Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27477
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Mon Oct 11, 2021 3:34 pm

Taxi645 wrote:
I think Keesje floated the A320.5 quite a while before Airbus even took over the C-series.

The argumention can be found on the first post here on A.net

Fair enough, instead of newly created from thin air, it's a reincarnation to make room for the A225.

Still seems pretty dubious to me.

The leeham article features a photoshop culled from a.net.

Seems pretty circular to me.
 
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 11, 2021 3:49 pm

JonesNL wrote:
Differentiation is just not there. Want more seats than A320, just get the A321 and be happy about the extra seats…


Revelation wrote:
Fair enough, instead of newly created from thin air, it's a reincarnation to make room for the A225.

Still seems pretty dubious to me.

The leeham article features a photoshop culled from a.net.

Seems pretty circular to me.


Yes circular would seem appropriate, although I don't see that really as a problem. A manufacture needs a keenly layed out product range.

The A320.5 (simple stretch, engine PIP and possible the new wing) vs. the A321; Similar seat mile fuel burn, but in a smaller package and slightly less range.
The A220-500 vs. The A320.5 (simple stretch, engine PIP and possible the new wing); probably bit lower seat mile fuel burn, in a smaller package and significantly less range.

So all three would each have their different role in the production range.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27477
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Mon Oct 11, 2021 4:02 pm

Taxi645 wrote:
Yes circular would seem appropriate, although I don't see that really as a problem. A manufacture needs a keenly layed out product range.

The A320.5 (simple stretch, engine PIP and possible the new wing) vs. the A321; Similar seat mile fuel burn, but in a smaller package and slightly less range.
The A220-500 vs. The A320.5 (simple stretch, engine PIP and possible the new wing); probably bit lower seat mile fuel burn, in a smaller package and significantly less range.

So all three would each have their different role in the production range.

Indeed a manufacturer needs a keenly layed out product range, and Airbus has not included A320.5 going back to the days of the CEO and also did not include one during the CEO to NEO transition. They even started with 'A330-lite' and evolved through A350 to A350-XWB which is a huge success and dropped A358 during the process when it did not pencil out.

Seems to me that they are taking a keen look at their product range, and are not including things just because they look good in photoshop.
 
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 11, 2021 4:08 pm

Revelation wrote:
Taxi645 wrote:
Yes circular would seem appropriate, although I don't see that really as a problem. A manufacture needs a keenly layed out product range.

The A320.5 (simple stretch, engine PIP and possible the new wing) vs. the A321; Similar seat mile fuel burn, but in a smaller package and slightly less range.
The A220-500 vs. The A320.5 (simple stretch, engine PIP and possible the new wing); probably bit lower seat mile fuel burn, in a smaller package and significantly less range.

So all three would each have their different role in the production range.

Indeed a manufacturer needs a keenly layed out product range, and Airbus has not included A320.5 going back to the days of the CEO and also did not include one during the CEO to NEO transition. They even started with 'A330-lite' and evolved through A350 to A350-XWB which is a huge success and dropped A358 during the process when it did not pencil out.

Seems to me that they are taking a keen look at their product range, and are not including things just because they look good in photoshop.


Yes, seem to me as well. That said, there are a few arguments for an A320.5 that weren't in play earlier or to a lesser extend:

1 It would make room for the A220-500
2 Historically efficiency improvements have translated into simple stretches to convert unneeded range into further CASM improvements. This would very much be the case if the new wing would apply to the whole A320NEO range instead of only the more capable models.
3 A320 sales are tapering off as Astuteman has quite clearly pointed out.
 
Elementalism
Posts: 688
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

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

Mon Oct 11, 2021 5:04 pm

I just dont see the allure of an A220-500. Isnt one of the benefits of the A320 it takes containers? And doesnt the A220 have worse cargo payload than its 6 wide competitors? I feel like the A220 is right where it needs to be. In the sub 150 market.
 
Kikko19
Posts: 933
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 4:45 pm

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

Mon Oct 11, 2021 6:11 pm

Elementalism wrote:
I just dont see the allure of an A220-500. Isnt one of the benefits of the A320 it takes containers? And doesnt the A220 have worse cargo payload than its 6 wide competitors? I feel like the A220 is right where it needs to be. In the sub 150 market.

What would be the consumption advantage over the 737/8?
 
Speedy752
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:13 am

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

Mon Oct 11, 2021 7:24 pm

I still think we’re ignoring some business aspects. 1. This is a duopoly, so Airbus spending $1 more on development to sell to the same people is $1 less in profit unless they find a way to get their customers to pay more for an a320.5/a225 which is probably a hard sell for most. It’s not like there’s an airline waiting to jump in for these planes which would actually bring incremental sales. Customers will buy current offerings. 2. Because this is a duopoly you have to consider competitors responses. Status quo is maintained because of the 738 and 321 strengths in their segments. Abandoning this could lead Boeing to develop a new aircraft, which could hose up Airbus’ plans completely. Airbus’ incentive is currently to do nothing. They also likely want to size up how important commonality between 150-200 seat aircraft and 200+ Seat aircraft is to determine what segment to target with their next planes. An a321 without an a320 could become a 757, excellent plane but not sufficient volume to make it compelling and widely used. I also believe once final XLR and MAX10 variants are done we’ve likely seen the terminal iterations of both planes since it’s clear the MAX won’t have another redesign and the NEO will be based on a 40 year old design soon and forced to follow.
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

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

Mon Oct 11, 2021 10:08 pm

Elementalism wrote:
I just dont see the allure of an A220-500. Isnt one of the benefits of the A320 it takes containers? And doesnt the A220 have worse cargo payload than its 6 wide competitors? I feel like the A220 is right where it needs to be. In the sub 150 market.


The container conversation only comes up when people want to disparage the 737 (even though it offers containers as well now). There are plenty of 737s, A220s and even A320s flying in Europe not using containers
 
trex8
Posts: 5852
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

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

Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:23 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Elementalism wrote:
I just dont see the allure of an A220-500. Isnt one of the benefits of the A320 it takes containers? And doesnt the A220 have worse cargo payload than its 6 wide competitors? I feel like the A220 is right where it needs to be. In the sub 150 market.


The container conversation only comes up when people want to disparage the 737 (even though it offers containers as well now). There are plenty of 737s, A220s and even A320s flying in Europe not using containers


The 737 can carry containers underfloor?? Not standard ones surely??
 
bigb
Posts: 1779
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

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

Mon Oct 11, 2021 11:39 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Elementalism wrote:
I just dont see the allure of an A220-500. Isnt one of the benefits of the A320 it takes containers? And doesnt the A220 have worse cargo payload than its 6 wide competitors? I feel like the A220 is right where it needs to be. In the sub 150 market.


