rbavfan
Posts: 2452
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 2:55 pm

skipness1E wrote:
I wonder if it'll ever be known by the Airbus nomenclature or remain forever as the C Series, the 717 was really just an MD95.


And everybody calls it the 717, rearly ever hear the MD95 name.
 
User avatar
LoganTheBogan
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2017 7:49 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 2:56 pm

timf wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
LoganTheBogan wrote:
https://twitter.com/airwayslive/status/1016610880182726656

Interesting. Also Airbus states the CSeries (A220) production line will be able to do 50-60 aircraft a month. The deliveries and backlog numbers are expected to change soon.

Can you provide a link to that? It's an extraordinarily high number for anything not A320/B737 family. Can't be accurate.

I think this was a misquote. The proper statement is the new Mobile assembly line will be able to do 50-60 aircraft annually.


Thanks for correcting me. Was doing 1001 things at once. Still a decent amount though.
Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 2452
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 2:59 pm

leghorn wrote:
Buy in the Q400, brand it an A120. launch clean sheet design entering service in 10 to 12 years and then they'll have covered everything from 50 thru 75, 100 seat all the way up to 500 seater VLAs.
Airbus; your one stop shop for freight and passenger aircraft.


Why would they do that? Airbus already owns the ATR brand.
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: Airbus A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 2:59 pm

downdata wrote:
I wonder how Boeing will rename the ejets after the merger with Embraer. B616/B636?


It's hard to imagine a Boeing aircraft without the 7's. Somehow A220 sounds better than B616!
 
User avatar
ZKNCL
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 1:00 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:06 pm

rbavfan wrote:
leghorn wrote:
Why would they do that? Airbus already owns the ATR brand.


Speaking of which, I suppose it would make sense for Airbus to ditch the ATR brand and bring it under the A2xx or a new A1xx series in the interests of commonality. Then again, that would require Leonardo S.p.A. to be onboard with the proposal.

Nevertheless, something like this would not be as pertinent as renaming the C-Series since the ATR family is already well established, recognised, and not seeking aggressive expansion in the short-term.
 
leghorn
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:13 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:08 pm

rbavfan wrote:
leghorn wrote:
Buy in the Q400, brand it an A120. launch clean sheet design entering service in 10 to 12 years and then they'll have covered everything from 50 thru 75, 100 seat all the way up to 500 seater VLAs.
Airbus; your one stop shop for freight and passenger aircraft.


Why would they do that? Airbus already owns the ATR brand.

Consolidation and the ATR72 won't stretch to 100 seats as a stop-gap. The long game would be to achieve total air superiority in the 50 to 100 seater market.
Where do Airbus want to see themselves in 10 to 12 years; one stop shop from 50 seats up to 500.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 3915
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:09 pm

Of course Airbus was going to rename it - that's what you do when you've bought majority control. A220, A440 -- who cares? One can tell this is a fan site. It's like a bunch of high school boys who've discovered a free porn site.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 1873
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:11 pm

I doubt it really is related but I have some people mention the fact that it was supposed to have a 220% tariff and now it is name the A220 as being interesting.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 8523
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:12 pm

leghorn wrote:
rbavfan wrote:
leghorn wrote:
Buy in the Q400, brand it an A120. launch clean sheet design entering service in 10 to 12 years and then they'll have covered everything from 50 thru 75, 100 seat all the way up to 500 seater VLAs.
Airbus; your one stop shop for freight and passenger aircraft.


Why would they do that? Airbus already owns the ATR brand.

Consolidation and the ATR72 won't stretch to 100 seats as a stop-gap. The long game would be to achieve total air superiority in the 50 to 100 seater market.
Where do Airbus want to see themselves in 10 to 12 years; one stop shop from 50 seats up to 500.

ATR is precisely why Airbus would probably be unsuccessful in getting the Q400. Antitrust authorities would balk at Airbus having a stake in both.


Granted at this stage ATR would probably be receptive to Airbus getting rid of their stake. Airbus has been the primary roadblock in ATR’s desire to build a larger turboprop.
 
