Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
LCI CEO Says A319 Will "struggle" Against CS300  
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3381 posts, RR: 2
Posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 15982 times:

The CEO of Irish lessor LCI says that the A319m will struggle against the CS300LR. Huh? The A319 has almost a 800nm range advantage and has a 4 seat advantage in a 2-class layout. Is he just trying to hype his 30 frame buy to potential customers or what?


"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
45 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1869 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 15745 times:

Well, there are those rumours of the PW1000G having much lower than expected fuel burn, so who knows...

Keep in mind CS300 is an optimized 130 seater, while A319 is a shrink carrying some dead weight.



STOP TERRORRUSSIA!!!
User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9976 posts, RR: 96
Reply 2, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 15643 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 1):
Well, there are those rumours of the PW1000G having much lower than expected fuel burn, so who knows...

Any gains the CS300ER gets should pass on to the A319NEO, as it will essentially have a derivative engine.

That said, there's no question that the A319NEO will be a heavier beast than the CS330ER, and will be more expensive to run.

But it will bury the CS300ER on range capability.

It will positively eat US transcon with miles to spare, whereas I don't think the CS300ER will be US transcon capable with a meaningful payload.

I'm willing to bet we could end up seeing both types in the same fleet some day.

Rgds


User currently offlinecolumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7057 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15282 times:

For airlines that do a lot of short flights and don´t need the extra range of the A319 the CS300 seems to be a very good choice, I think apart from Lufthansa a lot of European airlines will have a look at it.


It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12883 posts, RR: 100
Reply 4, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15159 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting astuteman (Reply 2):
Any gains the CS300ER gets should pass on to the A319NEO, as it will essentially have a derivative engine.

Actually, the PW1100G (A319NEO engine) is a much more advanced engine than the PW1500G (C-series). The overall pressure ratio was increased by 10% from 45 to 50 which will result in an even more efficient engine. The PW1500G is also optimized for a far shorter mission than the PW1100G.

So it is going to depend on the mission on which is the better airframe.

For airlines who predominately fly 2.5 hour or less missions, the C300 will have the superior economics. For airlines, such as B6, who fly a significant number of greater than 2.5 hour missions, the A319NEO will have the superior economics.

Now lets take the airline that has bought both: F9. They fly a mix of both missions. Either would work well for them. I suspect we'll see the C300 kept closer to home as it will have much lower costs on short flights. (There is no way the extra seats of the A319 will pay for the added costs on the sub 2 hour mission.) However, on longer flights to the US east coast, the A319NEO should have better economics.

Now the C300 has lower wing loading which means it has more of a short range cost advantage than the A319NEO has a long range cost advantage. B6 is the *only* airline I can come up where the A319NEO will have superior economics than the C300, unless fleet commonality makes the decision (as it will be AF, among others).

In numerous threads I've posted how when an airframe receives an engine upgrade, it makes the next larger stretch of that airframe the most economical variant. The 737 is the easiest example to explain.

Engine: Optimum length
JT8D 737-200
CFM-56-3B 737-300 (not the shorter 737-500 which was 732 length)
CFM-56-7 737-8, not the 736 (~732 length) or the 73G (733 replacement)

In the case of the A320 family, with the V2500, the optimum length was the A320 for most airlines (there are always exceptions) and the sales show that. I propose with the A320NEO the optimum length will be the A321NEO

I suspect most airlines that need an A319 sized aircraft will buy the C300 if it meets promise.

I also suspect the A321NEO will sell really well.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineFRNT787 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1319 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 13948 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 2):
I'm willing to bet we could end up seeing both types in the same fleet some day.

Indeed. Frontier has both on order. Even more interesting, due to all of the wheeling and dealing that Republic (Frontier parent company) was able to do with GE, the Airbus will have CFM Leap-X.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 4):
Now lets take the airline that has bought both: F9. They fly a mix of both missions. Either would work well for them. I suspect we'll see the C300 kept closer to home as it will have much lower costs on short flights. (There is no way the extra seats of the A319 will pay for the added costs on the sub 2 hour mission.) However, on longer flights to the US east coast, the A319NEO should have better economics.