The container conversation only comes up when people want to disparage the 737 (even though it offers containers as well now). There are plenty of 737s, A220s and even A320s flying in Europe not using containers


I’ll argue that airlines aren’t picking aircraft based on the ability to carry containers…. A lot of folks put way too much emphasis on containers…
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 12:52 am

trex8 wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Elementalism wrote:
I just dont see the allure of an A220-500. Isnt one of the benefits of the A320 it takes containers? And doesnt the A220 have worse cargo payload than its 6 wide competitors? I feel like the A220 is right where it needs to be. In the sub 150 market.


The container conversation only comes up when people want to disparage the 737 (even though it offers containers as well now). There are plenty of 737s, A220s and even A320s flying in Europe not using containers


The 737 can carry containers underfloor?? Not standard ones surely??


Telair makes containers that fit under the 737 door. Someone can probably make one for the A220 if they were super important. they’re not the same as those used on the A320.

bigb wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Elementalism wrote:
I just dont see the allure of an A220-500. Isnt one of the benefits of the A320 it takes containers? And doesnt the A220 have worse cargo payload than its 6 wide competitors? I feel like the A220 is right where it needs to be. In the sub 150 market.


The container conversation only comes up when people want to disparage the 737 (even though it offers containers as well now). There are plenty of 737s, A220s and even A320s flying in Europe not using containers


I’ll argue that airlines aren’t picking aircraft based on the ability to carry containers…. A lot of folks put way too much emphasis on containers…


I couldn’t agree more.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1825
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 12:57 am

bigb wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Elementalism wrote:
I just dont see the allure of an A220-500. Isnt one of the benefits of the A320 it takes containers? And doesnt the A220 have worse cargo payload than its 6 wide competitors? I feel like the A220 is right where it needs to be. In the sub 150 market.


The container conversation only comes up when people want to disparage the 737 (even though it offers containers as well now). There are plenty of 737s, A220s and even A320s flying in Europe not using containers


I’ll argue that airlines aren’t picking aircraft based on the ability to carry containers…. A lot of folks put way too much emphasis on containers…


Agree completely. So tired of that argument against the 767.

You buy containers to fit your airplane, not the other way around. And the argument for containers in narrowbodies is far from solid imho, and in the opinion of many airlines.
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 12:59 am

SteelChair wrote:
bigb wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:

The container conversation only comes up when people want to disparage the 737 (even though it offers containers as well now). There are plenty of 737s, A220s and even A320s flying in Europe not using containers


I’ll argue that airlines aren’t picking aircraft based on the ability to carry containers…. A lot of folks put way too much emphasis on containers…


Agree completely. So tired of that argument against the 767.

You buy containers to fit your airplane, not the other way around. And the argument for containers in narrowbodies is far from solid imho, and in the opinion of many airlines.


I assume you meant 737 since the 767 is probably the most popular freighter right now. More 767s have been sold this year than any other widebody.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 21236
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 7:12 am

Revelation wrote:
Honestly, the A320.5 thing seems to be manufactured hype.


It seems that as both OEMs produce fewer new models, the number of suggested fantasy planes on a.net increases in direct proportion. :spin:
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 7:20 am

This happens if you think Airbus and Boeing only exist to beat each other, while they are actually meant to make money. We have seen crazy ideas like doing a new aircraft for less than 5% gain in efficiency, or doing a new wing for 3% efficiency or 10% more range to fly some fringe routes. Fact is that the A320 series and 737 series are positioned in a way that makes it certain, that both OEMs will see enough sales to be happy. In a duopoly this is just fine and neither OEM will have any interest in turning this duopoly into a monopoly.
 
JonesNL
Posts: 807
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 8:01 am

Taxi645 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Taxi645 wrote:
Yes circular would seem appropriate, although I don't see that really as a problem. A manufacture needs a keenly layed out product range.

The A320.5 (simple stretch, engine PIP and possible the new wing) vs. the A321; Similar seat mile fuel burn, but in a smaller package and slightly less range.
The A220-500 vs. The A320.5 (simple stretch, engine PIP and possible the new wing); probably bit lower seat mile fuel burn, in a smaller package and significantly less range.

So all three would each have their different role in the production range.

Indeed a manufacturer needs a keenly layed out product range, and Airbus has not included A320.5 going back to the days of the CEO and also did not include one during the CEO to NEO transition. They even started with 'A330-lite' and evolved through A350 to A350-XWB which is a huge success and dropped A358 during the process when it did not pencil out.

Seems to me that they are taking a keen look at their product range, and are not including things just because they look good in photoshop.


Yes, seem to me as well. That said, there are a few arguments for an A320.5 that weren't in play earlier or to a lesser extend:

1 It would make room for the A220-500
2 Historically efficiency improvements have translated into simple stretches to convert unneeded range into further CASM improvements. This would very much be the case if the new wing would apply to the whole A320NEO range instead of only the more capable models.
3 A320 sales are tapering off as Astuteman has quite clearly pointed out.


1. The A225 is only worth it if it can stand its own against the A320 and 737 MAX, albeit in a smaller niche. If not, it is not worth investing.
2. If you want better CASM, get A321.
3. A320 sales are not important if A225 and A322 fill the backlogs...

The A320.5 is a fantasy that doesn't exists outside the internet. Otherwise Airbus would have introduced it years a go...
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 8:16 am

JonesNL wrote:
Taxi645 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Indeed a manufacturer needs a keenly layed out product range, and Airbus has not included A320.5 going back to the days of the CEO and also did not include one during the CEO to NEO transition. They even started with 'A330-lite' and evolved through A350 to A350-XWB which is a huge success and dropped A358 during the process when it did not pencil out.

Seems to me that they are taking a keen look at their product range, and are not including things just because they look good in photoshop.


Yes, seem to me as well. That said, there are a few arguments for an A320.5 that weren't in play earlier or to a lesser extend:

1 It would make room for the A220-500
2 Historically efficiency improvements have translated into simple stretches to convert unneeded range into further CASM improvements. This would very much be the case if the new wing would apply to the whole A320NEO range instead of only the more capable models.
3 A320 sales are tapering off as Astuteman has quite clearly pointed out.


1. The A225 is only worth it if it can stand its own against the A320 and 737 MAX, albeit in a smaller niche. If not, it is not worth investing.
2. If you want better CASM, get A321.
3. A320 sales are not important if A225 and A322 fill the backlogs...

The A320.5 is a fantasy that doesn't exists outside the internet. Otherwise Airbus would have introduced it years a go...

