Is it possible that Airbus has been working behind the scenes on the A225 already? I don't think at this point it is an if. I think it more along the lines of when. I could see Delta jumping all over that when it becomes reality.

Back when the C Series was being developed, was there talk of even a larger version than the 500?

And how are the airlines doing that have these planes? I heard Delta likes them alot. How is Air Canada doing with it?

F9Animal wrote:

Is it possible that Airbus has been working behind the scenes on the A225 already? I don't think at this point it is an if. I think it more along the lines of when. I could see Delta jumping all over that when it becomes reality.

Back when the C Series was being developed, was there talk of even a larger version than the 500?

And how are the airlines doing that have these planes? I heard Delta likes them alot. How is Air Canada doing with it?

AirBaltic is pretty happy as well and also looking for the LR and the -500

SteelChair wrote:

I don't see Airbus ever incorporating the 220 cockpit into the 320 series. Too much pride. Not invented here syndrome. Instead, at some point in the future, when business is better, I foresee them designing a new common cockpit for both (and perhaps their entire product line) that will easily facilitate not only FANS but single pilot ops.....with an eye towards future future no pilot ops. Mho

The main point is the common cockpit from A320, through A330/340, A380 to A350. There are of course differences, like screen size, numbers and so on, but otherwise it is the same. Airbus can move new features up and down the line.

What are the disadvantages of picking out the A320 for a similar cockpit to the A220 and having that design than incompatible with the rest.

One possible would be to design a new cockpit that can emulate different cockpits. Chose the A220 when you know that bird, or chose the A320/A330/350 when you learned that line.

We have machine tools used for teaching. Choose the user interface. Emulate a Siemens, Fanuc, or Heidenhain all on the same EMCO computer control. As it is you have to exchange hardware parts, take one panel off, put the next one on, plug and play, and off you go. In this case only aloud for teaching purpose.
As touch panels with the integrated buttons are getting privalent, the emulations will one day work without interchangeable hardware regarding the user interface.

I’m not really seeing Lack of cockpit commonality as a problem for the 220. Airbus is still very able to package it with the 321 for a winning combo and has done that a couple of times now. Will it improve marketability? Yes but I don’t think it’s worth the investment till the 220 is NEOd and the 321 series is replaced with a clean sheet and then the two can share that. I believe airbus will take the 220 cockpit and apply it to the clean sheet

Opus99 wrote:

I’m not really seeing Lack of cockpit commonality as a problem for the 220. Airbus is still very able to package it with the 321 for a winning combo and has done that a couple of times now. Will it improve marketability? Yes but I don’t think it’s worth the investment till the 220 is NEOd and the 321 series is replaced with a clean sheet and then the two can share that. I believe airbus will take the 220 cockpit and apply it to the clean sheet

There are still a lot of things about the 220 cockpit that are, imo, inferior to other Airbus products. I’ve never flown the 220, but I’ve been in the sim and the jumpseat and talked to a lot of guys who have flown both to get the rundown, as well as reading the manuals for it. There’s just some weird stuff about it. A couple examples: the FBW logic is different. The Airbus, in normal law, commands roll rate in the roll axis and G in the pitch axis, and aurotrims. You put a climbing left turn in with the stick, and the airplane will keep that same bank/pitch if you let go of the stick. With the 220, it commands aileron and elevator deflection, more like being in direct law in the Airbus. There’s also stick pressure in the 220 you have to “trim” off with trim switches more like a conventional plane, but then that trim adjusts the speed bug, so it’s trimming for speed. Guys who have flown both the 190 and the Airbus prior to the 220 at jetblue have said it’s not like either of them, and was kind of weird at first to get used to. Also, the autothrottles on the 190 can be overridden without becoming disengaged. If you hit a gust or updraft and know there’s a momentary change in airspeed, instead of letting the autothrottles chase it, you can periodically override them for the desired thrust state. The a220 disconnects the autothrottles if you try that. The Airbus, if in autothrust, doesn’t have that ability, but does have ground speed mini to compensate on the approach.

Those are a few examples I can think of for some fundamental differences…I don’t see Airbus going with the 220 cockpit, FBW logic, thrust logic, etc. for any future airplanes. I think a common cockpit centered around or otherwise similar to the 350, with traditional Airbus logic, is more likely. Kind of like the 320/330 is very similar…I just see Airbus staying Airbus and not adopting a bombardier design philosophy.

There’s a video out there of a bombardier guy explaining the design of the c series cockpit, saying a Boeing background pilot and an Airbus background pilot were instrumental in the design of the thing from a pilot standpoint. While it’s overall a fairly good cockpit, it’s very different than anything else Airbus, and puts Airbus in an interesting position for future product lines. It’d be great if it had commonality with something else…but the path to get there isn’t worth the commonality imo. And as far as airlines caring about that, look no further than jetblue and breeze. Jetblue wasn’t afraid to go 190 over 319 back in the day, and wasn’t afraid to go 220 over 195-E2, both examples of a smallish airline going for an entirely different product and foregoing commonality. Same story with breeze, and they are even smaller. Sometimes the business case for a plane doesn’t rely on commonality as much as one would think. It also probably depends on the airline too. I never saw WN getting a 220 despite better economics than a MAX7. Commonality there is important to their business, obviously. But I don’t see pilot/cockpit commonality with the 220 around the world as making or breaking a design decision for the next Airbus NB product. And frankly, I’d rather it not. Let the 220 be its own product and training pool. If they court retrofit a350 cockpits and FBW philosophy and decertify it…that’d be great. But that isn’t happening. I think it’s just destined to be its own, very different product that will never get airbusified, and no future Airbus product will get bombardierified. Jmo though.

Kikko19 wrote:

oldJoe wrote:

The next step for Airbus in my opinion is to anounce the A220-300LR and make Neeleman ( Breeze ) and Gauss ( Air Baltic ) to exercise some if not all remaining options of the two airlines. Reminder : Breeze has 40 options and Air Baltic 30 options left to be firmed. Just my two
I hope that Omicron don`t stop the next big airshow and the likes of Udvar Hazy can do what they are best at it : placing orders !
https://britishairshows.com/farnborough-airshow

July? We are talking about at least 2 new potential variants. The question is we will be coping well with the virus at this point in very distant future??