User avatar
sergegva
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 9:12 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:12 pm

Am I the only one to think that A220 is not an attractive name?
First, why choose a smaller number than Airbus current numbers? Usually, the more modern the aircraft, the more numbers increase. This is the case at both Airbus and Boeing.

The Cseries is the first real "next gen" narrowbody. It's a powerful marketing argument. CSeries, or Airbus A>399 is powerful. A220, comparing to A320, is weak and not very distinctive. "Just another aircraft", will think the general public.

I may go too far, but I wonder if it augurs well for the whole program at airbus...
Last edited by sergegva on Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2219
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:17 pm

Long live the CSeries!
 
cschleic
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:47 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:20 pm

enilria wrote:
Too much baggage for the A210 or A218! Lol

Boeing’s equivalent would be the 637.


Exactly. Probably too much for A219 as well. Better it has its own identity.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 1981
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:20 pm

sergegva wrote:
Am I the only one to think that A220 is not an attractive name?
First, why choose a smaller number than Airbus current numbers? Usually, the more modern the aircraft, the more numbers increase. This is the case at both Airbus and Boeing.

The Cseries is the first real "next gen" narrowbody. It's a powerful marketing argument. CSeries, or Airbus A>399 is powerful. A220, comparing to A320, is weak and not very distinctive. "Just another aircraft", will think the general public.

I may go too far, but I wonder if it augurs well for the whole program...


I was hoping for A360-100 and A360-300. It would send a signal that it was fully part of the Airbus narrowbody line-up. But I guess they chose A220 because it doesn't really have commonality with the rest, and it's also smaller. A4XX is used for military aircraft.
 
User avatar
sergegva
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 9:12 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:24 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
sergegva wrote:
Am I the only one to think that A220 is not an attractive name?
First, why choose a smaller number than Airbus current numbers? Usually, the more modern the aircraft, the more numbers increase. This is the case at both Airbus and Boeing.

The Cseries is the first real "next gen" narrowbody. It's a powerful marketing argument. CSeries, or Airbus A>399 is powerful. A220, comparing to A320, is weak and not very distinctive. "Just another aircraft", will think the general public.

I may go too far, but I wonder if it augurs well for the whole program...


I was hoping for A360-100 and A360-300. It would send a signal that it was fully part of the Airbus narrowbody line-up. But I guess they chose A220 because it doesn't really have commonality with the rest, and it's also smaller. A4XX is used for military aircraft.


Then why not A500 or A520? If the program turns to be successfull, they could continue the A5xx serie with the next Airbus aircraft (electric?). If it fails, they could stay with A360-A370-A390 and then jump to A6xx.
 
User avatar
Richard28
Posts: 2375
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 5:42 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:28 pm

sergegva wrote:
First, why choose a smaller number than Airbus current numbers? Usually, the more modern the aircraft, the more numbers increase. This is the case at both Airbus and Boeing.


the answer I think is in your post
 
leghorn
Posts: 582
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:13 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:30 pm

Polot wrote:
leghorn wrote:
rbavfan wrote:

Why would they do that? Airbus already owns the ATR brand.

Consolidation and the ATR72 won't stretch to 100 seats as a stop-gap. The long game would be to achieve total air superiority in the 50 to 100 seater market.
Where do Airbus want to see themselves in 10 to 12 years; one stop shop from 50 seats up to 500.

ATR is precisely why Airbus would probably be unsuccessful in getting the Q400. Antitrust authorities would balk at Airbus having a stake in both.


Granted at this stage ATR would probably be receptive to Airbus getting rid of their stake. Airbus has been the primary roadblock in ATR’s desire to build a larger turboprop.

