Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23755
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:14 pm

RalXWB wrote:

Always nice to start my day with a "Saj Bomb". It goes well with my morning Fruit Loops.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
BREECH
Posts: 619
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 3:20 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:56 pm

ytz wrote:
Go through the survivability methodology. Nothing better than an F-22 at present. The F-35 is next.

May I dare ask you to elaborate on this? How do you figure that two most unreliable American fighters from the most troublesome programs with the most technical problems have the most survivability? Last time I heard about F-22 it couldn't even fly higher than 2400 m because otherwise the pilots died from hypoxia.
No friendship, love or respect unite people as much as shared hatred.
Sergey Dovlatov
 
JulietteBravo
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2016 5:25 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:03 pm

The deal is about the civil aircraft CSeries and not fighterjets;)
 
User avatar
northstardc4m
Posts: 3378
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:05 pm

ytz wrote:

The US, Danes, Norwegians and Swedes all fly single engine jets inside the Arctic Circle. Canada did the same before CF-18. And Canada cross-shopped the F-16 and F-18 and only purchased the latter because of its radar. Dunno where the twin engine myth comes from. You know who really has an engine reliability requirement? The US Navy. Operating from a carrier is far more dangerous than operating in the Arctic. So if it's good enough for the USN, should be fine for us.


We did not do the same before the CF-18...

Since the Arctic Interceptor role was defined in the RCAF the aircraft used were:

CF-100 (twin)
CF-101 (twin)
CF-5/CF-116 (twin)
CF-18/CF-188 (twin)

The single engine fighter in CAF service replaced by the Hornet, the CF-104, was used primarily for European theater service.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
User avatar
deltadawg
Posts: 1014
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 2:56 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:25 pm

While I do think this is a smart move on Airbus's part I cant help but think of Boeing buying out M-D. In particular the 717. The 717 was a great product that was ahead of it's time (odd saying that considering it was a derivative of the DC9) and I think more airlines would have ordered it had the economy been right and such. However, the 717 was a step-child inherited from M-D and thought to be an answer for the 100-150 segment just like the CSeries and if some may recall they even floated a 717-300 for a while. However, Boeing soon realized that the 717 would have sacrificed it's lower 737 sales and thus seemingly put no effort into selling the 717 and let it die. I hope that is not the case for the CSeries but I just cannot help but think that this is the CSeries being bought in order to shut down. Perhaps the DL order will not let that happen.

Additionally, I wonder if we will see any sort of consolidation of the manufacturers as a result of this? Could a Boeing/Embraer partnership come out of this or even Boeing/Mitsubishi or Sukhoi? As others have said, Boeing screwed the pooch on this one and their backs are up against the wall in many respects. I believe this will force their hand to either get off the fence and push the 737 replacement forward along with the MoM or they will buy/partner with Embraer/Sukhoi/Comac/Irkut/Mitsubishi in order to combat a 100-250 product line that Airbus now has. I would think that their major reliable customers will demand it if they are not already - Ryanair, Southwest and the like will be pushing for something new soon. Interesting times!

Image
GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23755
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:31 pm

JulietteBravo wrote:
The deal is about the civil aircraft CSeries and not fighterjets;)

I agree. The Military Forum is the right place for F18 vs F22 vs F35 talk and there are other threads discussing the tariff issue's impact on the F18 deal. Seems to be no need to keep bringing it up in this thread, barring any new news.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
beechnut
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:27 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:47 pm

deltadawg wrote:
The 717 was a great product that was ahead of it's time (odd saying that considering it was a derivative of the DC9) and I think more airlines would have ordered it had the economy been right and such.


No it was behind its times. Basically a DC9-30. Same wing, fuselage, new engines and avionics. There's only limited efficiency you can find with a reheated airframe. It remained a 50 y.o. airplane. Mind you Boeing does the same with the 737; arguably the 737 was a more scalable design than the DC9.

Fine aircraft the DC9, my all-time fav in fact, but it's still a 1965 airplane. Put a modern direct-injection turbo engine in a '65 Pontiac, and it's still a '65 Pontiac... an overweight whale.

The C-series is a truly brand-new design, a ground-breaker of the same order as the 787 for larger aircraft. So I would like to hope it has some future.

Beech
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2066
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:52 pm

deltadawg wrote:
The 717 was a great product that was ahead of it's time (odd saying that considering it was a derivative of the DC9) and I think more airlines would have ordered it had the economy been right and such.

I think my problem with the 717, was the number itself. For whatever reason, it just didn't work.
Those of us of a certain age have always chuckled at the thought of the 727 having three engines, whilst the 737 only had two, Surely they were the wrong way round?
The 747 obviously put things right again, but after that it just went totally to pot.

But to go backwards and re-invent the 717, and then claim it was a "new" product. Not a chance! And that is why it never sold.

In a similar way, I know why Boeing are reluctant to start any new projects; they are running out of numbers!
The 797 will be the last in the series.
The big question is what do they do after that? I'm not sure the Boeing 808 is going to capture any hearts or minds. It sounds like something from the 1930's

(apologies for drifting off-topic, but with over 1300 posts on this thread, it's difficult to keep focussed) :D
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
KLDC10
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 8:15 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:08 pm

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
deltadawg wrote:
The 717 was a great product that was ahead of it's time (odd saying that considering it was a derivative of the DC9) and I think more airlines would have ordered it had the economy been right and such.

I think my problem with the 717, was the number itself. For whatever reason, it just didn't work.
Those of us of a certain age have always chuckled at the thought of the 727 having three engines, whilst the 737 only had two, Surely they were the wrong way round?
The 747 obviously put things right again, but after that it just went totally to pot.

But to go backwards and re-invent the 717, and then claim it was a "new" product. Not a chance! And that is why it never sold.

In a similar way, I know why Boeing are reluctant to start any new projects; they are running out of numbers!
The 797 will be the last in the series.
The big question is what do they do after that? I'm not sure the Boeing 808 is going to capture any hearts or minds. It sounds like something from the 1930's

(apologies for drifting off-topic, but with over 1300 posts on this thread, it's difficult to keep focussed) :D


But Boeing's aircraft designations have nothing to do with the number of engines an aircraft has. Or else the 707 ought have been a glider. Of course we don't expect that the Boeing 767 should have 6 engines. This is some peculiar thinking right here.

