AIRBUS VS THE WORLD - The Rise Of The A220
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 лип 2024
- When Airbus bought the CSeries and turned it into the A220, they wanted to better compete in the single-aisle niche market, rival any other offering, and be the perfect replacement for existing regional types. Essentially, the rise of the A220 coincides with Airbus' ambitions to truly tackle the world. How has the program faired so far?
BECOME A MEMBER:
/ @globetrottingatdjsavi...
🔔 Subscribe to GlobeTrotting: bit.ly/SubscribeGlobeTrotting
🖥️ Visit the website: djsaviation.net
CONNECT WITH GLOBETROTTING
🐦 Twitter: / djsaviation
👥 Facebook: / djsaviation
💬 Discord: / discord
💻 Patreon: / djsaviation
BUSINESS ENQUIRIES
📧 Email: contactdjsaviation@gmail.com
CHECK OUT THE PODCAST
🎙️ Spotify: bit.ly/DjsAviationPodcast
🎙️ Apple: bit.ly/DjsPodcastApple
SUBMIT VIDEO IDEAS
✍️ Form - bit.ly/SubmitVideoIdeas
ℹ️ MORE INFORMATION ℹ️
creativecommons.org/
Licensed under CC-BY-SA 2.0
-
-
-
-
-
🎵 OUTRO TRACK 🎵
Krys Talk - Fly Away [NCS Release]
Music provided by NoCopyrightSounds.
• Krys Talk - Fly Away |...
Free Download / Stream ncs.io/flyaway
#aviation #news #flight #aircraft #avgeek #airplane #airlines #airport #planespotting #airbus #boeing
I flew on Air Canada’s A220 a few days ago. Incredible plane.
Same a quick flight Toronto Montreal.
Happy flying
Way more quiet and roomy than the MAX. Still a comfy plane, however the A220 is several classes better
The A220 is a gold mind for airlines... Because of cost savings... The P&W issue has been address and being resolved so it's all up from now.
Airbus currently makes a loss in each one they sell. As the plane was not designed with such mass production in mind. That’s why they can’t only make 15 ish a month while the 320 is what 40 ish?
@@deanwood1338 But that's a good thing to some degree. Nice to see an overbooked order list than have planes stacking up... They do need that 500 model and another factory line or two to get the economics right... Plus you know, less introductory deep discounts like Delta got which set off the entire Boeing vs Bombardier battle that lead the program falling into Airbus' control...
A220 is roomy, quiet, efficient and just great all round. My first of many flights was on Swiss. IMHO it’s the best airliner in the sky.
I've flown AirBaltic A220. Fantastic plane! Its the best single isle plane currently in production.
The problem with Bombardier was that the US congress placed a 150% taxes on the CSeries to prevent bombardier to sell it in the US.
Airbus had a factory in Mobile Alabama and therefore protect the plane from the taxe since it would be an American built plane.
That’s what saved the program; not necessarily airbus itself
Add Cyprus Airlines ,and Air Austral to the lengthy list of customers grounding or dropping plans to aquire the type.. suggesting the Pratt issues are far from over.
We all know the long-standing Pratt issues, but to basically ignore it, and laude nothing but praise for the type ,is just biased reporting, in light of the recent groundings just announced in the past few days.
The A220-300 has pretty much replaced the A319 for new orders.
I think they just sold a few the other week actually. The 318 is definitely gone. A huge part of integrating the 220 was their production capacity for their own single-aisle aircraft. They probably couldn't have seen the spectacular success of the 321 NEO variants, but that one model family alone now has more orders than all MAX types combined. Their profit margins are much better on the 321's, especially the LR and XLR - they HAVE to build as many of those as possible to eat into that 5 year backlog. Freeing up production capacity by not worrying about the 318 and 319 is a good move for Airbus in general.
It's my favorite plane ride... I have been flying it recently on Air Canada 🇨🇦. 💯 Canadian Built and Designed.
Why I'd already prefer it much less for its more comfortable experience for passengers overall including the much needed wider seats for our collectively wider arses! Humans have grown an average of 6+ inches taller and wider than in previous generations thanks to dairy products and protein but airline seats have shrunken from 21" average to 17" while we haven't. That's math that hurts... Literally...
Luv the A220 the Air Cda one is great...with IFEs
The Bombardier 🇨🇦 C series aircraft is truly a engineering marvel decades ahead of any aircraft flying. Airbus will be able to take the a 220 to the next level.
