JonesNL
Posts: 134
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Thu Jan 30, 2020 7:11 pm

TObound wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
TObound wrote:


There's just no need to worry about Boeing. They don't have the resources or the willingness to launch the NMA and something to compete against the 220 at the same time. And even if they launched those programs today, they aren't going to enter service till 2027. And they are probably still a long ways off from a launch, especially after announcing they are going back to the drawing board. Delaying ATO buys time to see what technology is maturing. Also gets much firmer commitments if they know deliveries are 3-4 years away. The MAX fiasco has probably bought Airbus a half decade on their development timeline.


I agree, they don’t need to worry too much about Boeing. But having the market for yourself for 1-2 years before Boeing has anything to offer is an opportunity that can not be underestimated. At least, that’s what I think. Airbuses would be selling while Boeing will be in the design fase. All orders would land at Airbus as there is no other option. If the time difference between the ATO of A and B are 6-12 months a lot of airlines will just wait it out.

And to be honest there is not much secrecy or too much to reveal for an A225 and A322. I think even Boeing has the numbers run for the possible competitors, I would think really poorly of them if they didn’t.


Having time doesn't mean that they have to announce new models. Maturing tech, optimizing production, helping suppliers become more efficient and building up financial reserves are all very useful activities that will make them more competitive in the long run. As it stands, they are juggling a lot with production. And a lot of these activities will be necessary.

The only reason I think they might develop some stretches soon is to give their engineering talent something to do. But that doesn't in any way mean they need to announce it or offer it. They can do a ton of development work with out announcing a thing. They'll be ready to counter any rumour of a Boeing ATO with their own. And be able to offer EIS within 3-5 years. That's the power of good prep.


It’s much easier to help suppliers with more firmed orders in the backlog. It’s much easier to ramp up if the time between ATO and EIS 1-2 years longer.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22917
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Thu Jan 30, 2020 7:17 pm

TObound wrote:
I think it's more that regulators will expect any aircraft to implement what every other modern airliner has these days: full redundant FBW, centralized alerting, etc.

Yes, but the context was that 787/777x levels of integration were deemed inadequate. We should probably continue on the NMA thread.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3497
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Airbus A220 Developments : more of a match for A320neo than Airbus says

Thu Jan 30, 2020 7:37 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
A388 wrote:
leghorn wrote:
correction: down 36% at the moment. The markets are pissed off.


No where does the article mention anything about the markets being pissed off. It only says that Bombardier is reassessing its participation in the A220 project and that more investments are needed for this program. Where do you get that the markets are pissed? Which markets?

A388


The markets on which the shares of BBD trade. Do you think single-day 37% declines are normal for large Canadian and U.S. firms?


Far from the first or last time that big a swing happens in the markets. As they are not closed it could swing back before end of day.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 244
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:47 pm

HaulSudson wrote:
Gentlemen, before judging, please give the owner of Delta Airlines the opportunity to substantiate his claim that his A220s are lemons.


It is spelled Delta Air Lines.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 244
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Thu Jan 30, 2020 8:48 pm

767333ER wrote:
TObound wrote:
767333ER wrote:
You talking about the MAX here or is your airline WestJet because this is basically what Greg-the idiot-Saretsky said minus the word “Airbus” days before Delta placed their big order.

Having said that I know which company you call your airline and I’ve seen some of the previous things you’ve said and I have trouble believing lot of it considering you assert but offer no support or reason why such is the case. If there is issues with it to the point that’s it a lemon, you guys over there surely should live up to your MRO reputation of taking lemons and making lemonade like with the other PW engines in the fleet that would normally cause trouble such as on the 757 or on the A321s that are coming.

All I’ve head about the A220 so far is that it’s actually good and from the folks at AC that it’s much better than the MAX ever will be.


Some folks just can't hide their biases. In this case, I think somebody just doesn't want to learn a new type....

Most telling to me on the A220 is how many airlines have exercised options or upped firm orders after taking delivery. You have airlines like Air Baltic increasing the order count despite the issues they face with the engines. Delta's already exercised a few options. And JetBlue exercised a few options before even taking a single airplane. Then we have new airlines like AF jumping in with massive orders. No hint of caution or concern there. The only more reticent group is LH and they've not really said much negative about the airplane. Then there's the rumour thread of Airbus planning on taking this to a thousand orders by year's end. Clearly all signs that Airbus intends to wind down production and kill the A220. Airline CEOs and CFOs are clearly dumbasses who love buying stranded assets apparently. /s

Well it could be anything but most likely is either nationalism, fanboyism, or some other unfounded bias. This is the same person that claims, if I read it right, (In another thread) that a 30 year old A320 can have similar economics as an A220-100 so operating one A320 a day is much better than to of those. One has to wonder how this is the case when it is widely accepted that the slightly bigger A220-300 has similar economics to the A320N which is much more economic than than the original A320-200s. Surely a little bit of a shrink on a clean sheet aircraft can’t set you back 30 years in CASM. That outrageous so to believe that one has to be biased and living in a land of fallacies and fiction.