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1HH1SS

It also exists at Airbus, but was shelved 3 years ago amid ramp up issues.
 
marcelh
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 8:21 am

JonesNL wrote:
The A320.5 is a fantasy that doesn't exists outside the internet. Otherwise Airbus would have introduced it years a go...

I bet Airbus has at least a concept of an "A320.5" and they know very well the pros and cons of this design. IMHO it isn't an "internet fantasy", but an more like an option which doesn't tick all the boxes for Airbus in current market yet.
 
JonesNL
Posts: 807
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 8:49 am

marcelh wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
The A320.5 is a fantasy that doesn't exists outside the internet. Otherwise Airbus would have introduced it years a go...

I bet Airbus has at least a concept of an "A320.5" and they know very well the pros and cons of this design. IMHO it isn't an "internet fantasy", but an more like an option which doesn't tick all the boxes for Airbus in current market yet.


Seeing there backlog Airbus has zero incentive for the A320.5. You risk cannibalizing the A321 for less money, makes 0 business sense...
 
marcelh
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 9:07 am

JonesNL wrote:
marcelh wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
The A320.5 is a fantasy that doesn't exists outside the internet. Otherwise Airbus would have introduced it years a go...

I bet Airbus has at least a concept of an "A320.5" and they know very well the pros and cons of this design. IMHO it isn't an "internet fantasy", but an more like an option which doesn't tick all the boxes for Airbus in current market yet.


Seeing there backlog Airbus has zero incentive for the A320.5. You risk cannibalizing the A321 for less money, makes 0 business sense...


But that doesn't mean it's an "internet fantasy airplane".
 
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 12, 2021 10:04 am

.
:arrow: Over the life time of the A320, average NB seat capacity has moved up, because of lower CASM and the LCC aiming to fly as many passengers with 4 FA's. And legacy's increasing their NB seatcounts to compete.

Image
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dis ... _351377048

Just under 200 seats seems where many airlines want to go. On the A320 and 737-800 they have been reducing seatpitch, removing / minimizing lavatory & galley space to get there. The A320 has become a bit short there. It was optimized for 150 seats 2 class 35 years ago. Now LCC's are cramming in up to 186 seats at comfort levels that are not accepted by many airlines & passengers.

Airlines have been asking for a A320 stretch for a long time. Easyjet, Jetblue and most likely Air France. https://www.flightglobal.com/easyjet-re ... 22.article

Ryanair's O'Leary before he launched the 200 seat 737-8 200: "Look at the economics of the 737, the 800 [series] has 189 seats. The [Airbus] A320 has 180 seats. And those nine extra seats when you're flying them eight times a day, 365 days a year are a compelling competitive advantage for Boeing."

The A321 is way bigger (7-8 rows) than the A320, more expensive to buy & operate. So less attractive to function as a natural A320CEO replacement by large operators like Delta, UA and Air France. As shown by Astuteman the A320 backlog is shrinking. Big airlines are not ordering it, switching to A321's, ordering 737MAX or asking for A220-500. Medium term, not everything seems ok with the A320's market propostion. Doesn't mean Airbus will end it, there's just less demand.

Revelation wrote:
Taxi645 wrote:
I think Keesje floated the A320.5 quite a while before Airbus even took over the C-series.

The argumention can be found on the first post here on A.net

Fair enough, instead of newly created from thin air, it's a reincarnation to make room for the A225.

Still seems pretty dubious to me.

The leeham article features a photoshop culled from a.net.

Seems pretty circular to me.


Suggesting that an A320 stretch is just an internet dream to make room for another internet dream (A220-500) seems a bit uninformed and tendentious to me. Suddenly it is in the heads Airbus too apparently (*not if, when).

Maybe you shouldn't ignore Airbus was looking at stretching the A320 before Covid, but pushed it out concentrating on supply chain issues they had at that time.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... KKBN1HH1SS, viewtopic.php?t=1391201#p20317257
 
User avatar
Heavierthanair
Posts: 1111
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 11:20 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:29 am

G'day

keesje wrote:
Over the life time of the A320, average NB seat capacity has moved up, because of lower CASM and the LCC aiming to fly as many passengers with 4 FA's. And legacy's increasing their NB seatcounts to compete.


Well, in its early days the A320 was considered to be a 150 seater, 180 seats being A321 territory. Then with the introduction of slimline seats and reduced seat pitch capacity of the A320 was raised to 180 seats, even on so called legacy carriers. :crowded: Will the race to the bottom ever end? :hissyfit:

Cheers

Peter
 
oldJoe
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:04 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 11:02 am

Heavierthanair wrote:
G'day

keesje wrote:
Over the life time of the A320, average NB seat capacity has moved up, because of lower CASM and the LCC aiming to fly as many passengers with 4 FA's. And legacy's increasing their NB seatcounts to compete.


Well, in its early days the A320 was considered to be a 150 seater, 180 seats being A321 territory. Then with the introduction of slimline seats and reduced seat pitch capacity of the A320 was raised to 180 seats, even on so called legacy carriers. :crowded: Will the race to the bottom ever end? :hissyfit:

Cheers

Peter


If you ask Airbus no because the new offer is "Max Pax (188 pax solution)" Here on a.net is a new treat abut it with a link
 
astuteman
Posts: 7621
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 12:10 pm

keesje wrote:
.
:arrow: Over the life time of the A320, average NB seat capacity has moved up, because of lower CASM and the LCC aiming to fly as many passengers with 4 FA's. And legacy's increasing their NB seatcounts to compete.

Image
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dis ... _351377048

Just under 200 seats seems where many airlines want to go. On the A320 and 737-800 they have been reducing seatpitch, removing / minimizing lavatory & galley space to get there. The A320 has become a bit short there. It was optimized for 150 seats 2 class 35 years ago. Now LCC's are cramming in up to 186 seats at comfort levels that are not accepted by many airlines & passengers.

Airlines have been asking for a A320 stretch for a long time. Easyjet, Jetblue and most likely Air France. https://www.flightglobal.com/easyjet-re ... 22.article

Ryanair's O'Leary before he launched the 200 seat 737-8 200: "Look at the economics of the 737, the 800 [series] has 189 seats. The [Airbus] A320 has 180 seats. And those nine extra seats when you're flying them eight times a day, 365 days a year are a compelling competitive advantage for Boeing."

The A321 is way bigger (7-8 rows) than the A320, more expensive to buy & operate. So less attractive to function as a natural A320CEO replacement by large operators like Delta, UA and Air France. As shown by Astuteman the A320 backlog is shrinking. Big airlines are not ordering it, switching to A321's, ordering 737MAX or asking for A220-500. Medium term, not everything seems ok with the A320's market propostion. Doesn't mean Airbus will end it, there's just less demand.

Revelation wrote:
Taxi645 wrote:
I think Keesje floated the A320.5 quite a while before Airbus even took over the C-series.

