User avatar
JetBuddy
Topic Author
Posts: 2225
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:37 pm

Airbus is launching an A220-300LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower. I've just seen his tweets, but I don't have access to his website the Air Current.

- He's talking about increased fuel capacity, not only thrust bump.

- Possibly ACT.

- Beyond 4000 nm range.

- Neeleman also said the A220XLR could enabling connections between Florida to South America, transatlantic from east coast or Hawaii from midwestern. (Thanks queb)

"Neeleman’s Moxy will be launch operator for A220XLR. Yes, you read that right."

https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/ ... 00096?s=20

Official word from Airbus on the new (previously undisclosed) A220-300 LR: “We are always working with our customers listening to their fleet needs. We don’t comment on the our confidential discussions”

https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/ ... 67104?s=20

Maybe someone with access to the Air Current could get some more information.

https://theaircurrent.com/airlines/neel ... ul-e-jets/
Last edited by JetBuddy on Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
tphuang
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:38 pm

I wonder if they can get extra range on A220-100 out of LCY. That would certainly be attractive.
 
queb
Posts: 1016
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:10 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:50 pm

I have access to The Air Current:

Citing Neeleman, Ostrower talk about a A220-300 with range beyond 4000 nm featuring an auxiliary fuel tank. Neeleman also said 20 of 60 A220's will have the option.
 
queb
Posts: 1016
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:10 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:53 pm

Neeleman also said the A220XLR could enabling connections between Florida to South America, transatlantic from east coast or Hawaii from midwestern.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Topic Author
Posts: 2225
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:55 pm

Thanks for updates, queb. Will add to the initial post. Please continue contributing info if you have any.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3903
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:04 pm

I'm loving this innovation. Presumably the airframe would be extra attractive as an ACJ now (once Airbus buys out bombardier and Quebec and decides to offer one).
First to fly the 787-9
 
AirFiero
Posts: 1358
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:08 pm

Sounds like an Airbus smaller version 350 or 787 type for thinner routes?
 
airzona11
Posts: 1541
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:40 pm

Those are going to have to be on premium routes.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 6837
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:53 pm

Where would the extra tank go? Cargo hold? Tail? Elevators? Its not like a widebody where you have cavernous room.

Disclaimer: I am very excited for this news and I love the A220. I am genuinely curious how this mod will work.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
queb
Posts: 1016
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:10 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:55 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
Where would the extra tank go? Cargo hold? Tail? Elevators? Its not like a widebody where you have cavernous room.

Disclaimer: I am very excited for this news and I love the A220. I am genuinely curious how this mod will work.


it's not specified.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13186
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:57 pm

airzona11 wrote:
Those are going to have to be on premium routes.


Correct. The number of passengers & utilization to spread out fixed & variable costs is lower, boosting CASM. For Moxy it increases operational flexibility. I don't think airbus would invest in a MTOW bump for range only. The expected payload for range "-500" would require it anyway.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 656
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:13 pm

Interesting development. I love the A 220 family. If this is true an obvious choice for LCY-JFK. The field performance with the increased MTOW will be critical.

I agree a premium heavy configuration will work best. Connecting major TATL business centers from close in airports to attract those premium flyers. Long thin routes TATL i am a little dubious.
707 717 727 72S 737 733 737-700 747 757 753 767-300 764 A319 A320 DC-9-10 DC-9-30 DC-9-50, MD-82 MD-88 MD-90 DC-10-10 DC-10-40 F-100
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Topic Author
Posts: 2225
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:14 pm

Above 4000 nm range probably means at least matching the A321XLR on range.

However, it likely means premium 2-class configuration. In single class config, the A220-300 holds about 130-140 standard economy seats. Although it's certified for 160 seats in sardine can configuration.

So how many seats in an A220-300LR with a First Class / Business cabin up front? 100-115 total? That's around 60-70% of a similarly configured A321XLR.

On the other hand, it could probably be configured with 140-150 slim economy seats and still fly 3500 nm. Not that I'd want to be on that flight.

Either way, it seems like a very niche product. This is probably something that's only worth doing if the R&D and building costs are very low. So I'm guessing ACT like the A321LR and not fully integrated tanks like the A321XLR.
 
Prost
Posts: 2459
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:24 pm

Airbus has talked a lot about reducing their costs when building planes. Do these sub-types on the A220, A320-Neo/LR/XLR and A350 sub-types hinder these efforts?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18163
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:27 pm

keesje wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
Those are going to have to be on premium routes.


