yyztpa2 wrote:

September O&D shows the 5 A220-300 previously identified. No deliveries to Delta.

Also 3x A220-300 cancellations for Macquarie.

yyztpa2 wrote:

September O&D shows the 5 A220-300 previously identified. No deliveries to Delta.

Very interesting. It was pointed out in the AIB Family Flights Discord that almost all Delta Frames that have been marked as Exported on Transport Canada have made a Taxi Check in Delivery Registration on Flight Trackers. But I guess since it hasn't flown out its not Delivered.

bspc wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

September O&D shows the 5 A220-300 previously identified. No deliveries to Delta.

Very interesting. It was pointed out in the AIB Family Flights Discord that almost all Delta Frames that have been marked as Exported on Transport Canada have made a Taxi Check in Delivery Registration on Flight Trackers. But I guess since it hasn't flown out its not Delivered.

I asked for clarification earlier in this thread as to what is classified as delivered? Just because it hasn't flown out doesn't mean it's not delivered per contract. As long as final payment has been made it's delivered.

9252fly wrote:

bspc wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

September O&D shows the 5 A220-300 previously identified. No deliveries to Delta.

Very interesting. It was pointed out in the AIB Family Flights Discord that almost all Delta Frames that have been marked as Exported on Transport Canada have made a Taxi Check in Delivery Registration on Flight Trackers. But I guess since it hasn't flown out its not Delivered.

I asked for clarification earlier in this thread as to what is classified as delivered? Just because it hasn't flown out doesn't mean it's not delivered per contract. As long as final payment has been made it's delivered.

Yeah but it’s not marked on the official Airbus Spreadsheet. *shrug*

So we have A220 delivery count this year up to September. The number is 18 (eighteen).

The interesting information I would like to know is how many aircraft are completed and ready for delivery.

At this stage there should be at least 18 (eighteen), unless the production rate has slowed down.

Someone in the facilities should be able to count them. They should be in the hangars and parked outside.

VV wrote:

So we have A220 delivery count this year up to September. The number is 18 (eighteen).

The interesting information I would like to know is how many aircraft are completed and ready for delivery.

At this stage there should be at least 18 (eighteen), unless the production rate has slowed down.

Someone in the facilities should be able to count them. They should be in the hangars and parked outside.

Perhaps you can hazard an answer with pencil and paper and let us know with some research on https://www.abcdlist.nl/cseries/cseries.html
and on
https://aibfamily.flights/Airbus-A220

Flightaware.com shows 2 Delta A220-300 flights scheduled for today from BFM to ATL. Transport Canada reposted 55070 as exported yesterday while also adding 55075 and 55080.

yyztpa2 wrote:

Flightaware.com shows 2 Delta A220-300 flights scheduled for today from BFM to ATL. Transport Canada reposted 55070 as exported yesterday while also adding 55075 and 55080.

Its Thursday and Friday and also 2 A220-100 on Thursday out of YMX to MSP.

bspc wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

Flightaware.com shows 2 Delta A220-300 flights scheduled for today from BFM to ATL. Transport Canada reposted 55070 as exported yesterday while also adding 55075 and 55080.

Its Thursday and Friday and also 2 A220-100 on Thursday out of YMX to MSP.

Makes sense. Flightaware doesn't post dates. Should the third 300 be expected the following day?

As for the 100s, would this be the first time they were not delivered through ATL?

yyztpa2 wrote:

bspc wrote:

yyztpa2 wrote:

Flightaware.com shows 2 Delta A220-300 flights scheduled for today from BFM to ATL. Transport Canada reposted 55070 as exported yesterday while also adding 55075 and 55080.

Its Thursday and Friday and also 2 A220-100 on Thursday out of YMX to MSP.

Makes sense. Flightaware doesn't post dates. Should the third 300 be expected the following day?

As for the 100s, would this be the first time they were not delivered through ATL?

Yes i think its the first time the -100 are going straight to MSP. It could just be for storage. The -300 which might show off at ATL. I think i read that they'll start service with -300 in November.