This Canadian engineered aircraft is excellent for the environment, pilots and passengers LOVE IT and as well as airlines.
Happy flying.
Decades ahead? I bet airbus engineers are hoping to set it on par with current engineering practices within a decade, with Spirit being just added to that pipeline.
Recently rode Delta’s a220 on a 3 hour journey and it was better than 737s and a320s. The bins felt smaller but head and room was better than 737.
Everyone is avoiding the 737 max series now.
"If it's Boeing... I'm not going!" Best unintentional corporate motto of all time...
0:41 A versatile plane for a more niche market
Interesting topic. Easy to forget the Then CS100/300 had 375 firm orders at the time Airbus took over, which was OK at that time for a clean sheet, unproven design. Airbus have been able to garner more sales momentum since their takeover of this project, due to much better spares & support backup ability. This plane is the 'Dreamliner' equivalent of the narrow body sector in that it's revolutionizing Low density air travel
Bingo! Ideal for Canadian, Australian, Brazilian, Western Chinese, Eastern Russian, Indian, Africa, Middle Eastern, European or American routes outside of the Top 100 that demand huge A380 or B747/787 like figures... Here in Edmonton almost every flight is on a 737-sized jet or smaller so it would be nice to see those replaced with more A220's instead... Especially from Air Canada which is the only non Boeing aircraft operator here... Flair our ULCC unfortunately is tied into the MAX program which is why I'd never fly it...
Airbus please build the Airbus A220-500.
Boeing may have abandonned the DC9 (717), but it was also planning on buying the commercial division of Embraer. Had that succeeded, it would have competing product to what is now the A220. (E195-E2 with basically same engines).
But it didn't and here we are... More territory rightfully ceded to the Canadian wonder aircraft, A220...
It's going to be interesting to see what Southwest Airlines does given the continued delay with the Max 7. Time will tell and the A220 is a beautiful aircraft, engine issues aside.
Bingo! The obsession with brand loyalty to Boeing is both creepy and fatal. There's nothing wrong knowing when a superior product pops up especially for discount airlines that need the most fuel efficient products to stay competitive...
The airplane would have done just fine under Bombardier IF Bombardier wasn't in dire financial straits. Plus, they would have needed to invest in the new plant in Mobile, Alabama which they could definitely not afford to avoid the ridiculous tariff placed on them by the US government at the request of Boeing so that US carriers would be more or less forced into buying Boeing more as they already had plenty of competition from Airbus. The airplane really did need to become part of a larger manufacturer to succeed and, yes, I'm referring to either Airbus or Boeing. Airbus stepped in, Boeing missed a golden opportunity to place a counterbid due to it's focus on having the Bombardier C-Series eliminated altogether, and the airplane has enjoyed success with Airbus now as their 220. Aviation analysts and enthusiasts alike are concerned, however, about it's future. A wonderful airplane that takes longer to produce than the 737 or 320 series thus slowing orders and keeping airlines that would love to have it in partaking in placing orders. I believe the 319 neo production should end as it could cannibalize the 220 and I believe once a 220-500 (or 221) is developed then Airbus can end production on the 320 neo and focus on the 321 airplanes and then the 220/221 for their narrow-body fleet production. I think that efforts should be made to open a third plant in Toulouse or somewhere in Europe to help augment and increase production of this great airplane and allow more airlines the opportunity to add this great plane to their fleet. The P & W engine issue will be resolved and even if it isn't then there are plenty of other power plant options. Thanks for the daily news on aviation. I very much enjoy your channel.
Yup. Bombardier just couldn't scale up to defeat illegal American tariffs in time so Airbus took advantage of that and here we are... A bruise to the Canadian aviation ego as large as the superior Avro Arrow that the US bullied Canada into not building because they were afraid we'd sell it to "hostile" nations... Much like CANDU nuclear technology was sold to Romania, Pakistan, India at a time when they weren't so Western-friendly...
I’m surprised they haven’t put the Leap 1C engines on it to give airlines a new option.
You mention on your video front picture a comparison between Airbus vs Boeing vs Embraer, but I didn’t hear any comment on video comparing Embraer E2 to A220 ????!!
