User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8521
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:23 pm

SteelChair wrote:
seahawk wrote:
You know Airbus is there to make money. They have 3 options for airlines already. A220-300, A319NEO and A320NEO - why should they make another one, unless one would call 2 of those non competitive. Especially when Boeing can only field (the according to some unpopular) 737-7MAX and the larger (to some in dire need of replacement) 737-8.


Because customers want it?


Do they?
 
VV
Posts: 791
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:28 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
VV wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Sounds like you're the one who doesn't really understand and is stuck on a few words.

When the CSALP was created (even prior to Airbus' involvement), the CSeries "hardcore" development phase was over with; at the time, the remaining engineers working on the CSeries specifically were just a handful compared to when the program was in full development.
Those are the people that are most critical to the remaining life of the program (including a potential stretch), and I'm sure those are the ones brindabella was talking about.

Again, do you really believe Airbus bought into this program if they didn't get the most critical people involved as well as the IP? Do you think they are that dumb?


First, Airbus spent almost nothing to obtain 50.01% of the stake in CSALP. And yes, I am still wondering why the heck they took over the C Series program.

That is exactly the problem. You do not seem to understand the situation.

The whole discussion on the future development of the C Series should have started by the location of the design. Despite the fact CSALP might have been granted the right to use the IP, the Catia drawings, the documentation, the calculation methods and software are all on Bombardier's IT infrastructure.

Yes, you have not even started to understand the implications of the situation. It is like having the right to read a book that is stored in a secure vault and you don't have the key of the vault.

Shhhhh. . .

And you know that because???
... snip ...


Because I know.
 
VV
Posts: 791
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:30 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
VV wrote:
ZPhoto wrote:
The BBD engineering team who designed and built the CSeries were all transfered to CSALP and no longer have access to BBD's other facilities at Mirabel (and vice versa). Also, the CSeries engineering team was self contained so, for example: the landing gear engineers only worked on the CSeries landing gear and were not used on the CRJs or Q400s... unlike Embraer who use their guys to design landing gear for all their aircrafts, thus making them harder to part with (so Boeing had to buy the company). So I believe the IP was transferred to CSALP along with the engineers. Airbus will buy out Investissement Québec when the debt is repaid and will own a majority of the program with 66%. If they decide to stretch it it will be a CSALP project which will obligate BBD to share development costs.


This is absolutely inaccurate.


Correct. It is completely inaccurate.

... snipped ....


I fully agree. It is nice to hear from someone who actually knows.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1130
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:32 pm

VV wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
VV wrote:

First, Airbus spent almost nothing to obtain 50.01% of the stake in CSALP. And yes, I am still wondering why the heck they took over the C Series program.

That is exactly the problem. You do not seem to understand the situation.

The whole discussion on the future development of the C Series should have started by the location of the design. Despite the fact CSALP might have been granted the right to use the IP, the Catia drawings, the documentation, the calculation methods and software are all on Bombardier's IT infrastructure.

Yes, you have not even started to understand the implications of the situation. It is like having the right to read a book that is stored in a secure vault and you don't have the key of the vault.

Shhhhh. . .

And you know that because???
... snip ...


Because I know.

Gotcha

GUYS, no need to keep discussing, VV knows everything. Let's just close the thread... :roll:
 
VV
Posts: 791
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:54 pm

Yeah, let's close this thread.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1069
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 9:15 pm

VV wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
Why is it so hard for some people to understand that a 5 abreats airplane on a 1209 sqft wing with the small GTF engine is a completely different product than a 6 abreast aiplane on a 1340 sqft wing with the big GTF engine?

1. The benefits of fleet standardization are over-stated.

2. The "ends" of the market (the 50 seater on the small end and the VLA 748/A380/777X on the big end) are all beng marginalized, while the middle is being sliced and diced into ever smaller slices.


It is not necessarily about the aircraft, but it is more about the market and how operators wish to serve their network.

Is a 100-150 seater is the right answer? I don't know.
This said, there are now about five airframe-engine combinations in the landscape.
  1. E195-E2 PW
  2. CS300 PW
  3. A319neo PW
  4. A319neo CFM
  5. 737 MAX 7 CFM
It is a crowded place.


Not really.

Orders:

E195E2: 93
A319neo: 55
737-7max: ??? "Fewer than 100"
A220: 537

The market seems to have spoken. And A220 orders haven't really taken off yet.
 
VV
Posts: 791
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 9:51 pm

SteelChair wrote:
VV wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
Why is it so hard for some people to understand that a 5 abreats airplane on a 1209 sqft wing with the small GTF engine is a completely different product than a 6 abreast aiplane on a 1340 sqft wing with the big GTF engine?

1. The benefits of fleet standardization are over-stated.

2. The "ends" of the market (the 50 seater on the small end and the VLA 748/A380/777X on the big end) are all beng marginalized, while the middle is being sliced and diced into ever smaller slices.


It is not necessarily about the aircraft, but it is more about the market and how operators wish to serve their network.

Is a 100-150 seater is the right answer? I don't know.
This said, there are now about five airframe-engine combinations in the landscape.
  1. E195-E2 PW
  2. CS300 PW
  3. A319neo PW
  4. A319neo CFM
  5. 737 MAX 7 CFM
It is a crowded place.


Not really.

Orders:

E195E2: 93
A319neo: 55
737-7max: ??? "Fewer than 100"
A220: 537

The market seems to have spoken. And A220 orders haven't really taken off yet.


Well, let's see it from another perspective.

C Series was initially launched and then stopped and relaunched in 2008. That's ten years ago. Most of the orders are for CS300.

A320neo, A319neo, A321neo were launched in December 2010. Most orders are for the bigger members.

737 MAX 8, 9, 7 were launched in 2011 and 737 MAX 10 in 2017. Most orders are for the bigger ones.

E190-E2 and E195-E2 were launched in summer 2013.

You need to see the timeline. If you make an average on the C Series orders from its second launch in 2008, it is about 50 orders per year. There will be some cancellations. It is unavoidable because some orders are not needed by the airline any more.

E195-E2 does not have many orders as yet. It all depends on how well the joint-venture with Boeing will go.

As of 737 MAX 7 and A319neo, it is still not clear how Airbus and Boeing will market them. It is possible 737 MAX 7 will get more orders in three or four years for some obvious reasons that everybody knows.

All the above being said, it is a small market and there are too many airframe/engine combinations in that small space. It is crowded and one or more will have to fail.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20960
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 10:01 pm

keesje wrote:
Are we still discussing the aircraft that just got Moxy, Delta and Jetblue orders? It seems impossible.

It seems impossible that BBD sold 50.01% of a certified airliner for $1, but that happened too.

Maybe because they knew it wasn't viable as is and that it needed a lot of commercial support to have a chance for it to become a commercially viable product?

Perhaps?
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
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 542
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 10:26 pm

Revelation wrote:
Maybe because they knew it wasn't viable as is and that it needed a lot of commercial support to have a chance for it to become a commercially viable product?
Perhaps?
Definitely a possibility.

Also, when Boeing started offering 737-700s @$23M each to fend off a possible UA sale, the CSeries business case went from marginal to zero - big time.