I was speaking of the LR only and if the airshow at Farnborough this year happens it will be the right time to anounce it which would gain some additional orders. Look how many testflights were performed for both the -100 and the -300 last year and I guess there is something in the pipe. The -500 I expect one year later at Paris and I strongly believe that at this event the orderbook will hit the ceilling and overrun the 1000 sales

interesting from leehams's article on G4
https://leehamnews.com/2022/01/06/boein ... giant-ceo/

Airbus didn’t have enough delivery slots for the A220-300 to cover the smaller end of Allegiant’s needs. Additionally, the A220-300 hasn’t yet been certified for its maximum potential capacity of 160 passengers. Nor was Airbus willing to provide any assurances that a larger A220-500 would be launched. The A220-300 also has a shorter time to maintenance checks than the 737, reflecting the new aircraft type vs the 737-7’s derivative status.

I don't know how "desperate" Airbus is at winning more deals. This is a clear case where a carrier wanted A220-500 at some point, but Airbus refused. So they lost an Airbus client to Boeing. I wonder how many more of these will finally push Airbus toward launching A220-500.

tphuang wrote:

interesting from leehams's article on G4
https://leehamnews.com/2022/01/06/boein ... giant-ceo/

Airbus didn’t have enough delivery slots for the A220-300 to cover the smaller end of Allegiant’s needs. Additionally, the A220-300 hasn’t yet been certified for its maximum potential capacity of 160 passengers. Nor was Airbus willing to provide any assurances that a larger A220-500 would be launched. The A220-300 also has a shorter time to maintenance checks than the 737, reflecting the new aircraft type vs the 737-7’s derivative status.

I don't know how "desperate" Airbus is at winning more deals. This is a clear case where a carrier wanted A220-500 at some point, but Airbus refused. So they lost an Airbus client to Boeing. I wonder how many more of these will finally push Airbus toward launching A220-500.

What do you expect from Airbus if they can`t even offer enough delivery slots for the A220-300 for G4 let alone to anounce the -500 ? They can`t selleng for the sake of winning any campain if they are not able to satisfy the customer on time because there is no slot availible. The -500 will come and at the time every airline which bought in the meantime at the competition has to compete with the better solution for many years to come !

The Allegiant order is an example of the "opportunity cost" of not increasing production volumes faster.
It's a bit of a catch 22 (i.e. sales price remains below cost so why sell them vs. missing orders because of low production which would otherwise help profitability by lowering costs).

It's tough to know how to deal with that vicious circle.

Skywatcher wrote:

The Allegiant order is an example of the "opportunity cost" of not increasing production volumes faster.
It's a bit of a catch 22 (i.e. sales price remains below cost so why sell them vs. missing orders because of low production which would otherwise help profitability by lowering costs).

It's tough to know how to deal with that vicious circle.

Agreed. Good news is there are plans to further increase production. However the wins of 2021 means that once growth returns and the bulk of airlines are ordering, the A220 will have it tough due to lack of slots.

This issue is risk. Vendors won't make say an engine casing for free, so those long lead time items (ordered 18 to 24 months before aircraft delivery) must be done on Airbus' Euro.
As you note, Airbus must further drop cost and that will only be done with a volume increase. Automation favors high production rates (it costs too much to implement otherwise).

So either Airbus increases production rates soon, or this thread become less exciting with opportunities for Boeing and Embraer (the two vendors I see having the most near term slot availability).

Naturally Airbus wants a leasing company to take the risk. However, after the lockdown, I'm not certain they have the appetite for risk on low volume airframes. While I'm excited about the A220's increasing popularity, until there are over 20 operators and 400+ in service, it is a low volume airframe that has more risk to re-lease. The Allegiant order would have been a nice boost. In particular Allegiants reputation for buying used examples. However, that same habit of buying used means that Allegiant would almost certainly have more opportunity buying the MAX where a variety of opportunities will happen over the decades.

This is a marathon, not a sprint. However, it is time to increase production by say 2/month more. Otherwise Airbus will miss further opportunities.

Lightsaber

Skywatcher wrote:

The Allegiant order is an example of the "opportunity cost" of not increasing production volumes faster.
It's a bit of a catch 22 (i.e. sales price remains below cost so why sell them vs. missing orders because of low production which would otherwise help profitability by lowering costs).

Airbus has said (in the 2020 annual remarks) they were doing no better than covering variable costs (perhaps worse). There are two ways higher production volume can help costs:

1. Better labor productivity (say, more units assembled per million man-hours). Is labor productivity at Mirabel and Mobile significantly below industry standard? Or is better labor productivity just wishful thinking?

2. Lower purchased parts/systems costs per unit, if that's how their purchasing contracts are written.

If neither of those happens then more volume doesn't improve costs, because they're making no contribution towards overheads (engineering, manufacturing), anyway. More volume doesn't fix every cost problem.

In my youth I had the learning experience of working for a business where avg sales prices didn't cover variable costs, thus breakeven sales was infinite. If it's just a matter of volume, Airbus could go to a rate of 12-14/month next year, burn off some backlog, and have slots for more immediate delivery -- but that's not the plan as they have articulated it publicly.

I have a background partly in manufacturing accounting and information systems. I once set up a standard cost system with over a million separate part numbers and bills of materials up to 9 levels deep. There were many labour reporting codes/cost centres/routings/work orders and so on.

For sure there are always many ways of identifying inefficiencies and implementing solutions. I'm sure this process is ongoing and that results are continually being achieved. The question is how much and how soon?

Very little of the cost in the system I set up was actually direct labour. Material costs were the vast majority of the cost and I don't doubt that it's the same at YMX and MOB. Overhead is also a major part of the equation but it really matters what you include or don't include in the calculation. Maybe Airbus is over-burdening the cost with excessive cost transfers? Who knows?