The designation 717 was chosen because Boeing had previously skipped over it in terms of the company's civilian aircraft lineup. In fact, 717 was the Boeing's internal designation for the KC-135. Regardless, the designation '717', never saw the light of day as far as the public was concerned until Boeing acquired McDonnell Douglas and renamed the MD-95.

An aircraft sells if the demand is there. An airline does not make fleet acquisition decisions based on the name of an aircraft. As others have already noted, the 717 failed to sell largely because Boeing preferred to focus their marketing resources on an aircraft they had designed themselves - namely the 737. The events of 2001 hastened the demise of the Boeing 717, which eventually came in 2005 with the announcement that production of the airplane would come to an end. But the fact that only 156 were built has absolutely nothing to do with the name '717'.

Reading to the end of your post; I'm not sure how seriously to take it. Do you really believe Boeing hasn't produced a clean-sheet design yet because they're worried about running out of numbers? What the aircraft will be called is the least of their worries. So long as they produce a good aircraft which meets a demand in the market, they could call it whatever they like and it would still sell.
DC9/MD90/MD11/F70/BAE146
737/738/739/744/748/752/763/772/789
A319/A320/A321/A332/A333/A346/A359
Q400/E170/E175/E190/CS300
 
User avatar
deltadawg
Posts: 1014
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 2:56 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:43 pm

beechnut wrote:
deltadawg wrote:
The 717 was a great product that was ahead of it's time (odd saying that considering it was a derivative of the DC9) and I think more airlines would have ordered it had the economy been right and such.


No it was behind its times. Basically a DC9-30. Same wing, fuselage, new engines and avionics. There's only limited efficiency you can find with a reheated airframe. It remained a 50 y.o. airplane. Mind you Boeing does the same with the 737; arguably the 737 was a more scalable design than the DC9.

Fine aircraft the DC9, my all-time fav in fact, but it's still a 1965 airplane. Put a modern direct-injection turbo engine in a '65 Pontiac, and it's still a '65 Pontiac... an overweight whale.

The C-series is a truly brand-new design, a ground-breaker of the same order as the 787 for larger aircraft. So I would like to hope it has some future.

Beech


Sorry, perhaps I was not clear enough in my post but I believe you are missing the point. It was ahead of it's time by being a workhorse and in the right place at the right time for very few customers. However, as the 2000's moved past 9/11 it was apparent that there was indeed a place for a 100-150 seat aircraft such as the 717 and later the CSeries. The ultimate point being that Boeing chose to kill off the 717 in favor of the 737 perhaps in part due to pride (737 being a homegrown product and the 717 originally being someone else's child - MD95/MD80's/DC9). I don't think you can make the comparison of an aircraft versus a '65 Pontiac in actuality. If that were the case then there would be no 737NG/737Max nor A320neo. Yes, the 737 was more scalable thus the 738/739. The MD-90 was the ultimate push of the DC9 series but still came up short to a 739 but the DC9 and later the 717 were the predecessors of the CSeries in terms of marketplace, that's the point made. Sorry if I was unclear about that.
GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23755
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:28 pm

beechnut wrote:
No it was behind its times. Basically a DC9-30. Same wing, fuselage, new engines and avionics. There's only limited efficiency you can find with a reheated airframe. It remained a 50 y.o. airplane. Mind you Boeing does the same with the 737; arguably the 737 was a more scalable design than the DC9.

Fine aircraft the DC9, my all-time fav in fact, but it's still a 1965 airplane. Put a modern direct-injection turbo engine in a '65 Pontiac, and it's still a '65 Pontiac... an overweight whale.

The C-series is a truly brand-new design, a ground-breaker of the same order as the 787 for larger aircraft. So I would like to hope it has some future.

Thing is, current CS does match DC-9/MD-XX in terms of seating capacity, and the industry has largely moved on from the 100-150 capacity range. Obviously CS has more range, is far more efficient, and is a very modern and comfortable aircraft, but the industry largely did move on. It could have been due to a lack of a good DC-9/MD-XX replacement or it could be that larger frames are preferred or it could be that the market place worked against the presence of a 3rd airplane type. It all means that CS will still need to elbow its way into the market. Clearly DL was looking for something just like CS and its below-market pricing really helped close the deal. It's not clear to me at least how many other airlines have a place for the CS especially if new sales need to start bringing in positive revenue.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:29 pm

deltadawg wrote:

Additionally, I wonder if we will see any sort of consolidation of the manufacturers as a result of this? Could a Boeing/Embraer partnership come out of this or even Boeing/Mitsubishi or Sukhoi? As others have said, Boeing screwed the pooch on this one and their backs are up against the wall in many respects. I believe this will force their hand to either get off the fence and push the 737 replacement forward along with the MoM or they will buy/partner with Embraer/Sukhoi/Comac/Irkut/Mitsubishi in order to combat a 100-250 product line that Airbus now has. I would think that their major reliable customers will demand it if they are not already - Ryanair, Southwest and the like will be pushing for something new soon. Interesting times!



It would be a bold move for Boeing to partner with the up and coming Russians, but I doubt the US would allow it and Boeing seems to be very US-centric, they're not going to let anyone else hold the reigns so to speak. Same goes for COMAC, and COMAC is more likely to steal Boeing's IP and designs.

Boeing doesn't really need a partner at the moment, but if they choose one, it will probably be Embraer or Mitsubishi, or both!
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2066
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 4:31 pm

KLDC10 wrote:
But Boeing's aircraft designations have nothing to do with the number of engines an aircraft has. Or else the 707 ought have been a glider. Of course we don't expect that the Boeing 767 should have 6 engines. This is some peculiar thinking right here.
This should have been your first clue that maybe I have a screw loose. :D

KLDC10 wrote:
An airline does not make fleet acquisition decisions based on the name of an aircraft.
Are you SURE about that? Each airline has to worry about customer reception, and however good the Sukhoi SSJ might be, it is not going to be popular in the USA. Period.

KLDC10 wrote:
Reading to the end of your post; I'm not sure how seriously to take it.
As with a number of my posts, I often bury serious points under a small dung-heap of flippancy and humour. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it's Tuesday already....

The "serious" points in my post were that "717" jarred for me personally (which was never going to cause too much panic in Boeing HQ.)
I also feel that going backwards is a mistake; Boeing dumped the MD-80/MD-90 tag thus losing traditional customers, and introduced a new number that sounded like something from 1965, which indeed, ironically, is somewhat correct.

So long as they produce a good aircraft which meets a demand in the market, they could call it whatever they like and it would still sell.