And Boeing was not to let it go as it literally said it would not do the same mistake again (like it did in letting Airbus in) and have a new manufacturer enter the commercial airline market. It had to kill the CSeries (and BBD...) otherwise the bread and butter 737-8 will eventually be at risk. I'm not really sure how serious they were on that last one; maybe they thought a CS500 would eventually be launched.

Then later that ITC dumping complaint was the last straw. The Airbus $1 deal put a cap on the bleeding. And Boeing's likelihood/capacity of killing the CSeries (and taking down BBD with it) pretty well vanished at that moment.

But yes, we "perhaps" don't know exactly what Airbus had in mind in acquiring / investing in the CSeries. And I'm seriously not so sure anymore, particularly since reading some of VV's comments. More to follow soon I hope.
 
User avatar
LockheedBBD
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 6:59 pm

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 10:43 pm

VV wrote:
Wasn't Boeing approached at one point? I am not sure about it but I have a very vague memory having read they were approached, but declined or the discussion was not fruitful.


That is correct. It was in a Seattle Times article, Boeing was more interested in Embraer (as they have been for many years), so they declined Bombardier's offer.
 
VV
Posts: 791
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

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

Tue Jan 22, 2019 11:15 pm

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
But yes, we "perhaps" don't know exactly what Airbus had in mind in acquiring / investing in the CSeries. And I'm seriously not so sure anymore, particularly since reading some of VV's comments. More to follow soon I hope.


Seriously, I am just searching for answers to a lot of questions that I cannot answer myself. I am not raising any doubt about the C Series program.
I am convinced it could have been a very successful program if it was executed with discipline.

Today there are just too many questions left unanswered like why both A319neo versions would be certified when there is CS300 in the equation.

Another thing I really want to know is who owns the IP of the CSeries and where the data/drawings/documentation/software are. As long as it is in Bombardier's IT infrastructure, there is not any possibility for Airbus to modify or develop the aircraft.

There has to be a kind of agreement to grant CSALP the right to use Bombardier's IT and software, methods and data. Even in this case CSALP must hire people who know how to operate the IT system, software and who know the design of the C Series who know the basis for certification and all the method of compliance. I am not saying it is impossible, I am just insinuating that this is not at all straight forward and would take about one year to acquire.

When I went through Bombardier's gate three years ago escorted by my manager with only my personal belongings, I left an unfinished work with many items to certify. I am pretty sure not all them have been certified today because they need the knowledge that went out through that door with me and with other former colleagues who left to other places. I am not saying that we were indispensable, but you need time to recover the lost knowledge.

Hundreds even thousands of people worked on that program with dedication and spent a huge chunk of their life. Believe me, it would take time to improve the aircraft or even to complete the remaining items to certify, now that a lot of people left the company, laid off or by their own.

With this comment. I leave this thread and won't post any further comment.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 1:59 am

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Airbus is willing to give a lot of support to the product to get it through the ramp up phase. If it becomes a commercial success (i.e. not just aiming for break even but aiming for profitable growth), they'll invest more. It's a good mind set to have. The present planning shows it being produced at 1/6 to 1/4th the rate of the A320 family. Let's see if it can get to that point, make money on each frame sold, and book enough orders to be able to confidently predict profitable growth.

Really interesting to read this debate!

It seems the tremendous production rates of both A320/321 and the 737 make them the elephants in the room. They achieve fantastic production efficiency and can therefore be sold at extremely low prices while still being profitable. Furthermore, being highly “liquid” assets make them very attractive to leasing companies. A no brainer really.

In that context, profitably competing with those established models (even from “below”, like with the A220) appears to be almost impossible.

Now, would that 13% applies for the A220 when we know that a FAL “part 1” (much automated) is already completed and would be capable of producing 10 -12 A220/month (=> we’re missing FAL “part 2/3”thought).
Having the FAL"1" already completed/paid for, maybe the efficiency gain is more like 25% once 12 aircrafts/month is achieved, who knows.

Now I’m wondering what will it take for any future NB aircraft program (in the segment immediately below the A320/B737, or even immediately above) to be profitable? If it doesn’t achieve anywhere the economy of scale of A320s/B737s, it will most probably be a money losing program, right? Airlines would just keep using a single type NB fleet (A320 /321 or B737); those models being so cheap to procure, and easy to resell.

It appears having a right sized aircraft (with competitive CASM) is not sufficient to bypass the bargain priced/higher capacity B737s/A320s.

Volume creates a fortress.

But it makes A & B, from necessity, very cautious about developing models that could impact these goldmines, or that can't / won't achieve comparable profitability. And even more cautious about replacing these same models.

One reason Airbus took a low cost / low risk strategy with the A330NEO, and why Boeing is struggling with the 797, because it absolutely must not erode 737 and 787 volumes and profitability.

Why risk a new model, when every time you offer a larger / more capable 737 or A320, you widen margins?

Until technology makes a step change, or there are slot / flight crew / airspace constraints, or environmental impositions, A & B already have all the model families they need.

Unless / until the A220 makes a quantum leap in volumes, it's a support act for technology transfer, to increase A320 production capacity, provide future options, and neutralise competitors.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13045
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 8:32 am

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Maybe because they knew it wasn't viable as is and that it needed a lot of commercial support to have a chance for it to become a commercially viable product?
Perhaps?
Definitely a possibility.

Also, when Boeing started offering 737-700s @$23M each to fend off a possible UA sale, the CSeries business case went from marginal to zero - big time.

And Boeing was not to let it go as it literally said it would not do the same mistake again (like it did in letting Airbus in) and have a new manufacturer enter the commercial airline market. It had to kill the CSeries (and BBD...) otherwise the bread and butter 737-8 will eventually be at risk. I'm not really sure how serious they were on that last one; maybe they thought a CS500 would eventually be launched.

Then later that ITC dumping complaint was the last straw. The Airbus $1 deal put a cap on the bleeding. And Boeing's likelihood/capacity of killing the CSeries (and taking down BBD with it) pretty well vanished at that moment.

But yes, we "perhaps" don't know exactly what Airbus had in mind in acquiring / investing in the CSeries. And I'm seriously not so sure anymore, particularly since reading some of VV's comments. More to follow soon I hope.


Boeing made it entirely clear how they saw the CSeries program & even denied Airbus would ever invest in opening the Alabama line.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-15/boeing-scorns-airbus-bombardier-plan-for-c-series-plant-in-u-s
Obviously they totally miss judged the situation, and this is not long ago. Hopefully they'll take a more positive approach with Embraer.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
RalXWB
Posts: 436
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 9:36 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 8:46 am

Airbus go the A220 for a reason, I wonder why there is no such criticism or doubt about the EMB purchase by Boeing?
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2267
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 11:58 am

VV wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
.... snipped ....
*and many engineers working on the wing would argue they got it wrong with choosing a CFRP wing instead of a metallic wing. Benefits too marginal for the increased manufacturing cost. Others working on the fuselage would also argue the complex compound curvature of the pressure vessel was also a mistake.


On the CFRP wingbox, it is the right choice, but not necessarily from weight or technical perspective. Without the Resin Transfer Injection for the composite wing the UK government would have not given the subsidy. I do not remember the amount anymore. In addition there would have not been any tax credit and so on. The Belfast facilities must have been dismantled without the CFRP wingbox. So, the choice was absolutely awesome.


