 3000nm range, cargo capable, 6 abreast, up to 215 seats A320 and 737 series. Regardless of the engine.


User currently offlineAntoniemey From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1607 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 11677 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 3):
Well, the CSeries isn't beating the A320 or 737 in any guise. Did Bombardier forget to tell the airlines?

I haven't looked at the specs in depth, but I think they forgot the give it the range it needs to challenge the A320 and 737. But I could be wrong or that could be something they will address if they make larger versions.

Quoting olle (Reply 12):

And honestly is it not good for all to have 3 competotors instead of 2?

History seems to suggest that the market can only support two suppliers above a certain size of aircraft... but that may just be certain companies' aversion to losses or lack of innovation with their aircraft designs. I guess we won't know until someone other than Boeing or Airbus tries to launch an aircraft program above the 125 seat size



Make something Idiot-proof, and the Universe will make a more inept idiot.
User currently offlinemiller22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 11390 times:

Quoting Antoniemey (Reply 14):
I haven't looked at the specs in depth, but I think they forgot the give it the range it needs to challenge the A320 and 737.

I haven't been able to find where you guys are seeing this shorter range. Bombardier is saying full pax range at 130 seats is 2,950 nm. That's only 100 nm shorter than the 737-800.

http://www.nowisthefuture.com/En/


User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5478 posts, RR: 31
Reply 16, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 11204 times:

The CSeries isn't competing with the 738 or the 320. The largest planes that could possibly be considered as competing are the 737-700 and the 319.


What the...?
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31420 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 11041 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 16):
The CSeries isn't competing with the 738 or the 320. The largest planes that could possibly be considered as competing are the 737-700 and the 319.

Ah, but remember they have a 150-seat version (the CS500) ready to go within weeks of the successful EIS of the CS300 and that will drive a dagger through the heart of the 738 and A322, forcing Boeing to launch an all-new replacement and Airbus to re-engine lest their respective order backlog drop from the thousands to the handful.  

[Edited 2010-05-27 14:03:06]

User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5478 posts, RR: 31
Reply 18, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 10884 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 17):

I can hardly wait until the CS700 - 1000 series takes out the 787 and 350...



What the...?
User currently offlineplanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6441 posts, RR: 34
Reply 19, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 10485 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 9):
The past year? Hardly a trend....

A trend? Is that the past 12 months... or the past calendar year? How many airlines ordered which models? 
Quoting dw747400 (Reply 11):
You seem very negative

If I were starting an airline in Europe... and received launch pricing and financing... I would probably order the CSeries.  
Quoting dw747400 (Reply 11):
have you had the opportunity to review data that makes the CSeries look that bad or are you just emphasizing the caution needed regarding these marketing numbers?

The CSeries is not "that bad" at all... it is unfortunately a case of the CSeries not being "that good" enough to compel many airlines to switch. The CSeries hasn't finished detail design yet but just loking at BBD's marketing info is sufficient to see that the CSeries "promised "15% cash operating advantage" over today's narrowbodies" doesn't reflect reality.

Quoting dw747400 (Reply 11):
Given the scope of the project vs. previous Bombardier commercial projects, it is a major step forward in complexity and scale. I have to agree with your first thought: it is a bold statement.

Considering the delay that the CRJ1000 is going through... and that is a 3rd stretch of the CRJ200, it certainly is an optimistic statement.

Quoting keesje (Reply 13):
Airbus (Tom Williams) says the CSeries poses a threath, more then other new aircraft.

Yes... a threat because Airbus NB demand is high and if an airline can't get an adequate A32X delivery slot they may... just may opt for the CS300. But the increased NB production rate takes care of that.

Quoting keesje (Reply 13):
I think the Cseries will be lighter and leaner then the older, 3000nm range, cargo capable, 6 abreast, up to 215 seats A320 and 737 series. Regardless of the engine.

Of course the CSeries is going to be lighter and leaner... it is smaller and doesn't fly as far. But then you knew that... didn't you?  



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6965 posts, RR: 76
Reply 20, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 10486 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 2):
That they are increasing production of the A320 makes me think they feel their backs are not against a wall.  

(Same with Boeing, who are increasing 737 production.)

One part of the equation is order to delivery timeline... that's something BBD is hugely challenged on. Which leads to:

Quoting jdevora (Reply 8):
I can't find the link right now, but a few days ago a Boeing executive suggested that the rate increase that they and Airbus are doing is for avoid under-supply that will "force" airlines to buy the CSeries

And, I believe that more than:

Quoting planemaker (Reply 4):
The "15% cash operation advantage"

I don't buy marketing data. It's the stuff of A vs B legend... and now, we're gonna have A vs B vs C (C being Bombardier formerly Canadair   

If there are preliminary performance and planning manual such as FCOM2 or FPPM, that's where the truth is.

