https://simpleflying.com/air-france-airbus-a220-500/

A220-500 name spotted on a slide of the investor day:



Not a big news but it can fuel some discussions. I don't think we will see the A220-500 before 2030, they need to ensure a correct ramp-up first and it would predate the A320neo.

KLM announced that they willd rop the 330 for the same reason as above.
The A220-500 is so demanded that airbus is for sure going to build it. What is the current A220 backlog?

Judging that the NMA might not even get built (recent thread on airliners.net) it is certainly likely that Airbus will build a A220-500. 757s and 767s are soon out of the window, Boeing are looking to build an upgraded 767 with GEnx engines - surely Airbus will succeed as Airbus have had troubles with fitting big engines on an aircraft that possibly isn't meant for it

FlyRow wrote:

KLM announced that they willd rop the 330 for the same reason as above.
The A220-500 is so demanded that airbus is for sure going to build it. What is the current A220 backlog?

That slide also has an E140 with wing-mounted engines and a dash of "TBD" so I wouldn't read anything into it. "En bref, c'est de la merde."

And FLYERLHR, Boeing does not (despite the beliefs of some) make program launch decisions just because this forum has a chat about it. Nor does any other manufacturer. There is absolutely 0 indication Boeing is going to do anything more with the 767 platform at this time.

Air France fleet will be Simplified. LOL
They will add 2 more types to call it even at 21

I’m sure Airbus is looking at an A220-500 in their future planning, but as with anything the numbers have to stack up.

It will need to consider such a model in terms of its overall future offering, so we will wait and see how that plays out.

LaunchDetected wrote:

https://simpleflying.com/air-france-airbus-a220-500/

A220-500 name spotted on a slide of the investor day:



Not a big news but it can fuel some discussions. I don't think we will see the A220-500 before 2030, they need to ensure a correct ramp-up first and it would predate the A320neo.

Nice. Hits that old DC-9 sweet spot that’s been vacant for a while now. 16/80 for the -100, 16/100 for the -300, and 16/120 for the -500 (configs).

Que the Airbus NMA discussion to replace the 320 family... 16/140, 16/180 and 16/220 narrowbody with 757 performance anyone?

FLYERLHR wrote:

Judging that the NMA might not even get built (recent thread on airliners.net) it is certainly likely that Airbus will build a A220-500. 757s and 767s are soon out of the window, Boeing are looking to build an upgraded 767 with GEnx engines - surely Airbus will succeed as Airbus have had troubles with fitting big engines on an aircraft that possibly isn't meant for it

I assume you meant to say "surely Airbus will succeed as Boeing have had troubles with fitting big engines on an aircraft that possibly isn't meant for it"?

Airlines who wanted the NMA may choose a second hand A330-200 (range + capacity), B737 Max 8 or A321 Neo for the job.
Even though I personally don't believe the A321 wing is a good solution for range/ high TOW.
A fictional A220-500 wouldn't have the range nor the capacity of a NMA. For the short distances within Europe an A220-500 might be nice for an airline with all A220 fleet. Otherwise why not use an A320 instead?

Hope they will get rid of all these noisy and fuel inefficient 777s.

MrBren wrote:

fuel inefficient 777s.

You are biased, I am afraid...

dcaviation wrote:

Air France fleet will be Simplified. LOL
They will add 2 more types to call it even at 21

Going from 11 to 8 is simplification in my book.

FluidFlow wrote:

So no 77X and A350-1000 planned for now. The replacement for the A380 will be with smaller aircraft.

Given that the a380 is being phased oit due to being too big to use efficiently, I'd say that about makes sense.

Certain 77w configurations can seat 400+, so if the need ever really arises, they can always roll one of those out.

Amazing how recently it feels like the a380 was rolled out, and now here we are seeing future fleet plans without it already

Why not grabbing the A332 from KLM to grow A332 AF fleet ?

nicode wrote:

Why not grabbing the A332 from KLM to grow A332 AF fleet ?

KL A332 are a bit old already

I read the article and reviewed the slide, but why would this be newsworthy? AF has ordered the A220 several months ago. Of course they are going to consider the as yet unlaunched -500. They would be foolish not to do so, but the operative word is consider.

