A220s Mirabel workers have signed a new 5 years labour contract with Airbus Canada.

https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/a ... 52773.html

The new deal include the creation of a pre-FAL line (called suppliers center by Airbus) for all A220, including those for Mobile.

queb wrote:

A220s Mirabel workers have signed a new 5 years labour contract with Airbus Canada.

https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/a ... 52773.html

The new deal include the creation of a pre-FAL line (called suppliers center by Airbus) for all A220, including those for Mobile.

Thank you for sharing this!

I'd like to know more about this pre-FAL "suppliers center." What is it intended to do? I couldn't find anything online about it.

aerolimani wrote:

queb wrote:

A220s Mirabel workers have signed a new 5 years labour contract with Airbus Canada.

https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/a ... 52773.html

The new deal include the creation of a pre-FAL line (called suppliers center by Airbus) for all A220, including those for Mobile.

Thank you for sharing this!

I'd like to know more about this pre-FAL "suppliers center." What is it intended to do? I couldn't find anything online about it.

it's for sub-assemblies like fuselage sections to be mated and prepared before the FAL instead of doing it directly in the FAL.

yyztpa2 wrote:

UA947 wrote:

Jetsouth wrote:

Actually, 2 A220-100's remain to be delivered to SWISS. One apparently is in production, the other, apparently in outside storage.

And the one in production that you mention is now in the air for the first time.

With 50018 to be delivered this month, 50030 delivered earlier this month to Delta and 50034-37 also to be delivered to Delta, there should be 6 A221 this month. A A223 is whitetail and parked due to Redwings. Production uptick?

From what I can tell, there is always a production surge near the end of quarters. So March, June, September and especially December see huge output relative to the other months. I wonder if this is intentionally planned or the result of quarterly incentives.

AWY wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

UA947 wrote:

And the one in production that you mention is now in the air for the first time.

With 50018 to be delivered this month, 50030 delivered earlier this month to Delta and 50034-37 also to be delivered to Delta, there should be 6 A221 this month. A A223 is whitetail and parked due to Redwings. Production uptick?

From what I can tell, there is always a production surge near the end of quarters. So March, June, September and especially December see huge output relative to the other months. I wonder if this is intentionally planned or the result of quarterly incentives.

Last month of quarter/whole quarter
Q# ..2016..............2017...............2018...........2019
1....0/0 - 0%.......2/2 - 100%.......4/5 - 80%....6/8 - 75%
2....1/1 - 100%...2/5 - 40%.........3/7 - 43%
3....0/1 - 0%........0/4 - 0%...........3/9 - 33%
4....3/5 - 60%......3/6 - 50%.........8/12 - 67%

Looks more like only in March and December. June at 40 to 43% is a bit higher than 33% (ignoring 2016 when they were just starting out) and september is at most 33%.

December no surprise with end of year delivery push is 50 to 67% of Q4 Deliveries.

I'm a little surprised how high March is, but thinking about it, it makes sense with January being 0 deliveries after a busy December and February they're just getting started again and the month is only 28 days.

queb wrote:

aerolimani wrote:

queb wrote:

A220s Mirabel workers have signed a new 5 years labour contract with Airbus Canada.

https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/a ... 52773.html

The new deal include the creation of a pre-FAL line (called suppliers center by Airbus) for all A220, including those for Mobile.

Thank you for sharing this!

I'd like to know more about this pre-FAL "suppliers center." What is it intended to do? I couldn't find anything online about it.

it's for sub-assemblies like fuselage sections to be mated and prepared before the FAL instead of doing it directly in the FAL.

I have more details, prefal works also include installation of floors, galleys/lavatory, sidewalls, insulation and avionics components

AWY wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

UA947 wrote:

And the one in production that you mention is now in the air for the first time.

With 50018 to be delivered this month, 50030 delivered earlier this month to Delta and 50034-37 also to be delivered to Delta, there should be 6 A221 this month. A A223 is whitetail and parked due to Redwings. Production uptick?

From what I can tell, there is always a production surge near the end of quarters. So March, June, September and especially December see huge output relative to the other months. I wonder if this is intentionally planned or the result of quarterly incentives.

A "surge" in production during the Paris Air show is probably also the goal.