Well, Airbus Europe and YMX have value added taxes so there is no sales tax to be absorbed in the cost. If MOB has any state sales tax that is an extra burden for their cost structure unless they have an exemption. Again, this points out the complexity of costing by location. All those who say "YMX is more expensive" quite frankly don't know what they're talking about. It may be true but there are so many factors involved that it's impossible for all but a few insiders to know what is true or not.

StTim wrote:

It is often where does the company wish the profits (or losses) to be realised.

I agree to a large extent. You clearly know what you're talking about. Transfer pricing is a huge part of any costing that can distort any "true" underlying costs. It adds a whole layer to any cost comparisons between manufacturing sites. It is really complex is my point.

Exchange rates are a huge factor as well. I like that Airbus can play around with the CAD/USD and EU when costing to take advantage of currency fluctuations that might favour them.
Boeing not so much.

JoseSalazar wrote:

Opus99 wrote:

I’m not really seeing Lack of cockpit commonality as a problem for the 220. Airbus is still very able to package it with the 321 for a winning combo and has done that a couple of times now. Will it improve marketability? Yes but I don’t think it’s worth the investment till the 220 is NEOd and the 321 series is replaced with a clean sheet and then the two can share that. I believe airbus will take the 220 cockpit and apply it to the clean sheet

There are still a lot of things about the 220 cockpit that are, imo, inferior to other Airbus products. I’ve never flown the 220, but I’ve been in the sim and the jumpseat and talked to a lot of guys who have flown both to get the rundown, as well as reading the manuals for it. There’s just some weird stuff about it. A couple examples: the FBW logic is different. The Airbus, in normal law, commands roll rate in the roll axis and G in the pitch axis, and aurotrims. You put a climbing left turn in with the stick, and the airplane will keep that same bank/pitch if you let go of the stick. With the 220, it commands aileron and elevator deflection, more like being in direct law in the Airbus. There’s also stick pressure in the 220 you have to “trim” off with trim switches more like a conventional plane, but then that trim adjusts the speed bug, so it’s trimming for speed. Guys who have flown both the 190 and the Airbus prior to the 220 at jetblue have said it’s not like either of them, and was kind of weird at first to get used to. Also, the autothrottles on the 190 can be overridden without becoming disengaged. If you hit a gust or updraft and know there’s a momentary change in airspeed, instead of letting the autothrottles chase it, you can periodically override them for the desired thrust state. The a220 disconnects the autothrottles if you try that. The Airbus, if in autothrust, doesn’t have that ability, but does have ground speed mini to compensate on the approach.

Those are a few examples I can think of for some fundamental differences…I don’t see Airbus going with the 220 cockpit, FBW logic, thrust logic, etc. for any future airplanes. I think a common cockpit centered around or otherwise similar to the 350, with traditional Airbus logic, is more likely. Kind of like the 320/330 is very similar…I just see Airbus staying Airbus and not adopting a bombardier design philosophy.

There’s a video out there of a bombardier guy explaining the design of the c series cockpit, saying a Boeing background pilot and an Airbus background pilot were instrumental in the design of the thing from a pilot standpoint. While it’s overall a fairly good cockpit, it’s very different than anything else Airbus, and puts Airbus in an interesting position for future product lines. It’d be great if it had commonality with something else…but the path to get there isn’t worth the commonality imo. And as far as airlines caring about that, look no further than jetblue and breeze. Jetblue wasn’t afraid to go 190 over 319 back in the day, and wasn’t afraid to go 220 over 195-E2, both examples of a smallish airline going for an entirely different product and foregoing commonality. Same story with breeze, and they are even smaller. Sometimes the business case for a plane doesn’t rely on commonality as much as one would think. It also probably depends on the airline too. I never saw WN getting a 220 despite better economics than a MAX7. Commonality there is important to their business, obviously. But I don’t see pilot/cockpit commonality with the 220 around the world as making or breaking a design decision for the next Airbus NB product. And frankly, I’d rather it not. Let the 220 be its own product and training pool. If they court retrofit a350 cockpits and FBW philosophy and decertify it…that’d be great. But that isn’t happening. I think it’s just destined to be its own, very different product that will never get airbusified, and no future Airbus product will get bombardierified. Jmo though.

Actually, this is not true. The A220 FBW is also G and roll rate commands in normal mode. The difference is that it has speed stability law, which requires trimming. The 195-E2 is the same. It is the same concept as 787.
The A32x, Falcons and Praetors does not have speed stability loop, and therefore does not require trimming.
This difference between A220 and A32x control schemes are core to common type rating. Therefore, for A220 and A32x to have common type rating is much more than simply cockpit and displays layout. It requires a major re-think of the A220 or A32x design philosophies.

Airbus announced this today as their 1st 2022 order, it's a large A220 order from the lessor Azorra.


https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/pres ... y-aircraft

Airbus has signed a purchase agreement with Azorra for twenty-two A220 Family aircraft including twenty A220-300s and two ACJ TwoTwenty aircraft. Azorra is a Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA, based aircraft lessor focused on executive, regional and mid-size (“crossover”) aircraft.

Momo1435 wrote:

Airbus announced this today as their 1st 2022 order, it's a large A220 order from the lessor Azorra.


https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/pres ... y-aircraft

Airbus has signed a purchase agreement with Azorra for twenty-two A220 Family aircraft including twenty A220-300s and two ACJ TwoTwenty aircraft. Azorra is a Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA, based aircraft lessor focused on executive, regional and mid-size (“crossover”) aircraft.

It is nice to see this order. I had no idea it was in work.

This, hopefully, will be like ALC where these "crossover" leasing companies sell to a few airlines that would have bought more of the same.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Momo1435 wrote:

Airbus announced this today as their 1st 2022 order, it's a large A220 order from the lessor Azorra.


https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/pres ... y-aircraft

Airbus has signed a purchase agreement with Azorra for twenty-two A220 Family aircraft including twenty A220-300s and two ACJ TwoTwenty aircraft. Azorra is a Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA, based aircraft lessor focused on executive, regional and mid-size (“crossover”) aircraft.

