• 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 8426
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:07 am

DeltaB717 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
msycajun wrote:

Two things to consider:
B6 is not the only carrier in most of its nonstop markets, if they can offer more seats at a lower cost, they can draw passengers from other carriers in addition to growing the overall market.

As the overall gauge grows there will be more seats at a lower cost for connecting passengers as well. Here again, having a lower operating cost puts them at an advantage over other airlines competing for those connecting passengers.

But, yes, some routes may be reduced or cut as better opportunities arise with the evolving fleet.

I 100% agree with your post. In particular if JetBlue is competing with a high cost per seat RJ. In my opinion, JetBlue will excercise options.

Lightsaber


Not to mention, if the 40% lower trip cost vs. the current E190 fleet can be realised in service, having a larger aircraft (i.e. sharing a lower trip cost over a higher seat count) can only help the economics of many of those routes

Congrats to BBD, Airbus and B6 - I'm not surprised B6 went this way, and it's great to see the CS300/A220 expand its order book and (by virtue of the adjustment of B6's neo order) doing just what the CSAPL deal was intended to do. I have to say though, waking up to the press release from B6 and seeing "A220" in writing took a few reads and a bit/lot of getting used to!


Ya, I’m excited. This is the perfect aircraft for JetBlue and the perfect fleet mix as well. I will reall miss the “CSeries” moniker though.
-Dave


”Yet somewhere in Iceland a great anger stirred in the soul of a troubled individual...” - Revelation
 
behramjee
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 4:56 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:30 am

queb wrote:

I wonder how the E195-E2 would have fared on these metrics.

The A220-300 should have the same cost per seat as the A320NEO. I happen to agree JetBlue should go all A220-300 and A321NEO unless an A220-500 is gifted by Santa. :spin:

Lightsaber[/quote]

I feel here Airbus has one up against Boeing into building a true narrow body successor to the A320Neo family line for the 2028-2040 time period whilst Boeing hasnt come up with anything yet. Through Airbus's stake in the BBD C Series program, it can just use the new fuselage and avionics/engineering technology and build the A220 family line of aircraft to fully replace the A320Neo family line down the road.

A221 to replace regional jets / A318 / B736s
A223 to replace A319 / B737-700
A225 to be built similar size to A320Neo
A227 to be built similar size to A321Neo along with A227LR to replace A321NeoLR

BBD has already invested in the manufacturing line for the A221 and A223 so Airbus just needs to do the same for the larger A225 and A227 production line.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 8426
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:39 am

behramjee wrote:
queb wrote:

I wonder how the E195-E2 would have fared on these metrics.

The A220-300 should have the same cost per seat as the A320NEO. I happen to agree JetBlue should go all A220-300 and A321NEO unless an A220-500 is gifted by Santa. :spin:

Lightsaber


I feel here Airbus has one up against Boeing into building a true narrow body successor to the A320Neo family line for the 2028-2040 time period whilst Boeing hasnt come up with anything yet. Through Airbus's stake in the BBD C Series program, it can just use the new fuselage and avionics/engineering technology and build the A220 family line of aircraft to fully replace the A320Neo family line down the road.

A221 to replace regional jets / A318 / B736s
A223 to replace A319 / B737-700
A225 to be built similar size to A320Neo
A227 to be built similar size to A321Neo along with A227LR to replace A321NeoLR

BBD has already invested in the manufacturing line for the A221 and A223 so Airbus just needs to do the same for the larger A225 and A227 production line.[/quote]

I don’t see how any ultimate A220 family would be able to replace the A320 family. That’s literally a stretch too far. However it will allow Airbus’ eventual A320 successor to be upsized, allowing them to better bridge into the NMA territory. I’m imagining A320.5X/A321X/A322X (with these being clean sheet aircraft).
-Dave


”Yet somewhere in Iceland a great anger stirred in the soul of a troubled individual...” - Revelation
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 2689
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:43 am

JoeCanuck wrote:
Hold on a sec. Why would B6 spend billions of dollars on aircraft they don't want or need?


Who is saying that? Looks like B6 is getting what they want.

JoeCanuck wrote:
As for knowing that B6 won't order another 320, I don't. I'm merely extrapolating from their decision to not take 320's and switch their order to 321's. They had the option to take more 320's and they passed.


Ask yourself the question. Why did B6 pass on the A320? The answer is the A220.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 8426
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:52 am

JetBlue has been upsizing for years. I’m not surprised that they have converted the A320neo order to the larger variant, and honestly think this may have happened with an E195-E2 order as well. The growth prospects of the A220 series will likely seal that decision in the future if and when it’s stretched, but HetBlue has years before they really need to worry about running out of enough A320’s in their fleet.
-Dave


”Yet somewhere in Iceland a great anger stirred in the soul of a troubled individual...” - Revelation
 
B6JFKH81
Posts: 2042
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:35 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:56 am

CobaltScar wrote:
LockheedBBD wrote:
tphuang wrote:

I don’t think b6 could have ordered more embraer jets after what happened this summer.


What happened this summer?



A couple broke and I think are down for the count.


With significant structural repairs, they are making their way into the operation again. I was there for 3 of them, it was a amazing collaborative effort between B6, EMB and the MRO performing the repair.
"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
 
KD5MDK
Posts: 775
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 4:05 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:16 am

I assume the legacy E190s will be a good fit for flying around NY, PA, New England etc at low trip cost and little fuel usage.
 
ytz
Posts: 3414
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:38 am

LockheedBBD wrote:


Bears repeating. Fantastic article. It's really pretty clear that the A220 won, because the deal with Airbus let them completely changeover their fleet to better address their future needs. Seems to me they see the CSeries doing more than the E190 and that upgauging was just as important to help them get costs down. And they couldn't upgauge unless they got an aircraft that approaches the A320 at least marginally in performance and capacity.
 
ytz
Posts: 3414
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:41 am

MSPNWA wrote:

Ask yourself the question. Why did B6 pass on the A320? The answer is the A220.