The argumention can be found on the first post here on A.net

Fair enough, instead of newly created from thin air, it's a reincarnation to make room for the A225.

Still seems pretty dubious to me.

The leeham article features a photoshop culled from a.net.

Seems pretty circular to me.


Suggesting that an A320 stretch is just an internet dream to make room for another internet dream (A220-500) seems a bit uninformed and tendentious to me. Suddenly it is in the heads Airbus too apparently (*not if, when).

Maybe you shouldn't ignore Airbus was looking at stretching the A320 before Covid, but pushed it out concentrating on supply chain issues they had at that time.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... KKBN1HH1SS, viewtopic.php?t=1391201#p20317257


What is curious about that graphic is that the seat count increase seems to have been concentrated in the 2000-2010 period, and it seems to have tailed off since then.
Is the data for A320's only?
That might be explained by a ceiling being hit.
If it is all narrowbodys, then it paints a different picture.

Rgds
 
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 12, 2021 1:15 pm

astuteman wrote:
keesje wrote:
.
:arrow: Over the life time of the A320, average NB seat capacity has moved up, because of lower CASM and the LCC aiming to fly as many passengers with 4 FA's. And legacy's increasing their NB seatcounts to compete.

Image
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dis ... _351377048

Just under 200 seats seems where many airlines want to go. On the A320 and 737-800 they have been reducing seatpitch, removing / minimizing lavatory & galley space to get there. The A320 has become a bit short there. It was optimized for 150 seats 2 class 35 years ago. Now LCC's are cramming in up to 186 seats at comfort levels that are not accepted by many airlines & passengers.

Airlines have been asking for a A320 stretch for a long time. Easyjet, Jetblue and most likely Air France. https://www.flightglobal.com/easyjet-re ... 22.article

Ryanair's O'Leary before he launched the 200 seat 737-8 200: "Look at the economics of the 737, the 800 [series] has 189 seats. The [Airbus] A320 has 180 seats. And those nine extra seats when you're flying them eight times a day, 365 days a year are a compelling competitive advantage for Boeing."

The A321 is way bigger (7-8 rows) than the A320, more expensive to buy & operate. So less attractive to function as a natural A320CEO replacement by large operators like Delta, UA and Air France. As shown by Astuteman the A320 backlog is shrinking. Big airlines are not ordering it, switching to A321's, ordering 737MAX or asking for A220-500. Medium term, not everything seems ok with the A320's market propostion. Doesn't mean Airbus will end it, there's just less demand.

Revelation wrote:
Fair enough, instead of newly created from thin air, it's a reincarnation to make room for the A225.

Still seems pretty dubious to me.

The leeham article features a photoshop culled from a.net.

Seems pretty circular to me.


Suggesting that an A320 stretch is just an internet dream to make room for another internet dream (A220-500) seems a bit uninformed and tendentious to me. Suddenly it is in the heads Airbus too apparently (*not if, when).

Maybe you shouldn't ignore Airbus was looking at stretching the A320 before Covid, but pushed it out concentrating on supply chain issues they had at that time.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... KKBN1HH1SS, viewtopic.php?t=1391201#p20317257


What is curious about that graphic is that the seat count increase seems to have been concentrated in the 2000-2010 period, and it seems to have tailed off since then.
Is the data for A320's only?
That might be explained by a ceiling being hit.
If it is all narrowbodys, then it paints a different picture.

Rgds



It's the distribution of single-aisle aircraft seats and ranges over the years. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dis ... _351377048. I think the strong growth of LCC's, the retirement of large 4-5 abreast Business / First class cabins and the growing popularity of A321 and 737-800/900ER may be forces upping the average seatcounts for NB's. I remember being closely involved after 9-11 rationalizing 737 cabins. LCC's were growing in Europe. Internet booking took off.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7621
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 2:23 pm

keesje wrote:
astuteman wrote:
keesje wrote:
.
:arrow: Over the life time of the A320, average NB seat capacity has moved up, because of lower CASM and the LCC aiming to fly as many passengers with 4 FA's. And legacy's increasing their NB seatcounts to compete.

Image
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dis ... _351377048

Just under 200 seats seems where many airlines want to go. On the A320 and 737-800 they have been reducing seatpitch, removing / minimizing lavatory & galley space to get there. The A320 has become a bit short there. It was optimized for 150 seats 2 class 35 years ago. Now LCC's are cramming in up to 186 seats at comfort levels that are not accepted by many airlines & passengers.

Airlines have been asking for a A320 stretch for a long time. Easyjet, Jetblue and most likely Air France. https://www.flightglobal.com/easyjet-re ... 22.article

Ryanair's O'Leary before he launched the 200 seat 737-8 200: "Look at the economics of the 737, the 800 [series] has 189 seats. The [Airbus] A320 has 180 seats. And those nine extra seats when you're flying them eight times a day, 365 days a year are a compelling competitive advantage for Boeing."

The A321 is way bigger (7-8 rows) than the A320, more expensive to buy & operate. So less attractive to function as a natural A320CEO replacement by large operators like Delta, UA and Air France. As shown by Astuteman the A320 backlog is shrinking. Big airlines are not ordering it, switching to A321's, ordering 737MAX or asking for A220-500. Medium term, not everything seems ok with the A320's market propostion. Doesn't mean Airbus will end it, there's just less demand.



Suggesting that an A320 stretch is just an internet dream to make room for another internet dream (A220-500) seems a bit uninformed and tendentious to me. Suddenly it is in the heads Airbus too apparently (*not if, when).

Maybe you shouldn't ignore Airbus was looking at stretching the A320 before Covid, but pushed it out concentrating on supply chain issues they had at that time.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... KKBN1HH1SS, viewtopic.php?t=1391201#p20317257


What is curious about that graphic is that the seat count increase seems to have been concentrated in the 2000-2010 period, and it seems to have tailed off since then.
Is the data for A320's only?
That might be explained by a ceiling being hit.
If it is all narrowbodys, then it paints a different picture.

Rgds



It's the distribution of single-aisle aircraft seats and ranges over the years. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dis ... _351377048. I think the strong growth of LCC's, the retirement of large 4-5 abreast Business / First class cabins and the growing popularity of A321 and 737-800/900ER may be forces upping the average seatcounts for NB's. I remember being closely involved after 9-11 rationalizing 737 cabins. LCC's were growing in Europe. Internet booking took off.


But it does appear to have plateaued since 2012 ...
I'm trying to relate that to the huge growth in popularity of the A321NEO.
But I guess most of those are still in backlog - i.e. not built yet, so won't have wound their way through to these stats yet.