It is nice to see this order. I had no idea it was in work.

This, hopefully, will be like ALC where these "crossover" leasing companies sell to a few airlines that would have bought more of the same.

Lightsaber

I didn`t have this order on my radar as well. Nice to see the first Airbus order for 2022 is for the A220 family.
You mention ALC which is also a surprise to me that they swapped 6x A220-300 for 6 A220-100 in December
https://www.airbus.com/en/products-services/commercial-aircraft/market/orders-and-deliveries

Airbus delivered in 2021 50 A220 family aircraft compared to 38 in 2020 and that`s a good move in the right direction IMO. Soon the pre-FAL in Mirabel starts and this will help to raise the production rate to a healthier output.

The order delivery link below used to show Air Senegal order for 8 last December. I just noticed it is now listed under cancelled.

https://www.abcdlist.nl/cseries/cseries.html

They announced at the Dubai show a new lease agreement with Macquarie AirFinance for 5.
https://simpleflying.com/air-senegal-airbus-a220-2023/

They took delivery of its first originally Air Vanuatu's.

This is very confusing. Macquarie AirFinance is not listed as customer in the order link.
I didn't any news regarding Air Senegal having cancelled its A220. Its fleet shows one A220.

rtwodtwo wrote:

Macquarie AirFinance is not listed

Correction: Macquarie AirFinance is on the list and have an order for 29. Didn't recognize their logo.
I think Air Senegal likely cancelled their direct purchase and decided to lease their A220s from Macquarie

I see from CH Aviation News that Air Algerie is expected to buy 30 aircraft, which would seem to encompass most of its fleet, which is currently about 55, consisting of 737s (32), ATRs (15) and A330s (8). The CH article is behind a paywall, so I can't see exactly what they are interested in.

However, as a long time 737 operator, it would be very interesting to see how the 737 Max - v- A32X plays here; a win for Boeing would certainly be a confidence booster for Boeing; a loss would add to the clamour for Boeing to start planning for the NSA in earnest. Politics will come into it, of course, but I wonder if AH might consider the 787-9/10 as an A330 replacement.

The aviation media has been touting both the QF and KL orders as examples of why Boeing needs to accelerate the NSA and that the Max, even leaving aside its troubles, is not seen as a plane for the long haul (figuratively speaking!). However, I think the loss of Jet 2 is just as significant. Over the past 40 years or so (if not more), European IT operators have acted as leaders in seeking out the most efficient aircraft, given their need for a very reliable, very flexible, very versatile workhorses. For a long time, the 757 was their darling and most of the European IT carriers operated it - Condor, the UK carriers, Finnair, among others; then, the 738 became the vehicle of choice. Now, I think the A321 is being seen as the favourite, and this is reflected in Jet 2's selection.

rtwodtwo wrote:

rtwodtwo wrote:

Macquarie AirFinance is not listed

Correction: Macquarie AirFinance is on the list and have an order for 29. Didn't recognize their logo.
I think Air Senegal likely cancelled their direct purchase and decided to lease their A220s from Macquarie

The delivery made to Air Senegal on December 27 is attributed to CARLYLE AVIATION PARTNERS (AIR SENEGAL) on the Airbus delivery report. The orders sheet also shows the order booked the same day as the delivery occurred. So does not appear to be from the Macquarrie order.

oldJoe wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Momo1435 wrote:

Airbus announced this today as their 1st 2022 order, it's a large A220 order from the lessor Azorra.


https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/pres ... y-aircraft

Airbus has signed a purchase agreement with Azorra for twenty-two A220 Family aircraft including twenty A220-300s and two ACJ TwoTwenty aircraft. Azorra is a Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA, based aircraft lessor focused on executive, regional and mid-size (“crossover”) aircraft.

It is nice to see this order. I had no idea it was in work.

This, hopefully, will be like ALC where these "crossover" leasing companies sell to a few airlines that would have bought more of the same.

Lightsaber

I didn`t have this order on my radar as well. Nice to see the first Airbus order for 2022 is for the A220 family.
You mention ALC which is also a surprise to me that they swapped 6x A220-300 for 6 A220-100 in December
https://www.airbus.com/en/products-services/commercial-aircraft/market/orders-and-deliveries

Airbus delivered in 2021 50 A220 family aircraft compared to 38 in 2020 and that`s a good move in the right direction IMO. Soon the pre-FAL in Mirabel starts and this will help to raise the production rate to a healthier output.

The swap to A221s is a surprise. Not a big deal (as same quantity of aircraft, just a smaller model/lower price).

My point is the leasing companies find little airlines that need aircraft to expand the user base. We're starting to get to the point where the A220 will be better supported. The Allegiant order is a great example, of where more established economics of scale are required to entice a future order. hattip LAXintl for the link on this image:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FIb4GH-WUAA ... name=large


I'm going to expand the "spare parts coverage" to mean not just parts, but pilot/crew training options, MRO competition (how many service the plane), convenience of engine service (many have signed contracts with Pratt to support, but quite a few of those there is no evidence they have begun servicing PW1500Gs). Taking the 188 active at customers, one wouldn't yet expect good support (that takes 300+ active aircraft per industry "rules of thumb" I've heard about). Now, the A220 has more economy of scale than the 717 and the production ramp (pre-FAL assembly) should allow a nice acceleration of that in 2022. But it won't be until 2024 when we see enough A220s in service to self grow.

https://www.airfleets.net/exploit/production-csr.htm

So these leasing company orders are still important to seed new operators. That is what I'm excited about, the new operators with the corresponding increase in aircraft supported in service. I count 15 operators currently (I include Breeze). Soon we'll add a few more (e.g., QF, ITA). I'm very curious to see where the leasing companies place their A220s.

So in my opinion this order, while at 22 aircraft isn't huge, is a signal that there is demand from small operators. Perhaps operators moving up for turboprops (Azorra is a "crossover" leasing company). This is the start of the "virtuous cycle." It will be very interesting to watch the A220 economies of scale improve over the next two years. Hopefully we will see a nice jump in the production rates. I'd very much like to see the rate 14 per month as that ensures the supply chain, parts network, and training network really ramp up to what is needed for even more sales.

