2 new orders per rikkus67's link. That would be good news!

Oh, the CS300 looks great. Like a Su-100 on steroids. Much better looking than the CS100.

Lightsaber

Spirit's CEO reportedly said during today's earnings call that they will consider the CSeries.
https://www.thestreet.com/story/1386608 ... s-100.html

However, the context was unclear, and there wasn't any hint in his actual words that they were leaning towards the CSeries. It sounds more like an ordinary "we'll consider all our options" statement. At best, there might be an inferred leaning towards smaller aircraft based on a past statement that Spirit wants to grow in smaller markets.

He said the timing for their next order is 2019. Based on the statement that they have deliveries scheduled through 2021, but capacity growth will slow down in 2019, I think he means they will be looking for deliveries starting in 2019. I can't imagine there are many delivery slots available for the A320NEO in the 2019-2021 window, so if I'm reading him right, they must be considering placing an order soon.

Expanding on what iamluck said, Spirit said this about their A319s (145 seats): "They do have certain mission-critical use for us. And at the right price, they're very effective airplanes." Seems like theres still a need for a plane smaller than 180 seats in their plans.

Specifically on the CSeries question, they don't deny that they are looking to get it, rather they say that currently manufactures are really competitive like the air travel market is :
"[T]he marketplace is very competitive, and if you look at North America, and even South America, the low-cost sector, the true low-cost sector, is largely Airbus. And so the other manufacturers are ultimately going to be pretty aggressive. And so you have to weigh the opportunity of a new airplane, whatever incentives you can get, versus the inefficiencies of creating another fleet type... In this case, we're a consumer, and we need to explore all the opportunities in the space... It really is the right thing to do is to see what the competition will make available to us."

To me, that reads that Airbus would be preferred, but at the right cost to offset adding a fleet type anything manufacture is possible to win an order from them. So definitely CSeries is on the radar, and they're probably want deliveries to start by 2019-2021. Could be call to Airbus to give a good price, or to Bombardier, but either way BBD isn't favored or unfavored looking forward.

PS: that CS300 looks lovely in those colors, can't wait to see different ones it in the future:) Also 2 new orders according to Airways News? Wow, good win, can't wait to see who they are.

Edit: added PS, phrasing and minor things

On a separate topic... As we know there are 5x CS100 FTVs and 2x CS300 FTVs out there. Some will be kept indefinitely for future tests and development (my 2 cents one CS300 FTV will be streched to CS500 within 3 years). I recall reading a while ago that many will be refurbished and delivered. Anyone knows which FTVs will be sold, to whom and when? Whats it the process to do so? I guess the later FTVs might only need a new interior while the earlier one might need structural changes such as to remove the escape chute? How much of a discount can one expect for a refurbished FTV?

Delivering a few FTVs would help boost the total deliveries and obviously these are not lacking an engine from PWC.

-Dash9

Given BBD's financial situation I am not sure they could match Airbus on pricing.

Dash9 wrote:

On a separate topic... As we know there are 5x CS100 FTVs and 2x CS300 FTVs out there. Some will be kept indefinitely for future tests and development (my 2 cents one CS300 FTV will be streched to CS500 within 3 years). I recall reading a while ago that many will be refurbished and delivered. Anyone knows which FTVs will be sold, to whom and when? Whats it the process to do so? I guess the later FTVs might only need a new interior while the earlier one might need structural changes such as to remove the escape chute? How much of a discount can one expect for a refurbished FTV?

Delivering a few FTVs would help boost the total deliveries and obviously these are not lacking an engine from PWC.

-Dash9

I don't think anyone has access to that information, and my guess would actually be that BBD themselves have no idea who will take the FTVs that they do want to sell. I do believe there's actually 6 CS100s in use (or in storage at this point it's hard to say) by Bombardier. P1 (SN 50006) was also used for route proving. The other FTVs are 50001 to 50005.

Swiss has started taking their deliveries from 50010, so there's also the question of who will take 50007 to 50009.

Swiss' 4th CS100 (HB-JBD) made its first flight on November 6.

KarelXWB wrote:

Swiss' 4th CS100 (HB-JBD) made its first flight on November 6.

6th? I heard it flew the 5th (not that it matters, but this is for accuracy's sake!)

Dash9 wrote:

Anyone knows which FTVs will be sold, to whom and when?

I **think** the original plan was to refurb and sell all. But reality has bitten since. There are structural changes throughout the FTVs, with each more or less unique in their own way.

Now, I **believe** all but one, maybe 2, will be refurb'ed (inc. replacing a lot of structural components) and sold. No idea to who though.