Had Bombardier not launched 3 aircraft programmmes at same time, the C-Series, the Lear 85 and Global 7500, it might have been able to complete the C-Series all the way to industrial production and started to get revenues to not go under. Things would be very different today with a small but interesting 3rd guy in the big jet business. For Bombardier this was the big gradiation from selling to regionals to selling to mainline carriers. Embrarer still not selling the 195-E2 to USA mainline carriers.
Not launching 3 aircrafdt at same time might have allowed Bombardier to continue to invest to streamline train production with Bombardier Transportation remaining profitable with fewer delivery delays and better product quality (less penanties) and helping pay for the C-Series project completion.
Notable: it was under Bombardier that the sale to Delta was made. So that was a big win for Bombardier. The Air Canada sale was not a win because it was court ordered as a means to settle its violating itscharger (required it maintain maintenance base in Manitoba). air Baltic was a big order but not from a very visible carrier. Swiss was a samller order but from visible one willing to take risks.
However, as time progressed, the increasing lack of financial future for Bombardier hindered sales . Even Québec's injection of $1b and splitting of project into a separate compay that would survive Bombardier's bankruptcy/liquidation wasn't enough hence the desperate gifting of half of project to Airbus to give project better image of long term future and avoid Bombardier's image of a bankrupt company.
Yup! Too many products at once for a small maker doomed at least one project and the margins are probably just as healthy if not higher on CEO global crossing planes the type Oprah, Spielberg or T-Swift basically live out of like a flying bougie RV!
Mr Greedy had better watch out! I think Bombardier suffered from application of the McDonnell Douglas solution by Boeing with Airbus winning and Boeing likely in due course to retire hurt. Then Comac will show its head above the parapet again. Cheaper despite a 70% tariff wall.😢😮
I think the C Series would have done fine without airbus, maybe not AS good, but still would have seen success, IF Boeing didn't try (and fail) to eradicate the C series before it even saw its first delivery. Boeing thought they had legal grounds to impose extreme taxes on any CS100/300s that were going to be delivered to the US. These taxes would hinder the deal Bombardier had struck with Delta for a large order of the C series, if these taxes were to be put in place, Delta might have backed out of the deal, and Bombardier would lose tons of money. This fear is what led them to sell the program to Airbus, a much larger company that wouldn't be absolutely devastated if the taxes were put in place. The US government eventually found that Boeing had no legal ground to place these taxes on the C series, but it was too late for Bombardier, as they had already sold the program off. If Boeing had focused their time and money on improving their own planes and stayed out of Bombardiers business, the C series likely would have done just fine under Bombardiers wing, as many airlines were already showing interest in it. Can't say im disappointed, though, that Airbus has taken over the program.
Bombardier approached bankruptcy well before Boeing got into its tariffs game. It already had to spin off the project into separate company wchihc was re-capitalised by the Québec government in 2016. And it wasn't enough to push sales because potential custojers still did not beleive it could survive financially, hence Québec arranging to gift 50% of project to Airbvus to save it. (Airbus and Boeing had previously refused to invest in it when Bombardier asked).
Considering that the A321 NEO family now has more orders than the ENTIRE 737 MAX family (all variants) - it's proving to be a perfect move for Airbus, even more than it was initially. They can focus on production of the larger 32X family, and keep their offering of modern smaller aircraft as well (most of which doesn't occupy the same manufacturing spaces.) Getting as many aircraft out as possible when you have a 5-year backlog is critical, so not having to build the 318 or as many 319s has added benefit.
I wonder if an A220 NEO program would fix the Pratt & Whitney engine problems, by getting rid of them altogether?
What is the pratt and Whitney issue?
I don't think the C-Series would've taken off if Bombardier wasn't bailed out by Airbus. The initial deal Bombardier made with Delta in 2016 for 75 C-Series planes was nixed by Boeing's pressure policy campaign; and I believe Airbus would've done something something similar if Bombardier had managed deals with European airlines.
Unfortunately, this is another example of Canadian innovation being snuffed out or co-opted by the bigger players, like what happened to the Avro Arrow.
It depends how you look at it, I agree that the C-Series wouldn't have taken off without Aribus' help, but that's only because of Boeing trying to take the program down. If boeing had stayed out of it, I think the C-Series would have done fine under Bombardier, maybe not quite as good as they're doing with Airbus now, but they had large orders from Delta, Swiss, and Air Baltic already, with other airlines showing interest.
Not really. Swiss bought the C-Series and Airbus did not huff and puff about it. The focused on their work. However, when the opportunity arose to acquire the C-Series they took it.
@@mandandi Ah, you're right about Swiss--forgot about that deal.
@Prodagist I agree, if Boeing hadn't thrown a tantrum, the C-Series would've had modest success under Bombardier.
717 still exists??
You need to “research” the background of why Airbus bought into the C-Series program.
Yeah I was waiting for that to be brought up... the fallout with Boeing's ridiculous litigation COMPLETELY blew up in their face, and at the time they had alienated Embraer as well (the only possible competitor for that segment that Airbus now had.) Perfect timing and negotiation on Airbus' part. In hindsight, they've been able to integrate it into their portfolio very well, and reducing the sales of the 318 and 319 in a world dominated by 321 sales will surely allow them to make far more profit, regardless of how well the 220 does individually.
Its main issue is and will stay that it is Airbus odd sibling. At least from what it seems.
Turning the C-series into a true Airbus will cost how much?
It’s like the Boeing 717 that way…
They don't need to - it was never going to have commonality with the 32X series anyways. As far as training, parts, maintenance, simulators, etc etc - it's just another new plane. The airlines don't really care what name is on the MFG plate. Any given airline would have needed to integrate all those new aspects anyways if they had purchased it from Bombardier. Airbus simply brings capacity and stability, plus better marketing to the table - something which many airlines were concerned about with the C-Series, even though its performance always looked great on paper.
@@EstorilEm Well, it's about commonalities. Like in the cockpit and others, which would give Airbus another advantage. But about contracts with suppliers too. The P&W engines are considered too expensive for the A220, but the contract is fixed until 2025.
@@jantjarks7946 you’re missing my point. That type (AND Embraers offering) had zero commonality with either Boeing or Airbus, thus that factor has nothing to do with orders before or after any merger with Boeing or Airbus. Anyone who was going to buy the plane before, was already prepared for the lack of commonality.
It’s EXACTLY the same as the days when CRJs and ERJs rules the regional jet market, that did t stop anyone from buying the jets.
Having the support of planes like those, with the name of a company like Airbus and their support / parts network, is worth it alone in the eyes of potential buyers.
@@EstorilEm Well, we just made two different points it seems.
😉
Airbus a350 forever ❤❤❤❤❤❤Airbus fans here ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
I don't believe the Bombardier CS 100/300 could have achieved anything like the sales it's had as the Airbus A220-200/300. The heft of being part of the larger company, together to the assurance of full access to the US market through Airbus' assembly plant in Alabama was the type needed.
It already had a deal with delta before the airbus takeover.
The A220 is yet to be profitable for Airbus this many years later, so it would have bankrupted Bombardier had Airbus not gotten involved.
I think Boeing missed an opportunity.
Be polite when you ask someone to subscribe!
do you need a special training to pilot or it is same as 320/321 family?
Completely different training. The A220 wasn’t designed by Airbus.
You need a specific type rating. It’s not the same as the 320/330/350
@@rtbrtb_dutchy4183 that's one reason why the plane is slow in sales familiarity of the pilots. Usually when pilots switch planes from a320-a350 it will take 5 days but when they want the a220 2 months training
This fact will hold A220 back. Wonder the cost and issues with making A220 compatible with A320 type?
Did he use AI to narrate this...His voice sounds slightly different. Like a struggle 🤔
I find the E 195 E2 a better regional plane with it's 2 - 2 cabin layout and economy
A220 is not a regional. can fly up to 7 1/2 hours, they are mainly used as medium to longer range air flights
Its basically an A318/319 without the cargo and with a 2-3 config 😉
It is a completely new design with nothing in common with the A318/319/320/321 aircraft
Second 😊
first
Again, here are facts that don't get mentioned when you're watching a channel that belongs to an Airbus fan.
1. Regional aircraft are niche products. Most airlines use them to feed their hubs from smaller markets. That's why the two top planemakers don't build them.
2. When it comes to regional aircraft, Embraer is still king, even though their E2 series has lost a lot of market share to Airbus. Despite that, Embraer still sells plenty of the original E series.
3. Boeing has never developed a regional aircraft, and with the Max 7 having over 330 orders on its own, they don't need to.
4. Airbus has also never developed regional aircraft. Seriously.
5. Although the A220 has over 900 total orders, the aircraft is not yet profitable. Airbus is still losing money on the plane.
