Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
BaconButty
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:42 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:14 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Understandable, though the whole thing's rather odd.

What I don't understand is to whom is this marketing designed to appeal?

Airlines? ...what airline, ready to potentially invest billions, isn't going to be fully aware of the history of this frame?

I think it's about sending a message that Airbus is supporting this aircraft family. The travails of the A380 accrue significant reputational damage for Airbus - by branding the C Series in the same way, it sends a message.
Down with that sort of thing!
 
jb1087xna
Posts: 493
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:11 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:19 pm

anfromme wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Understandable, though the whole thing's rather odd.
What I don't understand is to whom is this marketing designed to appeal?
Airlines? ...what airline, ready to potentially invest billions, isn't going to be fully aware of the history of this frame?
Passengers? ...why bother, when you could tell 99% of them that it was an "Airbus 747" an they'd likely believe it.
Lessors? ...see "airlines" above.

For passengers, they mightn't be able to tell an A330 and a 777 apart, but they have a general idea that Airbus and Boeing exist and are generally renowned and recognised manufacturers. When the safety card says "Bombardier", "Embraer" or "Sukhoi"... different story.


I was going to stay out of this thread, but seeing as how over 40 of 45 departures from my home airport tomorrow are on "Bombardier" or "Embraer" models, I don't see the issue of passenger perception. I'd guess nearly all markets across the US have been seeing those names regularly for the last two decades in some capacity.
 
TangoandCash
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 5:52 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:10 am

Tradition and logic mean very little. This is probably being done by the same marketing department which unceremoniously renamed the AS350 helicopter, which number in the thousands and have been flying with that designation since the 1970s, to "H125" a few years ago.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20330
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:47 am

keesje wrote:
I think Airbus was condering A316 & A317 when they were considering 5 abreast CSeries like aircraft themselves with AVIC.

Image

A315 and A316 work. Leave A317 for a stretch...

I still like A120, A130...
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
cougar15
Posts: 1442
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 6:10 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:58 am

Boeing built a 717 (MD95), MD11´s were known as Boeing MD11´s after the takeover of MDD, heck there was even operators flying MD80s around with Boeing MD80 stickering. So why should Airbus not rename the product, as peers have done in the past?
some you lose, others you can´t win!
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6607
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:04 am

Makes total sense if you consider the way corporate management works. Managers' jobs are at far greater risk when a purchase from a non-established source doesn't work out than when a product from a major player doesn't work out. No one at an airline is going to get fired for choosing to buy an Airbus A230. Buying a Bombardier CS300, even if the product is exactly the same, is sticking your neck out a lot farther.

Airbus finally has a situation where their product numbers are in order of size (something I expect Boeing wishes it could easily do) and they aren't going to screw that up by calling their smallest aircraft the A360. I agree A210/A230 is inconsistent with past practice, but past practice is itself inconsistent. Airbus did things differently for the A300/A310, the A32S, and the A330/340/350.
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:07 am

Whatever the name, we will most likely be finding out the answer soon:


"Airbus, Bombardier eye CSeries deal by late May"
Airbus SE and Bombardier aim to close a deal giving the European planemaker a majority stake in the Canadian company’s CSeries jetliner program by the end of May, ahead of an initial timetable, two people familiar with the matter told Reuters.

An early deal closure would accelerate orders and efforts to reduce costs, the people added. A third source said the deal, initially expected to close in late 2018, and then mid-year, pending regulatory approval, is now “very close.” The companies have almost completed the process of seeking clearances which must span multiple jurisdictions, they added.



Source: https://www.reuters.com/article/bombard ... SL3N1S25G1
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24641
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:12 am

timf wrote:
Better yet, just use the next logical number A360-100 and A360-300.

Two 180s per flight? :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
 
QXAS
Posts: 366
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:26 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:27 am

Put my vote in for A360, A361, A362. Then if the eventual A320 replacement is based on the CSeries they can advertise them all as one family, the A360 family. This question takes us back in the history books, why did Airbus use A300 for their first jet? What’s the significance? Airbus still has A360, A370, and A390. Those could be eaten up rather quick if they decide to renunber Cseries to A3** and go with different families for A320 replacement and the MOM competitor. Making the CSeries an A200 would work but it would set the family apart from other models.
I am NOT an employee of any airline or manufacturer. I speak for myself, not on the behalf of any company.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15162
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:34 am

flyingclrs727 wrote:
A360 makes the most sense. It's a decades younger design than the A300. It shouldn't have a lower number than the A300. Also, A360 and A370 are still available almost 2 decades after the launch of the A380 program and more than a decade after the first A380 went into airline service.