Work that through. Which authority would be able to block it.
If Boeing have historically bought manufacturers to shut them down, Airbus can buy them to keep them running.
Bombardier have the ear of the Canadian Government and if they want to sell to get out of a financial hole they'll be allowed.
ATR as the dominant manufacturer in Europe can't complain about unfair competiton.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 8523
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:36 pm

leghorn wrote:
Polot wrote:
leghorn wrote:
Consolidation and the ATR72 won't stretch to 100 seats as a stop-gap. The long game would be to achieve total air superiority in the 50 to 100 seater market.
Where do Airbus want to see themselves in 10 to 12 years; one stop shop from 50 seats up to 500.

ATR is precisely why Airbus would probably be unsuccessful in getting the Q400. Antitrust authorities would balk at Airbus having a stake in both.


Granted at this stage ATR would probably be receptive to Airbus getting rid of their stake. Airbus has been the primary roadblock in ATR’s desire to build a larger turboprop.

Work that through. Which authority would be able to block it.
If Boeing have historically bought manufacturers to shut them down, Airbus can buy them to keep them running.
Bombardier have the ear of the Canadian Government and if they want to sell to get out of a financial hole they'll be allowed.
ATR as the dominant manufacturer in Europe can't complain about unfair competiton.


Airbus is not a charity. They don’t buy things to just keep them running. Many governments would be concerned about Airbus owning both the Q400 and owning 50% of ATR. The complaints wouldn’t be directed at BBD, or be from ATR. They would be directed at Airbus. And they would likely be successful. BBD and Airbus don’t have free reign over their respective governments.

Remember Airbus is not your friend. Neither is Boeing. They will both stab you in the back and screw you over if it serves their interests.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1654
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:39 pm

sergegva wrote:
Am I the only one to think that A220 is not an attractive name?
First, why choose a smaller number than Airbus current numbers? Usually, the more modern the aircraft, the more numbers increase. This is the case at both Airbus and Boeing.

The Cseries is the first real "next gen" narrowbody. It's a powerful marketing argument. CSeries, or Airbus A>399 is powerful. A220, comparing to A320, is weak and not very distinctive. "Just another aircraft", will think the general public.

I may go too far, but I wonder if it augurs well for the whole program at airbus...


What makes it a next generation aircraft? It’s just another tube and wings two engine narrowbody. The only real advantage it would have would be some newer systems and a carbon wing but it doesn’t seem to take huge advanatage of the later compared to the wings on the A320neo and 737.

It competed against those two programs for almost a decade now and no one found it to be a compelling generation ahead. Are they missing something?
 
User avatar
Slash787
Posts: 701
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 3:48 pm

Now can we get a A220-500........

I honestly thought they would not change the name. Bye Bye CS300.....
 
Antarius
Posts: 808
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:01 pm

sergegva wrote:
Am I the only one to think that A220 is not an attractive name?
First, why choose a smaller number than Airbus current numbers? Usually, the more modern the aircraft, the more numbers increase. This is the case at both Airbus and Boeing.

The Cseries is the first real "next gen" narrowbody. It's a powerful marketing argument. CSeries, or Airbus A>399 is powerful. A220, comparing to A320, is weak and not very distinctive. "Just another aircraft", will think the general public.

I may go too far, but I wonder if it augurs well for the whole program at airbus...


The A380 skipped the 50, 60 and 70. Still a colossal failure in terms of ROI. On the flip side, the A330-200 came after the A333; it was a huge success.

I think there is too much tea leaf reading going on with the name. Whether it was 220 or 520, it will not materially affect the success or failure of the formerly named Cseries line.
2018: AUA CLT IAH HOU DFW COS DEN CLL ORD PEK PVG PHX SFO SJC OAK PHL YYC STL DTW HNL OGG JFK LGA EWR GIG GRU IGU CWB SDU MDW BOS IAD DCA PBI FLL MIA
 
User avatar
ACCS300
Posts: 294
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 4:05 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:07 pm

sergegva wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
sergegva wrote:
Am I the only one to think that A220 is not an attractive name?
First, why choose a smaller number than Airbus current numbers? Usually, the more modern the aircraft, the more numbers increase. This is the case at both Airbus and Boeing.