Correct. The number of passengers & utilization to spread out fixed & variable costs is lower, boosting CASM. For Moxy it increases operational flexibility. I don't think airbus would invest in a MTOW bump for range only. The expected payload for range "-500" would require it anyway.

Single isle costs are much lower than widebody costs. While this won't be able to compete ULCC long haul, it will be competitive costs with any J/Y+/Y widebody.

It does lay 90% of the groundwork for the -500.

I do not understand the or in the title. Airbus will figure out a long range version, the marketing matters not.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17502
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:29 pm

And some "experts" here questioned the value or reason for a higher MTOW for the A220. :lol:
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6900
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:39 pm

Prost wrote:
Airbus has talked a lot about reducing their costs when building planes. Do these sub-types on the A220, A320-Neo/LR/XLR and A350 sub-types hinder these efforts?


Typically Airbus seem to work to make the features that allow the upgrades to become standard across the range - e.g. the cabinflex A321's all have the 97t MTOW capability of the A321LR.

See the current thread on A32X standardisation

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1431147

Rgds
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Topic Author
Posts: 2225
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 4:53 pm

lightsaber wrote:
I do not understand the or in the title. Airbus will figure out a long range version, the marketing matters not.

Lightsaber


It's because Jon Ostrower mentioned both LR and XLR in his tweets. And that's all the info I had. Feel free to change it to whatever you think is reasonable. :)
 
SQ317
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2018 2:16 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:02 pm

It makes sense, I remember in the thread when the MTOW bump got announced a few months back that the A220 was now fuel capacity limited?
 
Reddevil556
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:09 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:15 pm

I can see this as the impetus to launch a corporate A220. It could be a marketing strategy to initially test the market for interest in a LR/XLR variant and then modify that frame for a bizz jet model. Just a hunch. An ACJ220XLR would be neat and probably render the ACJ319 obsolete.
Jumped out of: C130H, C130J, C17A, C212, CH47, and UH60. Bucket list: C160, A400, C2
 
airzona11
Posts: 1541
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:18 pm

lightsaber wrote:
keesje wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
Those are going to have to be on premium routes.


Correct. The number of passengers & utilization to spread out fixed & variable costs is lower, boosting CASM. For Moxy it increases operational flexibility. I don't think airbus would invest in a MTOW bump for range only. The expected payload for range "-500" would require it anyway.

Single isle costs are much lower than widebody costs. While this won't be able to compete ULCC long haul, it will be competitive costs with any J/Y+/Y widebody.

It does lay 90% of the groundwork for the -500.

I do not understand the or in the title. Airbus will figure out a long range version, the marketing matters not.

Lightsaber


Assuming this config would be more of a Y+(domestic F class) and Y. With JVs on one side or the other of the Atlantic for example, I am not sure how many city pairs we will see flown. Event A321 sized numbers will be limited. Maybe some routes with premium demand to South America. Hawaii has so much 1-stop price competition, with hubs you have to fly over, I cannot see a lot of traffic there.

I think the groundwork for -500 is where this will have biggest impact.
 
inkjet7
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:32 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:26 pm

Prost wrote:
Airbus has talked a lot about reducing their costs when building planes. Do these sub-types on the A220, A320-Neo/LR/XLR and A350 sub-types hinder these efforts?


Car makers can do many variations on a single production line. Maybe Airbus found a way to easily do variations.
 
Leslieville
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 6:34 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:44 pm

Interesting news. With Airbus' penchant for incremental range increases (LR, XLR), it's not terribly surprising that they would eek out new official range options for the A220, especially when the aircraft is performing above its initial specs. Couple PIPs, and a modest auxiliary tank and you've got yourself a marketable sub-variant.

What will be interesting to me will be the new route proving that the A220LR/XLRs could open up. Long-thin route proving is part of the A220 brand promise and this just extends that further. And as for long-distance travel in single aisle aircraft, I honestly don't think its going to be anything but positive for A220 passengers. The seats are already wider than wide-bodies, one gets the same improved humidity benefits of a composite air frame as one gets on the 787 and A350, and the overhead bins will easily take the higher proportion of roll-on bags found on long-distance and international travel vs short hops. Plus, people are more likely to check luggage on international travel than domestic since most sane airlines still include a checked bag for those routes.
 
wrongwayup
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:49 pm

LR if launched as such will be a moniker for an increased MTOW version that will use margin reduction in the existing structure but will otherwise be the same as current A220-300s. XLR if launched will be fitted with ACT(s) for extra fuel volume but likely not additional weight carrying capacity meaning that it will add range only at lower payload levels (i.e. dual class).
 
ewt340
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:01 pm

Huh? While I do understand why they would want to do it. I'm surprised they didn't do it on A320neo first.

But maybe the higher MTOW variants could paved ways for stretched version in the future.
 
Vladex
Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 2:44 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:05 pm

Why not just wait for reengine in 2025 which should be substantial?
 
ewt340
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:15 pm

Vladex wrote:
Why not just wait for reengine in 2025 which should be substantial?


A bit too far away. They probably need to do it now to get more orders.

Who knows, by 2025. Airbus might have other bigger plans like A320neo and A321neo replacements?

Surely with A330neo and A350 program comes closer to completions, and A380 closure They have some free time to focus on A220.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2340
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:17 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
Where would the extra tank go? Cargo hold? Tail? Elevators? Its not like a widebody where you have cavernous room.


It will be within cargo hold - within the empennage is not a practical option.


Now I suppose there is a question of where in the cargo hold.

Do they go like Airbus tried with the A318 Elite and put the tanks at the aft of the rear bay, where it narrows down?
Pros:
- Better bit of cargo bay is left alone for baggage - easier ground handling
Cons:
- Aircraft balance changes a good bit during flight - so to avoid excessive trim drag you are always running on the rear loading margin.
- Further to route piping from ACT to main system, more complex install.

Or do they go with the more conventional ACT(s) placed immediately around the wingbox?
Pros & Cons are opposite of above.


From my own personal experience, Elite was a bit of a disaster, but not entirely due to the fuel system. If it were me, I'd put the ACTs around the wingbox.
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:20 pm

The question is now why use a NMA or B787/A330 when you can offer more frequencies and the same CASM with an A223?
I think that this also opens up a lot of thinner US transcon point to point routes.
To take the example of Ohio, second tier airports like CVG, CLE, CMH, CAK that were previously served by RJ's to the main hubs can now also be transformed (back) into mini hubs while third tier airports like TOL and DAY can see more services from the big hubs.

Many long thin routes that didn't previously make sense or that are out of range for RJ's or mainline jets now start making sense.
 
global1
Posts: 468
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2014 5:31 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:28 pm

Might there be a role for this aircraft at Delta?
Low season Boston-Europe?
Dtw-Düsseldorf, etc
 
raylee67
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:35 pm

Wasn't there a 8000km-capable A319LR? This would be the replacement if it's real.

Boeing has a 737-700ER too.
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 359/51 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
h1fl1er
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:58 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:39 pm

this plane will become a factor pretty quickly with that level of performance. any idea on what the payload is at those ranges?

the trend toward more capability in smaller aircraft continues unabated.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3257
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:40 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
Where would the extra tank go? Cargo hold? Tail? Elevators? Its not like a widebody where you have cavernous room.

Disclaimer: I am very excited for this news and I love the A220. I am genuinely curious how this mod will work.


the A220-300 has 150 cu. ft more cargo volume than the similar capacity 737-700. turn that area into a OEM fuel tank Ala A321XLR and you get quite a bit of extra fuel there. Lower seating could reduce cargo needs to allow more fuel. Mind you with the frames current range & fuel burn that alone could come close to the 4000nm range. Get the PW1100G to cope with rapid turn around in high heat/high humidity and Hawaiian would be very happy.
 
User avatar
Faro
Posts: 1933
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:08 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 7:23 pm

Fantastic development!...this may be the launch of the micro-long-haul market..

Only worry is the engine...will the PW1500G be able to take the thrust bump without developing any new untoward side-effects?...I understand it’s quite a different beast from the PW1100G...


Faro
The chalice not my son
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18163
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 8:28 pm

airzona11 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
keesje wrote:

Correct. The number of passengers & utilization to spread out fixed & variable costs is lower, boosting CASM. For Moxy it increases operational flexibility. I don't think airbus would invest in a MTOW bump for range only. The expected payload for range "-500" would require it anyway.