I think they were going in circles considering the A360
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2605
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:53 am

wjcandee wrote:
Well, emotions aside, I see the point of calling it an Airbus.

However, if A thinks that this is some kind of panacea, renaming the MD95 as the 717 didn't do squat, and while it may have been intended to give the impression that Boeing was fully-behind the model, Boeing of course shut the thing down as soon as they could to protect the horrible 737-600.

Based on what, your intuition? If Boeing had intended to shut down the 717 from the Get-Go, it wouldn't have continued trying to market it another 8+ years before it made the decision to shutter the line at Long Beach. They even floated a stretched -300 model to try to wring more sales from Air Tran. The 717 simply didn't sell in sufficient numbers to keep the line open. It's termination likely had more to do with Embraer's then emerging E-jets than with the 737-600 which was also a dog on the market, selling even fewer frames than the 717. The E-jets greater operating efficiency was surely the 717's real death knell since it was based heavily on an old type.Boeing never would have put marketing muscle behind the 717, putting ads for it in trade publications like Aviation Week, had they planned to end it as soon as the merger with McDonnell-Douglas was complete. That was done with the MD-80/90 but the 717 was kept because Boeing at the time felt it could address the regional market better than anything else they could develop soon. They were wrong of course, but they did give the 717 an honest tryout.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:26 am

anfromme wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Understandable, though the whole thing's rather odd.
What I don't understand is to whom is this marketing designed to appeal?
Airlines? ...what airline, ready to potentially invest billions, isn't going to be fully aware of the history of this frame?
Passengers? ...why bother, when you could tell 99% of them that it was an "Airbus 747" an they'd likely believe it.
Lessors? ...see "airlines" above.


Indeed, all of the above.
Marketing is still important, no matter how big the deal.
With tha A-name comes a completely different image in terms of available support, for instance. It also instills confidence that Airbus are committed to the type and you're not going to buy an orphan plane.
Both huge factors in plane purchasing decisions.
From my own experience, it's a lot easier to argue for a well-known quantity than for a supplier who's showing promise but has problems with support, a somewhat mixed track record, etc. Consequently, it's a lot easier to get approval for purchases.
For passengers, they mightn't be able to tell an A330 and a 777 apart, but they have a general idea that Airbus and Boeing exist and are generally renowned and recognised manufacturers. When the safety card says "Bombardier", "Embraer" or "Sukhoi"... different story.


Yes, I believe you are correct. Ultimately, Bombardier was able to design and build a competitive plane - a masterpiece IMO. They had enough money to do that. But they did NOT have enough money to compete with A&B's position in the world of aviation finance. Nobody does.

The residual values that underpin the attractive low payments on A&B leases and loans are based on A&B's strong support reputation (will they be here 15 years from now? Yes) and a known, liquid market for used airplanes. That is what moves BMW cars, too. What a tremendous barrier to entry for poor Bombardier! BBD would need to sell even cheaper than Airbus and Boeing during launch phase, with inferior cost scale, and with inferior access to capital. And no secondary market, greater OEM risk yada yada. A totally impossible situation. Now I think they were crazy for even trying! But hey, they designed a really nice airplane.
 
Max Q
Posts: 8514
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 3:07 am

flyingclrs727 wrote:
A360 makes the most sense. It's a decades younger design than the A300. It shouldn't have a lower number than the A300. Also, A360 and A370 are still available almost 2 decades after the launch of the A380 program and more than a decade after the first A380 went into airline service.



Not a good idea, we used to joke about
an A360


The name implies it flies in circles !
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
kaneporta1
Posts: 739
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:22 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 3:46 am

Instead of using the letter A and a random 3-digit number following it, why not just give the aircraft proper names like Andy and Alex?
I'd rather die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather, not terrified and screaming, like his passengers
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3628
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:10 am

william wrote:
Why hold onto the CS prefix? This isn't BBD's product anymore but Airbus's. Intelligent move by Airbus to change the CS name to something more in line with the Airbus family.



Airbus did not buy it oitright. They invested in it. So no it's not Airbus' product at this point.
 
aviationaware
Posts: 2858
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 12:02 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:49 am

Jayafe wrote:
aviationaware wrote:
Strictly against it. Would be sad to see the Bombardier brand vanish from the industry.


You know that Bombardier makes business selling other families of aircrafts, apart from the CSeries, don't you?


The CRJ and DH4 has limited breath left and business jets don't count.
 
rlwynn
Posts: 1506
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 3:35 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:58 am

A200 is a good idea, fits perfect.
I can drive faster than you
 
RalXWB
Posts: 499
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 9:36 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 7:20 am

Next logical step regarding the integration into the product portfolio of Airbus...
 