And they may well have done that even without Airbus owning the CSeries. Now Airbus gets 50% of the CS300s sold as A220-300s.

I suggest you at least read the Flightglobal article:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 20-450121/
 
F9Animal
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 5:48 am

This is awesome!!! I cant wait to finally fly one. I really think this is just the beginning of a successful venture between Bombardier and Airbus. This plane is no doubt gonna turn heads!
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1554
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 5:58 am

ytz wrote:
queb wrote:
Per JetBlue PR

The aircraft’s advanced aerodynamics combined with a specially designed Pratt & Whitney engine help the aircraft deliver approximately 40 percent lower fuel burn per seat than JetBlue’s current E190 fleet


http://blueir.investproductions.com/inv ... -211604881


If true....wow. I do think there's some marketing speak here.

If true, Boeings new acquisition would never be able to close the gap. No E190 based design can be improved 40%.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1170
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:50 am

Airbus is in the happy position that it will no longer need to complete the 320 against the C series on price
 
VSMUT
Posts: 1949
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:41 am

behramjee wrote:
I feel here Airbus has one up against Boeing into building a true narrow body successor to the A320Neo family line for the 2028-2040 time period whilst Boeing hasnt come up with anything yet. Through Airbus's stake in the BBD C Series program, it can just use the new fuselage and avionics/engineering technology and build the A220 family line of aircraft to fully replace the A320Neo family line down the road.

A221 to replace regional jets / A318 / B736s
A223 to replace A319 / B737-700
A225 to be built similar size to A320Neo
A227 to be built similar size to A321Neo along with A227LR to replace A321NeoLR

BBD has already invested in the manufacturing line for the A221 and A223 so Airbus just needs to do the same for the larger A225 and A227 production line.


The A220 is a poor substitute for the higher end of the A320 family. There is an optimal fuselage width to length ration. Once you stretch it longer than a certain point, a wider fuselage is lighter than a longer one. Putting 3+3 in the A220 is also possible, but hardly an ideal solution for TATL flights.

I could easily see them do a 180 seat A220-500 to replace the A320 from below though. They can then focus on updating or replacing the A320 and A321 with a design optimised for longer flights and larger capacities, ergo an A320 without the design compromises of being shrinkable to the A319 and A318. Think something like an A320.5, A321 and A322. They would receive an all new wing, as well as updates that will make it more compatible with the A220. The A320.5 would seat 200 pax, up to 240 on the A321, and 260-270 seats on the A322.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 7405
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:45 am

VSMUT wrote:
behramjee wrote:
I feel here Airbus has one up against Boeing into building a true narrow body successor to the A320Neo family line for the 2028-2040 time period whilst Boeing hasnt come up with anything yet. Through Airbus's stake in the BBD C Series program, it can just use the new fuselage and avionics/engineering technology and build the A220 family line of aircraft to fully replace the A320Neo family line down the road.

A221 to replace regional jets / A318 / B736s
A223 to replace A319 / B737-700
A225 to be built similar size to A320Neo
A227 to be built similar size to A321Neo along with A227LR to replace A321NeoLR

BBD has already invested in the manufacturing line for the A221 and A223 so Airbus just needs to do the same for the larger A225 and A227 production line.


The A220 is a poor substitute for the higher end of the A320 family. There is an optimal fuselage width to length ration. Once you stretch it longer than a certain point, a wider fuselage is lighter than a longer one. Putting 3+3 in the A220 is also possible, but hardly an ideal solution for TATL flights.

I could easily see them do a 180 seat A220-500 to replace the A320 from below though. They can then focus on updating or replacing the A320 and A321 with a design optimised for longer flights and larger capacities, ergo an A320 without the design compromises of being shrinkable to the A319 and A318. Think something like an A320.5, A321 and A322. They would receive an all new wing, as well as updates that will make it more compatible with the A220. The A320.5 would seat 200 pax, up to 240 on the A321, and 260-270 seats on the A322.


IMO trying to replace the A320neo with a A220-500 will be difficult. To match range, payload, cargo capabilities, there would be a lot of changes needed. There would be no containerized cargo on the A220-500.

I could imagine an A220-500 simple stretch, bringing a frame additional to the A320neo, with less capabilities but low CASM and inexpensive to operate for dedicated short haul.
 
LupineChemist
Posts: 643
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:03 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:49 am

KD5MDK wrote:
Be very entertaining to see Mint on these birds.


A BUR-JFK flight with mint would make a killing from entertainment industry flights. It's just not been economical to run any aircraft that has the legs for that trip due to overcapacity. This is the perfect answer.

Depending on how the future of automation goes, I could even see SJC-PIT for a similar type of route.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 7405
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:55 am

Regarding the change from 25 A320neo to 25 A321neo, I would look at that as a decision for the A321 rather than a decision against the A320. I assume that the 25 A320neo were ordered for additional capacity rather than replacement of current A320. Jet Blue operates 130 A320 with an average age of about 13 years. Replacement is not urgent. Replacing the A320neo order with A321neo just adds more capacity.

As the 60 ordered A220-300 will replace 60 ERJ 190, I do not believe any of the A220-300 will replace A320 in the fleet,
 
tphuang
Posts: 1905
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:02 pm

LupineChemist wrote:
KD5MDK wrote:
Be very entertaining to see Mint on these birds.