Exactly. Both airplanes can play a role. Republic announced a configuration of 138 seats on the C-Series, with Frontier's STRETCH seating included. The A319s currently flying have the same configuration. So, they will probably have the same number of seats in both. I could see a situation where the A319 fleet heads to DEN for the most part and the C-Series flies out of Milwaukee, Kansas City, Omaha, and any other potential smaller "focus cities" they launch.



"We have a right to fail, because failure makes us grow" --Glenn Beck
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 6, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 13591 times:

Quoting FRNT787 (Reply 5):
Republic announced a configuration of 138 seats on the C-Series, with Frontier's STRETCH seating included. The A319s currently flying have the same configuration. So, they will probably have the same number of seats in both.

SeatGuru shows 136 seats at 31-35" pitch on Frontier A319. IMO, it will be hard for CS300 to accommodate 138 seats with the same seat pitch as in A319. I suspect CS300 seat pitch will be slightly less than that in A319, but the extra width should make up for the smaller pitch and provide comparable comfort.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 4):
Actually, the PW1100G (A319NEO engine) is a much more advanced engine than the PW1500G (C-series). The overall pressure ratio was increased by 10% from 45 to 50 which will result in an even more efficient engine. The PW1500G is also optimized for a far shorter mission than the PW1100G.

So perhaps for shorter mission, PW1500G may negate most of the efficiency advantage of PW1100G.

I expect CS300ER to be about 12% lighter than A319NEO, and that should more than make up for any seat advantage of A319NEO--at least over shorter mission.


User currently offlineFRNT787 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1319 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 13229 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 6):
SeatGuru shows 136 seats at 31-35" pitch on Frontier A319. IMO, it will be hard for CS300 to accommodate 138 seats with the same seat pitch as in A319. I suspect CS300 seat pitch will be slightly less than that in A319, but the extra width should make up for the smaller pitch and provide comparable comfort.

My thoughts as well. In the end, one row may come out. At the end of the year, all F9 A319s will have the 138 seats. They are simply replacing the two seat bench by the overwing exits for a three seat bench.



"We have a right to fail, because failure makes us grow" --Glenn Beck
User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24999 posts, RR: 85
Reply 8, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 12947 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FRNT787 (Reply 5):
Indeed. Frontier has both on order. Even more interesting, due to all of the wheeling and dealing that Republic (Frontier parent company) was able to do with GE, the Airbus will have CFM Leap-X.

But the comments do illustrate why John Leahy at Airbus was so anxious to get an order for the A319neo ("it kills the business case for the C series") at Paris and why Republic/Frontier got such a beautiful deal.

 

mariner

[Edited 2011-07-16 12:54:12]


aeternum nauta
User currently offlinekmz From Germany, joined Feb 2008, 160 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 12317 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 4):
I propose with the A320NEO the optimum length will be the A321NEO

interesting - and it soundz very realistic. so the questions is:

a) why does airbus not start with the A321NEO

and

Quoting mariner (Reply 8):
and why Republic/Frontier got such a beautiful deal

b) why does airbus start with sweat deals when the A319NEO could become the new A318?


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24999 posts, RR: 85
Reply 10, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 12220 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kmz (Reply 9):
b) why does airbus start with sweat deals when the A319NEO could become the new A318?

Perhaps because Mr. Leahy said that the Neo kills the business case for the C series. But that really only applies to the A319neo, the direct competitor, as the OP says.

So it was quite important to pick up at least one order for the A319neo at Paris and - so far - Republic/Frontier remains the only customer for the type.

Some on a.net have speculated that unless Airbus gets more orders for the A319neo, it may never be built. I think that's extreme, but who knows?

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15715 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 11962 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 10):
So it was quite important to pick up at least one order for the A319neo at Paris and - so far - Republic/Frontier remains the only customer for the type.