User avatar
Lingon
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 7:34 am

anfromme wrote:
With tha A-name comes a completely different image in terms of available support, for instance. It also instills confidence that Airbus are committed to the type and you're not going to buy an orphan plane.


This.

Then if it's numbered A210/230 or 220/221 or whatever is less important. Maybe just avoid 367, 377, 666, 007 and a few other numbers :-)

What the passengers think is not relevant. Only if it is an iconic airplane (= well-known and generating positive feelings among ordinary people) marketing the aircraft model makes sense in airline ads. Norwegian curerntly has a campaign with TV-ads, where a passenger rips off a protective plastic cover from the window, then the speaker says "welcome to our brand new airplanes". No mentioning it is a Boeing, the selling point is "brand new".
An Airbus A210 instead of a Bombardier CS100 won't sell tickets.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9348
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:32 am

BaconButty wrote:
The travails of the A380 accrue significant reputational damage for Airbus....


Really?
Afaics only to those that try to compete by any means and only by acclamation.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14016
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:40 am

Airbus A200, A300, A400 series. E2's could use A100
:stirthepot:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1224
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:41 am

BaconButty wrote:
...The travails of the A380 accrue significant reputational damage for Airbus...


From a passenger pov? Can't be more the opposite, setting CSeries up as young brother of the successful A320, A330, A350 and A380.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:54 am

Stupid waste of money.

Save the millions and spend them on CPD instead.

Even worse, the proposed names are orphans of the Airbus naming scheme and make zero sense in their own right anyway!
Why not A360-200 & A360-300?
Or if they want to reset beyond the 3XX lineage, A410-200 & A410-300? Or A411 & A413?

When making model numbers, the stupid marketing clowns need to think beyond the next 10 years and to the next 100! The A380 name was utterly stupid in breaking the sequence.
 
mat66
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:12 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:24 am

Fortunately it is „one of the names discussed“
IMO A314,A315 or A315,A316 would make sense, even with no resemblance of 100 and 300.
As the CS300 is the base model, I would call it A315. Similar to A320 and the shrink A319. A316 as the future stretch.
A2**has nothing to do with Airbus commercial aircraft.
 
BHXLOVER
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2015 2:20 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 10:05 am

flyingturtle wrote:
What's the ruckus?

Not naming an aircraft something like "Brabazon", "Britannia", "Starliner" or "Backfire" is the real travesty.


Signed,
David


I don't think I would travel on an aircraft called "Backfire" !!
 
User avatar
Captain77W
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:29 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 10:45 am

Waterbomber wrote:
I think that Airbus would do well to highlight it as a baby version of an A320.
The A220 would be great for that.
That would then make it the A220-100, A220-300 and A220-500.
Or it could be A219, A220, A221.
One more option is to rename them as variants of the A320.
A312 A314 A316.

According to BBD it was going to be A vs B vs C.
Airbus cant have that so the C has to go.

Airbus’s marketing team should hire you, it’s a lot better named like that
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24641
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 10:49 am

QXAS wrote:
This question takes us back in the history books, why did Airbus use A300 for their first jet? What’s the significance?

Simply because the A300 was to have 300 seats.

707 arose because it simply was the next model number available in Boeing's filing system for new models.

All of these things have as much significance as we choose to give them.

Shakespeare (kinda) wrote: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"...
(ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_rose_by ... l_as_sweet)

Yet, marketing...

In the innocent days of yore product names didn't matter much.

Now we have the entire branding industry, and people choose to worry about their own personal brands.
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
 
ELBOB
Posts: 331
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:56 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:56 am

Slash787 wrote:
This is Madness. CS100 and CS300 are the perfect names for those aircrafts


Why? What is a C Series anyway, there was no A or B series. 100 for 100 seats and 300 for..?

I could have accepted CSJ as a successor to CRJ perhaps, but C Series is a meaningless marketing name that doesn't translate directly to Canadian-French; Série C pour les francophones.
 
User avatar
Erebus
Posts: 1167
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 2:40 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:14 pm

Revelation wrote:
timf wrote:
Better yet, just use the next logical number A360-100 and A360-300.

Two 180s per flight? :biggrin:


I would say that the A360 will have to be a revolutionary aircraft. :optimist:
 
User avatar
Clipper101
Posts: 697
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:46 pm

ELBOB wrote:
Why? What is a C Series anyway, there was no A or B series. 100 for 100 seats and 300 for..?

I could have accepted CSJ as a successor to CRJ perhaps, but C Series is a meaningless marketing name that doesn't translate directly to Canadian-French; Série C pour les francophones.