Lets hope they get Delivered

A220-100, Delta Air Lines, , N132DU (MSN 50051) is stated on AIB as "delivered".
https://aibfamily.flights/A220/50051
And flight:
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n132du#25d72328

This is the first of the parked A220-100. 55052 to 50056 are also ready for delivery.
Flight for 50052 is scheduled for today. Seems all to Minneapolis.
For A220-300, 2 are ready for delivery, 55070 and 55075.
55070 flight scheduled for today, from Mobile to Atlanta, 55075 for tomorrow.
Check Flightradar 24.

Let us hope it is true and they are really delivered or will be...

Official statement by Airbus: First A220-300, produced in Mobile official delivered.
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-releases/en/2020/10/airbus-delivers-its-first-usassembled-a220-from-mobile-alabama.html

I will open an extra thread.

Going through the delivery dates on airfleets:
https://www.airfleets.net/exploit/production-csr.htm

3Q2020 deliveries: 4
1 for Air Baltic
1 for Air Egypt
2 for Air Canada

But when I look at Airbus: A220 delivered by end August: 13 (in the detailed August spreadsheet)
by end September: 18 per the pdf press release. Whom did I miss accepting an A220 in September?

https://www.airbus.com/aircraft/market/ ... eries.html

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Going through the delivery dates on airfleets:
https://www.airfleets.net/exploit/production-csr.htm

3Q2020 deliveries: 4
1 for Air Baltic
1 for Air Egypt
2 for Air Canada

But when I look at Airbus: A220 delivered by end August: 13 (in the detailed August spreadsheet)
by end September: 18 per the pdf press release. Whom did I miss accepting an A220 in September?

https://www.airbus.com/aircraft/market/ ... eries.html

Lightsaber

2x Egypt Air. You have missed one, in Sep-2020, 55081 was delivered on 23-Sep-2020 and 55091 on 29-Sep-2020. Please note, 55087 was delivered before 55081. Delivery of 55081 was scheduled together with 55087 in Aug-2020. As the Egypt Air brought some COVID cases to Montreal, only one (55087) of both was delivered, the other was later together with 55091 to Toulouse and later in Sep-2020 taken up by Egypt Air in France.
https://www.abcdlist.nl/cseries/cseries.html
For an overview, I prefer Abcdlist.

A220-100, Delta Air Lines, N133DU (MSN 50052) has been delivered.
https://aibfamily.flights/A220/50052

And the flight.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n133du#25d96d06

T4thH wrote:

A220-100, Delta Air Lines, N133DU (MSN 50052) has been delivered.
https://aibfamily.flights/A220/50052

And the flight.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n133du#25d96d06

A220-300 Delta N303DU is in the air at this time
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airc ... u#25da5dda

Tomorrow's A220-100 delivery is identified as N138DU, which is before the four other Delta A220-100 completed earlier. Expectation is those four are in pre-delivery prep for a total of seven A220-100 and two A220-300 while a third A220-300 showed up on Transport Canada's export list.
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n138du

Delta is receiving an A220 every day this week.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ElQfYu9W0AA ... name=large

Delta350 wrote:

Delta is receiving an A220 every day this week.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ElQfYu9W0AA ... name=large

OMG, what changed? Do not get me wrong, I consider this excellent news for the A220.

With other deliveries expected soon, this is turning out to be the recovery quarter for the A220.

Lightsaber

Delta350 wrote:

Delta is receiving an A220 every day this week.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ElQfYu9W0AA ... name=large

And 2 on Friday! I thought they were parking a big portion of the A220's due to pilot furloughs.

9 are parked at SBD (8101, 8102, 8105, 8106, 8107, 8113, 8114, 8122, 8128).

There are 4 221s built (8134-8137), so that would align with the scheduled delivery flights. However, today's are tomorrow's are cancelled per DL.com, so we'll see how that goes...

lightsaber wrote:

Delta350 wrote:

Delta is receiving an A220 every day this week.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ElQfYu9W0AA ... name=large

OMG, what changed? Do not get me wrong, I consider this excellent news for the A220.

With other deliveries expected soon, this is turning out to be the recovery quarter for the A220.

Lightsaber

I belive DL agreed to take delivery of what was already built now in exchange for a delay in deliveries on down the road.