Single isle costs are much lower than widebody costs. While this won't be able to compete ULCC long haul, it will be competitive costs with any J/Y+/Y widebody.

It does lay 90% of the groundwork for the -500.

I do not understand the or in the title. Airbus will figure out a long range version, the marketing matters not.

Lightsaber


Assuming this config would be more of a Y+(domestic F class) and Y. With JVs on one side or the other of the Atlantic for example, I am not sure how many city pairs we will see flown. Event A321 sized numbers will be limited. Maybe some routes with premium demand to South America. Hawaii has so much 1-stop price competition, with hubs you have to fly over, I cannot see a lot of traffic there.

I think the groundwork for -500 is where this will have biggest impact.

This is to bypass the JVs. Ironically, their boosting of fares creates an opportunity for Moxie and JetBlue. The A223xLR will open up say South America to the USA. Mid size cities of the EU to BOS or IAD. DUB becomes a much more viable TATL hub (with the 2nd runway too).

As an analogy, when JetBlue started a.net lit up on how people wanted to fly a widebody TCON or to Hawaii. I heard every reason why narrowbody 5 hour flights would fail. Now all I take is narrowbody flights for these length of missions. I fly LAX to BDL/TPA or LGB so far to every TCON destination offered.

Why wouldn't I visit my brother in Boston and continue in to Europe? I usually fly to secondary cities as few primary cities are manufacturing. So why not skip the impacted hub?

In Asia hub bypass took NRT from a Superfortress with incredibly valuable slots to where airlines are moving their partner hubs deep into Asia. That will happen with the EU3 unless they adapt. The A223xLR provides such economical connections that if I must hub, I'm ok hubbing in BOS with JetBlue. I'm sure UA at IAD and EWR will grow, displace RJ slots as required. AA at PHL and CLT have plenty of room.

IAG at DUB. Hey, maybe a Scottish hub? :hyper:
I'm of Scottish/German decent. I'm not finding the obvious AF/KL or LH group hub, but there will be one.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18163
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 9:15 pm

Vladex wrote:
Why not just wait for reengine in 2025 which should be substantial?

New engine design costs billions. In general, at least a new wing to help sell the plane

The NEO happened because Pratt needed a high volume launch platform. In general, one produces an engine for 15 years for the business case.

Engine vendors demand a 15 year lock to protect investment. Why not just replace the aircraft? The development cost and supply chain impact is about equal.

PiPs are happening. CMCs will be introduced.

And not 2025. It takes 8 to ten years to develop a new engine. The A330NEO took years to implement a nearly complete engine.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
airzona11
Posts: 1541
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 9:33 pm

lightsaber wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
Single isle costs are much lower than widebody costs. While this won't be able to compete ULCC long haul, it will be competitive costs with any J/Y+/Y widebody.

It does lay 90% of the groundwork for the -500.

I do not understand the or in the title. Airbus will figure out a long range version, the marketing matters not.

Lightsaber


Assuming this config would be more of a Y+(domestic F class) and Y. With JVs on one side or the other of the Atlantic for example, I am not sure how many city pairs we will see flown. Event A321 sized numbers will be limited. Maybe some routes with premium demand to South America. Hawaii has so much 1-stop price competition, with hubs you have to fly over, I cannot see a lot of traffic there.

I think the groundwork for -500 is where this will have biggest impact.

This is to bypass the JVs. Ironically, their boosting of fares creates an opportunity for Moxie and JetBlue. The A223xLR will open up say South America to the USA. Mid size cities of the EU to BOS or IAD. DUB becomes a much more viable TATL hub (with the 2nd runway too).

As an analogy, when JetBlue started a.net lit up on how people wanted to fly a widebody TCON or to Hawaii. I heard every reason why narrowbody 5 hour flights would fail. Now all I take is narrowbody flights for these length of missions. I fly LAX to BDL/TPA or LGB so far to every TCON destination offered.

Why wouldn't I visit my brother in Boston and continue in to Europe? I usually fly to secondary cities as few primary cities are manufacturing. So why not skip the impacted hub?

In Asia hub bypass took NRT from a Superfortress with incredibly valuable slots to where airlines are moving their partner hubs deep into Asia. That will happen with the EU3 unless they adapt. The A223xLR provides such economical connections that if I must hub, I'm ok hubbing in BOS with JetBlue. I'm sure UA at IAD and EWR will grow, displace RJ slots as required. AA at PHL and CLT have plenty of room.