As I understand it from the following quote in the article referenced per OP:

The C Series branding was revealed at the Farnborough expo in 2004, where Bombardier said that it stood for “competitive, continental, connector.” The name also harked back to planemaker Canadair, which formed the core of Bombardier Aerospace following its acquisition in 1986, and hinted at the model’s aim of breaking the existing single-aisle duopoly, with “A” representing Airbus and “B” Boeing Co.


the C Series reflects acronym from the series of three words: Competitive, continental, connector followed by the C in Canadair (as opposed to A for Airbus & B for Boeing) then you have the numerical designator x00; so it ends up showing C Series C100/300, it is like they are trying to address their business case with such a name.

If you ask me, Airbus A200 series could be appropriate as opposed to A320 series. Then you will have Airbus A201 (for C100) and Airbus A203 (for C300) :D
 
timf
Posts: 568
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 8:36 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:52 pm

After further consideration, I do like A314/A315/(A316) the best. Avoiding A317 maintains a gap between the existing A320 series and the newly numbered C Series, plus model numbers ending in 7 is more of a Boeing thing.
 
User avatar
Slash787
Posts: 951
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:17 pm

ELBOB wrote:
Slash787 wrote:
This is Madness. CS100 and CS300 are the perfect names for those aircrafts


Why? What is a C Series anyway, there was no A or B series. 100 for 100 seats and 300 for..?


Well like what why call the A380 as A380? call it the B500, The BIG 500 cause it can carry 500 passengers and more.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2571
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:38 pm

A360 sounds much better.
 
User avatar
Slash787
Posts: 951
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:49 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
A360 sounds much better.


The name A360 would suit on a aircraft which would be long as the A340-600, it does not suit on the CSeries.
 
LupineChemist
Posts: 826
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:03 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:04 pm

Eh, I think the A210/230 works fine.

Signifies Airbus is really committed to the frame (however much truth may or may not be there, I do think they are) Also shows that it doesn't follow the same type rating as the 3X0 families. (not a pilot, but isn't the training significantly reduced for the rating of current Airbuses if you already hold another type rating?)

I don't really care about consistency of incrementing by 1 or 10.

Most of the cries for no is emotions attached to the current name which shows exactly why the name matters.
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 393
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:38 pm

aviationaware wrote:
Strictly against it. Would be sad to see the Bombardier brand vanish from the industry.



Don't worry, it's not going anywhere:

Image
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 1170
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:44 pm

anfromme wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Understandable, though the whole thing's rather odd.
What I don't understand is to whom is this marketing designed to appeal?
Airlines? ...what airline, ready to potentially invest billions, isn't going to be fully aware of the history of this frame?
Passengers? ...why bother, when you could tell 99% of them that it was an "Airbus 747" an they'd likely believe it.
Lessors? ...see "airlines" above.


Indeed, all of the above.
Marketing is still important, no matter how big the deal.
With tha A-name comes a completely different image in terms of available support, for instance. It also instills confidence that Airbus are committed to the type and you're not going to buy an orphan plane.
Both huge factors in plane purchasing decisions.
From my own experience, it's a lot easier to argue for a well-known quantity than for a supplier who's showing promise but has problems with support, a somewhat mixed track record, etc. Consequently, it's a lot easier to get approval for purchases.
For passengers, they mightn't be able to tell an A330 and a 777 apart, but they have a general idea that Airbus and Boeing exist and are generally renowned and recognised manufacturers. When the safety card says "Bombardier", "Embraer" or "Sukhoi"... different story.

Wouldn’t you think the people in the position to buy the CSeries or whatever it may be called in the further know they are dealing with Airbus rather than someone else? If not what are they doing in that position in the first place. I think one would have to be a bit naive to think a simple cheap name change is an endorsement of the product, especially since their proposed name is an odd duck name. You see how it worked for the 717, no one cared and Boeing discontinued it anyway. I can see the desire to rename it, but it should be a part of the A3XX family as all the other Airbus commercial aircraft are.
Slash787 wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
A360 sounds much better.


The name A360 would suit on a aircraft which would be long as the A340-600, it does not suit on the CSeries.

Why would that be though, that’d be like saying A310 should’ve been reserved for something larger than the A300 and so should’ve A320.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T PA-28-180

2 ears for spatial hearing, 2 eyes for depth perception, 2 ears for balance... How did Boeing think 1 sensor was good enough?!
 
aviationaware
Posts: 2858
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 12:02 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 3:37 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
aviationaware wrote:
Strictly against it. Would be sad to see the Bombardier brand vanish from the industry.