Yeah the fuel numbers were from the occ. I asked for two a320 and 220 on the same route as close to each other as they could get and they got me the numbers for two flights that left about an hour from each other. I was curious. And it was one of our oldest 320s.

Now, I'm sure the cseries doesnt have any fanboys here at all.... but, on our side it's more the opposite of fanboy of something else as much as we ordered these things, parked the idea of bringing on E190s and so we were pretty curious as to what this thing was like. I mean it was struggling mightily to make sales but maybe it was a bargain.

Turned out the more you learned the more you said wtf. Why did we order it? Probably had to do with that massive neo order book and the fact RA said we dont order new technology, we've got md90s. We are fine.

More power to tech ops. Maybe they can figure it out.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 6849
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Thu Jan 30, 2020 9:37 pm

BBD's earnings statement is due in two weeks. At that point we should see the size of their A220 write-down to confirm what they think their ~34% is worth. That's going to be a function of estimated profits over the life of the program, which itself is a function of projected volume, costs, and sales prices. IMHO fanbois are going to be shocked.

https://ir.bombardier.com/en/event-calendar
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1381
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Thu Jan 30, 2020 9:43 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
BBD's earnings statement is due in two weeks. At that point we should see the size of their A220 write-down to confirm what they think their ~34% is worth. That's going to be a function of estimated profits over the life of the program, which itself is a function of projected volume, costs, and sales prices. IMHO fanbois are going to be shocked.

https://ir.bombardier.com/en/event-calendar


Nah, not so much. There are so many financial shenanigans that go on, no one really knows what the score is on anything. People on this site quote Emirates financial statements for example, and say they're not state supported, wink wink.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Thu Jan 30, 2020 10:08 pm

Babyshark wrote:
767333ER wrote:
TObound wrote:

Some folks just can't hide their biases. In this case, I think somebody just doesn't want to learn a new type....

Most telling to me on the A220 is how many airlines have exercised options or upped firm orders after taking delivery. You have airlines like Air Baltic increasing the order count despite the issues they face with the engines. Delta's already exercised a few options. And JetBlue exercised a few options before even taking a single airplane. Then we have new airlines like AF jumping in with massive orders. No hint of caution or concern there. The only more reticent group is LH and they've not really said much negative about the airplane. Then there's the rumour thread of Airbus planning on taking this to a thousand orders by year's end. Clearly all signs that Airbus intends to wind down production and kill the A220. Airline CEOs and CFOs are clearly dumbasses who love buying stranded assets apparently. /s

Well it could be anything but most likely is either nationalism, fanboyism, or some other unfounded bias. This is the same person that claims, if I read it right, (In another thread) that a 30 year old A320 can have similar economics as an A220-100 so operating one A320 a day is much better than to of those. One has to wonder how this is the case when it is widely accepted that the slightly bigger A220-300 has similar economics to the A320N which is much more economic than than the original A320-200s. Surely a little bit of a shrink on a clean sheet aircraft can’t set you back 30 years in CASM. That outrageous so to believe that one has to be biased and living in a land of fallacies and fiction.


Yeah the fuel numbers were from the occ. I asked for two a320 and 220 on the same route as close to each other as they could get and they got me the numbers for two flights that left about an hour from each other. I was curious. And it was one of our oldest 320s.

Now, I'm sure the cseries doesnt have any fanboys here at all.... but, on our side it's more the opposite of fanboy of something else as much as we ordered these things, parked the idea of bringing on E190s and so we were pretty curious as to what this thing was like. I mean it was struggling mightily to make sales but maybe it was a bargain.

Turned out the more you learned the more you said wtf. Why did we order it? Probably had to do with that massive neo order book and the fact RA said we dont order new technology, we've got md90s. We are fine.

More power to tech ops. Maybe they can figure it out.


If what you say is true that doesn't seem to line up with what other operators are saying on fuel burn. Why the discrepancy?