Rgds
 
ewt340
Posts: 1548
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 3:03 pm

Revelation wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
The concept of A320.5 is a simple stretch by adding 3-4 extra frames into A320. They wouldn't increase the MTOW, modified the wings or change the engines. It's a really simple plug and play solution to increase capacity and provide better fuel efficiency.
This would increase the capacity by 12-18 passengers or 2-3 rows of seats. Bringing the capacity on par with B737-800. The longer cabin would be more useful for Full Service airlines compared to LCCs. Because the exit limit stays the same.

Thing is, this concept has been around long before A320neo, and I haven't heard of customers pushing for it nor Airbus even floating the idea.

This is different from A225 where both Airbus and customers openly discuss the concept.

If it was such a simple thing, why hasn't it been done already?

I suggest it's because both customers and vendor are happy enough with the current models.

Honestly, the A320.5 thing seems to be manufactured hype.


It's not the concept that I push. Only explained it to that specific user. I don't think A320.5 is realistic at this point. But it does come with benefits of increased passenger numbers and better fuel efficiency.

I still think A225 would be able to cover A320neo and MAX8 operations.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1548
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 3:09 pm

astuteman wrote:
keesje wrote:
astuteman wrote:

What is curious about that graphic is that the seat count increase seems to have been concentrated in the 2000-2010 period, and it seems to have tailed off since then.
Is the data for A320's only?
That might be explained by a ceiling being hit.
If it is all narrowbodys, then it paints a different picture.

Rgds



It's the distribution of single-aisle aircraft seats and ranges over the years. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dis ... _351377048. I think the strong growth of LCC's, the retirement of large 4-5 abreast Business / First class cabins and the growing popularity of A321 and 737-800/900ER may be forces upping the average seatcounts for NB's. I remember being closely involved after 9-11 rationalizing 737 cabins. LCC's were growing in Europe. Internet booking took off.


But it does appear to have plateaued since 2012 ...
I'm trying to relate that to the huge growth in popularity of the A321NEO.
But I guess most of those are still in backlog - i.e. not built yet, so won't have wound their way through to these stats yet.

Rgds


I think currently all the narrowbody are at it's limit. A320neo could fit more than 186 seats because of the 28" minimum that airlines currently tolerate. MAX8 moved up to 200 seats by adding extra doors and reduces the pitch down to 28" as well.

B737-900 without extra doors only certified to carry 189 passengers, with the extra doors on B737-900ER, they are legally allowed to increase the capacity to 220 seats at 28" seat pitch.

A321 went from maximum of 220 seats, to 230 seats, and now with the modification on how many doors and overwing windows, they are certified to carry up to 240 seats on A321neo, again with 28" seat pitch.

All of them already maximize their space. Unless airlines goes down to 27" seat pitch, they won't be able to add more seats into the cabin. The other solutions would be to stretch the fuselage to add capacity.

This is probably one of the reason to why the graph shows stagnation.
 
Elementalism
Posts: 688
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 5:14 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Elementalism wrote:
I just dont see the allure of an A220-500. Isnt one of the benefits of the A320 it takes containers? And doesnt the A220 have worse cargo payload than its 6 wide competitors? I feel like the A220 is right where it needs to be. In the sub 150 market.


The container conversation only comes up when people want to disparage the 737 (even though it offers containers as well now). There are plenty of 737s, A220s and even A320s flying in Europe not using containers


I tend to agree with you. My point wasnt centered on containers as much as the cargo capacity of the A220 vs a 737\A320. My understanding is cargo is noticeable revenue in this segment.
 
Elementalism
Posts: 688
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 5:21 pm

astuteman wrote:
keesje wrote:
astuteman wrote:

What is curious about that graphic is that the seat count increase seems to have been concentrated in the 2000-2010 period, and it seems to have tailed off since then.
Is the data for A320's only?
That might be explained by a ceiling being hit.
If it is all narrowbodys, then it paints a different picture.

Rgds



It's the distribution of single-aisle aircraft seats and ranges over the years. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dis ... _351377048. I think the strong growth of LCC's, the retirement of large 4-5 abreast Business / First class cabins and the growing popularity of A321 and 737-800/900ER may be forces upping the average seatcounts for NB's. I remember being closely involved after 9-11 rationalizing 737 cabins. LCC's were growing in Europe. Internet booking took off.


But it does appear to have plateaued since 2012 ...
I'm trying to relate that to the huge growth in popularity of the A321NEO.
But I guess most of those are still in backlog - i.e. not built yet, so won't have wound their way through to these stats yet.

Rgds


Makes sense to me as there hasnt been movement in this space in terms of new aircraft. NEO\MAX add nominal if at all numbers to seat. And I would imagine post 2008 crash many older MD80s\90s\DC9s were retired and replaced with 737-800\900 and A320\321. That is showed by the narrowing of the band. Plus the 757 slowing dying off at the top end of NB capacity. I dont think we will see it move much until a new generation of NB aircraft are released with increase capacities. I agree with whoever said the airlines are trying to get to the 180-200 sweet spot in NB's.

What I find interesting is anything below 150 is not within the band that is the meat of the market now.
 
User avatar
FiscAutTecGarte
Posts: 904
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:40 pm

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

Tue Oct 12, 2021 11:27 pm

scbriml wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Honestly, the A320.5 thing seems to be manufactured hype.


It seems that as both OEMs produce fewer new models, the number of suggested fantasy planes on a.net increases in direct proportion. :spin:


sorry man.... present reality is lulling us to sleep... fantasy planes can be entertaining... :rotfl:
 
TObound
Posts: 997
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

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

Wed Oct 13, 2021 12:44 am

keesje wrote:
.
:arrow: Over the life time of the A320, average NB seat capacity has moved up, because of lower CASM and the LCC aiming to fly as many passengers with 4 FA's. And legacy's increasing their NB seatcounts to compete.

Image
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dis ... _351377048

Just under 200 seats seems where many airlines want to go. On the A320 and 737-800 they have been reducing seatpitch, removing / minimizing lavatory & galley space to get there. The A320 has become a bit short there. It was optimized for 150 seats 2 class 35 years ago. Now LCC's are cramming in up to 186 seats at comfort levels that are not accepted by many airlines & passengers.

Airlines have been asking for a A320 stretch for a long time. Easyjet, Jetblue and most likely Air France. https://www.flightglobal.com/easyjet-re ... 22.article

Ryanair's O'Leary before he launched the 200 seat 737-8 200: "Look at the economics of the 737, the 800 [series] has 189 seats. The [Airbus] A320 has 180 seats. And those nine extra seats when you're flying them eight times a day, 365 days a year are a compelling competitive advantage for Boeing."