So with Swiss 50018 now flight testing is there any movement with 50019? Or is 50019 a "right off" as an early production model? I can only find vague third party comments about the last two Swiss cs100s. Is 50019 stored out in the open at Mirabel? Just curious.

pik1 wrote:

AWY wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

With 50018 to be delivered this month, 50030 delivered earlier this month to Delta and 50034-37 also to be delivered to Delta, there should be 6 A221 this month. A A223 is whitetail and parked due to Redwings. Production uptick?

From what I can tell, there is always a production surge near the end of quarters. So March, June, September and especially December see huge output relative to the other months. I wonder if this is intentionally planned or the result of quarterly incentives.

A "surge" in production during the Paris Air show is probably also the goal.

So with Swiss 50018 now flight testing is there any movement with 50019? Or is 50019 a "right off" as an early production model? I can only find vague third party comments about the last two Swiss cs100s. Is 50019 stored out in the open at Mirabel? Just curious.

This has everything to do with end-of-quarter financial targets (get the money in the door before quarter- and year-end). They won't be doing production planning around marketing events like PAS/FAS. If anything, the completed aircraft that get displayed at the show rather than get delivered to customers are delayed as a result, not "surged"...

How do these surges affect production & the supply chain? I would think that running at a regular steady pace is the most efficient.

Canuck600 wrote:

How do these surges affect production & the supply chain? I would think that running at a regular steady pace is the most efficient.

I'm still not sure there's really a surge besides December.
In 2018
Q1 - 0, 1 4
Q2 - 1, 3, 3
Q3 - 3, 3, 3
Q4 - 2, 2, 8

For Q1, the "surge" is really more of a January lull and short February (if Feb was a normal length month it would have been 0, 2, 3) In Q2 it was more back heavy - but 1 in April followed by 3 each May and June seems more like April was a little low than a surge in June. Q3 consistent each month. Q4 absolutely there is a surge. And that surged was followed with 2019Q1 deliveries of 0, 2, 6 (if Feb was a normal length month it would be 0, 4, 4).

I agree 4 surges a year would lead to inefficiencies. However looking at the numbers I feel it's a December surge followed by a January lull which leads to a perceived March surge. And then the rest of the year is steady. If anything, the end of Q123 surge is the test pilots work a little extra to push a delivery up a couple days. Q4 is more of an all hands on deck actual production surge.

lightsaber wrote:

keesje wrote:

After a few years in passenger service, it seems the CSeries / A220 is doing pretty well in service with regards to reliability, fuel efficiency & passenger feed-back. We now have to see how the hours are going to work on the aircraft (engines, SB, AD's, checks) but all is still under warrantly. It seems at this stage BBD engineers / supply chain did a pretty good job on the A220.

Doing much better:

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... ential?amp

Engine seals are almost completely replaced. That fixes dispatch reliability.

The combustors currently only have a 13,000 hr life. Oops. Design was 48,000 hr. So right now, about a 3 year life until 1st overhaul. An ouch on warranty bills, but not the end if the world.

I believe sales will now increase.

Lightsaber

Does one need to do a full overhaul to replace the combustors? Can the combustors be refurbished (zero time, TSO = 0)?

Not familiar with the GTF design and maintenance philosophy, but most engines you can do that at HSI (Hot Section Inspection) and some even on-wing. I know several engines where one can be replace the combustors without having to perform a test cell run; a pre- and post-mainmtenance validation ground run could do the trick.

PW100 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

keesje wrote:

After a few years in passenger service, it seems the CSeries / A220 is doing pretty well in service with regards to reliability, fuel efficiency & passenger feed-back. We now have to see how the hours are going to work on the aircraft (engines, SB, AD's, checks) but all is still under warrantly. It seems at this stage BBD engineers / supply chain did a pretty good job on the A220.

Doing much better:

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... ential?amp

Engine seals are almost completely replaced. That fixes dispatch reliability.

The combustors currently only have a 13,000 hr life. Oops. Design was 48,000 hr. So right now, about a 3 year life until 1st overhaul. An ouch on warranty bills, but not the end if the world.

I believe sales will now increase.

Lightsaber

Does one need to do a full overhaul to replace the combustors? Can the combustors be refurbished (zero time, TSO = 0)?