The Cseries is the first real "next gen" narrowbody. It's a powerful marketing argument. CSeries, or Airbus A>399 is powerful. A220, comparing to A320, is weak and not very distinctive. "Just another aircraft", will think the general public.

I may go too far, but I wonder if it augurs well for the whole program...


I was hoping for A360-100 and A360-300. It would send a signal that it was fully part of the Airbus narrowbody line-up. But I guess they chose A220 because it doesn't really have commonality with the rest, and it's also smaller. A4XX is used for military aircraft.


Then why not A500 or A520? If the program turns to be successfull, they could continue the A5xx serie with the next Airbus aircraft (electric?). If it fails, they could stay with A360-A370-A390 and then jump to A6xx.


Was hoping for A360 as well, '360' has some great marketing potential like '360 degree thinking', missed opportunity here IMO, A220 doesn't roll off the tongue like A360 would.
 
User avatar
GE90man
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 9:10 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:21 pm

ACCS300 wrote:
sergegva wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:

I was hoping for A360-100 and A360-300. It would send a signal that it was fully part of the Airbus narrowbody line-up. But I guess they chose A220 because it doesn't really have commonality with the rest, and it's also smaller. A4XX is used for military aircraft.


Then why not A500 or A520? If the program turns to be successfull, they could continue the A5xx serie with the next Airbus aircraft (electric?). If it fails, they could stay with A360-A370-A390 and then jump to A6xx.


Was hoping for A360 as well, '360' has some great marketing potential like '360 degree thinking', missed opportunity here IMO, A220 doesn't roll off the tongue like A360 would.


Maybe they’re saving it for something even better
 
flyb
Posts: 549
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 7:39 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:43 pm

Jshank83 wrote:
I doubt it really is related but I have some people mention the fact that it was supposed to have a 220% tariff and now it is name the A220 as being interesting.


That is what came to my mind this morning, how fitting of a name:)
 
AvroLanc
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 12:40 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:44 pm

Thinking we are all reading way too much into the number branding. 99% of all people stepping foot on this airplane wont care if its numbers are 1234, as long as it gets from A to B(and not the A,B around this site). We should celebrate the good that this change will likely bring to the industry.
707,717,727,732,734,737,738,742,744,767,773,DC8,9,10,MD80,L1011,HSTrident,BAC111,DHComet.DH8-100,Q400,CRJ100,200,700,EM75,90,A310,319,320,321,333
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 8303
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:45 pm

Polot wrote:
LoganTheBogan wrote:
https://twitter.com/airwayslive/status/1016610880182726656

Eh just marketing. Notice how they break out the Max 200, which is just the 8 with an extra pair of doors, yet don’t bother distinguishing between A321 ACF and old A321 layout.


Gotta love marketing. You can also spin it another way and say Boeing has more options or solutions. However, Airbus really does have a great lineup there, absent an A320.5.

IWMBH wrote:
OA940 wrote:
#CSERIESBESTSERIES #BRINGBACKTHECSERIES #SAVETHECSERIES #STOPTHISMADNESS

So after Airbus demonstrated that they are complete morons. It wasn't enough that they ruin the name, they had to make it demeaning in comparison with their own products. Well I guess the superior program has to lose something.



#SAVETHECSERIES? That's just what Airbus has done. If you want to blame someone for what is happening with de C-series is should be Boeing....


Yes, blame evil Boeing. They entirely screwed up the production, marketing and delivery of the CSeries. If they had only stayed quiet, the program would have gone on to a rousing success. Nevermind that the NEO was partially conceived as a counter to the efficiencies of the CSeries and fought hard for sales against the little guy. If it weren't for the A321neo's success, Airbus probably would have fought even harder.

It's always easier to blame someone else for your failures than to look in a mirror, eh?

MIflyer12 wrote:
Of course Airbus was going to rename it - that's what you do when you've bought majority control. A220, A440 -- who cares? One can tell this is a fan site. It's like a bunch of high school boys who've discovered a free porn site.