The A319 and A318 only accounted for about 20% of the orders for the family before, so now with more competition and increased range in the larger variants, I think it would be something of a surprise if that number even stays where it is let alone increases.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24999 posts, RR: 85
Reply 12, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 11948 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 11):
The A319 and A318 only accounted for about 20% of the orders for the family before, so now with more competition and increased range in the larger variants, I think it would be something of a surprise if that number even stays where it is let alone increases.

Even so, Mr. Leahy has made this a public challenge to the C Series and I think he would have been left with a certain amount of egg on his face if the A319neo had not picked up any orders at Paris.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1293 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 9478 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 6):
CS300ER to be about 12% lighter than A319NEO

How does 36.5t vs. 42.8t (MWE 38.4t) sound?

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 6):
I suspect CS300 seat pitch will be slightly less than that in A319, but the extra width should make up for the smaller pitch and provide comparable comfort.

30" is about reasonable for 136 pax Y-cabin LOPA


User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12883 posts, RR: 100
Reply 14, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 9223 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 6):
So perhaps for shorter mission, PW1500G may negate most of the efficiency advantage of PW1100G.

I expect CS300ER to be about 12% lighter than A319NEO, and that should more than make up for any seat advantage of A319NEO--at least over shorter mission.

The PW1500G will have better economics during climb. There is a cost for that higher OPR... (weight, complexity=more maintenance cost).

The more I think about it, the less I'm liking the A319NEO...

Quoting kmz (Reply 9):
a) why does airbus not start with the A321NEO

Risk. In particular with the engine. Pratt would have talked them into launching a lower thrust length. Airbus has been asking Pratt for more thrust for the A321 (well... Pratt & RR +partners for the V2500), but hasn't liked the eocnomics of that engine. Expect the PW1100G to have a higher thrust variant. No engine vendor wants to launch at peak thrust.

Quoting kmz (Reply 9):
b) why does airbus start with sweat deals when the A319NEO could become the new A318?

I believe it will be such a risk. But the only cost for Airbus will be the flight testing. Far less cost than to develop the A318. Airbus might as well offer... I expect AF will want a few examples. (AF manages gauge more than many other airlines, so for them the A319NEO makes sense. A few other airlines too. But that was true of the 736 too... It sold and then it didn't.)

If I were the 'armchair CEO' of an airline I'd buy a few A320NEO to start and then focus on the A321NEO if I went Airbus. But heck... I'd go C300...

Quoting mariner (Reply 10):
Some on a.net have speculated that unless Airbus gets more orders for the A319neo, it may never be built. I think that's extreme, but who knows?

I suspect F9 will then be getting really cheap A320NEO.  

Oh, I suspect that is a very likely scenario. Otherwise why change the delivery order?

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 13):
How does 36.5t vs. 42.8t (MWE 38.4t) sound?

Expect the C300 to become lighter. Bombardier is starting to pay engineers to cut the weight further.  
Quoting mariner (Reply 12):
I think he would have been left with a certain amount of egg on his face if the A319neo had not picked up any orders at Paris.

Airbus does not want a 3rd narrowbody vendor. Some will choose the C300 over the A320NEO. While the gauge is smaller, the lower flight costs present an opportunity.

The issue the C-series still faces is that it must prove itself. Most airlines won't buy it until they see 2 years of in-service data. I'm excited for the plane, but I also understand waiting to see how it performs. There are now enough orders to give it that chance. I hope it breaks 300 orders before EIS... but that isn't required.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinekmz From Germany, joined Feb 2008, 160 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 8261 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 12):
I think he would have been left with a certain amount of egg on his face if the A319neo had not picked up any orders at Paris

so airbus would rather loose money than take the risk that one of its (top) employees might loose his face?   honestly, i wouldn't be surprised if it were like that!


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15715 posts, RR: 26
Reply 16, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 8219 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 12):
I think he would have been left with a certain amount of egg on his face if the A319neo had not picked up any orders at Paris.

Of course he would. That's one of the risks of running one's mouth all the time and being something of a lightning rod: if you're wrong, everyone knows it.