I do think we'll see a good 2022.

To add to the list:

Realized campains in 2022:
1. Azorra (20 A223, 2 two twenty)

Active campaigns
1.Air Burkina
2. Possible top off order for 10 by AirCanada
3. Possible top off by AirFrance
4. Croatia Airways (possibly 2 others in Croatia, I don't know if they were serious or just kicking tires)
5. Green Africa
6. Israir
7. LOT (possibly a large order)
8. SAS (possibly a large order)
9. Uganda Airways
10. LH group for A319 replacement and regional replacement (new order, I'm unsure of the possible size)
11. A new Ukraine airline MOU for 6
https://www.scramble.nl/civil-news/ukra ... al-airline
12. Aviation capital group MOU for 20
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1468399

Due to their size, the LOT and SAS orders will be of interest as will the LH group as a "top off" order would show confidence in the type.
This could be a breakout year for the A220.

Lightsaber

From FG

With the “very aggressive” ramp-up of A220-300 and -100 production among Airbus’s priorities, Scherer says the question of stretching the aircraft is “really not an imminent decision upon us”.
He reiterates that the A220 is on a “great trajectory of success” and a stretch is a “natural evolution”, adding that the need to consider it “will come”.
“There is no precise timeline,” he says. “It will come over time, but it’s not an agenda item for near-term decisions

https://www.flightglobal.com/air-transp ... 71.article

fcogafa wrote:

From FG

With the “very aggressive” ramp-up of A220-300 and -100 production among Airbus’s priorities, Scherer says the question of stretching the aircraft is “really not an imminent decision upon us”.
He reiterates that the A220 is on a “great trajectory of success” and a stretch is a “natural evolution”, adding that the need to consider it “will come”.
“There is no precise timeline,” he says. “It will come over time, but it’s not an agenda item for near-term decisions

https://www.flightglobal.com/air-transp ... 71.article

Typical German consistency. must get boring for reporters to get the same answer every time...

Not really LH group but according to this article (in french, sorry ) ,Luxair would be interested in having the A220 to replace its fleet around 2025, especially the possible -500 that would be the perfect for them
http://m.lessentiel.lu/fr/economie/doss ... irect=mobi

not sure which thread to use for this news, or if it warrants a new one?
The Quebec government in considering investing another 200M CAD into AirBus Canada. They are not required to do so but as Airbus is adding capital, Quebec must follow or else get diluted. I guess they want to keep their 25% share of capital.
Article only in french, couldn't find an english one
https://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/2022-0 ... gtemps.php

Theotime74 wrote:

Not really LH group but according to this article (in french, sorry ) ,Luxair would be interested in having the A220 to replace its fleet around 2025, especially the possible -500 that would be the perfect for them
http://m.lessentiel.lu/fr/economie/doss ... irect=mobi

This is an interesting suprise for me too besides the Azzora.
translated from the article :
- looking for fleet renewal of the smaller aircraft fleet ( Dash 8-400 and 737-700 ) with A220 or E2 jets in 2024-2025 timeframe
- the A220-500 if offered would be the perfect replacement for them for the 737-800
- medium term will buy used 737`s and even A320 family are also an option

In other words if Airbus can offer them the -500 I could see Luxair as a sole A220 operator in the future even with all three variants of the A220
10 A220-100 , 5 A220-300 and 5 A220-500 is my guess

Dash9 wrote:

not sure which thread to use for this news, or if it warrants a new one?
The Quebec government in considering investing another 200M CAD into AirBus Canada. They are not required to do so but as Airbus is adding capital, Quebec must follow or else get diluted. I guess they want to keep their 25% share of capital.
Article only in french, couldn't find an english one
https://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/2022-0 ... gtemps.php

In the medium to long term I feel that this is a reasonable investment.
Investissement Quebec is an equity investor with hundreds (thousands?) of equity investments and loans. Sometimes they do really well and exit with big profits like many venture capital firms do..

If Airbus feels confident to invest $600 million (75%) I don't see why IQ can't ante up their $200 million (25%) share?

It takes capital to grow!

I feel that this is a positive vote of confidence in the program.

Too bad the Federal government can't take some of the billions that they pump into the Canadian car industry on a regular basis and divert some to the A-220. How about the billions of Federal subsidies going to the hydrocarbon industry (pipelines/orphan oil well salvaging/CO2 re-capture subsidies and so on). Funny how politics allows some but not the other? Too bad Bombardier poisoned the well while the other industries are alright?

Dash9 wrote:

not sure which thread to use for this news, or if it warrants a new one?
The Quebec government in considering investing another 200M CAD into AirBus Canada. They are not required to do so but as Airbus is adding capital, Quebec must follow or else get diluted. I guess they want to keep their 25% share of capital.
Article only in french, couldn't find an english one
https://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/2022-0 ... gtemps.php

Has there been any news or reference to why Airbus is injecting 600M in to the program? Is it to cover losses or is it for investing in new projects? Seeing the previous messages it is for investing in supply chain efficiency...

JonesNL wrote:

Dash9 wrote:

not sure which thread to use for this news, or if it warrants a new one?
The Quebec government in considering investing another 200M CAD into AirBus Canada. They are not required to do so but as Airbus is adding capital, Quebec must follow or else get diluted. I guess they want to keep their 25% share of capital.
Article only in french, couldn't find an english one
https://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/2022-0 ... gtemps.php

Has there been any news or reference to why Airbus is injecting 600M in to the program? Is it to cover losses or is it for investing in new projects? Seeing the previous messages it is for investing in supply chain efficiency...

The "pre-FAL' that is stuffing the barrels to accelerate production will need equipment:
https://leehamnews.com/2021/09/28/airbu ... cut-costs/

Florent Massou, the SVP and Head of the A220 program, told LNA the company wants to shave 50% of the final assembly time for the A220. There will be an unrevealed cost reduction, which Massou declined to reveal. But he said it isn’t a one-for-one cost reduction.