And yet, here you are. :-)

ACCS300 wrote:
Was hoping for A360 as well, '360' has some great marketing potential like '360 degree thinking', missed opportunity here IMO, A220 doesn't roll off the tongue like A360 would.


I'm sad to see the CSeries name go, but to me the A220 sounds right. A smaller A320. I don't like the -100/-300 thing, though. I think the A219/A220 would have been better personally. There's just something about "360" that has a weird ring to it. Maybe the play on "180" and "turn around and go back to the gate" or something? Anyhow, just not my fave option for Airbus.
-Dave


”Yet somewhere in Iceland a great anger stirred in the soul of a troubled individual...” - Revelation
 
User avatar
sergegva
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 9:12 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:53 pm

bigjku wrote:
sergegva wrote:
Am I the only one to think that A220 is not an attractive name?
First, why choose a smaller number than Airbus current numbers? Usually, the more modern the aircraft, the more numbers increase. This is the case at both Airbus and Boeing.

The Cseries is the first real "next gen" narrowbody. It's a powerful marketing argument. CSeries, or Airbus A>399 is powerful. A220, comparing to A320, is weak and not very distinctive. "Just another aircraft", will think the general public.

I may go too far, but I wonder if it augurs well for the whole program at airbus...


What makes it a next generation aircraft? It’s just another tube and wings two engine narrowbody. The only real advantage it would have would be some newer systems and a carbon wing but it doesn’t seem to take huge advanatage of the later compared to the wings on the A320neo and 737.

It competed against those two programs for almost a decade now and no one found it to be a compelling generation ahead. Are they missing something?


I thought it was the first narrowbody aircraft with composite parts, a la 787/A350. And I thought it has a better fuel efficiency than NEO / MAX. It would be interesting to compare CS300 & A319neo fuel efficiency, but we are still not sure if there will be an A319neo in pax commercial service ever...

Anyway, the fact that the Cseries is not (yet) successful does not mean it is not a next generation aircraft!
 
User avatar
jeffh747
Posts: 797
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 6:32 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:55 pm

Given this new nomenclature of the A220 sounding like the smaller sibling of the A320, when can we expect to see the big brother A420 :duck: :rotfl:
A318 A319 A320 A320neo A321 A321neo A332 A333 B717 B727 B734 B73G B738 B739 B752 B762 B763 B772 B788 CRJ2 DHC6 DHC8-300 E145 E190 MD82 MD83 MD90 SF340B
 
fsxfan38
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2017 1:06 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:13 pm

Why not A200? You know...to start the number cycle again?
 
User avatar
KrustyTheKlown
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:45 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:14 pm

The A420 will be the first carbon neutral jet by running on hemp oil.

That will totally destroy MoM.
 
Aircellist
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 8:43 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:14 pm

A220… Just like the higher pitched string on my cello…
"When I find out I was wrong, I change my mind. What do you do?" -attributed to John Maynard Keynes
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1210
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:18 pm

sergegva wrote:
I thought it was the first narrowbody aircraft with composite parts, a la 787/A350.


The A380 is a wide body that had composite parts before those two.
 
User avatar
Clipper101
Posts: 660
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:19 pm

With its Airbus scheme, I can see A220 physical appearance becoming to highly complement that of the A350.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 8303
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:20 pm

jeffh747 wrote:
Given this new nomenclature of the A220 sounding like the smaller sibling of the A320, when can we expect to see the big brother A420 :duck: :rotfl:


Launch customers will get some smokin' deals.
-Dave


”Yet somewhere in Iceland a great anger stirred in the soul of a troubled individual...” - Revelation
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:32 pm

leghorn wrote:
Buy in the Q400, brand it an A120.


Airbus already has ATR for turboprops. Even disregarding that, regulators wouldn't allow Airbus a monopoly on the turboprop market.
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: Airbus A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:40 pm

downdata wrote:
I wonder how Boeing will rename the ejets after the merger with Embraer. B616/B636?

Heh, we're already making these speculations, are we? LOL! :rotfl:
No, "FA" in my username does not stand for "flight attendant"...
 