I know they got money from various streams, NCGW etc - but I didn't think it amounted to all that much, not sure if it was much more than at most a few tens of millions...?
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1069
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 12:36 pm

RalXWB wrote:
Airbus go the A220 for a reason, I wonder why there is no such criticism or doubt about the EMB purchase by Boeing?


Well i think there is tons of doubt about that.

But this thread is about the A220 and Airbus.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1069
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 12:50 pm

VV wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
VV wrote:

It is not necessarily about the aircraft, but it is more about the market and how operators wish to serve their network.

Is a 100-150 seater is the right answer? I don't know.
This said, there are now about five airframe-engine combinations in the landscape.
  1. E195-E2 PW
  2. CS300 PW
  3. A319neo PW
  4. A319neo CFM
  5. 737 MAX 7 CFM
It is a crowded place.


Not really.

Orders:

E195E2: 93
A319neo: 55
737-7max: ??? "Fewer than 100"
A220: 537

The market seems to have spoken. And A220 orders haven't really taken off yet.


Well, let's see it from another perspective.

C Series was initially launched and then stopped and relaunched in 2008. That's ten years ago. Most of the orders are for CS300.

A320neo, A319neo, A321neo were launched in December 2010. Most orders are for the bigger members.

737 MAX 8, 9, 7 were launched in 2011 and 737 MAX 10 in 2017. Most orders are for the bigger ones.

E190-E2 and E195-E2 were launched in summer 2013.

You need to see the timeline. If you make an average on the C Series orders from its second launch in 2008, it is about 50 orders per year. There will be some cancellations. It is unavoidable because some orders are not needed by the airline any more.

E195-E2 does not have many orders as yet. It all depends on how well the joint-venture with Boeing will go.

As of 737 MAX 7 and A319neo, it is still not clear how Airbus and Boeing will market them. It is possible 737 MAX 7 will get more orders in three or four years for some obvious reasons that everybody knows.

All the above being said, it is a small market and there are too many airframe/engine combinations in that small space. It is crowded and one or more will have to fail.


My point was that the competitors to the A220/CSeries have pretty much already failed. 2 are too big, the other is too small/narrow. The order book reflects their failure.

WRT 10 years having passed for the CSeries/A220, well yes that is true. But the timing for the launch could hardly have been worse. For example, the largest single customer (now), Delta, did not even know if it would survive in 2008. Now, its by far the best full service carrier in the USA, both operationally and financially. So a lot changed in those 10 years. The CS continues to evolve, that it has survived thus far is a minor miracle. My sincere condolences to those, such as yourself, who invested so much yet lost their job. Your professional legacy is the great product that still survives adn has a bright future ahead: the CSeries/A220.
 
brindabella
Posts: 569
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 1:05 pm

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Maybe because they knew it wasn't viable as is and that it needed a lot of commercial support to have a chance for it to become a commercially viable product?
Perhaps?
Definitely a possibility.

Also, when Boeing started offering 737-700s @$23M each to fend off a possible UA sale, the CSeries business case went from marginal to zero - big time.

And Boeing was not to let it go as it literally said it would not do the same mistake again (like it did in letting Airbus in) and have a new manufacturer enter the commercial airline market. It had to kill the CSeries (and BBD...) otherwise the bread and butter 737-8 will eventually be at risk. I'm not really sure how serious they were on that last one; maybe they thought a CS500 would eventually be launched.

Then later that ITC dumping complaint was the last straw. The Airbus $1 deal put a cap on the bleeding. And Boeing's likelihood/capacity of killing the CSeries (and taking down BBD with it) pretty well vanished at that moment.

But yes, we "perhaps" don't know exactly what Airbus had in mind in acquiring / investing in the CSeries. And I'm seriously not so sure anymore, particularly since reading some of VV's comments. More to follow soon I hope.


Sorry, I can see that this is important to you; but nevertheless:-

Your metric (above) is that 737-700 at $23million then completely negated the CSeries Business case.

1) If that was true then, why would it not be true now?
2) and do you have information to demonstrate the BA could not now afford to sell those frames at $23million, if they chose to do so? :?:

By your own statement, the CSseries would seem to be on borrowed time.

cheers
Billy
 
brindabella
Posts: 569
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 10:38 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 1:18 pm

smartplane wrote:
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Airbus is willing to give a lot of support to the product to get it through the ramp up phase. If it becomes a commercial success (i.e. not just aiming for break even but aiming for profitable growth), they'll invest more. It's a good mind set to have. The present planning shows it being produced at 1/6 to 1/4th the rate of the A320 family. Let's see if it can get to that point, make money on each frame sold, and book enough orders to be able to confidently predict profitable growth.

Really interesting to read this debate!

It seems the tremendous production rates of both A320/321 and the 737 make them the elephants in the room. They achieve fantastic production efficiency and can therefore be sold at extremely low prices while still being profitable. Furthermore, being highly “liquid” assets make them very attractive to leasing companies. A no brainer really.

In that context, profitably competing with those established models (even from “below”, like with the A220) appears to be almost impossible.

Now, would that 13% applies for the A220 when we know that a FAL “part 1” (much automated) is already completed and would be capable of producing 10 -12 A220/month (=> we’re missing FAL “part 2/3”thought).
Having the FAL"1" already completed/paid for, maybe the efficiency gain is more like 25% once 12 aircrafts/month is achieved, who knows.

Now I’m wondering what will it take for any future NB aircraft program (in the segment immediately below the A320/B737, or even immediately above) to be profitable? If it doesn’t achieve anywhere the economy of scale of A320s/B737s, it will most probably be a money losing program, right? Airlines would just keep using a single type NB fleet (A320 /321 or B737); those models being so cheap to procure, and easy to resell.

It appears having a right sized aircraft (with competitive CASM) is not sufficient to bypass the bargain priced/higher capacity B737s/A320s.

Volume creates a fortress.

But it makes A & B, from necessity, very cautious about developing models that could impact these goldmines, or that can't / won't achieve comparable profitability. And even more cautious about replacing these same models.

One reason Airbus took a low cost / low risk strategy with the A330NEO, and why Boeing is struggling with the 797, because it absolutely must not erode 737 and 787 volumes and profitability.

Why risk a new model, when every time you offer a larger / more capable 737 or A320, you widen margins?

Until technology makes a step change, or there are slot / flight crew / airspace constraints, or environmental impositions, A & B already have all the model families they need.


Unless / until the A220 makes a quantum leap in volumes, it's a support act for technology transfer, to increase A320 production capacity, provide future options, and neutralise competitors.


Seriously?

And BA`have been going on and on all these years; talking, publicising, testing reactions etc etc. -meanwhile in reality firstly making sure to protect those programs?

Talking to a multitude of airlines & Leasing Cos., and not really meaning a word they said?

:sorry:

Good luck trying to sell to those important customers ever, ever again!

cheers
Billy
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20960
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 1:45 pm

brindabella wrote:
smartplane wrote:
Volume creates a fortress.