IAG at DUB. Hey, maybe a Scottish hub? :hyper:
I'm of Scottish/German decent. I'm not finding the obvious AF/KL or LH group hub, but there will be one.

Lightsaber


Great points and analogies.

My biggest point of skepticism is that the A220 as it stands today, doesn't seat a lot of passengers (no CASM help) and on these mid-range routes, thanks to the likes of JetBlue MINT, lie flats are offered up front. Therefore the routes of the LR are going to have to have high paying customers to make them work. Smallest transcon birds today are A320s/738s, which are all being upgauged to A321s/739s.

That being said... LAX/SFO/ORD/JFK/EWR/BOS/IAD etc are all surrounded by smaller airports but very close to large populations, so there is prime real estate and market opportunity!
 
DominoxX
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 6:52 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:12 pm

Now I'm dreaming of MIA-IQQ/ANF/CJC/CUZ/MIA/IGU, JFK-ABZ/LIL/LUX
Thank u, next.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 5894
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:22 pm

Waterbomber2 wrote:
The question is now why use a NMA or B787/A330 when you can offer more frequencies and the same CASM with an A223?


Why? Pilot count should be at the top of everybody's list. You don't want to have 18,000 pilots doing the work (ASMs) of 14,000 today. Slots, where restricted by allocation or buy/market factors.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18163
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:39 pm

airzona11 wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
airzona11 wrote:

Assuming this config would be more of a Y+(domestic F class) and Y. With JVs on one side or the other of the Atlantic for example, I am not sure how many city pairs we will see flown. Event A321 sized numbers will be limited. Maybe some routes with premium demand to South America. Hawaii has so much 1-stop price competition, with hubs you have to fly over, I cannot see a lot of traffic there.

I think the groundwork for -500 is where this will have biggest impact.

This is to bypass the JVs. Ironically, their boosting of fares creates an opportunity for Moxie and JetBlue. The A223xLR will open up say South America to the USA. Mid size cities of the EU to BOS or IAD. DUB becomes a much more viable TATL hub (with the 2nd runway too).

As an analogy, when JetBlue started a.net lit up on how people wanted to fly a widebody TCON or to Hawaii. I heard every reason why narrowbody 5 hour flights would fail. Now all I take is narrowbody flights for these length of missions. I fly LAX to BDL/TPA or LGB so far to every TCON destination offered.

Why wouldn't I visit my brother in Boston and continue in to Europe? I usually fly to secondary cities as few primary cities are manufacturing. So why not skip the impacted hub?

In Asia hub bypass took NRT from a Superfortress with incredibly valuable slots to where airlines are moving their partner hubs deep into Asia. That will happen with the EU3 unless they adapt. The A223xLR provides such economical connections that if I must hub, I'm ok hubbing in BOS with JetBlue. I'm sure UA at IAD and EWR will grow, displace RJ slots as required. AA at PHL and CLT have plenty of room.

IAG at DUB. Hey, maybe a Scottish hub? :hyper:
I'm of Scottish/German decent. I'm not finding the obvious AF/KL or LH group hub, but there will be one.

Lightsaber


Great points and analogies.

My biggest point of skepticism is that the A220 as it stands today, doesn't seat a lot of passengers (no CASM help) and on these mid-range routes, thanks to the likes of JetBlue MINT, lie flats are offered up front. Therefore the routes of the LR are going to have to have high paying customers to make them work. Smallest transcon birds today are A320s/738s, which are all being upgauged to A321s/739s.

That being said... LAX/SFO/ORD/JFK/EWR/BOS/IAD etc are all surrounded by smaller airports but very close to large populations, so there is prime real estate and market opportunity!

Ahhh... Now we're debating which narrowbody takes over which means which market for what an is fat daddy seats good enough or are lie flats required?

I think both the A321LR/xLR and A223xLR will thrive and make money.

We are down to debating how many? Since the cost of floor area in a223 in an a320 is the same, I'm not sure how you can say the casms that bad. obviously the smaller plane won't be flying on the routes a larger plane is adequate for as floor space on the A321 is about 8% cheaper.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
h1fl1er
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 5:58 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Sat Sep 14, 2019 12:13 am

lightsaber wrote:
This is to bypass the JVs. Ironically, their boosting of fares creates an opportunity for Moxie and JetBlue. The A223xLR will open up say South America to the USA. Mid size cities of the EU to BOS or IAD. DUB becomes a much more viable TATL hub (with the 2nd runway too).