I think many here took a look at a possible A220-500 specification and market segment. It could do most a A320 /737-8 does, with less payload. But it would be much lighter and has the latest engines. The A220-300 already ~ killed the 737-7 and A319.

The MAX is the MAX & the NEO is sold for close to 9 years. So few feel the A220-500 is a bad idea, specailly after the latest A220-300 MTOW bumb.

But also almost everybody seemed to agree getting A220 production and supply chain above 15-20 / month and cost efficient is the #1, 2 and 3 priority.. that's where AF's (500)? question mark comes from..


viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1423035&start=100

DL747400 wrote:

I read the article and reviewed the slide, but why would this be newsworthy? AF has ordered the A220 several months ago. Of course they are going to consider the as yet unlaunched -500. They would be foolish not to do so, but the operative word is consider.

As I said, not a big news. However seeing an airline pushing publicly for a variant not publicly considered by its manufacturer is something noteworthy.

FGITD wrote:

FluidFlow wrote:

So no 77X and A350-1000 planned for now. The replacement for the A380 will be with smaller aircraft.

Given that the a380 is being phased oit due to being too big to use efficiently, I'd say that about makes sense.

Certain 77w configurations can seat 400+, so if the need ever really arises, they can always roll one of those out.

Amazing how recently it feels like the a380 was rolled out, and now here we are seeing future fleet plans without it already

When looking closely at the slides, you notice AF now has 107 widebody aircraft, and have a target of 118-123 aircraft. 4x A343 and 10x A388 will disappear, leaving 93 wb aircraft. AF have 27x A359 and 1x 789 on order, so that will be 121 aircraft - their target, give or take. So, if you just look at aircraft retired versus new arrivals, the A388 will be replaced by A359. In reality, A388 routes will be operated by 77W, and some 77W routes taken over by A359.

777 replacement undecided yet, although A350 should be favorite if AF intends to simplify their fleet. But additional 787 orders I don't rule out either. Ben Smith has said earlier the 787s now operated by AF won't go to KLM. 6 of the future deliveries will go to KLM, but that's it, nothing more, he basically said.

Airbus would do themselves a great service if along with the work for the A220-500 (which on paper at least looks unbeatable by anything in Boeings' stable) they added a second engine option.
Pratt seems to have knocked it out of the park with the functionality, performance and reliability of their gear box and screwed everything else.

frigatebird wrote:

777 replacement undecided yet, although A350 should be favorite if AF intends to simplify their fleet. But additional 787 orders I don't rule out either. Ben Smith has said earlier the 787s now operated by AF won't go to KLM. 6 of the future deliveries will go to KLM, but that's it, nothing more, he basically said.

Additional 787s and additional A350s are both potential options according to the chart.

AF/KL operates nearly 100 777's of which most are 300ERs and lots of A380s and 744s are phased out.

I suppose Boeing doesn't plan on letting those go A350-1000 easily.

Polot wrote:

frigatebird wrote:

777 replacement undecided yet, although A350 should be favorite if AF intends to simplify their fleet. But additional 787 orders I don't rule out either. Ben Smith has said earlier the 787s now operated by AF won't go to KLM. 6 of the future deliveries will go to KLM, but that's it, nothing more, he basically said.

Additional 787s and additional A350s are both potential options according to the chart.

At this point despite there being no "official" word, I think it's safe to say the 772 replacement is the a350.

Fairly similar seat counts, with the a350 having more, and a very similar intended fleet count. (25 772 vs 28 350)

The 77w fleet isn't in need of replacement for awhile, but it'll be interesting to see where they go. Perhaps the 350-1000, given that by that point the 359 fleet will already be a pretty substantial number. Assuming they're happy with them, why not? Would also align with the AF=Airbus//KL=Boeing plan.

the 787 and 777 are 'potential' common pilot type ratings or am I reading that incorrectly? Is that how it is today??

To me a220 looks like a perfect new change for a320ceo family. A220-300 for a318,319 and a320 while a220-500 for a320 and a321. With more and more low cost competition market fragmentation in Europe is more than obvious so getting smaller more efficient and capable machines is must. Air France a320 has 168-178 seats while a321 has 200-212 which means something in between 174 and 212 like a220-500 would fit perfectly. Also Air France would be great launch customer for 500 version from marketing standpoint.