But it makes A & B, from necessity, very cautious about developing models that could impact these goldmines, or that can't / won't achieve comparable profitability. And even more cautious about replacing these same models.

One reason Airbus took a low cost / low risk strategy with the A330NEO, and why Boeing is struggling with the 797, because it absolutely must not erode 737 and 787 volumes and profitability.

Why risk a new model, when every time you offer a larger / more capable 737 or A320, you widen margins?

Until technology makes a step change, or there are slot / flight crew / airspace constraints, or environmental impositions, A & B already have all the model families they need.


Unless / until the A220 makes a quantum leap in volumes, it's a support act for technology transfer, to increase A320 production capacity, provide future options, and neutralise competitors.


Seriously?

And BA`have been going on and on all these years; talking, publicising, testing reactions etc etc. -meanwhile in reality firstly making sure to protect those programs?

Talking to a multitude of airlines & Leasing Cos., and not really meaning a word they said?

I agree with the statements about volume that smartplane is making.

The fact that any new products will need to both (a) not undermine the high volume cash cows and (b) be at great pains to compete with the cash cows due to their immense volume of production are indeed just that, facts.

And yes, the customers being wined and dined know this too. As above they know the vendor will address their needs if and only if they overlap with the vendor's needs too.

It's also why NMA is being aimed at the market gap above the 737: it'd be suicide to aim at the 737.

You'll note that Airbus did not spend the billions of dollars and decade or so time developing the C Series itself, for those same reasons.

Airbus is moving forward with A220 because BBD ate all of those billions of dollars and years of opportunity costs and sold half the program for $1 out of sheer desperation, shortly after offering Boeing a similar deal (from what we are told) that was rejected.

If you want to see indigestible losses, just take a look at BBD's performance over the last few years.

Now that Airbus has been gifted the A220 they are developing it further with what is for them (but not the mortibund BBD) modest investments, but are also being careful to not undermine the A320 family especially because (a) they depend on the huge cash flow coming from A320 and (b) the A220 supply chain is not scaled up to the point where it could replace the low end of A320 with similar or better profit margins.

Thus this thread has the title "Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says" -- Airbus is being very careful about what they say.

The last thing Airbus wants right now is customers to drop A320 orders to wait and see if there will be an A220-500. It'd be a bigger disaster for Airbus than the A380 has been, and that's saying a lot. The whole lifeblood of the company runs through the A320 line. Severing that would kill the company. A380 was more akin to losing a limb rather than losing a life.
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
 
TropicalSky
Posts: 247
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 1:37 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 1:58 pm

This was a very good read Revelation.....I agree with everything said

Revelation wrote:
brindabella wrote:
smartplane wrote:
Volume creates a fortress.

But it makes A & B, from necessity, very cautious about developing models that could impact these goldmines, or that can't / won't achieve comparable profitability. And even more cautious about replacing these same models.

One reason Airbus took a low cost / low risk strategy with the A330NEO, and why Boeing is struggling with the 797, because it absolutely must not erode 737 and 787 volumes and profitability.

Why risk a new model, when every time you offer a larger / more capable 737 or A320, you widen margins?

Until technology makes a step change, or there are slot / flight crew / airspace constraints, or environmental impositions, A & B already have all the model families they need.


Unless / until the A220 makes a quantum leap in volumes, it's a support act for technology transfer, to increase A320 production capacity, provide future options, and neutralise competitors.


Seriously?

And BA`have been going on and on all these years; talking, publicising, testing reactions etc etc. -meanwhile in reality firstly making sure to protect those programs?

Talking to a multitude of airlines & Leasing Cos., and not really meaning a word they said?

I agree with the statements about volume that smartplane is making.

The fact that any new products will need to both (a) not undermine the high volume cash cows and (b) be at great pains to compete with the cash cows due to their immense volume of production are indeed just that, facts.

And yes, the customers being wined and dined know this too. As above they know the vendor will address their needs if and only if they overlap with the vendor's needs too.

It's also why NMA is being aimed at the market gap above the 737: it'd be suicide to aim at the 737.

You'll note that Airbus did not spend the billions of dollars and decade or so time developing the C Series itself, for those same reasons.

Airbus is moving forward with A220 because BBD ate all of those billions of dollars and years of opportunity costs and sold half the program for $1 out of sheer desperation, shortly after offering Boeing a similar deal (from what we are told) that was rejected.

If you want to see indigestible losses, just take a look at BBD's performance over the last few years.

Now that Airbus has been gifted the A220 they are developing it further with what is for them (but not the mortibund BBD) modest investments, but are also being careful to not undermine the A320 family especially because (a) they depend on the huge cash flow coming from A320 and (b) the A220 supply chain is not scaled up to the point where it could replace the low end of A320 with similar or better profit margins.

Thus this thread has the title "Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says" -- Airbus is being very careful about what they say.

The last thing Airbus wants right now is customers to drop A320 orders to wait and see if there will be an A220-500. It'd be a bigger disaster for Airbus than the A380 has been, and that's saying a lot. The whole lifeblood of the company runs through the A320 line. Severing that would kill the company. A380 was more akin to losing a limb rather than losing a life.
 
wrongwayup
Posts: 367
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:23 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 2:17 pm

VV wrote:


Another thing I really want to know is who owns the IP of the CSeries and where the data/drawings/documentation/software are. As long as it is in Bombardier's IT infrastructure, there is not any possibility for Airbus to modify or develop the aircraft.

There has to be a kind of agreement to grant CSALP the right to use Bombardier's IT and software, methods and data...


Where the IP physically resides is really inconsequential to all this. As you say, CSALP would have the right to use the data, wherever it lies. This is pretty common M&A stuff and the lawyers splitting off CSALP from BCA would have absolutely included it in the agreement. Think of it like the legal/technological equivalent to the Mirabel plant itself - everyone drives around the same roundabout in the morning, but after they park they enter physically separated facilities.

Where BBD will actually come out ahead in all of this will be through their Aerostructures & Engineering Services business unit - although Airbus may own 50.01% of CSALP, Bombardier is still a huge tier 1 supplier to CSALP in the form of flight compartment (St Laurent), and fuselage and wings (Belfast).

VV wrote:
...Even in this case CSALP must hire people who know how to operate the IT system, software and who know the design of the C Series who know the basis for certification and all the method of compliance. I am not saying it is impossible, I am just insinuating that this is not at all straight forward and would take about one year to acquire.

When I went through Bombardier's gate three years ago escorted by my manager with only my personal belongings, I left an unfinished work with many items to certify. I am pretty sure not all them have been certified today because they need the knowledge that went out through that door with me and with other former colleagues who left to other places. I am not saying that we were indispensable, but you need time to recover the lost knowledge...


I'd hate to say it but if it was three years ago, they will have recovered and then some by now. No one is that irreplaceable, there are a lot of talented designers at BBD.
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 542
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:13 pm

brindabella wrote:
Your metric (above) is that 737-700 at $23million then completely negated the CSeries Business case.
1) If that was true then, why would it not be true now?
2) and do you have information to demonstrate the BA could not now afford to sell those frames at $23million, if they chose to do so? :?:
By your own statement, the CSseries would seem to be on borrowed time.
cheers

By offering 737-700s at $23M (75% discount?), it was obvious Boeing was willing to lower its prices to whatever level just to kill any potential CSeries sale. (Again, they also confirmed their intention to kill the CSeries + not let Bombardier enter the market).

