WayexTDI
Posts: 1012
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Wed Jan 30, 2019 2:57 pm

PW100 wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
I’m starting to think Airbus plan was to capture the CSeries and kill it eventually. A future A320 replacement, if they ever go that way, In 2030 will not be a 25 year old outsider with a 2x3 cabin that would require the hot 321 to be separated from its 150 seat variant. I’m sure for Airbus it was better to just take it and own it then have Boeing grab it.


Problem with that theory is that the C-series had already been offered to Beoing at the time, and Boeing declined.

So . . . for Airbus it was better to just take it and own it then have Boeing grab it . . . does not seem plausible.

Wasn't Airbus approached first, then Boeing, then Airbus again?
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9282
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Wed Jan 30, 2019 4:00 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
PW100 wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
I’m starting to think Airbus plan was to capture the CSeries and kill it eventually. A future A320 replacement, if they ever go that way, In 2030 will not be a 25 year old outsider with a 2x3 cabin that would require the hot 321 to be separated from its 150 seat variant. I’m sure for Airbus it was better to just take it and own it then have Boeing grab it.


Problem with that theory is that the C-series had already been offered to Beoing at the time, and Boeing declined.

So . . . for Airbus it was better to just take it and own it then have Boeing grab it . . . does not seem plausible.

Wasn't Airbus approached first, then Boeing, then Airbus again?

I don’t know exactly who was approached when and how many times, but yes Airbus was approached more than once. I think the first time it was publicly leaked was when BBD was running out of cash and looking for a partner back in late 2015/ early 2016. Airbus declined (but acknowledged there were talks) and the Quebec state ended up investing.
 
wrongwayup
Posts: 349
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Wed Jan 30, 2019 4:51 pm

keesje wrote:

Yes, a minor difference with the 717 acquisition of Boeing would be that the A220 has a backlog already 3x as large as the complete 717 production, the A220 is an entirely new platform and Airbus is investing in setting up a second assembly line to meet demand. For the rest it's a very similar & interesting comparison.


There is an oft overlooked but massive dfference in the Boeing MD-95/717 scenario versus the Airbus CSeries/A220 scenario. The 717 was just along for the ride as part of a much larger MDD acquisition whose target was mostly the military programs. Airbus went directly after the A220 and nothing else (even though they could have had the whole of BBD Commercial had they wanted it). Very important difference.
 
stephanwintner
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2019 5:04 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:06 pm

Amiga500 wrote:

So . . . for Airbus it was better to just take it and own it then have Boeing grab it . . . does not seem plausible.


Well, the next place BBD were going to go with it was China.

That was something neither Boeing or Airbus could entertain. Boeing just didn't appreciate that risk when the offer was made to them.


Good point. I think Boeing really misjudged the risks - BBD was broke & desperate. Boeing chose to try to kill them. In doing so, they lost the CF-18 replacement deal, gave the program to Airbus, and got zilch from it. Airbus can now invest modestly, and hopefully have a nice little return, even if the CSeries never turns into a massive success. As someone else said, the CSeries can have a nice run at modest volumes in the smaller gauge space.

A point that gets overlooked - given limited landing slots, gauge and frequency are not free variables (You can't just fly the smaller plane more often on many routes). At current sizes, the threat to the 737 is limited by that. For smaller markets, the CSeries offers a nice compromise that the 737/A320 can't touch (because they are too big) and the RJs can't either. I don't think Boeing's complaint to the FTC was argued based on an possible CS500 growth version, it was off the direct threat....

Of course, if Airbus can really squeeze the supply chain and get enough cost-efficiency in place... who knows.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3637
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:18 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
PW100 wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
I’m starting to think Airbus plan was to capture the CSeries and kill it eventually. A future A320 replacement, if they ever go that way, In 2030 will not be a 25 year old outsider with a 2x3 cabin that would require the hot 321 to be separated from its 150 seat variant. I’m sure for Airbus it was better to just take it and own it then have Boeing grab it.


Problem with that theory is that the C-series had already been offered to Beoing at the time, and Boeing declined.

So . . . for Airbus it was better to just take it and own it then have Boeing grab it . . . does not seem plausible.

Wasn't Airbus approached first, then Boeing, then Airbus again?


May have been (my grey cells seem to be going at an alarming rate), but even so, it does not change the point being made . . .
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17515
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Wed Jan 30, 2019 10:38 pm

stephanwintner wrote:


A point that gets overlooked - given limited landing slots, gauge and frequency are not free variables (You can't just fly the smaller plane more often on many routes). At current sizes, the threat to the 737 is limited by that.

When the fraction of slots at ORD, ATL, and DTW that are RJs is small, I accept that argument.

The counter argument is that airports non expanding increase gauge on trunk routes and other hubs will have to handle. ULCCs have done a great job of opening new airports around impacted airports. A smaller low cost per seat aircraft is perfect for them.

Plenty of runways under construction in India and China.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 522
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:10 pm

Agree with Lightsaber comments.

Furthermorei, if the A220 is used to replace smaller eqpt (like Delta, replacing 76 seaters that will then replace 50 seaters); then the lack of slots is irrelevant. We actually get to fit in more seats for those same valuable slots.

Others might use them off peak on heavier routes - at times when slots tends to be more available.
 
stephanwintner
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2019 5:04 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:21 pm

lightsaber wrote:
stephanwintner wrote:


A point that gets overlooked - given limited landing slots, gauge and frequency are not free variables (You can't just fly the smaller plane more often on many routes). At current sizes, the threat to the 737 is limited by that.

When the fraction of slots at ORD, ATL, and DTW that are RJs is small, I accept that argument.

The counter argument is that airports non expanding increase gauge on trunk routes and other hubs will have to handle. ULCCs have done a great job of opening new airports around impacted airports. A smaller low cost per seat aircraft is perfect for them.

Plenty of runways under construction in India and China.

Lightsaber


I don't disagree with your point.

But, if that niche (ULCC, and/or secondary airports, and/or upgauging on routes currently flown by RJs) was a substantial niche, then Boeing would have either a) kept the 717 going, b) built a more competitive plane in that segment, or c) bought a plane to compete in that segment when Bombardier offered it to them - or, for that matter, Fairchild Dornier's 728, or invested in Embraer. Boeing didn't see a large enough market to attractively invest in, so they didn't take advantage of their opportunities over the years. Yes, markets change, maybe the 717 wasn't a good market at that time.

Still, if the CSeries was a substantial threat to the 737, it seems to me that they would have, at some point.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1114
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:45 pm

stephanwintner wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
stephanwintner wrote:


A point that gets overlooked - given limited landing slots, gauge and frequency are not free variables (You can't just fly the smaller plane more often on many routes). At current sizes, the threat to the 737 is limited by that.