User avatar
sturmovik
Posts: 683
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 12:05 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:42 pm

jeffh747 wrote:
Given this new nomenclature of the A220 sounding like the smaller sibling of the A320, when can we expect to see the big brother A420 :duck: :rotfl:


I can picture the A420 already - it'll likely have a blunt nose. And great climb performance, that plane will get pretty high. As things stand though, the business case for it seems doobie-ous, and Airbus might need to bring in a joint venture partner to make it viable.
'What's it doing now?'
 
morrisond
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:46 pm

LoganTheBogan wrote:
https://twitter.com/airwayslive/status/1016610880182726656

Interesting. Also Airbus states the CSeries (A220) production line will be able to do 50-60 aircraft a month. The deliveries and backlog numbers are expected to change soon.



50-60 PER MONTH? That has me thinking they are really thinking of this as the replacement for the A320 series on Short Haul. I would fully expect to see a A220-500 sooner rather than later to take over the A320 size. With Airbus backing and support I could see these volumes as the A220 should run rings around A320/737 due to it's much lower weight and I'm guessing better Aero.

Then I would see the 320 replacement get bigger as more of a MOM to replace A320 and A330. It's small size would be A321ish like and it's larger sizes approaching A330-200
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:50 pm

Pepper456 wrote:
For Brazilians, RIP Embraer it Will have almost certain the same destino of bombardier


Brazilians will benefit a lot by being able to help design and potentially build a future Boeing NSA and NMA. Bombardier, not so much. Bombardier is pretty much out of the commercial aviation game (once the CRJ/Q400 run their course) and will resemble something more like Gulfstream. Bombardier's commercial aviation era has closed.
Last edited by LockheedBBD on Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:54 pm, edited 3 times in total.
 
User avatar
Captain77W
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:29 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:53 pm

The ATRs can be rebranded as A240-400(ATR42-600 and A240-700(ATR72-600)
 
Elementalism
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:54 pm

Watched the video. Great looking bird. I hope DL brings it to MSP at some point.
 
User avatar
Super80Fan
Posts: 1059
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 4:14 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:57 pm

Great going Boeing. The only one who deserves praise here is Airbus for saving it.
RIP McDonnell Douglas
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 5:59 pm

IWMBH wrote:
OA940 wrote:
#CSERIESBESTSERIES #BRINGBACKTHECSERIES #SAVETHECSERIES #STOPTHISMADNESS

So after Airbus demonstrated that they are complete morons. It wasn't enough that they ruin the name, they had to make it demeaning in comparison with their own products. Well I guess the superior program has to lose something.



#SAVETHECSERIES? That's just what Airbus has done. If you want to blame someone for what is happening with de C-series is should be Boeing....


Even without the Boeing complaint, Bombardier wasn't selling any planes. Only Bombardier is to blame for wasting $2.6 billion developing a tiny LearJet then cancelling the program and heading towards bankruptcy.
 
Elementalism
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:00 pm

morrisond wrote:
LoganTheBogan wrote:
https://twitter.com/airwayslive/status/1016610880182726656

Interesting. Also Airbus states the CSeries (A220) production line will be able to do 50-60 aircraft a month. The deliveries and backlog numbers are expected to change soon.



50-60 PER MONTH? That has me thinking they are really thinking of this as the replacement for the A320 series on Short Haul. I would fully expect to see a A220-500 sooner rather than later to take over the A320 size. With Airbus backing and support I could see these volumes as the A220 should run rings around A320/737 due to it's much lower weight and I'm guessing better Aero.

Then I would see the 320 replacement get bigger as more of a MOM to replace A320 and A330. It's small size would be A321ish like and it's larger sizes approaching A330-200


I would imagine now this plane falls under the Airbus brand airlines will start ordering in droves. The plane was great but hard to buy into it without knowing it will have the financial backing over its life cycle. I can see them selling these by the thousands.