Quoting kmz (Reply 15):
so airbus would rather loose money than take the risk that one of its (top) employees might loose his face?

That's not likely the case at all. It's a loss leader and usually the launch customers for a model get a hefty discount.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinekmz From Germany, joined Feb 2008, 160 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 8004 times:

so, if i understand correctly, the NEO program is more one engineering task over all types (319,320,321) with individual flight test programs, rather than individual development programs. Which would make it easier for Airbus to push certain types (319) just to make sure other competitors (CS300) will have a bumpy start?

User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24999 posts, RR: 85
Reply 18, posted (3 years 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7776 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kmz (Reply 15):
so airbus would rather loose money than take the risk that one of its (top) employees might loose his face?   honestly, i wouldn't be surprised if it were like that!

I didn't say they are risking losing money. They may be, I don't know.

JetBlue got a wonderful deal as one of the launch customers for the A320Neo, and I don't think Airbus is going to lose money on the A320Neo.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 16):
Of course he would. That's one of the risks of running one's mouth all the time and being something of a lightning rod: if you're wrong, everyone knows it.

Given the order book the Neo family, I think John Leahy would fine with a bit of egg on his face. But he hasn't got egg on his face.

The desire of a customer and the manufacturer coalesced. Not for the first time in the history of airlines and surely not for the first time with that customer and this manufacturer.

mariner

[Edited 2011-07-17 03:37:42]


aeternum nauta
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12128 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (3 years 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6966 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 2):
It will positively eat US transcon with miles to spare, whereas I don't think the CS300ER will be US transcon capable with a meaningful payload.

Actually the CS-300 does have TRANSCON range. At MTOW, the CS-300ER has a range of 2950 nm. The longest TRANSCON route is the BOS-SFO route at 2350 nm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-Series#Specifications

BOS-SFO%0D%0A&RANGE=&PATH-COLOR=red&PATH-UNITS=nm&PATH-MINIMUM=&SPEED-GROUND=445&SPEED-UNITS=kts&RANGE-STYLE=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=" target="_blank">http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=B...E=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=


User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9976 posts, RR: 96
Reply 20, posted (3 years 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6807 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 19):
Actually the CS-300 does have TRANSCON range. At MTOW, the CS-300ER has a range of 2950 nm. The longest TRANSCON route is the BOS-SFO route at 2350 nm.

Presumably the stories regarding A320 and A321 struggles are just myths, seeing as how they both have a 3000Nm nominal range........  

In reality, it's highly unlikely that a passenger ready CS300ER will be any nearer the manufacturers OEW than A320's or 737's are, so you can figure perhaps a 200Nm real-world hit on the still-air range. At that, an 18%-20% headwind will rule out a westbound transcon, even at nominal 12t payload.

An A319NEO will take upwards of 17t under the same conditions....

And the CS300ER will take a bigger range hit as payload rises.

Rgds


User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12883 posts, RR: 100
Reply 21, posted (3 years 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 6696 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mariner (Reply 18):
I don't think Airbus is going to lose money on the A320Neo.

   I just see a shift to the larger gauge A320 variants.


Quoting astuteman (Reply 20):
And the CS300ER will take a bigger range hit as payload rises.

Agreed. Which is why Bombardier should take out more weight. And if the rumors on engine fuel burn are true...  

The A319 will have greater TCON payload. But as the C300 improves, the 'break even' range will go further and further out (vs. the C300). At some point, that range is too far out for the missions of most airlines, in particular European airlines.

Then again, what I'm most excited about the A320NEO is TATL. It will happen. Pratt and Airbus were working on that twelve years ago. When I look at the Pratt organization chart I see a bunch of names who 'cut their teeth' on projects such as that and I know were personally excited by the idea of a TATL A320/A321.

So we will have an exciting decade for narrowbodies!    And their engines.  

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30551 posts, RR: 84
Reply 22, posted (3 years 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 6621 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mariner (Reply 12):
Even so, Mr. Leahy has made this a public challenge to the C Series and I think he would have been left with a certain amount of egg on his face if the A319neo had not picked up any orders at Paris.