Boeing have a large and loyal fanbase, so you may well be right. But look what happened to Coca-Cola when they messed with tradition.

If you still have any doubts as to my sanity; just take a good long look at my username. ;)
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
washingtonflyer
Posts: 1609
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:03 pm

So, I was shooting the breeze with a couple of colleagues over the weekend. This "deal" may not be the saving grace that Airbus or Bombardier wants. The dilemma that we see in this deal is that Airbus is now going to be "affiliated" with Bombardier/CSALP through an ownership stake in the C-Series program. Under US law, where you have affiliates doing further processing of merchandise that is subject to a tariff, the investigating agency (Commerce) has the authority to view the semifinished product as being subject to an AD/CVD order if an affiliate is completing assembly in the USA. Commerce has a special questionnaire - the Section "E" questionnaire that I mentioned in the other thread.

What this will hinge on is how far assembled the aircraft is.

Either way, here it appears that Delta is no longer on the hook for the duties. As the importer of record (this is an assumption) Airbus may now be on the hook for the 300% duties.

This is going to get fun...
Last edited by washingtonflyer on Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
StTim
Posts: 3677
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:03 pm

But put the duties on Airbus and a trade war with Europe ensues.
 
User avatar
northstardc4m
Posts: 3378
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:08 pm

StTim wrote:
But put the duties on Airbus and a trade war with Europe ensues.


Trade wars in general seem to be coming regardless...
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
StTim
Posts: 3677
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:14 pm

northstardc4m wrote:
StTim wrote:
But put the duties on Airbus and a trade war with Europe ensues.


Trade wars in general seem to be coming regardless...



I know and we are all going to suffer for them.
 
VV
Posts: 1702
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:29 pm

First thing first.

I am extremely happy and absolutely delighted by Airbus' decision to take a majority stake in CSALP. Please note this statement.
It is good for Bombardier and it is good for the industry. It is even very good for 737 MAX and E-Jets E2. This is one of those very rare moves that makes everyone happy.


CFRPwingALbody wrote:
VV,
If the deal goes true, Airbus will offer three options: (from ~H2 2018)
1) A321Neo, A320Neo and A319Neo with CFM LEAP-A
2) A321Neo, A320Neo and A319Neo with PW-1100G
3) A321Neo & A320 Neo with PW-1100G and CS300 & CS100 with PW-1500G

Boeing has only one option. 737-MAX10, 737-MAX9, 737-MAX8 and 737-MAX7 with CFM LEAP-B.
I think airlines like to have multiple options and figure out what is best for them.


Why do you forget the fourth option? I guess it is not intentional and is just an oversight.

1) A321Neo, A320Neo and A319Neo with CFM LEAP-A
2) A321Neo, A320Neo and A319Neo with PW-1100G
3) A321Neo & A320 Neo with PW-1100G and CS300 with PW-1500G (and CS100 if needed)
4) A321Neo & A320 Neo with CFM Leap-1A and CS300 with PW-1500G (and CS100 if needed)

I hope you didn't intent to obfuscate the fact the options 3 and 4 will need to have extra engine spares for the C Series anyway. In addition, I am pretty sure Airbus has this principle of equal treatment between the two engine manufactures present on the A320neo.

I am just trying to emphasis once again that nothing has changed from 737 MAX perspective.
When airlines say they like to have options, usually they talk about aircraft manufacturers or engine manufacturers. It is not necessarily about multiple and confusing proposals from one aircraft manufacturer.

An yes, a CFM Leap-1B like engine for the C Series is absolutely awesome. I cannot promote my blog. I am so sorry, but I did raise the question about it there.

CFRPwingALbody wrote:
I think that Boeing's single aissle market share is going to drop ~5% further. Airbus 60% Boeing 35% others 5% (BBD largest)


Well, I think you forgot that E195-E2 and E190-E2 are also in the tight space of 100-130 seater short-range market.

Although I do not think there is any need of formal/contractual cooperation between Boeing and Embraer, a gentlemen's agreement can happen in sales campaigns where there is a need for sub 150 seater.

I am not at all trying to "defend" Boeing nor to "bash" Airbus, but I just simply do not see any impact of Airbus' decision to take majority stake in CSALP on the 737 MAX.

The only significant thing I see is that it transform the C Series from a liability to Bombardier to a real opportunity, by giving it the much needed credibility.
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:36 pm

And now we know why Boeing was so shocked:

http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/23/news/co ... index.html
 
PPVRA
Posts: 8476
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:37 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
This means that these tax breaks are not "free money" as so many here assert: you have to be a significant business with a track record of producing products and improving properties and creating jobs. These are all things that benefit those tax payers footing the bills.


And that doesn´t mean it is anti-competitive how? And of course without legally binding Job guarantees, that Boeing doesn´t give, the point is mute. It also does in no way mean the money is less free for them. They have 8 Bn more in the bank and they paid exactly nothing for it. I also don´t see any proof that 8 Bn in Boeings hands will lead to more Jobs and Business created than 8Bn in citizens hands, or even the governments. Both don´t have much of a tendency to use money to relocate jobs out of the country, use more outsourcing or park it in tax heavens.

Fact remains: RLI increase competition, Tax breaks prevent it.


This is not true at all. Both RLIs and tax breaks increase competition.

RLIs increase the likelihood a certain investment will be made by reducing associated risks and costs. Tax breaks increase the likelihood a certain investment will be made by improving its appeal, i.e., profitability. It does nothing to risk levels, other than reduce them relative to the potential gains. This is a lot more "natural" than RLIs.

Furthermore, in both cases only large, politically well connected companies get it.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:07 pm

ytz wrote:
And now we know why Boeing was so shocked:

http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/23/news/co ... index.html


Interesting comment from above article:

"That's a direct consequence of the tariff discussion, said the senior leader close to the deal. If you try to kill someone, don't miss!"

From my past service experience, there are some implacable truth in this...
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23755
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:18 pm

ytz wrote:
And now we know why Boeing was so shocked:

http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/23/news/co ... index.html

Which says:

But Boeing's leadership was betting on China taking over the C Series, not Airbus, according to two people familiar with the company's thinking.

So Boeing got what it wanted, China did not end up with the C Series! :biggrin:

Also:

A senior industry executive predicted another similar shakeup: A Boeing alliance with Brazil's Embraer.