Air Baltic says they are getting more than expected.

https://m.atwonline.com/air-transport/a ... el-savings

Swiss says they've been doing better than expected.

https://airwaysmag.com/industry/swiss-pilot-cseries/

Your own carrier says it's meeting it's targets:

Previously, Delta calculated that the A220 features a 20% improvement in fuel burn per seat over a 76-seat CRJ700 and offers 12% more premium seats....Shortly after the A220’s launch at Delta Mr Bastian remarked that “It’s coming in at great fuel efficiency. The fuel efficiency that we’re replacing, whether its regional jets or even the MD-80s with it, are coming in at double digit improvements.”


https://centreforaviation.com/analysis/ ... nce-494791

I'd say the fact that a 109 seat A220-100 has the same per seat fuel burn as a 157 seat A320CEO is actually notable. Find me another almost RJ sized jet that is competitive with a mainline narrowbody that carries 44% more pax. And of course, that's just from your anecdote. We have analysis that says the A220-300 has per seat fuel burn on part with the 320NEO and MAX 8 (apparently confirmed by AC....):

https://leehamnews.com/2019/01/17/airbu ... rbus-says/

And there's still PIPs in the pipeline to cut fuel burn further:

https://leehamnews.com/2019/01/17/pips- ... ing-costs/
 
Babyshark
Posts: 244
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:30 am

I'm looking right at the numbers. I have another set. Per passenger block number on identical route and same conditions is the same. Dont know what to tell you.
Last edited by Babyshark on Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:36 am

Babyshark wrote:
I'm looking right at the numbers. I have another set. Per passenger block number is the same. Dont know what to tell you.


If the fuel burn is the same per passenger for a 109 seat aircraft and a 157 seat aircraft, that speaks to the efficiency of the smaller aircraft. And it explains why Delta is buying more 220s. It also means the 223 is going to be fantastic at DL.
Last edited by TObound on Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 244
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:39 am

TObound wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
I'm looking right at the numbers. I have another set. Per passenger block number is the same. Dont know what to tell you.


If the fuel burn is the same per passenger for a 109 seat aircraft and a 157 seat aircraft, that speaks to the efficiency of the smaller aircraft. And it explains why Delta is buying more 220s. It also means the 223 is going to be fantastic at DL.


But the bigger one makes you a lot more money.

And the Gtf on the 320N would mean it burns 20% less asm then the 221.
Last edited by Babyshark on Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:39 am

Babyshark wrote:
But the bigger one makes you a lot more money.


Only if you can fill the seats....

And that's not true for every route and every time slot which is why airlines operate aircraft of different size. I would think someone who works at an airline would understand this.
Last edited by TObound on Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:53 am

Babyshark wrote:
And the Gtf on the 320N would mean it burns 20% less asm then the 221.


Do you actually work at an airline? Serious question. This is a pretty amateur discussion to have.

A 160-170 seat 320N is not in the same category as a 100-115 seat 221. And because of that they serve different purposes. The 221 maybe used to add rotations that build frequency on a route without adding a ton of seats that would tank yield. Or it's used to open up new markets. Etc.

Also your anecdotes are basically confirming the other reports. If the 221 is competitive with something so much larger, the 223 is definitely going to be better than the 320NEO and Max 8. Incidentally, this is also being asserted by Airbus executives:

Scherer said the A220-300 economics are better than the slightly larger A320neo and Boeing 737-8.


https://leehamnews.com/2020/01/16/air-c ... ice-today/

Calling it now. DL will have 300 A220s in service by 2030. AF, AC and B6 will all have > 100.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 244
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:06 am

TObound wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
And the Gtf on the 320N would mean it burns 20% less asm then the 221.


Do you actually work at an airline? Serious question. This is a pretty amateur discussion to have.

A 160-170 seat 320N is not in the same category as a 100-115 seat 221. And because of that they serve different purposes. The 221 maybe used to add rotations that build frequency on a route without adding a ton of seats that would tank yield. Or it's used to open up new markets. Etc.

Also your anecdotes are basically confirming the other reports. If the 221 is competitive with something so much larger, the 223 is definitely going to be better than the 320NEO and Max 8. Incidentally, this is also being asserted by Airbus executives:

Scherer said the A220-300 economics are better than the slightly larger A320neo and Boeing 737-8.


https://leehamnews.com/2020/01/16/air-c ... ice-today/

Calling it now. DL will have 300 A220s in service by 2030. AF, AC and B6 will all have > 100.


Wow, that is a really big fleet you're calling for there! I don't know if you work for an airline but I know you don't work for our crew resources with those big dream numbers.

The current fleet with 400+ RJs, nearly 1000 domestic nbs, and 200+ international is massive. We are currently headed to 350 A320s, potentially and likely 450. Plus 200 737s. 100 717s. 100 220s, 100 757s that we want to keep. Not sure where another 250 223s will go by... 2030?!? I'll let you own that call all you want.

