• 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 12
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:27 pm

SteelChair wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
Personally, an A220-500 makes more sense. It would be far better to optimize A32x production so all sites are heavily automated and able to produce the A321.


In terms of DOC per seat-mile, definitely.

However, there are - what - around 2000 A320s scheduled for deliver over the next, say, 7 years. So call that 300 a year.

Current CS100/CS300 output is looking like 33 over last year and ~50 over this year, with growth at around 30% a year - which is obviously unsustainable as numbers get higher and the chokepoints require fundamental changes to the supply chain (rather than massaging of assembly lines).


Using a bastardised hybrid of current ramp factors and current ramp iterative rates, I cannot see 300+ CS100/CS300 being delivered per year this side of 2025. Probably more like 2030.

Airbus have soooo much work to do in terms of manufacturing ramp before an A225 is a viable replacement for the A320 in numbers.


But but but.....experts on here are claiming that the 500 will never be built because its a threat to the 320N. Now you come and say it'll be years before Airbus is able to build, certify, and produce in quantity the 500 (Note that i skipped "design").


The 500 is inevitable. Airbus itself has said so. The only question is when. Airbus has the option to buy out Bombardier's and the Quebec government's share in the program in a few years. At that point the 225 won't be competing as much with the 320.

And all that coincides nicely with the need to stretch, rewing, etc the 320 and 321 to compete with the NMA.

As for design time. It's not nearly as relevant as the ramp. Airbus could put out the 225 in a year.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:34 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
But but but.....experts on here are claiming that the 500 will never be built because its a threat to the 320N. Now you come and say it'll be years before Airbus is able to build, certify, and produce in quantity the 500 (Note that i skipped "design").


I'm not quite saying that.

I'm saying until the production rates get up to that level - or give Airbus the confidence that they can be got to that level in good time - then any discussion about how good an A220-500 might be is moot.

They won't build it because they couldn't ever deliver them quick enough.


Except Airbus is quietly expanding capacity.

https://montrealgazette.com/business/lo ... in-mirabel

And that's exactly how ramps works. You don't turn off one production line and turn on one the next day. Once Airbus figures out how they want to evolve the 320/321 and where the 225 fits, they'll plan their ramp for the transition.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17934
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:59 pm

TObound wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:

In terms of DOC per seat-mile, definitely.

However, there are - what - around 2000 A320s scheduled for deliver over the next, say, 7 years. So call that 300 a year.

Current CS100/CS300 output is looking like 33 over last year and ~50 over this year, with growth at around 30% a year - which is obviously unsustainable as numbers get higher and the chokepoints require fundamental changes to the supply chain (rather than massaging of assembly lines).


Using a bastardised hybrid of current ramp factors and current ramp iterative rates, I cannot see 300+ CS100/CS300 being delivered per year this side of 2025. Probably more like 2030.

Airbus have soooo much work to do in terms of manufacturing ramp before an A225 is a viable replacement for the A320 in numbers.


But but but.....experts on here are claiming that the 500 will never be built because its a threat to the 320N. Now you come and say it'll be years before Airbus is able to build, certify, and produce in quantity the 500 (Note that i skipped "design").


The 500 is inevitable. Airbus itself has said so. The only question is when. Airbus has the option to buy out Bombardier's and the Quebec government's share in the program in a few years. At that point the 225 won't be competing as much with the 320.

And all that coincides nicely with the need to stretch, rewing, etc the 320 and 321 to compete with the NMA.

As for design time. It's not nearly as relevant as the ramp. Airbus could put out the 225 in a year.

While I agree the -500 will happen, I also believe that growth happens. I expect many A320 routes to be either upgauged for low yield or frequency increased for high yield or even both!

I also expect the yield for that 5th tier to have dropped too much for AF costs. I would expect 25% to 35% of routes to down gauge.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2298
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Wed Jul 24, 2019 3:37 pm

TObound wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
But but but.....experts on here are claiming that the 500 will never be built because its a threat to the 320N. Now you come and say it'll be years before Airbus is able to build, certify, and produce in quantity the 500 (Note that i skipped "design").


I'm not quite saying that.

I'm saying until the production rates get up to that level - or give Airbus the confidence that they can be got to that level in good time - then any discussion about how good an A220-500 might be is moot.

They won't build it because they couldn't ever deliver them quick enough.


Except Airbus is quietly expanding capacity.

https://montrealgazette.com/business/lo ... in-mirabel

And that's exactly how ramps works. You don't turn off one production line and turn on one the next day. Once Airbus figures out how they want to evolve the 320/321 and where the 225 fits, they'll plan their ramp for the transition.



All the CSeries suppliers have been working on the basis of a max rate of 120 /year.

That means the wingsets, the fuselage barrels, the empennage, nacelles etc etc etc.

If you want to treble that rate - then it requires massive increases in factory sizes and jig/tools* - not all of which will be possible on existing factory footprints - meaning separate facilities need to be acquired.

*even within existing factories, you probably won't have the space to reshuffle things without stopping the lines for a time. A trebling of potential rate would have fundamental effects on the build/assembly philosophies of the line.

The wing and centre fuselage are probably most sensitive to this as it is all being done in the one location now that the penny has finally dropped that Shenyang are never going to be up to it.


I'm not saying it cannot be done - I'm putting emphasis on the scale of the task.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17934
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Wed Jul 24, 2019 4:30 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
TObound wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:

I'm not quite saying that.

I'm saying until the production rates get up to that level - or give Airbus the confidence that they can be got to that level in good time - then any discussion about how good an A220-500 might be is moot.

They won't build it because they couldn't ever deliver them quick enough.


Except Airbus is quietly expanding capacity.

https://montrealgazette.com/business/lo ... in-mirabel

And that's exactly how ramps works. You don't turn off one production line and turn on one the next day. Once Airbus figures out how they want to evolve the 320/321 and where the 225 fits, they'll plan their ramp for the transition.



All the CSeries suppliers have been working on the basis of a max rate of 120 /year.

That means the wingsets, the fuselage barrels, the empennage, nacelles etc etc etc.

If you want to treble that rate - then it requires massive increases in factory sizes and jig/tools* - not all of which will be possible on existing factory footprints - meaning separate facilities need to be acquired.

*even within existing factories, you probably won't have the space to reshuffle things without stopping the lines for a time. A trebling of potential rate would have fundamental effects on the build/assembly philosophies of the line.

The wing and centre fuselage are probably most sensitive to this as it is all being done in the one location now that the penny has finally dropped that Shenyang are never going to be up to it.


I'm not saying it cannot be done - I'm putting emphasis on the scale of the task.

Airbus will bid for new deliveries in say 24 months at a new rate with a new ramp. 3D printing tools must be bought 30 months out. But even buildings are quick to build. Airbus will certainly ramp up.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
N717TW
Posts: 533
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 9:24 pm

Re: AF to order A220

Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:48 pm

kimimm19 wrote:
As exciting and welcome an A220 order would be, so disappointing would a a380 replacement order be, especially if it is to be replaced by the 787...

Why not replace it with the a350-1000 or at least the a359? Anything smaller would be ridiculous.


with the a few exceptions, it really makes sense to run a flight 2X on smaller aircraft rather than once daily with an A388. 1st, it gives you flexibility to drop down to 1x on low days (e.g. 2X except Tuesday) or on low seasons. 2nd you actually get more pricing premium by offering different time slots. You can capture a high-fare passenger who wants/needs get to their destination early AND capture the high-fare passenger who wants/needs to stay in the origin until later; and gives you better connection opportunities so that the conx itinerary shows up higher on the GDS. This its something AA/DL proved decades ago as they were plying the skies with multiple 767s while PA/TWA +BA/AF/LH, etc. were running single 747s.
 
rrbsztk
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:48 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:46 pm

Re whether or not the A320NEO has a place in the fleet I think its important to look at ages. For Air France I don't think they're looking to replace the A320s yet. They have (as of Dec31 2019 per airfleets.net)
Age: 0-4...5-8...9-12...13-16...17-20
A320s: 4....13.....18......8.............1
The A318s are 12+, 319s almost all 16+, and about half (10 of 20) of the A321s are 16+.
If the order later this month is 220s and 321s I don't think it necessarily means they're not interested in having a plane in the 320 size. Only 20% of the A320s are over 12 years old so if they stick with only A321NEOs and A220s it seems fairly similar to what's leaving the fleet. 321 replaces 321s and some old 320s (about 10). 220 replaces 318/9s. Some size increase with 318s to 223s and 320s to 321s.

For the remaining ~80% of A320s (35 <12yrs old) they have several years to order 320NEOs or MAX8s or a new design (A220-500 or a NSA from either manufacturer).
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:54 am

rrbsztk wrote:
For the remaining ~80% of A320s (35 <12yrs old) they have several years to order 320NEOs or MAX8s or a new design (A220-500 or a NSA from either manufacturer).