A BUR-JFK flight with mint would make a killing from entertainment industry flights. It's just not been economical to run any aircraft that has the legs for that trip due to overcapacity. This is the perfect answer.

Depending on how the future of automation goes, I could even see SJC-PIT for a similar type of route.

Actually, jfk bur is already one of the most profitable non mint transcon in their system despite being a red eye flight with no first class seating. I would think adding some kind of first class seating on a220 would make a killing. A320 always struggles west bound during winter time. And the short runway meant they struggled east bound also. A220 would solve all of Those problems. The only thing is that it might not make sense to have it for 2/3 of the trips it would fly on and I am not sure they will have Sub fleet just for mid con and transcon flights.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 15442
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:06 pm

rheinwaldner wrote:
ytz wrote:
queb wrote:


If true....wow. I do think there's some marketing speak here.

If true, Boeings new acquisition would never be able to close the gap. No E190 based design can be improved 40%.

There is enough with the E2-195. The improved wing is good for 6%. E-190 subsystems were not efficient and thus the E2 subsystems save a few percent (but not as much as the A220 subsystems). The rest is engines, aerodynamics, and aircraft empty weight. All indications are the E2 was a serious contender.

I personally hope it was range that sold the A220. Then again, my next few flights areon thin TCON routes, so I'm being selfish. ;). I would like to see LGB to Florida flights. Easy to do for an A220-300 in JetBlue configuration, if they bought a higher MTOW.

I say if as it is known that DL is accepting low MTOW, reduced thrust, and even capped fuel capacity (capped by the fuel controller shutting of filling the tanks, not physically). All of that is upgradable bysoftware, but as I noted before, software upgrades that cost (I estimate $4.5 million per aircraft for DL).

The mil-spec dongles (USB sticks designed for harsh environments) only cost about $25, but DL would get 4 (or 5, I don't know the A220 avionics to that detail) for $4.5 million. :spin:

I hope B6 bought the full 3,400nm range. : hyper:. If not, at least 3,050 for robust TCON duty (but not Hawaii). I personally hope the keep up a JV with HA and avoid potentially loss making routes to Hawaii. JetBlue isn't high enough yeild to enter that market.

Now everyone should take a breath and realize the long thin capabilities of the A220 and that JetBlue is the airline known for long thin who just bought aircraft that can have 3,400nm range (significantly more range than the A320/A321CEOs, but also significantly less than A321NEOs).

Lightsaber
You only have the first amendment with the 2nd. If you're not going to offend someone with what you say, you don't have the 1st.
 
PartsGuy20
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:09 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:24 pm

LockheedBBD wrote:



With significant structural repairs, they are making their way into the operation again. I was there for 3 of them, it was a amazing collaborative effort between B6, EMB and the MRO performing the repair.


I tried searching to find out more about this but had no luck... what happened to them? Were there fatigue issues or were there a series of incidents that required all of that work? Do we know tail #'s?
 
VSMUT
Posts: 1949
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:36 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
IMO trying to replace the A320neo with a A220-500 will be difficult. To match range, payload, cargo capabilities, there would be a lot of changes needed. There would be no containerized cargo on the A220-500.


Which is why a two-pronged approach is needed. It is hardly any secret that the A320 isn't the best optimized aircraft around. It was designed for 179 pax, and they barely managed to increase that to 189 by moving interior components around. It is at a disadvantage on this point vs the 737-8, which now seats up to 200. At the same time, you have the A220-500 concept, which would offer an absolutely outstanding CASM. It would almost be too good to waste such an opportunity.
 
ytz
Posts: 3414
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:37 pm

rheinwaldner wrote:
ytz wrote:
queb wrote:


If true....wow. I do think there's some marketing speak here.

If true, Boeings new acquisition would never be able to close the gap. No E190 based design can be improved 40%.


To be fair, the real competitor to the CS3 would be the E2-195. Comparing to an E-190, while relevant to B6, is really not a valid comparison. I suspect the advantage over an E2-195 is single digits.
 
tphuang
Posts: 1905
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:44 pm

lightsaber wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
ytz wrote:

If true....wow. I do think there's some marketing speak here.

If true, Boeings new acquisition would never be able to close the gap. No E190 based design can be improved 40%.

There is enough with the E2-195. The improved wing is good for 6%. E-190 subsystems were not efficient and thus the E2 subsystems save a few percent (but not as much as the A220 subsystems). The rest is engines, aerodynamics, and aircraft empty weight. All indications are the E2 was a serious contender.

I personally hope it was range that sold the A220. Then again, my next few flights areon thin TCON routes, so I'm being selfish. ;). I would like to see LGB to Florida flights. Easy to do for an A220-300 in JetBlue configuration, if they bought a higher MTOW.

I say if as it is known that DL is accepting low MTOW, reduced thrust, and even capped fuel capacity (capped by the fuel controller shutting of filling the tanks, not physically). All of that is upgradable bysoftware, but as I noted before, software upgrades that cost (I estimate $4.5 million per aircraft for DL).

The mil-spec dongles (USB sticks designed for harsh environments) only cost about $25, but DL would get 4 (or 5, I don't know the A220 avionics to that detail) for $4.5 million. :spin:

I hope B6 bought the full 3,400nm range. : hyper:. If not, at least 3,050 for robust TCON duty (but not Hawaii). I personally hope the keep up a JV with HA and avoid potentially loss making routes to Hawaii. JetBlue isn't high enough yeild to enter that market.

Now everyone should take a breath and realize the long thin capabilities of the A220 and that JetBlue is the airline known for long thin who just bought aircraft that can have 3,400nm range (significantly more range than the A320/A321CEOs, but also significantly less than A321NEOs).