777Mech wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Delta350 wrote:

Delta is receiving an A220 every day this week.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ElQfYu9W0AA ... name=large

OMG, what changed? Do not get me wrong, I consider this excellent news for the A220.

With other deliveries expected soon, this is turning out to be the recovery quarter for the A220.

Lightsaber

I belive DL agreed to take delivery of what was already built now in exchange for a delay in deliveries on down the road.

I was expecting that was so but is anyone aware of which Airbus models are delayed? The WBs might be an obvious.

Probably the A321 Neo’s as well. Those are easier to sell to other parties than the A220, which has only an handful of operators.

yyztpa2 wrote:

777Mech wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

OMG, what changed? Do not get me wrong, I consider this excellent news for the A220.

With other deliveries expected soon, this is turning out to be the recovery quarter for the A220.

Lightsaber

I belive DL agreed to take delivery of what was already built now in exchange for a delay in deliveries on down the road.

I was expecting that was so but is anyone aware of which Airbus models are delayed? The WBs might be an obvious.

The NEOs for sure, and probably a more spread out schedule on the CEO.

Airbus Canada A220 -371 55072 VP-BMU GTLK Europe ferried 28oct20 ENS-MST for paint into? ex C-FOWV

https://www.skyliner-aviation.de/regdb. ... av4&page=2

danipawa wrote:

Airbus Canada A220 -371 55072 VP-BMU GTLK Europe ferried 28oct20 ENS-MST for paint into? ex C-FOWV

https://www.skyliner-aviation.de/regdb. ... av4&page=2

Has it found an operator?

Delta A200-100 ship N137DU in flight from Montreal (YMX) to Minneapolis (MSP)

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airc ... u#25ea9a3e

Delta A200-100 ship N136DQ in flight from Montreal (YMX) to Minneapolis (MSP)

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airc ... q#25eab168

With these deliveries today to Delta, there should be a total of 12 A220 deliveries in October with Delta receiving 7 A220-100 from YMX and 4 A220-300 from BFM. The other delivery was to Air Canada for a A220-300 from YMX.

Twelve deliveries in a month is a record!

Something I did not see discussed here: Airways reports Airbus is "restricting" A220 production at YMX to 3 per month and MOB at 1 per month. The pre-covid targets were 10/month at YMX and 4/month at MOB.

Ref: https://airwaysmag.com/industry/airbus/ ... -facility/

It mentions that AC has canceled 12 A220 orders and has deferred 18 orders till 2022. Not sure why this got a prominent mention.

The A220 production rate is a big difference to A320 where Airbus has maintained rate 40 (or 2/3rds of long term goal of 60/month) and is heading for rate 47 (~80% of long term goal) next year.

I'm not sure I understand why they would be aggressive with A320 but not with A220. Both have substantial backlogs.

Revelation wrote:

Something I did not see discussed here: Airways reports Airbus is "restricting" A220 production at YMX to 3 per month and MOB at 1 per month. The pre-covid targets were 10/month at YMX and 4/month at MOB.

Ref: https://airwaysmag.com/industry/airbus/ ... -facility/

It mentions that AC has canceled 12 A220 orders and has deferred 18 orders till 2022. Not sure why this got a prominent mention.

The A220 production rate is a big difference to A320 where Airbus has maintained rate 40 (or 2/3rds of long term goal of 60/month) and is heading for rate 47 (~80% of long term goal) next year.

I'm not sure I understand why they would be aggressive with A320 but not with A220. Both have substantial backlogs.

Substantial A220 backlog but not a wide customer base yet. Current major orders (from airlines) in backlog left for delivery are Air Baltic, AC, AF, DL, B6, and Breeze.

AC has signaled that they are deferring 18 til 2022 and cancelled 12 -that is probably most of what they were expecting for all of 2020 (that they didn’t receive) and 2021.

DL has likely deferred as part of their large Airbus deferment made (not a lot of detail about deferments yet afaik)

B6 has already adjusted A220 deliveries to accelerate some deliveries, appetite is probably not there to accelerate more.

AF/Air Baltic- unsure where there head is at in terms of deferment but unlikely to accelerate deliveries.