Some of us are contending that they don't need to wait because it doesn't need to be a 1:1 order. By the time they are taking any replacements for the these 320s, It'll be around 5 years away. They could easily make it part of this deal to try and leverage good volume discounts or favourable option timing and pricing. And if it doesn't need to be a 1:1 order than you don't need a match for the 320. You can downsize to boost yield as Lightsaber suggests. Or you can upgauge to increase ASMs and boost profits.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:07 am

lightsaber wrote:
brindabella wrote:
TObound wrote:

As mentioned elsewhere, commonality is less of an issue when you have 50+ of each type.

And more specifically as Delta and JetBlue are showing, you don’t necessarily need the 320NEO. Both of them have ordered large numbers of 220s and 321NEOs only. The 223/321N seems to work well for mainline short/medium haul with the 223 acting as the schedule builder and the 321N providing the heavy lift.


:?:
Have to say that I am surprised by the apparent overwhelming consensus here.

Is the 223 -being dribbled-out from the 2 current lines - really so absolutely superior in CASM/RASM/buy price to an A320neo being pumped-out at 50+/Month?
(This is giving the benefit-of-the doubt that transition costs to a substantially different product are negligible. Another assumption hereabouts).

Some evidence, anyone?

cheers

The A220 has incredibly low CASM:
https://airinsight.com/cseries-beats-ne ... ile-costs/

You do know yield drops with passenger count? On a city pair their might be:
12 passengers in top fare bucket
20 in 2nd fare bucket
30 in 3rd bucket
50 in 4th and say 250 in last (cheapest) bucket.

In my example, there are only 62 fares worth pursuing. The rest are carried at a loss. So a smaller aircraft that carries people at the same or lower cost will make more profit.

The issue with the c-series was support and production is being fixed. At this time, there is less wait for the A220 as Pratt is finally producing engines on time. CFM still hasn't met demand.

Most of the A220 benefit is CFRP wing and electrical subsystems (saves about 3% in fuel).

The A220 engines are optimized for a 1 hour mission, the A320 NEO was mandated to optimize for 2 hours on the A321, which means about 3 hours in the A320. In other words, the A320 is carrying so much extra engine that the A220 has a definitive cost advantage in shorter missions, but the lower wing loading helps on longer missions.

The A320 needs a new wing. The current wing is out of date on multiple grounds (fuel system design, material, lack of underside laminar flow which requires a greater aspect ratio).

Technology has moved on.

For AF, the A220 is an excellent fit. They will make more profit with it.

Lightsaber


Our delta 320s from the early 90s burn the same amount of fuel as the 220s we have on the same leg. I can look at the flight plans and compare, same per seat. 223 might do better but we don’t have 320Ns to compare, sure they do better too.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:09 am

TObound wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:

In terms of DOC per seat-mile, definitely.

However, there are - what - around 2000 A320s scheduled for deliver over the next, say, 7 years. So call that 300 a year.

Current CS100/CS300 output is looking like 33 over last year and ~50 over this year, with growth at around 30% a year - which is obviously unsustainable as numbers get higher and the chokepoints require fundamental changes to the supply chain (rather than massaging of assembly lines).


Using a bastardised hybrid of current ramp factors and current ramp iterative rates, I cannot see 300+ CS100/CS300 being delivered per year this side of 2025. Probably more like 2030.

Airbus have soooo much work to do in terms of manufacturing ramp before an A225 is a viable replacement for the A320 in numbers.


But but but.....experts on here are claiming that the 500 will never be built because its a threat to the 320N. Now you come and say it'll be years before Airbus is able to build, certify, and produce in quantity the 500 (Note that i skipped "design").


The 500 is inevitable. Airbus itself has said so. The only question is when. Airbus has the option to buy out Bombardier's and the Quebec government's share in the program in a few years. At that point the 225 won't be competing as much with the 320.

And all that coincides nicely with the need to stretch, rewing, etc the 320 and 321 to compete with the NMA.

As for design time. It's not nearly as relevant as the ramp. Airbus could put out the 225 in a year.


Where has Airbus said the 225 is inevitable? Link to it.
 
rrbsztk
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:48 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:46 am

TObound wrote:
rrbsztk wrote:
For the remaining ~80% of A320s (35 <12yrs old) they have several years to order 320NEOs or MAX8s or a new design (A220-500 or a NSA from either manufacturer).


Some of us are contending that they don't need to wait because it doesn't need to be a 1:1 order. By the time they are taking any replacements for the these 320s, It'll be around 5 years away. They could easily make it part of this deal to try and leverage good volume discounts or favourable option timing and pricing. And if it doesn't need to be a 1:1 order than you don't need a match for the 320. You can downsize to boost yield as Lightsaber suggests. Or you can upgauge to increase ASMs and boost profits.


Certainly it would make sense to leverage bulk orders and they are reporting about 100 orders (currently they have 103 A320family) with 50 to 70 A220 or roughly a 50/50 split depending on article.

And i certainly see the logic behind going a223/a321 and could see it being the route they go and it being successful.

I suppose I see it more as there is so much time between now and all 320s leaving that any current plan is subject to alteration. If they only order 100 aircraft total I could see in 5 years deciding to convert 321neo options to 320s or a220-300 options to a theoretical a220-500. If they order more than 100 they probably could somehow get Airbus to agree to converting some a321s to a320s or a223s to a225s. And they could always just make a new separate order, leveraging AF/KLM for a bulk order.

Broadly speaking, my perspective is that even though Air France (potentially - we'll know more next week), Delta, and Jet Blue are moving towards a 223/321 fleet based on orders, it's too early to say that means the a320 isn't needed. Personally, until they start retiring a meaningful amount of their a320 size air craft, i'm open to them deciding to order more. As they take deliveries they'll see how its going and then decide if the a320 has a role as 15% or 40% or 0%, and alter plans accordingly if needed.
 
User avatar
adambrau
Posts: 259
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:44 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 3:17 am

I love the A380 but as an AF employee in a station who sees them daily I am glad they are rumored to be exiting the fleet. Simply too many people in restricted terminal facilities.
Let's keep the skies friendly.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:20 am

Babyshark wrote:
TObound wrote:
SteelChair wrote:

But but but.....experts on here are claiming that the 500 will never be built because its a threat to the 320N. Now you come and say it'll be years before Airbus is able to build, certify, and produce in quantity the 500 (Note that i skipped "design").


The 500 is inevitable. Airbus itself has said so. The only question is when. Airbus has the option to buy out Bombardier's and the Quebec government's share in the program in a few years. At that point the 225 won't be competing as much with the 320.

And all that coincides nicely with the need to stretch, rewing, etc the 320 and 321 to compete with the NMA.

As for design time. It's not nearly as relevant as the ramp. Airbus could put out the 225 in a year.


Where has Airbus said the 225 is inevitable? Link to it.


It all depends on how reliable you consider Airbus' President of Commercial Aircraft I guess:

"It's very likely that… once the A220 has done the ramp up, is economically viable [and] then we can further invest, that this is going to happen," Airbus president of commercial aircraft Guillaume Faury tells reporters on 16 January. "Once this success is on track, it would be time for looking at what we do for the product.

"We are not there yet," he adds. "We see the very strong potential." Industry observers have suggested such an aircraft would be called the A220-500.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 20-455067/

The wing is already sized for a 225. This is one of the easiest and greatest ROI derivatives that Airbus can do. And it's exactly why they need to announce it substantially in advance. They could EIS in 1-2 years. So Airbus has plenty of time to see what Boeing does and pull this out of their back pocket.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8622
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:58 am

And then imagine a new wing for the A320 to go with it. It would move the A320 line to A320 - A321 - A322 and open the space for the A225.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:41 pm

Babyshark wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
brindabella wrote:

:?:
Have to say that I am surprised by the apparent overwhelming consensus here.

Is the 223 -being dribbled-out from the 2 current lines - really so absolutely superior in CASM/RASM/buy price to an A320neo being pumped-out at 50+/Month?
(This is giving the benefit-of-the doubt that transition costs to a substantially different product are negligible. Another assumption hereabouts).

Some evidence, anyone?

cheers

The A220 has incredibly low CASM:
https://airinsight.com/cseries-beats-ne ... ile-costs/

You do know yield drops with passenger count? On a city pair their might be:
12 passengers in top fare bucket
20 in 2nd fare bucket
30 in 3rd bucket
50 in 4th and say 250 in last (cheapest) bucket.

In my example, there are only 62 fares worth pursuing. The rest are carried at a loss. So a smaller aircraft that carries people at the same or lower cost will make more profit.

The issue with the c-series was support and production is being fixed. At this time, there is less wait for the A220 as Pratt is finally producing engines on time. CFM still hasn't met demand.

Most of the A220 benefit is CFRP wing and electrical subsystems (saves about 3% in fuel).

The A220 engines are optimized for a 1 hour mission, the A320 NEO was mandated to optimize for 2 hours on the A321, which means about 3 hours in the A320. In other words, the A320 is carrying so much extra engine that the A220 has a definitive cost advantage in shorter missions, but the lower wing loading helps on longer missions.