The A321 is way bigger (7-8 rows) than the A320, more expensive to buy & operate. So less attractive to function as a natural A320CEO replacement by large operators like Delta, UA and Air France. As shown by Astuteman the A320 backlog is shrinking. Big airlines are not ordering it, switching to A321's, ordering 737MAX or asking for A220-500. Medium term, not everything seems ok with the A320's market propostion. Doesn't mean Airbus will end it, there's just less demand.

Revelation wrote:
Taxi645 wrote:
I think Keesje floated the A320.5 quite a while before Airbus even took over the C-series.

The argumention can be found on the first post here on A.net

Fair enough, instead of newly created from thin air, it's a reincarnation to make room for the A225.

Still seems pretty dubious to me.

The leeham article features a photoshop culled from a.net.

Seems pretty circular to me.


Suggesting that an A320 stretch is just an internet dream to make room for another internet dream (A220-500) seems a bit uninformed and tendentious to me. Suddenly it is in the heads Airbus too apparently (*not if, when).

Maybe you shouldn't ignore Airbus was looking at stretching the A320 before Covid, but pushed it out concentrating on supply chain issues they had at that time.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... KKBN1HH1SS, viewtopic.php?t=1391201#p20317257


Great analysis. I would add too that I think it's very likely than any 320.5 has to be paired with a 321+ and 225. Airbus will have to execute all three to reposition their entire lineup successfully. And that necessarily means Airbus will be very cautious on when they pull the trigger. The 320.5 and 321+ probably have to go first. Both for the sake of commonality and to make any necessary room for a 225. But the 225 is probably the easier program. Yet, the 220 is not profitable yet. So Airbus has to balance all of this. The best they can do in the meantime is invest in infrastructure, production capacity, and R&D so that when the trigger is pulled they can move quickly and bring massive production to bear quickly.
 
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 13, 2021 6:10 am

Why should Airbus do this again?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27477
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Wed Oct 13, 2021 2:28 pm

seahawk wrote:
Why should Airbus do this again?

To make the Powerpoints look better.
 
TObound
Posts: 997
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

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

Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:29 pm

seahawk wrote:
Why should Airbus do this again?


Profit.

I can't believe how much this forum ignores the possibility that emerging climate policy could substantially pressure aviation as a whole. Cutting relative fuel consumption is absolutely necessary to keep aviation growing. Slowing development just because of duopoly dynamics is a particularly terrible look in front of policymakers.
 
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 13, 2021 7:10 pm

TObound wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Why should Airbus do this again?


Profit.

I can't believe how much this forum ignores the possibility that emerging climate policy could substantially pressure aviation as a whole. Cutting relative fuel consumption is absolutely necessary to keep aviation growing. Slowing development just because of duopoly dynamics is a particularly terrible look in front of policymakers.


Exactly for the reason to cut fuel consumption they will have to do a new single aisle to be ready around 2035 that will have to bring 20+% lower fuel burn than the NEO. Most likely second gen GTFs or Open Rotor engines and probably different fuels. This is the game changer that is coming for both OEMs and the big thing for the future. Neither can afford to fumble that design and neither can afford wasting money on pet projects before it. We are heading for a time that will see many disrupting new technologies emerge and those will render all current designs obsolete. Now is the time to earn the money to be ready.
 
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.. ?

Wed Oct 13, 2021 8:35 pm

Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Why should Airbus do this again?

To make the Powerpoints look better.


I think if you scroll back, the case has been explained, substantiated & referenced a few times by several posters. But one could spare the effort, if ones ideas are set in stone really. :thumbsup:
 
ewt340
Posts: 1548
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

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

Wed Oct 13, 2021 9:55 pm

seahawk wrote:
TObound wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Why should Airbus do this again?


Profit.

I can't believe how much this forum ignores the possibility that emerging climate policy could substantially pressure aviation as a whole. Cutting relative fuel consumption is absolutely necessary to keep aviation growing. Slowing development just because of duopoly dynamics is a particularly terrible look in front of policymakers.


Exactly for the reason to cut fuel consumption they will have to do a new single aisle to be ready around 2035 that will have to bring 20+% lower fuel burn than the NEO. Most likely second gen GTFs or Open Rotor engines and probably different fuels. This is the game changer that is coming for both OEMs and the big thing for the future. Neither can afford to fumble that design and neither can afford wasting money on pet projects before it. We are heading for a time that will see many disrupting new technologies emerge and those will render all current designs obsolete. Now is the time to earn the money to be ready.


But that's assuming that New Narrowbody that Cost $20-$30 billion dollars to built would be a good investment for Airbus in 2035. If they could have Hydrogen or all Electric aircraft, then Yes, the investment would be great. But if it's just another new narrobody with traditional design, then it's a big waste of money.

A220 is the first Next Generation Narrowbody that currently flying in the sky. As far as I know, It's the only narrowbody on the market that utilized composite materials.

It also came with the added benefit of the "stretching" paradox. Where an aircraft that got stretched tend to have better fuel efficiency than it's original model because it got optimized. Especially if they are doing a simple stretch to increase its capacity while keeping similar operational costs compared to the smaller model.

My point is, Airbus should utilize A220-500 and A321neo/XLR until the Hydrogen aircraft ready. A220 already used composite materials for its production. It's one of the main difference between older narrowbody vs next gen narrowbody.
 
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.. ?

Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:16 pm

ewt340 wrote:
seahawk wrote:
TObound wrote:

Profit.

I can't believe how much this forum ignores the possibility that emerging climate policy could substantially pressure aviation as a whole. Cutting relative fuel consumption is absolutely necessary to keep aviation growing. Slowing development just because of duopoly dynamics is a particularly terrible look in front of policymakers.


Exactly for the reason to cut fuel consumption they will have to do a new single aisle to be ready around 2035 that will have to bring 20+% lower fuel burn than the NEO. Most likely second gen GTFs or Open Rotor engines and probably different fuels. This is the game changer that is coming for both OEMs and the big thing for the future. Neither can afford to fumble that design and neither can afford wasting money on pet projects before it. We are heading for a time that will see many disrupting new technologies emerge and those will render all current designs obsolete. Now is the time to earn the money to be ready.


But that's assuming that New Narrowbody that Cost $20-$30 billion dollars to built would be a good investment for Airbus in 2035. If they could have Hydrogen or all Electric aircraft, then Yes, the investment would be great. But if it's just another new narrobody with traditional design, then it's a big waste of money.

A220 is the first Next Generation Narrowbody that currently flying in the sky. As far as I know, It's the only narrowbody on the market that utilized composite materials.

It also came with the added benefit of the "stretching" paradox. Where an aircraft that got stretched tend to have better fuel efficiency than it's original model because it got optimized. Especially if they are doing a simple stretch to increase its capacity while keeping similar operational costs compared to the smaller model.