Somehow Boeing appeared convinced the CSeries was a treat to their bread and butter 737s. (What do you think; was that a valid fear???) From that moment, "little" Bombardier had no chances to survive a price war. And yes indeed, the CSeries business case went from marginal to zero.

However, now Airbus has taken over the program. Whenever an A220 sale can displace a Boeing/Embraer sale, Airbus will be capable to sustain the "heat" and obtain that sale in many instances. (JetBlue being an example). Worst, denying potential Boeing/Embraer sales might now be part of the A220 business case. Who know.

So I would disagree with your statement that the A220 would still be in "borrowed time". The CSeries/A220 situation has changed dramatically (Definitely not pretending it's a runaway success thought. Well, not just yet ;-) )
Last edited by ExMilitaryEng on Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:43 pm, edited 3 times in total.
 
Aircellist
Posts: 1517
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 8:43 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:38 pm

… And at some point, the A220 could give Airbus some time to breathe and think, when it will be necessary (if ever…) to replace the A32x family…
"When I find out I was wrong, I change my mind. What do you do?" -attributed to John Maynard Keynes
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 542
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:46 pm

brindabella wrote:
Your metric (above) is that 737-700 at $23million then completely negated the CSeries Business case.
1) If that was true then, why would it not be true now?
2) and do you have information to demonstrate the BA could not now afford to sell those frames at $23million, if they chose to do so? :?:
By your own statement, the CSseries would seem to be on borrowed time.
cheers

By offering 737-700s at $23M (75% discount?), it was obvious Boeing was willing to lower its prices to whatever level just to kill any potential CSeries sale. (Again, they also confirmed their intention to kill the CSeries + not let Bombardier enter the market).

Somehow Boeing appeared convinced the CSeries was a threat to their bread and butter 737s. (What do you think; was that a valid fear???) From that moment, "little" Bombardier had no chances to survive a price war. And yes indeed, the CSeries business case went from marginal to zero.

However, now Airbus has taken over the program. Whenever an A220 sale can displace a Boeing/Embraer sale, Airbus will be capable to sustain the "heat" and obtain that sale in many instances. (JetBlue being an example). Worst, denying potential Boeing/Embraer sales might now be part of the A220 business case. Who knows.

So I would disagree with your statement that the A220 would still be in "borrowed time". The CSeries/A220 situation has changed dramatically. Definitely not pretending it's a runaway success thought. Well, not just yet ;-)
 
ORDfan101
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2019 2:14 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:10 pm

Will BA buy A220-300s for LCY-NA flights?

I think- 10 or 15 for flights to East Coast and Ord could work. Maybe CLE, which gets me thinking of the new markets for BA
 
ORDfan101
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2019 2:14 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:14 pm

Will BA buy A220-300s for LCY-NA flights?

I think- 10 or 15 for flights to East Coast and Ord could work. Maybe CLE, which gets me thinking of the new markets for BA
 
ExMilitaryEng
Posts: 542
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 7:12 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:45 pm

ORDfan101 wrote:
Will BA buy A220-300s for LCY-NA flights?

I think- 10 or 15 for flights to East Coast and Ord could work. Maybe CLE, which gets me thinking of the new markets for BA

You probably meant the A220-100, as the A220-300 is not LCY certified.

Those East Coast destinations you are proposing have to be "thin" (and not already well serviced, like ORD) and have a very high "business customer revenue" potential - unlike CLE.
Last edited by ExMilitaryEng on Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17708
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:50 pm

Revelation wrote:
brindabella wrote:
smartplane wrote:
Volume creates a fortress.

But it makes A & B, from necessity, very cautious about developing models that could impact these goldmines, or that can't / won't achieve comparable profitability. And even more cautious about replacing these same models.

One reason Airbus took a low cost / low risk strategy with the A330NEO, and why Boeing is struggling with the 797, because it absolutely must not erode 737 and 787 volumes and profitability.

Why risk a new model, when every time you offer a larger / more capable 737 or A320, you widen margins?

Until technology makes a step change, or there are slot / flight crew / airspace constraints, or environmental impositions, A & B already have all the model families they need.


Unless / until the A220 makes a quantum leap in volumes, it's a support act for technology transfer, to increase A320 production capacity, provide future options, and neutralise competitors.


Seriously?

And BA`have been going on and on all these years; talking, publicising, testing reactions etc etc. -meanwhile in reality firstly making sure to protect those programs?

Talking to a multitude of airlines & Leasing Cos., and not really meaning a word they said?

I agree with the statements about volume that smartplane is making.

The fact that any new products will need to both (a) not undermine the high volume cash cows and (b) be at great pains to compete with the cash cows due to their immense volume of production are indeed just that, facts.

And yes, the customers being wined and dined know this too. As above they know the vendor will address their needs if and only if they overlap with the vendor's needs too.

It's also why NMA is being aimed at the market gap above the 737: it'd be suicide to aim at the 737.

You'll note that Airbus did not spend the billions of dollars and decade or so time developing the C Series itself, for those same reasons.

Airbus is moving forward with A220 because BBD ate all of those billions of dollars and years of opportunity costs and sold half the program for $1 out of sheer desperation, shortly after offering Boeing a similar deal (from what we are told) that was rejected.

If you want to see indigestible losses, just take a look at BBD's performance over the last few years.

Now that Airbus has been gifted the A220 they are developing it further with what is for them (but not the mortibund BBD) modest investments, but are also being careful to not undermine the A320 family especially because (a) they depend on the huge cash flow coming from A320 and (b) the A220 supply chain is not scaled up to the point where it could replace the low end of A320 with similar or better profit margins.

Thus this thread has the title "Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says" -- Airbus is being very careful about what they say.

The last thing Airbus wants right now is customers to drop A320 orders to wait and see if there will be an A220-500. It'd be a bigger disaster for Airbus than the A380 has been, and that's saying a lot. The whole lifeblood of the company runs through the A320 line. Severing that would kill the company. A380 was more akin to losing a limb rather than losing a life.

Spot on to protect the A320 orders. Until this gifted horse is ready to run. But at some point within the next decade Airbus must transition the NEO to primarily the A321 and retain customers prior to launch of a CFRP winged with folding wingtips 737RS.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20960
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:50 pm

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
But yes, we "perhaps" don't know exactly what Airbus had in mind in acquiring / investing in the CSeries. And I'm seriously not so sure anymore, particularly since reading some of VV's comments. More to follow soon I hope.

Thanks for your interesting comments on this thread. A lot of them raise some questions that are difficult or impossible to answer. I'll provide my opinion on this one.

I think Airbus's acquisition of A220 is in a lot of ways similar to Boeing's acquisition of 717.

Neither intended to acquire either product.

Both acquired the product under favorable circumstances.

Both incorporated the product into their product lineups.

IMHO both will run in to the problems mentioned above: the need to protect the cash cows and the relatively small scale of their production lines.

As you mention BBD has already committed to the equipment to upsize the A220 production line.