The A320 needs a new wing. The current wing is out of date on multiple grounds (fuel system design, material, lack of underside laminar flow which requires a greater aspect ratio).

Technology has moved on.

For AF, the A220 is an excellent fit. They will make more profit with it.

Lightsaber


Our delta 320s from the early 90s burn the same amount of fuel as the 220s we have on the same leg. I can look at the flight plans and compare, same per seat. 223 might do better but we don’t have 320Ns to compare, sure they do better too.


Halfway through your comment, you mention per seat. I'm guessing the block is considerably less. Can you confirm how much less the block is on a percentage basis?
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:53 pm

I'm surprised at the rumours that AF would get more 220s than 320Ns/321Ns.

Given their use of ULDs for cargo, I would think:

320N + 321N > 223

Arguably the only scenario that would change that would be pulling a Delta and replacing RJs with 220s at mainline.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:55 pm

seahawk wrote:
And then imagine a new wing for the A320 to go with it. It would move the A320 line to A320 - A321 - A322 and open the space for the A225.


Agree completely.

I believe the GTF engine totally changed the optimum mission profile of the A320 series, resulting in the "sweet spot" moving to the A321. The A320 is now analogous to the 788 imho, optimized for very long routes that airlines largely don't want to fly. I expect the 321 to continue to grow in popularity vis a vis the 320 going forward.

I see the Airbus product range coalescing around two basic airplanes, one based upon the 73 inch fan GTF, the other based upon the 81 inch GTF.

Pilot/cockpit standardization? Pffft. Who cares? When you are talking about 200-300 airplane fleets those considerations are secondary imho....secondary to the operating characteristics based upon having the right plane in the right market a greater percentage of the time.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:11 pm

SteelChair wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
The A220 has incredibly low CASM:
https://airinsight.com/cseries-beats-ne ... ile-costs/

You do know yield drops with passenger count? On a city pair their might be:
12 passengers in top fare bucket
20 in 2nd fare bucket
30 in 3rd bucket
50 in 4th and say 250 in last (cheapest) bucket.

In my example, there are only 62 fares worth pursuing. The rest are carried at a loss. So a smaller aircraft that carries people at the same or lower cost will make more profit.

The issue with the c-series was support and production is being fixed. At this time, there is less wait for the A220 as Pratt is finally producing engines on time. CFM still hasn't met demand.

Most of the A220 benefit is CFRP wing and electrical subsystems (saves about 3% in fuel).

The A220 engines are optimized for a 1 hour mission, the A320 NEO was mandated to optimize for 2 hours on the A321, which means about 3 hours in the A320. In other words, the A320 is carrying so much extra engine that the A220 has a definitive cost advantage in shorter missions, but the lower wing loading helps on longer missions.

The A320 needs a new wing. The current wing is out of date on multiple grounds (fuel system design, material, lack of underside laminar flow which requires a greater aspect ratio).

Technology has moved on.

For AF, the A220 is an excellent fit. They will make more profit with it.

Lightsaber


Our delta 320s from the early 90s burn the same amount of fuel as the 220s we have on the same leg. I can look at the flight plans and compare, same per seat. 223 might do better but we don’t have 320Ns to compare, sure they do better too.


Halfway through your comment, you mention per seat. I'm guessing the block is considerably less. Can you confirm how much less the block is on a percentage basis?


Sure I’ll look it up, but when everything is done by asm it seemed the better comparison. If I don’t find what I saved I’ll get another one tonight.
Last edited by Babyshark on Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:12 pm

TObound wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
TObound wrote:

The 500 is inevitable. Airbus itself has said so. The only question is when. Airbus has the option to buy out Bombardier's and the Quebec government's share in the program in a few years. At that point the 225 won't be competing as much with the 320.

And all that coincides nicely with the need to stretch, rewing, etc the 320 and 321 to compete with the NMA.

As for design time. It's not nearly as relevant as the ramp. Airbus could put out the 225 in a year.


Where has Airbus said the 225 is inevitable? Link to it.


It all depends on how reliable you consider Airbus' President of Commercial Aircraft I guess:

"It's very likely that… once the A220 has done the ramp up, is economically viable [and] then we can further invest, that this is going to happen," Airbus president of commercial aircraft Guillaume Faury tells reporters on 16 January. "Once this success is on track, it would be time for looking at what we do for the product.

"We are not there yet," he adds. "We see the very strong potential." Industry observers have suggested such an aircraft would be called the A220-500.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 20-455067/

The wing is already sized for a 225. This is one of the easiest and greatest ROI derivatives that Airbus can do. And it's exactly why they need to announce it substantially in advance. They could EIS in 1-2 years. So Airbus has plenty of time to see what Boeing does and pull this out of their back pocket.


This is from the Paris Air Show in June:

Christian Scherer on A220-500: Every plane wishes to be stretched but we’re not considering it right now. #PAS19

https://mobile.twitter.com/airwaysmagaz ... for-now%2F
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:17 pm

[code][/code]
Babyshark wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
Babyshark wrote:

Our delta 320s from the early 90s burn the same amount of fuel as the 220s we have on the same leg. I can look at the flight plans and compare, same per seat. 223 might do better but we don’t have 320Ns to compare, sure they do better too.


Halfway through your comment, you mention per seat. I'm guessing the block is considerably less. Can you confirm how much less the block is on a percentage basis?


Sure I’ll look it up, but when everything is done by asm it seemed the better comparison.


Thanks. I wonder how the 221 seat mile costs compare to 76 seat RJ seat mile costs?
 
Babyshark
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:24 pm

SteelChair wrote:
seahawk wrote:
And then imagine a new wing for the A320 to go with it. It would move the A320 line to A320 - A321 - A322 and open the space for the A225.


Agree completely.

I believe the GTF engine totally changed the optimum mission profile of the A320 series, resulting in the "sweet spot" moving to the A321. The A320 is now analogous to the 788 imho, optimized for very long routes that airlines largely don't want to fly. I expect the 321 to continue to grow in popularity vis a vis the 320 going forward.

I see the Airbus product range coalescing around two basic airplanes, one based upon the 73 inch fan GTF, the other based upon the 81 inch GTF.

Pilot/cockpit standardization? Pffft. Who cares? When you are talking about 200-300 airplane fleets those considerations are secondary imho....secondary to the operating characteristics based upon having the right plane in the right market a greater percentage of the time.


Pilot standardization is enough of a force to drive the 73 program into the ground. It’s a big deal. It can easily be $70,000 in lost productivity pay just to swap one pilot crew from A220 to 320. Not including sims, facilities, Instructor salaries (figure $1500 per lesson in Instructor pay) and all of the synergy lost in having to separately staff and cover trips and overnights as well as IROPS.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:30 pm

Babyshark wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
seahawk wrote:
And then imagine a new wing for the A320 to go with it. It would move the A320 line to A320 - A321 - A322 and open the space for the A225.


Agree completely.

I believe the GTF engine totally changed the optimum mission profile of the A320 series, resulting in the "sweet spot" moving to the A321. The A320 is now analogous to the 788 imho, optimized for very long routes that airlines largely don't want to fly. I expect the 321 to continue to grow in popularity vis a vis the 320 going forward.

I see the Airbus product range coalescing around two basic airplanes, one based upon the 73 inch fan GTF, the other based upon the 81 inch GTF.

Pilot/cockpit standardization? Pffft. Who cares? When you are talking about 200-300 airplane fleets those considerations are secondary imho....secondary to the operating characteristics based upon having the right plane in the right market a greater percentage of the time.


Pilot standardization is enough of a force to drive the 73 program into the ground. It’s a big deal. It can easily be $70,000 in lost productivity pay just to swap one pilot crew from A220 to 320. Not including sims, facilities, Instructor salaries (figure $1500 per lesson in Instructor pay) and all of the synergy lost in having to separately staff and cover trips and overnights as well as IROPS.


What are you talking about with regard to your first sentence?
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3766
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:34 pm

Babyshark wrote:
TObound wrote:
It all depends on how reliable you consider Airbus' President of Commercial Aircraft I guess:

"It's very likely that… once the A220 has done the ramp up, is economically viable [and] then we can further invest, that this is going to happen," Airbus president of commercial aircraft Guillaume Faury tells reporters on 16 January. "Once this success is on track, it would be time for looking at what we do for the product.

"We are not there yet," he adds. "We see the very strong potential." Industry observers have suggested such an aircraft would be called the A220-500.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 20-455067/
The wing is already sized for a 225. This is one of the easiest and greatest ROI derivatives that Airbus can do. And it's exactly why they need to announce it substantially in advance. They could EIS in 1-2 years. So Airbus has plenty of time to see what Boeing does and pull this out of their back pocket.

This is from the Paris Air Show in June:
Christian Scherer on A220-500: Every plane wishes to be stretched but we’re not considering it right now. #PAS19
https://mobile.twitter.com/airwaysmagaz ... for-now%2F


Key words in corporate speak; ". . . right now . . . ".
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:37 pm

Babyshark wrote:
TObound wrote:
Babyshark wrote:

Where has Airbus said the 225 is inevitable? Link to it.