My point is, Airbus should utilize A220-500 and A321neo/XLR until the Hydrogen aircraft ready. A220 already used composite materials for its production. It's one of the main difference between older narrowbody vs next gen narrowbody.


Airbus said Hydrogen planes won't take off until 2050. https://www.euronews.com/next/2021/06/1 ... -to-the-eu Also a leading climate researcher told Euronews that using hydrogen-derived fuels for short flights could have a bigger carbon footprint than using regular fossil-fuel kerosene.

Not further developing upgrades from existing products coming years, because a "miracle "total solution could be available from 2035, sounds like irresponsible. The Greenwashing days seem over.
 
TObound
Posts: 997
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

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

Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:01 am

seahawk wrote:
TObound wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Why should Airbus do this again?


Profit.

I can't believe how much this forum ignores the possibility that emerging climate policy could substantially pressure aviation as a whole. Cutting relative fuel consumption is absolutely necessary to keep aviation growing. Slowing development just because of duopoly dynamics is a particularly terrible look in front of policymakers.


Exactly for the reason to cut fuel consumption they will have to do a new single aisle to be ready around 2035 that will have to bring 20+% lower fuel burn than the NEO. Most likely second gen GTFs or Open Rotor engines and probably different fuels. This is the game changer that is coming for both OEMs and the big thing for the future. Neither can afford to fumble that design and neither can afford wasting money on pet projects before it. We are heading for a time that will see many disrupting new technologies emerge and those will render all current designs obsolete. Now is the time to earn the money to be ready.


If they decide to wait till 2035 for even moderate product development, they should expect smaller addressable markets in some parts of the world as regulators really start taxing aviation emissions. I think a lot of people in this forum forget how little sympathy there is for air travellers in most of the world.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

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

Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:17 am

TObound wrote:
seahawk wrote:
TObound wrote:

Profit.

I can't believe how much this forum ignores the possibility that emerging climate policy could substantially pressure aviation as a whole. Cutting relative fuel consumption is absolutely necessary to keep aviation growing. Slowing development just because of duopoly dynamics is a particularly terrible look in front of policymakers.


Exactly for the reason to cut fuel consumption they will have to do a new single aisle to be ready around 2035 that will have to bring 20+% lower fuel burn than the NEO. Most likely second gen GTFs or Open Rotor engines and probably different fuels. This is the game changer that is coming for both OEMs and the big thing for the future. Neither can afford to fumble that design and neither can afford wasting money on pet projects before it. We are heading for a time that will see many disrupting new technologies emerge and those will render all current designs obsolete. Now is the time to earn the money to be ready.


If they decide to wait till 2035 for even moderate product development, they should expect smaller addressable markets in some parts of the world as regulators really start taxing aviation emissions. I think a lot of people in this forum forget how little sympathy there is for air travellers in most of the world.


Big leaps in development come from the engines. The next gen for single aisle jets will be ready around 2035 and everything we know so far points to the fact that those engines will need a new plane, as they won´t fit under the A320 or the 737. I am all for developing the existing frames and if they see a business case for a new wing in combination with a slight stretch, they should do it, as it would at least bring a meaningful improvement. Adding 2 rows to the A320 only reduces the CASM, if you can fill the seats and if you are using a sardine can configuration. It however comes with the drawback of additional weight and it renders all A320NEOs in the old form old and drops their value. This is just a power point excercise for me.
 
JonesNL
Posts: 807
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

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

Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:49 am

seahawk wrote:
TObound wrote:
seahawk wrote:

Exactly for the reason to cut fuel consumption they will have to do a new single aisle to be ready around 2035 that will have to bring 20+% lower fuel burn than the NEO. Most likely second gen GTFs or Open Rotor engines and probably different fuels. This is the game changer that is coming for both OEMs and the big thing for the future. Neither can afford to fumble that design and neither can afford wasting money on pet projects before it. We are heading for a time that will see many disrupting new technologies emerge and those will render all current designs obsolete. Now is the time to earn the money to be ready.


If they decide to wait till 2035 for even moderate product development, they should expect smaller addressable markets in some parts of the world as regulators really start taxing aviation emissions. I think a lot of people in this forum forget how little sympathy there is for air travellers in most of the world.


Big leaps in development come from the engines. The next gen for single aisle jets will be ready around 2035 and everything we know so far points to the fact that those engines will need a new plane, as they won´t fit under the A320 or the 737. I am all for developing the existing frames and if they see a business case for a new wing in combination with a slight stretch, they should do it, as it would at least bring a meaningful improvement. Adding 2 rows to the A320 only reduces the CASM, if you can fill the seats and if you are using a sardine can configuration. It however comes with the drawback of additional weight and it renders all A320NEOs in the old form old and drops their value. This is just a power point excercise for me.

Indeed, the A320.5 brings where little to the table. The A322 and A225 are the right cards if played right, but the A320.5 is an optimization that is probably not worth it. Even if the cert cost would be on the low end of around 1 Billion, you would need a lot of extra new sales to recover the investment. So, at 2 million premium, minimum of 500 sales that would otherwise been lost to 737-8 max. Not seeing it work…
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

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

Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:12 am

JonesNL wrote:
seahawk wrote:
TObound wrote:

If they decide to wait till 2035 for even moderate product development, they should expect smaller addressable markets in some parts of the world as regulators really start taxing aviation emissions. I think a lot of people in this forum forget how little sympathy there is for air travellers in most of the world.


Big leaps in development come from the engines. The next gen for single aisle jets will be ready around 2035 and everything we know so far points to the fact that those engines will need a new plane, as they won´t fit under the A320 or the 737. I am all for developing the existing frames and if they see a business case for a new wing in combination with a slight stretch, they should do it, as it would at least bring a meaningful improvement. Adding 2 rows to the A320 only reduces the CASM, if you can fill the seats and if you are using a sardine can configuration. It however comes with the drawback of additional weight and it renders all A320NEOs in the old form old and drops their value. This is just a power point excercise for me.

Indeed, the A320.5 brings where little to the table. The A322 and A225 are the right cards if played right, but the A320.5 is an optimization that is probably not worth it. Even if the cert cost would be on the low end of around 1 Billion, you would need a lot of extra new sales to recover the investment. So, at 2 million premium, minimum of 500 sales that would otherwise been lost to 737-8 max. Not seeing it work…


I could see B6 ordering some as their 130 A320s age out. They need something between 140 seat 223s and 321NEOs, and it won’t be 320NEOs most likely. Would those sales otherwise be MAX8s? No. I could see B6 doing future orders mixed between 223/225/320.5/321/322, with probably 50-75 of those being 320.5 in the next decade. Whether or not a 320.5 would help Airbus recoup R&D bucks if B6 bought them instead of more 220s or 321s and be financially worth it…I don’t know. On its own, no. If other orders existed and it was happening anyway? Might be worth it.