Lightsaber


Just curious, would you be willing to fly these birds to east coast out of sna? They are having a rough time on lgb fll. Long term, I think that flight gets moved to bur or sna once they get a220 into service.

Also seems to me it would make most sense to have the earliest delivered a220s replace the longest e90 routes like bos aus/msy which would get them the biggest savings. And then after that, I hope they start putting them on transcon.

Those shuttle routes out of Boston should stick with e90s until the very end when they can decided if they should downgauge some with a220-100.
 
CaptPizzaPants
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:44 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 5:09 pm

I'm wondering how the A220 might fit into JetBlue's South America flying/ambitions. It has good hot/high performance doesn't it?
 
ytz
Posts: 3414
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 5:12 pm

mjoelnir wrote:

IMO trying to replace the A320neo with a A220-500 will be difficult. To match range, payload, cargo capabilities, there would be a lot of changes needed. There would be no containerized cargo on the A220-500.


How much of that range, payload and cargo capabilities (lift and container handling) does B6 need on every one of their 320 routes? Chances are the 320 is too much airplane for many routes. And they didn't have an optimal solution till the CSeries. Now they can split their 320 replacement with 223s and 321s.

mjoelnir wrote:
I could imagine an A220-500 simple stretch, bringing a frame additional to the A320neo, with less capabilities but low CASM and inexpensive to operate for dedicated short haul.


I really hope doesn't do something foolish like stretching the 225 to the same capacity as the 320. Leave it below the 320, where it can rule the roost. And focus on replacing the 320 and 321 with a new airplane in a few years.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 15971
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:06 pm

VSMUT wrote:
At the same time, you have the A220-500 concept, which would offer an absolutely outstanding CASM. It would almost be too good to waste such an opportunity.


Has the "CS-500" ever been an official Bombardier study or concept? I've never considered it anything more than a fanboy dream. Certainly Bombardier was in no position to even consider building it for many years, and I see little incentive for Airbus to spend money on it.

Despite your views of the A320, it's still the best selling plane in its class. When A320 sales are at A319 levels, then maybe Airbus needs to move.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
Flighty
Posts: 9607
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:15 pm

JetBlue would want a 150 pax coach configured C series. The -300 is nearly big enough but not quite. And it looks very capable so no issue there. Then you need to ask, how about a 150 pax aircraft that has a premium cabin too. Those two sizes are both interesting. -400 and -500. The -300 is just great for long and thin routes in a JetBlue configuration. But a -400 utterly replaces the JetBlue A320 (150 pax comfy coach). The 162 configuration was an attempt to deal with the non optimal size of the A320.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2276
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:38 pm

CaptPizzaPants wrote:
I'm wondering how the A220 might fit into JetBlue's South America flying/ambitions. It has good hot/high performance doesn't it?


The C-Series makes some thin routes from JFK & FLL to Northern & Central S. America (respectively) a possibility. Pending the hot and high performance.
 
drgmobile
Posts: 949
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:06 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:06 pm

WkndWanderer wrote:
catiii wrote:
Fex180 wrote:
Wonder what this means for their smaller markets like BTV, PWM, SYR ect.


It means nothing.


What other examples are there where an airline replaced their smallest plane for a 30-40% increase in capacity without any smaller gauge replacement or regional flying in place? May be interesting to see to see how that affected smaller markets.


At essentially the same cost as the Embraers. So the extra capacity is all gravy.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4486
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:30 pm

mjoelnir wrote:

IMO trying to replace the A320neo with a A220-500 will be difficult. To match range, payload, cargo capabilities, there would be a lot of changes needed. There would be no containerized cargo on the A220-500.

I could imagine an A220-500 simple stretch, bringing a frame additional to the A320neo, with less capabilities but low CASM and inexpensive to operate for dedicated short haul.


There wouldn't be any need to instantly replace the 320 with a 220-500. If the stretch happens, I imagine it would be proposed as an additional option in the 150-180 passenger segment. If you primarily need a people mover over short to medium stages, your best bet would be a 220-500. If you need more range or cargo, a 320 might be the right choice.

That being said, I think JetBlue got it exactly right. If an airline really is looking for more range and payload, the 321 is probably the better pairing with the 220 -300 and eventually, -500. I think pip's will give the 321 significant enough performance improvements that it will end up being the standard model in the 320 family...if it's not happening already.

Even now, the 320 doesn't really have too many advantages over the 321, and the 321 has a lot of advantages over the 320. When you combo the 321 with the 220-300, you get an overlap that almost entirely covers the 320. A 220-500 would make that coverage 100%.


scbriml wrote:
Has the "CS-500" ever been an official Bombardier study or concept? I've never considered it anything more than a fanboy dream. Certainly Bombardier was in no position to even consider building it for many years, and I see little incentive for Airbus to spend money on it.

Despite your views of the A320, it's still the best selling plane in its class. When A320 sales are at A319 levels, then maybe Airbus needs to move.


I remember reading that BBD copyrighted CS500, CS700 and CS900. Besides, it seems logical considering the capabilities baked into the aircraft and the relative success of the longest DC/MD's. As to whether or not Airbus should develop the 220-500, that will depend on a lot of factors...most importantly customer demand.

Now that the 220 is gaining real traction, it might not be too long before airlines start asking for a cheaper to operate 180 seater.
What the...?
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 7405
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:36 pm

VSMUT wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
IMO trying to replace the A320neo with a A220-500 will be difficult. To match range, payload, cargo capabilities, there would be a lot of changes needed. There would be no containerized cargo on the A220-500.