It all depends on how reliable you consider Airbus' President of Commercial Aircraft I guess:

"It's very likely that… once the A220 has done the ramp up, is economically viable [and] then we can further invest, that this is going to happen," Airbus president of commercial aircraft Guillaume Faury tells reporters on 16 January. "Once this success is on track, it would be time for looking at what we do for the product.

"We are not there yet," he adds. "We see the very strong potential." Industry observers have suggested such an aircraft would be called the A220-500.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 20-455067/

The wing is already sized for a 225. This is one of the easiest and greatest ROI derivatives that Airbus can do. And it's exactly why they need to announce it substantially in advance. They could EIS in 1-2 years. So Airbus has plenty of time to see what Boeing does and pull this out of their back pocket.


This is from the Paris Air Show in June:

Christian Scherer on A220-500: Every plane wishes to be stretched but we’re not considering it right now. #PAS19

https://mobile.twitter.com/airwaysmagaz ... for-now%2F


"Right now." - That's your clue.

That doesn't at all contradict what Guillaume Faury said above.

The 225 is a nice ace that Airbus has in their backpocket. They'll wait for Boeing to show their cards and then pull it out. Doing so before that would be poor strategy. In the meantime, they quietly build up production capacity, get the costs down by squeezing suppliers and optimizing production and get on with all the PIPs.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:44 pm

Babyshark wrote:
Pilot standardization is enough of a force to drive the 73 program into the ground. It’s a big deal. It can easily be $70,000 in lost productivity pay just to swap one pilot crew from A220 to 320. Not including sims, facilities, Instructor salaries (figure $1500 per lesson in Instructor pay) and all of the synergy lost in having to separately staff and cover trips and overnights as well as IROPS.


If crew standardization was anywhere as much of a concern as you say, groups like IAF, AF/KL and all the large American carriers (UA, DL, AA) would be flying one family per role (only 737 or A320 for narrowbodies, only 787 or A350 for widebodies, etc.). They don't. And that's because when a fleet gets to a certain size, the labour pool for a family/type is large enough that returns from synergy are less than suboptimal airframe deployment or disruptive risks.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:52 pm

SteelChair wrote:
[code][/code]
Babyshark wrote:
SteelChair wrote:

Halfway through your comment, you mention per seat. I'm guessing the block is considerably less. Can you confirm how much less the block is on a percentage basis?


Sure I’ll look it up, but when everything is done by asm it seemed the better comparison.


Thanks. I wonder how the 221 seat mile costs compare to 76 seat RJ seat mile costs?


Dunno about a 76-seat RJ. But here's B6 on the 223 vs. E190:

JetBlue estimates that the A220 will lower operating costs by 29% on a per seat basis, comprising a 40% reduction in fuel costs and 22% decline in non-fuel expenses, when compared with its existing Embraer E190 fleet. On a per aircraft basis, the A220 is expected to drive incremental profit of $4-$5 million.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 20-450121/

I can only imagine how much greater the case for a 221 over an RJ would be.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:05 pm

TObound wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
Pilot standardization is enough of a force to drive the 73 program into the ground. It’s a big deal. It can easily be $70,000 in lost productivity pay just to swap one pilot crew from A220 to 320. Not including sims, facilities, Instructor salaries (figure $1500 per lesson in Instructor pay) and all of the synergy lost in having to separately staff and cover trips and overnights as well as IROPS.


If crew standardization was anywhere as much of a concern as you say, groups like IAF, AF/KL and all the large American carriers (UA, DL, AA) would be flying one family per role (only 737 or A320 for narrowbodies, only 787 or A350 for widebodies, etc.). They don't. And that's because when a fleet gets to a certain size, the labour pool for a family/type is large enough that returns from synergy are less than suboptimal airframe deployment or disruptive risks.


Yes, agree. If pilot standardization were that big a factor, the A319N and 737-7M wouldn't be dying.
 
T4thH
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:17 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 3:10 pm

TObound wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
[code][/code]
Babyshark wrote:

Sure I’ll look it up, but when everything is done by asm it seemed the better comparison.


Thanks. I wonder how the 221 seat mile costs compare to 76 seat RJ seat mile costs?


Dunno about a 76-seat RJ. But here's B6 on the 223 vs. E190:

JetBlue estimates that the A220 will lower operating costs by 29% on a per seat basis, comprising a 40% reduction in fuel costs and 22% decline in non-fuel expenses, when compared with its existing Embraer E190 fleet. On a per aircraft basis, the A220 is expected to drive incremental profit of $4-$5 million.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 20-450121/

I can only imagine how much greater the case for a 221 over an RJ would be.


Just check Wikipedia, than you can identify it by yourself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft
But please remind, as has been shown in the following years (in real live), the real fuel values are around 2% to 3% for the A220-300 and around/or little more than 1% less than estimated. The official papers shall have been already updated by Airbus. Implemented in this listing are the "estimated" values, which are now outdated by the real live.

To compare the values, that you are always verifying:
1. The same range (as bad excample Irkut M21, medium haul, 1750 nmi, all others are 2000 or more than 3000 nmi). The M21 will fly with much less weight.
2. The same seating class (so one or two class seating) and not the total number of PAX.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:33 pm

SteelChair wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
SteelChair wrote:

Agree completely.

I believe the GTF engine totally changed the optimum mission profile of the A320 series, resulting in the "sweet spot" moving to the A321. The A320 is now analogous to the 788 imho, optimized for very long routes that airlines largely don't want to fly. I expect the 321 to continue to grow in popularity vis a vis the 320 going forward.

I see the Airbus product range coalescing around two basic airplanes, one based upon the 73 inch fan GTF, the other based upon the 81 inch GTF.

Pilot/cockpit standardization? Pffft. Who cares? When you are talking about 200-300 airplane fleets those considerations are secondary imho....secondary to the operating characteristics based upon having the right plane in the right market a greater percentage of the time.


Pilot standardization is enough of a force to drive the 73 program into the ground. It’s a big deal. It can easily be $70,000 in lost productivity pay just to swap one pilot crew from A220 to 320. Not including sims, facilities, Instructor salaries (figure $1500 per lesson in Instructor pay) and all of the synergy lost in having to separately staff and cover trips and overnights as well as IROPS.


What are you talking about with regard to your first sentence?


Keeping the 737max with the same type as a 732 is how you get a program with a 1960s overhead panel, the absence of a centralized computer monitoring system, antiquated flight controls and a low riding height above the ground that doesnt allow for GTF engines to be placed normally.

Fixing any of that meant you couldn't have pilots fly classics and NGs or Max's and NGs. So boeing appeased the airlines while trying to compete with the 320N and now they have a disaster on their hands.

Or as we say at work, that's what you get.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:44 pm

TObound wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
TObound wrote:

It all depends on how reliable you consider Airbus' President of Commercial Aircraft I guess:



https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 20-455067/

The wing is already sized for a 225. This is one of the easiest and greatest ROI derivatives that Airbus can do. And it's exactly why they need to announce it substantially in advance. They could EIS in 1-2 years. So Airbus has plenty of time to see what Boeing does and pull this out of their back pocket.


This is from the Paris Air Show in June:

Christian Scherer on A220-500: Every plane wishes to be stretched but we’re not considering it right now. #PAS19

https://mobile.twitter.com/airwaysmagaz ... for-now%2F


"Right now." - That's your clue.

That doesn't at all contradict what Guillaume Faury said above.

The 225 is a nice ace that Airbus has in their backpocket. They'll wait for Boeing to show their cards and then pull it out. Doing so before that would be poor strategy. In the meantime, they quietly build up production capacity, get the costs down by squeezing suppliers and optimizing production and get on with all the PIPs.


The quote you had is rather old compared to one from PAS.

Plus back in January Faury also said there is competition between the two products, but in some cases the A319 still has superiority.

Put 2 and 2 together, A220 is not Airbus and Airbus priority is Airbus not A220. The 225 is not happening.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:50 pm

Babyshark wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
Babyshark wrote:

Pilot standardization is enough of a force to drive the 73 program into the ground. It’s a big deal. It can easily be $70,000 in lost productivity pay just to swap one pilot crew from A220 to 320. Not including sims, facilities, Instructor salaries (figure $1500 per lesson in Instructor pay) and all of the synergy lost in having to separately staff and cover trips and overnights as well as IROPS.


What are you talking about with regard to your first sentence?


Keeping the 737max with the same type as a 732 is how you get a program with a 1960s overhead panel, the absence of a centralized computer monitoring system, antiquated flight controls and a low riding height above the ground that doesnt allow for GTF engines to be placed normally.

Fixing any of that meant you couldn't have pilots fly classics and NGs or Max's and NGs. So boeing appeased the airlines while trying to compete with the 320N and now they have a disaster on their hands.

Or as we say at work, that's what you get.