But do remember we were originally going to get E190s to replace 76 seaters, then BBD may or may not have offered us a "deal". We went with 221s to replace 76 seaters. Bigger jet, less frequency, more margin. Kind of the same as many of the 321s replacing 88s, which operationally was an awesome move. So what's a 223 doing? The 223 is... what happens when the NEO order books exploded and we already are going to do the 221.

As to the original purpose of this thread, imho, BBD wrapped a boa constrictor around the neck of the CS with Airbus and I think that reality has hit home. Airbus loves their own designs. A lot. And the cornerstone to it is the A320. Anyone who thinks they're falling in love with the CS and seeing the error of their 320 ways (/s) is going to be severely disappointed. Not to mention Boeing will likely make a nb move and Airbus will likely respond, and it won't be with the 225. If the 220 as is, is gone by 2030, I don't think Airbus will be upset. But I'm open to hearing why you think they would be.

As to me, since you asked, I've been here for a while. Do a lot of union work. I got addicted to the ease of the 320, decided to go to the 350 and see what even easier is like.
 
VV
Posts: 1481
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 7:33 am

Babyshark wrote:
...

As to me, since you asked, I've been here for a while. Do a lot of union work. I got addicted to the ease of the 320, decided to go to the 350 and see what even easier is like.


I think the A350-900 is doing great great in Delta and will continue to do so. A350-900 is a very attractive aircraft from many aspects.

Looking at Delta's fleet data, it seems the A320 fleet is powered by CFM56-5A. They are quite old, although the CFM56-5A is almost indestructible. I guess that fleet was inherited from Northwest.
And since you said you have been around during A320 introduction then most probably you were at Northwest back then.

Is there any plan to order new single aisle aircraft beyond the current single aisle?
It is possible your airline's next new aircraft choice is for a mid-sized 767-class aircraft. Can you tell us more about it?

By the way 13 February 2020 is the date for Airbus' Q4 and full year 2019 earnings call. The same day Bombardier will also announce its results. I think Airbus will do it first because Toulouse/Paris is six hours ahead of Montreal.

Maybe there will be very important announcements from both sides related to Airbus Canada Limited Partnership.
Bombardier has a tradition of leaks, but nothing has leaked so far. There are two possibilities.
1. the secret about the significant change is extremely well guarded this time or
2. there is nothing significant to announce.
I think this time the first option is the right one.
 
HaulSudson
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:02 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 10:27 am

Babyshark wrote:
HaulSudson wrote:
Gentlemen, before judging, please give the owner of Delta Airlines the opportunity to substantiate his claim that his A220s are lemons.


It is spelled Delta Air Lines.


Thanks, it's really helpful for substantiating your claim.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 244
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 11:26 am

VV wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
...

As to me, since you asked, I've been here for a while. Do a lot of union work. I got addicted to the ease of the 320, decided to go to the 350 and see what even easier is like.


I think the A350-900 is doing great great in Delta and will continue to do so. A350-900 is a very attractive aircraft from many aspects.

Looking at Delta's fleet data, it seems the A320 fleet is powered by CFM56-5A. They are quite old, although the CFM56-5A is almost indestructible. I guess that fleet was inherited from Northwest.
And since you said you have been around during A320 introduction then most probably you were at Northwest back then.

Is there any plan to order new single aisle aircraft beyond the current single aisle?
It is possible your airline's next new aircraft choice is for a mid-sized 767-class aircraft. Can you tell us more about it?

By the way 13 February 2020 is the date for Airbus' Q4 and full year 2019 earnings call. The same day Bombardier will also announce its results. I think Airbus will do it first because Toulouse/Paris is six hours ahead of Montreal.

Maybe there will be very important announcements from both sides related to Airbus Canada Limited Partnership.
Bombardier has a tradition of leaks, but nothing has leaked so far. There are two possibilities.
1. the secret about the significant change is extremely well guarded this time or
2. there is nothing significant to announce.
I think this time the first option is the right one.


Ha I haven't been here that long! Not many have.

We have A5s on 319s. A1s and 3s on 320s.

Nothing with the fleet is a known thing until the jets are here and painted.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 244
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 11:48 am

HaulSudson wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
HaulSudson wrote:
Gentlemen, before judging, please give the owner of Delta Airlines the opportunity to substantiate his claim that his A220s are lemons.


It is spelled Delta Air Lines.


Thanks, it's really helpful for substantiating your claim.


Hey. Just helping. It's interesting history.

Do I have to own the place to have an opinion?
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:33 pm

Babyshark wrote:
Wow, that is a really big fleet you're calling for there!


Indeed it is.

Babyshark wrote:
The current fleet with 400+ RJs, nearly 1000 domestic nbs, and 200+ international is massive. We are currently headed to 350 A320s, potentially and likely 450. Plus 200 737s. 100 717s. 100 220s, 100 757s that we want to keep. Not sure where another 250 223s will go by... 2030?!? I'll let you own that call all you want.