Which is why a two-pronged approach is needed. It is hardly any secret that the A320 isn't the best optimized aircraft around. It was designed for 179 pax, and they barely managed to increase that to 189 by moving interior components around. It is at a disadvantage on this point vs the 737-8, which now seats up to 200. At the same time, you have the A220-500 concept, which would offer an absolutely outstanding CASM. It would almost be too good to waste such an opportunity.


And still the A320neo sells better than the 737MAX. Quite a feat for a sub optimal frame. I would like to see some numbers, before I believe a non existing A220-500 to be a A320neo beater.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 15971
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:38 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
I remember reading that BBD copyrighted CS500, CS700 and CS900.


That's a long way from any confirmation that they expended any efforts or money on it. I don't believe they have.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 7405
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:41 pm

I think writing off the A320 at JetBlue is a bit early. With all ordered frames delivered, both A220 and A321, the A320 will still be the most common frame at JetBlue.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4486
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:15 pm

mjoelnir wrote:

And still the A320neo sells better than the 737MAX. Quite a feat for a sub optimal frame. I would like to see some numbers, before I believe a non existing A220-500 to be a A320neo beater.


As does everybody...but I think it's not the 220-500 that is likely to have Airbus thinking about replacing the 320...but the 321. Once the 321 starts outselling the 320, (and I don't think that's too far off), Airbus will have a gap to fill with a more efficient aircraft. I think the JetBlue order is a sign of things to come. Airlines won't get rid of their 320's...but I suspect we'll see more airlines choosing to upsize to the 321 instead of ordering more 320's...and that includes orders currently on the books.

As for the relative sales numbers...overall, the 320neo family has outsold the 737max family, but according to wiki, (so take it with a grain of salt), if we take the past three years, from the start of 2015 until June 30, 2018, Boeing has sold 1584 max's to Airbus's 1410 neo's. So it's definitely true that the neo WAS outselling the max, the past 3 years show pretty much a dead heat.

scbriml wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
I remember reading that BBD copyrighted CS500, CS700 and CS900.


That's a long way from any confirmation that they expended any efforts or money on it. I don't believe they have.


I don't think anybody is pretending that the 220-500 is anything more than speculation at this point, but there's nothing wrong with speculation. This site is practically built on it.
What the...?
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 15971
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:20 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
but there's nothing wrong with speculation


There isn't, but the way some folks talk, the prototype is just about to roll off the line.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
ytz
Posts: 3414
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:35 pm

scbriml wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
but there's nothing wrong with speculation


There isn't, but the way some folks talk, the prototype is just about to roll off the line.


Nobody has said that. Dunno where you get this idea. But I think all of us see it as an obvious step. They sized the wing for it. They had trademarked the name. If BBD had the resources, they might have done it themselves. Alas, they didn't have the resources to keep the program themselves. For the model.

Now, we're all left wondering when Airbus will pull the trigger.
 
User avatar
Erebus
Posts: 615
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 2:40 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Thu Jul 12, 2018 11:39 pm

ytz wrote:
scbriml wrote:
JoeCanuck wrote:
but there's nothing wrong with speculation


There isn't, but the way some folks talk, the prototype is just about to roll off the line.


Nobody has said that. Dunno where you get this idea. But I think all of us see it as an obvious step. They sized the wing for it. They had trademarked the name. If BBD had the resources, they might have done it themselves. Alas, they didn't have the resources to keep the program themselves. For the model.

Now, we're all left wondering when Airbus will pull the trigger.


IMHO, I think a good time to launch a 500 is when it is time to replace the A320 family as a whole. At that same time, give the A220 family a midlife upgrade, improvements and maybe NEO it. AIrbus can then focus on developing a clean sheet replacement for the A321 centred around 200 seats sharing some elements from the A220.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 18752
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:23 am

lightsaber wrote:
I say if as it is known that DL is accepting low MTOW, reduced thrust, and even capped fuel capacity (capped by the fuel controller shutting of filling the tanks, not physically). All of that is upgradable bysoftware, but as I noted before, software upgrades that cost (I estimate $4.5 million per aircraft for DL).

The mil-spec dongles (USB sticks designed for harsh environments) only cost about $25, but DL would get 4 (or 5, I don't know the A220 avionics to that detail) for $4.5 million. :spin:

I hope B6 bought the full 3,400nm range. : hyper:. If not, at least 3,050 for robust TCON duty (but not Hawaii). I personally hope the keep up a JV with HA and avoid potentially loss making routes to Hawaii. JetBlue isn't high enough yeild to enter that market.

Now everyone should take a breath and realize the long thin capabilities of the A220 and that JetBlue is the airline known for long thin who just bought aircraft that can have 3,400nm range (significantly more range than the A320/A321CEOs, but also significantly less than A321NEOs).

Lightsaber

Very interesting.

How much will DL have to pay the Russian hackers to reverse engineer the mil-std dongle for them? :-)

The marketing side must love to be able to have different price points for all the different permutations of max MTOW, max thrust and max fuel capacity.

It'll be interesting to see the longest route DL flies its A220s on, and the same for B6.

Maybe we'll have to wait for the cockpit videos for us to see the settings page with the values for these things on them! :-)
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has it's beaches, it's homeland and thoughts of it's own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has it's seasons, it's evenings and songs of it's own
 
c933103
Posts: 2742
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:23 pm

https://business.financialpost.com/tran ... der-moodys
The carrier probably paid US$1.4 billion to US$1.7 billion for 60 Airbus A220-300 jets, or between US$23 million and US$28 million per plane, Moody’s analyst Jonathan Root said in a report Friday, citing estimates by appraisers and price breaks that are typical for large orders. That’s a discount of as much as 72 per cent from the deal’s list value, he said.