By "the rules of the game theory" in a duopoly, the executive said of the Nobel Prize-winning research that helps predict corporate behavior. "You mirror the movements of your opponent."

So what used to be called "groupthink" is now "the rules of the game theory"? :biggrin:
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5574
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:48 pm

deltadawg wrote:
While I do think this is a smart move on Airbus's part I cant help but think of Boeing buying out M-D. In particular the 717. The 717 was a great product that was ahead of it's time (odd saying that considering it was a derivative of the DC9) and I think more airlines would have ordered it had the economy been right and such. However, the 717 was a step-child inherited from M-D and thought to be an answer for the 100-150 segment just like the CSeries and if some may recall they even floated a 717-300 for a while. However, Boeing soon realized that the 717 would have sacrificed it's lower 737 sales and thus seemingly put no effort into selling the 717 and let it die. I hope that is not the case for the CSeries but I just cannot help but think that this is the CSeries being bought in order to shut down. Perhaps the DL order will not let that happen.

It's interesting to look at sales of the 737 since the shutdown of the 717 line was announced in January 2005. In the period from January 2005 to present, there have been 294 orders placed for the 737-700 including 11 -700Cs and 4 -700s for Korea's Peace Eagle programme), compared to 3757 for the 737-800 (3878 if you count the P-8), and 495 for the 737-900ER. Most of those orders for the -700 were in single digits - a Southwest order for 54 was the only large order placed in one go. When you sum up the various small orders over the time period, the largest orderers for the -700 from January 2005 onwards were AirTran (17), BOC Aviation (14), China Eastern (30), China Southern (18), KLM (13), and Southwest (79). It is an interesting thought experiment to wonder how much the continued presence of the 717 would really have impacted the 737 (I would suggest not much at all in the scheme of things - maybe the tune of 150 orders over a 12 year period), and how much of the 100-150 seat market Boeing could have captured with a combo of the 717-200 and 717-300 (not going to take a stab at that, too many variables). Unfortunately the 717 couldn't get past a slump in orders after an initial flurry. The test for the C Series now is if it can add sufficient new orders and follow-ons to keep the line running. The next few years will be interesting to say the least!

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3324
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:56 pm

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... eries-jet/

I think this is life raft to the Canadian aerospace industry.
 
Waterbomber
Posts: 849
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:51 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:03 pm

With the A320 NEO line virtually sold out until after 2025, Airbus has nothing left to sell for new campaigns.
So it makes sense to add the CSeries so that beyond having something to sell, some customers can convert their NEO orders to the Cseries and free up A320NEO slots.
Also, as they no longer compete against BBD for sales, they no longer have to discount the NEO's as much.

If Airbus is smart, they will launch the CS500 and offer customers a choice of two families in the profitable segment of the market.

Perhaps BBD's biggest mistake was launching the CSeries as a CS100/CS300 combo instead of CS300/CS500.
Had they gone with the CS500 from the start, they would have had a better shot.

Today we still talk about the duopoly, but there is more going on with Russia and China developing their own aircraft.
I also expect Japan to join the party in the not too distant future. The MRJ is a first step, it can't be an end game. The Japanese are maniacal in support and operational efficiency, so I have high expectations for their MRJ launch.

Who knows where the market will be at in 10 years?

In the meanwhile, I expect LH to place an order sooner rather than later, along with IAG and AF.
Jetblue is a given, DL is probably going to top up and convert part of the existing orders to the CS300.
Air Asia perhaps.
Last edited by Waterbomber on Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:21 pm, edited 3 times in total.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3324
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:09 pm

Waterbomber wrote:
With the A320 NEO line virtually sold out until after 2025, Airbus has nothing left to sell for new campaigns.
So it makes sense to add the CSeries so that beyond having something to sell, some customers can convert their NEO orders to the Cseries and free up A320NEO slots.
Also, as they no longer compete against BBD for sales, they no longer have to discount the NEO's as much.

If Airbus is smart, they will launch the CS500 and offer customers a choice of two families in the profitable segment of the market.

Perhaps BBD's biggest mistake was launching the CSeries as a CS100/CS300 combo instead of CS300/CS500.
Had they gone with the CS500 from the start, they would have had a better shot.

Today we still talk about the duopoly, but there is more going on with Russia and China developing their own aircraft.
I also expect Japan to join the party in the not too distant future.
Who knows where the market will be at in 10 years?


One discounts to win the order, its as simple as that. CS in the mix or not.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9391
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:21 pm

I think Airbus could move faster on a C series FAL than waiting on closing of the deal. What stops Airbus from starting on a building generic enough to house the second FAL, but in the case of no deal could house some other expansion at Mobile. The fourth A320 series line in XFW is housed in a building previous used for the A380 outfitting. I expect Airbus to expand Mobile anyway in the face of growing USA protectionism in trade.
 
User avatar
northstardc4m
Posts: 3378
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:37 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
I expect Airbus to expand Mobile anyway in the face of growing USA protectionism in trade.


Absolutely they will... it's also an easy pressure point politically for them... High tech manufacturing jobs in a Republican state with powerful lawmakers incumbent, makes things in Washington all the more interesting despite the foreign ownership.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1314
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:47 pm

william wrote:
Waterbomber wrote:
With the A320 NEO line virtually sold out until after 2025, Airbus has nothing left to sell for new campaigns.
So it makes sense to add the CSeries so that beyond having something to sell, some customers can convert their NEO orders to the Cseries and free up A320NEO slots.
Also, as they no longer compete against BBD for sales, they no longer have to discount the NEO's as much.

If Airbus is smart, they will launch the CS500 and offer customers a choice of two families in the profitable segment of the market.

Perhaps BBD's biggest mistake was launching the CSeries as a CS100/CS300 combo instead of CS300/CS500.
Had they gone with the CS500 from the start, they would have had a better shot.

Today we still talk about the duopoly, but there is more going on with Russia and China developing their own aircraft.
I also expect Japan to join the party in the not too distant future.
Who knows where the market will be at in 10 years?


One discounts to win the order, its as simple as that. CS in the mix or not.

Yes… but steep discounts are not possible/desirable in the long run. A and B discounted heavily against BBD because they calculated that they could kill it off fairly quickly. With only A and B in the mix now, it is not in their mutual interest to offer such heavy discounts, as neither of them could hope to win such a war. It's sort of a cold-war-style, mutually assured destruction scenario.
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:37 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
I think Airbus could move faster on a C series FAL than waiting on closing of the deal. What stops Airbus from starting on a building generic enough to house the second FAL, but in the case of no deal could house some other expansion at Mobile. The fourth A320 series line in XFW is housed in a building previous used for the A380 outfitting. I expect Airbus to expand Mobile anyway in the face of growing USA protectionism in trade.