Thx....wasn't sure what you were referring to.....generally speaking, I agree.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 5:37 pm

Babyshark wrote:
TObound wrote:
Babyshark wrote:

This is from the Paris Air Show in June:

Christian Scherer on A220-500: Every plane wishes to be stretched but we’re not considering it right now. #PAS19

https://mobile.twitter.com/airwaysmagaz ... for-now%2F


"Right now." - That's your clue.

That doesn't at all contradict what Guillaume Faury said above.

The 225 is a nice ace that Airbus has in their backpocket. They'll wait for Boeing to show their cards and then pull it out. Doing so before that would be poor strategy. In the meantime, they quietly build up production capacity, get the costs down by squeezing suppliers and optimizing production and get on with all the PIPs.


The quote you had is rather old compared to one from PAS.

Plus back in January Faury also said there is competition between the two products, but in some cases the A319 still has superiority.

Put 2 and 2 together, A220 is not Airbus and Airbus priority is Airbus not A220. The 225 is not happening.


You seem pretty sure for somebody who has no more or less information than anybody else. I'd say my reading of the tea leaves are as valid as yours or anybody else's. Heck, there were also people on here who said Airbus was buying the program to kill it. Yet the 220 orderbook has doubled in time since the Airbus deal was announced than the whole decade before that. If Airbus didn't see the A220 as an Airbus product and really an Airbus priority as you contend, why are they investing in growing production capacity and doubling the orderbook? Also, it seems to me that if you are trying to sell airplanes, right now, you don't want to tell your customers there's something better around the corner. That might be counter-productive to your sales campaign.

I am basing my assertion not on the current situation, but the 2025/2026 timeframe, when the A220, in all likelihood, will end up as a wholly owned Airbus program. There's a clear path for Airbus here. Build the 225 to replace the low end of the 320N. And replace the 320N and 321N with a stretched and rewinged variants that compete better with the 737 MAX 200 and the low end of the NMA. The market itself is already moving in that direction with 321/320 ratio moving increasingly to favour the 321N. Airbus will develop their product lineup accordingly, imho.

But hey, this is getting off topic. Let's chat in 6 years in the thread about the 225 launch.
Last edited by TObound on Thu Jul 25, 2019 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17934
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 5:40 pm

SteelChair wrote:
seahawk wrote:
And then imagine a new wing for the A320 to go with it. It would move the A320 line to A320 - A321 - A322 and open the space for the A225.


Agree completely.

I believe the GTF engine totally changed the optimum mission profile of the A320 series, resulting in the "sweet spot" moving to the A321. The A320 is now analogous to the 788 imho, optimized for very long routes that airlines largely don't want to fly. I expect the 321 to continue to grow in popularity vis a vis the 320 going forward.

I see the Airbus product range coalescing around two basic airplanes, one based upon the 73 inch fan GTF, the other based upon the 81 inch GTF.

Pilot/cockpit standardization? Pffft. Who cares? When you are talking about 200-300 airplane fleets those considerations are secondary imho....secondary to the operating characteristics based upon having the right plane in the right market a greater percentage of the time.

Engine upgrades always lengthen the optimal size. The 737 is a telling example:
JT8D, optimum 732
Early CFM-56-3, 737-300 (not -500 that was -200 sized)
Later CFM-56-7 737-800 (not -700 which was -300 size)
LEAP-1B is still -8, but I expect the -10 to grow.

The prior A321CEO suffers from the engines needing more frequent overhauls. The PW1100G and I believe the LEAP-1A is optimized for the A321. They are slightly oversized for the A320. The A319 has poor sales for many reasons.

I too see A321 and A220 optimization. If Airbus doesn't do the A220-500, that is silly. The A320 has weight in it for range that most airlines won't use. Weight costs fuel, increases maintenance costs, and ATC fees.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 5:43 pm

Babyshark wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
Babyshark wrote:

Pilot standardization is enough of a force to drive the 73 program into the ground. It’s a big deal. It can easily be $70,000 in lost productivity pay just to swap one pilot crew from A220 to 320. Not including sims, facilities, Instructor salaries (figure $1500 per lesson in Instructor pay) and all of the synergy lost in having to separately staff and cover trips and overnights as well as IROPS.


What are you talking about with regard to your first sentence?


Keeping the 737max with the same type as a 732 is how you get a program with a 1960s overhead panel, the absence of a centralized computer monitoring system, antiquated flight controls and a low riding height above the ground that doesnt allow for GTF engines to be placed normally.

Fixing any of that meant you couldn't have pilots fly classics and NGs or Max's and NGs. So boeing appeased the airlines while trying to compete with the 320N and now they have a disaster on their hands.

Or as we say at work, that's what you get.


This is the perspective of an OEM. Not an airline. AF isn't about to order oversized 320Ns or overweight and low-order 319Ns just because they are concerned about crew standardization. If that was a driver, we would not have even heard about a potential 220 order.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:00 pm

lightsaber wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
seahawk wrote:
And then imagine a new wing for the A320 to go with it. It would move the A320 line to A320 - A321 - A322 and open the space for the A225.


Agree completely.

I believe the GTF engine totally changed the optimum mission profile of the A320 series, resulting in the "sweet spot" moving to the A321. The A320 is now analogous to the 788 imho, optimized for very long routes that airlines largely don't want to fly. I expect the 321 to continue to grow in popularity vis a vis the 320 going forward.

I see the Airbus product range coalescing around two basic airplanes, one based upon the 73 inch fan GTF, the other based upon the 81 inch GTF.

Pilot/cockpit standardization? Pffft. Who cares? When you are talking about 200-300 airplane fleets those considerations are secondary imho....secondary to the operating characteristics based upon having the right plane in the right market a greater percentage of the time.

Engine upgrades always lengthen the optimal size. The 737 is a telling example:
JT8D, optimum 732
Early CFM-56-3, 737-300 (not -500 that was -200 sized)
Later CFM-56-7 737-800 (not -700 which was -300 size)
LEAP-1B is still -8, but I expect the -10 to grow.

The prior A321CEO suffers from the engines needing more frequent overhauls. The PW1100G and I believe the LEAP-1A is optimized for the A321. They are slightly oversized for the A320. The A319 has poor sales for many reasons.

I too see A321 and A220 optimization. If Airbus doesn't do the A220-500, that is silly. The A320 has weight in it for range that most airlines won't use. Weight costs fuel, increases maintenance costs, and ATC fees.

Lightsaber


Excellent post. I agree that they'll pull the trigger at some point. Existing operators alone are probably already asking about the 225. But they can't scope accurately until they know exactly what Boeing is going to do. And keeping the program relatively small is most certainly in their interest, since it will help keep the costs low when they want to buy out the Quebec Government and Bombardier. How much they are investing and squeezing suppliers is really telling of where this is going though.....
 
Babyshark
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:40 pm

TObound wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
TObound wrote:

"Right now." - That's your clue.

That doesn't at all contradict what Guillaume Faury said above.

The 225 is a nice ace that Airbus has in their backpocket. They'll wait for Boeing to show their cards and then pull it out. Doing so before that would be poor strategy. In the meantime, they quietly build up production capacity, get the costs down by squeezing suppliers and optimizing production and get on with all the PIPs.


The quote you had is rather old compared to one from PAS.

Plus back in January Faury also said there is competition between the two products, but in some cases the A319 still has superiority.

Put 2 and 2 together, A220 is not Airbus and Airbus priority is Airbus not A220. The 225 is not happening.


You seem pretty sure for somebody who has no more or less information than anybody else. I'd say my reading of the tea leaves are as valid as yours or anybody else's. Heck, there were also people on here who said Airbus was buying the program to kill it. Yet the 220 orderbook has doubled in time since the Airbus deal was announced than the whole decade before that. If Airbus didn't see the A220 as an Airbus product and really an Airbus priority as you contend, why are they investing in growing production capacity and doubling the orderbook? Also, it seems to me that if you are trying to sell airplanes, right now, you don't want to tell your customers there's something better around the corner. That might be counter-productive to your sales campaign.

I am basing my assertion not on the current situation, but the 2025/2026 timeframe, when the A220, in all likelihood, will end up as a wholly owned Airbus program. There's a clear path for Airbus here. Build the 225 to replace the low end of the 320N. And replace the 320N and 321N with a stretched and rewinged variants that compete better with the 737 MAX 200 and the low end of the NMA. The market itself is already moving in that direction with 321/320 ratio moving increasingly to favour the 321N. Airbus will develop their product lineup accordingly, imho.

But hey, this is getting off topic. Let's chat in 6 years in the thread about the 225 launch.


I feel pretty sure after seeing Airbus says they’re not considering it right now. I also remember when some here thought they’d be announcing the 225 at PAS not saying they’re not considering it right now.

Plus I don’t think the 225 is a priority for Bombardier/Airbus with Bombardier running from commercial aviation, the QC coming out of Mirabel continuing to be a problem for operators, the engines having corrosion issues, conflict with the money making products, and Airbus struggling to meet massive demand for 6,000 Neos that need to get out the door yesterday.