How do analysts come up with this type of estimates?
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4486
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:43 pm

Revelation wrote:

How much will DL have to pay the Russian hackers to reverse engineer the mil-std dongle for them? :-)



Mueller's working on that.
What the...?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 15442
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:03 pm

c933103 wrote:
https://business.financialpost.com/transportation/airlines/jetblue-got-a-discount-of-up-to-72-on-its-airbus-a220-order-moodys
The carrier probably paid US$1.4 billion to US$1.7 billion for 60 Airbus A220-300 jets, or between US$23 million and US$28 million per plane, Moody’s analyst Jonathan Root said in a report Friday, citing estimates by appraisers and price breaks that are typical for large orders. That’s a discount of as much as 72 per cent from the deal’s list value, he said.

How do analysts come up with this type of estimates?

Aerospace people gossip a bunch. Honestly, those numbers are $1 million higher than my estimates.

$22 million for a plane whose MTOW, allowed fuel load and thrust is less than what DL ordered.

$27 million for maximum capabilities (best dongles) and lighter fittings (CFRP and titanium costs more than aluminum).

You can find enough information to get tight estimates from quarterly reports. Sometimes actual contracts are seen by the press in violation of NDAs.

I can estimate within 10% (usually within 5%) doing price estimates as a hobby and getting to see real numbers to calibrate my estimates here and there. An analyst should know better.

The fact this analyst has a range tells me the individual actually has a good understanding of how aircraft are sold.

Both Boeing and Airbus make a nice profit off anxillary services which includes everything from Goldcare, help desk, customized maintenance plans (cuts costs), and increasing capabilities.

I hope everyone realizes the new aircraft are now software platforms. For example the C-series er... A220 has had a climate control software patch that reduced startup wear and tear and a tiny amount of fuel burn.

Aircraft are now finally to where machine tools we're in 2000. If you know what to do, software upgrades improve efficiency every year. I remember a team cutting production costs in half by figuring out when to slow and speed up cutting rates to reduce tool wear and get part production in sync with the people schedule.

With aircraft, optimizing acceleration and velocity of actuators to minimize wear or improve fuel burn. Thankfully the avionics stagnation has ended and we have some improvement ahead. Seriously, avionics took a 15 year pause in real hardware improvements. UAS systems forced improvements and now commercial aviation is benefitting.

Let's be real, prior generation didn't even use fiber optics for data nor proper routers. Now with far better command, data, and power distribution... We can do more. Heck, the 787 came out before those neat solid state transformers that clip any aircraft power supply to variable frequency AC or more precise DC voltage control.

Take my previous car's fan. It had a variable frequency 4 phase AC (square wave) that set the radiator fan to precisely the RPM to maintain precisely the same temperature. That technology is now cheap, so components last much longer, have far smoother startups, and thus control more precisely and thus save fuel.

The A220 saves 3% in fuel burn using that technology on secondary systems. I fully expect a PIP to further cut fuel burn (only a quarter percent or so) and increase component mean time between failure and better early warning of needed component R&R.

The 787 is doing this. EIS was troublesome, but now all that software is better than promise on maintenance. At least on the GE engines. :duck:

The first JetBlue A220s are in 2020. By then the A220 reliability and maintenance should be top notch.

Embraer really showed the value of better software development with the outstanding E2-190 EIS. If they can sell more they will be a contender.

Software has infinite economics of scale. So if you sell a software PIP as an upgrade or as part of an annual maintenance plan, all it takes is quantity in the field buying the upgrade to pay engineers to update the code.

So this analyst gets pricing and gets how aircraft are going to the anxillary revenue model. Pay more for support to save money on maintenance...

This is why I pound on economy of scale. When the number of aircraft paying for support contracts drops below 500, find a new use for the software team. The extreme example is the MD-80 where every airline cancelled support contracts so Boeing had to cut up vendor contracts and shut down the help desk.

Airbus needs to get A220 sales over 500 soon (soon being 2 years). Same goes for every other new software intensive airframe.

Lightsaber
You only have the first amendment with the 2nd. If you're not going to offend someone with what you say, you don't have the 1st.
 
tphuang
Posts: 1905
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:19 pm

lightsaber wrote:
c933103 wrote:
https://business.financialpost.com/transportation/airlines/jetblue-got-a-discount-of-up-to-72-on-its-airbus-a220-order-moodys
The carrier probably paid US$1.4 billion to US$1.7 billion for 60 Airbus A220-300 jets, or between US$23 million and US$28 million per plane, Moody’s analyst Jonathan Root said in a report Friday, citing estimates by appraisers and price breaks that are typical for large orders. That’s a discount of as much as 72 per cent from the deal’s list value, he said.

How do analysts come up with this type of estimates?

Aerospace people gossip a bunch. Honestly, those numbers are $1 million higher than my estimates.

$22 million for a plane whose MTOW, allowed fuel load and thrust is less than what DL ordered.

$27 million for maximum capabilities (best dongles) and lighter fittings (CFRP and titanium costs more than aluminum).

You can find enough information to get tight estimates from quarterly reports. Sometimes actual contracts are seen by the press in violation of NDAs.

I can estimate within 10% (usually within 5%) doing price estimates as a hobby and getting to see real numbers to calibrate my estimates here and there. An analyst should know better.

The fact this analyst has a range tells me the individual actually has a good understanding of how aircraft are sold.

Both Boeing and Airbus make a nice profit off anxillary services which includes everything from Goldcare, help desk, customized maintenance plans (cuts costs), and increasing capabilities.

I hope everyone realizes the new aircraft are now software platforms. For example the C-series er... A220 has had a climate control software patch that reduced startup wear and tear and a tiny amount of fuel burn.