Between current orders and options, DL is going to get 125 A220s. And they still have to replace plenty of 717s, 319s, 320s, 738s and a handful of 73Gs. Some of that is most assuredly going to the A220. Your own numbers show many aircraft there are to replace over the next decade.

The minimum DL ends up with by the end of the decade is 200. That's too cover the replacements of the 717s, 73Gs, 319s and 320s, adding up to 220 frames. But I'm optimistic and I think they'll find the 223/321N tag team working fantastically while the 221 let's them whoop AA and UA running RJs on some routes. I expect we'll see closer to 300 than 200.

Babyshark wrote:
But do remember we were originally going to get E190s to replace 76 seaters, then BBD may or may not have offered us a "deal". We went with 221s to replace 76 seaters. Bigger jet, less frequency, more margin. Kind of the same as many of the 321s replacing 88s, which operationally was an awesome move. So what's a 223 doing? The 223 is... what happens when the NEO order books exploded and we already are going to do the 221.


The 223 is what happens when operators fly the 221 for a bit and figure out that the 223 has the same fuel burn per passenger-mile as the 320NEO or Max 8. Fantastic tool to boost frequency while preserving yield.

It's the reason DL and B6 didn't order 320NEOs. There's just no point. Fly something bigger and more efficient (321NEO) or smaller and just as efficient (223). Here's my prediction: DL will never buy the 320NEO or Max 8 or Max 9. They'll replace 717s, 319s, 73Gs and some 320s with 220s. And upgauge some 320/738/739 rotations with 321Ns.

Babyshark wrote:
Airbus loves their own designs. A lot. And the cornerstone to it is the A320. Anyone who thinks they're falling in love with the CS and seeing the error of their 320 ways (/s) is going to be severely disappointed.


You keep saying this. And yet Airbus has sold several hundred 220s since they took over, built a second FAL and seem to be genuinely interested in taking over the entire program. The rumor thread had their target goal for a 1000 sales by the end of the year. Looks to me like they are plenty interested in the 220.

I think you're going to be disappointed when the eventual day comes where they announce 100% ownership of the program and launch the 225. It's all but inevitable given how sales in this program are taking off. And how complimentary this platform is proving to the 321NEO.

Babyshark wrote:
Boeing will likely make a nb move and Airbus will likely respond, and it won't be with the 225. If the 220 as is, is gone by 2030, I don't think Airbus will be upset. But I'm open to hearing why you think they would be.


LOL. Boeing's current narrowbody isn't flying. And you think they're going to have something that beats every size category from a 221 to 321N, flying within a decade? That's funny.

Babyshark wrote:
As to me, since you asked, I've been here for a while. Do a lot of union work. I got addicted to the ease of the 320, decided to go to the 350 and see what even easier is like.


I said earlier that you sound like someone who doesn't want to learn a new type. That's becoming more apparent.

Your comfort with the Airbus cockpit has allowed wilful ignorance to creep in and you just can't understand why management keeps buying these airplanes you don't like. It's telling that having the passenger block numbers you couldn't see the value of the 221. It's a good thing for DL that you just drive the bus and don't manage the airline.
 
HaulSudson
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:02 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:44 pm

It's more telling that all evidence provided by Babyspellchecker consists of ... a hearsay story about two flights.

You couldn't make it up.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:50 pm

HaulSudson wrote:
It's more telling that all evidence provided by Babyspellchecker consists of ... a hearsay story about two flights.

You couldn't make it up.


More to the point, his evidence shows just how competitive the 220 is. The 221 has the same fuel burn per passenger-mile as the 320CEO? Think of the implications of that for a route planning team and how they could use that to manage yield.

I'm excited for DL to get in the 321NEO and the 223 this year and to watch how fantastically that tag team works for them. I think Airbus is going to get plenty more orders for both from DL.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1381
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:59 pm

Little predator, you remind me of a guy I once knew who was constantly forgetting things. He even forgot to bid sometimes.

Pilots LOVE the A220. The setup of the cockpit and the software are eons ahead of the A320 series, and it is even easier to fly. In fact, it could easily be flown by a single pilot. Not that I think that will happen anytime soon.