Mandala499



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 10443 times:

The Cseries will cover part of the segment currently covered by the A320 and 737.

It will probably be lighter and more efficient there, because it's smaller & lighter.

The part of the NB segment covered by the CSseries is pretty large really.

I fully understand Airbus & Boeing dismissing & reacting at the same time.

We as aviation enthousiasts should welcome new competition to the slightly lazy current duopoly.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/boe...bus-is-coming-to-an-end-2010-05-20


User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1578 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 10442 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 18):

Quoting Stitch (Reply 17):

I can hardly wait until the CS700 - 1000 series takes out the 787 and 350...


I seem to remember a lot of people a couple of years ago saying that Boeing would be offering a 787-11 and being very serious about it. Given how BBD have stretched the old cl601 frame right out to the crj-1000 I have no doubts they are capable of it.

Fred


User currently offlineplanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6441 posts, RR: 34
Reply 23, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 10279 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
The Cseries will cover part of the segment currently covered by the A320 and 737.
Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
The part of the NB segment covered by the CSseries is pretty large really.

BBD says that the CSeries segment is "below" both A & B's NBs... that is not "pretty large - really". Furthermore, that is the segment populated with the E-Jets, SSJ, ARJ-21 & MRJ.

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
It will probably be lighter and more efficient there, because it's smaller & lighter.

And it is smaller and lighter for a reason... to try to maximize a COC delta - unsuccessfully. The trade off for range, pax capacity... and commonality is not what many airlines obviously want.

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
We as aviation enthousiasts should welcome new competition to the slightly lazy current duopoly.

A and B are not "slightly lazy" because they don't produce an all-new NB design just to please you. BBD has pulled out all the stops in the CSeries design and it nevertheless isn't producing the step change perfomance improvement that airlines are demanding. The only reason why there is a CSeries is not because the market is demanding it but only because BBD is trying to stay alive in the commercial jet biz and is trying to shoe horn a model between the E-jets and A&B's NB line-up.



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10243 posts, RR: 97
Reply 24, posted (4 years 6 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 10203 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
We as aviation enthousiasts should welcome new competition to the slightly lazy current duopoly.

???

The "slightly lazy duopoly" is actually up to its eyeballs developing a whole range of widebodied airliners and military aircraft.....
They're anything but twiddling their thumbs   

Of course, that does also mean they will do and say whatever it takes to keep some kind of lid on the C-series until they're ready to go in the narrowbody developments.