Interesting. They will probably wait for the Feb 2018 decision (on "harm") before going forward. If legal uncertainty persists, it would be more cost effective to complete the Mirabel's FAL ramp up. (Which could eventually reach a maximum of 150/year, with optimal $ at 120/year).

I'm reading that BBD alone would bear the costs of a CSeries FAL in Mobile. Apparently BBD has on hand all the toolings for a second FAL.

(I also suspect BBD might wait to achieve a critical mass of US sales before starting spending $ in Mobile)
 
User avatar
TVNWZ
Posts: 2257
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:28 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:31 pm

What commercial airplane manufacturer ever kept the the acquired company's (project in this case) and ran with it? I don't think any. Thus, will probably be the fate of the C series. Lot more profit in their own planes. Take the technology. Kill the plane. Done is my guess.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5500
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 9:42 pm

VirginFlyer wrote:
deltadawg wrote:
While I do think this is a smart move on Airbus's part I cant help but think of Boeing buying out M-D. In particular the 717. The 717 was a great product that was ahead of it's time (odd saying that considering it was a derivative of the DC9) and I think more airlines would have ordered it had the economy been right and such. However, the 717 was a step-child inherited from M-D and thought to be an answer for the 100-150 segment just like the CSeries and if some may recall they even floated a 717-300 for a while. However, Boeing soon realized that the 717 would have sacrificed it's lower 737 sales and thus seemingly put no effort into selling the 717 and let it die. I hope that is not the case for the CSeries but I just cannot help but think that this is the CSeries being bought in order to shut down. Perhaps the DL order will not let that happen.

It's interesting to look at sales of the 737 since the shutdown of the 717 line was announced in January 2005. In the period from January 2005 to present, there have been 294 orders placed for the 737-700 including 11 -700Cs and 4 -700s for Korea's Peace Eagle programme), compared to 3757 for the 737-800 (3878 if you count the P-8), and 495 for the 737-900ER. Most of those orders for the -700 were in single digits - a Southwest order for 54 was the only large order placed in one go. When you sum up the various small orders over the time period, the largest orderers for the -700 from January 2005 onwards were AirTran (17), BOC Aviation (14), China Eastern (30), China Southern (18), KLM (13), and Southwest (79). It is an interesting thought experiment to wonder how much the continued presence of the 717 would really have impacted the 737 (I would suggest not much at all in the scheme of things - maybe the tune of 150 orders over a 12 year period), and how much of the 100-150 seat market Boeing could have captured with a combo of the 717-200 and 717-300 (not going to take a stab at that, too many variables). Unfortunately the 717 couldn't get past a slump in orders after an initial flurry. The test for the C Series now is if it can add sufficient new orders and follow-ons to keep the line running. The next few years will be interesting to say the least!

V/F


Goes to the heart of the matter—is there a business case for a CS 100/300 sized airliner? Look at those numbers and the “success” of the A318/319, Fokker 70/100 and EMB-190 and it’s hard not to come away with the conclusion—NO, there isn’t a market for small airliners. Why? The fixed costs of development and certification of a small airliner in a niche are too high and the production run not long enough to amortize those costs.

GF
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4026
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:05 pm

Likely not a business case, at least for Airbus or Boeing, on a C-series size aircraft family. But definitely Bombardier having built it and two sets of FAL there is an advantage to Airbus buying, supporting, and competing against Boeing with it.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4026
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:05 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Likely not a business case, at least for Airbus or Boeing, on a C-series size aircraft family. But definitely Bombardier having built it and two sets of FAL tooling there is an advantage to Airbus buying, supporting, and competing against Boeing with it.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
thumper76
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:16 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
VirginFlyer wrote:
deltadawg wrote:
While I do think this is a smart move on Airbus's part I cant help but think of Boeing buying out M-D. In particular the 717. The 717 was a great product that was ahead of it's time (odd saying that considering it was a derivative of the DC9) and I think more airlines would have ordered it had the economy been right and such. However, the 717 was a step-child inherited from M-D and thought to be an answer for the 100-150 segment just like the CSeries and if some may recall they even floated a 717-300 for a while. However, Boeing soon realized that the 717 would have sacrificed it's lower 737 sales and thus seemingly put no effort into selling the 717 and let it die. I hope that is not the case for the CSeries but I just cannot help but think that this is the CSeries being bought in order to shut down. Perhaps the DL order will not let that happen.

It's interesting to look at sales of the 737 since the shutdown of the 717 line was announced in January 2005. In the period from January 2005 to present, there have been 294 orders placed for the 737-700 including 11 -700Cs and 4 -700s for Korea's Peace Eagle programme), compared to 3757 for the 737-800 (3878 if you count the P-8), and 495 for the 737-900ER. Most of those orders for the -700 were in single digits - a Southwest order for 54 was the only large order placed in one go. When you sum up the various small orders over the time period, the largest orderers for the -700 from January 2005 onwards were AirTran (17), BOC Aviation (14), China Eastern (30), China Southern (18), KLM (13), and Southwest (79). It is an interesting thought experiment to wonder how much the continued presence of the 717 would really have impacted the 737 (I would suggest not much at all in the scheme of things - maybe the tune of 150 orders over a 12 year period), and how much of the 100-150 seat market Boeing could have captured with a combo of the 717-200 and 717-300 (not going to take a stab at that, too many variables). Unfortunately the 717 couldn't get past a slump in orders after an initial flurry. The test for the C Series now is if it can add sufficient new orders and follow-ons to keep the line running. The next few years will be interesting to say the least!

V/F


Goes to the heart of the matter—is there a business case for a CS 100/300 sized airliner? Look at those numbers and the “success” of the A318/319, Fokker 70/100 and EMB-190 and it’s hard not to come away with the conclusion—NO, there isn’t a market for small airliners. Why? The fixed costs of development and certification of a small airliner in a niche are too high and the production run not long enough to amortize those costs.