The 2026 time range will probably have Airbus holding onto a plan B In the event Boeing tries to replace the 737. They already have something worked up and if there was something they can take from CS they will I guess. But I remember Boeing merging and taking on the 717, I guess you can say I see it from that perspective. I mean if the CS500 is the most awesome jet that could ever exist then maybe it makes sense Airbus captured it to kill it and protect the A320?

Air France seems to be pulling a Delta and looking at A220s to replace the smaller type jets.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:06 pm

Babyshark wrote:

I feel pretty sure after seeing Airbus says they’re not considering it right now.


You seem to conflate "right now" with "never".

Babyshark wrote:
I also remember when some here thought they’d be announcing the 225 at PAS not saying they’re not considering it right now.


The only people who thought that were over-excited fans who had no clue how much work is left on the prodcution ramp. Even the original Guillaume Faury comment was clear: they would not consider further investment until the ramp was complete and the program was stable and profitable. We're at least 2 years away from that.

Babyshark wrote:
Plus I don’t think the 225 is a priority for Bombardier/Airbus with Bombardier running from commercial aviation, the QC coming out of Mirabel continuing to be a problem for operators, the engines having corrosion issues, conflict with the money making products, and Airbus struggling to meet massive demand for 6,000 Neos that need to get out the door yesterday.


You talk as though Airbus can't walk and chew gum at the same time. I think they are more than capable of managing multiple programs. Indeed, having an 8 year backlog of NEOs actually buys them a ton of flexibility on all their other programs. Boeing would kill to have that kind of backlog and cash flow right now. Moreover, Airbus engineering is actually coming into a period where they don't have a lot of major projects/programs to work on.

Also, Bombardier's departure from commercial aviation should have no bearing on how the program goes forward at all. Airbus being the majority shareholder and having the option to buy out the other partners means they are in the driver seat.

Babyshark wrote:
The 2026 time range will probably have Airbus holding onto a plan B In the event Boeing tries to replace the 737. They already have something worked up and if there was something they can take from CS they will I guess.


Fundamentally, there's no way to have a single aircraft family that spans 100-250 seats. Not without massive compromises that costs you marketshare anyway. They got incredibly lucky getting the CSeries, that Bombardier spent billions developing, for nothing more than future investment in production and marketing.

In the event that Boeing attempts to replace the MAX family, Airbus can launch the 225, 320N+ and 321N+, all within 2-3 years and cover 100-250 seats with competitive aircraft before Boeing has their first NSA or NMA in the air. Heck, I bet they pull the trigger on this once the NMA is announced. They are wrapping up a ton of development programs and engineers are being freed up. They will have room to support this. The just don't want to lock in before they know what Boeing is going to do.

Babyshark wrote:
But I remember Boeing merging and taking on the 717, I guess you can say I see it from that perspective.


You seem to ignore a major contextual different. Airbus is building new FALs for the 220. Boeing killed the 717. The two companies could not be more different in their approach to onboarding a new program they acquired. Also, the 717 offered little to Boeing and required major investment to be competitive. This is not even close to the case with the CSeries. The 220 family will fit in nicely with Airbus and let them upgauge the 320N+ family to be centered around 200-220 seats.

Babyshark wrote:
I mean if the CS500 is the most awesome jet that could ever exist then maybe it makes sense Airbus captured it to kill it and protect the A320?


It would if aviation starts and ends with the current generation of airplanes. But sooner or later, Boeing will have a new family in the 100-180 seat range. And the 320N will not be competitive. See what the 223 did to the 319NEO and 737 MAX 7? That's what the NSA would do to the 320NEO if there was no response from Airbus. This is why I say the 225 is the ace in the back pocket. They can EIS it before Boeing even have a NSA prototype and then compete with the NMA with a stretched and rewinged 320N and 321N.

More broadly, it's better in business for you to cannibalize your own product than your competitor to do so. They own the 220 program. 220 sales make them profit. I highly doubt they want to see customers choose a Boeing product over the 220, just because they minimize it to protect the 320NEO. That would be some truly foolish management.

Babyshark wrote:
Air France seems to be pulling a Delta and looking at A220s to replace the smaller type jets.


No. They aren't. Pulling a Delta would mean using 221s at mainline to replace regional jets at regional carriers (Delta Connection). There's no indication at all that Air France is drawing down Hop! and increasing mainline. As these rumours contend, the 223s are replacing mainline 318s and 319s. This is similar to what Air Canada is planning to do with its 223s, and to a lesser extent JetBlue.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:38 pm

Babyshark wrote:
TObound wrote:
Babyshark wrote:

The quote you had is rather old compared to one from PAS.

Plus back in January Faury also said there is competition between the two products, but in some cases the A319 still has superiority.

Put 2 and 2 together, A220 is not Airbus and Airbus priority is Airbus not A220. The 225 is not happening.


You seem pretty sure for somebody who has no more or less information than anybody else. I'd say my reading of the tea leaves are as valid as yours or anybody else's. Heck, there were also people on here who said Airbus was buying the program to kill it. Yet the 220 orderbook has doubled in time since the Airbus deal was announced than the whole decade before that. If Airbus didn't see the A220 as an Airbus product and really an Airbus priority as you contend, why are they investing in growing production capacity and doubling the orderbook? Also, it seems to me that if you are trying to sell airplanes, right now, you don't want to tell your customers there's something better around the corner. That might be counter-productive to your sales campaign.

I am basing my assertion not on the current situation, but the 2025/2026 timeframe, when the A220, in all likelihood, will end up as a wholly owned Airbus program. There's a clear path for Airbus here. Build the 225 to replace the low end of the 320N. And replace the 320N and 321N with a stretched and rewinged variants that compete better with the 737 MAX 200 and the low end of the NMA. The market itself is already moving in that direction with 321/320 ratio moving increasingly to favour the 321N. Airbus will develop their product lineup accordingly, imho.

But hey, this is getting off topic. Let's chat in 6 years in the thread about the 225 launch.


I feel pretty sure after seeing Airbus says they’re not considering it right now. I also remember when some here thought they’d be announcing the 225 at PAS not saying they’re not considering it right now.

Plus I don’t think the 225 is a priority for Bombardier/Airbus with Bombardier running from commercial aviation, the QC coming out of Mirabel continuing to be a problem for operators, the engines having corrosion issues, conflict with the money making products, and Airbus struggling to meet massive demand for 6,000 Neos that need to get out the door yesterday.

The 2026 time range will probably have Airbus holding onto a plan B In the event Boeing tries to replace the 737. They already have something worked up and if there was something they can take from CS they will I guess. But I remember Boeing merging and taking on the 717, I guess you can say I see it from that perspective. I mean if the CS500 is the most awesome jet that could ever exist then maybe it makes sense Airbus captured it to kill it and protect the A320?

Air France seems to be pulling a Delta and looking at A220s to replace the smaller type jets.


"But I remember Boeing merging and taking on the 717, I guess you can say I see it from that perspective"

According to rumors I heard at the time, Boeng tried very aggressively to sell the 717, going so far as to offer it to least one major airline for less than they were paying for CRJs. But said airline said no, because ALPA/APA wanted exorbitant rates to fly the thing. Twice as many seats for less purchase price....
 
wrongwayup
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:35 pm

Babyshark wrote:
...I remember Boeing merging and taking on the 717, I guess you can say I see it from that perspective...


Keep in mind that Boeing bought MDD primarily for the defense business, and the 717 was an afterthought. In the A220 scenario, Airbus went after the program directly. There is a fundamental strategic difference between the two cases.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:30 pm

SteelChair wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
TObound wrote:

You seem pretty sure for somebody who has no more or less information than anybody else. I'd say my reading of the tea leaves are as valid as yours or anybody else's. Heck, there were also people on here who said Airbus was buying the program to kill it. Yet the 220 orderbook has doubled in time since the Airbus deal was announced than the whole decade before that. If Airbus didn't see the A220 as an Airbus product and really an Airbus priority as you contend, why are they investing in growing production capacity and doubling the orderbook? Also, it seems to me that if you are trying to sell airplanes, right now, you don't want to tell your customers there's something better around the corner. That might be counter-productive to your sales campaign.

I am basing my assertion not on the current situation, but the 2025/2026 timeframe, when the A220, in all likelihood, will end up as a wholly owned Airbus program. There's a clear path for Airbus here. Build the 225 to replace the low end of the 320N. And replace the 320N and 321N with a stretched and rewinged variants that compete better with the 737 MAX 200 and the low end of the NMA. The market itself is already moving in that direction with 321/320 ratio moving increasingly to favour the 321N. Airbus will develop their product lineup accordingly, imho.

But hey, this is getting off topic. Let's chat in 6 years in the thread about the 225 launch.


I feel pretty sure after seeing Airbus says they’re not considering it right now. I also remember when some here thought they’d be announcing the 225 at PAS not saying they’re not considering it right now.