This is JL we're talking about. I'm confident he had that order signed, sealed and delivered before he made that comment. Big grin



If the A319neo ends up being at a disadvantage to the CS300, the 737-700RE would be, as well.

In such a scenario, the speculation that Boeing was looking at 737-800 / 737-900 / 757-200 sizes for the 797 might not have been so crazy, after all.

Yes, I know that means Boeing wouldn't have a product for WN's current fleet, but FR makes the 737-800 work for them and WN is starting to experiment with that capacity.

Or Boeing may feel the a 797 model that covers the 737-700 is what they need to keep an airline like WN out of the arms of Bombardier, so a 737-700RE isn't really an effective option for them.

[Edited 2011-07-17 09:40:36]

User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 23, posted (3 years 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6405 times:

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 13):
Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 6):
CS300ER to be about 12% lighter than A319NEO

How does 36.5t vs. 42.8t (MWE 38.4t) sound?

My most recent OEW estimate, as discussed in the following thread, for CS300ER is 35.5t. Given the recent trend of B787 and A350 coming in heavier than initial estimates, I will go with your estimate of 36.5t.
CS300 Versus B737-700 Updated Analysis (by LAXDESI Apr 1 2009 in Tech Ops)

Airbus airport planning document indicates OEW of nearly 40t for A319. Winglets on NEO are expected to add 400 kg(200 X 2). I can not easily locate the added weight of newer engines and additional structure on A319NEO. I am inclined towards an OEW of 41 to 41.5t for A319NEO.

The following article suggests that Korean Air is planning to use the CS300ER(2 class layout) on 45 routes to China, Japan, and SE Asia currently operated by B738(149 seats in 2 class), as the B738 is too large for some of these routes. Korean Air does not operate B73G.
http://www.centreforaviation.com/new...-bombardier-cseries-aircraft/page1


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24999 posts, RR: 85
Reply 24, posted (3 years 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6392 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 21):
   I just see a shift to the larger gauge A320 variants.

I agree. But I don't think that is necessarily the death knell of the A319Neo. Not every route can support the higher capacity of the A320, Neo or not.

And at least in the US, there is fast becoming a "problem" area (100/120 seats, short to medium range). The C Series may well fill that gap. Then again, if the rumors are true, Embraer offered Republic/Frontier a honey of a deal for more E190/195 - if they cancelled the C Series order.

So I don't think it is just JL/Airbus that is gunning for the C Series.

From what I understand, Republic has not yet decided on the requirements of the fleet beyond about 2015 (the planned first delivery of the C Series) or the disposition of the fleet(s). The one thing I have heard is that the A320Neo family (including the A319Neo) will probably go to DEN because of the hot/high requirements.

I'm not a Tech Wallah, I don't know what that says about the C Series.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 21):
Then again, what I'm most excited about the A320NEO is TATL.

I think the A321Neo with TATL capability would be stunning. But - are they there yet?

There has always - always - been a confusion in my mind between what the Tech Wallahs tell me about the range of the A320 family and what the airlines tell me. See posts #19 and 20 above.

The present A320 has not had true transcon range, or did not have. It can do it, but not in all weathers, and the stories of tech stops in certain seasons are legion. The one thing JL has promised with the Neo is that it has transcon range. But most TATL routes are further, and I haven't heard they are there yet.

In the case that I know best - Frontier - the CEO used to say that the A319 - with a commercially realistic load - is limited to a maximum of 2500 miles. That DEN-SJO is possible that DEN-PTY is dodgy, right at the limit. Nor has Frontier ever used the A320 on DEN-ANC. United has, but it has a lower seat count because of the premium class.