GF

Repeat after me. Boeing is right, Boeing is right. Boeing is right, Boeing is right. Just wanted to ensure you are on the right page. Please don't turn the page love B
 
Nean1
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:01 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
VirginFlyer wrote:
deltadawg wrote:
While I do think this is a smart move on Airbus's part I cant help but think of Boeing buying out M-D. In particular the 717. The 717 was a great product that was ahead of it's time (odd saying that considering it was a derivative of the DC9) and I think more airlines would have ordered it had the economy been right and such. However, the 717 was a step-child inherited from M-D and thought to be an answer for the 100-150 segment just like the CSeries and if some may recall they even floated a 717-300 for a while. However, Boeing soon realized that the 717 would have sacrificed it's lower 737 sales and thus seemingly put no effort into selling the 717 and let it die. I hope that is not the case for the CSeries but I just cannot help but think that this is the CSeries being bought in order to shut down. Perhaps the DL order will not let that happen.

It's interesting to look at sales of the 737 since the shutdown of the 717 line was announced in January 2005. In the period from January 2005 to present, there have been 294 orders placed for the 737-700 including 11 -700Cs and 4 -700s for Korea's Peace Eagle programme), compared to 3757 for the 737-800 (3878 if you count the P-8), and 495 for the 737-900ER. Most of those orders for the -700 were in single digits - a Southwest order for 54 was the only large order placed in one go. When you sum up the various small orders over the time period, the largest orderers for the -700 from January 2005 onwards were AirTran (17), BOC Aviation (14), China Eastern (30), China Southern (18), KLM (13), and Southwest (79). It is an interesting thought experiment to wonder how much the continued presence of the 717 would really have impacted the 737 (I would suggest not much at all in the scheme of things - maybe the tune of 150 orders over a 12 year period), and how much of the 100-150 seat market Boeing could have captured with a combo of the 717-200 and 717-300 (not going to take a stab at that, too many variables). Unfortunately the 717 couldn't get past a slump in orders after an initial flurry. The test for the C Series now is if it can add sufficient new orders and follow-ons to keep the line running. The next few years will be interesting to say the least!

V/F


Goes to the heart of the matter—is there a business case for a CS 100/300 sized airliner? Look at those numbers and the “success” of the A318/319, Fokker 70/100 and EMB-190 and it’s hard not to come away with the conclusion—NO, there isn’t a market for small airliners. Why? The fixed costs of development and certification of a small airliner in a niche are too high and the production run not long enough to amortize those costs.

GF


Especially in the US, the market for aircraft between 80 and 130 passengers seems very difficult, squeezed between the high-fleet 737/320 models and regional aviation from 70-76 passengers, operating at lower personnel costs. There are punctual successes but a consistent story is still missing.
 
Nean1
Posts: 379
Joined: Mon May 30, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:11 am

Waterbomber wrote:
With the A320 NEO line virtually sold out until after 2025, Airbus has nothing left to sell for new campaigns.
So it makes sense to add the CSeries so that beyond having something to sell, some customers can convert their NEO orders to the Cseries and free up A320NEO slots.
Also, as they no longer compete against BBD for sales, they no longer have to discount the NEO's as much.

If Airbus is smart, they will launch the CS500 and offer customers a choice of two families in the profitable segment of the market.

Perhaps BBD's biggest mistake was launching the CSeries as a CS100/CS300 combo instead of CS300/CS500.
Had they gone with the CS500 from the start, they would have had a better shot.

Today we still talk about the duopoly, but there is more going on with Russia and China developing their own aircraft.
I also expect Japan to join the party in the not too distant future. The MRJ is a first step, it can't be an end game. The Japanese are maniacal in support and operational efficiency, so I have high expectations for their MRJ launch.

Who knows where the market will be at in 10 years?

In the meanwhile, I expect LH to place an order sooner rather than later, along with IAG and AF.
Jetblue is a given, DL is probably going to top up and convert part of the existing orders to the CS300.
Air Asia perhaps.


I suspect Airbus will soon realize that its monthly production target for the A320 family is excessively high. I find it hard to believe that the world economy is so strong and the sales come from companies with adequate business cases.

In a way, the difficulty for companies such as BBD, Embraer and Sukhoi in replenish their order books (even with significant investment in product renewal) seems to me a sign of the risk perceived by airlines.
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:13 am

There's some analysis and a bit of an eye on insider thinking here:
http://www.fliegerfaust.com/transatlant ... 50189.html

Major points for me:

1) Bombardier is going to start working on the design for the second FAL. Could be up and running as early as 2019.
2) Airbus thinks they can get production costs down by 10%.
3) Mirabel alone could produce up to 280 frames.



To those who want to discuss fighters. Start another thread and invite me there. But I will say this. A lot of you don't seem to actually Arctic operations (as we conduct them in the RCAF today) or the procurement process (namely the fact that the requirement specs are written by operators). I don't think this deal changes anything with Europe, and Sylvain has good analysis here:

http://www.fliegerfaust.com/cf-18-repla ... 04839.html

We can discuss more in another thread if I get invited over.
Last edited by ytz on Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9302
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:31 am

deltadawg wrote:
Sorry, perhaps I was not clear enough in my post but I believe you are missing the point. It was ahead of it's time by being a workhorse and in the right place at the right time for very few customers.


That doesn't hold water, either. The MD-95 was launched during one of the most aggressive growth economies in modern history. The A320 and 737 were selling by the hundreds per year. The MD-95 wasn't selling before the Boeing-MD merger and the resources Boeing added to the program weren't enough to help the 717.

deltadawg wrote:
However, as the 2000's moved past 9/11 it was apparent that there was indeed a place for a 100-150 seat aircraft such as the 717 and later the CSeries.


Let's evaluate that claim. The 717-200 was size equal to the A318, 737-600, and E195. Those three models totaled roughly 300 orders. Add the 717 sales and that's roughly 450 frames. That's less than 5% of the narrowbodies sold over the last 20 years. Where's the demand?

deltadawg wrote:
The ultimate point being that Boeing chose to kill off the 717 in favor of the 737 perhaps in part due to pride (737 being a homegrown product and the 717 originally being someone else's child - MD95/MD80's/DC9)


Unsubstantiated B.S.

Boeing also killed-off "their own" 757 family before to ending 717 production. The decision to end 717 production was clearly motivated by Boeing's decision to consolidate non-competitive product lines and focus resources on product lines with highest demand. Pride had nothing to do with it.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:37 am

The argument for whether there is a business case for the CSeries, rest on whether you believe that airlines should not have aircraft with less than 150 seats for mainline service. It presumes upgauging of virtually every 73G and 319 ever sold. I find that to be quite the assumption. Obviously, that may have proved true when Bombardier was selling the airplane. We'll see if this changes now that Airbus will be marketing it. On a more personal note, I find a lot of that perspective seems to come from Americans and Europeans used to much more populated and dense market. This is not the case everywhere. And as a Canadian used to seeing AC operate 90 and 100 seaters, it's not a stretch to me that an airline would need aircraft operating in this size class.