I could see delta ordering them to replace their aging 738/320s. That’s probably good for at least 100-150. I know UAL is heavy into the max, but I could see them taking 100 or so to replace their 320s and add to their NEO economy of scale alongside their 120 321NEO/XLRs. I could see AA buying 50-100 of them…they have some really old 320s and 738s needing replacement in the next 5-10 years. I don’t see any of those 4 ever ordering a 320NEO for those 320/738 replacements, but I do see them ordering MAX8s, and I could see a 320.5 winning the bulk of those orders if it were offered.

I would also think if it was offered with exits that supported 200 seats, spirit and frontier would jump on them and make them 200 seaters to replace their 320CEOs. Maybe 100-200 would be bought between those two. And that’s just in the USA. I would bet some other 320 operators around the world would also buy them. Would those sales otherwise stay with Airbus for 320/321? Yeah. But if they could be sold for a small premium over the 320, it could still be worth it.

Anyway, I think your 500 number is achievable, possibly just in the USA alone. And I don’t think you have to look at just sales that’d otherwise go to MAX8s. Gotta look at existing/future 320NEO sales that’d get upgauged at a premium as well. And the list price of a 321NEO over 320NEO is ~$18m. Say sales prices are half that premium at $9m, I think a 320.5 with a capacity in the middle of 320/321 could be priced halfway between, so I would guess it’d be a $3-5m premium per copy. But maybe I’m off on that.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

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

Thu Oct 14, 2021 8:39 am

JonesNL wrote:
seahawk wrote:
TObound wrote:

If they decide to wait till 2035 for even moderate product development, they should expect smaller addressable markets in some parts of the world as regulators really start taxing aviation emissions. I think a lot of people in this forum forget how little sympathy there is for air travellers in most of the world.


Big leaps in development come from the engines. The next gen for single aisle jets will be ready around 2035 and everything we know so far points to the fact that those engines will need a new plane, as they won´t fit under the A320 or the 737. I am all for developing the existing frames and if they see a business case for a new wing in combination with a slight stretch, they should do it, as it would at least bring a meaningful improvement. Adding 2 rows to the A320 only reduces the CASM, if you can fill the seats and if you are using a sardine can configuration. It however comes with the drawback of additional weight and it renders all A320NEOs in the old form old and drops their value. This is just a power point excercise for me.

Indeed, the A320.5 brings where little to the table. The A322 and A225 are the right cards if played right, but the A320.5 is an optimization that is probably not worth it. Even if the cert cost would be on the low end of around 1 Billion, you would need a lot of extra new sales to recover the investment. So, at 2 million premium, minimum of 500 sales that would otherwise been lost to 737-8 max. Not seeing it work…


For me the A322 is the most interesting point the the line-up. If they do it and how. If they just do a simple stretch or do a new wing as well. If they just aim for a 753 CASM monster, the simple stretch would be just fine and would have enough range. If they do a new wing, it makes sense to also look at the other members of the family and this could open the door for a A225. I think this will be decided in 2022, when we see how traffic picks up again.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 13644
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

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

Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:43 pm

I see no point in launching the A225 until Airbus gets 100% of the program when they buy out Quebec (in 2025?). Before then they have to convince Quebec to throw some money towards development, or else Airbus are just boosting the value of the program, meaning it will be more expensive to buy Quebec out, on top of paying for all the development.
 
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.. ?

Thu Oct 14, 2021 3:03 pm

Polot wrote:
I see no point in launching the A225 until Airbus gets 100% of the program when they buy out Quebec (in 2025?). Before then they have to convince Quebec to throw some money towards development, or else Airbus are just boosting the value of the program, meaning it will be more expensive to buy Quebec out, on top of paying for all the development.


Contrary to what many believed, Airbus is investing Billions in Mirabel and Mobile facilities with the aim to tripple production in a few years. It seems some still have issues their predictions on Airbus' CSeries strategy not matching unfolding realities. https://www.pesmedia.com/airbus-a220-in ... st-240220/, https://simpleflying.com/airbus-a220-ma ... nvestment/,

Increasing aircraft size reduces seat costs, in case of 15% capacity increases, cost per seat could reduce 5% just because of that.

Image
https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/reports/delta-air-lines-widebody-fleet-revamp-on-the-horizon-453772

The A319NEO, A320NEO backlogs are shrinking instead of growing. Airlines ask for A220-500 & Airbus COO says they'll build it. We have seen airlines upgauging their NB fleets for years, to reduce fuel burn per passenger, add capacity and OE's responding to the development.

Airbus has the market position, resources to upgauge the A220-300 and A320, to increase revenues and strengthen their medium term market position. I'm a bit surprised to see the resistance to this seemingly natural development.

Image
https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/reports/delta-air-lines-widebody-fleet-revamp-on-the-horizon-453772
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27477
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:00 pm

keesje wrote:
Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Why should Airbus do this again?

To make the Powerpoints look better.

I think if you scroll back, the case has been explained, substantiated & referenced a few times by several posters. But one could spare the effort, if ones ideas are set in stone really. :thumbsup:

And the case against has been explained, substantiated & referenced a few times by several posters too, but if one's ideas are set in stone already....
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10417
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

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

Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:30 pm

Well, the analysis should make for happy faces at Boeing, as the 777-9 will be great when bigger is better.
 
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.. ?

Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:45 pm

Revelation wrote:
keesje wrote:
Revelation wrote:
To make the Powerpoints look better.

I think if you scroll back, the case has been explained, substantiated & referenced a few times by several posters. But one could spare the effort, if ones ideas are set in stone really. :thumbsup:

And the case against has been explained, substantiated & referenced a few times by several posters too, but if one's ideas are set in stone already....


The cases against seem a bit on the light side and references sparse. But maybe I missed the strong ones, or they were removed.

Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Why should Airbus do this again?

To make the Powerpoints look better.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27477
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Thu Oct 14, 2021 6:01 pm

keesje wrote:
Revelation wrote:
keesje wrote:
I think if you scroll back, the case has been explained, substantiated & referenced a few times by several posters. But one could spare the effort, if ones ideas are set in stone really. :thumbsup:

And the case against has been explained, substantiated & referenced a few times by several posters too, but if one's ideas are set in stone already....

The cases against seem a bit on the light side and references sparse. But maybe I missed the strong ones, or they were removed.

Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Why should Airbus do this again?

To make the Powerpoints look better.

Sorry you feel that way, at least we can agree they do make the Powerpoints look better.

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