You seem to have no respect for the primacy of small planes and capacity discipline in the minds of airline executives. Especially your employer. The days of buying big planes based upon rosy future projections of huge traffic growth are gone. They would rather buy smaller, less expensive, more efficient, airplanes and be forced later to buy bigger ones by actual traffic, and actual profits. The A220 series is much lighter than the A320 series. I also believe that Delta will have 300 (or more) A220s before all is said and done. The A320 replacement will be the 500....its just too light and efficient to ignore. The big GTF is too big for the A320....its like a 788....its not optimized for every day, short haul flying. Another analogy, the big GTF on an A320 is like a GEnX on the 763....just too much engine for the frame. I don't forsee Delta ever ordering another A320, lots of 321s, but no more 320s.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:13 pm

SteelChair wrote:
I also believe that Delta will have 300 (or more) A220s before all is said and done.


Just look at seating capacity. A fleet of 100 221s, 140 223s and 60 321Ns works out to be perfect wash for all of their 717s, 73Gs, 738s, 319s and 320s. Adds up to about the same number of airplanes too. So if they need growth, they just swap 321Ns for 223s. It's why I see 200 frames as the minimum by 2030.

I think they will actually order over 100 221s if that aircraft proves to be a great fighter against the RJs that UA and AA are running.

SteelChair wrote:
The A320 replacement will be the 500....its just too light and efficient to ignore.


I don't even see the -500 as necessary for DL. Certainly DL will have exercised their options and taken 125 220s before the 225 enters service. But if the 225 happens by 2025, the likelihood of DL finishing the decade with 300 A220s goes up substantially in my opinion.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 2:12 pm

It's interesting on the Boeing NMA thread that we're talking about cockpit design and the 220 being state-of-the-art. If regulators are really thinking about upping the standard, the A220 just gained a whole bunch of additional value for Airbus.
 
VV
Posts: 1481
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 2:49 pm

Babyshark wrote:
VV wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
...

As to me, since you asked, I've been here for a while. Do a lot of union work. I got addicted to the ease of the 320, decided to go to the 350 and see what even easier is like.


I think the A350-900 is doing great great in Delta and will continue to do so. A350-900 is a very attractive aircraft from many aspects.

Looking at Delta's fleet data, it seems the A320 fleet is powered by CFM56-5A. They are quite old, although the CFM56-5A is almost indestructible. I guess that fleet was inherited from Northwest.
And since you said you have been around during A320 introduction then most probably you were at Northwest back then.

Is there any plan to order new single aisle aircraft beyond the current single aisle?
It is possible your airline's next new aircraft choice is for a mid-sized 767-class aircraft. Can you tell us more about it?

By the way 13 February 2020 is the date for Airbus' Q4 and full year 2019 earnings call. The same day Bombardier will also announce its results. I think Airbus will do it first because Toulouse/Paris is six hours ahead of Montreal.

Maybe there will be very important announcements from both sides related to Airbus Canada Limited Partnership.
Bombardier has a tradition of leaks, but nothing has leaked so far. There are two possibilities.
1. the secret about the significant change is extremely well guarded this time or
2. there is nothing significant to announce.
I think this time the first option is the right one.


Ha I haven't been here that long! Not many have.

We have A5s on 319s. A1s and 3s on 320s.

Nothing with the fleet is a known thing until the jets are here and painted.


The CFM56-5A has worse fuel burn than the current CFM56-5B.

I do not understand your comparison between A320 with 5A cav be better than the CSeries.

Can you be more specific please?
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4890
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 3:26 pm

One thing Delta does better than any US carrier, and BBD studied this hard as part of the sale, is match aircraft size to market, not daily or seasonally, but hourly. Fill up the plane by having the right number of seats. The A220 fits right in.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Fri Jan 31, 2020 3:47 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
One thing Delta does better than any US carrier, and BBD studied this hard as part of the sale, is match aircraft size to market, not daily or seasonally, but hourly. Fill up the plane by having the right number of seats. The A220 fits right in.


It's always surprising when even the bus drivers on this forum don't understand how good and how sensitive those yield models are. And why smaller aircraft can be a great tool at managing yield. This is what makes the CSeries/A220 so fantastic. No loss in fuel burn. Possibly lower crew costs (assuming the crews gets a lower rate than 320/738). So DL gets to better match supply to demand without incurring higher operating costs (per passenger mile). Most planners dream of having airplanes like this as an option.

I suspect this is also what drove DL and B6 not to order the 320NEO or even used 738s for DL. There's probably many cases where the yield hit of deploying a 321NEO or the cost to simply passing up a few pax and flying a full 223, is better than having an airplane with just a dozen seats over 150 needing an extra FA. They can manage yield with a 200 seat and a 130-140 seater just fine.

In the case of DL, the 225 can be laid out to be exactly a 150 seat airplane, while having passenger-mile fuel burn lower than a 321NEO. The planners at DL must be giddy at the thought.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22917
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Tue Feb 04, 2020 6:24 pm

Some interesting comments from A220 programme chief Florent Massou:

While Airbus still relies on Bombardier for some services, says Massou, the integration has reached a point where “all the [A220] functions in Airbus are just working like any other programme”. Procurement, supply-chain agreements, sales and marketing have all been transferred and the support network is being finalised.