Airbus imo got the steal of a lifetime with this plane.
Last edited by Elementalism on Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Captain77W
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:29 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:02 pm

LockheedBBD wrote:
leghorn wrote:
rbavfan wrote:

Why would they do that? Airbus already owns the ATR brand.

Consolidation and the ATR72 won't stretch to 100 seats as a stop-gap. The long game would be to achieve total air superiority in the 50 to 100 seater market.
Where do Airbus want to see themselves in 10 to 12 years; one stop shop from 50 seats up to 500.


Airbus should buy the troubled Mitsubishi MRJ program to have an aircraft that competes against the E170/E175/E190.

The Airbus A210 Family :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:05 pm

leghorn wrote:
rbavfan wrote:
leghorn wrote:
Buy in the Q400, brand it an A120. launch clean sheet design entering service in 10 to 12 years and then they'll have covered everything from 50 thru 75, 100 seat all the way up to 500 seater VLAs.
Airbus; your one stop shop for freight and passenger aircraft.


Why would they do that? Airbus already owns the ATR brand.

Consolidation and the ATR72 won't stretch to 100 seats as a stop-gap. The long game would be to achieve total air superiority in the 50 to 100 seater market.
Where do Airbus want to see themselves in 10 to 12 years; one stop shop from 50 seats up to 500.


Airbus should buy the troubled Mitsubishi MRJ program to have an aircraft that competes against the E170/E175/E190.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1654
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:11 pm

sergegva wrote:
bigjku wrote:
sergegva wrote:
Am I the only one to think that A220 is not an attractive name?
First, why choose a smaller number than Airbus current numbers? Usually, the more modern the aircraft, the more numbers increase. This is the case at both Airbus and Boeing.

The Cseries is the first real "next gen" narrowbody. It's a powerful marketing argument. CSeries, or Airbus A>399 is powerful. A220, comparing to A320, is weak and not very distinctive. "Just another aircraft", will think the general public.

I may go too far, but I wonder if it augurs well for the whole program at airbus...


What makes it a next generation aircraft? It’s just another tube and wings two engine narrowbody. The only real advantage it would have would be some newer systems and a carbon wing but it doesn’t seem to take huge advanatage of the later compared to the wings on the A320neo and 737.

It competed against those two programs for almost a decade now and no one found it to be a compelling generation ahead. Are they missing something?


I thought it was the first narrowbody aircraft with composite parts, a la 787/A350. And I thought it has a better fuel efficiency than NEO / MAX. It would be interesting to compare CS300 & A319neo fuel efficiency, but we are still not sure if there will be an A319neo in pax commercial service ever...

Anyway, the fact that the Cseries is not (yet) successful does not mean it is not a next generation aircraft!


I believe it probably has a cost per seat mile advantage on the 737-7 and the A319. I don’t believe it does over the 737-8 nor the A320neo.

The narrowbody space is different than the widebody space. Composites don’t confer quite as much advantage weight wise for a variety of reasons and the scale of production is quite different than with widebody aircraft. The CS went for a composite wing and metal fuselage. Embraer stuck with all metal. So did Boeing and Airbus.

Basically BBD took up the business case both Boeing and Airbus would eventually reject (a new narrowbody) and then downsized it into the smallest market from the previous narrows plus the largest regional jets and tried to make it work.

Fundamentally it’s problems seems to be that it doesn’t offer a hugely compelling reason to buy it rather than the established planes in those markets. Airbus May choose to cannbalize some of their A320neo family market space to feed into this but they will study that to death before they do.
 
Elementalism
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:12 pm

How quickly can Airbus ramp production? I am shocked Bombadier was only able to deliver 28 frames so far.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 8523
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:14 pm

LockheedBBD wrote:
leghorn wrote:
rbavfan wrote:

Why would they do that? Airbus already owns the ATR brand.

Consolidation and the ATR72 won't stretch to 100 seats as a stop-gap. The long game would be to achieve total air superiority in the 50 to 100 seater market.
Where do Airbus want to see themselves in 10 to 12 years; one stop shop from 50 seats up to 500.