Rgds


25 keesje : they have been on their cashcow NB's though. The 737s and A320s haven't changed much for the last decades & said they would wait at least another
26 SEPilot : The C-series is a different aircraft from the 737 and A320, and is optimized for a different mission. This is the mission for which the 737 and A320 w
27 art : CSeries CS300 range with 130 pax @ 102Kg per pax is given as 2200 miles on the Bombardier site. The ER version range for the same load is given as 29
28 Post contains images keesje : Thnx for asking it >2000nm seems a Niche globally. And the graph comes from a major A320 supplier.. As soon as the dimensions of the Cseries becam
29 Stitch : Which makes you wonder why Bombardier added the structural empty weight to allow the plane to fly 2200-3000nm if nobody does...
30 Post contains links keesje : IMO the addition of a certified heavier CS300ER version makes a stretch with the same MTOW far easier / quicker. http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z
31 incitatus : But consider mission requirements from the perspective of an airline. An airline wants a 130-150 seater and 10% of its missions are 1500 nm and above
32 miller22 : Can't remember where I read it, but there actually is no physical difference between the standard and ER version. It's simply paperwork. So the aircr
33 Antoniemey : Fair enough... as I said, I could have been wrong, and I am. So the issue, at least for European carriers, would seem to be that they either already
34 Stitch : Sure, but you're hurting the economics of the base model moving all that extra weight for shorter-range missions which RR has declared is the vast bu
35 Post contains images art : I think they missed an opportunity where the larger NB operators are concerned. There is much talk of the flexibilty that abuse of a type offers (fly
36 Post contains images planemaker : Sad, isn't it... Keesje has been beating the sub-1000 nm, super efficient NB design for so long and yet BBD just didn't listen to him... and designed
37 dw747400 : That is further compounded by the fact that winds, alternates, and fuel requirements demand the aircraft to have a lot more range than what the great
38 czbbflier : Just out of curiosity.... to the a.net experts (I am a bit overwhelmed by ranges and the technical data being tossed about).... It is possible that th
39 Post contains images keesje : On the Cseries, of course were weak during the last 2 yrs, just like the A320 & 737. Looking at the noise both Airbus and Boeing are making recen
40 Post contains images lightsaber : Every C-series thread the nay-sayers come out pretty loud. We all know the C-series will have it tough until they have enough orders to provide both '
41 planemaker : It will never... ever... happen. The whole point of the CSeries is that BBD wants to remain in the commercial jet biz. A and B, on the other hand, ar
42 miller22 : Good! That's low risk. 20% savings at low risk is pretty darn good. Using your methodology, what was so truly innovative about the A320? The 737 NG,
43 Post contains links and images keesje : Few people agree with you. I think e.g. a two class 134 seat lay out (12F (2-2), 122 economy) is doable and a further stretch of another 4-5 rows is
44 XT6Wagon : Hmm, A 80% all new plane with 70% commonality with the previous model? Seems innovative to me, given the Airlines needs to minimize costs, and the ab
45 planemaker : It isn't 20% savings... and it isn't low risk for BBD - just look at the delays to the CRJ-1000. It speaks volumes that they can't nail a thrid stret
46 r2rho : LH, which initially had plans to retire their 737Classics, has decided to stick around with them for a while more and is even investing money in small
47 Stitch : I can buy into that argument. The CS100 covering the 737-500, the CS200 covering the 737-300 and a "CS500" covering the 737-400. The typical OEW for
48 planemaker : You are missing the point... entirely. A & B do not want to do clean sheets BECAUSE the technology is not available for the 20-30% improvement in
49 keesje : The Cseries was launched July 2008, right at the start of the biggest credit crisis in modern history. Please stick with your believe the Cseries (ju
50 Post contains images Stitch : Which makes it interesting that when they first tried to launch it in March 2005, right at the start of the biggest airliner order boom in modern his
51 miller22 : Stitch, Fuel prices were 25% of what they are now, and the CSeries fuel savings is almost twice what it was then. The airframe was ahead of the engine
52 planemaker : Keesje, sometimes you have me wondering. On the one hand you produce some great posts and promote great concepts... and then on the other hand you co
53 XT6Wagon : I agree. Only as you note the MTOW is too low. Oh and the 733/735 are still easy to get in decent quality. If you need a dozen of them, plenty of pla
54 planemaker : But there won't be more to be had by giving it up. You just have to look at BBD's market forecast, let alone A or B or E's market forecasts. Seriousl
55 Post contains links miller22 : You mean, like these people: http://www.leeham.net/filelib/ScottsColumn072908.pdf And even Albaugh already admits to no interest at 130 or fewer seat
56 Antoniemey : Technically a final determination has not been made in that regard. Eventually the 319s will be replaced... but how soon and what by will be determin
57 miller22 : Techincally, maybe. Bedford did finally admit that the CS300's were coming as 319 leases expired, unfortunately I can't find the article, but it's not
58 bravo1six : And planemaker's allegation that the LH purchase is conditional surfaces once again. I think we're now up to the third (or fourth?) time reminding yo
59 Antoniemey : I can partially agree with it. Yes, the C-Series will all but certainly replace the leased 319s... but not all of them are leased and if they need en
60 Burkhard : Last time I checked the CSeries was in size of A318, max A319 resp. 736/737. I fail to see how it could threaten the 180seaters resp the 210 seaters,
61 rheinwaldner : Why do you think that this will happen? Where do they admit that? Show me the sources. Boeing proposed a larger short range widebody. But surely not
62 planemaker : No where does Carson (the article is 2 years old) say that he was abandoning the 73G market... a market worth BILLIONS. Again... they are NOT abandon
63 keesje : Looking at the statistics from reply 28, It think the 130-165 segment is to large to ignore. A shrink 190 seater would probably not be competative. T
64 Post contains links jdevora : It is not the same article but it quotes the same words: Boeing expects decision on 737's future by year-end
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Easyjet: Re-engining A320/737 Not Good Enough. posted Mon Mar 22 2010 04:49:26 by keesje
A320 Will Continue - Re-engined Version An Option posted Mon Mar 15 2010 10:37:35 by art
Re-engining The A320/737 Decision Next Year? posted Sun Oct 11 2009 05:10:23 by OyKIE
Has This Qatar Airways A320 Been Re-engined? posted Fri Mar 31 2006 08:31:22 by LTU932
Could 737 Be Re-engined With BR715? posted Tue Nov 27 2001 08:02:03 by VirginFlyer
Shahab Leasing Will Order 50 A320/737 In 2009 posted Mon Oct 13 2008 10:41:55 by FCKC
Re-engining The 737 An Option For Boeing posted Fri Sep 5 2008 08:15:02 by OyKIE
A320/737 Replacement Twin-aisle? posted Tue Jun 3 2008 05:46:31 by Beaucaire
AF-KL Pushing For A320/737 Replacement posted Mon Oct 29 2007 02:19:10 by Scbriml
Truth Revealed RE 2005 A320 China Orders posted Thu Jun 15 2006 05:51:47 by Mham001