Breeze- hasn’t started ops yet, is not going to accelerate deliveries as that is a quick way to bite off more than you can chew and sink a new airline.

Lessors unlikely to want substantial number at this time, too difficult to place at the moment.

So not really enough airlines willing to take A220 near term and cover deferments, which means slowing down ramp up (or “restricting” production if you want to package it into a nicer PR term).

A320 has wide customer base so (hopefully) easier to find someone else to take delivery and cover deferments.

Polot wrote:

So not really enough airlines willing to take A220 near term and cover deferments, which means slowing down ramp up (or “restricting” production if you want to package it into a nicer PR term).

A320 has wide customer base so (hopefully) easier to find someone else to take delivery and cover deferments.

The last data I saw ( https://airwaysmag.com/industry/airbus/ ... roduction/ ) said that while Airbus was able to place 10 A32x white tails they still have 135 unplaced white tails, so over 3 months of production at current rates.

I still can't wrap my head around why Airbus is willing to "play chicken" with A320 and not A220. If they're confident the market will bounce back and support rate 40 then rate 53 for A320, are they really not confident that the market will eventually want any A220s they are now producing? Or is it that current A220 production is cash negative (cost to produce higher than the contracted price) whereas A320 is still cash positive therefore they freeze A220 out till after the crisis?

9252fly wrote:

As long as final payment has been made it's delivered.

Not correct. A promise to pay is enough. Many commercial aircraft are being delivered with forgiven and / or deferred and / or OEM (or related party) finance, a trend which started pre-COVID with WB's, and now includes NB.

Revelation wrote:

Polot wrote:

So not really enough airlines willing to take A220 near term and cover deferments, which means slowing down ramp up (or “restricting” production if you want to package it into a nicer PR term).

A320 has wide customer base so (hopefully) easier to find someone else to take delivery and cover deferments.

The last data I saw ( https://airwaysmag.com/industry/airbus/ ... roduction/ ) said that while Airbus was able to place 10 A32x white tails they still have 135 unplaced white tails, so over 3 months of production at current rates.

I still can't wrap my head around why Airbus is willing to "play chicken" with A320 and not A220. If they're confident the market will bounce back and support rate 40 then rate 53 for A320, are they really not confident that the market will eventually want any A220s they are now producing? Or is it that current A220 production is cash negative (cost to produce higher than the contracted price) whereas A320 is still cash positive therefore they freeze A220 out till after the crisis?

Your last para is likely, especially as depending on when the order was placed, there are still offsets likely accruing to B.

Revelation wrote:

Polot wrote:

So not really enough airlines willing to take A220 near term and cover deferments, which means slowing down ramp up (or “restricting” production if you want to package it into a nicer PR term).

A320 has wide customer base so (hopefully) easier to find someone else to take delivery and cover deferments.

The last data I saw ( https://airwaysmag.com/industry/airbus/ ... roduction/ ) said that while Airbus was able to place 10 A32x white tails they still have 135 unplaced white tails, so over 3 months of production at current rates.

I still can't wrap my head around why Airbus is willing to "play chicken" with A320 and not A220. If they're confident the market will bounce back and support rate 40 then rate 53 for A320, are they really not confident that the market will eventually want any A220s they are now producing? Or is it that current A220 production is cash negative (cost to produce higher than the contracted price) whereas A320 is still cash positive therefore they freeze A220 out till after the crisis?

I am afraid you have misunderstood the article: you are right that there were 10 white tail A32x that have found a new buyer, but the 135 A32x aren't all white tails. The article says that they are simply in storage and I expect that for most of them, delivery has just been deferred. For example, there are a number of China Southern A321neos in storage, and I would be surprised if they weren't taken up eventually.
To be honest, I don't have the impression that Airbus is keen on building white tails, but that the plan to increase the production rate to 47 per month is necessary to deliver the A32x on time according to the contracts they have with the airlines at the moment. As more customers defer their deliveries, the increase in production rate will be postponed.

a2b7 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Polot wrote:

So not really enough airlines willing to take A220 near term and cover deferments, which means slowing down ramp up (or “restricting” production if you want to package it into a nicer PR term).