As an analogy, when JetBlue started a.net lit up on how people wanted to fly a widebody TCON or to Hawaii. I heard every reason why narrowbody 5 hour flights would fail. Now all I take is narrowbody flights for these length of missions. I fly LAX to BDL/TPA or LGB so far to every TCON destination offered.


I remember talking to a buddy in the mid 90s and being like where have all the widebody TCONs gone? This is why when I read the VLA forecasts I predicted that AB was making a huge mistake with the 380. Used to choose routes to get a 767 or DC10 with empty seats. Now you're lucky on a lot of routes to get a 737. The 220 is going to accelerate this. AA is running a CRJ/ERJ hub out of DCA; they're building a new terminal to support this activity. I expect the max and xlr to take over substantial amounts of TATL routes by 10 years from now if not sooner and the 220 to start eating into what used to be bread and butter 737/320 routes.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2892
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:06 am

I see this as a sign that the A319neo is dead in the water, and that the A220-300 would be offered with ACTs for a VIP configuration (in a passenger configuration, it can't exceed 3500 nmi because of fuel limitations). However, for passenger limitations, I can't see that being really profitable as it's too small. That's where the A321neo or 737 MAX 8/9 would be best.

The A220 will take over a lot of what are current regional routes, but I can't see the narrowbody market fragmenting into the A220 replacing A320 routes. There are airlines who might have considered the A220 over another larger model had it been available sooner; this would be great for markets like Brazil, the South Pacific, Africa, and Central America.
 
flyby519
Posts: 1442
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:31 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:24 am

h1fl1er wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
This is to bypass the JVs. Ironically, their boosting of fares creates an opportunity for Moxie and JetBlue. The A223xLR will open up say South America to the USA. Mid size cities of the EU to BOS or IAD. DUB becomes a much more viable TATL hub (with the 2nd runway too).

As an analogy, when JetBlue started a.net lit up on how people wanted to fly a widebody TCON or to Hawaii. I heard every reason why narrowbody 5 hour flights would fail. Now all I take is narrowbody flights for these length of missions. I fly LAX to BDL/TPA or LGB so far to every TCON destination offered.


I remember talking to a buddy in the mid 90s and being like where have all the widebody TCONs gone? This is why when I read the VLA forecasts I predicted that AB was making a huge mistake with the 380. Used to choose routes to get a 767 or DC10 with empty seats. Now you're lucky on a lot of routes to get a 737. The 220 is going to accelerate this. AA is running a CRJ/ERJ hub out of DCA; they're building a new terminal to support this activity. I expect the max and xlr to take over substantial amounts of TATL routes by 10 years from now if not sooner and the 220 to start eating into what used to be bread and butter 737/320 routes.


The only difficulty will be gates/slots on either end for high demand routes. Think of something like JFK-LHR. Slot acquisition costs, gates, fees, etc might favor a wide body to maximize revenue generation vs a narrow body.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1539
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:48 am

Waterbomber2 wrote:
The question is now why use a NMA or B787/A330 when you can offer more frequencies and the same CASM with an A223?
I think that this also opens up a lot of thinner US transcon point to point routes.
To take the example of Ohio, second tier airports like CVG, CLE, CMH, CAK that were previously served by RJ's to the main hubs can now also be transformed (back) into mini hubs while third tier airports like TOL and DAY can see more services from the big hubs.

Many long thin routes that didn't previously make sense or that are out of range for RJ's or mainline jets now start making sense.

First of all, you need to check your facts on your Ohio airports. There is no way CAK is second tier and DAY is third tier, whatever that means. Second of all, this plane isn’t going to turn CLE, CMH, or CVG into a mini hub. Quite frankly, I am having a hard time figuring out why this plane is going to be so much more successful than the 73G ER.
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
User avatar
CarlosSi
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:29 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Sat Sep 14, 2019 2:06 am

Interesting development. I imagine such a launch will garner a lot of orders shortly after. Longer and thinner is the fad nowadays. Maybe Hawaiian would like some for deeper routes into the US :scratchchin: ?