Yet even if things track well to the plan the end result is they will be producing 1/4th the number of A220s as A320s and would need to double their investment again to get to half the scale of the A320 family production lines.

Maybe a good metric for additional funding is if you want more than 1/4th the A320 production line capacity you should have 1/4th the backlog as the A320 family.

Maybe a reasonable trigger for additional A220 investment would be a backlog of 1500 orders, since A320's backlog is ~6000 frames?

It raises the question of where the next 500 orders come from, never mind the next 1000.

Clearly A220 has a great advantage: it is emergent technology, whereas 717 was mature technology when Boeing acquired the program.

717 came with the advantage of compatibility with all the DC9/MD80 fleets, A220 has no installed base to market into,

Boeing could have chose to stretch 717 just like AirTran begged for, but the numbers did not support growing 717 at the expense of 737.

I think when push comes to shove we'll see A220 have a nice run in its position beneath the A320 and Airbus will not fund a model that overlaps A320.

And yes, this is just my opinion.
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
 
ILNFlyer
Posts: 370
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:34 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:40 pm

Revelation wrote:
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
But yes, we "perhaps" don't know exactly what Airbus had in mind in acquiring / investing in the CSeries. And I'm seriously not so sure anymore, particularly since reading some of VV's comments. More to follow soon I hope.

Thanks for your interesting comments on this thread. A lot of them raise some questions that are difficult or impossible to answer. I'll provide my opinion on this one.

I think Airbus's acquisition of A220 is in a lot of ways similar to Boeing's acquisition of 717.

Neither intended to acquire either product.

Both acquired the product under favorable circumstances.

Both incorporated the product into their product lineups.

IMHO both will run in to the problems mentioned above: the need to protect the cash cows and the relatively small scale of their production lines.

As you mention BBD has already committed to the equipment to upsize the A220 production line.

Yet even if things track well to the plan the end result is they will be producing 1/4th the number of A220s as A320s and would need to double their investment again to get to half the scale of the A320 family production lines.

Maybe a good metric for additional funding is if you want more than 1/4th the A320 production line capacity you should have 1/4th the backlog as the A320 family.

Maybe a reasonable trigger for additional A220 investment would be a backlog of 1500 orders, since A320's backlog is ~6000 frames?

It raises the question of where the next 500 orders come from, never mind the next 1000.

Clearly A220 has a great advantage: it is emergent technology, whereas 717 was mature technology when Boeing acquired the program.

717 came with the advantage of compatibility with all the DC9/MD80 fleets, A220 has no installed base to market into,

Boeing could have chose to stretch 717 just like AirTran begged for, but the numbers did not support growing 717 at the expense of 737.

I think when push comes to shove we'll see A220 have a nice run in its position beneath the A320 and Airbus will not fund a model that overlaps A320.

And yes, this is just my opinion.


Good stuff.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20960
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 7:36 pm

ILNFlyer wrote:
Revelation wrote:
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
But yes, we "perhaps" don't know exactly what Airbus had in mind in acquiring / investing in the CSeries. And I'm seriously not so sure anymore, particularly since reading some of VV's comments. More to follow soon I hope.

Thanks for your interesting comments on this thread. A lot of them raise some questions that are difficult or impossible to answer. I'll provide my opinion on this one.

One more thought I'll add: Tom Enders gave a few big interviews once the Airbus BoD chose not to extend his tenure. One thing he was really proud of is how he helped the company expand beyond the borders of the EU, and specifically mentioned Mobile as helping secure orders in the largest air travel market in the world. So, one think I think the company had in mind was expanding its footprint in both USA and Canada. Not a crucial factor, but may have had some influence on the decision to go ahead with the CS acquisition.
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
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3830
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 7:52 pm

If an airline is already flying the A320/A319 airplane series? I'm not sure of the rationale in buying the A220. #1) a different type rating for Pilots, #2) lack of parts commonality up to and including Engines, Tires, Brakes, windshields cabin furnishings, avionics, etc. This is just another new mousetrap, Delta is having a fleet renewal and for them this is a god idea. This is also a good airplane for those moving into the market. But I fail to see where this airplane will be a market changer if you're not a regional. And I just don't mean US regional.
 
ZPhoto
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri May 25, 2018 10:04 am

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 8:19 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
VV wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
And you know that because???
... snip ...


Because I know.

Gotcha

GUYS, no need to keep discussing, VV knows everything. Let's just close the thread... :roll:


Thanks to all who contributed, I know much more now than when I posted.
I looked for the article I read when news of the Boeing Embraer tie up broke out but could not find it, so could not quote it. The article explained that Boeing and Embraer could not have the same type of partnership as Airbus and Bombardier have with the CSeries/A220 because the Cseries project was kept in a "silo" (separate from other programs like the CRJ's)... so it was relatively easy to transfer the entire CSeries project to the CSALP partnership. From there I assumed the IP followed the engineers but was wrong. IP is complex... for example, Bombardier's Short Brothers in Northern Ireland build the A220 wings. The IP for wing manufacturing processes will always belong to Bombardier... but who owns the IP for the wing design?

 
trav777
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 7:17 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 8:45 pm

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
brindabella wrote:
Your metric (above) is that 737-700 at $23million then completely negated the CSeries Business case.
1) If that was true then, why would it not be true now?
2) and do you have information to demonstrate the BA could not now afford to sell those frames at $23million, if they chose to do so? :?:
By your own statement, the CSseries would seem to be on borrowed time.
cheers

By offering 737-700s at $23M (75% discount?), it was obvious Boeing was willing to lower its prices to whatever level just to kill any potential CSeries sale. (Again, they also confirmed their intention to kill the CSeries + not let Bombardier enter the market).

Somehow Boeing appeared convinced the CSeries was a treat to their bread and butter 737s. (What do you think; was that a valid fear???) From that moment, "little" Bombardier had no chances to survive a price war. And yes indeed, the CSeries business case went from marginal to zero.

However, now Airbus has taken over the program. Whenever an A220 sale can displace a Boeing/Embraer sale, Airbus will be capable to sustain the "heat" and obtain that sale in many instances. (JetBlue being an example). Worst, denying potential Boeing/Embraer sales might now be part of the A220 business case. Who know.

So I would disagree with your statement that the A220 would still be in "borrowed time". The CSeries/A220 situation has changed dramatically (Definitely not pretending it's a runaway success thought. Well, not just yet ;-) )


Of course this jet is a threat to both 737 and 320.

It's a carbon fiber all new narrowbody. The threat it poses is why I said on the NMA/NSA thread that BA should do a NSA. The competitive advantage to the carbon construction are profound, which they already learnt in the widebody space. this is the future, and they let their competitor have a jet that can eat up a lot of routes that maybe their jets would have been flying
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1134
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:32 pm

Aircellist wrote:
… And at some point, the A220 could give Airbus some time to breathe and think, when it will be necessary (if ever…) to replace the A32x family…

Indeed. And, as the 737 has so ever gracefully proven, the tendency is for the average size of a family to increase over time, and for the smallest sizes to be dropped entirely. It's likely that the current size of the A320CEO/NEO will be the smallest size offered in next generation of the A320 family. If that future A320 plane were to sell as poorly as the A319NEO, then there would be plenty of room for an A220-500.