Don't worry, it's not going anywhere:

Image


Unsure what trainsets have to do with the aviation industry?
 
Olddog
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:04 pm

You should have a look at the Bombardier portfolio :)
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10362
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:35 pm

Knickers....we don't know what the other one is..
As for the renaming, if it was an American company I would said this was expected, but a European company, let's see we still have BA and IB and AF and KLM so why the renaming, what's the real story?
Everyone and their unborn babies are lining up to buy this a/c as it is the a/c that shamed Boeing, so marketing is not an issue.
Unless, Airbus intends to bring the a/c up to Airbus standards and they prefer to have it done on an a/c that has their name versus the Airbus CXXX series...
 
aviationjunky
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:27 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:44 pm

anfromme wrote:
Uhm, how is AXXX almost finished?
A3XX is almost finished (A360, A370 and A390 are still left, though), and A4XX seems reserved for military use. But they still have another seven A*XX variations (A1XX, A2XX, A5XX etc) left before they'll have to reuse names, or change the starting letter, or just go to four digits, or come up with something else starting with A.


I meant the A3XX system. If they want to keep with the letter A, the A2** numbering system would be the logical choice, as the planes are smaller. I say go with the C100 just to pay homage to the CSeries.
LAS is Life
 
S0Y
Posts: 132
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2017 5:25 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:56 pm

Seriously, the only people who care about any of this are Anetters. The market for these products (Airlines and Lessors), are not basing their decisions on what numbering system was used to denote the aircraft model.
 
Dash9
Posts: 296
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:02 pm

S0Y wrote:
Seriously, the only people who care about any of this are Anetters. The market for these products (Airlines and Lessors), are not basing their decisions on what numbering system was used to denote the aircraft model.


Not true as it is reported in many financial and mainstrem medias

http://business.financialpost.com/trans ... eal-closes
https://www.sfgate.com/technology/busin ... 864795.php
http://www.businessinsider.com/airbus-t ... ort-2018-4
http://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/economi ... irbus-.php
 
ODwyerPW
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:04 pm

scbriml wrote:
There's nothing like an new airline paint scheme or the naming of an aircraft to cause a.net to get its collective panties in a wad.

Absolutely.


It's a departure, but I could see it working. Use A200 for the hybrid regional/mainline that the CS occupies...

Leave A100 for the true regionals ( the eventual E135 all the way through CRJ700 replacements the markets will be wanting in a few more years).... Even if it's Bombardier that builds them... call them A1XX. :hyper:
learning never stops.
 
YRA
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:16 pm

I don’t like using the numbers immediately below A318. That number range feels like it is for that existing family of aircraft. It feels like an A317, A316, A315, etc. would be even shorter than the A318 while sharing the same platform as the whole A320 family.

I love the idea of an A220 with numbers higher and lower depending on the size of the aircraft. So A219, A220, and A221 for the family. As the C-Series is a smaller, lighter plane similar to what the A320 family can do, but with better economics, put it down to the 200 level to indicate a step down in size from the 320 series, but have the “-20” in there to connote commonality of scope between the two families.

In essence, keeping the “-20” feels most important to me to show a bridge between the two families since they do compete somewhat, especially if the CS500 ever comes online. If we’re getting real technical, the CS500 would be the A220, the CS 300 as A219, and CS100 as A218.
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1224
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:18 pm

aviationaware wrote:
Unsure what trainsets have to do with the aviation industry?


You are sad about a manufacturer you don’t even recognise its logo? :scratchchin:
 
twaconnie
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 3:18 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:43 pm

A210 and A230 sounds like older models. I vote leave it alone.
 
aviationaware
Posts: 2858
Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 12:02 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 5:49 pm

Jayafe wrote:
aviationaware wrote:
Unsure what trainsets have to do with the aviation industry?


You are sad about a manufacturer you don’t even recognise its logo? :scratchchin:


Let me rephrase: What does the presence of the Bombardier brand in railstock give me when I want to see it on an aircraft. Better now?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 6:15 pm

767333ER wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
...what airline, ready to potentially invest billions, isn't going to be fully aware of the history of this frame?

Wouldn’t you think the people in the position to buy the CSeries or whatever it may be called in the further know they are dealing with Airbus rather than someone else? If not what are they doing in that position in the first place.

:checkmark: Yep, that's what I'm wondering.

Again, I understand the desire. Just don't understand what it'd actually accomplish.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
flyabr
Posts: 866
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:42 am

Re: Airbus considering re-branding CSeries as A200

Thu Apr 26, 2018 6:17 pm

How about an AC100 or A100C to at least pay some homage to the current title? Whatever it's called, I hope some major orders are signed this year!

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