Then again, I don't follow all this as closely as you Tech Wallahs.

mariner

[Edited 2011-07-17 13:17:39]


aeternum nauta
25 bjorn14 : Ouch. Now were talking FR territory. I think the CS300 will be chasing the 319 with the NEO. I've heard range improvements of 3-7% I think only the 3
26 Post contains links mariner : Not with a commercially viable Y class payload. The A319LR can do it - as with PrivatAir - but that is with an all business class configuration - 48
27 Stitch : I expect trip costs will what really decides whether an airline buys the A319meo or the A320neo, just as it decides whether an airline buys the Class
28 Post contains links travelhound : http://www.theaustralian.com.au/busi...plane/story-e6frg95x-1226094837251 This article gives us a little bit of insight into why Asian carriers repres
29 Post contains links bjorn14 : Hmmm....please tell me what am I missing? http://www.airbus.com/aircraftfamili...craft/a320family/a319/performance/
30 mariner : I can't open that link so I don't know what you are missing, sorry. Since it is an Airbus link, I can only assume we may have this situation: Tech Wa
31 bjorn14 : That makes two of us. The map shows the A319 could make CDG-ORD with a 2-class 124 seat payload. Just sayin'.
32 mariner : As I said earlier, I have always understood - from the airlines - that 2500 miles is the limit of the A319 range with an effective commercial load. T
33 larshjort : The ability to do it all year round against all winds. I cannot find where Airbus describes what winds they are calculating with. /Lars
34 Viscount724 : You must be referring to the A319LR with extra tanks (comparable to the BBJ). I have noticed in the past that Airbus has some very misleading range f
35 Stitch : Boeing uses 85% annual winds for their range charts, so I would not be surprised if Airbus did the same.
36 Post contains images lightsaber : This is going to be like the A318 vs. the A319. The cost savings per flight of the A318 didn't justify the lost revenue. Now with the NEO, the A320 w
37 mercure1 : That sounds reasonable, I believe that is a similar wt increase for the APB winglets on the NG srs. Basic MWE around 36.5t, w/ operator allowances, t
38 mariner : I am sure many airlines will go for that combo, but I am not convinced there is no market for the A319Neo. Just as there are many airlines that won't
39 mercure1 : Mariner, that is true, good point. The A319NEO advantage (over the 320/321NEO) will be similar as the non-NEO's today. Slightly more range (300nm or
40 Aesma : Passengers, OTOH, not so excited ! Unless we talk about a 8500nm ACJ, of course.
41 catiii : I think this is vastly overblown. People said the same thing about putting the 757s TATL, and that's worked out fine.
42 r2rho : First of all, I do not interpret the current NEO order book as being made up of almost 80% A320NEO's, 15% A321NEO's, and 5% A319NEO's (roughly speakin
43 lightsaber : I was thinking about this thread (why? I was cruising at the beach on a rented Segway, my mind should have been elsewhere...) and I had a thought. Wh
44 bjorn14 : Just a note the 319ACJ is the biz version, the 319LR is the airline version.
45 r2rho : Thanks, that was a bit confusing at first. There is a potential for both, but it will be small in terms of volume, IMO. The ACJ319 could get formidab
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...
Spirit CEO Says Luggage "not Essential" posted Wed Jul 14 2010 19:09:33 by Logos
IATA: Budget Airlines Will Struggle; EasyJet: No posted Wed Jun 4 2008 03:43:57 by Costastic
JetBlue Q&A: CEO Says It's Time To 'hunker Down' posted Mon Jun 2 2008 13:42:30 by LAXintl
French TV LCI : Spinetta Says No And Leaves! posted Wed Apr 2 2008 10:41:54 by Beaucaire
Delta CEO Says Consolidation Makes Sense posted Tue Oct 16 2007 08:12:04 by UAL777UK
Gecas CEO Says No Plan For A350 Order posted Mon Jun 18 2007 19:29:23 by NYC777
DL CEO Says 764 Developed Specifically For Delta posted Tue Apr 3 2007 06:43:05 by ConcordeBoy
Oman Air Says It Will Order Airbus A330-200 posted Mon Apr 2 2007 14:06:41 by EI321
NWA Reports Profit-Says It Will Share With Workers posted Tue Feb 6 2007 21:08:51 by KarlB737
Boeing CEO Says 787 Halfway To Weight Reduction posted Tue Feb 6 2007 17:43:27 by NYC777