A320 has wide customer base so (hopefully) easier to find someone else to take delivery and cover deferments.

The last data I saw ( https://airwaysmag.com/industry/airbus/ ... roduction/ ) said that while Airbus was able to place 10 A32x white tails they still have 135 unplaced white tails, so over 3 months of production at current rates.

I still can't wrap my head around why Airbus is willing to "play chicken" with A320 and not A220. If they're confident the market will bounce back and support rate 40 then rate 53 for A320, are they really not confident that the market will eventually want any A220s they are now producing? Or is it that current A220 production is cash negative (cost to produce higher than the contracted price) whereas A320 is still cash positive therefore they freeze A220 out till after the crisis?

I am afraid you have misunderstood the article: you are right that there were 10 white tail A32x that have found a new buyer, but the 135 A32x aren't all white tails. The article says that they are simply in storage and I expect that for most of them, delivery has just been deferred. For example, there are a number of China Southern A321neos in storage, and I would be surprised if they weren't taken up eventually.
To be honest, I don't have the impression that Airbus is keen on building white tails, but that the plan to increase the production rate to 47 per month is necessary to deliver the A32x on time according to the contracts they have with the airlines at the moment. As more customers defer their deliveries, the increase in production rate will be postponed.

Yes, they use the word 'stored' for the 135, which means some could be deferred and some could be white tail. Thanks for the correction!

Revelation wrote:

Polot wrote:

So not really enough airlines willing to take A220 near term and cover deferments, which means slowing down ramp up (or “restricting” production if you want to package it into a nicer PR term).

A320 has wide customer base so (hopefully) easier to find someone else to take delivery and cover deferments.

The last data I saw ( https://airwaysmag.com/industry/airbus/ ... roduction/ ) said that while Airbus was able to place 10 A32x white tails they still have 135 unplaced white tails, so over 3 months of production at current rates.

I still can't wrap my head around why Airbus is willing to "play chicken" with A320 and not A220. If they're confident the market will bounce back and support rate 40 then rate 53 for A320, are they really not confident that the market will eventually want any A220s they are now producing? Or is it that current A220 production is cash negative (cost to produce higher than the contracted price) whereas A320 is still cash positive therefore they freeze A220 out till after the crisis?

Labor laws and labor attitudes are almost certainly a factor. North American workers, for better or worse, can more easily be laid-off/furloughed.

enplaned wrote:

Labor laws and labor attitudes are almost certainly a factor. North American workers, for better or worse, can more easily be laid-off/furloughed.

I'm not sure that's really it. Yes, it's easier to lay off workers in Mobile - not so sure about Quebec. But either way, you don't really want to - it's a difficult skill set to sustain and replace. Fast-food workers (as an example only) don't become proficient aircraft assemblers in a day.

There's also the matter of needing to buy the parts to assemble if you've already rationalized spending for the labor. The typical Japanese auto way (including Japanese-owned plants in North America) is just to put everybody on 'special projects': training, cleaning, painting floors... not to keep assembling finished goods that aren't needed.

MIflyer12 wrote:

I'm not sure that's really it. Yes, it's easier to lay off workers in Mobile - not so sure about Quebec. But either way, you don't really want to - it's a difficult skill set to sustain and replace. Fast-food workers (as an example only) don't become proficient aircraft assemblers in a day.

There's also the matter of needing to buy the parts to assemble if you've already rationalized spending for the labor. The typical Japanese auto way (including Japanese-owned plants in North America) is just to put everybody on 'special projects': training, cleaning, painting floors... not to keep assembling finished goods that aren't needed.

Yet here we have a ramp up aiming for 14/month now "restricted" to 4/month. Seems a lot of long lead time items were already being produced to the higher rate, so will need to see a ramp-down till the rate is no longer restricted. Not sure where the hiring is/was, but it too must be getting "restricted".

Revelation wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

I'm not sure that's really it. Yes, it's easier to lay off workers in Mobile - not so sure about Quebec. But either way, you don't really want to - it's a difficult skill set to sustain and replace. Fast-food workers (as an example only) don't become proficient aircraft assemblers in a day.