Airbus should buy the troubled Mitsubishi MRJ program to have an aircraft that competes against the E170/E175/E190.

Until US scope closes get adjusted (allowing for higher MTOW) the MRJ program is just too risky of a buy for anyone. Even then it would be an uphill battle against the then eligible E175 E2 (since Embrear has an installed customer base with commonality, while the MRJ does not have commonality with anything). Boeing didn’t buy Embraer for the E175, although they will obviously benefit from it.
Last edited by Polot on Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
bigjku
Posts: 1654
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:15 pm

planecane wrote:
morrisond wrote:
LoganTheBogan wrote:
https://twitter.com/airwayslive/status/1016610880182726656

Interesting. Also Airbus states the CSeries (A220) production line will be able to do 50-60 aircraft a month. The deliveries and backlog numbers are expected to change soon.



50-60 PER MONTH? That has me thinking they are really thinking of this as the replacement for the A320 series on Short Haul. I would fully expect to see a A220-500 sooner rather than later to take over the A320 size. With Airbus backing and support I could see these volumes as the A220 should run rings around A320/737 due to it's much lower weight and I'm guessing better Aero.

Then I would see the 320 replacement get bigger as more of a MOM to replace A320 and A330. It's small size would be A321ish like and it's larger sizes approaching A330-200


The two issues I see Airbus might have growing the A220 to replace the A320 are, first of all can the A220 be stretched to A320 or 738 size efficiently with a 2-3 arrangement?

Also, they lose the commonality sales pitch to retain current customers. Assuming the Boeing/Embraer JV will be designing the replacement for the 737 which will be the competitor to the A220 a few years from now, it will be an open competition between the Boeing NSA and the A220 series because neither will share commonality with the current dominant narrowbodies (unless Boeing makes a software configurable cockpit and mimics the 737 control for southwest).

I can't see any reason for the Boeing/Embraer JV other than developing the NSA. If it was just a co-marketing agreement for the E2s there was no reason to do a JV like they did.


I expect Boeing to do new avionics and cockpit on the NMA and then backfeed that into whatever replaces the 737 so they can offer commonality across those families. It won’t go top to bottom in the lineup but I think even Airbus will have to come off that soon anyway.

One pilot operations are going to come eventually to the smaller aircraft and that means major changes. The CS will be hampered by being different but not so different that it offers major cost savings. Airlines will change more willingly if there is potential for a cost savings.
Last edited by bigjku on Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
planecane
Posts: 164
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Airbus rebrands C-Series to A220

Tue Jul 10, 2018 6:16 pm

morrisond wrote:
LoganTheBogan wrote:
https://twitter.com/airwayslive/status/1016610880182726656

Interesting. Also Airbus states the CSeries (A220) production line will be able to do 50-60 aircraft a month. The deliveries and backlog numbers are expected to change soon.



50-60 PER MONTH? That has me thinking they are really thinking of this as the replacement for the A320 series on Short Haul. I would fully expect to see a A220-500 sooner rather than later to take over the A320 size. With Airbus backing and support I could see these volumes as the A220 should run rings around A320/737 due to it's much lower weight and I'm guessing better Aero.

Then I would see the 320 replacement get bigger as more of a MOM to replace A320 and A330. It's small size would be A321ish like and it's larger sizes approaching A330-200


The two issues I see Airbus might have growing the A220 to replace the A320 are, first of all can the A220 be stretched to A320 or 738 size efficiently with a 2-3 arrangement?

Also, they lose the commonality sales pitch to retain current customers. Assuming the Boeing/Embraer JV will be designing the replacement for the 737 which will be the competitor to the A220 a few years from now, it will be an open competition between the Boeing NSA and the A220 series because neither will share commonality with the current dominant narrowbodies (unless Boeing makes a software configurable cockpit and mimics the 737 control for southwest).

I can't see any reason for the Boeing/Embraer JV other than developing the NSA. If it was just a co-marketing agreement for the E2s there was no reason to do a JV like they did.

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