DominoxX wrote:
Now I'm dreaming of MIA-IQQ/ANF/CJC/CUZ/MIA/IGU, JFK-ABZ/LIL/LUX


Yes that MIA-MIA route is such a holy grail route. It’s on my bucket list, actually.
 
musman9853
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Sat Sep 14, 2019 2:33 am

CarlosSi wrote:
Interesting development. I imagine such a launch will garner a lot of orders shortly after. Longer and thinner is the fad nowadays. Maybe Hawaiian would like some for deeper routes into the US :scratchchin: ?

DominoxX wrote:
Now I'm dreaming of MIA-IQQ/ANF/CJC/CUZ/MIA/IGU, JFK-ABZ/LIL/LUX


Yes that MIA-MIA route is such a holy grail route. It’s on my bucket list, actually.


At least travel time is short
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18163
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Sat Sep 14, 2019 2:42 am

h1fl1er wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
This is to bypass the JVs. Ironically, their boosting of fares creates an opportunity for Moxie and JetBlue. The A223xLR will open up say South America to the USA. Mid size cities of the EU to BOS or IAD. DUB becomes a much more viable TATL hub (with the 2nd runway too).

As an analogy, when JetBlue started a.net lit up on how people wanted to fly a widebody TCON or to Hawaii. I heard every reason why narrowbody 5 hour flights would fail. Now all I take is narrowbody flights for these length of missions. I fly LAX to BDL/TPA or LGB so far to every TCON destination offered.


I remember talking to a buddy in the mid 90s and being like where have all the widebody TCONs gone? This is why when I read the VLA forecasts I predicted that AB was making a huge mistake with the 380. Used to choose routes to get a 767 or DC10 with empty seats. Now you're lucky on a lot of routes to get a 737. The 220 is going to accelerate this. AA is running a CRJ/ERJ hub out of DCA; they're building a new terminal to support this activity. I expect the max and xlr to take over substantial amounts of TATL routes by 10 years from now if not sooner and the 220 to start eating into what used to be bread and butter 737/320 routes.

Customers like direct and frequency.

People point out that high demand routes won't down gauge and I agree. LHR-JFK will be amoung the last BA VLA routes. But impacted hubs must be bypassed. Fly to France, but not Paris. Fly to Germany, but not FRA. Fly to the UK, but not LHR...

By no means do I think the A223 will be the bulk of the market. I do think many RJs will be upgauged.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
heavymetal
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri May 08, 2015 3:37 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:35 am

Waterbomber2 wrote:
The question is now why use a NMA or B787/A330 when you can offer more frequencies and the same CASM with an A223?
I think that this also opens up a lot of thinner US transcon point to point routes.
To take the example of Ohio, second tier airports like CVG, CLE, CMH, CAK that were previously served by RJ's to the main hubs can now also be transformed (back) into mini hubs while third tier airports like TOL and DAY can see more services from the big hubs.

Many long thin routes that didn't previously make sense or that are out of range for RJ's or mainline jets now start making sense.


How will a low-density A220-300LR have the same CASM as an NMA or B787/A330?
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:46 am

lightsaber wrote:
Customers like direct and frequency.

People point out that high demand routes won't down gauge and I agree. LHR-JFK will be amoung the last BA VLA routes. But impacted hubs must be bypassed. Fly to France, but not Paris. Fly to Germany, but not FRA. Fly to the UK, but not LHR...

By no means do I think the A223 will be the bulk of the market. I do think many RJs will be upgauged.

Lightsaber


Airlines like direct too. I travel SEA-BOS & always on Alaska, because they have a direct, saves me at least 3 hours. It's typically $150 more RT than my cheapest 1 stop. It is worth it, AS cost for my flight is possibly less also. The flights are always full. I think right now only JetBlue also does direct.

Going direct P-P and skipping the hub is changing the industry, it is also reducing costs. If the total distance via the hub is less than 20% more than the direct distance, the hub is sure to cost less. But when the travelled distance via the hub is 50% longer, it would be cheaper to fly direct even if the plane was 2/3 full.

The A220 could invade like the Mad Dogs in their heyday. Didn't AA have a fleet of 400 at one point?
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 6837
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Airbus launching A220LR or XLR according to Jon Ostrower

Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:59 am

DominoxX wrote:
Now I'm dreaming of MIA-IQQ/ANF/CJC/CUZ/MIA/IGU, JFK-ABZ/LIL/LUX

You dont need an A220LR to fly MIA-MIA ;)
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.

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