There's also the matter of needing to buy the parts to assemble if you've already rationalized spending for the labor. The typical Japanese auto way (including Japanese-owned plants in North America) is just to put everybody on 'special projects': training, cleaning, painting floors... not to keep assembling finished goods that aren't needed.

Yet here we have a ramp up aiming for 14/month now "restricted" to 4/month. Seems a lot of long lead time items were already being produced to the higher rate, so will need to see a ramp-down till the rate is no longer restricted. Not sure where the hiring is/was, but it too must be getting "restricted".

To be honest, 14/month was the aim for 2025. Last year they produced 48 (4/month). So, it is more sustaining current production and delaying the previous ramp up plans.

Revelation wrote:

I still can't wrap my head around why Airbus is willing to "play chicken" with A320 and not A220.

Remind me again how many 737s Boeing produced even after it should have been obvious it wasn't going to be ungrounded for several months.

JonesNL wrote:

To be honest, 14/month was the aim for 2025. Last year they produced 48 (4/month). So, it is more sustaining current production and delaying the previous ramp up plans.

Right, yet keeping A320 at 10x the rate of A220 and committing for >13x the rate in 2021 keeping A220 flat shows the relative lack of priority Airbus gives to A220. It runs counter to the a.net narrative about A220's importance to Airbus and to the aviation industry. It is a very nice aircraft but it is still a bit player akin to 717 in the 1990s.

SamYeager2016 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

I still can't wrap my head around why Airbus is willing to "play chicken" with A320 and not A220.

Remind me again how many 737s Boeing produced even after it should have been obvious it wasn't going to be ungrounded for several months.

I'm not seeing how these two things have much to do with each other, especially from the A220 perspective which is the topic of this thread.

Revelation wrote:

Right, yet keeping A320 at 10x the rate of A220 and committing for >13x the rate in 2021 keeping A220 flat shows the relative lack of priority Airbus gives to A220. It runs counter to the a.net narrative about A220's importance to Airbus and to the aviation industry. It is a very nice aircraft but it is still a bit player akin to 717 in the 1990s.

IMHO, Airbus is protecting A320 pricing by ensuring deliveries meet contract. In my opinion, Airbus is trying for better A220 pricing.

The 717 analogy falls apart on several fronts:
1. Range. The A220, thanks to its efficiency, opens up many new routes.
2. Opperators. The A220 has several significant (> 25 aircraft) while the 717 had AirTran and then Delta. We will see AirBaltic, Delta, JetBlue, Breeze, AirCanada, and AirFrance as significant A220 operators.
3. Backlog. While you are correct in pointing out the production rate is 10% of the A320NEO, the A220 will maintain the peak 717 delivery rate for years (only one year for the 717, 2001, not for years). 4X the 717 sales is a very different economy of scale. In 2002 the 717 had 64 in the backlog (after TWA cancelled), to he A220 has 507.
4. Engine overhauls. For the 717, you had RR and no vendors who did repairs to cut overhaul costs. For the A220: Pratt, MTU, Delta, and Embraer (eventually). Ok, only Delta is certain to do repairs, but at least there is one.

I conceed deliveries are below desired. For the A220, they will only accelerate with new sales. The A320 has a wonderful backlog 11.7X the A220. (5,956 to be delivered vs. 507). So a production rate of 10X is appropriate.

Airbus was able to garner enough A220 sales (JetBlue, Breeze, AF in particular) to change the fate of the A220. What they missed was Farnborough 2020 which was supposed to raise the backlog and increase the number we could discuss being delivered.

I have far more faith in the A220 now than I did in the 717 in say early 2002. The 717 depended on one airline to order, an airline that needed more range. The A220 has top off orders to come and should win new orders.

I do not expect any significant orders until Farnborough 2022 though for the A220. So this will be... an extended discussion.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Right, yet keeping A320 at 10x the rate of A220 and committing for >13x the rate in 2021 keeping A220 flat shows the relative lack of priority Airbus gives to A220. It runs counter to the a.net narrative about A220's importance to Airbus and to the aviation industry. It is a very nice aircraft but it is still a bit player akin to 717 in the 1990s.

