Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Cseries orders for 2017

Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:23 pm

Lightsaber you mean the third. The Mirabel FAL already has two parrallel lines. There is space for two more lines.
This would only be FAL1. Cabin outfitting and engine installation was planed to take place in FAL2. Two FAL1 lines would assemble planes for one FAL 2 lines. In total two FAL 2 lines could be placed at Mirabel.
Now two out of three CSeries hangars (flight line), are used as FAL 2.
The bottle neck for production ramp up past rate 2/month is the leg of engine delivery. Thus all sport in the hangars and even the hangar that used to hose the 2th CRJ line are filled with gliders.

I think the Mobile CSeries FAL will contain one FAL1 line and some hangar spaces for FAL2. This could fit inside a building the size of Mirabel FAL1. Sorry for the off topic post.
{I've used images from other sources}

Good news on the LOI's from Egyptian Airlines and Air Baltic.
I think it's a very good choose for Egyptian. They fly in two or three class layout. With 24" business class seats and the available size economy seats. Most likely the CS300 get 12 business class seats at 2-2 configuration and the rest will be (standard) 2-3 economy. Beter space utilization than the four rows with 3 seats on E-jets, or three rows of 4 seats on 737's.
I think that the CSeries is especially good in two or three class layout with wider business suites.
This is why I dare to bet that KLM Cityhopper won't introduce the CSeries. They sell premium economy as business class on regional flights.

Let's also add this, Youtube: BBD Dubai Airshow day 3 recap
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: Cseries orders for 2017

Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:52 pm

Fliegerfaust found a article from Iraqi news.
Iraq has firmed up their order for 5x CS300.
Posts: 1366
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Cseries orders for 2017

Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:05 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
So what the airline would do is operate 4 E190's over 3 of these thin routes. This allows the busiest route to get double morning and evening flights.

So what the airline would do is leave 25% of the possible revenue of 2 routes behind them?

I know based on historical post trend you are biased against BBD, but that is beyond ridiculous. If you are going to try and argue, at least try and not make it embarrassingly silly!
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:04 pm

Re: Cseries orders for 2017

Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:03 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
Sticking with our 3 hrs sector time, that would mean running flights at midnight and 3am. You might get sufficient passengers for these flights (and no airport night operating restrictions), so the numbers *may* add up, in which case, yes, 190E2 is the way to go.

Or if you are wanting to fit more flights in during conventional short-haul "hours", you need another airframe.

You won't need twice as many E190's to operate the route that a CS100 could do.

Most thin routes would be feeding into a larger hub. So aircraft can be put to use on another route.

So what the airline would do is operate 4 E190's over 3 of these thin routes. This allows the busiest route to get double morning and evening flights.

4 E190'e are similar cost to 3 CS100's.

So again we have a very small niche market for the C series. A market where a 737 can't get enough frequency for good yields and above the E190 that has superior CASM. The only advantage the C series has over the E190 is range. Most feeder routes would be fairly short. The C series allows airlines to open up a handful of new feeder routes between 2000-3000nm. The C series will have to be sold cheap for airlines to justify the costs of adding an extra type.

The E190 CASM is causing some trouble around. But have you seen the interior of the Cseries? The windows? Just wow! Give it a whirl, it has much more going over the E190 than just range.
Topic Author
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 12:59 pm

Re: Cseries orders for 2017

Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:18 am

To bring this thread back on topic, so far in 2017 the orders for the CSeries consist of 31+30 from an unknown airline, possibly SAS; 12+12 CS300's from Egyptair (both orders are LOI's, expected to firm up before year end), an order of 5 CS300's from Iraqi Air seems now to have firmed up, and a possible followup order from AirBaltic to come shortly.
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

Re: Cseries orders for 2017

Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:47 am

It is fascinating how these threads drift, the thread title is C Series Orders for 2017. In the last 50 posts, maybe a half dozen mention orders or potential orders. Some interesting discussion though.
Posts: 3303
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Cseries orders for 2017

Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:46 pm

RJMAZ posts show the difference between engineers and fleet planners/business managers. His proposals here would bankrupt an airline in days.

There's a lot more to running an airline than CASM and load factors. Something that is nearly always missed on is RASM (I'm guilty of this too). Airlines are also looking to maximize revenue and more specifically yield (RASM - CASM roughly). The PDEWs are somewhat flexible and fungible. PDEWs are sensitive to the schedule and price you operate at. Fewer flights and/or higher ticket prices mean lower demand. More flights and lower ticket prices mean higher demand. Heck, RASM is also sensitive to the time at which you operate. If you have crap timings in the middle of the night, you aren't going to get great yield. Just ask all the discount carriers with their odd timings and use of secondary airports, how great their yields are.

Airlines have to balance the frequency on routes against the congestion of their hubs and the rising CASM of lower seat airplanes. So the upsize where necessary. RJMAZ is really looking at this as a simple problem of PDEWS split into whatever achieves the highest load factor at the lowest CASM. But in reality, it's more like what's the minimum set of frequencies to maximize RASM and for each of those flights, what's the aircraft that can be deployed to maximize yield. Sometimes a 737-9 might the best fit. Sometimes it'll be a CS100.

The real value of the CSeries is in allowing airlines to move just above RJ/regional services for a reasonable CASM. The CS100 and E2-190/195 allow airlines to grow a route without adding or cutting frequencies. That flexibility is valuable. There's cities with 2-3 larger RJ flights (and a lot of those particularly in the US). They can replace one of the frequencies with the CS100 to add capacity without much of an increase in cost, while improving yield (in some cases substantially). This is valuable for example in the busier morning or evening flights.

Popular Searches On

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