When the fraction of slots at ORD, ATL, and DTW that are RJs is small, I accept that argument.

The counter argument is that airports non expanding increase gauge on trunk routes and other hubs will have to handle. ULCCs have done a great job of opening new airports around impacted airports. A smaller low cost per seat aircraft is perfect for them.

Plenty of runways under construction in India and China.

Lightsaber


I don't disagree with your point.

But, if that niche (ULCC, and/or secondary airports, and/or upgauging on routes currently flown by RJs) was a substantial niche, then Boeing would have either a) kept the 717 going, b) built a more competitive plane in that segment, or c) bought a plane to compete in that segment when Bombardier offered it to them - or, for that matter, Fairchild Dornier's 728, or invested in Embraer. Boeing didn't see a large enough market to attractively invest in, so they didn't take advantage of their opportunities over the years. Yes, markets change, maybe the 717 wasn't a good market at that time.

Still, if the CSeries was a substantial threat to the 737, it seems to me that they would have, at some point.

Boeing's decisions are as subjective, and as prone to being poor as anyone else's. The president of the USA doesn't eat sushi, but that doesn't make eating sushi is a bad idea.

And, in fact, Boeing has now invested in Embraer. And, they most certainly saw the CSeries as a threat to the 737. There was that whole business with the ITC imposing duties (at Boeing's behest), plus significant evidence of Boeing undercutting BBD in order to take sales away from them.
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 522
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Wed Jan 30, 2019 11:52 pm

Well, both Airbus and Boeing had no incentives to invest Billions of $ to launch anything below their high volume A320s/B737s.

They figured it was just cheaper to offer A319s/737-700s instead. And at bargain/dumping prices if need be... ([email protected]$23M)
 
stephanwintner
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2019 5:04 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:05 am

aerolimani wrote:
Boeing's decisions are as subjective, and as prone to being poor as anyone else's..


I agree - they made some poor ones - and thus lost the CF-18 replacement and handed Airbus a gift. Granted, that's in hindsight... then again, the people making the decisions are supposed to be professionals, and we aren't (I'm an engineer, not a businessman).

aerolimani wrote:
And, in fact, Boeing has now invested in Embraer. And, they most certainly saw the CSeries as a threat to the 737. There was that whole business with the ITC imposing duties (at Boeing's behest), plus significant evidence of Boeing undercutting BBD in order to take sales away from them.


Yes, I am sure they did see some threat, clearly it is a threat. I tried to say that I see a nice little niche for the CSeries at current sizes, clearly that means there is some competitive overlap with larger and smaller aircraft. How big of one? I think it's pretty limited (my amatuer opinion). Their choices (not investing, repeatedly, over the years) reflect their opinion. Undercutting a competitors price is simply everyday business.

I think they thought they could easily block even that threat via the ITC. Which didn't work out as they expected, but they should have expected Bombardier to approach Airbus again, and should have seen the China risk that Amiga mentioned above.

I think investing in Embraer was their "Oh, shoot. What have we done now?" response, once Airbus snapped up the C-Series. Airbus makes the C-Series a much more formidable threat, if for no other reason than leverage with the supply chain. If they had thought the segment was so attractive, they would have invested earlier, and not cost themselves the CF-18 deal to boot.
 
stephanwintner
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2019 5:04 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:06 am

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
They figured it was just cheaper to offer A319s/737-700s instead. And at bargain/dumping prices if need be... ([email protected]$23M)


Exactly.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 987
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jan 31, 2019 12:38 am

stephanwintner wrote:
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
They figured it was just cheaper to offer A319s/737-700s instead. And at bargain/dumping prices if need be... ([email protected]$23M)


Exactly.


But.....they never actually delivered even a single 737-700 at that price did they?
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 522
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jan 31, 2019 4:33 pm

SteelChair wrote:
stephanwintner wrote:
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
And at bargain/dumping prices if need be... ([email protected]$23M)

Exactly.

But.....they never actually delivered even a single 737-700 at that price did they?

In the case of UA, Boeing accomplished the mission which was to block a CSeries sale.

Indeed, UA later converted/delayed/cancelled the order. It probably figured out that it could not operate profitably those additional 737-700s. Wonder why...

And it probably got a simillar bargain on the conversion - as long it did not order anything from BBD...
 
VV
Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:06 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
VV wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
I saw on another site a discussion on who owns the Intellectual Property (IP). BBD designed and got the certification on the CS series. Before the Airbus 'rescue' the production (but not the IP) the CSALP was created, a JV basically of the government and BBD.
... snipped ...


Where does the discussion take place? It seems to be a very interesting one.


As he also uses 'V V' I thought it might be you. The site is "Vero Venia" a blog by a former BBD employee. I find it quite interesting, he has a good post about the stretch today.

https://verovenia.wordpress.com/


By the way, there is a new post concerning the CS100.

Basically it suggests that CSALP should decide to mothball the CS100 production for the next two or three years as a tactical move while they improve the productivity.
It suggests that with only one type of product they have better chance to reduce cost and thus improve the program's productivity and profitability.

It does not suggest to abandon CS100 altogether, but to pause the production to give way to the most popular member of the family first. The proof is that Delta converted 35 of its CS100 orders to CS300.

The total order for CS100 is now only 88 units. Twelve of them have been delivered.
 
brindabella
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Sun Feb 03, 2019 1:46 pm

stephanwintner wrote:
aerolimani wrote:
Boeing's decisions are as subjective, and as prone to being poor as anyone else's..


I agree - they made some poor ones - and thus lost the CF-18 replacement and handed Airbus a gift. Granted, that's in hindsight... then again, the people making the decisions are supposed to be professionals, and we aren't (I'm an engineer, not a businessman).

aerolimani wrote:
And, in fact, Boeing has now invested in Embraer. And, they most certainly saw the CSeries as a threat to the 737. There was that whole business with the ITC imposing duties (at Boeing's behest), plus significant evidence of Boeing undercutting BBD in order to take sales away from them.


Yes, I am sure they did see some threat, clearly it is a threat. I tried to say that I see a nice little niche for the CSeries at current sizes, clearly that means there is some competitive overlap with larger and smaller aircraft. How big of one? I think it's pretty limited (my amatuer opinion). Their choices (not investing, repeatedly, over the years) reflect their opinion. Undercutting a competitors price is simply everyday business.

I think they thought they could easily block even that threat via the ITC. Which didn't work out as they expected, but they should have expected Bombardier to approach Airbus again, and should have seen the China risk that Amiga mentioned above.

I think investing in Embraer was their "Oh, shoot. What have we done now?" response, once Airbus snapped up the C-Series. Airbus makes the C-Series a much more formidable threat, if for no other reason than leverage with the supply chain. If they had thought the segment was so attractive, they would have invested earlier, and not cost themselves the CF-18 deal to boot.