GalebG4 wrote:

To me a220 looks like a perfect new change for a320ceo family. A220-300 for a318,319 and a320 while a220-500 for a320 and a321. With more and more low cost competition market fragmentation in Europe is more than obvious so getting smaller more efficient and capable machines is must. Air France a320 has 168-178 seats while a321 has 200-212 which means something in between 174 and 212 like a220-500 would fit perfectly. Also Air France would be great launch customer for 500 version from marketing standpoint.

It is highly unlikely that any A220-500 would be larger than the A320. It would probably seat around 175 at most in typical eurobusiness cabin specs (roughly +30 over the A223). Any larger and the 5 ab cabin starts becoming a liability rather than an asset.

LaunchDetected wrote:

https://simpleflying.com/air-france-airbus-a220-500/

A220-500 name spotted on a slide of the investor day:



Not a big news but it can fuel some discussions. I don't think we will see the A220-500 before 2030, they need to ensure a correct ramp-up first and it would predate the A320neo.

It feels like kind of a message to Airbus : "look, we still have 50 to 60 A320/A321 to replace and it could be with our 60 A220 options if -500 or with something else entirely if not".

That's gonna kill Boeing if Airbus goes through with a -500 stretch.

FluidFlow wrote:

So no 77X and A350-1000 planned for now. The replacement for the A380 will be with smaller aircraft.

The 'future' a350-1000 is mentioned briefly on slide #26.

keesje wrote:

But also almost everybody seemed to agree getting A220 production and supply chain above 15-20 / month and cost efficient is the #1, 2 and 3 priority.. that's where AF's (500)? question mark comes from..

Agree.

The last input we had from Airbus on this topic was in January:

"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.

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

Our discussion at viewtopic.php?t=1413243 was interesting, with you ( viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1413243&start=50#p21023041 ) suggesting a 2024-5 time line.

Maybe it will happen if the production and supply chain progresses as hoped.

The title and OP were about the A220-500, but most comments are on WB's, can we stay on topic.

To me The A225 makes great sense, but will probably launch sometime after there are 500 A220's in service. At rate 10 production that will be like in 4 years.

My forecast is the A225 being offered for sale in 2021 with an EIS in 2025-26.

In order to hit a real sweet spot, the A225 capacity should be in between that of an A320 and A321 as in this way it can tap into both market demand segments rapidly.

OneX123 wrote:

the 787 and 777 are 'potential' common pilot type ratings or am I reading that incorrectly? Is that how it is today??

The Dutch Civil Aviation Regulator recognises the 777 and 787 as a common type, but most regulators don't.

Of course airlines also have to get permission from their pilots union too for Mixed Fleet Flying to take place.

zkojq wrote:

OneX123 wrote:

the 787 and 777 are 'potential' common pilot type ratings or am I reading that incorrectly? Is that how it is today??

The Dutch Civil Aviation Regulator recognises the 777 and 787 as a common type, but most regulators don't.

Of course airlines also have to get permission from their pilots union too for Mixed Fleet Flying to take place.

Interesting, thanks!! Do any airlines fly it as a common type? Are flying dynamics similar? I know the 757 and 767 are common type but I've also heard they handle very similarly.

keesje wrote:

I think many here took a look at a possible A220-500 specification and market segment. It could do most a A320 /737-8 does, with less payload. But it would be much lighter and has the latest engines. The A220-300 already ~ killed the 737-7 and A319.

The MAX is the MAX & the NEO is sold for close to 9 years. So few feel the A220-500 is a bad idea, specailly after the latest A220-300 MTOW bumb.

But also almost everybody seemed to agree getting A220 production and supply chain above 15-20 / month and cost efficient is the #1, 2 and 3 priority.. that's where AF's (500)? question mark comes from..


viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1423035&start=100

Is that plane taking a dump? What’s on the tail?

LY777 wrote:

MrBren wrote:

fuel inefficient 777s.