Not familiar with the GTF design and maintenance philosophy, but most engines you can do that at HSI (Hot Section Inspection) and some even on-wing. I know several engines where one can be replace the combustors without having to perform a test cell run; a pre- and post-mainmtenance validation ground run could do the trick.

I do not know the changes in the EO. Normally, combustor outer liners last 2 or 3 overhauls, but the guide swirlers and floatwall pannels are replaced.

Inspections on wing are a given. However, after breaking open the casing, old school philosophy was a test run. In this case, due to combined compressor rotor corrosion inspections, much more work is required.

Lightsaber

First major pieces of Airbus’ new jet arrive in Mobile

https://www.al.com/news/mobile/2019/06/ ... obile.html

Delivery Schedule of Reported A220 Deliveries (BOLD is reported in news or press relase underline is reported by A.net useritalics is when i evened deliveries out based on known data as best able)
Mobile (presuming all A223 for Delta, JetBlue, and Moxy)
YEAR......2019...2020...2021...2022...2023...2024...2025
Delta A223s..........6.......12......17......15
JetBlue.................1.......6.......8.......19......22......14..
Moxy....................6......12......12......15......15
MOBILE TOTAL....13......30......37......49......37......14

Mirabel (all others)
YEAR......2019...2020...2021...2022...2023...2024...2025
Air Baltic.....8.......12.......12........4
Air Canada 1.......14........15......15
Air Vanuatu 0........2..........2
Delta A221s..24.....12.......5..
EgyptAir.......6........6
Korean Air...1
Swiss.......... 2
YEAR......2019...2020...2021...2022...2023...2024...2025
MIRABEL...42......46........34......19

Mirabel and Mobile Combined
YEAR......2019...2020...2021...2022...2023...2024...2025
TOTAL........42......59.......64......56......49......37......14

Possible Orders to be added (let me know thoughts on how I do this part, I've debated trying to split up into years but not sure there's an accurate way to do so)
YEAR......2019...2020...2021...2022...2023...2024...2025
Lessors....150 ---> ---> ---> ---> ---> ---> --->
Falcon........2 ---> -->
Iraqi............5 --> -->
Possible Options to be added
YEAR......2019...2020...2021...2022...2023...2024...2025
EqyptAir...............12...---> ---> .---> --->
Swiss...................30 .---> ---> ---> --->
Korean..................20 .---> ---> .---> --->
Air Baltic...................................30 .---> ---> .---> --->
Air Canada................................30 .---> ---> .---> --->
Delta.................................................50 .---> ---> .--->
JetBlue..................................................................50 .--->

Lessors, Falcon, and Iraqi - since it's possible the 6 for STLC could be placed this year, maybe even with Falcon or Iraqi, they are starting 2019
Lessors include 50 ALC, 20 NAC, 20 LCI, 40 Macquaire, 14 IFC, 6 STLC

Options - I assumed the earliest options would kick in is the same year as last delivery. However, I doubt Swiss or Korean will get options delivered in 2019 so I said 2020.

Orders not included in table:
86 Unlikely to happen imho (10 Braathens, 10 Gulf Air, 10 Odyssey, 40 Republic, 16 Saudi Gulf)

UPDATES:
Jet Blue Order: Per A.Net user tphuang they will now have 14 in 2025 with their 10 converted options. (I double checked my math and initial table should have said 4 instead of 2 for 2025)

Delta Order: I put them in as evened across years for 2021. Given that the last top up for 15 increased 2019 by 11 and 2020 by 7 (2021-23 dropped one each) I'm wondering if they might be as soon as 2020 and Airbus has Delta on speed dial for when they have short term slots left to sell.

With no news about the STLC/Red Wings 6 planes, I have removed them from the list.

ALC and NAC lease orders added.


Data is in post 59 and 130 in this thread

First parts for Mobile being delivered:
https://www.al.com%2fnews%2fmobile%2f20 ... Type%3damp

As one would expect, first aircraft will take more time.

What is going on with the 29th A220 delivery to SWISS? They are already up to 10 pre-delivery flights.

The first four flights were on the 15th, 17th, 18th, and 19th. Then there were 4 yesterday and 2 today. Not sure but im wondering if it's just Swiss being EXTREMELY thorough before accepting a plane stored outside for so long and it's just a lot of customer acceptance flights.

rrbsztk wrote:

The first four flights were on the 15th, 17th, 18th, and 19th. Then there were 4 yesterday and 2 today. Not sure but im wondering if it's just Swiss being EXTREMELY thorough before accepting a plane stored outside for so long and it's just a lot of customer acceptance flights.