Hi, I have been reading your posts carefully; and have been wondering why you haven't mentioned EMB at any stage.

But now, when you do, it is in condescending terms. EG BA only linked-up with a poor second-best alternative when all else had gone wrong.

You may be right.

But I suspect not.

Again, I really had not paid much attention to the whole sub-130 seat market before this recent convulsion; but a few things seem to be clear and they run contrary to your thesis:

1) EMB seems to be a very impressive organisation indeed, with a very strong record in innovation, design, production and skills/resources management. (It is clear that Muilenberg, for one, rates them very highly indeed. Worth considering, I think).

2) BA and EMB have in fact had a very long relationship indeed. And my :twocents: is that behind-the scenes discussions about a JV have been taking-place between BA and EMB for a very long time indeed. Hardly a panicky second-best option.

3) the E2 series has only just emerged at a time when Enders is openly putting the entire AB weight behind the C-series; the E2 family promises to be very impressive; and it seems to me it will give the C-series a very hard time when the backing of BA is also available to properly balance the scales. (Meantime the E2 hasn't bankrupted EMB like the C-series did to Bombardier.).

cheers

(PS - before I get dumped-upon, I am quite aware that the C-series is now the AB A220 family. However I have deliberately used the C-series terminology to highlight the longevity and background to both the the (now) A220 family and also the E2 family).
Billy
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3638
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Sun Feb 03, 2019 2:35 pm

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
stephanwintner wrote:
Exactly.

But.....they never actually delivered even a single 737-700 at that price did they?

In the case of UA, Boeing accomplished the mission which was to block a CSeries sale.

Indeed, UA later converted/delayed/cancelled the order. It probably figured out that it could not operate profitably those additional 737-700s. Wonder why...

And it probably got a simillar bargain on the conversion - as long it did not order anything from BBD...


United converted the 737-700 order because they were able to acquire 20 A319s which were only 10 years old from Aercap. China Southern was having slot and capacity constraints so they worked a deal with Aercap to upgauge to new A321s and Offload young A319s. Aercap turned around and gave United a screaming deal that undercut the new build 737-700s, which had already undercut the A220s.

The lessors have added a layer of complexity that never used to exist. Cheap A319s & A320s and 737NGs from China on the used market are also hurting A220 sales for now. THe Chinese Airlines buy a lot of planes but they also sell a lot of planes keeping a very robust market for 10-15 year old planes. 737-700 and A319 prices are very low.
 
2175301
Posts: 1424
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Sun Feb 03, 2019 5:29 pm

aerolimani wrote:
I think there's a lot of short-sightedness in this thread. I think Airbus is playing a very long game with the A220. Unlike many other corporations, I feel that they not obsessively concerned with the next quarterly result, and are looking much further ahead. To apply conservative quarterly thinking to Airbus, in order to guess at their reasonings and objectives, will not yield any results. I think one needs to think how the A220 could work for them, another 10-20 years from now.


I actually think that this may well be in play; and I do believe that Airbus is in fact considering a future A220-500 (C-500).

While it is true that perhaps they were not looking at acquiring the C-Series, and that they got it at an advantageous price...

I don't believe it is true that Airbus would never build the "C-500" as it would overlap with the current A320 family.

Here is a potential long game that Airbus may be seriously considering: The A320 family has been growing larger in size over the decades, just as the 737 family has. The smaller versions don't sell well because they are not that cost efficient for their size.

Somewhere beyond 2025 and by 2030 Airbus is going to need to start a clean-sheet replacement of the current A320 family (and Boeing will also do a clean-sheet replacement for the 737). These clean-sheet replacements will likely ignore the smaller end of the current A320 and 737 families. Perfect space for the "C-500" to be developed and fill into.

Now I will agree that the C-Series will not be the most current design aircraft; but, at the same time the market size will be such that it will not be worth doing another clean-sheet design to fill that market segment. I can be modified with newer engines and perhaps minor wing tweaks as well. The C-Series (100, 300, 500 - likely in a neo version) will potentially be a strong competitor for this market slot. The other competitor is likely to be whatever the Em-BA response is in the near future.

This is long game thinking... but; this makes the most sense to me.

Have a great day,
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1114
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Sun Feb 03, 2019 6:49 pm

brindabella wrote:
3) the E2 series has only just emerged at a time when Enders is openly putting the entire AB weight behind the C-series; the E2 family promises to be very impressive; and it seems to me it will give the C-series a very hard time when the backing of BA is also available to properly balance the scales. (Meantime the E2 hasn't bankrupted EMB like the C-series did to Bombardier.).

Sorry… but I think your timeline is a bit off. Until the CSALP was formed in October 2017, Airbus was a competitor to BBD’s CSeries, and was not in any way supporting BBD. On the other hand, the E2 was announced in 2013, and took its first flight in 2016. The E2 could be viewed as a response to BBD and the CSeries, but this has nothing to do with Airbus.

Furthermore, the E2 is not actually performing well (in terms of sales) versus the A220. It is too heavy to be replace its predecessor in the USA, due to scope clause restrictions. And yet, airlines seem to be generally uninterested in the E2 as a mainline aircraft. There are real doubts about the E2’s ability to compete with the A220. If the A220 is in an awkward place, in between regional jets and the 6-across narrowbody mainline jets, then the E2 seems to be in an even more awkward position. Even before Airbus involvement, the CSeries was doing better than the E2, despite BBD’s poor financial state. I have my doubts that Boeing’s involvement is going to make much difference to the E2.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1334
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Sun Feb 03, 2019 9:55 pm

VV wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
VV wrote:

Where does the discussion take place? It seems to be a very interesting one.


As he also uses 'V V' I thought it might be you. The site is "Vero Venia" a blog by a former BBD employee. I find it quite interesting, he has a good post about the stretch today.

https://verovenia.wordpress.com/


By the way, there is a new post concerning the CS100.

Basically it suggests that CSALP should decide to mothball the CS100 production for the next two or three years as a tactical move while they improve the productivity.
It suggests that with only one type of product they have better chance to reduce cost and thus improve the program's productivity and profitability.

It does not suggest to abandon CS100 altogether, but to pause the production to give way to the most popular member of the family first. The proof is that Delta converted 35 of its CS100 orders to CS300.

The total order for CS100 is now only 88 units. Twelve of them have been delivered.


I read it and I think the idea of focusing on the CS300 first is a smart choice, also changing the CS100 into a shrink has merit, a lot of the CS100 orders have been to meet the regional vs mainline clauses.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Sun Feb 03, 2019 11:31 pm

I don’t feel there is any pressure on Airbus to re consider selling the A319, A320, A220-100 or A220-300 in paralel. They might overlap in seatcount, but have very different capabilities, commonalities and specific market niches. Even an A220-500 won’t significantly impact the A320s 4000 aircraft backlog.

Filling the orderbook for the next 5-6 years, building production volume and securing a dominant marketshare in the 120-160 segment seem to be the priorities.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
brindabella
Posts: 562
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:06 pm

aerolimani wrote:
brindabella wrote:
3) the E2 series has only just emerged at a time when Enders is openly putting the entire AB weight behind the C-series; the E2 family promises to be very impressive; and it seems to me it will give the C-series a very hard time when the backing of BA is also available to properly balance the scales. (Meantime the E2 hasn't bankrupted EMB like the C-series did to Bombardier.).

Sorry… but I think your timeline is a bit off. Until the CSALP was formed in October 2017, Airbus was a competitor to BBD’s CSeries, and was not in any way supporting BBD. On the other hand, the E2 was announced in 2013, and took its first flight in 2016. The E2 could be viewed as a response to BBD and the CSeries, but this has nothing to do with Airbus.

Furthermore, the E2 is not actually performing well (in terms of sales) versus the A220. It is too heavy to be replace its predecessor in the USA, due to scope clause restrictions. And yet, airlines seem to be generally uninterested in the E2 as a mainline aircraft. There are real doubts about the E2’s ability to compete with the A220. If the A220 is in an awkward place, in between regional jets and the 6-across narrowbody mainline jets, then the E2 seems to be in an even more awkward position. Even before Airbus involvement, the CSeries was doing better than the E2, despite BBD’s poor financial state. I have my doubts that Boeing’s involvement is going to make much difference to the E2.


1) timeline:

"Sorry… but I think your timeline is a bit off. Until the CSALP was formed in October 2017, Airbus was a competitor to BBD’s CSeries, and was not in any way supporting BBD."

Sorry, your timeline is off. October 217 is quite some time ago now; I noted Enders recently congratulating the whole of AB for getting right behind the A220 for the last 12 months.

"Furthermore, the E2 is not actually performing well (in terms of sales) versus the A220"

1) the E2 has only just arrived on the scene whereas the C-series has been flying and being sold and delivered for years now.
2) I noted recent bitter complaints emanating from EMB that the very low prices at which the A220 is being offered was making E2 sales very hard indeed.
Hence my comment above that a valid comparison should realistically include BA backing and supporting the E2 just as hard as AB have been doing for the A220 for the last 12 months (see Enders above).

- Which of course BA cannot do right now.
- Hence IMHO your comparison is currently invalid and such will only really be possible when BA is backing the E2 just as hard as Enders says that AB is backing the A220 right now.

cheers

(BTW- great volcano! :yes: :D )
Billy
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:24 pm

brindabella wrote:
aerolimani wrote:
brindabella wrote:
3) the E2 series has only just emerged at a time when Enders is openly putting the entire AB weight behind the C-series; the E2 family promises to be very impressive; and it seems to me it will give the C-series a very hard time when the backing of BA is also available to properly balance the scales. (Meantime the E2 hasn't bankrupted EMB like the C-series did to Bombardier.).

Sorry… but I think your timeline is a bit off. Until the CSALP was formed in October 2017, Airbus was a competitor to BBD’s CSeries, and was not in any way supporting BBD. On the other hand, the E2 was announced in 2013, and took its first flight in 2016. The E2 could be viewed as a response to BBD and the CSeries, but this has nothing to do with Airbus.

Furthermore, the E2 is not actually performing well (in terms of sales) versus the A220. It is too heavy to be replace its predecessor in the USA, due to scope clause restrictions. And yet, airlines seem to be generally uninterested in the E2 as a mainline aircraft. There are real doubts about the E2’s ability to compete with the A220. If the A220 is in an awkward place, in between regional jets and the 6-across narrowbody mainline jets, then the E2 seems to be in an even more awkward position. Even before Airbus involvement, the CSeries was doing better than the E2, despite BBD’s poor financial state. I have my doubts that Boeing’s involvement is going to make much difference to the E2.


1) timeline:

"Sorry… but I think your timeline is a bit off. Until the CSALP was formed in October 2017, Airbus was a competitor to BBD’s CSeries, and was not in any way supporting BBD."

Sorry, your timeline is off. October 217 is quite some time ago now; I noted Enders recently congratulating the whole of AB for getting right behind the A220 for the last 12 months.

"Furthermore, the E2 is not actually performing well (in terms of sales) versus the A220"

1) the E2 has only just arrived on the scene whereas the C-series has been flying and being sold and delivered for years now.
2) I noted recent bitter complaints emanating from EMB that the very low prices at which the A220 is being offered was making E2 sales very hard indeed.
Hence my comment above that a valid comparison should realistically include BA backing and supporting the E2 just as hard as AB have been doing for the A220 for the last 12 months (see Enders above).

- Which of course BA cannot do right now.
- Hence IMHO your comparison is currently invalid and such will only really be possible when BA is backing the E2 just as hard as Enders says that AB is backing the A220 right now.

cheers

(BTW- great volcano! :yes: :D )


maybe the NMA decision delay is partly tracing back to the upcoming Embraer take-over. If Boeing is working with Embraer to ensure a credible marketshare in the (huge) 120-160 seat segment, https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1410405, that enables them to better optimize their NSA - NMA development. Maybe a large base NSA specification enables them to combine it with their upcoming NMA specification.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
stephanwintner
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2019 5:04 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:44 pm

brindabella wrote:
stephanwintner wrote:
aerolimani wrote:
Boeing's decisions are as subjective, and as prone to being poor as anyone else's..


I agree - they made some poor ones - and thus lost the CF-18 replacement and handed Airbus a gift. Granted, that's in hindsight... then again, the people making the decisions are supposed to be professionals, and we aren't (I'm an engineer, not a businessman).

aerolimani wrote:
And, in fact, Boeing has now invested in Embraer. And, they most certainly saw the CSeries as a threat to the 737. There was that whole business with the ITC imposing duties (at Boeing's behest), plus significant evidence of Boeing undercutting BBD in order to take sales away from them.


Yes, I am sure they did see some threat, clearly it is a threat. I tried to say that I see a nice little niche for the CSeries at current sizes, clearly that means there is some competitive overlap with larger and smaller aircraft. How big of one? I think it's pretty limited (my amatuer opinion). Their choices (not investing, repeatedly, over the years) reflect their opinion. Undercutting a competitors price is simply everyday business.

I think they thought they could easily block even that threat via the ITC. Which didn't work out as they expected, but they should have expected Bombardier to approach Airbus again, and should have seen the China risk that Amiga mentioned above.

I think investing in Embraer was their "Oh, shoot. What have we done now?" response, once Airbus snapped up the C-Series. Airbus makes the C-Series a much more formidable threat, if for no other reason than leverage with the supply chain. If they had thought the segment was so attractive, they would have invested earlier, and not cost themselves the CF-18 deal to boot.