I would also argue (and I have for years) that the business case for the whole CSeries rests on whether the CS500 gets built. It completes the family and gives a substantially better reason for operators to buy into the whole family. It's easy to see an airline like JetBlue going CS100, CS500 and 321NEO/LR. Or Easyjet going CS300 and CS500. The decision is now Airbus' to make.

Lastly, for those who keep saying Airbus is going to kill it. To start with Airbus is not Boeing. They fully own CASA and 50% of ATR. Yet, they haven't tried nuking ATR. Next, the job guarantees given to Quebec's government are pretty substantial. I don't see how they would meet those if they kill the CSeries. And that's aside from the other promises they made to the Quebec government on keeping the CSeries going.

They could choose to underinvest though. And have it wither on the vine. Though I would argue that businesses usually want to play to their strengths. And the CSeries is definitely an asset in the Airbus lineup. I don't see any reason for them not to invest. Even after the 8th FAL and production rate increase, if you order today, you're probably getting delivery in 2025. They can sell another 200-300 airplanes a year with BBD, and make 50% on every sale. And use freed up slots to drum up even more time sensitive customers. Why would they not do that?
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9302
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:46 am

VirginFlyer wrote:
It's interesting to look at sales of the 737 since the shutdown of the 717 line was announced in January 2005. In the period from January 2005 to present, there have been 294 orders placed for the 737-700 including 11 -700Cs and 4 -700s for Korea's Peace Eagle programme), compared to 3757 for the 737-800 (3878 if you count the P-8), and 495 for the 737-900ER. Most of those orders for the -700 were in single digits - a Southwest order for 54 was the only large order placed in one go. When you sum up the various small orders over the time period, the largest orderers for the -700 from January 2005 onwards were AirTran (17), BOC Aviation (14), China Eastern (30), China Southern (18), KLM (13), and Southwest (79).


Pretty damning for the 717 that one of the customers the 737-700 won was AirTran.

VirginFlyer wrote:
It is an interesting thought experiment to wonder how much the continued presence of the 717 would really have impacted the 737 (I would suggest not much at all in the scheme of things - maybe the tune of 150 orders over a 12 year period), and how much of the 100-150 seat market Boeing could have captured with a combo of the 717-200 and 717-300 (not going to take a stab at that, too many variables). Unfortunately the 717 couldn't get past a slump in orders after an initial flurry.


The 717 had no "initial flurry" of orders. It was launched on a single order by ValueJet (later AirTran) and didn't pick-up another order for two years.

The biggest order in the 100-125 seat range post-717 era was the Azul Brazilian Airlines order for 31 E195 plus 20 options (eventually exercised). You can decide for yourself if you think the 717 would have been competitive for that order.

And let's not forget. There are very real opportunity costs to keeping a production line open.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9391
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 1:05 am

There will be a big change with the C series. The main argument against a 737-7 or a A319neo is, that the trip cost is not much lower than the frame one size up. The trip cost of a CS100 or CS300 is significantly lower than a 737-8 or A320neo.
 
User avatar
coronado
Posts: 1278
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 1999 9:42 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 1:55 am

Before year end I fully expect Delta to convert its 50 options to a firm conditional order of CS300. The existing order for 75CS100, of which numbers 36 to 75 are convertible at Delta option to CS300 will probably be split with another 35CS100 and 15CS300, The ''conditional'' will be on their being Made in Alabama, USA,*** and place a follow on order for another 50 Mobile built CS300. With a lot of announcements with politicians and American flags present. Airbus will simultaneously announce an expansion of its Mobile facilities. IMHO Delta's new RFP will be for a further 50 A320.5NEO and 50 A321 Neos, with a significant number to undergo final assembly in Mobile and for good measure a carrot to Boeing with an order for 50-75 737-9 or even737 -10 Max's.

All those MD88's, MD90's and 757's are not getting any younger.

Delta has a lot of skin and reputation in the CS Series and also sees the opportunity of becoming the pre-eminent MRO for the C series, with IMHO an expansion of MSP and DTW Tech Ops facilities..
The Original Coronado: First CV jet flights RG CV 990 July 1965; DL CV 880 July 1965; Spantax CV990 Feb 1973
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:13 am

coronado wrote:
Before year end I fully expect Delta to convert its 50 options to a firm conditional order of CS300. The existing order for 75CS100, of which numbers 36 to 75 are convertible at Delta option to CS300 will probably be split with another 35CS100 and 15CS300, The ''conditional'' will be on their being Made in Alabama, USA,*** and place a follow on order for another 50 Mobile built CS300. With a lot of announcements with politicians and American flags present. Airbus will simultaneously announce an expansion of its Mobile facilities. IMHO Delta's new RFP will be for a further 50 A320.5NEO and 50 A321 Neos, with a significant number to undergo final assembly in Mobile and for good measure a carrot to Boeing with an order for 50-75 737-9 or even737 -10 Max's.

All those MD88's, MD90's and 757's are not getting any younger.

Delta has a lot of skin and reputation in the CS Series and also sees the opportunity of becoming the pre-eminent MRO for the C series, with IMHO an expansion of MSP and DTW Tech Ops facilities..


There's no way DL commits to anything substantial until they know how all the legal machinations work out for Airbus and Bombardier. They have time to exercise those options. If they want to lock down discounts on a second tranche, they could negotiate purchase rights. But that's about as far as I see them going. I wonder if there are any restrictions on the options or there switch all of them to CS300s. DL may just have a great replacement for its 319s and 73Gs. They can then work Airbus for a nice deal on 321NEOs and more CS100 for that 717 replacement.

I do agree though, that they will convert every order that they can to CS300s and exercise all 50 options. Bet they are wishing they had taken up a lot more options. They got a fantastic deal on those. They won't pass them up now.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1314
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:25 am

For those of you who have been longtime followers of the CSeries Production and Testing thread, let me say this. I miss Planemaker! I would be very interested to know his/her opinion on all this. :stirthepot:
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:35 am

aerolimani wrote:
For those of you who have been longtime followers of the CSeries Production and Testing thread, let me say this. I miss Planemaker! I would be very interested to know his/her opinion on all this. :stirthepot:


His opinion would be obvious.