6. While geared turbofan engines are more efficient, they actually cost more to maintain because they require more frequent service cycles than other engine types.
7. There's an upfront initial cost for airlines to bring a new type into their fleet, so while they may benefit long term, it can be potentially painful in the beginning. That's why some airlines are phasing the planes out of their fleets.
So, that's the other side of the story, the one an Airbus fan doesn't like to tell you.
1) "Regional aircraft" is a very different market in the US from elsewhere - mostly for regulatory reasons. Most countries do not do feeder aircraft much at all but they do a lot of commuter aircraft (ie point to point, not hub-and-spoke) which the US does less of.
2) Embraer dominates the regional market in the US because its planes - mostly turboprop - are smaller, which again is about regulation (scope clauses). Again a US thing - but the US is only 20% of commercial aviation worldwide.
(3) and (4) True but pretty irrelevant because "regional jet" has a different meaning in the US than in the rest of the world and in this post. The 220 was never meant to be a US-style "regional jet" (ie about 78 seats, designed as a short range feeder aircraft) but to fill the smallest segment of "mainline" (in US parlance) travel. That's why mainline airlines bought it, not their regional subsidiaries.
5) True, because it was designed with production of only 20 or 30 a year in mind (ie effectively hand built) and is therefore an expensive plane. That's a problem that will be fixed in time but meanwhile means there's a huge backlog of orders to work through. A backlog of orders is a nice problem to have - it indicates success, not failure.
6) True, but the 220 is certainly not the only plane that has suffered from the GTF's maintenance woes - including Boeing ones. In the long run though the fuel efficency of a GTF in a small plane will easily eclipse the more frequent maintenance.
7) Sure, it costs extra to run ANY mixed fleet (running a mix of 737s and 320s is much worse) but it depends on what size and sort of airline you are whether it's worth it for the extra flexibility.
It is more correct to say that the 220 is filling a big market that both Airbus and Boeing have previously abandoned because neither ever served it well. The gap between an Embraer and a 737/320.
@@kenoliver8913Fair points, but:
1. It's true that many countries use the regional aircraft for point to point, but that's a moot point because all the US airlines also fly them point to point. They're not only used as feeder planes. With the A220, the only 2 airlines I know that use them as mainline fleet aircraft are Air Baltic and Breeze Airways. It's also why they're the main ones asking for a stretch version.
2. Embraer's top sellers in the regional sector are its turbojet planes, not the turboprops.
3. The turboprop market has other players, and some of them are going out of business if they haven't already, or merged due to the shrinking market.
4. The regional market that the A220 is playing in is not in the 73 seat and under market but rather in the 100-150 seat, which is in smaller 737/A320 territory. That's why neither Boeing nor Airbus have developed a regional aircraft in that sector.
5. Geared turbofan engines are proving to be a headache in hot climates, which is why most of the buyers of the aircraft mostly operate in cooler regions. Qantas is the newest player to operate the aircraft in a hot region, and they only just started so we'll see how it shakes out long-term.
6. Sure, I expect the GTFs to be more beneficial long term due to fuel efficiency, but the jury is still out as to the durability of the engines going by what's happening at the moment. I'm sure that future versions will address some of the flaws, but things in our modern world are not trending towards durability due to corporate greed.
My whole reason for pointing out these things is to illustrate the fact that the reporting here is not always balanced, so I try to point out the parts that tend to go unmentioned.
Longest ad I have seen in a while. If this was a Boeing in would have been all about the ongoing engine problems, new aircraft grounded for preventative maintenance, talk of corrosion issues and that the A220 is impacted by the same fake titanium issue that earned Boeing screaming headlines. One 787 grounded n Singapore with engine problems was a recent headline with "787 grounding" when it is an everyday occurrence for the A220. And how about those delivery delays?
Such things are normal for airliner manufacturers but only one earns constant negative headlines.
Hi Boeing! hahahahahahahahahahaha
When was the last Airbus falling apart over America again? For Boeing it was yesterday. I rest my case. Bye, boo!
@davidcarter...
Good Point !!!
@@stickynorth have fun up there when your a220 breaks up in midair because the fake titanium its made of fatigued
👎
A220 has no future - 1st. there will be no A220 in 15 years when the new engine planes come, 2nd Airbus is still losing money on that program and will never going get even with the current production management and capacity - and that will not change for this plane because of the 1st. point.