Amiga500 wrote:

Dash9 wrote:

Anyone knows which FTVs will be sold, to whom and when?

I **think** the original plan was to refurb and sell all. But reality has bitten since. There are structural changes throughout the FTVs, with each more or less unique in their own way.

Now, I **believe** all but one, maybe 2, will be refurb'ed (inc. replacing a lot of structural components) and sold. No idea to who though.

Maybe BBD should look keep one for future testing

Amiga500 wrote:

Dash9 wrote:

Anyone knows which FTVs will be sold, to whom and when?

I **think** the original plan was to refurb and sell all. But reality has bitten since. There are structural changes throughout the FTVs, with each more or less unique in their own way.

Now, I **believe** all but one, maybe 2, will be refurb'ed (inc. replacing a lot of structural components) and sold. No idea to who though.

I wasn't aware of any structural changes made during the initial production and flight testing of the CSeries. We know the 787 had many (aka the Terribal Teens) but I recall only software changes were required on the Cseries, not structure. Obviously I'm not taking into account flight-test specific structures such as the escape chute.

You have any link for these changes you are referring to?

thank you
-Dash9

INFINITI329 wrote:

Amiga500 wrote:

Dash9 wrote:

Anyone knows which FTVs will be sold, to whom and when?

I **think** the original plan was to refurb and sell all. But reality has bitten since. There are structural changes throughout the FTVs, with each more or less unique in their own way.

Now, I **believe** all but one, maybe 2, will be refurb'ed (inc. replacing a lot of structural components) and sold. No idea to who though.

Maybe BBD should look keep one for future testing

I'm confident they'll keep at least FTV1, which was damaged with the engine explosion and might have poor residual value (custom fix on a test airplane... might not be able to certify it)
I also think they'll keep either FTV6 or FTV7 (CS300) for future stretch / upgrade / certification testing. Remember they kept the CR700 prototype that became the CRJ900 prototype that become the CRJ1000 prototype! Bombardier sure knows how to stretch and air frame.

-Dash9

Dash9 wrote:

You have any link for these changes you are referring to?

Nope, no links.

I don't know how much I can say without giving clues as to who I may be either.

Swiss colors have been removed from FTV5.


https://twitter.com/TheAviationBeat

KarelXWB wrote:

Swiss colors have been removed from FTV5.


https://twitter.com/TheAviationBeat

I wondered why DL wanted to see C-Series again

Hmmm..... CS300 order?

Bombardier plans to deliver 30-35 CSeries aircraft in 2017.

https://twitter.com/sylvainfaust/status ... 3442124802

rikkus67 wrote:

Hmmm..... CS300 order?

Maybe a CS300 order is in the card but I think Delta won't pull the trigger until they have the CS100 on property and performing well. Beside, if they wanted to order a CS300, BBD would have flown a CS300 instead of a CS100 down to Atlanta yesterday

-Dash9

KarelXWB wrote:

Bombardier plans to deliver 30-35 CSeries aircraft in 2017.

https://twitter.com/sylvainfaust/status ... 3442124802

Not too impressive. Less than 3 per month on average

It took me a moment to realize the picture was interesting mainly because it's in Atlanta.

Maybe Delta requested an opportunity for their trainers, planners, and maintenance staff to have some time with the aircraft to help them get started on their preparations to integrate it into the fleet in a little over a year. Sometimes a hands-on is really helpful.

Someone83 wrote:

KarelXWB wrote:

Bombardier plans to deliver 30-35 CSeries aircraft in 2017.

https://twitter.com/sylvainfaust/status ... 3442124802

Not too impressive. Less than 3 per month on average

It's moderately slower than Boeing's 787 ramp up (2011: 3 deliveries; 2012: 46 deliveries). However, Bombardier is not facing an urgent rush from customers whose fleet plans were being turned upside down by the delays like with the 787. I think a lot of customers are pretty content to bide their time and let Swiss discover as many bugs as possible.

Bombardier also has cut their production staff to the bones. I'd be very worried about trying to force a rapid ramp-up with new hires.

And of course, they still have to stave off a long term cash crunch, which means they need to ramp up as efficiently as possible.

Yup DL execs saw it yesterday, definitely a familiarity visit. But it was only on the ground for an hour. C-GWXZ (50005) has been doing a lot of different routes lately, currently in Albany.