Final assembly typically runs 5% to 8% of the total cost of the airplane, according to Boeing’s touch labor union, the IAM 751.
So part of that money is to reduce the cost per aircraft.

LuxAir has expressed interest in the A220-500 joining AirFrance, Breeze, and AirBaltic. This would be an easy sell. One could hope the start of development.
https://www.aerotime.aero/29982-luxair- ... s-a220-500

There will also be development of the longer range A220-300 that Korean Air and Breeze have expressed interest in (above link notes Breeze interest).

Production rate, thanks to the pre-FAL is going up to 6 per month (if not now, soon) with plans to grow over 4 years to 14 per month. That will take money.
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... er%20month.


Unfortunately, I estimate half the money is to cover losses. That said, I expect break even to be the priority and then A220-500 development as Airbus has been clear in their communication:

https://www.flightglobal.com/air-transp ... 71.article

Goal is break even on the A220 in the "mid-2020s." Sooner would be better, obviously.
https://www.worldglobal.co.uk/2021/02/1 ... ly%20lines.

Lightsaber

The day Luxair will have any influence on Airbus deciding to start A220-500 development is not happening... Air France, Breeze or Jetblue is alright, but not Luxair.

lightsaber wrote :
LuxAir has expressed interest in the A220-500 joining .......

They have a reason for this interest. First they want to replace the eleven Dash 8`s and four 737-700`s with A220 or E2 jets by 2024-25. If Airbus could offer them the A220-500 which replaces the four 737-800`s than Luxair would be a sole and new A220 operator. Unfortunate for the E2 than.
see link in #80 and my #82
The second surprise in 2022 for a possible new A220 operator.

SA280 wrote:

The day Luxair will have any influence on Airbus deciding to start A220-500 development is not happening... Air France, Breeze or Jetblue is alright, but not Luxair.

No one is thinking about that Luxair has any influence ! The more airlines ask for the A220-500 the higher the pressure on Airbus.( they are aware of this )
Let`s not forget that Airbus could switch Luxair from the competition. Keep in mind that also Cargolux is interested in the A350F and with a competive offer for both products you have a complete new picture of the scene.

oldJoe wrote:

SA280 wrote:

The day Luxair will have any influence on Airbus deciding to start A220-500 development is not happening... Air France, Breeze or Jetblue is alright, but not Luxair.

No one is thinking about that Luxair has any influence ! The more airlines ask for the A220-500 the higher the pressure on Airbus.( they are aware of this )
Let`s not forget that Airbus could switch Luxair from the competition. Keep in mind that also Cargolux is interested in the A350F and with a competive offer for both products you have a complete new picture of the scene.

If I may rephrase, the more airlines that express interest, the better the business case for the A220-500 looks and the more likely Airbus will move forward.

The Allegiant MAX purchase shows airlines are looking for more from the A220. They want a family. Now, that doesn't make a business case and no business should chase every single sale. However, if the A220-500 prevents another defection to the MAX, there should be consideration. Also, Airbus must certify the 160 seat A223 as the added fuel tanks. Those are cheap projects that will (eventually) sell more A220 in my opinion. The thread for Allegiant's MAX order:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1468829

Lightsaber

Luxair needs A220-500 size to avoid a mixed fleet in the future:

“If Airbus were to bring out the A220-500, that of course would be brilliant for us,” Luxair CEO Gilles Feith said in an interview with Swiss aviation magazine Aerotelegraph.

According to Feith, that would be the only way for Luxair to avoid operating a mixed fleet. The airline needs a replacement for both the De Havilland Canada Dash 8 and the Boeing 737. While the Airbus A220-300 or the Embraer E915-E2 could replace the smaller aircraft, Luxair still needs something the size of the Airbus A320 or A321."

https://www.aerotime.aero/29982-luxair- ... s-a220-500

lightsaber wrote:

oldJoe wrote:

SA280 wrote:

The day Luxair will have any influence on Airbus deciding to start A220-500 development is not happening... Air France, Breeze or Jetblue is alright, but not Luxair.

No one is thinking about that Luxair has any influence ! The more airlines ask for the A220-500 the higher the pressure on Airbus.( they are aware of this )
Let`s not forget that Airbus could switch Luxair from the competition. Keep in mind that also Cargolux is interested in the A350F and with a competive offer for both products you have a complete new picture of the scene.

If I may rephrase, the more airlines that express interest, the better the business case for the A220-500 looks and the more likely Airbus will move forward.

The Allegiant MAX purchase shows airlines are looking for more from the A220. They want a family. Now, that doesn't make a business case and no business should chase every single sale. However, if the A220-500 prevents another defection to the MAX, there should be consideration. Also, Airbus must certify the 160 seat A223 as the added fuel tanks. Those are cheap projects that will (eventually) sell more A220 in my opinion. The thread for Allegiant's MAX order:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1468829

Lightsaber

Thanks for the rephrase ( keep in mind I`m not a natural english speaker )
The different between Allegiant and Luxair is the size of order. The first part of the order for Luxair is to replace the Dash 8`s and the 737-700 ( 15 frames ) with either A220 or E2 jets and the timeline is given for 2024-25 which should be possible. They are even talking about to get used 737`s or A320`s for a medium term solution. I think if Airbus could agree to offer past 2025 the A220-500 , Luxair will be in the future a sole A220 operator and more important , a new one !
I personally would have nothing against this because I live about 40 km from the airport and would prefer an A220 over the Dash 8 on my trips at any time !

late edit : should be on your next summary list please

Something I haven't seen discussed in this or last years sales campaign thread is sales price. The notion seems to be that currently Airbus is losing money on every A220 sold and only after production has sufficiently increased in efficiency the start making a profit on each sales. Airbus currently also seems to be missing out on sales because there simply are no short term slots available.

Now normally if such a combination of factors occurs, price will go up. That's common economic laws based on common sense. So A220 sales seem to be accelerating (perhaps sometime some one will have the time and interest to make a graph for that one, that would be interesting). So it seems that Airbus are intentionally not increasing their actual sale price as much as restricted supply would suggest. They seem to have an interest to get the A220 at sufficient number of airlines to showcase what the aircraft can do.