Hi, I have been reading your posts carefully; and have been wondering why you haven't mentioned EMB at any stage.

But now, when you do, it is in condescending terms. EG BA only linked-up with a poor second-best alternative when all else had gone wrong.

You may be right.

But I suspect not.

Again, I really had not paid much attention to the whole sub-130 seat market before this recent convulsion; but a few things seem to be clear and they run contrary to your thesis:

1) EMB seems to be a very impressive organisation indeed, with a very strong record in innovation, design, production and skills/resources management. (It is clear that Muilenberg, for one, rates them very highly indeed. Worth considering, I think).

2) BA and EMB have in fact had a very long relationship indeed. And my :twocents: is that behind-the scenes discussions about a JV have been taking-place between BA and EMB for a very long time indeed. Hardly a panicky second-best option.

3) the E2 series has only just emerged at a time when Enders is openly putting the entire AB weight behind the C-series; the E2 family promises to be very impressive; and it seems to me it will give the C-series a very hard time when the backing of BA is also available to properly balance the scales. (Meantime the E2 hasn't bankrupted EMB like the C-series did to Bombardier.).

cheers

(PS - before I get dumped-upon, I am quite aware that the C-series is now the AB A220 family. However I have deliberately used the C-series terminology to highlight the longevity and background to both the the (now) A220 family and also the E2 family).


Morning Billy, thanks for the respectful, thoughtful reply. I hadn't mentioned EMB at any point because I was commenting on the Cseries, mostly in the pre-Airbus buyout period. I certainly don't think poorly of EMB, and if it sounds like I do then I misspoke.

I think Boeing invested in EMB, only after Airbus grabbed the CSeries, and as a reaction to that, yes, and as a 2nd choice. But that is not to say EMB products or staff are 2nd rate (IMHO). I see Boeing consistently choosing to invest in larger sized aircraft over the last decade and change. Longer, really. You suggest that a BA-EMB deal has been under consideration for a while (I don't know, I'm not doubting you), and perhaps this is playing out the way Boeing wanted. AB invests in the CSeries, and then Boeing invests in EMB and is, in the end, better positioned. Maybe. Maybe they did a better job of playing their cards than I think they did. It seems to me they could have played it a bit differently, let AB have the CSeries, joined up with EMB, and kept the CF-18 deal too, if that was their goal. I'm not going to speculate further as to what Boeing was thinking.

That wasn't the point I was trying to make - I was trying to comment on the CSeries having a nice niche below the 737 & A320, but also that that niche was somewhat limited. I did and do see a good shot at a nice run of modest sales and a nice investment for AB. I think both Boeing and Airbus looked at investing in the sub-150 seat market many times over the decades (if they didn't, they are incompetent. Boeing chose very wisely with both the 787 and 777. They aren't incompetent.) They both consistently chose to invest elsewhere, probably for a good reason. Airbus only invested in it once the price dropped to near nothing - neither Boeing nor Airbus rescued Dornier, which wasn't as far along.

Stephan
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1114
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:48 pm

brindabella wrote:
aerolimani wrote:
brindabella wrote:
3) the E2 series has only just emerged at a time when Enders is openly putting the entire AB weight behind the C-series; the E2 family promises to be very impressive; and it seems to me it will give the C-series a very hard time when the backing of BA is also available to properly balance the scales. (Meantime the E2 hasn't bankrupted EMB like the C-series did to Bombardier.).

Sorry… but I think your timeline is a bit off. Until the CSALP was formed in October 2017, Airbus was a competitor to BBD’s CSeries, and was not in any way supporting BBD. On the other hand, the E2 was announced in 2013, and took its first flight in 2016. The E2 could be viewed as a response to BBD and the CSeries, but this has nothing to do with Airbus.

Furthermore, the E2 is not actually performing well (in terms of sales) versus the A220. It is too heavy to be replace its predecessor in the USA, due to scope clause restrictions. And yet, airlines seem to be generally uninterested in the E2 as a mainline aircraft. There are real doubts about the E2’s ability to compete with the A220. If the A220 is in an awkward place, in between regional jets and the 6-across narrowbody mainline jets, then the E2 seems to be in an even more awkward position. Even before Airbus involvement, the CSeries was doing better than the E2, despite BBD’s poor financial state. I have my doubts that Boeing’s involvement is going to make much difference to the E2.


1) timeline:

"Sorry… but I think your timeline is a bit off. Until the CSALP was formed in October 2017, Airbus was a competitor to BBD’s CSeries, and was not in any way supporting BBD."

Sorry, your timeline is off. October 217 is quite some time ago now; I noted Enders recently congratulating the whole of AB for getting right behind the A220 for the last 12 months.

"Furthermore, the E2 is not actually performing well (in terms of sales) versus the A220"

1) the E2 has only just arrived on the scene whereas the C-series has been flying and being sold and delivered for years now.
2) I noted recent bitter complaints emanating from EMB that the very low prices at which the A220 is being offered was making E2 sales very hard indeed.
Hence my comment above that a valid comparison should realistically include BA backing and supporting the E2 just as hard as AB have been doing for the A220 for the last 12 months (see Enders above).

- Which of course BA cannot do right now.
- Hence IMHO your comparison is currently invalid and such will only really be possible when BA is backing the E2 just as hard as Enders says that AB is backing the A220 right now.

cheers

(BTW- great volcano! :yes: :D )

I misunderstood. I took your statement to mean that you thought the E2 was created as a response to Airbus involvement with the CSeries. Hence, why I thought you had your timelines confused.

Granted, the CSeries has a 5-year headstart in terms of sales, and perhaps it is too soon to judge A220 vs E2 sales. Nonetheless, my feeling is that the E2, as an update of an existing successful program, ought to be doing better than it is. Embraer should be able to sell it well, as they have done with the EJet generation 1, without needing Boeing's help.

I've read many posts on here stating that BBD got it wrong in thinking that the upwardly migrating size of the 737 and A320 families left a gap underneath for a smaller mainline jet. If that was a BBD mistake, then I think that Embraer has got it even more wrong. Gambling on the scope clause was a risky decision, and so far, it's not been going well for Embraer. While the MTOW issue is primarily a US problem, sales in the rest of the world are not exactly booming either. It really doesn't help that the Skywest order, 38.4% of the entire E2 order book, is at risk. It may not be in writing (that we know of), but the order is contingent upon scope clause relaxation, and it there is absolutely no guarantee of that happening. Honestly, for the sake of Embraer, I hope that scope clause relaxation will happen in 2019. It's going to be an interesting year to watch the union news!

Glad you like my "volcano." :D
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 11:42 am

Airbus today announced 2.3t extra MTOW.

:arrow: Not unpractical when discussing a stretch.

You can maintain range compared to the A220-300 / CS300.

Image

https://twitter.com/AirbusPRESS/status/1130761935912349696

They also celebrated Airbus 12000 aircraft delivery, apparently a A220-100 for Delta..

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 12:21 pm

VV wrote:
I plotted a "simple stretch" ZFW-range diagram based on the aircraft characteristics for airport planning document.

Image

You see there's a potential to significantly increase CS100 payload-range capability.
A standardization and increased commonality of parts among the family members will also improve CS100's production cost in a very significant manner.


VV you already put up a payload range for a simple stretch. Incorporating a 2.3t / 5000 lbs MTOW and an serious stretch 2+3 rows / 25 seats / 160inch / 3.8m, could it still reach 2000Nm, assuming 100kg / passenger? I think so if we assume a meter of A220 weighs around 500kg (ref CS100/CS300) . I admit I might be ballparking a bit off here.. (btw I'll sponsor you a coffee & sandwhich at Paris).
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
StTim
Posts: 3355
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 12:41 pm

Definitely ballpark if if 2-3 rows is 25 more seats.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 987
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 1:09 pm

keesje wrote:
Airbus today announced 2.3t extra MTOW.

:arrow: Not unpractical when discussing a stretch.

You can maintain range compared to the A220-300 / CS300.

Image

https://twitter.com/AirbusPRESS/status/1130761935912349696

They also celebrated Airbus 12000 aircraft delivery, apparently a A220-100 for Delta..

Image


Interesting that they chose BOS for the chart. JetBlue service to Europe?
 
StudiodeKadent
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:43 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 1:16 pm

SteelChair wrote:

Interesting that they chose BOS for the chart. JetBlue service to Europe?


JetBlue would want to offer Mint on services to Europe, so I think that will all be A321s.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9282
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 1:19 pm

SteelChair wrote:
keesje wrote:
Airbus today announced 2.3t extra MTOW.

:arrow: Not unpractical when discussing a stretch.

You can maintain range compared to the A220-300 / CS300.

Image

https://twitter.com/AirbusPRESS/status/1130761935912349696

They also celebrated Airbus 12000 aircraft delivery, apparently a A220-100 for Delta..

Image


Interesting that they chose BOS for the chart. JetBlue service to Europe?

When the chart shows the A223 barely makes it to Europe with a typical payload?
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 1:44 pm

StTim wrote:
Definitely ballpark if if 2-3 rows is 25 more seats.


In a 5 a row frame you need 5 rows for 25 more seats.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 1:49 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
StTim wrote:
Definitely ballpark if if 2-3 rows is 25 more seats.


In a 5 a row frame you need 5 rows for 25 more seats.


keesje wrote:
.. serious stretch 2+3 rows / 25 seats / 160inch / 3.8m, could it still reach 2000Nm, ...


I wrote "2 + 3 rows", 2 behind the wing, 3 in front for cg reasons.


Looking at the graphs, it seems the additional range offers some better range, specially for heavy all economy class cabins. TATL seems an extreme, small niche..

It closes most of the range gab with the A319 though, that's seems increasingly "replaced" by the A220-300. If only looking at the backlogs.

Image
Last edited by keesje on Tue May 21, 2019 1:57 pm, edited 3 times in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17515
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 1:53 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
SteelChair wrote:

But.....they never actually delivered even a single 737-700 at that price did they?

In the case of UA, Boeing accomplished the mission which was to block a CSeries sale.

Indeed, UA later converted/delayed/cancelled the order. It probably figured out that it could not operate profitably those additional 737-700s. Wonder why...

And it probably got a simillar bargain on the conversion - as long it did not order anything from BBD...


United converted the 737-700 order because they were able to acquire 20 A319s which were only 10 years old from Aercap. China Southern was having slot and capacity constraints so they worked a deal with Aercap to upgauge to new A321s and Offload young A319s. Aercap turned around and gave United a screaming deal that undercut the new build 737-700s, which had already undercut the A220s.

The lessors have added a layer of complexity that never used to exist. Cheap A319s & A320s and 737NGs from China on the used market are also hurting A220 sales for now. THe Chinese Airlines buy a lot of planes but they also sell a lot of planes keeping a very robust market for 10-15 year old planes. 737-700 and A319 prices are very low.

You make a good point. I would add A320NEO variable costs are much lower than A319CEO variable costs. With any airlines upgauging, it is creating a steeper depreciation curve.

That said, this is nothing new. In 1992, Boeing complained they competed heavily with their used products (727s were cheap then). The difference is the larger leasing companies are able to deliver commonality. AerCap, GECAS, and ALC motivate airlines to take standard configurations. For Example, Southwest buys a lot of used 737s. Leasing companies ensure they are as compatible as cheaply possible to ensure the greatest market. Since small airlines really do not care who supplied the galley oven and coffee maker, Southwest standard is the default.

This does hurt the A220. Production costs must be brought down to meet this reality. This is one disadvantage to competition. ;). In particular the A320 LOV increase from 48,000FC/60,000FH to 60,000 FC/120,000 FH (and still the majority will retire on flight hours, not cycles).


Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 2:36 pm

One of the reason Airbus kept on selling A319 and developped the A319NEo was that most ACJ's are A319 based.

Today's news, coincidentally with the announced A220 range boost:

https://www.lufthansa-technik.com/press-releases/-/asset_publisher/Xix57wMv0mow/content/press-release-skyretreat?p_p_auth=0Q4OyIHO&_101_INSTANCE_LMQlVvc4xSJw_redirect=%2F

W'll probably see the launch / some launching customers for the ACJ220 at the Paris airshow, or even at the EBACE in the coming days..

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17515
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 3:48 pm

keesje wrote:
One of the reason Airbus kept on selling A319 and developped the A319NEo was that most ACJ's are A319 based.

Today's news, coincidentally with the announced A220 range boost:

https://www.lufthansa-technik.com/press-releases/-/asset_publisher/Xix57wMv0mow/content/press-release-skyretreat?p_p_auth=0Q4OyIHO&_101_INSTANCE_LMQlVvc4xSJw_redirect=%2F

W'll probably see the launch / some launching customers for the ACJ220 at the Paris airshow, or even at the EBACE in the coming days..

Image

The ACJ backlog is tiny. Unfortunately, the added height of the ACJ makes it less appealing. While the BBJ outsells the ACJ, Dassault, Gulfstream, and Bombardier ship more business jets in this price range per month than Boeing or Airbus do in a year.

What were the ACJ deliveries last year? Last 5 years? Heck, I cannot recall shipments in double digits. The A319 ACJ won't pay for the costs to flight test the A319NEO, much less engineering.

The A220 business jet might sell twelve. (Total) It won't move the needle versus a hundred Globals a year.

Lightsaber

Late edit:

https://gama.aero/facts-and-statistics/ ... y-outlook/

In the history of 26 A319ACJs, most well over a decade ago.
2018:. 1
2017:. None
2016: 1

Huh.... Ever since the G650 was launched, sales fell off a cliff. Coincidence?

2009, 11 years ago, was the last double digits year. ACJ deliveries were high initially, but then fell off a cliff.

With the Global 7500 shipping, too much of this market is taken. Every time I hang around people who regularly fly business jets, the conversation always deteriorates into a bragging session on speed. One of my relatives always takes off after his friend to ensure he can Skype a friendly "we'll save a seat at the bar" as he passes mid air.

Commercial aircraft are about economy, not speed.

Lightsaber

Even later edit:. G650 made public in 2008. (Wikipedia)

It changed the business Jet market. It shocks me that it took until now to unseat it on range at speed.
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
SQ22
Moderator
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:29 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 4:33 pm

Please note there is already an ongoing thread about the MTOW increase, so no need to discuss it here as well.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1423035
 
User avatar
LaunchDetected
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:42 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Tue May 21, 2019 8:09 pm

lightsaber wrote:
What were the ACJ deliveries last year? Last 5 years? Heck, I cannot recall shipments in double digits. The A319 ACJ won't pay for the costs to flight test the A319NEO, much less engineering.


A319neo could also be used as the Airbus D&S Maritime Patrol Aircraft project platform (even if it’s an A320 on the advertising campaign). Just a guess to justify flight tests. I don’t know about the future of the A220 as a military aircraft.
Caravelle lover
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Fri Jun 07, 2019 10:43 am

lightsaber wrote:
keesje wrote:
One of the reason Airbus kept on selling A319 and developped the A319NEo was that most ACJ's are A319 based.

Today's news, coincidentally with the announced A220 range boost:

https://www.lufthansa-technik.com/press-releases/-/asset_publisher/Xix57wMv0mow/content/press-release-skyretreat?p_p_auth=0Q4OyIHO&_101_INSTANCE_LMQlVvc4xSJw_redirect=%2F

W'll probably see the launch / some launching customers for the ACJ220 at the Paris airshow, or even at the EBACE in the coming days..

Image

The ACJ backlog is tiny. Unfortunately, the added height of the ACJ makes it less appealing. While the BBJ outsells the ACJ, Dassault, Gulfstream, and Bombardier ship more business jets in this price range per month than Boeing or Airbus do in a year.

What were the ACJ deliveries last year? Last 5 years? Heck, I cannot recall shipments in double digits. The A319 ACJ won't pay for the costs to flight test the A319NEO, much less engineering.

The A220 business jet might sell twelve. (Total) It won't move the needle versus a hundred Globals a year.

Lightsaber

Late edit:

https://gama.aero/facts-and-statistics/ ... y-outlook/

In the history of 26 A319ACJs, most well over a decade ago.
2018:. 1
2017:. None
2016: 1

Huh.... Ever since the G650 was launched, sales fell off a cliff. Coincidence?

2009, 11 years ago, was the last double digits year. ACJ deliveries were high initially, but then fell off a cliff.

With the Global 7500 shipping, too much of this market is taken. Every time I hang around people who regularly fly business jets, the conversation always deteriorates into a bragging session on speed. One of my relatives always takes off after his friend to ensure he can Skype a friendly "we'll save a seat at the bar" as he passes mid air.

Commercial aircraft are about economy, not speed.

Lightsaber

Even later edit:. G650 made public in 2008. (Wikipedia)

It changed the business Jet market. It shocks me that it took until now to unseat it on range at speed.


It is clear few cooperations can justify ACJ's / BBJ's when Globals do the job as good at half the costs..

Things could get interesting if ACJ321XLR's can do WB government / head of state transports at half the costs & parlements notice it.
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1393699
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17515
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Fri Jun 07, 2019 1:46 pm

keesje wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
keesje wrote:
One of the reason Airbus kept on selling A319 and developped the A319NEo was that most ACJ's are A319 based.

Today's news, coincidentally with the announced A220 range boost:

https://www.lufthansa-technik.com/press-releases/-/asset_publisher/Xix57wMv0mow/content/press-release-skyretreat?p_p_auth=0Q4OyIHO&_101_INSTANCE_LMQlVvc4xSJw_redirect=%2F

W'll probably see the launch / some launching customers for the ACJ220 at the Paris airshow, or even at the EBACE in the coming days..

Image

The ACJ backlog is tiny. Unfortunately, the added height of the ACJ makes it less appealing. While the BBJ outsells the ACJ, Dassault, Gulfstream, and Bombardier ship more business jets in this price range per month than Boeing or Airbus do in a year.

What were the ACJ deliveries last year? Last 5 years? Heck, I cannot recall shipments in double digits. The A319 ACJ won't pay for the costs to flight test the A319NEO, much less engineering.

The A220 business jet might sell twelve. (Total) It won't move the needle versus a hundred Globals a year.

Lightsaber

Late edit:

https://gama.aero/facts-and-statistics/ ... y-outlook/

In the history of 26 A319ACJs, most well over a decade ago.
2018:. 1
2017:. None
2016: 1

Huh.... Ever since the G650 was launched, sales fell off a cliff. Coincidence?

2009, 11 years ago, was the last double digits year. ACJ deliveries were high initially, but then fell off a cliff.

With the Global 7500 shipping, too much of this market is taken. Every time I hang around people who regularly fly business jets, the conversation always deteriorates into a bragging session on speed. One of my relatives always takes off after his friend to ensure he can Skype a friendly "we'll save a seat at the bar" as he passes mid air.

Commercial aircraft are about economy, not speed.

Lightsaber

Even later edit:. G650 made public in 2008. (Wikipedia)

It changed the business Jet market. It shocks me that it took until now to unseat it on range at speed.


It is clear few cooperations can justify ACJ's / BBJ's when Globals do the job as good at half the costs..

Things could get interesting if ACJ321XLR's can do WB government / head of state transports at half the costs & parlements notice it.
https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1393699

That sums it up. A Global 7500 is far cheaper to own in business jet duty (maximum about 500 hours per year). Paying for an aircraft that can be pushed over 4,000 hours per year makes no sense today.

Gulfstream and Bombardier have taken the narrowbody business jet market with their purpose built business jets. I only know a few people in the social economic strata who fly business jets regularly. When they talk their jets it is like teenagers discussing drag racing, it is all about speed which no commercial jet could match.

The economics of business jets drive one to use the speed as other per hour costs exceed the added fuel burn until the last Mach 0.03 of the capability of a modern business jet.

So their will be few A220 business jets. There will be few ACJs (as is the case today, see my prior links).

But the A220-300 is incredibly competitive after the needed PIps getting rid of (finally) EIS Gremlins. No, it isn't just the engines.

What is needed is economy if scale. That is production of 200+ per year. In this tough sales year, I don't see that level of sales. That means the competition for NK, cityflier, and any other 2019 orders are critical. Not as critical as for the E2, but still critical.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
OlafW
Posts: 302
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Fri Jun 07, 2019 2:11 pm

Korean Air considers the A220-500 would be a good match, if offered: https://www.aero.de/news-31824/Korean-A ... -A220.html
sorry, German only
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Fri Jun 07, 2019 2:29 pm

OlafW wrote:
Korean Air considers the A220-500 would be a good match, if offered: https://www.aero.de/news-31824/Korean-A ... -A220.html
sorry, German only


In earlier estimation I made it showed a streched A220-500 would give in on payload-range / container capability. If that's not important for an operator, it would be significant lighter then a same seat capacity A320 / 737. Lower weight always works on aircraft, fuel, maintenance, taxes, everything.

Image

As Lightsaber mentioned and we all know, todays backlog and production ramp up in the next 2 years will probably drive A220 strategy.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20610
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Fri Jun 07, 2019 2:30 pm

lightsaber wrote:
What is needed is economy of scale. That is production of 200+ per year. In this tough sales year, I don't see that level of sales. That means the competition for NK, cityflier, and any other 2019 orders are critical. Not as critical as for the E2, but still critical.

We have the famous quote from Faury: "As the A220 program evolves and becomes a commercial success you could expect Airbus to invest in it further as we have done with the A320 family". So we have the expectation of success in the commercial realm, but that is a precondition for further investment. Clearly he's not looking for the A380 kind of "success", he's looking for a money maker.

References below agree with you, the program needs economy of scale. The milestone sale to DL was done with the help of aggressive pricing. It will be interesting to see how aggressive the pricing is in the near future in the face of an expensive ramp up coupled with some aggressively priced orders needing to be filled and a looming set of milestones with regard to the ownership of the enterprise. This is largely still a BBD funded enterprise at a time where BBD is selling off its commercial aviation interests. It'll be interesting to look back and see if BBD pulled the eject handles a bit too soon or not.

Ref: viewtopic.php?t=1413243
Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ro-455082/
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:12 am

When deciding to commit to a new type, longer term developments are taken into account.

While the A220-300 seems well positioned as A318, A319, 737-700 replacement, an A220-500 would overlap with the A320 and 737-8, despite being a little smaller / less capable.

While the focus for the next few years will probably on ramping up production & efficiency, I'm sure potential A220 customers like BA and AF look a bit further into the future.

In the past I've seen long term airline fleet plans & non existing / to be developped aircraft versions were pencilled in, in various possible fleet / network development scenarios.

A two class 150 seat aircraft, significantly lighter / leaner than the A320s / 737-800s, looks tempting for some operations op to 3-4 hours.

As Airbus concluded re-enging the A320 and later on taking over the CSeries program.

Image

https://www.airway1.com/a-stretched-variant-of-the-a220-may-be-the-solution-to-replace-a319neo/
Last edited by keesje on Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 2401
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:25 am

keesje wrote:
A two class 150 seat aircraft, sufficantly lighter / leaner than the A320s / 737-800s looks tempting for some operations op to 3-4 hours.


28F seems like a very large cabin. I don't think anyone operates an F cabin in the US anywhere near as large? In Europe it is highly unlikely that any large airline would operate with a fixed J cabin. This version of the A220 would seat ~180 in the typical European layout at BA and LH. Both fly A320neos at 180C/Y. I can't see Airbus launching this aircraft, unless the MAX remains grounded long-term, Boeing need to develop a new aircraft, Airbus can't ramp ramp-up A32x to fill the demand and can ramp A220. Thats a very specific scenario!
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:34 am

BrianDromey wrote:
keesje wrote:
A two class 150 seat aircraft, sufficantly lighter / leaner than the A320s / 737-800s looks tempting for some operations op to 3-4 hours.


28F seems like a very large cabin. I don't think anyone operates an F cabin in the US anywhere near as large? In Europe it is highly unlikely that any large airline would operate with a fixed J cabin. This version of the A220 would seat ~180 in the typical European layout at BA and LH. Both fly A320neos at 180C/Y. I can't see Airbus launching this aircraft, unless the MAX remains grounded long-term, Boeing need to develop a new aircraft, Airbus can't ramp ramp-up A32x to fill the demand and can ramp A220. Thats a very specific scenario!


The stretch could also be a bit less. It would be a trade-off balancing range, capacity, CoG..

Image
https://www.airway1.com/a-stretched-var ... e-a319neo/

I can't see Airbus launching this aircraft, unless..


We have to realize
- the A320 is sold out for the next 8-9 years, hampering sales.
- the A220 and A320 have totally seperated supply chains, not hurting each other too much.
- Airbus is in a very healthy position (portfolio, backlog, competition).
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:53 am

Airbus would need a production capacity of ca. 40 A220 family aircraft per month in 2026 to slowly discontinue the 320 and from there on concentrate fully on A321(with 40 per month) while starting to transition removed A320 capacity to the A322 (A321 with new wing and engine and A220 cockpit), and then when this is up change the A321 in 2030 to the A321feo (future engine option) with the A322 wing and A220 cockpit.

Then you have the product portfolio in 2030 of A220-100/300/500 and A321/322 in the NB segment with common cockpit and production rate of around 50 A220 and 70 A321/322 per month.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 12943
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:03 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
Airbus would need a production capacity of ca. 40 A220 family aircraft per month in 2026 to slowly discontinue the 320 and from there on concentrate fully on A321(with 40 per month) while starting to transition removed A320 capacity to the A322 (A321 with new wing and engine and A220 cockpit), and then when this is up change the A321 in 2030 to the A321feo (future engine option) with the A322 wing and A220 cockpit.

Then you have the product portfolio in 2030 of A220-100/300/500 and A321/322 in the NB segment with common cockpit and production rate of around 50 A220 and 70 A321/322 per month.


Airbus Canada is nowhere in the direction of 40 aircraft/month and probably never will.

It's abig challenge meeting current customer commitments.. they would be happy to be at 5 month early 2020..

Getting up to 15-20 / month in 2025 would already be a great achievement. This is hampering A220 sales today..

Image
https://alabamanewscenter.com/2019/06/19/hpm-airbus-a220-assembly-line-project-gaining-momentum-in-alabama/
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2131
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:25 pm

The backlog and production capacity is the largest issue for an A220-500.

Do you think Airbus would consider opening an A220 production line in Europe?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:29 pm

So if Airbus does the A220-500 will it have cockpit commonality with its earlier sibling or with the Airbus fleet above it, namely the A32X series?
Or to ask it another way, how extensive does Airbus want to have two narrow body fleets where small carriers dominate?

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