You are biased, I am afraid...

is he or are you? As amazing the 77W once was, keep in mind the 77E never was especially so compared to its peers, we live in times of 787s and A350s and today the 77E, A332 and 77W are the least fuel efficient Wide Bodies in AFs future fleet by very likely double digits.

best regards
Thomas

FluidFlow wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

LY777 wrote:

You are biased, I am afraid...

is he or are you? As amazing the 77W once was, keep in mind the 77E never was especially so compared to its peers, we live in times of 787s and A350s and today the 77E, A332 and 77W are the least fuel efficient Wide Bodies in AFs future fleet by very likely double digits.

best regards
Thomas

Fuel efficiency is nice but overall economy of the frames is the real deal for the airlines. And I am making a wild guess here but most of them "old" frames are payed off and therefore do not have any expenses for financing, lease, etc., or in case of some 77W were probably really cheap to buy (recent and future adds of 77W for KL). So for this "old" frames, as long as fuel is so cheap the costs to replace them is higher than to run them till they are 30+ years old.

Yes, of course. But if you look at fuel burn only, and that is what has been discussed, the statement is correct.

Best regards
Thomas

I think Air France has expressed their intention some time ago they will place an order for A220 stretch version if Airbus offers it. This is the link back in August 2019.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ch-460099/

What does the A220-500 offer that the A320 doesn’t? Production slots? The 500 would be a direct competitor with the 320. Unless AF has no plans for NEOs, can’t remember off the top of my head, it doesn’t really make sense. It’s not like Airbus is competing against itself in the marketing realm or would want to.

By the time 320neo production slows down, A220 technology will be a non factor. Unless Airbus decides to trim off the 320 line and run an A220 line in conjunction with the A321 line then I just don’t see a business case for Airbus to develop the -500. It would be one thing if the 320neo was selling poorly.

Reddevil556 wrote:

What does the A220-500 offer that the A320 doesn’t? Production slots?

Better CASM & better trip costs. A common-type family that runs down to 120 seats.

Production slots on a line that doesn't take an A321 production slot.

If profit(A220-500 + A321) > profit(A320) then Airbus are better off selling the A220-500 (assuming amortization of design costs for simplicity).

The A220-500 would also be the first step in the longer term A320 replacement evolution - as it would let Airbus size their clean sheet 6AB for a slightly higher capacity from the start.


Furthermore, the 737-8 is better than A320 on shorter stage lengths due to lower weight, this switches with longer missions due to the A320's better L/D and better TSFC due to bigger fan diameter. The A220-500 would be better than the 737-8 on shorter stage lengths due to even lower weight. The A320 would still be the long distance king (I think - due to A220-500 range sacrifice - but thats an opinion open to being wrong) - but Airbus would be boxing the 737-8 in from both ends. So even though there is big overlap on capacity - the strengths of both products lie within different niches of that sub-market.

Reddevil556 wrote:

What does the A220-500 offer that the A320 doesn’t?

Better CASM.

Is there even a concept drawing for this aircraft and if so, what is the stretch over the -300 to the -500 under discussion?

Amiga500 wrote:

Reddevil556 wrote:

What does the A220-500 offer that the A320 doesn’t? Production slots?

snip..

Furthermore, the 737-8 is better than A320 on shorter stage lengths due to lower weight, this switches with longer missions due to the A320's better L/D and better TSFC due to bigger fan diameter. The A220-500 would be better than the 737-8 on shorter stage lengths due to even lower weight. The A320 would still be the long distance king (I think - due to A220-500 range sacrifice) - but Airbus would be boxing the 737-8 in from both ends. So even though there is big overlap on capacity - the strengths of both products lie within different niches of that sub-market.

This is the bread and butter segment in the whole market. Without the MAX problems you are talking about 120planes per month with quite some growth. The best offering in that space takes the biggest pie of cash in the market. Which is why an A225 is inevitable, with an new FAL in China (my guess) and extra investment in Mobile or Montreal (ACLP snagged x times the land of the current FAL).

With the current forecast, without the A225, Airbus will be producing around 90 narrow bodies per month in 2025.

NZ321 wrote:

Is there even a concept drawing for this aircraft and if so, what is the stretch over the -300 to the -500 under discussion?