Aircraft are now finally to where machine tools we're in 2000. If you know what to do, software upgrades improve efficiency every year. I remember a team cutting production costs in half by figuring out when to slow and speed up cutting rates to reduce tool wear and get part production in sync with the people schedule.

With aircraft, optimizing acceleration and velocity of actuators to minimize wear or improve fuel burn. Thankfully the avionics stagnation has ended and we have some improvement ahead. Seriously, avionics took a 15 year pause in real hardware improvements. UAS systems forced improvements and now commercial aviation is benefitting.

Let's be real, prior generation didn't even use fiber optics for data nor proper routers. Now with far better command, data, and power distribution... We can do more. Heck, the 787 came out before those neat solid state transformers that clip any aircraft power supply to variable frequency AC or more precise DC voltage control.

Take my previous car's fan. It had a variable frequency 4 phase AC (square wave) that set the radiator fan to precisely the RPM to maintain precisely the same temperature. That technology is now cheap, so components last much longer, have far smoother startups, and thus control more precisely and thus save fuel.

The A220 saves 3% in fuel burn using that technology on secondary systems. I fully expect a PIP to further cut fuel burn (only a quarter percent or so) and increase component mean time between failure and better early warning of needed component R&R.

The 787 is doing this. EIS was troublesome, but now all that software is better than promise on maintenance. At least on the GE engines. :duck:

The first JetBlue A220s are in 2020. By then the A220 reliability and maintenance should be top notch.

Embraer really showed the value of better software development with the outstanding E2-190 EIS. If they can sell more they will be a contender.

Software has infinite economics of scale. So if you sell a software PIP as an upgrade or as part of an annual maintenance plan, all it takes is quantity in the field buying the upgrade to pay engineers to update the code.

So this analyst gets pricing and gets how aircraft are going to the anxillary revenue model. Pay more for support to save money on maintenance...

This is why I pound on economy of scale. When the number of aircraft paying for support contracts drops below 500, find a new use for the software team. The extreme example is the MD-80 where every airline cancelled support contracts so Boeing had to cut up vendor contracts and shut down the help desk.

Airbus needs to get A220 sales over 500 soon (soon being 2 years). Same goes for every other new software intensive airframe.

Lightsaber

If that’s the case then JetBlue really did well to capitalize on its position. How much higher do you think a220 can price now that it has 2 major us airlines operating it? It seems like if it can get moxy on board also, there is no more reason for airbus to give such deep discounting.
 
CaptPizzaPants
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:44 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:43 pm

Airbus may have also given them a good deal since they turned the 25 A320's into A321's.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4486
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:49 pm

lightsaber wrote:

I hope everyone realizes the new aircraft are now software platforms. For example the C-series er... A220 has had a climate control software patch that reduced startup wear and tear and a tiny amount of fuel burn.


Lightsaber


To reinforce your point, I have a real world example...though not airliner related. I recently bought a small drone. I got a deal because it is last years model. The major upgrade to the new model was essentially an upgrade to the electronic speed controller. By changing the shape of the signal wave which controls motor speed, not the motor itself, they were able to not only increase battery endurance by around 5%, but also reduce motor noise.

For this, they get to increase the price by around 10%.

lightsaber wrote:

Airbus needs to get A220 sales over 500 soon (soon being 2 years). Same goes for every other new software intensive airframe.

Lightsaber


Low production numbers are probably going to be the biggest impediment to sales going forward. Open production slots will likely help the 195 win some orders over the 220.
Last edited by JoeCanuck on Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What the...?
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 2689
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:50 pm

If those analysts are right, that's also very low price for the A220 that mirrors the DL order. Not exactly a good sign for profitability for the A220 line, and also not a good sign for Airbus profits with the hit that they took with this order with the A320neo being substituted for it.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4486
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:55 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
If those analysts are right, that's also very low price for the A220 that mirrors the DL order. Not exactly a good sign for profitability for the A220 line, and also not a good sign for Airbus profits with the hit that they took with this order with the A320neo being substituted for it.


I think in general, airline makers are more inclined to live with low profits on sales if it means higher profits on after sales parts and services.
What the...?
 
JamesCousins
Posts: 278
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:19 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:07 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
Not a big surprise. B6 was the carrier where Airbus had the edge with the CSeries. It does illustrate a problem with having the A220 compete against the A320. Airbus may have gained in A220 orders, but now they've lost A320 orders. It's tough to compete against yourself.


The alternative, don't compete against yourself, compete against someone else. The A220/C-Series is a threat to the A320neo whether they own it or not, better to be making money from it...
A320-200, A321-200, 737-500, 737-800, 747-400, 757-200, 787-9
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 15442
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:12 pm

tphuang wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
c933103 wrote:
https://business.financialpost.com/transportation/airlines/jetblue-got-a-discount-of-up-to-72-on-its-airbus-a220-order-moodys

How do analysts come up with this type of estimates?

Aerospace people gossip a bunch. Honestly, those numbers are $1 million higher than my estimates.

$22 million for a plane whose MTOW, allowed fuel load and thrust is less than what DL ordered.

$27 million for maximum capabilities (best dongles) and lighter fittings (CFRP and titanium costs more than aluminum).

You can find enough information to get tight estimates from quarterly reports. Sometimes actual contracts are seen by the press in violation of NDAs.

I can estimate within 10% (usually within 5%) doing price estimates as a hobby and getting to see real numbers to calibrate my estimates here and there. An analyst should know better.

The fact this analyst has a range tells me the individual actually has a good understanding of how aircraft are sold.

Both Boeing and Airbus make a nice profit off anxillary services which includes everything from Goldcare, help desk, customized maintenance plans (cuts costs), and increasing capabilities.

I hope everyone realizes the new aircraft are now software platforms. For example the C-series er... A220 has had a climate control software patch that reduced startup wear and tear and a tiny amount of fuel burn.

Aircraft are now finally to where machine tools we're in 2000. If you know what to do, software upgrades improve efficiency every year. I remember a team cutting production costs in half by figuring out when to slow and speed up cutting rates to reduce tool wear and get part production in sync with the people schedule.

With aircraft, optimizing acceleration and velocity of actuators to minimize wear or improve fuel burn. Thankfully the avionics stagnation has ended and we have some improvement ahead. Seriously, avionics took a 15 year pause in real hardware improvements. UAS systems forced improvements and now commercial aviation is benefitting.

Let's be real, prior generation didn't even use fiber optics for data nor proper routers. Now with far better command, data, and power distribution... We can do more. Heck, the 787 came out before those neat solid state transformers that clip any aircraft power supply to variable frequency AC or more precise DC voltage control.

Take my previous car's fan. It had a variable frequency 4 phase AC (square wave) that set the radiator fan to precisely the RPM to maintain precisely the same temperature. That technology is now cheap, so components last much longer, have far smoother startups, and thus control more precisely and thus save fuel.

The A220 saves 3% in fuel burn using that technology on secondary systems. I fully expect a PIP to further cut fuel burn (only a quarter percent or so) and increase component mean time between failure and better early warning of needed component R&R.

The 787 is doing this. EIS was troublesome, but now all that software is better than promise on maintenance. At least on the GE engines. :duck:

The first JetBlue A220s are in 2020. By then the A220 reliability and maintenance should be top notch.

Embraer really showed the value of better software development with the outstanding E2-190 EIS. If they can sell more they will be a contender.

Software has infinite economics of scale. So if you sell a software PIP as an upgrade or as part of an annual maintenance plan, all it takes is quantity in the field buying the upgrade to pay engineers to update the code.

So this analyst gets pricing and gets how aircraft are going to the anxillary revenue model. Pay more for support to save money on maintenance...

This is why I pound on economy of scale. When the number of aircraft paying for support contracts drops below 500, find a new use for the software team. The extreme example is the MD-80 where every airline cancelled support contracts so Boeing had to cut up vendor contracts and shut down the help desk.

Airbus needs to get A220 sales over 500 soon (soon being 2 years). Same goes for every other new software intensive airframe.

Lightsaber

If that’s the case then JetBlue really did well to capitalize on its position. How much higher do you think a220 can price now that it has 2 major us airlines operating it? It seems like if it can get moxy on board also, there is no more reason for airbus to give such deep discounting.

Evidence points to the JetBlue order of the A220-300 over the E2-195 was a close call. By close, I mean that if Embraer had cut prices $1.5 million per aircraft or $0.1 billion, we would be discussing how difficult it will be for the A220 to win orders at airlines operating E-jets. Instead...

Let us look at known campaigns:
1. United values range, but about $0.5 million per aircraft less than JetBlue per aircraft. So if Embraer offers the E2-195 for $1 million less than they offered JetBlue, flip a coin on which United buys. If Airbus raises the price $1 million per Airframe, Embraer win.

2. Spirit values the A220 capabilities even less. This is Embraer's best chance in my opinion.

3. Ethiopian values shortfield performance. This will be with better dongles or the A220-100. This improves the E2-195 chances I estimate $1 million per Airframe.

4. Kenya:. I'm hearing scuttlebutt this is down to options and upgrade pricing for the A220. In other words, Embraer can only win by setting a new pricing low.

I do not believe Airbus can raise pricing until over 500 firm A220 orders due to the E2
You only have the first amendment with the 2nd. If you're not going to offend someone with what you say, you don't have the 1st.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 2689
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:13 pm

JamesCousins wrote:
The alternative, don't compete against yourself, compete against someone else. The A220/C-Series is a threat to the A320neo whether they own it or not, better to be making money from it...


That's assuming A) the A220 will be profitable for Airbus and B) it will more profitable than if they had not purchased their stake and instead continued competing against a mightily struggling program that they were handily beating. Big question mark. Prices that low - if true - are not a good sign.
 
Planeflyer
Posts: 1078
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 3:49 am

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:17 pm

JoeCanuck wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
If those analysts are right, that's also very low price for the A220 that mirrors the DL order. Not exactly a good sign for profitability for the A220 line, and also not a good sign for Airbus profits with the hit that they took with this order with the A320neo being substituted for it.


I think in general, airline makers are more inclined to live with low profits on sales if it means higher profits on after sales parts and services.



AB has overall margins in the low to mid teens and they are targeting high teens.

I’m guessing they are trying to create critical mass for 220 so that they can achieve the scale lightsaber mentioned above.

In
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 15442
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: JetBlue Orders 60 Airbus A220-300

Sat Jul 14, 2018 12:02 am

Planeflyer wrote:
J canoeCanuck wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
If those analysts are right, that's also very low price for the A220 that mirrors the DL order. Not exactly a good sign for profitability for the A220 line, and also not a good sign for Airbus profits with the hit that they took with this order with the A320neo being substituted for it.


I think in general, airline makers are more inclined to live with low profits on sales if it means higher profits on after sales parts and services.



AB has overall margins in the low to mid teens and they are targeting high teens.

I’m guessing they are trying to create critical mass for 220 so that they can achieve the scale lightsaber mentioned above.

In

Not only create scale, but a hope to stop the E2 from attaining scale. Both need to develop a resale market; neither has enough opperators to ensure (going from memory, the MAX has 80 and the NEO more which helps leasing companies place narrowbody aircraft).

Lightsaber
You only have the first amendment with the 2nd. If you're not going to offend someone with what you say, you don't have the 1st.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

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