Its up to 11 pre-delivery flights now.....

Jetsouth wrote:

rrbsztk wrote:

The first four flights were on the 15th, 17th, 18th, and 19th. Then there were 4 yesterday and 2 today. Not sure but im wondering if it's just Swiss being EXTREMELY thorough before accepting a plane stored outside for so long and it's just a lot of customer acceptance flights.

Its up to 11 pre-delivery flights now.....

Hopefully that's the last one.

Even more so, hopefully this is unique to that plane (and maybe the other swiss one once they get to it) and every other plane can keepgoing with 2-4 test flights and delivered in 2 to 3 weeks.

13 pre-delivery flights so far for the 29th A220 to be delivered to SWISS. This must be some kind of record......

Maybe they want 29 pre delivery flights for the 29th plane? (I hope not)

Jetsouth wrote:

13 pre-delivery flights so far for the 29th A220 to be delivered to SWISS. This must be some kind of record......

Perhaps Airbus and Swiss have agreed to use it for certification for capability that FTVs are not capable of.

yyztpa2 wrote:

Jetsouth wrote:

13 pre-delivery flights so far for the 29th A220 to be delivered to SWISS. This must be some kind of record......

Perhaps Airbus and Swiss have agreed to use it for certification for capability that FTVs are not capable of.

Is it a -100 or a -300? Could it be testing related to LCY approaches? Is there anything unusual about the flight profiles (steep approach angles, etc.)?

DeltaB717 wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

Jetsouth wrote:

13 pre-delivery flights so far for the 29th A220 to be delivered to SWISS. This must be some kind of record......

Perhaps Airbus and Swiss have agreed to use it for certification for capability that FTVs are not capable of.

Is it a -100 or a -300? Could it be testing related to LCY approaches? Is there anything unusual about the flight profiles (steep approach angles, etc.)?

It's the 100 which is already LCY certified.
Perhaps the MTOW change?

AIB says flight 13 was "circuits at ymx"
https://aibfamily.flights/Airbus-A220

Does circuits clarify anything? (Im not really sure what circuits means besides the obvious general dictionary definition...not sure exactly what it means for flights)

yyztpa2 wrote:

DeltaB717 wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

Perhaps Airbus and Swiss have agreed to use it for certification for capability that FTVs are not capable of.

Is it a -100 or a -300? Could it be testing related to LCY approaches? Is there anything unusual about the flight profiles (steep approach angles, etc.)?

It's the 100 which is already LCY certified.
Perhaps the MTOW change?

I've always been curious. Seems to me that the 300 might be able to be certified for LCY. Dunno if Airbus and Bombardier would be interested.

rrbsztk wrote:

AIB says flight 13 was "circuits at ymx"
https://aibfamily.flights/Airbus-A220

Does circuits clarify anything? (Im not really sure what circuits means besides the obvious general dictionary definition...not sure exactly what it means for flights)

Circuits means it’s flying in circles around the airport, either doing touch and go’s or go arounds at the end of each round. In the aircrafts case it could test things like auto land or other landing/takeoff related items.

Unrelated to this aircraft, circuits are one of the basic maneuvers when learning how to fly.

bspc wrote:

rrbsztk wrote:

AIB says flight 13 was "circuits at ymx"
https://aibfamily.flights/Airbus-A220

Does circuits clarify anything? (Im not really sure what circuits means besides the obvious general dictionary definition...not sure exactly what it means for flights)

Circuits means it’s flying in circles around the airport, either doing touch and go’s or go arounds at the end of each round. In the aircrafts case it could test things like auto land or other landing/takeoff related items.

Unrelated to this aircraft, circuits are one of the basic maneuvers when learning how to fly.

Thanks. Much appreciated. Google was all about the Fort Wayne Flying Circuits and this was a lot more informative than me going 'well im guessing it's flying in circles?'

TObound wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

DeltaB717 wrote:

Is it a -100 or a -300? Could it be testing related to LCY approaches? Is there anything unusual about the flight profiles (steep approach angles, etc.)?