IMHO, Airbus is protecting A320 pricing by ensuring deliveries meet contract. In my opinion, Airbus is trying for better A220 pricing.

The 717 analogy falls apart on several fronts:
1. Range. The A220, thanks to its efficiency, opens up many new routes.
2. Opperators. The A220 has several significant (> 25 aircraft) while the 717 had AirTran and then Delta. We will see AirBaltic, Delta, JetBlue, Breeze, AirCanada, and AirFrance as significant A220 operators.
3. Backlog. While you are correct in pointing out the production rate is 10% of the A320NEO, the A220 will maintain the peak 717 delivery rate for years (only one year for the 717, 2001, not for years). 4X the 717 sales is a very different economy of scale. In 2002 the 717 had 64 in the backlog (after TWA cancelled), to he A220 has 507.
4. Engine overhauls. For the 717, you had RR and no vendors who did repairs to cut overhaul costs. For the A220: Pratt, MTU, Delta, and Embraer (eventually). Ok, only Delta is certain to do repairs, but at least there is one.

I conceed deliveries are below desired. For the A220, they will only accelerate with new sales. The A320 has a wonderful backlog 11.7X the A220. (5,956 to be delivered vs. 507). So a production rate of 10X is appropriate.

Airbus was able to garner enough A220 sales (JetBlue, Breeze, AF in particular) to change the fate of the A220. What they missed was Farnborough 2020 which was supposed to raise the backlog and increase the number we could discuss being delivered.

I have far more faith in the A220 now than I did in the 717 in say early 2002. The 717 depended on one airline to order, an airline that needed more range. The A220 has top off orders to come and should win new orders.

I do not expect any significant orders until Farnborough 2022 though for the A220. So this will be... an extended discussion.

Lightsaber

IMO it doesn't fail on the dimensions I mentioned, scale and relative impact to the industry. All your points are valid but you don't mention the entire industry has grown tremendously since the 90s when 717 was introduced and A220 will still face competition from many directions including Airbus's ability to produce A320 family members with a higher profit margin than A220 for the foreseeable future. A220 has a blue chip customer in DL, some bluish customers in B6, AC and AF, and a list of aspirants, in proportion not too different than 717 in the 90s.

Revelation wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Right, yet keeping A320 at 10x the rate of A220 and committing for >13x the rate in 2021 keeping A220 flat shows the relative lack of priority Airbus gives to A220. It runs counter to the a.net narrative about A220's importance to Airbus and to the aviation industry. It is a very nice aircraft but it is still a bit player akin to 717 in the 1990s.

IMHO, Airbus is protecting A320 pricing by ensuring deliveries meet contract. In my opinion, Airbus is trying for better A220 pricing.

The 717 analogy falls apart on several fronts:
1. Range. The A220, thanks to its efficiency, opens up many new routes.
2. Opperators. The A220 has several significant (> 25 aircraft) while the 717 had AirTran and then Delta. We will see AirBaltic, Delta, JetBlue, Breeze, AirCanada, and AirFrance as significant A220 operators.
3. Backlog. While you are correct in pointing out the production rate is 10% of the A320NEO, the A220 will maintain the peak 717 delivery rate for years (only one year for the 717, 2001, not for years). 4X the 717 sales is a very different economy of scale. In 2002 the 717 had 64 in the backlog (after TWA cancelled), to he A220 has 507.
4. Engine overhauls. For the 717, you had RR and no vendors who did repairs to cut overhaul costs. For the A220: Pratt, MTU, Delta, and Embraer (eventually). Ok, only Delta is certain to do repairs, but at least there is one.

I conceed deliveries are below desired. For the A220, they will only accelerate with new sales. The A320 has a wonderful backlog 11.7X the A220. (5,956 to be delivered vs. 507). So a production rate of 10X is appropriate.

Airbus was able to garner enough A220 sales (JetBlue, Breeze, AF in particular) to change the fate of the A220. What they missed was Farnborough 2020 which was supposed to raise the backlog and increase the number we could discuss being delivered.

I have far more faith in the A220 now than I did in the 717 in say early 2002. The 717 depended on one airline to order, an airline that needed more range. The A220 has top off orders to come and should win new orders.