Plus I don’t think the 225 is a priority for Bombardier/Airbus with Bombardier running from commercial aviation, the QC coming out of Mirabel continuing to be a problem for operators, the engines having corrosion issues, conflict with the money making products, and Airbus struggling to meet massive demand for 6,000 Neos that need to get out the door yesterday.

The 2026 time range will probably have Airbus holding onto a plan B In the event Boeing tries to replace the 737. They already have something worked up and if there was something they can take from CS they will I guess. But I remember Boeing merging and taking on the 717, I guess you can say I see it from that perspective. I mean if the CS500 is the most awesome jet that could ever exist then maybe it makes sense Airbus captured it to kill it and protect the A320?

Air France seems to be pulling a Delta and looking at A220s to replace the smaller type jets.


"But I remember Boeing merging and taking on the 717, I guess you can say I see it from that perspective"

According to rumors I heard at the time, Boeng tried very aggressively to sell the 717, going so far as to offer it to least one major airline for less than they were paying for CRJs. But said airline said no, because ALPA/APA wanted exorbitant rates to fly the thing. Twice as many seats for less purchase price....


There's a high likelihood that Delta alone will fly more 220s than the total number of 717s ever produced. The A220 delivered half the total 717 fleet by the end of last month. They will have outdelivered the 717 entirely by Thanksgiving 2020.

The comparisons between the 717 and the 220 are borne of ignorance. Boeing got a warmed over MD, couldn't sell it because they got hit by the rise of the RJs and the 9/11 slump. Airbus got a product that is selling well, is more technologically advanced and has no real competitor in its class.

There's only one way to really compete with the 220: by flanking it with a family from above and below. Not a cheap solution for customers. And Airbus has a solution for that too: the 223/321N combo.

Hoping AF is the next combo customer.

As an aside, sort of ironic that Boeing bought the EJets program and is running up against the same sort of labour issues as the 717, with scope clauses.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 12:16 am

TObound wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
Babyshark wrote:

I feel pretty sure after seeing Airbus says they’re not considering it right now. I also remember when some here thought they’d be announcing the 225 at PAS not saying they’re not considering it right now.

Plus I don’t think the 225 is a priority for Bombardier/Airbus with Bombardier running from commercial aviation, the QC coming out of Mirabel continuing to be a problem for operators, the engines having corrosion issues, conflict with the money making products, and Airbus struggling to meet massive demand for 6,000 Neos that need to get out the door yesterday.

The 2026 time range will probably have Airbus holding onto a plan B In the event Boeing tries to replace the 737. They already have something worked up and if there was something they can take from CS they will I guess. But I remember Boeing merging and taking on the 717, I guess you can say I see it from that perspective. I mean if the CS500 is the most awesome jet that could ever exist then maybe it makes sense Airbus captured it to kill it and protect the A320?

Air France seems to be pulling a Delta and looking at A220s to replace the smaller type jets.


"But I remember Boeing merging and taking on the 717, I guess you can say I see it from that perspective"

According to rumors I heard at the time, Boeng tried very aggressively to sell the 717, going so far as to offer it to least one major airline for less than they were paying for CRJs. But said airline said no, because ALPA/APA wanted exorbitant rates to fly the thing. Twice as many seats for less purchase price....


There's a high likelihood that Delta alone will fly more 220s than the total number of 717s ever produced. The A220 delivered half the total 717 fleet by the end of last month. They will have outdelivered the 717 entirely by Thanksgiving 2020.

The comparisons between the 717 and the 220 are borne of ignorance. Boeing got a warmed over MD, couldn't sell it because they got hit by the rise of the RJs and the 9/11 slump. Airbus got a product that is selling well, is more technologically advanced and has no real competitor in its class.

There's only one way to really compete with the 220: by flanking it with a family from above and below. Not a cheap solution for customers. And Airbus has a solution for that too: the 223/321N combo.

Hoping AF is the next combo customer.

As an aside, sort of ironic that Boeing bought the EJets program and is running up against the same sort of labour issues as the 717, with scope clauses.


Well yeah, but its a different bunch of d¥mba$$e$ running Boeing now.

Agree.....the 220 is an all new design with all new systems while the 717 was a rehashed DC9. (Interestingly the 220 is quite a bit heavier than the 717). And the engines: the GTF should get better, its first gen, while the 717 has a consortia engine with minimal installed base at airlines and only marginally better fuel burn than what it was replacing.

The main similarity is the 5 abreast width.

Think about that "combo" vis a vis Boeing. Boeing has 4 abreast E jet and a frozen production line Max. Airbus has the 5 abreast 220 family and the outstanding 321 that is 4 inches wider than the Max and is tall enough on the gear to accept the GTF engine.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21228
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 12:29 am

TObound wrote:
The only people who thought that were over-excited fans who had no clue how much work is left on the prodcution ramp. Even the original Guillaume Faury comment was clear: they would not consider further investment until the ramp was complete and the program was stable and profitable. We're at least 2 years away from that.

I agree, this is the right context to evaluate future opportunities, one that many posters here ignore.

I also agree with the comments saying Airbus has the financial and engineering resources to make pretty much any needed improvements, but doing so changes the point at which the program becomes profitable.

TObound wrote:
They own the 220 program. 220 sales make them profit. I highly doubt they want to see customers choose a Boeing product over the 220, just because they minimize it to protect the 320NEO. That would be some truly foolish management.

They own 50.01% of the program and deliveries today are not profitable. Also, any gains the program makes will increase the fair market price that Airbus has to pay to buy out BBD/QC when the time comes. It's a bit of a balancing act, IMO.

In viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1413243&start=50#p21026193 I referred to an AvWeek article that gave a lot of interesting context. The A220 has a promising future for its market, but the stated goal was only be at 10/month in ~2025 so in rough terms it'll take another six years or so to get to the point where one A220 rolls out of the factory for every six A320s.
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
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:28 am

Revelation wrote:

They own 50.01% of the program and deliveries today are not profitable. Also, any gains the program makes will increase the fair market price that Airbus has to pay to buy out BBD/QC when the time comes. It's a bit of a balancing act, IMO.


I made the exact same point earlier. Investing before 2026, only means paying more to buy out BBD and IQ. Which is why I said I don't think this will happen soon. Unless, there's some shift in the competitive landscape (Boeing NMA or NSA launch), I don't anticipate Airbus pulling the trigger before 2026. Instead, the focus on a slow but steady ramp, PIPs (which facilitate the 225 too) and sorting out the supply chain. This housekeeping is essential to stabilizing the program and bringing it to profit. Where I took exception is the idea that it will never happen.

I agree that it's a balancing act. But I also think people are looking at this wrong. A 225 competes with the 320N in specific ways. A 225 won't have the range, the containerized cargo handling, crew and spares commonality. So it's not a 1:1 switch. Also, there's this idea that a 225 sale will steal from the 320N program. A bizarre assertion when Airbus controls pricing and production rates for both. I see an opportunity to boost yield/margins by freeing up some slots to sell higher value 321 variants, while stealing marketshare from Boeing. People forget that we've gone from CSeries sales competing with Airbus to every 220 sale cutting a cheque to Airbus while costing Boeing a sale.


Revelation wrote:

In viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1413243&start=50#p21026193 I referred to an AvWeek article that gave a lot of interesting context. The A220 has a promising future for its market, but the stated goal was only be at 10/month in ~2025 so in rough terms it'll take another six years or so to get to the point where one A220 rolls out of the factory for every six A320s.


Lines up just right to take over from the other partners and ramp up investment.

This will be my last post on this topic. Don't want to take too much from discussing a potential AF order. And I'm just really excited to see another 223/321N combo. I hope I'm close on my theory.
Last edited by TObound on Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
T4thH
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 11:17 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:36 am

Revelation wrote:
TObound wrote:
The only people who thought that were over-excited fans who had no clue how much work is left on the prodcution ramp. Even the original Guillaume Faury comment was clear: they would not consider further investment until the ramp was complete and the program was stable and profitable. We're at least 2 years away from that.

I agree, this is the right context to evaluate future opportunities, one that many posters here ignore.

I also agree with the comments saying Airbus has the financial and engineering resources to make pretty much any needed improvements, but doing so changes the point at which the program becomes profitable.

TObound wrote:
They own the 220 program. 220 sales make them profit. I highly doubt they want to see customers choose a Boeing product over the 220, just because they minimize it to protect the 320NEO. That would be some truly foolish management.

They own 50.01% of the program and deliveries today are not profitable. Also, any gains the program makes will increase the fair market price that Airbus has to pay to buy out BBD/QC when the time comes. It's a bit of a balancing act, IMO.

In viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1413243&start=50#p21026193 I referred to an AvWeek article that gave a lot of interesting context. The A220 has a promising future for its market, but the stated goal was only be at 10/month in ~2025 so in rough terms it'll take another six years or so to get to the point where one A220 rolls out of the factory for every six A320s.