“We are very pleased,” says Massou. “The A220 is now part of the family, a very dynamic one. It’s a very positive message.”

Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-int ... 01.article

Seems BBD's participation isn't all that vital, no?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
dstblj52
Posts: 269
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 8:38 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Tue Feb 04, 2020 7:13 pm

Revelation wrote:
Some interesting comments from A220 programme chief Florent Massou:

While Airbus still relies on Bombardier for some services, says Massou, the integration has reached a point where “all the [A220] functions in Airbus are just working like any other programme”. Procurement, supply-chain agreements, sales and marketing have all been transferred and the support network is being finalised.

“We are very pleased,” says Massou. “The A220 is now part of the family, a very dynamic one. It’s a very positive message.”

Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-int ... 01.article

Seems BBD's participation isn't all that vital, no?

I think the plan is to squeeze bombardier for all the money you can get out of them in the contract, buy their stake when they badly need the cash, then turn around and offer a jobs guarantee for the life of the program to IQ (who cares far more about keeping the paychecks in the local economy then whose issuing them), in exchange for their stake than bringing the project fully in house. Then maybe try and retrofit an a350 cockpit as an option to the aircraft and then they have another golden goose to work with.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 814
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Tue Feb 04, 2020 7:23 pm

dstblj52 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Some interesting comments from A220 programme chief Florent Massou:

While Airbus still relies on Bombardier for some services, says Massou, the integration has reached a point where “all the [A220] functions in Airbus are just working like any other programme”. Procurement, supply-chain agreements, sales and marketing have all been transferred and the support network is being finalised.

“We are very pleased,” says Massou. “The A220 is now part of the family, a very dynamic one. It’s a very positive message.”

Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-int ... 01.article

Seems BBD's participation isn't all that vital, no?

I think the plan is to squeeze bombardier for all the money you can get out of them in the contract, buy their stake when they badly need the cash, then turn around and offer a jobs guarantee for the life of the program to IQ (who cares far more about keeping the paychecks in the local economy then whose issuing them), in exchange for their stake than bringing the project fully in house. Then maybe try and retrofit an a350 cockpit as an option to the aircraft and then they have another golden goose to work with.


Sounds very sensible. No, Airbus wouldn't be devious to do it -- it's not them who actually drew BBD into a situation, where offloading their most cash-hungry unit (C Series) did not stop BBD from bleeding massive amounts of money, to the point, where they are at risk of running dry.
AN4 A40 L4T TU3 TU5 IL6 ILW I93 F50 F70 100 146 ARJ AT7 DH4 L10 CRJ ERJ E90 E95 DC-9 MD-8X YK4 YK2 SF3 S20 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 74M 757 767 777
Ceterum autem censeo, Moscovia esse delendam
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Tue Feb 04, 2020 7:32 pm

Revelation wrote:
Some interesting comments from A220 programme chief Florent Massou:

While Airbus still relies on Bombardier for some services, says Massou, the integration has reached a point where “all the [A220] functions in Airbus are just working like any other programme”. Procurement, supply-chain agreements, sales and marketing have all been transferred and the support network is being finalised.

“We are very pleased,” says Massou. “The A220 is now part of the family, a very dynamic one. It’s a very positive message.”

Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-int ... 01.article

Seems BBD's participation isn't all that vital, no?


The plan was always to have BBD's actual involvement reduced to that of a supplier, with the investment providing their upside return.

dstblj52 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Some interesting comments from A220 programme chief Florent Massou:

While Airbus still relies on Bombardier for some services, says Massou, the integration has reached a point where “all the [A220] functions in Airbus are just working like any other programme”. Procurement, supply-chain agreements, sales and marketing have all been transferred and the support network is being finalised.

“We are very pleased,” says Massou. “The A220 is now part of the family, a very dynamic one. It’s a very positive message.”

Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-int ... 01.article

Seems BBD's participation isn't all that vital, no?

I think the plan is to squeeze bombardier for all the money you can get out of them in the contract, buy their stake when they badly need the cash, then turn around and offer a jobs guarantee for the life of the program to IQ (who cares far more about keeping the paychecks in the local economy then whose issuing them), in exchange for their stake than bringing the project fully in house. Then maybe try and retrofit an a350 cockpit as an option to the aircraft and then they have another golden goose to work with.


IQ isn't just going to turn over shares. And any government that did that would get pilloried in the press. At minimum, they'll have to get back what they invested. The jobs guarantee was already signed as part of the original commitment. Airbus would have to do better than that.

