Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
Opus99
Posts: 3523
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 11:44 am

keesje wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Every NEO sold makes money, no A220 sold makes money. The 225 only makes sense if the A320 line is clocked up with A321 or/and A322.


I think this short term realism made the biggest OE in the world the second biggest. If a manufacturer concludes, based on sales, marketshare, margin and competitive developments they need to act, add 7-8 years in terms of development, certification and ramp-up of the solution.. -> No vision no glory.

The question seems to be if a 5-6 t lower empty weight of a A220-500 compared to A320/738 would really make that much of a difference for bigger airlines replacing previous generation NB's. I think yes, a big impact.

I don’t think Airbus will close on a 220-500. The 7 years you’re talking about as it draws to a close airbus will be launching their new narrowbody which will completely dwarf the 220-500 they launch now.

It’s too late to launch a new narrowbody. The 500 should’ve come with the program or earlier. How many people will buy it when they have NEOs and so many NEOs to come. It will cannibalise, they also hold that market well. I mean this is building for the sake of building and airbus is also a profit making business.

You have to look at the business case and the timings. Looking ahead will they sell 220-500 and the new NEO replacement together.

Or launch the 220-500 with current generation engines and not launch a 320neo replacement and only 321neo replacement and allow the 220-500 to compete with Boeing?

Also how much advantage over the 320NEO does the 500 really give? What 3%? 5%? 10%?
 
ewt340
Posts: 1548
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 12:15 pm

747-600X wrote:
777Mech wrote:
A 180 seat A225?? Paging DL....

Delta puts 180 seats on their 737-900s. I don't think an A220-500 would quite cut it. Their A220-100s have 109 seats and -300s have 130. The stretch being talked about here would make room for maybe 160 seats, but 180? Not a chance.


With Delta's current configurations, A220-500 would accommodate 3 less economy+ seats on the cabin compared to A320.

BUT

Delta's B737-800 is sparsely configure. If we look at Delta's current B737-800 configuration. A220-500 would actually carry 16 Business class seats, 35 Economy+, and 100 Economy class seats. They would have the same number of galleys and lavatories.

So 9 seats less from B737-800.
Last edited by ewt340 on Sun Oct 03, 2021 12:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
reidar76
Posts: 693
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 12:22 pm

ewt340 wrote:
Some comparison to seating capacity amongst narrowbody in the market right now. This comparison based on speculation that Airbus would stretch A220-500 by adding 8 extra frames into the fuselage which resulted in 168" in cabin space for A220-500.

Image


I'm not saying your table is wrong, but there several prerequisites and assumptions made that are not obvious to everyone reading your post.

1) Both the A220 and 737 have the right side front door placed further forward than the left side door, while the A320 have the front doors exactly opposite of each other. When the 737 is configured with 189 seats that extra space is used for that extra half row (31 rows = 186 + half row = 189). Seats from the overwing exit to the right side front door will not be at 31 pitch. This extra space is also why Air France configures the A220-300 with 148 seats, that's half a row extra in the forward part of the cabin on the right side of the aircraft.

2) For the A220-500 you have not added an extra toilet. It will be a very short haul aircraft with 190 seats and two toilets, while both the A320 and 737-8 will have three. The A220 have two options for the front galley, one small and one slightly larger. Air France have selected the reduced front galley.

3) For the A320neo you are assuming a non-cabin flex configuration. Allmost all operators use cabin-flex on the A320neo. This will add one row to your numbers.

4) You list the A320 with 186 seats at 28" pitch. You have omitted the 29" pitch category in your table. The wast majority of rows in the A320 @ 186 seats will be at 29 inch pitch. In the forward part of the cabin the majority of seats will be at 30" pitch.

5) It looks like you have not subtracted for the extra space needed, when going from one to two overwing exits. The 737-7 needs two overwing exits from 150 passengers seats, while the A319neo/A320neo need two overwing exits exceeding 165 seats. This is due to larger front and rear doors, with dual lane slides. The 737-8200 needs an pair of additional mid-cabin doors, when exceeding 189 seats. These doors limits and restricts placement of seats, which it looks like you have not accounted for. You are assuming toilets placed rear of the rear doors, removing almost the entire rear galley on the 737.

6) The A220-300 is currently not certified for more than 148 passengers. The maximum passenger capability was recently increased from 145 to 148. Your table assumes recertification, with increased exit limits.

7) It is possible to argue that the wider seats on the A220 (and on A320), and the lower number of middle seats, will allow reduced pitch at same passenger comfort level. Space per passenger = seat width x seat pitch. By the way, the A320 is actually very slightly larger than the 737-8, in volume. The 737-8 is longer, but the A320 is wider.

If we account for all this (1 to 7), and assume at least one toilet per 65 passengers, and enough galley space for one light meal service, your table would look quite different.

For example, if we increase the length of the A220-300 by 8 frames the we could get the following number of passenger seats at 30 pitch. Air France A220-300 is at 30" pitch @ 148 seats, with reduced forward galley. For the A220-500 at 30" pitch, we could switch to a regular front galley, loosing three seats on the right side. Additionally we could add an extra toilet in the rear on the left side, loosing two seats. The A220-300 @ 30" pitch (Air France) = 148 seats, A220-500 configured similarly would then have 20 seats more, for a total of 168 seats. I have then accounted for extra space needed for an additional overwing exit. This configuration is very much comparable to the Lufthansa A320neo @ 30" pitch with 180 seats. In your table the A220-500 and the A320neo would be at 175 and 174 seats respectively, while it could very well be 168 to 180 seats with different prerequisites and assumptions.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 1:08 pm

Opus99 wrote:
keesje wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Every NEO sold makes money, no A220 sold makes money. The 225 only makes sense if the A320 line is clocked up with A321 or/and A322.


I think this short term realism made the biggest OE in the world the second biggest. If a manufacturer concludes, based on sales, marketshare, margin and competitive developments they need to act, add 7-8 years in terms of development, certification and ramp-up of the solution.. -> No vision no glory.

The question seems to be if a 5-6 t lower empty weight of a A220-500 compared to A320/738 would really make that much of a difference for bigger airlines replacing previous generation NB's. I think yes, a big impact.

I don’t think Airbus will close on a 220-500. The 7 years you’re talking about as it draws to a close airbus will be launching their new narrowbody which will completely dwarf the 220-500 they launch now.

It’s too late to launch a new narrowbody. The 500 should’ve come with the program or earlier. How many people will buy it when they have NEOs and so many NEOs to come. It will cannibalise, they also hold that market well. I mean this is building for the sake of building and airbus is also a profit making business.

You have to look at the business case and the timings. Looking ahead will they sell 220-500 and the new NEO replacement together.

Or launch the 220-500 with current generation engines and not launch a 320neo replacement and only 321neo replacement and allow the 220-500 to compete with Boeing?

Also how much advantage over the 320NEO does the 500 really give? What 3%? 5%? 10%?


If we look at weights, engine sfc, purchase costs 10% seems a reasonable figure for a "simple stretch (no new wings, engines, MTOW etc.)

If we look at the left side of the table and knowing the number of customers, sales of the A319NEO & 737-7 vs the A220-300, it might indicate the lower weight, operating costs of the A220-300 made an impact. Tyhe same could be the case for the right side of the table.
Image
keesje

A real A320 family replacement doesn't seem logical at this stage. It will probably include new energy sources (most people seem to think H2 at this moment). Airbus themselves indicated this won't be practical before 2035-2050. https://www.euronews.com/next/2021/06/1 ... -to-the-eu. Personally I think this was an un-politcal slip of the tongue by a few overly honest Airbus technies. Because soon after, Airbus changed their tone of voice. :laughing: https://centreforaviation.com/news/airb ... 27-1077982

Anyway, if a A320 replacement aircraft would fly in 2035, that's 14 years out. During which time Comac will probably have their act together, ramp-up and Boeing will be forced to launch a 737 replacement. The current backlog seems ok for a years, but they probably want to keep it stable for at least 15 years.

Image
https://www.adl-europe.com/CAPABILITIES/product-lifecycle-managment.html

Extending the product life cycles of both the A220 and A320 families would seem a logical strategic approach this decade.

Looking at market developments, growing capacity and capability while enhancing efficiency per seat/km is a proven approach for the 737, 767, A320, A330 and DC/MD80 families.

Securing marketshare and profitability longer term isn't realized by pushing out investment, consuming free cash flow and assuming competition will sit on their hands. You have to take the innitiative.

Image
keesje

ewt340 wrote:
So, it's a lot of point from you but let's answer it one by one. I used the documents both Airbus, Boeing and Bombardier provide from their own official websites. I would tag them here to explained it better:


Ah I see! Just don't go there! Ignore, it's purely marketing material. Look at real cabins, dimensions, airline specifications. Airbus Boeing and Bombardier don't decide how to configure their cabins, their customers do.

Sky high seatcount numbers work marvously for per-seat efficiency marketing statements, materials aimed at influencers, media, stockholders that don't (want to) understand. They want good news.
Last edited by keesje on Sun Oct 03, 2021 1:25 pm, edited 4 times in total.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1548
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 1:16 pm

reidar76 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
Some comparison to seating capacity amongst narrowbody in the market right now. This comparison based on speculation that Airbus would stretch A220-500 by adding 8 extra frames into the fuselage which resulted in 168" in cabin space for A220-500.

Image


I'm not saying your table is wrong, but there several prerequisites and assumptions made that are not obvious to everyone reading your post.

1) Both the A220 and 737 have the right side front door placed further forward than the left side door, while the A320 have the front doors exactly opposite of each other. When the 737 is configured with 189 seats that extra space is used for that extra half row (31 rows = 186 + half row = 189). Seats from the overwing exit to the right side front door will not be at 31 pitch. This extra space is also why Air France configures the A220-300 with 148 seats, that's half a row extra in the forward part of the cabin on the right side of the aircraft.

2) For the A220-500 you have not added an extra toilet. It will be a very short haul aircraft with 190 seats and two toilets, while both the A320 and 737-8 will have three. The A220 have two options for the front galley, one small and one slightly larger. Air France have selected the reduced front galley.

3) For the A320neo you are assuming a non-cabin flex configuration. Allmost all operators use cabin-flex on the A320neo. This will add one row to your numbers.

4) You list the A320 with 186 seats at 28" pitch. You have omitted the 29" pitch category in your table. The wast majority of rows in the A320 @ 186 seats will be at 29 inch pitch. In the forward part of the cabin the majority of seats will be at 30" pitch.

5) It looks like you have not subtracted for the extra space needed, when going from one to two overwing exits. The 737-7 needs two overwing exits from 150 passengers seats, while the A319neo/A320neo need two overwing exits exceeding 165 seats. This is due to larger front and rear doors, with dual lane slides. The 737-8200 needs an pair of additional mid-cabin doors, when exceeding 189 seats. These doors limits and restricts placement of seats, which it looks like you have not accounted for. You are assuming toilets placed rear of the rear doors, removing almost the entire rear galley on the 737.

6) The A220-300 is currently not certified for more than 148 passengers. The maximum passenger capability was recently increased from 145 to 148. Your table assumes recertification, with increased exit limits.

7) It is possible to argue that the wider seats on the A220 (and on A320), and the lower number of middle seats, will allow reduced pitch at same passenger comfort level. Space per passenger = seat width x seat pitch. By the way, the A320 is actually very slightly larger than the 737-8, in volume. The 737-8 is longer, but the A320 is wider.

If we account for all this (1 to 7), and assume at least one toilet per 65 passengers, and enough galley space for one light meal service, your table would look quite different.

For example, if we increase the length of the A220-300 by 8 frames the we could get the following number of passenger seats at 30 pitch. Air France A220-300 is at 30" pitch @ 148 seats, with reduced forward galley. For the A220-500 at 30" pitch, we could switch to a regular front galley, loosing three seats on the right side. Additionally we could add an extra toilet in the rear on the left side, loosing two seats. The A220-300 @ 30" pitch (Air France) = 148 seats, A220-500 configured similarly would then have 20 seats more, for a total of 168 seats. I have then accounted for extra space needed for an additional overwing exit. This configuration is very much comparable to the Lufthansa A320neo @ 30" pitch with 180 seats. In your table the A220-500 and the A320neo would be at 175 and 174 seats respectively, while it could very well be 168 to 180 seats with different prerequisites and assumptions.


Point Number 1) We could refer to the A220-500 and MAX7 and MAX8 pictures in my previous reply to see how Airbus, Boeing and Bombardier decide to configure their cabins. This would explained all your concerns regarding the door placements and how the space are being used.

Point Number 6) As far as I know, The 2 overwing exits IS the requirements for A220-300 to carry 160 seats. Maybe the regulations change, but as far as I know today, it's stand at 160 seats. Here is some pdf documents that you could download from Airbus directly. If you scroll down you could see Airbus listed A220-300's capacity as 160 seats max.
https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... ooklet.pdf

Point Number 7) I only calculated the space for the seat count based on how much space available in the main cabin. So I'm talking about length of the cabin rather than the width. Because comparing the width between A320neo and the MAXes are quite useless since regulators only allowed maximum of 6-abreasts configuration on a single aisle aircraft currently.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 1:32 pm

keesje wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Every NEO sold makes money, no A220 sold makes money. The 225 only makes sense if the A320 line is clocked up with A321 or/and A322.


I think this short term realism made the biggest OE in the world the second biggest. If a manufacturer concludes, based on sales, marketshare, margin and competitive developments they need to act, add 7-8 years in terms of development, certification and ramp-up of the solution.. -> No vision no glory.

The question seems to be if a 5-6 t lower empty weight of a A220-500 compared to A320/738 would really make that much of a difference for bigger airlines replacing previous generation NB's. I think yes, a big impact.


Glory does not pay bills. It is not in the interest of Airbus to have the A320 series production give up economy of scale advantages to improve the situation of the A220. The A225 makes sense, if Airbus is able to fill the capacity of the A320 production with the A225 taking a big share of the A320 sales. This only happens, if they sell even more A321s or add an A322 above it.
 
JonesNL
Posts: 804
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 1:47 pm

seahawk wrote:
keesje wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Every NEO sold makes money, no A220 sold makes money. The 225 only makes sense if the A320 line is clocked up with A321 or/and A322.


I think this short term realism made the biggest OE in the world the second biggest. If a manufacturer concludes, based on sales, marketshare, margin and competitive developments they need to act, add 7-8 years in terms of development, certification and ramp-up of the solution.. -> No vision no glory.

The question seems to be if a 5-6 t lower empty weight of a A220-500 compared to A320/738 would really make that much of a difference for bigger airlines replacing previous generation NB's. I think yes, a big impact.


Glory does not pay bills. It is not in the interest of Airbus to have the A320 series production give up economy of scale advantages to improve the situation of the A220. The A225 makes sense, if Airbus is able to fill the capacity of the A320 production with the A225 taking a big share of the A320 sales. This only happens, if they sell even more A321s or add an A322 above it.


So, launch A322 in 2023 -> if sales of A322 are more then 1000 + production costs of A220 line have dropped enough -> launch A225 in 2025.

Sounds about right...
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 2:17 pm

I wouldn't be suprised if there are some major customers that are ready to do a large ($10B?) commitment, but they need them starting 2026-27, not next decade. Big Airbus NB customers not ordering A320NEO's is an indication IMO. Same for the evaporating A220-100, A319NEO backlogs. However production rates must move up to 200-300 a year later this decade.. and that's a challenge apparently.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 24337
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 2:39 pm

If using copyright images
1. Post a source
2. Limit to "fair use" excerpts
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27477
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 3:19 pm

seahawk wrote:
Every NEO sold makes money, no A220 sold makes money. The 225 only makes sense if the A320 line is clocked up with A321 or/and A322.

It's funny how some here still see A220 as a program Airbus spent $1 on, whereas we know Airbus paid BBD $561M for their remaining share of the program, let BBD off the hook for $700M more that it had committed to invest in the program that Airbus presumably has to make up, let the Government of Quebec increase its share to 25% for free, and as above is estimated to still be losing $400M/year on the program.

Ref: https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisagarc ... 1-million/
Ref: https://leehamnews.com/2021/09/28/airbu ... cut-costs/

How many A220s does Airbus have to sell to break even on that investment? Keep in mind 25% of the revenue goes to QC, unless Airbus comes up with another $561M or so to buy them out. I think we can now see why Airbus is more reticent to invest in the program than many a.net members are.

Clearly Airbus would want to see the program generate hundreds of millions of dollars of positive cash flow to start paying down the red ink before they decide to invest hundreds of millions of dollars more in the program to do a stretch. Till then they'll keep investing in things like more A320 family production capacity in TLS, because they know they'll get a positive return on investment on that.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27477
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 3:29 pm

scbriml wrote:
Indeed, not least of which is the billions that Airbus would have to spend to bring the A225 to market. Something the fantasy brigade simply ignore.

Even if it's hundreds of millions rather than billions to bring an A225 to market, the problem is that they are already hundreds of millions in the hole, and the hole is getting deeper each year since we see they have had to invest in new facilities just to meet earlier commitments. Meanwhile they know they can invest more in A32x and get immediate returns, which is what they are doing.
 
User avatar
Taxi645
Posts: 609
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:29 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 4:15 pm

Luckily strategy planners at healthy companies not only look at the current situation/cashflow as another poster already pointed out. Any investment at any company anywhere in the world has an initial negative effect on cashflow. Wether you're investing in R&D, in tooling, in production efficiency improvements or in getting enough critical mass of planes in the air of a type you have confidence in will return a profit in the future. It's a means to an end. Everyone is getting their panties in a twist just because this investment happens to be in the form of currently selling planes without profitability. Yes, selling planes is their core revenue, but that does not mean you can not except a temporal reduction in revenue if you reckon it will gain you more in the future than it costs today.

Airbus seems to have confidence in the future product range role and profitability of the A220 program. They have indicated (as can be seen in the multiple links already in this thread) that the A220-500 is a question of when, not if. One would reckon Airbus has the most accurate assessment on the potential of future profitability and customer response on the A220 and would not be making these investments if the did not have a positive outlook. On the A320, efficiency of scale gains are very hard to come given the already huge scale of that operation. Not so on the A220. Currently I reckon they are balancing/timing on how far to open the throttle how soon, given current and future cost, opportunity and competitive landscape.
 
LCDFlight
Posts: 1834
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 4:16 pm

Revelation wrote:
scbriml wrote:
Indeed, not least of which is the billions that Airbus would have to spend to bring the A225 to market. Something the fantasy brigade simply ignore.

Even if it's hundreds of millions rather than billions to bring an A225 to market, the problem is that they are already hundreds of millions in the hole, and the hole is getting deeper each year since we see they have had to invest in new facilities just to meet earlier commitments. Meanwhile they know they can invest more in A32x and get immediate returns, which is what they are doing.


Yes, I do not think these A220 initial costs concern Airbus at all. In the long run scheme, that is nothing. Nothing compared to (arguably) 3,000 A220-500 and their fuel savings over the long term. Airbus can sell that value. Or, they can decide not to, because they may make more money the way it is now. I suspect Airbus will never have a good faith answer to this question. This competition is now within Airbus - and either way, they win. Good for Airbus; bad for everybody else.
 
JonesNL
Posts: 804
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 4:22 pm

Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Every NEO sold makes money, no A220 sold makes money. The 225 only makes sense if the A320 line is clocked up with A321 or/and A322.

It's funny how some here still see A220 as a program Airbus spent $1 on, whereas we know Airbus paid BBD $561M for their remaining share of the program, let BBD off the hook for $700M more that it had committed to invest in the program that Airbus presumably has to make up, let the Government of Quebec increase its share to 25% for free, and as above is estimated to still be losing $400M/year on the program.

Ref: https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisagarc ... 1-million/
Ref: https://leehamnews.com/2021/09/28/airbu ... cut-costs/

How many A220s does Airbus have to sell to break even on that investment? Keep in mind 25% of the revenue goes to QC, unless Airbus comes up with another $561M or so to buy them out. I think we can now see why Airbus is more reticent to invest in the program than many a.net members are.

Clearly Airbus would want to see the program generate hundreds of millions of dollars of positive cash flow to start paying down the red ink before they decide to invest hundreds of millions of dollars more in the program to do a stretch. Till then they'll keep investing in things like more A320 family production capacity in TLS, because they know they'll get a positive return on investment on that.


While the pessimism is understandable, actions speak louder than words and Airbus latest actions seem to indicate they are optimistic about the programs future…
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27477
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 5:22 pm

JonesNL wrote:
While the pessimism is understandable, actions speak louder than words and Airbus latest actions seem to indicate they are optimistic about the programs future…

Actually, Airbus's latest words seem to indicate they are optimistic about the program's future, their latest actions are that they are keeping the same targets for A220 that they have had for several years (aiming for 14/year by 2025, not going to increase investment till the program shows it can stand on its own financially) while increasing production of A320 by creating a new FAL at TLS.

To me it's spin to label this as pessimism. I think it's realism. Surely Airbus has hopes for the future of the program (as do I, believe it or not), but the evidence is that those hopes aren't on the scale that some here like to suggest. For instance, remember all those A220 at WN threads? Airbus was going to do what it took to earn the ~300 orders that ended up being MAX7, that would drive the volume A220 needed to compete with MAX and A320, yada yada. Turns out that was nonsense. We could have known it at the time if we just listened to what WN's CEO was saying instead of the inflated, imagined projections being made here on a.net. Now let's just listen to what Scherer has estimated, the stretch might happen in a time frame of about five years. I think that should be enough guidance, no need for inflation or exaggeration or "recycling" threads to try to get something new out of old news.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 7:05 pm

Revelation wrote:
Now let's just listen to what Scherer has estimated, the stretch might happen in a time frame of about five years. I think that should be enough guidance, no need for inflation or exaggeration or "recycling" threads to try to get something new out of old news.


So how long would it take to develop, build, test and certify a more efficient and environmetally friendly A220-500?

Sidenote, looking at backlogs, I don't think many A220-100 & A319 will be produced in 5 years. C919's will probably be ramping up. Airbus is trippling A220 production in 4 years. The 737-7 sells better than ever before, airlines are eager. Nothing to see here I guess. https://youtu.be/aKnX5wci404
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 7:07 pm

JonesNL wrote:
seahawk wrote:
keesje wrote:

I think this short term realism made the biggest OE in the world the second biggest. If a manufacturer concludes, based on sales, marketshare, margin and competitive developments they need to act, add 7-8 years in terms of development, certification and ramp-up of the solution.. -> No vision no glory.

The question seems to be if a 5-6 t lower empty weight of a A220-500 compared to A320/738 would really make that much of a difference for bigger airlines replacing previous generation NB's. I think yes, a big impact.


Glory does not pay bills. It is not in the interest of Airbus to have the A320 series production give up economy of scale advantages to improve the situation of the A220. The A225 makes sense, if Airbus is able to fill the capacity of the A320 production with the A225 taking a big share of the A320 sales. This only happens, if they sell even more A321s or add an A322 above it.


So, launch A322 in 2023 -> if sales of A322 are more then 1000 + production costs of A220 line have dropped enough -> launch A225 in 2025.

Sounds about right...


That is the scenario which makes sense and which would strengthen the overall position of the company.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27477
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 7:20 pm

keesje wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Now let's just listen to what Scherer has estimated, the stretch might happen in a time frame of about five years. I think that should be enough guidance, no need for inflation or exaggeration or "recycling" threads to try to get something new out of old news.

So how long would it take to develop, build, test and certify a more efficient and environmetally friendly A220-500?

It's not about how long it will take ACLP to develop, build, test and certify an A220-500, it's more about when ACLP's owners feel ACLP can financially support itself and then develop the new model too. As above, perhaps that is in five years, according to Airbus's CCO. I'm not sure why you doubt his estimate.
 
User avatar
FiscAutTecGarte
Posts: 894
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 7:49 pm

seahawk wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
seahawk wrote:

Glory does not pay bills. It is not in the interest of Airbus to have the A320 series production give up economy of scale advantages to improve the situation of the A220. The A225 makes sense, if Airbus is able to fill the capacity of the A320 production with the A225 taking a big share of the A320 sales. This only happens, if they sell even more A321s or add an A322 above it.


So, launch A322 in 2023 -> if sales of A322 are more then 1000 + production costs of A220 line have dropped enough -> launch A225 in 2025.

Sounds about right...


That is the scenario which makes sense and which would strengthen the overall position of the company.


Most of us that see the A220-500 are of that opinion as well. A320 family grows up and A321/A322 keep the production lines very busy, selling very profitable frames. A220-500 helps airbus keep the 2 A220 production lines busy as well, and guess what the A220-500 should be a very profitable fame at scale.... No one is proposing they build the A225 just because they can to the detriment of the A320 family.
 
Speedy752
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:13 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Sun Oct 03, 2021 9:53 pm

ADent wrote:
I saw an article ( https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/airc ... y-recovery ) where they said the program is limited by the original long term contracts, but "One insider says the potential A220-500, a stretched version of the -300 already on the drawing boards, could provide Airbus with an elegant solution to take more work in-house in the long term."

So there is thinking that an A220-500 may allow Airbus freedom to make changes that could help the program .


Suppliers who invested heavily in a320neo component and systems expecting a full production run and priced accordingly would not be happy if Airbus tried to make a separate platform it’s new volume aircraft. They would likely see cost increases on a321 parts unless somehow a320neos became unpopular with a zero backlog. You would also lose commonality benefits, so lessors and large operators would also likely not be pleased. The a319neo was an easy sub for a220 because of its backlog, killing of the a320neo would have larger ramifications for the whole program that I don’t think Airbus would want to step in.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Mon Oct 04, 2021 9:28 am

Speedy752 wrote:
ADent wrote:
I saw an article ( https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/airc ... y-recovery ) where they said the program is limited by the original long term contracts, but "One insider says the potential A220-500, a stretched version of the -300 already on the drawing boards, could provide Airbus with an elegant solution to take more work in-house in the long term."

So there is thinking that an A220-500 may allow Airbus freedom to make changes that could help the program .


Suppliers who invested heavily in a320neo component and systems expecting a full production run and priced accordingly would not be happy if Airbus tried to make a separate platform it’s new volume aircraft. They would likely see cost increases on a321 parts unless somehow a320neos became unpopular with a zero backlog. You would also lose commonality benefits, so lessors and large operators would also likely not be pleased. The a319neo was an easy sub for a220 because of its backlog, killing of the a320neo would have larger ramifications for the whole program that I don’t think Airbus would want to step in.


I think few people are thinking Airbus would kill the A320NEO. It's the best sold aircraft ever and there are thousands in the backlog. An A220-500 would be an additional option for operators that don't need the payload range, container compatibility and pilot ratings the A320NEO family offers.

Clinging on to cash cows, resisting enhancement out of standardisation concerns and trying to force customers into moving along, prioritizing short term free cash flow consumption, is a long term risk. You' re opening up your customer base to shop around.

Further more environmental issues may also be a key factor as well as reliance on a single aircraft or engine program play a bigger role than before.

One doesn't have to a be scientist to understand that a substantially lighter aircraft doing your 6-8 short flights a day saves a lot of money. Operators might be willing to pay a premium for such an aircraft. Because ROI looks good. The 737-8 and A320 have become "heavy", over specified for LCC operations.

Image
https://aviationweek.com/special-topics ... cost-model

Some years ago, AirAsia studied the A220 (then the Bombardier C Series). JetBlue and Breeze Airlines have already chosen to fly the A220,” von Schoenberg continues. “In addition, if the mooted A220-500 stretch becomes reality, the depth of the family’s capacity could have great appeal to LCCs, whereas the E-Jet fuselage cross section does not lend itself to an equivalent growth.”
https://aviationweek.com/special-topics ... cost-model
 
nicode
Posts: 343
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 7:58 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Mon Oct 04, 2021 10:16 am

Would it be feasible for Airbus to create a FAL in Hambourg or Toulouse in order to accelerate production and in middle term to build the A225 ?
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Mon Oct 04, 2021 12:19 pm

nicode wrote:
Would it be feasible for Airbus to create a FAL in Hambourg or Toulouse in order to accelerate production and in middle term to build the A225 ?


I guess they are in the middle of restructuring, ramping up Mirabel & Mobile with the goal of trippling production in 2025. Before production is raised to 25 per month, they probably won't consider another line. If demand is high & China commits to double the backlog, a China FAL might be more likely. The Chinese build large A220 fuselage sections, but placed no orders so far. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dw4dmgoV4AE ... name=large
 
User avatar
Taxi645
Posts: 609
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:29 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Mon Oct 04, 2021 12:43 pm

keesje wrote:
nicode wrote:
Would it be feasible for Airbus to create a FAL in Hambourg or Toulouse in order to accelerate production and in middle term to build the A225 ?


I guess they are in the middle of restructuring, ramping up Mirabel & Mobile with the goal of trippling production in 2025. Before production is raised to 25 per month, they probably won't consider another line. If demand is high & China commits to double the backlog, a China FAL might be more likely. The Chinese build large A220 fuselage sections, but placed no orders so far. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dw4dmgoV4AE ... name=large


I don't want to draw politics too far into this and obviously as ever money talks, but I do think European views on strategic investments in China is starting to shift. Why upset EU unions, expose more intellectual property and empower by having a Chinese FAL before an European one? The time for naivety has passed for a while now.
Last edited by Taxi645 on Mon Oct 04, 2021 12:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
Olddog
Posts: 1653
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Mon Oct 04, 2021 12:47 pm

I guess that if Airbus want build a FAL in EU they may consider Sevilla (Spain). Hambourg and Toulouse are already packed.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7617
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Mon Oct 04, 2021 6:08 pm

Revelation wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
While the pessimism is understandable, actions speak louder than words and Airbus latest actions seem to indicate they are optimistic about the programs future…

Actually, Airbus's latest words seem to indicate they are optimistic about the program's future, their latest actions are that they are keeping the same targets for A220 that they have had for several years (aiming for 14/year by 2025, not going to increase investment till the program shows it can stand on its own financially) while increasing production of A320 by creating a new FAL at TLS.

To me it's spin to label this as pessimism. I think it's realism. Surely Airbus has hopes for the future of the program (as do I, believe it or not), but the evidence is that those hopes aren't on the scale that some here like to suggest. For instance, remember all those A220 at WN threads? Airbus was going to do what it took to earn the ~300 orders that ended up being MAX7, that would drive the volume A220 needed to compete with MAX and A320, yada yada. Turns out that was nonsense. We could have known it at the time if we just listened to what WN's CEO was saying instead of the inflated, imagined projections being made here on a.net. Now let's just listen to what Scherer has estimated, the stretch might happen in a time frame of about five years. I think that should be enough guidance, no need for inflation or exaggeration or "recycling" threads to try to get something new out of old news.


As you say, Airbus' actions are to commit to the expansion that they targeted prior to Covid - and one which they say puts them in the black.
Accepting that increasing throughput reduces cost, I think there is also a dynamic that they'd rather produce fewer planes until the supply chain cost challenge bears fruit - can't prove that.

There's no question that Airbus are increasing NEO production.
In terms of the A220-500 debate, though, it might be worth pointing these statistics out ....

Since EIS,
the A320NEO order book has grown by 550 frames, and 1,300 have been delivered - i.e. the backlog has fallen by 750 frames
the A321NEO order book has grown by 2,600 frames in the same time, with 600 delivered - i.e. the backlog has grown by 2,000 frames

In the last 3 years..
the A320NEO order book has fallen by 330 frames, and 800 have been delivered - i.e. the backlog has fallen by 1,130 frames
the A321NEO order book has grown by 1,300 frames in the same time, with 470 delivered - i.e. the backlog has grown by 830 frames


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A3 ... deliveries

Note that with the orders, the linked wiki page does not reflect the large conversions from A320NEO to A321NEO that have occurred.
I've had to refer to records from the O+D spreadsheets I've saved from Q4 2018 for the last 3 year stats

In that context, its not impossible to imagine that the A320NEO will gradually run out of steam in its current form, and that production will focus increasingly on the more profitable A321NEO and possible A322.
According to the articles linked, Airbus have said an A220-500 launch could occur in 5 years.
That sounds like prudent option planning to me.
40 x A220-300 and -500 per month and 50 x A321NEO and A322 NEO in a decades time could be a very profitable reality.
Not saying that will happen.
But I'm not saying it won't either.
The A220 is definitely a financial marathon, not a sprint. Just like every other airliner programme this millenium.
Outside of the A320NEO itself, of course :)
Focussing on the losses in current A220 production might not be "pessimistic", but it is "short termist" ... :)

Rgds
 
tsr22
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 1:15 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Mon Oct 04, 2021 9:02 pm

Another discussion around the mythical A220 - 500, and agreed nothing much different yet from Airbus to bring any clearer outlook, albeit in these current strange days of passing optimism then false dawns. And yet whilst some customers like Air France openly champion many others like American and Delta have not yet made their selections on huge A320/800NG fleet replacement. With Boeing focused on putting its recent Max debacle behind it and successfully taking many MAX orders over the past 6 months whilst not caving to O'Leary's latest price arm-twisting perhaps Airbus cannot afford to prevaricate when a potential golden fleece may be there for the taking.
I would hope Airbus is already in discussions with existing strong partners they can trust to stick with a non-disclosure the detailed commercial benefits the plane brings, and at the justified premium price to ascertain annualised demand and revenue projections. Much enhanced production rates to hit such demand, if identified (!), should then drive existing or alternative site selection, together with the very latest state of art tooling, like the auto test tooling Lightsabre saw recently at Airbus Germany, with associated timelines and costs to be in place in time to meet said demand. And with such a potentially devastating new model at such high volumes competing long established Airbus supply chains with those inherited from Bombardier could finally solve the longstanding unit profit/loss conundrum. And if that lead to switching from supposedly unprofitable - 300s to profitable 500s it might accelerate the disposal of unhelpful albatross suppliers, streamline the production line faster, and bring forward programme profitability sooner than the oft quoted 2025 .
Should these enquiries confirm the scale and earnings Airbus hoped for then an accelerated build/flight programme should be started for a 2025 launch INTO SERVICE, if that is the outcome of the marketing exercise.
Undoubtedly a challenge but fortune favours the brave and with teams of German, French and British engineering and production experience and talent honed and blooded over the past two decades something methinks to relish!
 
yyztpa2
Posts: 391
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 8:30 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Mon Oct 04, 2021 9:16 pm

I still think that Airbus has the option to buy out the Quebec government in 2023. Until then, ACPL needs to fund internally for any development with costs to be shared between the owners. We shouldn't expect any major development program until Airbus has 100% complete control.
 
User avatar
FLALEFTY
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Mon Oct 04, 2021 10:40 pm

tsr22 wrote:
Another discussion around the mythical A220 - 500, and agreed nothing much different yet from Airbus to bring any clearer outlook, albeit in these current strange days of passing optimism then false dawns. And yet whilst some customers like Air France openly champion many others like American and Delta have not yet made their selections on huge A320/800NG fleet replacement. With Boeing focused on putting its recent Max debacle behind it and successfully taking many MAX orders over the past 6 months whilst not caving to O'Leary's latest price arm-twisting perhaps Airbus cannot afford to prevaricate when a potential golden fleece may be there for the taking.
I would hope Airbus is already in discussions with existing strong partners they can trust to stick with a non-disclosure the detailed commercial benefits the plane brings, and at the justified premium price to ascertain annualised demand and revenue projections. Much enhanced production rates to hit such demand, if identified (!), should then drive existing or alternative site selection, together with the very latest state of art tooling, like the auto test tooling Lightsabre saw recently at Airbus Germany, with associated timelines and costs to be in place in time to meet said demand. And with such a potentially devastating new model at such high volumes competing long established Airbus supply chains with those inherited from Bombardier could finally solve the longstanding unit profit/loss conundrum. And if that lead to switching from supposedly unprofitable - 300s to profitable 500s it might accelerate the disposal of unhelpful albatross suppliers, streamline the production line faster, and bring forward programme profitability sooner than the oft quoted 2025 .
Should these enquiries confirm the scale and earnings Airbus hoped for then an accelerated build/flight programme should be started for a 2025 launch INTO SERVICE, if that is the outcome of the marketing exercise.
Undoubtedly a challenge but fortune favours the brave and with teams of German, French and British engineering and production experience and talent honed and blooded over the past two decades something methinks to relish!


Prior to the pandemic, Delta's re-fleeting plan was to replace MD-88/90's, B738's and A320's with B739's and A321's (late-build CEO's, along with NEO's). Demand was there to fill the extra capacity and the profit potential more than offset the slightly higher operational costs. The pandemic messed with this plan temporarily, but as the recovery stumbles back from its late-Summer setback look for the fleet planners in Atlanta to return to their pre-pandemic plan.

Where I think Delta might go in the near-future is ordering some more A223's to facilitate the full retirement of B717's and A319's. I am thinking this order will materialize in a year or two. The future Delta narrowbody fleet will probably go from 109 seats (A221), 130 seats (A223), 180 seats (B739) and 191/192 seats (A321). It is possible that the A220's might get "densified" to 114 (A221) and 135 seats (A223) closing some of the capacity gap at the lower end of the range and generate more revenue.

As for American, they have already committed to the B737-8 as their mid-capacity narrowbody jet of the future. Expect them to order more as their B738 and A320 fleets age out. This same scenario also exists at UA.

What the Airbus needs is for AF/KLM to convince one, or both of their EU competitors, Lufthansa Group and IAG, to help champion the launch of the A225 program. That would give Airbus a good order base of 200 to 300 of the type. Due to the expensive, weight-based landing fees in the EU, a midsize aircraft lighter and more efficient than the B737-8 and A320NEO would be a great add.
 
oldJoe
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:04 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Mon Oct 04, 2021 11:35 pm

Olddog wrote:
I guess that if Airbus want build a FAL in EU they may consider Sevilla (Spain). Hambourg and Toulouse are already packed.


Toulouse packed ? What about the closed A380 FAL and the outfitting in Hamburg? Plenty of space, isn`t it ?
 
marcelh
Posts: 2098
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 6:07 am

oldJoe wrote:
Olddog wrote:
I guess that if Airbus want build a FAL in EU they may consider Sevilla (Spain). Hambourg and Toulouse are already packed.


Toulouse packed ? What about the closed A380 FAL and the outfitting in Hamburg? Plenty of space, isn`t it ?

IIRC the closed A380 FAL will become an A32x FAL.
 
User avatar
Pythagoras
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2020 12:33 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 6:53 am

This is like a game of chess. Sometimes you need to sacrifice a piece to gain a strategic advantage. Whether the A220-500 can be sold for a premium should not be the reason for launching the program. If Airbus stretches the A220 and re-wings the A320, it is game over for Boeing as far as market share goes. Boeing can't respond in the near term with the debt that its carrying and a production system in transition to effectively counter both moves should they occur simultaneously. Once Airbus has market share, you just take advantage of economies of scale to make the profit. Profit per unit isn't the key metric. It is the cumulative profit over the life of the program that matters.
 
Jomar777
Posts: 712
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 8:45 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 8:17 am

I am sorry but I simply do not get it. We have discussed the A220-500 soooo many times and the answer is simply one: no point in doing it. The A220 firstly needs to become profitable. Then it needs to be positioned as such as avoiding dilute the A320 orders. Why would Airbus create a direct competitor to their main product? Also, the A320 has one thing with their start product (the A321 portfolio of NEO, LR and XLR) which the A220 does not have: commonality. It is a hard drive to sell an A225 to a customer that would normally consider a A320 since it has A321s (e.g. Easyjet and Wizzair).

I believe that, in some shape or form we would have the A220-500 - when Airbus revamp the whole portfolio by offering a brand new MOM that would replace the whole A220 & A320 family so they would have commonality across the board and also be able to position its offering better. Do not know when that will happen tough...
 
JonesNL
Posts: 804
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 9:17 am

astuteman wrote:
Revelation wrote:
...


In the last 3 years..
the A320NEO order book has fallen by 330 frames, and 800 have been delivered - i.e. the backlog has fallen by 1,130 frames
the A321NEO order book has grown by 1,300 frames in the same time, with 470 delivered - i.e. the backlog has grown by 830 frames

Rgds


In 6 years the backlog of the A320 will have shrunk by 2260 frames using a linear extrapolation from this data, while trends like this usually accelerate faster than the linear trend.

One could say that it seems that the A320 is not competitive compared to the A321 and 737 MAX 8 and Airbus needs to act to get a bigger slice of that segment in the NB market.
 
BrianDromey
Posts: 3310
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:23 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 10:03 am

keesje wrote:
I think this short term realism made the biggest OE in the world the second biggest. If a manufacturer concludes, based on sales, marketshare, margin and competitive developments they need to act, add 7-8 years in terms of development, certification and ramp-up of the solution.. -> No vision no glory.

I agree with you. Boeing got too busy complaining about the C-Series, pushed Bombardier into the hands of Airbus and then spent time on their abortive joint venture with Embraer, while focussing on further developments of already optimised aircraft (MAX and 77X). If you go back 30 years this is a replay of the MDD merger with the DC-9/10 to MD90/11.

Boeing has gotten itself into a strategic problem, Airbus has a nicely rounded portfolio from 100 to 500 seats. The Airbus family covers the F100/73G size, the 738/A320 and the A321/752 size categories quite nicely. There is still room to further improve the A32x platform by adding a new wing and/or stretching the fuselage. Any inherent weight penalty for the smaller versions can be mitigated by offering the A220 family, see the Qantas RFQ, for example. This is the issue for Boeing, what is their route to market for a new aircraft family? If they target ~250 seats with transcend USA range there must be a real risk that Airbus slaps new centerbox/wings, stretches the fuselage and puts engines destined for the NSA on the A321. Although not without risk and expense, thats a lot cheaper than a clean-sheet.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 10:57 am

Thnx Astuteman for digging up the numbers.

:arrow: It's evident to A320NEO has been surrendering marketshare, even without an A220-500 "competing".

The A320 isn't a bad aircraft. Contrary, probably the best ever (6000 deliveries) for Airbus, it brought them were they are today. But market requirements seem to slowly outgrown A320 capacity. If the trend is clear, why try to cling on to existing products when you have a solution in house? Didn't work out well for the competitor (bumping the NSA, CSeries and Embraer).

Airbus is transferring billions across the Atlantic to have the Canadians / Americans restructure, streamline and bump up A220 production. Short term profitability is set aside for long term profitability.

While I agree with most, the program needs to reach economies of scale, Airbus must also be responsive to market requirements. The A319NEO and A220-100, from a commercial standpoint, seem to have lost out, even before they really took off. That shrinks the Airbus NB portfolio from below.

In my opinion the A320 has already become the smallest A320 family offering (that sells). The gab between the A320 and A321 (40+ seats) could be taken care of to assure dominance in the >170 seat NB segment for years to come (e.g. a A320Plus).

Image
Source: Boeing, viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1405623

Having the A220 remaining a dual aircraft offering, now that the A220-100 backlog is also evaporating ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_A ... y_customer ) seems a logical roadmap ahead. Airbus seems to confirm their intentions (Scherer interview).

The past has shown, Airbus aren't shy to move ahead, not being distracted by endless risk analyses and hiding behind short term cash flow / divident / bonus considerations. I think Airbus are closely monitoring A220 supply chain, cost and ramp-up progress to see what, when is possible & responsible.

Image
A220 new "fuselage sections pre-stuffing" facilities, source: https://leehamnews.com/2021/09/28/airbu ... cut-costs/

If they have confidence in the supply chain, production will be ramped up further later this decade.

:arrow: Did Airbus state they first want the program to be profitable, focus on output first? Yes!
:arrow: Will Airbus adjust, if the market changes and customer pressure to move builds up? Most likely!
 
ewt340
Posts: 1548
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 12:07 pm

keesje wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Now let's just listen to what Scherer has estimated, the stretch might happen in a time frame of about five years. I think that should be enough guidance, no need for inflation or exaggeration or "recycling" threads to try to get something new out of old news.


So how long would it take to develop, build, test and certify a more efficient and environmetally friendly A220-500?

Sidenote, looking at backlogs, I don't think many A220-100 & A319 will be produced in 5 years. C919's will probably be ramping up. Airbus is trippling A220 production in 4 years. The 737-7 sells better than ever before, airlines are eager. Nothing to see here I guess. https://youtu.be/aKnX5wci404


Apart from Southwest, I don't see how MAX7 would sell more than it is now. If we look at the costumer base for MAX7, it clearly shown that only 2 airlines actually ordered it. Sure, Boeing didn't disclose all the order's variant in their order book since many airlines could swap the models they see fit in the future.
But there seems to be little evidence for many airlines to choose MAX7 over the superior MAX8.

As for C919. I don't think China would be interested in ramping up the production of C919 until they actually delivered significant amount of the backlogs and then start seeing significant sales outside of China.
They could ramp up the production as much as they want. But unless they got international costumers at significant numbers, it would be a waste of money for them and could sink their profit.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1548
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 12:17 pm

JonesNL wrote:
astuteman wrote:
Revelation wrote:
...


In the last 3 years..
the A320NEO order book has fallen by 330 frames, and 800 have been delivered - i.e. the backlog has fallen by 1,130 frames
the A321NEO order book has grown by 1,300 frames in the same time, with 470 delivered - i.e. the backlog has grown by 830 frames

Rgds


In 6 years the backlog of the A320 will have shrunk by 2260 frames using a linear extrapolation from this data, while trends like this usually accelerate faster than the linear trend.

One could say that it seems that the A320 is not competitive compared to the A321 and 737 MAX 8 and Airbus needs to act to get a bigger slice of that segment in the NB market.


Exactly. Also, many people keep focusing soo much on comparison between A220-500 and A320neo. Even though, the main reason for A220-500 would be to counter and compete with MAX8.
While it would eat up at A320neo future sales. It would also affect MAX8 sales.

Looking at MAX sales, we see significant jump on sales after the grounding got lifted. People still hang up soo much on A321neo/XLR and the grounding, that they think MAX isn't going to gain any momentum. With Southwest order and the the United order, Followed by speculation that Delta might be interested in ordering the MAX. Airbus need to do something radical because clearly, these airlines didn't see any benefits to order A320neo. It's there, they don't order it no more.

Significant fuel savings would be the only way to beat MAX8 and slows its momentum.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7617
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 1:30 pm

JonesNL wrote:
astuteman wrote:
Revelation wrote:
...


In the last 3 years..
the A320NEO order book has fallen by 330 frames, and 800 have been delivered - i.e. the backlog has fallen by 1,130 frames
the A321NEO order book has grown by 1,300 frames in the same time, with 470 delivered - i.e. the backlog has grown by 830 frames

Rgds


In 6 years the backlog of the A320 will have shrunk by 2260 frames using a linear extrapolation from this data, while trends like this usually accelerate faster than the linear trend.

One could say that it seems that the A320 is not competitive compared to the A321 and 737 MAX 8 and Airbus needs to act to get a bigger slice of that segment in the NB market.


In terms of competitiveness with the 737-8, at 3,800 sales the A320NEO has almost certainly matched the 737-8 in the marketplace.
It's clear that the A321NEO has greater appeal in the marketplace in recent years - I'm waiting to see if the 737-10 reflects a similar trend in the MAX family.
I think it has passed a lot of people by that the A320NEO order book actually shrank in the last 3 years - it's been buried by the A321NEO landslide.

I can certainly see Airbus looking to push bigger NEO's (the A321NEO and a possible A322NEO) as they will command greater margin than the A320NEO (I suspect).
I also think that in terms of final assembly, the economy of scale in terms of production volume becomes a diminishing return beyond a certain point.
Most posters making efficiency claims on volume have experienced it at component level. Complex product final assembly is a different animal.
Most of my experience is in this field.

I'm not saying its a fact, but I can see a scenario where Airbus push an A220-500 in c. 5 years time, and target output levels of 30 or 40 per month, letting the A320NEO wither, and focussing NEO sales on higher margin models.

I think people looking at today's production rate and loss rate are either missing or avoiding a bigger picture.
Armchair CEO is a great job role.
But these big companies will put a lot of thought into this crucial narrowbody market segment, and will have a longer term strategy view in mind when making decisions at time now.

Rgds
 
astuteman
Posts: 7617
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 1:35 pm

Jomar777 wrote:
I am sorry but I simply do not get it. We have discussed the A220-500 soooo many times and the answer is simply one: no point in doing it. The A220 firstly needs to become profitable. Then it needs to be positioned as such as avoiding dilute the A320 orders. Why would Airbus create a direct competitor to their main product? Also, the A320 has one thing with their start product (the A321 portfolio of NEO, LR and XLR) which the A220 does not have: commonality. It is a hard drive to sell an A225 to a customer that would normally consider a A320 since it has A321s (e.g. Easyjet and Wizzair)...


Thanks for the opinion. I don't agree that the answer is anything like as simple or clear cut as you make out - explanation in the post above.
The A320NEO may be over the order hump already.
Yes, A220 needs to become profitable - Airbus suggest 2025-2026 for this.
By then we'll have a clearer view on the trajectory for the A320NEO.
You never know, it may be ripe for being replaced in the line up by an A220-500 by then.
If you had said "there's no point in doing it right now", I would have agreed :)

Rgds
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14915
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 1:52 pm

astuteman wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
astuteman wrote:

In the last 3 years..
the A320NEO order book has fallen by 330 frames, and 800 have been delivered - i.e. the backlog has fallen by 1,130 frames
the A321NEO order book has grown by 1,300 frames in the same time, with 470 delivered - i.e. the backlog has grown by 830 frames

Rgds

It's clear that the A321NEO has greater appeal in the marketplace in recent years - I'm waiting to see if the 737-10 reflects a similar trend in the MAX family.


And it's an easy up-sell. An Airline pays somewhat more to buy it and very little more to run an A321neo vs. an A320neo, but gets more capacity, more range and very much the same field performance for it's money. The -10 isn't that simple, costing range and field performance.

Best regards
Thomas
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 2:10 pm

ewt340 wrote:
Significant fuel savings would be the only way to beat MAX8 and slows its momentum.


The A320NEO is a bit lighter than the 737-8, has ~4% better sfc LEAPS because of its higher BPR, that have lower thrust rates too. 737-8 burning less fuel than a A320NEO would be a miracle IMO.

I doubt if Airbus will "ever" replace the A320NEO. It still has a huge customer base, backlog and unique capability. Even compared to an A220-500 (range, AKH). Top up orders will be substantial.

:arrow: An A220-500 would be an addition, offering unmatched effiency on shorter, lighter flights. Production volumes (6/month today going 15 by 2025) only half A320 family volumes (45/month today going 64 by 2023) would be at least a decade away..
Last edited by keesje on Tue Oct 05, 2021 2:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27477
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 2:11 pm

astuteman wrote:
I think it has passed a lot of people by that the A320NEO order book actually shrank in the last 3 years - it's been buried by the A321NEO landslide.

A shift to the larger size doesn't necessarily mean a lack of interest in the smaller size, it can very well mean a stronger interest in the larger one in the near term and once that need is filled the desire for the smaller can be filled after. This is what happened with WN's short term shift to bringing -800/MAX8 on board. They already had enough -700s to fill the smaller role while the desire for the larger plane was being filled.

Just because airlines are shifting orders to A321neo doesn't mean they want to abandon A320neo for A220-500.

astuteman wrote:
I'm not saying its a fact, but I can see a scenario where Airbus push an A220-500 in c. 5 years time, and target output levels of 30 or 40 per month, letting the A320NEO wither, and focussing NEO sales on higher margin models.