It will be 14 per month through the whole year 2025. They will reach the 14 per month already in 2024. These were four for the Mobile FAL and 10 for the Mirabel/Montreal FAL (and this is also the maximum capacity (or near to the maximum) of both together). The narrow-body production year by Airbus (for other locations) is regular little more than 11 month (around 11.5) while it seems to be 10 and little more for the wide-bodies. So for 2025 a total production of around 155 to160 A220 jets is expected and as said, this will also be the maximum expected capacity of these two A220 FALs. If the capacity shall be further raised, either additional production facilities/FALs have to be build or the existing (especially the FAL in Mobile) strongly further upgraded/rebuild to a FAL with a 10/month capacity. The 10/month production lines seems to be the standard FAL capacity for the A320 family in Hamburg and Toulouse, around 4 for this one in Mobile. So we can expect a 10/month as maximum capacity for a narrow-body FAL?
Airbus is trying to expand the whole area size in Montreal/Mirabel connected to the existing area. It seems, they have asked for something around 800% of the whole existing Bombardier/Airbus area in Montreal/Mirabel, they want to buy additional. Just remind,
Airbus has not just bought the whole A220 program for 1$; it seems to be more correct to say, Canada has bought in into the Airbus family of Airbus producing countries for just 1$. Airbus is committed by contract to stay in Montreal for decades.
Airbus bought (or is still buying now) so much land, we can expect more than only production facilities for the A220 family, I will not be surprised to see the announcement for another FAL for something else (not A220). We will see/know more in few years.

During first part of the ramp up of the production, no one can expect, they will be profitable, no bird in the world would be, especially as Airbus has to invest high amount of money in Mobile and to upgrade and get rid of all of the several bottlenecks at Mirabel FAL.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:23 am

Anybody knowledgeable on the union situation and scope at AF?

The Hop! fleet looks like a mess to me. I don't get why 221s can't be ordered to standardize on one type, with the benefit of commonality for those transitioning to mainline
 
User avatar
LaunchDetected
Posts: 248
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:42 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:26 am

TObound wrote:
Anybody knowledgeable on the union situation and scope at AF?

The Hop! fleet looks like a mess to me. I don't get why 221s can't be ordered to standardize on one type, with the benefit of commonality for those transitioning to mainline


According to a news from 10th July, they are still in negociations to integrate (or not) Hop! into the mainline.
https://www.lesechos.fr/industrie-services/tourisme-transport/air-france-le-risque-de-greve-chez-hop-cet-ete-semble-ecarte-1037101

Hop fleet will decrease to 51 aircraft between 2018 and 2021.

A Hop! ERJ-190STD was painted with an easily removable Hop! logo on the side, i'm sure we will know more about the situation after the meeting in few days.

Last edited by LaunchDetected on Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Caravelle lover
 
sciing
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:29 am

lightsaber wrote:
I too see A321 and A220 optimization. If Airbus doesn't do the A220-500, that is silly. The A320 has weight in it for range that most airlines won't use. Weight costs fuel, increases maintenance costs, and ATC fees.

How large would be the empty weight difference between an A220-500 and A320neo?
At the moment the difference to the -300 is acc. Wikipedia just 7t. So with the additional weight of a stretch it seems that difference could not be larger than 2-3t.
This not zero but your statement implies for me a much bigger difference.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21228
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 12:01 pm

TObound wrote:
Lines up just right to take over from the other partners and ramp up investment.

This will be my last post on this topic. Don't want to take too much from discussing a potential AF order. And I'm just really excited to see another 223/321N combo. I hope I'm close on my theory.

Thanks for your very balanced post. The product indeed offers great rewards over time, but there's still a bunch of challenges to come, and the ramp up as we know it is not what some here imagine it to be.

T4thH wrote:
It will be 14 per month through the whole year 2025. They will reach the 14 per month already in 2024. These were four for the Mobile FAL and 10 for the Mirabel/Montreal FAL (and this is also the maximum capacity (or near to the maximum) of both together). The narrow-body production year by Airbus (for other locations) is regular little more than 11 month (around 11.5) while it seems to be 10 and little more for the wide-bodies. So for 2025 a total production of around 155 to160 A220 jets is expected and as said, this will also be the maximum expected capacity of these two A220 FALs. If the capacity shall be further raised, either additional production facilities/FALs have to be build or the existing (especially the FAL in Mobile) strongly further upgraded/rebuild to a FAL with a 10/month capacity. The 10/month production lines seems to be the standard FAL capacity for the A320 family in Hamburg and Toulouse, around 4 for this one in Mobile. So we can expect a 10/month as maximum capacity for a narrow-body FAL?
Airbus is trying to expand the whole area size in Montreal/Mirabel connected to the existing area. It seems, they have asked for something around 800% of the whole existing Bombardier/Airbus area in Montreal/Mirabel, they want to buy additional. Just remind,
Airbus has not just bought the whole A220 program for 1$; it seems to be more correct to say, Canada has bought in into the Airbus family of Airbus producing countries for just 1$. Airbus is committed by contract to stay in Montreal for decades.
Airbus bought (or is still buying now) so much land, we can expect more than only production facilities for the A220 family, I will not be surprised to see the announcement for another FAL for something else (not A220). We will see/know more in few years.

During first part of the ramp up of the production, no one can expect, they will be profitable, no bird in the world would be, especially as Airbus has to invest high amount of money in Mobile and to upgrade and get rid of all of the several bottlenecks at Mirabel FAL.

Also thank you for the detailed and inteteresting post.

The point I'm trying to make is that what we know of the program is not sized to replace a large slice of the A320 production, and so will not have the same economy of scale.

Above I gave the number six A320s to every A220 produced through 2025 but that was based on old information. Your new information projects A220 production being 14/month by 2024. Yet Airbus has announced rate 63 for A320 in 2021 ( ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 63-455775/ ) and is studying rate 70 when the engine manufacturers are ready ( https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ak-455103/ ).

So it seems the earlier 6/1 ratio is high, but 70/14 is 5/1 and if you look at the FALs we see A320 has 8 (2*TLS, 4*XFW, TJN, BFM) and using your post I think we'd say A220 has 1.4 so again the scale is along the lines of 5/1.

Regardless of the exact number, I think it's pretty clear that the A320 will be the dominant family member through 2025 unless things change in a way we cannot predict.

Given the large amount of momentum the A320 family has with both the vendor and its customer and its huge economy of scale, it's not going to be as easy for A220 to take over the low end of the family that some on this site keep projecting, at least not any time soon.

What A220 is doing is impressive but it is not being built out to take over a large slice of A320 production, at least not through 2025 or so, where as TObound points out is where the call/put options for the program and its other owners BBD/IQ kick in.

I feel that the program is in "wait and see" mode till the ownership issue settles out, because the program's success just increases the cost for Airbus to buy out their partners.

In the mean time there are challenges. All the early orders including DLs are not the typical launch orders we'd see from a mature vendor, but they're orders made when the C Series itself and its parent BBD were under great duress. DL is well known as a sharp negotiator and had all the cards in its hand. Multiplying your footprint by a factor of 8 is expensive and logistically challenging. Having major elements being made in China is challenging. The pending sale of Shorts Belfast is challenging.

Many challenges but also a nice market niche to pursue and a resourceful team to pursue them.

Hopefully it will all turn out well, but we can't ignore the challenges.

And hopefully AF will keep the planes clean! :biggrin:
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
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 12:14 pm

If AF pulls the trigger on the A220, they will be the first large blue chip network carrier, after the Airbus take over of the CSeries. And they aren't likely to get DL or B6 or LH pricing. It'll be the first "honest" order if you will. Huge for the program. And good for AF. They'll be buying from a much more stable program and years from now after several PIPs.

Likewise, the E2 could really steal the show here. I wonder how badly Boeing wants this order.
 
TObound
Posts: 311
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: AF to order A220, replace A380 with 787 or A350?

Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:25 pm

LaunchDetected wrote:
TObound wrote:
Anybody knowledgeable on the union situation and scope at AF?

The Hop! fleet looks like a mess to me. I don't get why 221s can't be ordered to standardize on one type, with the benefit of commonality for those transitioning to mainline


According to a news from 10th July, they are still in negociations to integrate (or not) Hop! into the mainline.
https://www.lesechos.fr/industrie-services/tourisme-transport/air-france-le-risque-de-greve-chez-hop-cet-ete-semble-ecarte-1037101

Hop fleet will decrease to 51 aircraft between 2018 and 2021.

A Hop! ERJ-190STD was painted with an easily removable Hop! logo on the side, i'm sure we will know more about the situation after the meeting in few days.



It's interesting that HOP! has a 110 seat limit and is not integrated like Cityhopper. To my amateur eyes, Hop looks like it could really use some fleet rationalization and even the 30% cut to drop them to 51 aircraft won't do much. I assume they will cut the ERJ145 and some CR7s. They are flying 7 types across 4 families with 72 airplanes. Nuts!

I would think they would be better off getting rid of the 100 seaters and replacing those with 220s or E2-195s at mainline and then the 70/76 seaters with turboprops.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 12

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