I suspect when sufficient demand has been created that way, airbus will move into a new phase where sales prices are more reflective of the demand and supply situation. With this increased sales price, the improvements in efficiencies in production now being undertaken and the upcoming improvements in economy of scale, I think the margin will slowly start to open up.

Taxi645 wrote:

Something I haven't seen discussed in this or last years sales campaign thread is sales price. The notion seems to be that currently Airbus is losing money on every A220 sold and only after production has sufficiently increased in efficiency the start making a profit on each sales. Airbus currently also seems to be missing out on sales because there simply are no short term slots available.

Now normally if such a combination of factors occurs, price will go up. That's common economic laws based on common sense. So A220 sales seem to be accelerating (perhaps sometime some one will have the time and interest to make a graph for that one, that would be interesting). So it seems that Airbus are intentionally not increasing their actual sale price as much as restricted supply would suggest. They seem to have an interest to get the A220 at sufficient number of airlines to showcase what the aircraft can do.

I suspect when sufficient demand has been created that way, airbus will move into a new phase where sales prices are more reflective of the demand and supply situation. With this increased sales price, the improvements in efficiencies in production now being undertaken and the upcoming improvements in economy of scale, I think the margin will slowly start to open up.

Airbus put a supply chain manager in charge of the A220 to reign in costs:
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news ... 0it%20A220.
Airbus Chief Executive Guillaume Faury has been seeking cuts of 20% in the cost of major components, industry sources say. One source said Airbus had obtained solid cuts from dominant suppliers Raytheon Technologies - which makes engines and avionics - and wingmaker Spirit Aero Systems but was still struggling to make a significant dent in most other costs.
...
Airbus could further reduce costs by redesigning parts and overhauling the production system for the A220

I posted upthread that Airbus doesn't expect to be in the black until mid decade when they can increase production rates.

Price is going up against the MAX. Price will also be constrained because there isn't an A220-500 in the family (natural cost of splitting fleets). Now that doesn't make a full business case on the A220-500, but it should contribute. I do not believe Airbus could get much volume at significantly higher pricing.

The new pre-FAL will significantly lower costs, but only if volume significantly increases.
https://leehamnews.com/2021/09/28/airbu ... cut-costs/
Florent Massou, the SVP and Head of the A220 program, told LNA the company wants to shave 50% of the final assembly time for the A220.


That alone will cut 2% to 4% off of the cost of the A220. I don't know how much Airbus is saving on the engines, avionics, and wings, but once production ramps up, it should be at lease break even in just a few years. You are correct in that the margin will slowly open up.

There will also be economics of scale on the operations side (e.g., flight simulators will be better utilized allowing them to negotiate deals for weekend or a 2nd shift training hours, MROs will compete for business).

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Taxi645 wrote:

Something I haven't seen discussed in this or last years sales campaign thread is sales price. The notion seems to be that currently Airbus is losing money on every A220 sold and only after production has sufficiently increased in efficiency the start making a profit on each sales. Airbus currently also seems to be missing out on sales because there simply are no short term slots available.

Now normally if such a combination of factors occurs, price will go up. That's common economic laws based on common sense. So A220 sales seem to be accelerating (perhaps sometime some one will have the time and interest to make a graph for that one, that would be interesting). So it seems that Airbus are intentionally not increasing their actual sale price as much as restricted supply would suggest. They seem to have an interest to get the A220 at sufficient number of airlines to showcase what the aircraft can do.

I suspect when sufficient demand has been created that way, airbus will move into a new phase where sales prices are more reflective of the demand and supply situation. With this increased sales price, the improvements in efficiencies in production now being undertaken and the upcoming improvements in economy of scale, I think the margin will slowly start to open up.

Airbus put a supply chain manager in charge of the A220 to reign in costs:
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news ... 0it%20A220.
Airbus Chief Executive Guillaume Faury has been seeking cuts of 20% in the cost of major components, industry sources say. One source said Airbus had obtained solid cuts from dominant suppliers Raytheon Technologies - which makes engines and avionics - and wingmaker Spirit Aero Systems but was still struggling to make a significant dent in most other costs.
...
Airbus could further reduce costs by redesigning parts and overhauling the production system for the A220

I posted upthread that Airbus doesn't expect to be in the black until mid decade when they can increase production rates.

Price is going up against the MAX. Price will also be constrained because there isn't an A220-500 in the family (natural cost of splitting fleets). Now that doesn't make a full business case on the A220-500, but it should contribute. I do not believe Airbus could get much volume at significantly higher pricing.

The new pre-FAL will significantly lower costs, but only if volume significantly increases.
https://leehamnews.com/2021/09/28/airbu ... cut-costs/
Florent Massou, the SVP and Head of the A220 program, told LNA the company wants to shave 50% of the final assembly time for the A220.


That alone will cut 2% to 4% off of the cost of the A220. I don't know how much Airbus is saving on the engines, avionics, and wings, but once production ramps up, it should be at lease break even in just a few years. You are correct in that the margin will slowly open up.

There will also be economics of scale on the operations side (e.g., flight simulators will be better utilized allowing them to negotiate deals for weekend or a 2nd shift training hours, MROs will compete for business).

Lightsaber

Regarding economies of scales; they are roughly aiming at doubling twice from 50 to 200 frames a year. Using the 15% savings this should result in a compounded savings of 32%. Not sure if the numbers will be realized by Airbus…

JonesNL wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Taxi645 wrote:

Something I haven't seen discussed in this or last years sales campaign thread is sales price. The notion seems to be that currently Airbus is losing money on every A220 sold and only after production has sufficiently increased in efficiency the start making a profit on each sales. Airbus currently also seems to be missing out on sales because there simply are no short term slots available.

Now normally if such a combination of factors occurs, price will go up. That's common economic laws based on common sense. So A220 sales seem to be accelerating (perhaps sometime some one will have the time and interest to make a graph for that one, that would be interesting). So it seems that Airbus are intentionally not increasing their actual sale price as much as restricted supply would suggest. They seem to have an interest to get the A220 at sufficient number of airlines to showcase what the aircraft can do.

I suspect when sufficient demand has been created that way, airbus will move into a new phase where sales prices are more reflective of the demand and supply situation. With this increased sales price, the improvements in efficiencies in production now being undertaken and the upcoming improvements in economy of scale, I think the margin will slowly start to open up.

Airbus put a supply chain manager in charge of the A220 to reign in costs:
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news ... 0it%20A220.
Airbus Chief Executive Guillaume Faury has been seeking cuts of 20% in the cost of major components, industry sources say. One source said Airbus had obtained solid cuts from dominant suppliers Raytheon Technologies - which makes engines and avionics - and wingmaker Spirit Aero Systems but was still struggling to make a significant dent in most other costs.
...
Airbus could further reduce costs by redesigning parts and overhauling the production system for the A220

I posted upthread that Airbus doesn't expect to be in the black until mid decade when they can increase production rates.

Price is going up against the MAX. Price will also be constrained because there isn't an A220-500 in the family (natural cost of splitting fleets). Now that doesn't make a full business case on the A220-500, but it should contribute. I do not believe Airbus could get much volume at significantly higher pricing.

The new pre-FAL will significantly lower costs, but only if volume significantly increases.
https://leehamnews.com/2021/09/28/airbu ... cut-costs/
Florent Massou, the SVP and Head of the A220 program, told LNA the company wants to shave 50% of the final assembly time for the A220.


That alone will cut 2% to 4% off of the cost of the A220. I don't know how much Airbus is saving on the engines, avionics, and wings, but once production ramps up, it should be at lease break even in just a few years. You are correct in that the margin will slowly open up.

There will also be economics of scale on the operations side (e.g., flight simulators will be better utilized allowing them to negotiate deals for weekend or a 2nd shift training hours, MROs will compete for business).

Lightsaber

Regarding economies of scales; they are roughly aiming at doubling twice from 50 to 200 frames a year. Using the 15% savings this should result in a compounded savings of 32%. Not sure if the numbers will be realized by Airbus…

The manufacturing costs will drop nicely. I've yet to see a purchase contract that didn't have economics of scale built in. Now, it might be less, say 10% every doubling and there must be a guarantee of 3 and a half years at full production or the buyer makes up the difference (excluding risk sharing partners), but it will be there. Raytheon (engines and avionics) and Spirit already caved. That leaves landing gear and aircraft bodies. Since Spirit also makes the aircraft bodies, I assume there was negotiations there. Spirit is operating in the red, but will want the A220 growth.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/why-s ... 04408.html

Rivets/fasteners will now be bought at Airbus pricing. There the A220 gains A320 economics of scale.
I would assume the same for tires, brakes, and other components whose vendors often change based on price negotiations.

I wouldn't expect airbus to achieve a full 32% (although I use 1/8th reduction per doubling for my estimates).

Airbus is certainly making a go of it with the Qantas and Azorra orders.

My list is currently growing. I'm sure Airbus will lose some sales campaigns (e.g., I didn't even know about Allegiant until it was lost), but they'll win some too:

Realized campains in 2022:
1. Azorra (20 A223, 2 two twenty)

Active campaigns
1.Air Burkina
2. Possible top off order for 10 by AirCanada
3. Possible top off by AirFrance
4. Croatia Airways (possibly 2 others in Croatia, I don't know if they were serious or just kicking tires)
5. Green Africa
6. Israir
7. LOT (possibly a large order)
8. SAS (possibly a large order)
9. Uganda Airways
10. LH group for A319 replacement and regional replacement (new order, I'm unsure of the possible size)
11. A new Ukraine airline MOU for 6
https://www.scramble.nl/civil-news/ukra ... al-airline
12. Aviation capital group MOU for 20
13. Luxair (might be dependent upon A225 launch)

At a production rate of 6 per month, we'll celebrate over two hundred A220 at airlines by end of April (probably in March, I'm hedging my bets).
https://www.airfleets.net/exploit/production-csr.htm

Success breeds success. Volumes produce economics of scale. I hope to see rate 14 ASAP.

Lightsaber

I seem to recall MS had 12 options when they ordered, does anyone know if they expired?

lightsaber wrote :
At a production rate of 6 per month, we'll celebrate over two hundred A220 at airlines by end of April (probably in March, I'm hedging my bets).

Over two hundret delivered should be not a big problem. Until end of 2021 193 were delivered plus in January 2022 the first ACJ TwoTwenty which means seven more for this target. Last year they delivered the seventh frame at 17th of March for comparison. Given that at the moment there are eight frames already build and some have performed test flights and my bet is March. The production rate of 6 is not enough IMO to make the sales team happier.

lightsaber wrote:

Active campaigns

3. Possible top off by AirFrance


Lightsaber

To my knowledge, they said they will do that top-up along with an A220-500 order, or just go all maxes for A320/21 replacements. At least that was their threat for not making the variant

I have a question regarding the suitability of the A220-300 for LCC operators. From the list of operators, both current and future (disclosed), there does not seem to be much interest from traditional LCCs.

Does the A220-300 not appeal to LCCs because of the per-departure capacity cut it would have compared to the A320/B737-800 which have become LCC mainstays? Is it size, cost, availability, commonality and/or crew/maintenance training conversion costs standing in the way of the A220-300 gaining a meaningful foothold with traditional LCCs?

MoKa777 wrote:

I have a question regarding the suitability of the A220-300 for LCC operators. From the list of operators, both current and future (disclosed), there does not seem to be much interest from traditional LCCs.

Does the A220-300 not appeal to LCCs because of the per-departure capacity cut it would have compared to the A320/B737-800 which have become LCC mainstays? Is it size, cost, availability, commonality and/or crew/maintenance training conversion costs standing in the way of the A220-300 gaining a meaningful foothold with traditional LCCs?

One issue is density and gauge. You can’t put enough seats on the A220 and CASK/CASM will struggle compared to an exit limit A320 or 737.