It's the 100 which is already LCY certified.
Perhaps the MTOW change?

I've always been curious. Seems to me that the 300 might be able to be certified for LCY. Dunno if Airbus and Bombardier would be interested.

It would be damn stupid to certify 300 for LCY.

Which stupid aircraft manufacturer would certify an aircraft just to make it able to land at LCY basically empty?

50037 - N118DU just got delivered. 5th A220 this month, and maybe the one for Swiss will be delivered too.

VV wrote:

TObound wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

It's the 100 which is already LCY certified.
Perhaps the MTOW change?

I've always been curious. Seems to me that the 300 might be able to be certified for LCY. Dunno if Airbus and Bombardier would be interested.

It would be damn stupid to certify 300 for LCY.

Which stupid aircraft manufacturer would certify an aircraft just to make it able to land at LCY basically empty?

The A220-300 would be able to fly more people than the -100, just on shorter missions.

With a typical configuration I expect, I see missions limited to 500nm to 750nm.

That is enough to get to quite a few EU3 hubs:
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?R=500nm%40lcy

But we have another thread on IAG's decision:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1424001


The CS300 has the thrust versus the A318 and wing area. I see no technical reason it won't be certified for LCY.

I'm curious as to the next orders for the A220.
We've seen LOIs for Air lease, Nordic aviation, DL, and B6 this year.


Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

VV wrote:

TObound wrote:

I've always been curious. Seems to me that the 300 might be able to be certified for LCY. Dunno if Airbus and Bombardier would be interested.

It would be damn stupid to certify 300 for LCY.

Which stupid aircraft manufacturer would certify an aircraft just to make it able to land at LCY basically empty?

The A220-300 would be able to fly more people than the -100, just on shorter missions.

With a typical configuration I expect, I see missions limited to 500nm to 750nm.

That is enough to get to quite a few EU3 hubs:
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?R=500nm%40lcy

But we have another thread on IAG's decision:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1424001


The CS300 has the thrust versus the A318 and wing area. I see no technical reason it won't be certified for LCY.

I'm curious as to the next orders for the A220.
We've seen LOIs for Air lease, Nordic aviation, DL, and B6 this year.


Lightsaber

I said it would be stupid to certify the A220-300 to land at LCY. Isn't that clear enough?

It won't be able to carry more passengers than the A220-100 into LCY for LANDING issues.
Full stop.

Please stop the madness about CS300 certification at LCY. It will never happen.

VV wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

VV wrote:

It would be damn stupid to certify 300 for LCY.

Which stupid aircraft manufacturer would certify an aircraft just to make it able to land at LCY basically empty?

The A220-300 would be able to fly more people than the -100, just on shorter missions.

With a typical configuration I expect, I see missions limited to 500nm to 750nm.

That is enough to get to quite a few EU3 hubs:
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?R=500nm%40lcy

But we have another thread on IAG's decision:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1424001


The CS300 has the thrust versus the A318 and wing area. I see no technical reason it won't be certified for LCY.

I'm curious as to the next orders for the A220.
We've seen LOIs for Air lease, Nordic aviation, DL, and B6 this year.


Lightsaber

I said it would be stupid to certify the A220-300 to land at LCY. Isn't that clear enough?

It won't be able to carry more passengers than the A220-100 into LCY for LANDING issues.
Full stop.

Please stop the madness about CS300 certification at LCY. It will never happen.

My job is to make aircraft perform in ways the competition thinks is impossible. I see an easy path for the A220-300:at LCY. Thinking about it last night, it might just be a software upgrade.

Watch words like stupid. Winning the IAG order alone is sufficient to pay the costs for the certification, including new breaks (if required).

Outside sources are discussing the certification as I posted earlier. I see no reason that the A220-300 couldn't be LCY certified. This would improve sales to IAG, LH Group, and possibly others. One would certainly expect AirBaltic to sign up for the opportunity.

Again, my job is to help improve aerospace performance. So I have a feel of what is plausible. So far, it looks like Bombardier's work optimizing the c-series for LCY operations will allow the A220-300. There could be gotchas. Another solution is change a linkage in the spoilers to provide more downforce.

As we say at work, present solutions, not problems.