Looking at the test aircraft, 55001, 50001, 50003, 50004, and 50006 have had little/no flying over the last couple of weeks, this is normal correct? 50002 has been doing a bit of testing out of AZA and ICT, and 51002 just got back from its Asian tour on Nov 5.

iamlucky13 wrote:

Someone83 wrote:

KarelXWB wrote:

Bombardier plans to deliver 30-35 CSeries aircraft in 2017.

https://twitter.com/sylvainfaust/status ... 3442124802

Not too impressive. Less than 3 per month on average

It's moderately slower than Boeing's 787 ramp up (2011: 3 deliveries; 2012: 46 deliveries). However, Bombardier is not facing an urgent rush from customers whose fleet plans were being turned upside down by the delays like with the 787. I think a lot of customers are pretty content to bide their time and let Swiss discover as many bugs as possible.

Bombardier also has cut their production staff to the bones. I'd be very worried about trying to force a rapid ramp-up with new hires.

And of course, they still have to stave off a long term cash crunch, which means they need to ramp up as efficiently as possible.

I think it is less Bombardier having customers content to bide their time for debugging and more Bombardier doesn't have enough (solid) customers for a large ramp up.

3 deliveries per months is way better than one per 6 weeks as it is now. They must ramp up. Don't forget its useless for them to ramp up quicker than PWC can deliver engines.

BBD has not cut production staff on the Cseries, au contraire. They are letting 1000 of employees go on other programs or back office department while at the same moment hiring more on the Cseries FAL.

I was very surprised to see the CS300 C-FFDO ( the one with the blue engines, tail and Air Baltic titles ) in HND recently.
Bombardier hoping to cash in on the MRJ's development troubles by tempting NH ??

Dash9 wrote:

3 deliveries per months is way better than one per 6 weeks as it is now. They must ramp up. Don't forget its useless for them to ramp up quicker than PWC can deliver engines.

BBD has not cut production staff on the Cseries, au contraire. They are letting 1000 of employees go on other programs or back office department while at the same moment hiring more on the Cseries FAL.

Not in the latest round of layoffs, but there have been CSeries layoffs in the past. More importantly, running a tight workforce all over the company that they currently are does not give them a lot of experienced hands to depend on to negotiate the ramp up and mentor the new hires.

iamlucky13 wrote:

[

Not in the latest round of layoffs, but there have been CSeries layoffs in the past. More importantly, running a tight workforce all over the company that they currently are does not give them a lot of experienced hands to depend on to negotiate the ramp up and mentor the new hires.

This is the biggest problem. Often it's the older folks who go first. Their salaries are higher so you get a better result with less effort. However, these decisions are often made and executed rather quickly leaving no time for proper transfer of knowledge.

Dash9 wrote:

BBD has not cut production staff on the Cseries, au contraire.

If they stick to the 2017 delivery target of 30-35 aircraft, what happens with the 8-13 missing aircraft that were supposed to be delivered in 2016?

KarelXWB wrote:

Dash9 wrote:

BBD has not cut production staff on the Cseries, au contraire.

If they stick to the 2017 delivery target of 30-35 aircraft, what happens with the 8-13 missing aircraft that were supposed to be delivered in 2016?

Everything gets pushed back, I suppose. Honestly, I have little confidence in BBD to deliver 30-35 aircraft in 2017. That's close to 3 aircraft per month, and I just don't see that being possible given the current delivery rate. 2017 is less than two months away. That said, I suspect Bombardier is secretly happy to be able to blame PWC for the slow ramp-up. Bombardier is probably eager to ramp-up quite quickly, but a slow ramp-up is always safer and it seems to have paid off so far in terms of reliability of the CS100 in service.

Quantos wrote:

KarelXWB wrote:

Dash9 wrote:

BBD has not cut production staff on the Cseries, au contraire.

If they stick to the 2017 delivery target of 30-35 aircraft, what happens with the 8-13 missing aircraft that were supposed to be delivered in 2016?

Everything gets pushed back, I suppose. Honestly, I have little confidence in BBD to deliver 30-35 aircraft in 2017. That's close to 3 aircraft per month, and I just don't see that being possible given the current delivery rate. 2017 is less than two months away. That said, I suspect Bombardier is secretly happy to be able to blame PWC for the slow ramp-up. Bombardier is probably eager to ramp-up quite quickly, but a slow ramp-up is always safer and it seems to have paid off so far in terms of reliability of the CS100 in service.

Well we know they intended to deliver 15-20 CSeries in 2016 and will only have 7 delivered. Thats 8-13 units that could supposedly be built but lacks engines. To meet 30-35 deliveries next year, BBD only needs to complete 17-28 units, provided that PWC can catch up on their engines backlog. In other words, BBD not meeting their delivery 2016 target, which they can blame on PWC and get compensation from, may also help them achieve their 2017 target even if they encounter other ramp-up problems.