As for retrofiring the cockpit, where do people come up with such crazy ideas?
 
dstblj52
Posts: 269
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 8:38 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Tue Feb 04, 2020 7:39 pm

TObound wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Some interesting comments from A220 programme chief Florent Massou:

While Airbus still relies on Bombardier for some services, says Massou, the integration has reached a point where “all the [A220] functions in Airbus are just working like any other programme”. Procurement, supply-chain agreements, sales and marketing have all been transferred and the support network is being finalised.

“We are very pleased,” says Massou. “The A220 is now part of the family, a very dynamic one. It’s a very positive message.”

Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-int ... 01.article

Seems BBD's participation isn't all that vital, no?


The plan was always to have BBD's actual involvement reduced to that of a supplier, with the investment providing their upside return.

dstblj52 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Some interesting comments from A220 programme chief Florent Massou:


Ref: https://www.flightglobal.com/flight-int ... 01.article

Seems BBD's participation isn't all that vital, no?

I think the plan is to squeeze bombardier for all the money you can get out of them in the contract, buy their stake when they badly need the cash, then turn around and offer a jobs guarantee for the life of the program to IQ (who cares far more about keeping the paychecks in the local economy then whose issuing them), in exchange for their stake than bringing the project fully in house. Then maybe try and retrofit an a350 cockpit as an option to the aircraft and then they have another golden goose to work with.


IQ isn't just going to turn over shares. And any government that did that would get pilloried in the press. At minimum, they'll have to get back what they invested. The jobs guarantee was already signed as part of the original commitment. Airbus would have to do better than that.

As for retrofitting the cockpit, where do people come up with such crazy ideas?

They have a jobs guarantee through 2041 but narrowbody lifespans tend to be much longer than 21 years so it's conceivable that a for the life of the program guarantees they might be willing to give up their stake especially if airbus promises equal growth with mobile, and you can retrofit cockpits on aircraft that operate fly by wire, it's far from impossible a 500 million to billion-dollar project, yes but basically everything in aviation is really expensive.
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:19 pm

dstblj52 wrote:
They have a jobs guarantee through 2041 but narrowbody lifespans tend to be much longer than 21 years so it's conceivable that a for the life of the program guarantees they might be willing to give up their stake especially if airbus promises equal growth with mobile,


Guaranteeing jobs beyond 2041 would be massively risky for Airbus. Nobody really has that much of a handle on what the aviation market will be like that far down the road. I can't see Airbus lawyers and accountants ever agreeing to that. And I can't see the Government of Quebec sign of on what amounts to a multi-billion dollar asset transfer without massive demands. And by that I mean, guarantees for even more jobs than there are today.

dstblj52 wrote:
and you can retrofit cockpits on aircraft that operate fly by wire, it's far from impossible a 500 million to billion-dollar project, yes but basically everything in aviation is really expensive.


People keep coming up with this harebrained idea of retrofitting cockpits. I don't know if any of those suggesting this have actually worked in aviation. I get a headache just thinking about the cert effort. And then there's the engineering work of figuring out to how fit that kind of layout in a 220 space. All for what? How many sales would a common cockpit actually drive? Even more to the point, I'm not even sure the 350 cockpit is more advanced than the 220 cockpit. The CSeries cockpit might actually be the more up-to-date product.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22917
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:26 pm

TObound wrote:
People keep coming up with this harebrained idea of retrofitting cockpits. I don't know if any of those suggesting this have actually worked in aviation. I get a headache just thinking about the cert effort. And then there's the engineering work of figuring out to how fit that kind of layout in a 220 space. All for what? How many sales would a common cockpit actually drive? Even more to the point, I'm not even sure the 350 cockpit is more advanced than the 220 cockpit. The CSeries cockpit might actually be the more up-to-date product.

Should I be the first to ask if Airbus will retrofit the A220 cockpit to the A350? :biggrin:
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
TObound
Posts: 743
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 12:54 am

Re: Bombardier reassessing future participation in Airbus Canada Limited Partnership

Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:33 pm

Revelation wrote:
TObound wrote:
People keep coming up with this harebrained idea of retrofitting cockpits. I don't know if any of those suggesting this have actually worked in aviation. I get a headache just thinking about the cert effort. And then there's the engineering work of figuring out to how fit that kind of layout in a 220 space. All for what? How many sales would a common cockpit actually drive? Even more to the point, I'm not even sure the 350 cockpit is more advanced than the 220 cockpit. The CSeries cockpit might actually be the more up-to-date product.

Should I be the first to ask if Airbus will retrofit the A220 cockpit to the A350? :biggrin:


Alright. That made me laugh. I'll admit.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos