CSeries - Flight Testing And Production Thread (Part 2)

kaneporta1 · Wed Jun 17, 2015 5:47 pm

Quoting YYZYYT (Reply 52):
According to the video (at 4:35), engine beats specs by 1%, another 4% yet to come. So the rest must be aerodynanmics / weight.

That is incorrect. In the video it mentions overall performance. In the photo attached in my previous post, it is very clear where the current performance enhancements come from.

Tangowhisky · Thu Jun 18, 2015 12:50 am

Quoting kaneporta1 (Reply 41):
The way I interpret this, is that the newly announced boost in performance comes from the airframe rather than the engine

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 42):
According to Leeham, the numbers BBD used at Paris are very conservative. In fact they believe the range will be greater than recently announced

I am still trying to understand what the improvement is. They are announcing an increase in range by increasing the MTOW. Where is the increase in range purely by lower fuel burn? Maybe I am missing something but MTOW increase in development programs can also mean the OWE (Operating Weight Empty) went up. So a new and much higher MTOW can produce more range (assuming same payload and not reached max fuel load) and address the creep in empty weight. Any thoughts?

[Edited 2015-06-17 18:18:58]

neromancer · Thu Jun 18, 2015 1:55 am

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 57):
I am still trying to understand what the improvement is. They are announcing an increase in range by increasing the MTOW. Where is the increase in range purely by lower fuel burn? Maybe I am missing something but MTOW increase in development programs can also mean the OWE (Operating Weight Empty) went up. So a new and much higher MTOW can produce more range (assuming same payload and not reached max fuel load) and address the creep in empty weight. Any thoughts?

Increase of the MTOW appears to be part of it. But BBD was very clear that improvements in aerodynamics also played a role. By the sounds of things the C Series has exceeded expectations in every category and that has led to the improvements that have been announced (See the picture and link in post 41).

queb · Thu Jun 18, 2015 2:44 am

Quoting Tangowhisky, reply=57:

What I understand is even with more pax (so more payload), greater mtow, the aircraft still burn 1% less fuel than planned (+4% in 2018).

queb · Thu Jun 18, 2015 2:11 pm

Swiss CS100 seatmap

http://www.swiss.com/CMSContent/web/...nDocuments/Fleet/CS100-Seatmap.pdf

rbrunner · Thu Jun 18, 2015 2:24 pm

Quoting queb (Reply 60):
Swiss CS100 seatmap

Thanks. Capacity 130 pax. Why on earth does it jump from row 16 to row 28?

Polot · Thu Jun 18, 2015 2:33 pm

Quoting rbrunner (Reply 61):
Thanks. Capacity 130 pax. Why on earth does it jump from row 16 to row 28?

Swiss has all their narrowbodies end at row 36/37 except for the Avros, so all their narrowbodies have a jump around row 16/17 to twenty something. This does not include the A321 which has no gaps to row 37 (except for row 13). I don't know why LX does this, usually airlines that include gaps do so to keep the exit row or the bulkheads/first row of economy consistent across the fleet not the last row number.

Also minor nitpick but it has 125 seats, not 130.

[Edited 2015-06-18 07:35:34]

DALCE · Thu Jun 18, 2015 2:44 pm

LX does this as there is less need to re-assign seats to pax in case of short term equipment changes.
Quite smart I think

Polot · Thu Jun 18, 2015 2:56 pm

Quoting dalce (Reply 63):
LX does this as there is less need to re-assign seats to pax in case of short term equipment changes.

Do they routinely just assign rows ~17-~28 last? As that is the only scenario I can think of where the gaps makes the process really any easier. In full, or mostly full, flights for example you are just shifting who gets booted off the plane, although of course in that situation LX is going to avoid doing an equipment swap.

Quantos · Thu Jun 18, 2015 3:46 pm

FTV7 is en route to Belfast now!

Tangowhisky · Fri Jun 19, 2015 1:02 am

Quoting queb (Reply 59):
What I understand is even with more pax (so more payload), greater mtow, the aircraft still burn 1% less fuel than planned (+4% in 2018).

OK thanks for the clarification. I guess they are re-positionINg the seat categories of the CS100 and CS300, and that the CS300 can have more seats than the A319 and burn now even less fuel.

Did they mention what the fuel burn improvement is compared to the baseline initial brochure?

r2rho · Fri Jun 19, 2015 11:30 am

Quoting polot (Reply 62):
it has 125 seats

As I expected, and what I also expect to be the standard configuration for EU carriers, at 30-31" pitch. (standard single class 32" capacity is 120 pax). A perfect 735 replacement, right, LH?

Dash9 · Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:18 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rItaS0eh3gI

Nice video from the Swiss chief pilots who explains in more details who are the people involved and tasks accomplished by an airline when it introduces a new type, even more so when its launch operator.

We also see a very short glimpse of the FAL where there are two CS100 in final assembly. Since all CS100 FTVs are built and flying these must be the two first production aircraft. Both look structural completed but without engines. not sure about the landing gears and the interior.

Anyone has more information on the status of the birds in final assembly?

Dash9

[Edited 2015-06-19 09:18:57]

aerolimani · Fri Jun 19, 2015 5:06 pm

Quoting Dash9 (Reply 68):

Thanks for the video!

Please, do your fellow a-netters the courtesy of removing the s from https, when you post a link. That way, it will be clickable.Also, using the "share" button on youtube will reveal a link (youtu.be) that opens properly no matter what type of device someone is using.

http://youtu.be/rItaS0eh3gI

Cheers!

INFINITI329 · Fri Jun 19, 2015 5:33 pm

BBD has said they may add gear doors on the CRJ in a bid to helps its aerodynamics for fuel burn. Could landing gear doors be of any benefit to the c-series?

rikkus67 · Fri Jun 19, 2015 6:09 pm

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 70):
Could landing gear doors be of any benefit to the c-series?

Lack of doors hasn't hurt the ERJ's or 737's...

aerolimani · Fri Jun 19, 2015 7:18 pm

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 70):
BBD has said they may add gear doors on the CRJ in a bid to helps its aerodynamics for fuel burn. Could landing gear doors be of any benefit to the c-series?

It's a matter of whether the extra weight would pays off versus an aerodynamic gain. Plus, there's consideration to be given to the addition of more moving parts, in terms of maintenance and potential breakdown.

It would seem to me that on shorter-range aircraft, doors would be less beneficial than on longer range aircraft. On a plane doing several short trips in a day, the doors would have more cycles in relation to the number of hours actually in the air. The maintenance costs would be higher relative to the amount of time such doors would be helping save money aerodynamically.

There are ways to aerodynamically help gear without doors. That's what the 737's hubcaps are about.

Paolo92 · Fri Jun 19, 2015 8:25 pm

Quoting Dash9 (Reply 68):
We also see a very short glimpse of the FAL where there are two CS100 in final assembly. Since all CS100 FTVs are built and flying these must be the two first production aircraft. Both look structural completed but without engines. not sure about the landing gears and the interior.

This is a screenshot from the video with the two aircraft:

There's no way to uniquely identify the frames, though the one in the background is a CS300 (greater number of windows and double overwing exit) possibly the first CS300 for airBaltic (msn 55003).

Dash9 · Fri Jun 19, 2015 9:22 pm

Quoting Paolo92 (Reply 73):
There's no way to uniquely identify the frames, though the one in the background is a CS300 (greater number of windows and double overwing exit) possibly the first CS300 for airBaltic (msn 55003).

Indeed the back one is a CS300 with double over wing exit, good observation. Maybe its FTV8, the 2nd and last CS300 FTV?

The front one is definitely a CS100 as its MSN is 500xx and all CS300 are numbered MSN55xxx

Paolo92 · Sat Jun 20, 2015 11:35 am

Quoting Dash9 (Reply 74):

Yep, the one in the foreground is a CS100 indeed.

Here's the latest update (dated March 6, 2015) on the production line from Bombardier:

Quote:
As for production, Dewar says the CSeries is now being built “in position,” as planned, with no traveled work. This includes the three aircraft on the final-assembly line in the new building at Mirabel: second CS300 test aircraft FTV8 and production CS100s P2 and P3.

http://aviationweek.com/advanced-mac...-accelerating-cseries-test-program

on a side note, CS300 FTV8 will also feature a full interior, like the CS100 FTV5.

AntonovA330 · Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:14 am

"The C Series aircraft program recorded its longest flight today when the fifth flight test vehicle (FTV5) returned to its Mirabel, Québec base following its demo in Zurich with launch operator, SWISS Airlines. The non-stop, transatlantic trip, which covered 3,350 nautical miles (6,204 km) was completed with an air time of approximately 8.4 hours."
http://news.commercialaircraft.bomba...-program-records-longest-flight-2/
Rumours said it was going to make a fuel stop. So this comes as a surprise!

queb · Sun Jun 21, 2015 12:25 pm

Quoting Dash9 (Reply 74):
Indeed the back one is a CS300 with double over wing exit

Don't forget, the second overwing exit is optional (and retrofitable) for customers who want more than 145 seats.

lightsaber · Sun Jun 21, 2015 2:32 pm

With a material increase in seats, I'm betting the 160 seat CS300 has a future with ULCCs.

Quoting OKCFlyer (Reply 31):
The CSeries is roughly 8,000lbs heavier than the E2 jets IIRC. That's a material difference.

Yes, but there is a material difference in wing. So in effect, the two planes are optimized for different missions. The E2 will be much more efficient on the 1 hour mission. On 2+ hour missions, the C-series will have the advantage

The E2 is undergoing a major redesign to overcome the E-jets poor maintenance reputation. Neither Embraer or Bombardier seem to get FBW, so it will be interesting to see how their projects go.

As a Pratt fan, I'll grab a bucket of popcorn and enjoy seeing which aircraft wins. I can't loose.

Lightsaber

YYZYYT · Tue Jun 30, 2015 5:37 pm

I am posting an article about the Swiss presentation of the CSeries - some great pictures, and a fun read (I also posted it in the thread that covered that event, but I am re-posting here in cased you missed it)

http://www.planepics.org/cms/cseries

There is a technical question that arises from the article... see the following quote:

"The chief pilot took his time to explain the aircraft’s handling using the sidestick and the fly by wire system, and outlined the huge differences to Airbus’ approach. In the CSeries there is much more direct feedback from the airplane. For example, it doesn’t autotrim during manual flight, and the thrust levers are moving when autothrust adjusts the settings. All this should enhance the connection between airplane and pilot, reducing the risk of errors."

How new / different is this? Are there any other details that go into the "huge differences" (or is that just enthusiasm form the author / BBD public relations squad)?

Thoughts?

lightsaber · Tue Jun 30, 2015 6:29 pm

Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 40):

4% more... At least half is the engine.

Quoting YYZYYT (Reply 52):

Engine beating by only 1%... My rumor mill seems optimistic.

Cest LA vie.

Lightsaber

rbrunner · Wed Jul 01, 2015 11:42 am

Quoting YYZYYT (Reply 79):
the thrust levers are moving when autothrust adjusts the settings

I tend to agree with this one. The thrust levers moving is a stronger reference than the gauges.

Tangowhisky · Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:14 am

Quoting YYZYYT (Reply 79):
How new / different is this?

My understanding is that Bombardier kept the side stick of the Airbus, but the control laws are closer to the Boeing 777/787 which use CStar based on speed stability. The Airbus is flight path stability. The Airbus planes do not have trim switches and the throttles do not move when auto-throttles engaged. On the CSeries, pilots have a trim switch on the stick that indicates the speed target the pilot is trimming for, and the throttles move in auto mode. I think experienced pilots will judge which is more preferable.

JoeCanuck · Thu Jul 02, 2015 4:51 am

.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 82):

Judging from some past threads on the subject, any debate about what type of control input, (yoke or sidestick), what control laws, (Boeing or Airbus) and having the autothrottles move or not, (Airbus vs Boeing and BBD), elicits some very deeply felt and personal feelings.

Having never flown any of the aircraft, I don't have a horse in the race so after getting scolded, I've learned my lessons about expressing any opinions or analysis on the subjects and keep my opinions to myself.

If you want to talk about Cessna 172 control laws, I'm your guy.

It seems, regardless of what you prefer, and why, them's fighting words.

starbucks · Tue Jul 07, 2015 7:26 pm

VMU done!:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKCW-5tEgcg&feature=youtu.be

neromancer · Thu Jul 09, 2015 12:14 am

CS300 Visit to Belfast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttT8wAmIwYw

YYZYYT · Mon Jul 20, 2015 6:42 pm

Latest update:

As of July 4, flight testing program is 83% done, two months to completion at the rate of 200 hours per month.

http://airinsight.com/2015/07/01/c-s...ght-test-june-update/#.VZPdJnD3arU

ps - I took note of the speculation (information?) in the discussion that follows that the CSC500 will be announced, with orders, at 2016 Farnborough...

[Edited 2015-07-20 11:49:58]

KarelXWB · Tue Aug 04, 2015 10:45 am

MSN 50006, the first production frame, received test registration C-FFCO.

http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/C-FFCO.html

http://twitter.com/Paolo_Pilot/status/628514337234227200

neromancer · Tue Aug 04, 2015 9:13 pm

Smoke testing on the C-Series

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8ixDalfvK4

aerolimani · Thu Aug 06, 2015 11:06 pm

An interesting development: http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...-engine-option-for-cseries-415481/

P & W say they are going to produce yet another engine option for the CSeries, a higher-thrust version of the PW1500G, dubbed the PW1525G. No hardware changes. I won't requote the whole article here. It's worth a read.

Tangowhisky · Fri Aug 07, 2015 1:49 am

Quoting aerolimani (Reply 89):
P & W say they are going to produce yet another engine option for the CSeries,

CS500.

aerolimani · Fri Aug 07, 2015 5:13 am

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 90):
CS500.

That's what I was thinking! I just wasn't brave enough to write it.

BlueSky1976 · Fri Aug 07, 2015 6:38 am

The writing's on the wall.
Haters, be afraid.

[Edited 2015-08-06 23:38:25]

neromancer · Sat Aug 08, 2015 12:55 am

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 90):
CS500.

As stated in another thread could this also be an ultra short field performance version for a customer like Porter?

Tangowhisky · Sat Aug 08, 2015 1:55 am

Quoting Neromancer (Reply 93):
As stated in another thread could this also be an ultra short field performance version for a customer like Porter?

Possibly as it may help the runway amount extension

lightsaber · Sat Aug 08, 2015 2:51 am

Quoting aerolimani (Reply 89):

Definitely worth the read! My take, due to the Mach 0.1 minimum speed is they allow the thrust once the low spool is spun up enough to enhance engine cooling.

Or is might be to have enough windspeed across the CS100 rudder...

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 90):

I hope... I think it will happen. But first, let us see CS100 and CS300 EIS.

Quoting Neromancer (Reply 93):

Since it is available for the CS100, yes!

Lightsaber

neromancer · Sat Aug 08, 2015 2:55 pm

Another Video up by Bombardier:

First passengers on the C-Series:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m10P9damhFM

nikeson13 · Sat Aug 08, 2015 4:01 pm

Just looked thru the order books again and saw 40 CS300 on order from Macquarie AirFinance. Who will these be for?

CXH · Mon Aug 10, 2015 5:31 am

As per an item on cseries.com, FTV2 is at Phoenix-Mesa (AZA) airport doing hot weather testing. There are some photos on the site. Photos and testing taken on August 4, according to the last photo of a Blackberry - 106F!
http://news.commercialaircraft.bomba...series/#/c-series/category/photos/

Interestingly, FTV5, the full cabin demonstrator in SWISS livery, is also now at AZA via Wichita. I know FTV2 is painted shiny black on some parts of one side of the aircraft and matte black on the other side to test cold and hot weather. But why send FTV5 there? To test cabin cooling ability?

http://www.flightradar24.com/reg/c-gwxz

http://www.flightradar24.com/reg/c-gwyd

[Edited 2015-08-09 22:44:26]

yyztpa · Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:50 pm

Quoting CXH (Reply 98):
But why send FTV5 there?

http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airplanes/c-gwxz/#71433fc

An interesting flight track today to.......?

r2rho · Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:46 am

Quoting Neromancer (Reply 93):
As stated in another thread could this also be an ultra short field performance version for a customer like Porter?

IMO it is both. On the CS100, it will improve short field performance. This could open up other niche markets fopr the CSeries apart from Porter. But in the future it will also help pave the way towards the CS500.

JoeCanuck · Thu Aug 20, 2015 7:41 pm

Flight Global reports that the CS100 has completed 82% of certification flight testing and the program has begun production ramp up.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...cseries-production-ramp-up-415924/

Quote:
The company had slowed the production system to a crawl a year ago even as a new final assembly line opened in Mirabel, Canada. As delays extended the CSeries flight test programme by more than a year, Bombardier wanted to avoid building too many aircraft that would require extensive design changes after certification, Dewar says.

Tangowhisky · Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:32 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 101):
Flight Global reports that the CS100 has completed 82% of certification flight testing and the program has begun production ramp up.

Unless they get some solid new CRJ orders, they will need to ramp up even faster. They are in negative cash flow mode.

lightsaber · Sat Aug 22, 2015 3:22 am

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 101):
and the program has begun production ramp up.

That is good news. Finally. But what we do not have is an EIS day.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 102):
They are in negative cash flow mode.

The pain unfortunately isn't done. While this could be an inflection point, it is not the cash flow bottom.

Lightsaber

planemaker · Sat Aug 22, 2015 9:23 pm

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 102):
Unless they get some solid new CRJ orders, they will need to ramp up even faster. They are in negative cash flow mode.

Ramp up for... More than 100 Bombardier CSeries orders at risk of delays or cancellations, analysis says??

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 103):
The pain unfortunately isn't done. While this could be an inflection point, it is not the cash flow bottom.

Not the cash flow bottom, indeed: Bombardier Bondholders Suffer as Jet Delays Burn Through Cash

But at least the BBD press release provided a little bit of "lift" for the stock after the Fitch BBD downgrade:Bombardier shares hit new low as Fitch again downgrades Bombardier. There were very few on here that imagined the stock going from $26 to the current $1.29.

Tangowhisky · Sun Aug 23, 2015 2:17 am

Quoting planemaker (Reply 104):
There were very few on here that imagined the stock going from $26 to the current $1.29.

What are the chances that the Quebec and/or Federal governments find a legit angle (like through their pension funds) and buy out the outstanding Class B shares at about $2 and become partners (until things get sorted out with Bombardoier) with the Class A shares owned by the Bombardier family? Kind of like the auto industry bail out. I mean a legit angle so that there will be no fuss with subsidy/trade legalities. Maybe there is something in the works to drive the stock way down so that it will be a lesser burden on tax payers, and the investment bankers will get their share of the transaction (wink wink).

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net