Keesje has some drawings. The concept entails that the stretch would add 5 rows 25 seats and come around at a cost of 2.9t.

NZ321 wrote:

Is there even a concept drawing for this aircraft and if so, what is the stretch over the -300 to the -500 under discussion?

This image reminds me of something I seen floating around years ago.

Amiga500 wrote:

Reddevil556 wrote:

What does the A220-500 offer that the A320 doesn’t? Production slots?

Better CASM & better trip costs. A common-type family that runs down to 120 seats.

Production slots on a line that doesn't take an A321 production slot.

If profit(A220-500 + A321) > profit(A320) then Airbus are better off selling the A220-500 (assuming amortization of design costs for simplicity).

The A220-500 would also be the first step in the longer term A320 replacement evolution - as it would let Airbus size their clean sheet 6AB for a slightly higher capacity from the start.


Furthermore, the 737-8 is better than A320 on shorter stage lengths due to lower weight, this switches with longer missions due to the A320's better L/D and better TSFC due to bigger fan diameter. The A220-500 would be better than the 737-8 on shorter stage lengths due to even lower weight. The A320 would still be the long distance king (I think - due to A220-500 range sacrifice - but thats an opinion open to being wrong) - but Airbus would be boxing the 737-8 in from both ends. So even though there is big overlap on capacity - the strengths of both products lie within different niches of that sub-market.

That’s what I would like know about the 500, is it a projected true 320 replacement? If that is the case, what kind of gap would there be between the -500 and the 321? Mostly rhetorical questions because the -500 is still an idea or a least in the early planning. I just don’t see Airbus going full tilt on the -500 unless airlines want it as a 320 replacement or synchronize with a fleet of A220s. Time will tell.

Getting a bit off track it seems the NMA should should be a family that can drop to-500 capacity but cover through 321. One frame for a whole fleet vs a blended fleet of narrow bodies.

JonesNL wrote:

Reddevil556 wrote:

What does the A220-500 offer that the A320 doesn’t?

Better CASM.

Hypothetically since it’s a purely concept at this point. But also what would be the sticker price on a 320neo vs 220-500? That could be a huge factor.

MavyWavyATR wrote:

That's gonna kill Boeing if Airbus goes through with a -500 stretch.

We used to say that you can never beat a paper tiger. You have a concept airplane and you are talking about it destroying a real airplane.

It is pretty obvious that the A321neo will be a gold mine for more than a decade. It will eventually bring in more money than the A320neo, but the common type rating will ensure that the A320neo will remain very profitable for many years.

As of 30 September 2019 it looks like 2019 will be the first year when the A321neo will place more orders than the A320neo (97 to 38).
IndiGo has placed a firm order for 300 A320neo Family aircraft in October, but it remains to be seen how many are of each type.

Prior to this order IndiGo was already the biggest customer of the A320neo family with 290 A320neo and 150 A321neo orders.

Still the A320 neo has 3,830 -748 = 3,082 unfilled orders.

Looking at MTOW
A220-100 63.05 tonnes,
A220-300 69.85 tonnes,
A319neo 75.5 tonnes,
A320neo 79 tonnes.

An A220-500 will probably disrupt A320neo orders as much or more than it will disrupt B737MAX orders.


Why would Airbus executives try and challenge that golden scenario in the next decade with an A220-500?

FlyRow wrote:

KLM announced that they willd rop the 330 for the same reason as above.
The A220-500 is so demanded that airbus is for sure going to build it. What is the current A220 backlog?

The simple stretch of the CS300 is the version that is perfect for Europe. It is not a surprise AirFrance is interested to have that version.

In reality, if you look into the plan, the introduction of CS300 (A220-300) adds a level of complexity in their narrowbody fleet.

However, if CS300 simple stretch is offered then the likelihood Af would drop the A320neo is quite high. Only the A321neo will remain in that case.

If A220-500 is indeed offered then AF narrowbody fleet would be A220-300, A220-500 and A321neo. If this happens, it validates the concern expressed by some people in the blogosphere about a possible cannibalization of the A320neo by A220-300/-500..

It is very difficult to imagine Airbus would sacrifice the A320neo for A220-500 in AF's fleet.