Just a theory of mine.
-Dash9

Dash9 wrote:

Quantos wrote:

KarelXWB wrote:

If they stick to the 2017 delivery target of 30-35 aircraft, what happens with the 8-13 missing aircraft that were supposed to be delivered in 2016?

Everything gets pushed back, I suppose. Honestly, I have little confidence in BBD to deliver 30-35 aircraft in 2017. That's close to 3 aircraft per month, and I just don't see that being possible given the current delivery rate. 2017 is less than two months away. That said, I suspect Bombardier is secretly happy to be able to blame PWC for the slow ramp-up. Bombardier is probably eager to ramp-up quite quickly, but a slow ramp-up is always safer and it seems to have paid off so far in terms of reliability of the CS100 in service.

Well we know they intended to deliver 15-20 CSeries in 2016 and will only have 7 delivered. Thats 8-13 units that could supposedly be built but lacks engines. To meet 30-35 deliveries next year, BBD only needs to complete 17-28 units, provided that PWC can catch up on their engines backlog. In other words, BBD not meeting their delivery 2016 target, which they can blame on PWC and get compensation from, may also help them achieve their 2017 target even if they encounter other ramp-up problems.

Just a theory of mine.
-Dash9

That is, of course, assuming that it is actually the engines holding up further production.

Polot wrote:

I think it is less Bombardier having customers content to bide their time for debugging and more Bombardier doesn't have enough (solid) customers for a large ramp up.

Polot wrote:

That is, of course, assuming that it is actually the engines holding up further production.

Always looking at the bright side of life, huh?

yyztpa wrote:

Polot wrote:

I think it is less Bombardier having customers content to bide their time for debugging and more Bombardier doesn't have enough (solid) customers for a large ramp up.

Polot wrote:

That is, of course, assuming that it is actually the engines holding up further production.

Always looking at the bright side of life, huh?

If the engines were the only thing holding up production Bombardier would still build the frames sans engines (just like Airbus and the neos, and Boeing and the 741), to expedite delivery as soon as PWC can deliver the engines. They wouldn't totally slow down production over a year because of the lack of engines.

it costs many tens of millions of dollars to build an airframe. it doesn't make any sense to pay upfront to build a bunch of engineless frames they won't get paid for until delivery.,...which means engines.

Plus, it costs a bunch more to prep a aircraft for long term storage to keep it in ready to deliver shape.

If they could suddenly expect a whole bunch of engines all at once at a predictable time, then maybe ....but Pratt is probably going to continue to low rate trickle out the engines...and BBD will keep pace.

In my opinion, GE is much more likely to quickly ramp up engine production than Pratt...and that benefits both Boeing and Airbus.

Good read about the C-series on flight global
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... yptr=yahoo

Polot wrote:

yyztpa wrote:

Polot wrote:

I think it is less Bombardier having customers content to bide their time for debugging and more Bombardier doesn't have enough (solid) customers for a large ramp up.

Polot wrote:

That is, of course, assuming that it is actually the engines holding up further production.

Always looking at the bright side of life, huh?

If the engines were the only thing holding up production Bombardier would still build the frames sans engines (just like Airbus and the neos, and Boeing and the 741), to expedite delivery as soon as PWC can deliver the engines. They wouldn't totally slow down production over a year because of the lack of engines.

Do you have any sources to confirm they have stopped building airframes completely and slowed down production? That would slow the whole supply chain by doing so, which is the opposite they're are trying to do to ramp up.

Blogger Sylvain Faust, that has an excellent track record on Cseries production status, indicated BBD was building CS100 with engines, but without fan blades.

INFINITI329 wrote:

Good read about the C-series on flight global
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... yptr=yahoo

Yeah I read it this morning and the second to last paragraph says it all. For a pilot with over 10k hours in a 737 he states very clearly he'd rather fly the C Series over the 737 any day. Now if they can just start getting them out of the door with great reliability a big new order will follow (I'm looking at you AA).

Dash9 wrote:

Polot wrote:

yyztpa wrote:

Always looking at the bright side of life, huh?

If the engines were the only thing holding up production Bombardier would still build the frames sans engines (just like Airbus and the neos, and Boeing and the 741), to expedite delivery as soon as PWC can deliver the engines. They wouldn't totally slow down production over a year because of the lack of engines.

Do you have any sources to confirm they have stopped building airframes completely and slowed down production? That would slow the whole supply chain by doing so, which is the opposite they're are trying to do to ramp up.

Blogger Sylvain Faust, that has an excellent track record on Cseries production status, indicated BBD was building CS100 with engines, but without fan blades.

Im not saying they stopped production. But if the recent deliveries guidelines are to go by then Bombardier is expecting to deliver significantly less airframes than initially planned (considering they will likely not make initial 2015 delivery projections).

Nothing wrong with that, ramping up new production is hard, even for experienced companies with programs that experienced minimal difficulties (just ask Airbus and the A350). There are some here who want to peg the whole missed projections solely on PWC though, and I suspect that is not fully the case.

Didn't see it posted elsewhere, the first Air Baltic CS300 is currently doing some test flight(BBA533)

The first CS300 aircraft will be delivered to airBaltic today.

JoeCanuck wrote:

it costs many tens of millions of dollars to build an airframe. it doesn't make any sense to pay upfront to build a bunch of engineless frames they won't get paid for until delivery.,...which means engines.

Plus, it costs a bunch more to prep a aircraft for long term storage to keep it in ready to deliver shape.

If they could suddenly expect a whole bunch of engines all at once at a predictable time, then maybe ....but Pratt is probably going to continue to low rate trickle out the engines...and BBD will keep pace.

In my opinion, GE is much more likely to quickly ramp up engine production than Pratt...and that benefits both Boeing and Airbus.

I agree, if engines were the only issue, BBD would be parking airframes sans engines. It is simply not possible to ramp aircraft production quickly. So while the engines are an issue, something else is also delaying production.

Lightsaber

KarelXWB wrote:

The first CS300 aircraft will be delivered to airBaltic today.

Delivered!

http://montrealgazette.com/business/loc ... -airbaltic


Now for the promised orders.

lightsaber wrote:

KarelXWB wrote:

The first CS300 aircraft will be delivered to airBaltic today.

Delivered!

http://montrealgazette.com/business/loc ... -airbaltic


Now for the promised orders.

Rumored orders!

Until Pratt can give them a definite schedule for engine delivery, it doesn't make much sense for BBD to go crazy building a bunch of engineless frames. Unlike the big boys, they don't have the deep pockets to spend on building a bunch of very expensive lawn ornaments.

I suspect that BBD will match its production to Pratt as closely as possible, and ramp up accordingly.

With 4 CS 100 delivered to Swiss now and one CS300 to Baltic, only two deliveries out of a total of 7 forecast remain to be delivered this year. I presume that 1 CS100 and 1 CS300 will be delivered to Swiss and Baltic in December?

lightsaber wrote:

JoeCanuck wrote:

it costs many tens of millions of dollars to build an airframe. it doesn't make any sense to pay upfront to build a bunch of engineless frames they won't get paid for until delivery.,...which means engines.

Plus, it costs a bunch more to prep a aircraft for long term storage to keep it in ready to deliver shape.

If they could suddenly expect a whole bunch of engines all at once at a predictable time, then maybe ....but Pratt is probably going to continue to low rate trickle out the engines...and BBD will keep pace.

In my opinion, GE is much more likely to quickly ramp up engine production than Pratt...and that benefits both Boeing and Airbus.

I agree, if engines were the only issue, BBD would be parking airframes sans engines. It is simply not possible to ramp aircraft production quickly. So while the engines are an issue, something else is also delaying production.

Lightsaber

...which is exactly what they're doing:
2x completed aircrafts without engines here (not painted as engines would need paint anyway):
2x completed aircrafts with engines (fully painted). Maybe these are only lacking the fan blades?
source: https://twitter.com/airwayslive/status/ ... 2367716353

BBD needs to ramp up production. Slowing it down now would be crazy as ramping back up would take even more time. Their cash flow situation has improved a lot recently (ref Q3 2016 results) so I'm sure they can afford to have a few units parked, waiting for their engines.

-Dash9

Jetsouth wrote:

With 4 CS 100 delivered to Swiss now and one CS300 to Baltic, only two deliveries out of a total of 7 forecast remain to be delivered this year. I presume that 1 CS100 and 1 CS300 will be delivered to Swiss and Baltic in December?

Plan after the revised schedule was to deliver 2 CS300 aircraft this year. Unfortunately delivery schedules keep sliding, airBaltic now announced it will receive its second CS300 in early January instead of the end of 2016.

And Swiss got 3 CS100 delivered, not 4. Another 2 have been painted and got their engines installed, that should bring total deliveries to 6 (5x Swiss, 1x airBaltic).

Who will be the next customer to get delivery?

First CS300 for AirBaltic enroute to ARN:

www.fr24.com/BTI9801

Latest article on the Swiss CS100 fleet:

Swiss grades CS100 after four months in service

Overall Swiss is satisfied, their biggest frustration is the slow ramp-up.

“All I need is more aircraft and some [fan] blades,” Koch says.