While the next generation of the A320 family may seem a long ways down the road, I do expect the A220 to be around for a while. Unlike the 717 example, the A220 is absolutely current technology, with plenty of potential life left in it. The general consensus seems to be that BBD actually designed a very good aircraft.

While I think it's way too soon to discuss launching an A220-500, it is the right time to start floating balloons and gauging industry response.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1134
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:36 pm

trav777 wrote:
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
brindabella wrote:
Your metric (above) is that 737-700 at $23million then completely negated the CSeries Business case.
1) If that was true then, why would it not be true now?
2) and do you have information to demonstrate the BA could not now afford to sell those frames at $23million, if they chose to do so? :?:
By your own statement, the CSseries would seem to be on borrowed time.
cheers

By offering 737-700s at $23M (75% discount?), it was obvious Boeing was willing to lower its prices to whatever level just to kill any potential CSeries sale. (Again, they also confirmed their intention to kill the CSeries + not let Bombardier enter the market).

Somehow Boeing appeared convinced the CSeries was a treat to their bread and butter 737s. (What do you think; was that a valid fear???) From that moment, "little" Bombardier had no chances to survive a price war. And yes indeed, the CSeries business case went from marginal to zero.

However, now Airbus has taken over the program. Whenever an A220 sale can displace a Boeing/Embraer sale, Airbus will be capable to sustain the "heat" and obtain that sale in many instances. (JetBlue being an example). Worst, denying potential Boeing/Embraer sales might now be part of the A220 business case. Who know.

So I would disagree with your statement that the A220 would still be in "borrowed time". The CSeries/A220 situation has changed dramatically (Definitely not pretending it's a runaway success thought. Well, not just yet ;-) )


Of course this jet is a threat to both 737 and 320.

It's a carbon fiber all new narrowbody. The threat it poses is why I said on the NMA/NSA thread that BA should do a NSA. The competitive advantage to the carbon construction are profound, which they already learnt in the widebody space. this is the future, and they let their competitor have a jet that can eat up a lot of routes that maybe their jets would have been flying

Just to clarify, the A220 is an Al-Li fuselage with CF wings.
 
trav777
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 7:17 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:39 pm

aerolimani wrote:
trav777 wrote:
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
By offering 737-700s at $23M (75% discount?), it was obvious Boeing was willing to lower its prices to whatever level just to kill any potential CSeries sale. (Again, they also confirmed their intention to kill the CSeries + not let Bombardier enter the market).

Somehow Boeing appeared convinced the CSeries was a treat to their bread and butter 737s. (What do you think; was that a valid fear???) From that moment, "little" Bombardier had no chances to survive a price war. And yes indeed, the CSeries business case went from marginal to zero.

However, now Airbus has taken over the program. Whenever an A220 sale can displace a Boeing/Embraer sale, Airbus will be capable to sustain the "heat" and obtain that sale in many instances. (JetBlue being an example). Worst, denying potential Boeing/Embraer sales might now be part of the A220 business case. Who know.

So I would disagree with your statement that the A220 would still be in "borrowed time". The CSeries/A220 situation has changed dramatically (Definitely not pretending it's a runaway success thought. Well, not just yet ;-) )


Of course this jet is a threat to both 737 and 320.

It's a carbon fiber all new narrowbody. The threat it poses is why I said on the NMA/NSA thread that BA should do a NSA. The competitive advantage to the carbon construction are profound, which they already learnt in the widebody space. this is the future, and they let their competitor have a jet that can eat up a lot of routes that maybe their jets would have been flying

Just to clarify, the A220 is an Al-Li fuselage with CF wings.


it's like 50% composites by weight isn't it? How is this possible?
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1134
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 9:43 pm

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.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1134
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:35 pm

trav777 wrote:
aerolimani wrote:
trav777 wrote:

Of course this jet is a threat to both 737 and 320.

It's a carbon fiber all new narrowbody. The threat it poses is why I said on the NMA/NSA thread that BA should do a NSA. The competitive advantage to the carbon construction are profound, which they already learnt in the widebody space. this is the future, and they let their competitor have a jet that can eat up a lot of routes that maybe their jets would have been flying

Just to clarify, the A220 is an Al-Li fuselage with CF wings.


it's like 50% composites by weight isn't it? How is this possible?

The skin is Al-Li alloy. Besides the wings and empennage, many other structural parts are composite. The oft-quoted numbers for non-traditional materials are 46% composites and 24% aluminum-lithium alloys.
 
User avatar
BaconButty
Posts: 797
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:42 pm

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

Wed Jan 23, 2019 10:55 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.


The A320 and 737 replacement aircraft are pencilled in for the 2030+ time frame - it's the schedule programs like Clean Skies 2 are working to. In the unlikely event of that deadline being hit, there's then the matter of industrial ramp up to 50-70 aircraft per month. The upshot is that both Boeing and Airbus will need to be delivering current generation narrow body aircraft into the second half of the 2030's if not early 2040's. This gives a potential obsolescence headache. Sure, what else are they going to buy? Even if no competitor emerges, airlines could keep aircraft longer, or not expand into marginal routes that might have been opened by reduced operating costs. I can't see Airbus and Boeing going into the 2030's with the A320NEO and 737NG as their bread and butter. So what do they do? Boeing might hope to take up that cashflow slack with the MOM - will that be enough?

As for Airbus, while it may be good for moving towards MOM territory, refreshing the A320 line again will only move the family further from the 500nm people mover airlines want. Could the A220 platform make more sense as the basis for that? I could really see Airbus going into the 2030's with a three pronged line up. The legacy A320NG family, an updated (stretched? re-engined) A220 and some kind of updated A321 based mid range aircraft. I can really see Airbus interest in the C-Series as a hedge against the obsolescence issue.
Down with that sort of thing!
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17708
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

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

Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:04 am

BaconButty wrote:
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.


The A320 and 737 replacement aircraft are pencilled in for the 2030+ time frame - it's the schedule programs like Clean Skies 2 are working to. In the unlikely event of that deadline being hit, there's then the matter of industrial ramp up to 50-70 aircraft per month. The upshot is that both Boeing and Airbus will need to be delivering current generation narrow body aircraft into the second half of the 2030's if not early 2040's. This gives a potential obsolescence headache. Sure, what else are they going to buy? Even if no competitor emerges, airlines could keep aircraft longer, or not expand into marginal routes that might have been opened by reduced operating costs. I can't see Airbus and Boeing going into the 2030's with the A320NEO and 737NG as their bread and butter. So what do they do? Boeing might hope to take up that cashflow slack with the MOM - will that be enough?

As for Airbus, while it may be good for moving towards MOM territory, refreshing the A320 line again will only move the family further from the 500nm people mover airlines want. Could the A220 platform make more sense as the basis for that? I could really see Airbus going into the 2030's with a three pronged line up. The legacy A320NG family, an updated (stretched? re-engined) A220 and some kind of updated A321 based mid range aircraft. I can really see Airbus interest in the C-Series as a hedge against the obsolescence issue.