Lightsaber

VV; is it "stupid" the same way as increasing the MTOW of both the CS100 and the CS300? Oh wait, Delta just switched to that heavier MTOW...

However, I indeed see the difficulty about LCY. The tricky part was slowing down a fully loaded CS100 with a wet pavement.

Cheers.

ExMilitaryEng wrote:

VV; is it "stupid" the same way as increasing the MTOW of both the CS100 and the CS300? Oh wait, Delta just switched to that heavier MTOW...

However, I indeed see the difficulty about LCY. The tricky part was slowing down a fully loaded CS100 with a wet pavement.

Cheers.

Do you have a link on DL ordering the higher MTOW?

As to LCY with a wet runway, increase spoilers and break size. There are solutions. Solutions with a ROI.

Lightsaber

Link for Delta mtow
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... craft.html

"Le Bourget – Delta Air Lines has ordered five additional A220-100 aircraft, bringing to 95 the total number of orders placed, including both the A220-100s and A220-300s. The airline is the first to select the new increased maximum takeoff weight option for its entire fleet from 2020."

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 20-459113/

Not sure though how many will be of the higher MTOW.

Oops, someone else answered first. Please delete my post...

ExMilitaryEng wrote:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/paris-delta-to-take-higher-weight-a220-459113/

Not sure though how many will be of the higher MTOW.

Oops, someone else answered first. Please delete my post...

Haven't seen official numbers but if entire fleet from 2020 will have higher mtow means all deliveries from January 2020 that would include 100% of A220-300 and about 35% of the 100s (based on 4 delivered in 2018 and planned 24 deliveries in 2019 leaving 17 of the A220-100s to be delivered 2020 onwards)

ExMilitaryEng wrote:

VV; is it "stupid" the same way as increasing the MTOW of both the CS100 and the CS300? Oh wait, Delta just switched to that heavier MTOW...
...
Cheers.

Yes.
It shows the aircraft is not optimized for the huge majority of the routes for which it will be sold.

It has just given more room to E-Jet E2.

Well, maybe Airbus wants to slightly move away from the E195E2 and a little closer to the Max8. (And launching an A320.5?)

VV wrote:

TObound wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

It's the 100 which is already LCY certified.
Perhaps the MTOW change?

I've always been curious. Seems to me that the 300 might be able to be certified for LCY. Dunno if Airbus and Bombardier would be interested.

It would be damn stupid to certify 300 for LCY.

Which stupid aircraft manufacturer would certify an aircraft just to make it able to land at LCY basically empty?

It's an assumption on your part that they can't certify the aircraft to land at LCY with a useful load. You know what they say about assumptions....

I am fairly sure any investment study/business case would consider what's feasible and the costs to achieve the pledged performance and proceed from there. If feasible, the only thing stupid would be not to canvas their customers for interest in such an option.

TObound wrote:

VV wrote:

TObound wrote:

I've always been curious. Seems to me that the 300 might be able to be certified for LCY. Dunno if Airbus and Bombardier would be interested.

It would be damn stupid to certify 300 for LCY.

Which stupid aircraft manufacturer would certify an aircraft just to make it able to land at LCY basically empty?

It's an assumption on your part that they can't certify the aircraft to land at LCY with a useful load. You know what they say about assumptions....

I am fairly sure any investment study/business case would consider what's feasible and the costs to achieve the pledged performance and proceed from there. If feasible, the only thing stupid would be not to canvas their customers for interest in such an option.

No, there is no case for CS300 operation at LCY. FULL STOP.
It will never happen.

lightsaber wrote:

VV wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

The A220-300 would be able to fly more people than the -100, just on shorter missions.

With a typical configuration I expect, I see missions limited to 500nm to 750nm.

That is enough to get to quite a few EU3 hubs:
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?R=500nm%40lcy

But we have another thread on IAG's decision:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1424001


The CS300 has the thrust versus the A318 and wing area. I see no technical reason it won't be certified for LCY.

I'm curious as to the next orders for the A220.
We've seen LOIs for Air lease, Nordic aviation, DL, and B6 this year.


Lightsaber

I said it would be stupid to certify the A220-300 to land at LCY. Isn't that clear enough?

It won't be able to carry more passengers than the A220-100 into LCY for LANDING issues.
Full stop.

Please stop the madness about CS300 certification at LCY. It will never happen.

My job is to make aircraft perform in ways the competition thinks is impossible. I see an easy path for the A220-300:at LCY. Thinking about it last night, it might just be a software upgrade.

Watch words like stupid. Winning the IAG order alone is sufficient to pay the costs for the certification, including new breaks (if required).

Outside sources are discussing the certification as I posted earlier. I see no reason that the A220-300 couldn't be LCY certified. This would improve sales to IAG, LH Group, and possibly others. One would certainly expect AirBaltic to sign up for the opportunity.

Again, my job is to help improve aerospace performance. So I have a feel of what is plausible. So far, it looks like Bombardier's work optimizing the c-series for LCY operations will allow the A220-300. There could be gotchas. Another solution is change a linkage in the spoilers to provide more downforce.

As we say at work, present solutions, not problems.

Lightsaber

When they announced the A220-100 certification at LCY I'm pretty sure they mentioned then that they were looking to do it for certification for the A220-300 as well in their press release. However, if I remember correctly, Swiss' A220-100 flights to LCY are limited by number of passengers; they can't take the full load I don't think. On that basis I doubt the A220-300 would work there and certainly not with a European configuration but then again I'm not an expert so may be totally wrong

Wouldn’t there anyway be a gate space/parking issue with the A223 at LCY? Isn’t it too big for all the stands anyway?

OMG.

Please stop this madness about CS300 at LCY. It is not going to happen.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.belfas ... 90795.html

So in September last year theres an article with someone from LCY corporate affairs talking about certifying the A220-300.

"Liam McKay, the airport's corporate affairs director, said it hoped to certify the larger A220-300 for use. "

I'm done reponding to someone saying it just won't happen. If there is a business case and buyers commit, it happens.

In my opinion, the A220-300 at LCY increases the chance IAG buys the type. It depends on quantity that Spirit might, or might not, orders as to which is more interesting.

rrbsztk wrote:

Link for Delta mtow
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... craft.html

"Le Bourget – Delta Air Lines has ordered five additional A220-100 aircraft, bringing to 95 the total number of orders placed, including both the A220-100s and A220-300s. The airline is the first to select the new increased maximum takeoff weight option for its entire fleet from 2020."

If the largest buyer of a type likes an option, there is value to sell more!

I personally thought this would be a winner for the highest density opperators, not a 2-class like DL. Hmmm... That means this MTOW increase has higher value than I anticipated.

This gives me more hope on the two potential A220 orders I know about.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

I'm done reponding to someone saying it just won't happen. If there is a business case and buyers commit, it happens.

In my opinion, the A220-300 at LCY increases the chance IAG buys the type. It depends on quantity that Spirit might, or might not, orders as to which is more interesting.

...

Lightsaber

There will never be any business case and there will be NO buyers.

Please stop this madness about CS300 at LCY.

VV wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

I'm done reponding to someone saying it just won't happen. If there is a business case and buyers commit, it happens.

In my opinion, the A220-300 at LCY increases the chance IAG buys the type. It depends on quantity that Spirit might, or might not, orders as to which is more interesting.

...

Lightsaber

There will never be any business case and there will be NO buyers.

Please stop this madness about CS300 at LCY.

But surely this is what will get the A220 into the BA fleet.

rrbsztk wrote:

ExMilitaryEng wrote:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/paris-delta-to-take-higher-weight-a220-459113/

Not sure though how many will be of the higher MTOW.

Oops, someone else answered first. Please delete my post...

Haven't seen official numbers but if entire fleet from 2020 will have higher mtow means all deliveries from January 2020 that would include 100% of A220-300 and about 35% of the 100s (based on 4 delivered in 2018 and planned 24 deliveries in 2019 leaving 17 of the A220-100s to be delivered 2020 onwards)

Sorry, but this is incorrect.
The MTOW upgrade for the A220-300 is scheduled for mid 2020 and for the A220-100 for 2021 (one year later).

Scheduled for approval in the A220-300 in mid-2020 and in the A220-100 about a year later, the mtow and resulting range increase will certainly open more transatlantic routes, added Dewar, while the 180-minute ETOPS capability will allow the likes of Asian launch customer Korean Air to fly more direct routes over the Pacific.

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2019-06-11/airbus-commits-ensuring-a220-meets-full-potential