Just getting to 14/month has been a big goal for quite a long time. Aiming for 2x-3x of that will be a big ask for the rest of the supply chain. I think we might have heard some sort of signal along that front, just like we hear Airbus signaling they want to get to 60/month for the A320 family. They would need their partners to be planning such an investment a long time in advance. Yet what we do hear seems to be much more tepid than what we read posted here. Not saying it won't/can't happen, am pointing out we are well out ahead of events in the real world.

astuteman wrote:
I think people looking at today's production rate and loss rate are either missing or avoiding a bigger picture.
Armchair CEO is a great job role.
But these big companies will put a lot of thought into this crucial narrowbody market segment, and will have a longer term strategy view in mind when making decisions at time now.

I think such plans will have "gates" for the program to get through, and that's what the messaging indicates. Let's see them get to positive consistent financial and production results and consider if their partner IQ holding 25% of the program should be bought out before deciding to invest in a huge increase in production rate and a new model to boot.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7617
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 3:19 pm

Revelation wrote:
astuteman wrote:
I think people looking at today's production rate and loss rate are either missing or avoiding a bigger picture.
Armchair CEO is a great job role.
But these big companies will put a lot of thought into this crucial narrowbody market segment, and will have a longer term strategy view in mind when making decisions at time now.

I think such plans will have "gates" for the program to get through, and that's what the messaging indicates. Let's see them get to positive consistent financial and production results and consider if their partner IQ holding 25% of the program should be bought out before deciding to invest in a huge increase in production rate and a new model to boot.


I don't disagree with this at all. I think the notion of the "gated" approach is what Airbus are doing.
I think its worth keeping our powder dry as the gates evolve.
I think the feel of a 5 year timespan before Airbus get into decision mode makes sense.
FWIW I don't think the A320NEO is in imminent danger of going away, but I can see options for an A220-500 at one end of the spectrum, as I have described, that I consider plausible if nothing else.

I'm not in the "A220-500 just won't happen - period" camp, any more than I am in the "A220-500 is a given" camp.

Rgds
 
User avatar
Taxi645
Posts: 609
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 7:29 pm

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 4:17 pm

Well strangely, we've seem to have reached some sort of consensus on this for a change (at least some).
 
flightsimer
Posts: 1306
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 5:38 pm

I personally think the A220-500 is further along than anyone realizes.

I’ve been hearing strong rumors that a certain blue carrier has already signed up for it.

Obviously,
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 8:23 pm

If you are an A220 operator the option to order a growth version seems attractive.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/simpleflyi ... retch/amp/
 
TObound
Posts: 997
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Tue Oct 05, 2021 11:54 pm

FLALEFTY wrote:
tsr22 wrote:
Another discussion around the mythical A220 - 500, and agreed nothing much different yet from Airbus to bring any clearer outlook, albeit in these current strange days of passing optimism then false dawns. And yet whilst some customers like Air France openly champion many others like American and Delta have not yet made their selections on huge A320/800NG fleet replacement. With Boeing focused on putting its recent Max debacle behind it and successfully taking many MAX orders over the past 6 months whilst not caving to O'Leary's latest price arm-twisting perhaps Airbus cannot afford to prevaricate when a potential golden fleece may be there for the taking.
I would hope Airbus is already in discussions with existing strong partners they can trust to stick with a non-disclosure the detailed commercial benefits the plane brings, and at the justified premium price to ascertain annualised demand and revenue projections. Much enhanced production rates to hit such demand, if identified (!), should then drive existing or alternative site selection, together with the very latest state of art tooling, like the auto test tooling Lightsabre saw recently at Airbus Germany, with associated timelines and costs to be in place in time to meet said demand. And with such a potentially devastating new model at such high volumes competing long established Airbus supply chains with those inherited from Bombardier could finally solve the longstanding unit profit/loss conundrum. And if that lead to switching from supposedly unprofitable - 300s to profitable 500s it might accelerate the disposal of unhelpful albatross suppliers, streamline the production line faster, and bring forward programme profitability sooner than the oft quoted 2025 .
Should these enquiries confirm the scale and earnings Airbus hoped for then an accelerated build/flight programme should be started for a 2025 launch INTO SERVICE, if that is the outcome of the marketing exercise.
Undoubtedly a challenge but fortune favours the brave and with teams of German, French and British engineering and production experience and talent honed and blooded over the past two decades something methinks to relish!


Prior to the pandemic, Delta's re-fleeting plan was to replace MD-88/90's, B738's and A320's with B739's and A321's (late-build CEO's, along with NEO's). Demand was there to fill the extra capacity and the profit potential more than offset the slightly higher operational costs. The pandemic messed with this plan temporarily, but as the recovery stumbles back from its late-Summer setback look for the fleet planners in Atlanta to return to their pre-pandemic plan.

Where I think Delta might go in the near-future is ordering some more A223's to facilitate the full retirement of B717's and A319's. I am thinking this order will materialize in a year or two. The future Delta narrowbody fleet will probably go from 109 seats (A221), 130 seats (A223), 180 seats (B739) and 191/192 seats (A321). It is possible that the A220's might get "densified" to 114 (A221) and 135 seats (A223) closing some of the capacity gap at the lower end of the range and generate more revenue.

As for American, they have already committed to the B737-8 as their mid-capacity narrowbody jet of the future. Expect them to order more as their B738 and A320 fleets age out. This same scenario also exists at UA.

What the Airbus needs is for AF/KLM to convince one, or both of their EU competitors, Lufthansa Group and IAG, to help champion the launch of the A225 program. That would give Airbus a good order base of 200 to 300 of the type. Due to the expensive, weight-based landing fees in the EU, a midsize aircraft lighter and more efficient than the B737-8 and A320NEO would be a great add.


It's not just landing fees. We're back to $80/bbl and substantial underinvestment in oil exploration means high oil prices are here to stay. As are carbon taxes coming all over the place. And substantial consumer and regulatory pressure to reduce emissions. This is a completely different environment in the 2020s than the 2010s.

I imagine authorities and the public will start to take a dim view of a duopoly actively holding back more efficient products to keep their margins up. People seem to forget that it's actually possible to regulate or tax aviation into substitution in some cases (especially places with substantial rail infrastructure).
 
TObound
Posts: 997
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Wed Oct 06, 2021 12:06 am

JonesNL wrote:
astuteman wrote:
Revelation wrote:
...


In the last 3 years..
the A320NEO order book has fallen by 330 frames, and 800 have been delivered - i.e. the backlog has fallen by 1,130 frames
the A321NEO order book has grown by 1,300 frames in the same time, with 470 delivered - i.e. the backlog has grown by 830 frames

Rgds


In 6 years the backlog of the A320 will have shrunk by 2260 frames using a linear extrapolation from this data, while trends like this usually accelerate faster than the linear trend.

One could say that it seems that the A320 is not competitive compared to the A321 and 737 MAX 8 and Airbus needs to act to get a bigger slice of that segment in the NB market.


What Airbus needs is a 40.5m aircraft that is between the Max 8 and Max 9 in size, and comfortably fits 200 seats for the LCCs. And while LCCs are asking them for this, the mainline carries are probably asking for 321 stretch that gets to between a 752 and 753 with TATL range. I foresee a two member, 3rd generation of 320 family filling this need before the end of the decade.

And that in turn opens up room for the 225, which will nicely boost margins and profitability across the entire 220 program.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Airbus pushed for A220-500, replacing A320CEO / 737-800.. ?

Wed Oct 06, 2021 7:50 am

The A321 sells because it is often the logical replacement of the A320, that you ordered 15 years ago. The natural growths of demand, means that a A321 is the better choice on routes currently seeing the A320. Another point is that there are very few A321CEOs to be had used.

Imho Airbus needs to launch the A322 before it can launch the A225.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

Who is online

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