A good analogy to how competitive the MAX and NEO would be to look at the CEO and NG market. AerCap has stopped buying them younger than 5 years (my interpretation of the following link).
http://m.aviationweek.com/commercial-av ... embraer-e2

The same thing happened 737-300/400 to the 700/800 family after about 2 years. Anyone else remember the fan issues at EIS of the 738 on the CFM-56-7? I didn't think so. The NEOs and MAX aren't mature yet, but they will be. Fuel is 25% to 30% of costs, more for airlines in high fuel tax locations (India).

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
ORDfan101
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2019 2:14 am

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

Fri Jan 25, 2019 8:07 pm

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
ORDfan101 wrote:
Will BA buy A220-300s for LCY-NA flights?

I think- 10 or 15 for flights to East Coast and Ord could work. Maybe CLE, which gets me thinking of the new markets for BA

You probably meant the A220-100, as the A220-300 is not LCY certified.

Those East Coast destinations you are proposing have to be "thin" (and not already well serviced, like ORD) and have a very high "business customer revenue" potential - unlike CLE.

Sorry I forgot 300 was not certified. I meant that maybe they could have higher frequencies of flights to major US east coast cities and add more minor destinations from LHR like Hartford. They could for sure fill a 100 from CLE to LHR. My question was poorly phrased i meant that they could add more flights to smaller cities in the USA or increase frequencies from LHR and add more transatlantic flights from LHR
 
Babyshark
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

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

Wed Jan 30, 2019 3:31 am

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.

The only success I could see is you rip out the RJ/corporate cockpit and put in a A320 cockpit and get it certified as one type. Problem is the A320neo will still kill it.
 
impilot
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 1:38 pm

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

Wed Jan 30, 2019 3:40 am

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.

The only success I could see is you rip out the RJ/corporate cockpit and put in a A320 cockpit and get it certified as one type. Problem is the A320neo will still kill it.



Riiiight.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21481
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

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

Wed Jan 30, 2019 5:47 am

A tangent:
Sometime in the last decade and a half, someone on A.net said something to the effect of: "Believe it or not, airlines don't want to fly 737s across the Atlantic."

Whoever said that was dead wrong. The A220, especially kjeese's A220-500 paper plane, could offer most of what the A320 can do for the US domestic market. It can fly JFK<->SFO, West Coast-HI, etc. and just about any route within Europe. I think that aircraft in this style of build may be the future in domestic air traffic. Meanwhile, as the A320-size aircraft get more and more capable, we might start seeing them used more on TATL and eventually maybe even TPAC flights (not the A320, per se, but its successor perhaps).

While I don't think Widebodies will ever completely go away, they'll be relegated to large trunk routes like LAX-NRT and such. I can see an increase in hub-to-point services by A320 aircraft in the next 20-30 years. Imagine, for example, a CDG-BDL route. An A320 a few times a week would work for that.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
VV
Posts: 791
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

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

Wed Jan 30, 2019 7:59 am

I decided to leave this thread, but I changed my mind because it seems the subject was still very active.

The A320neo's back log is huge, at current delivery rate it would take about nine years to deliver the whole backlog. It does not even consider possible future new orders.

It would bring us to 2029 at the earliest before they might think about replacing the A320 family with something new or to improve further the product family.

Let us keep in mind that the C Series was launched in 2008. So when Airbus will or will not decide to launch a new aircraft to replace A320 family or to significantly improve it, the C Series will be about 21 years old.
Will there be incremental improvements on the C Series between now and then?

t depends on a lot of things and how Airbus wants to balance the weight between the current A320neo, the C Series and also the hypothetical aircraft that will enter into service around 2033.

There are a lot of strategic decisions to be made. Whether those decisions will be favorable to the C Series is something that we need to monitor very-very closely.

This comment is quite vague, but I would like to invite those who read this to think about "time".
In my opinion, thinking that the C Series could be used as the foundation for possible future A320 replacement or enhancement is not necessarily right.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13045
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

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

Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:15 am

ILNFlyer wrote:
Revelation wrote:
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
But yes, we "perhaps" don't know exactly what Airbus had in mind in acquiring / investing in the CSeries. And I'm seriously not so sure anymore, particularly since reading some of VV's comments. More to follow soon I hope.

Thanks for your interesting comments on this thread. A lot of them raise some questions that are difficult or impossible to answer. I'll provide my opinion on this one.

I think Airbus's acquisition of A220 is in a lot of ways similar to Boeing's acquisition of 717.

Neither intended to acquire either product.

Both acquired the product under favorable circumstances.

Both incorporated the product into their product lineups.

IMHO both will run in to the problems mentioned above: the need to protect the cash cows and the relatively small scale of their production lines.

As you mention BBD has already committed to the equipment to upsize the A220 production line.

Yet even if things track well to the plan the end result is they will be producing 1/4th the number of A220s as A320s and would need to double their investment again to get to half the scale of the A320 family production lines.

Maybe a good metric for additional funding is if you want more than 1/4th the A320 production line capacity you should have 1/4th the backlog as the A320 family.

Maybe a reasonable trigger for additional A220 investment would be a backlog of 1500 orders, since A320's backlog is ~6000 frames?

It raises the question of where the next 500 orders come from, never mind the next 1000.

Clearly A220 has a great advantage: it is emergent technology, whereas 717 was mature technology when Boeing acquired the program.

717 came with the advantage of compatibility with all the DC9/MD80 fleets, A220 has no installed base to market into,

Boeing could have chose to stretch 717 just like AirTran begged for, but the numbers did not support growing 717 at the expense of 737.

I think when push comes to shove we'll see A220 have a nice run in its position beneath the A320 and Airbus will not fund a model that overlaps A320.

And yes, this is just my opinion.


Good stuff.


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.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
mad99
Posts: 1171
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:33 am

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

Wed Jan 30, 2019 9:15 am

aerolimani wrote:
trav777 wrote:
ExMilitaryEng wrote:
By offering 737-700s at $23M (75% discount?), it was obvious Boeing was willing to lower its prices to whatever level just to kill any potential CSeries sale. (Again, they also confirmed their intention to kill the CSeries + not let Bombardier enter the market).

Somehow Boeing appeared convinced the CSeries was a treat to their bread and butter 737s. (What do you think; was that a valid fear???) From that moment, "little" Bombardier had no chances to survive a price war. And yes indeed, the CSeries business case went from marginal to zero.

However, now Airbus has taken over the program. Whenever an A220 sale can displace a Boeing/Embraer sale, Airbus will be capable to sustain the "heat" and obtain that sale in many instances. (JetBlue being an example). Worst, denying potential Boeing/Embraer sales might now be part of the A220 business case. Who know.

So I would disagree with your statement that the A220 would still be in "borrowed time". The CSeries/A220 situation has changed dramatically (Definitely not pretending it's a runaway success thought. Well, not just yet ;-) )


Of course this jet is a threat to both 737 and 320.

It's a carbon fiber all new narrowbody. The threat it poses is why I said on the NMA/NSA thread that BA should do a NSA. The competitive advantage to the carbon construction are profound, which they already learnt in the widebody space. this is the future, and they let their competitor have a jet that can eat up a lot of routes that maybe their jets would have been flying

Just to clarify, the A220 is an Al-Li fuselage with CF wings.


the aft fuse section is composit
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3719
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 1:32 pm

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.
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"

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