I do not expect any significant orders until Farnborough 2022 though for the A220. So this will be... an extended discussion.

Lightsaber

IMO it doesn't fail on the dimensions I mentioned, scale and relative impact to the industry. All your points are valid but you don't mention the entire industry has grown tremendously since the 90s when 717 was introduced and A220 will still face competition from many directions including Airbus's ability to produce A320 family members with a higher profit margin than A220 for the foreseeable future. A220 has a blue chip customer in DL, some bluish customers in B6, AC and AF, and a list of aspirants, in proportion not too different than 717 in the 90s.

You have a valid point in the market growth. The difference is minimum production went from 12 aircraft/year to 25.

Hey, LH is a blue chip customer and Swiss noted the A220 is now meeting internal reliability targets or As for the dispatch reliability, he said it has “increased constantly and has reached our internal target.”
https://www.skiesmag.com/news/airbus-a2 ... rmoil/amp/

I will conceed some analogies, such as more profit per A32x than A220. Actually, did we miss break even due to the production slowdown? (I believe so, but I have no link.)

AirTran was at best "blueish," I would put AirBaltic at the same level as AirTran. I believe Airbus will continue to market the A220. At this point, 4/month is good economics of scale. About 2X the 1/month the 717 settled into on a relative economics of scale.

The engines on the A220 do not yet have the 717 (BR715) economics of scale due to the huge BR710 and later BR725 sales. The G500/600 has relatively few deliveries and the 6X, none, E2 few, and MRJ none. RR and Pratt had the right idea, invest in a core to reuse as much as possible (80% of overhaul costs are the core, typically). However, even 4/month will ensure the small PurePower core develops economics of scale. For one thing hasn't changed, engine parts are still made in a minimum batch of 25.

The other thing on the engines, the 717 always had short engine overhaul intervals. That drives up opperating costs. The PW1500 should have normal narrowbody overhaul intervals. IIRC, the BR715 was on 8500 cycles (the disadvantage of a business jet core). Before someone mentions the 10,000 hours shop visit for the PW815, look at the penalties Gulfstream imposes if all the other guarantees weren't met (brutal requirements).

So I see the A220 having far more deliveries than the current order backlog. The 717 never had any Leasing company buy in.

But I noted before, I expect no orders of note before Farnborough 2022.

Lightsaber

Revelation wrote:

JonesNL wrote:

To be honest, 14/month was the aim for 2025. Last year they produced 48 (4/month). So, it is more sustaining current production and delaying the previous ramp up plans.

Right, yet keeping A320 at 10x the rate of A220 and committing for >13x the rate in 2021 keeping A220 flat shows the relative lack of priority Airbus gives to A220. It runs counter to the a.net narrative about A220's importance to Airbus and to the aviation industry. It is a very nice aircraft but it is still a bit player akin to 717 in the 1990s.

Most narratives are nothing more than opinions. A32x is the prime bread and butter line to Airbus as is the 737 to Boeing. The A22x is an interesting plane as it is the newest NB, but it will never catch the A32x. Like lightsaber says often, this is an game of scale and the A22x is not forecasted by Airbus to scale to reach more than 1/5th of the A32x lines (75/m vs 14/m). Even the owner of the plane doesn't believe in the A22x being the most important, so it is quite a mystery where that narrative comes from...

So, how many aircraft are ready for delivery?

I am just evaluating a possible delivery surge at the end of the year.

VV wrote:

So, how many aircraft are ready for delivery?

I am just evaluating a possible delivery surge at the end of the year.

You ask every month. As previously provided by another poster in post #307, you can find this information yourself: https://www.abcdlist.nl/cseries/cseries.html and https://aibfamily.flights/Airbus-A220

jbs2886 wrote:

VV wrote:

So, how many aircraft are ready for delivery?

I am just evaluating a possible delivery surge at the end of the year.

You ask every month. As previously provided by another poster in post #307, you can find this information yourself: https://www.abcdlist.nl/cseries/cseries.html and https://aibfamily.flights/Airbus-A220

I am not clever enough to interpret the information therein.
It is so much better if someone who is on the factory floor tells us the number.