What happened to him anyway?
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9391
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 8:44 am

washingtonflyer wrote:
So, I was shooting the breeze with a couple of colleagues over the weekend. This "deal" may not be the saving grace that Airbus or Bombardier wants. The dilemma that we see in this deal is that Airbus is now going to be "affiliated" with Bombardier/CSALP through an ownership stake in the C-Series program. Under US law, where you have affiliates doing further processing of merchandise that is subject to a tariff, the investigating agency (Commerce) has the authority to view the semifinished product as being subject to an AD/CVD order if an affiliate is completing assembly in the USA. Commerce has a special questionnaire - the Section "E" questionnaire that I mentioned in the other thread.

What this will hinge on is how far assembled the aircraft is.

Either way, here it appears that Delta is no longer on the hook for the duties. As the importer of record (this is an assumption) Airbus may now be on the hook for the 300% duties.

This is going to get fun...


I well understand that you have specialized laws in the USA, written to apply to foreign produced merchandise only, with specialized kangaroo courts to execute those laws. But I do not get, how you want to get past the point were an aircraft assembled in the USA, with 50 or more percent USA content, can be declared a foreign produced air frame. The moment it has to be accepted as an USA produced product, all laws regarding foreign produced merchandise should go out of the window.
Ownership of the factory where a frame is assembled should not matter. Airbus or CSALP will only import aircraft parts into the USA, with very expensive parts like engines and avionics produced in the USA, never seeing an international border. So we will see parts like fuselage parts and wings being imported, Do you expect the USA to say to hell with international agreements that aircraft parts move between countries without customs being applied?
 
User avatar
SomebodyInTLS
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:05 am

mjoelnir wrote:
I think Airbus could move faster on a C series FAL than waiting on closing of the deal. What stops Airbus from starting on a building generic enough to house the second FAL, but in the case of no deal could house some other expansion at Mobile. The fourth A320 series line in XFW is housed in a building previous used for the A380 outfitting. I expect Airbus to expand Mobile anyway in the face of growing USA protectionism in trade.


It was my understanding that the buildings in Mobile are already there, pending expansion of Airbus lines.

I seem to remember reading a quote that space for a second A320 line will now be given over to the second CSeries line instead.

Basically, they can start assembling the line as soon as they are comfortable and as soon as the parts are ready. I also thought that most of the line is the late stages of preparation since Bombardier was due to start assembling it themselves soon...
"As with most things related to aircraft design, it's all about the trade-offs and much more nuanced than A.net likes to make out."
 
Flyglobal
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:25 am

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:27 am

mjoelnir wrote:
washingtonflyer wrote:
So, I was shooting the breeze with a couple of colleagues over the weekend. This "deal" may not be the saving grace that Airbus or Bombardier wants. The dilemma that we see in this deal is that Airbus is now going to be "affiliated" with Bombardier/CSALP through an ownership stake in the C-Series program. Under US law, where you have affiliates doing further processing of merchandise that is subject to a tariff, the investigating agency (Commerce) has the authority to view the semifinished product as being subject to an AD/CVD order if an affiliate is completing assembly in the USA. Commerce has a special questionnaire - the Section "E" questionnaire that I mentioned in the other thread.

What this will hinge on is how far assembled the aircraft is.

Either way, here it appears that Delta is no longer on the hook for the duties. As the importer of record (this is an assumption) Airbus may now be on the hook for the 300% duties.

This is going to get fun...


I well understand that you have specialized laws in the USA, written to apply to foreign produced merchandise only, with specialized kangaroo courts to execute those laws. But I do not get, how you want to get past the point were an aircraft assembled in the USA, with 50 or more percent USA content, can be declared a foreign produced air frame. The moment it has to be accepted as an USA produced product, all laws regarding foreign produced merchandise should go out of the window.
Ownership of the factory where a frame is assembled should not matter. Airbus or CSALP will only import aircraft parts into the USA, with very expensive parts like engines and avionics produced in the USA, never seeing an international border. So we will see parts like fuselage parts and wings being imported, Do you expect the USA to say to hell with international agreements that aircraft parts move between countries without customs being applied?


If I were Airbus I would have the strategic goal that the C Series built in US has a higher local US Content then the Boeing 787.
Anyone in the know, how much American the 787 is compared to the C-Series?

Flyglobal
 
fsabo
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Airbus and Bombardier Announce CSeries Partnership

Tue Oct 24, 2017 10:37 am

Flyglobal wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
washingtonflyer wrote:
So, I was shooting the breeze with a couple of colleagues over the weekend. This "deal" may not be the saving grace that Airbus or Bombardier wants. The dilemma that we see in this deal is that Airbus is now going to be "affiliated" with Bombardier/CSALP through an ownership stake in the C-Series program. Under US law, where you have affiliates doing further processing of merchandise that is subject to a tariff, the investigating agency (Commerce) has the authority to view the semifinished product as being subject to an AD/CVD order if an affiliate is completing assembly in the USA. Commerce has a special questionnaire - the Section "E" questionnaire that I mentioned in the other thread.

What this will hinge on is how far assembled the aircraft is.

Either way, here it appears that Delta is no longer on the hook for the duties. As the importer of record (this is an assumption) Airbus may now be on the hook for the 300% duties.

This is going to get fun...


I well understand that you have specialized laws in the USA, written to apply to foreign produced merchandise only, with specialized kangaroo courts to execute those laws. But I do not get, how you want to get past the point were an aircraft assembled in the USA, with 50 or more percent USA content, can be declared a foreign produced air frame. The moment it has to be accepted as an USA produced product, all laws regarding foreign produced merchandise should go out of the window.
Ownership of the factory where a frame is assembled should not matter. Airbus or CSALP will only import aircraft parts into the USA, with very expensive parts like engines and avionics produced in the USA, never seeing an international border. So we will see parts like fuselage parts and wings being imported, Do you expect the USA to say to hell with international agreements that aircraft parts move between countries without customs being applied?


If I were Airbus I would have the strategic goal that the C Series built in US has a higher local US Content then the Boeing 787.
Anyone in the know, how much American the 787 is compared to the C-Series?

Flyglobal


I doubt the percentage of US content and percentage of assembly in the US will have any effect. The only thing that matters is the potential response to what is essentially protectionism.

Fran

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos