Airbus A220 (CSeries) Production/Delivery Thread 2018

KarelXWB · Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:55 pm

r2rho wrote:
I agree and hence why I have stated in the past that the Mobile FAL is a bluff - which has worked brilliantly so far.

Yet we continue reading Bombardier progressing with Alabama CSeries site plans and Planning for Alabama jet plant 'at an advanced stage'.

At some point someone will have to break ground.

Of course Airbus will keep the idea of Mobile floating around, to make sure the decision does not get reverted, but at 40 a/c per year there is no business point in a 2nd FAL (political point is another issue).

A second FAL is just a strategic decision. Airbus' A320 plants in Alabama and Tianjin didn't make much sense either (from an economic point of view), except Airbus' narrow body market share in China jumped from 20 to 50% as Chinese carriers ordered A320s by the hundreds since then. It's the same reason Boeing feels it needs an 737 completion centre in China, even when cabin fit in Renton is more efficient.

KarelXWB · Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:12 pm

One of the early production aircaft, MSN 50007, suffered an incident in Mirabel:

https://www.fliegerfaust.com/mirabel-cs ... 88647.html

ExMilitaryEng · Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:51 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
One of the early production aircaft, MSN 50007, suffered an incident in Mirabel:
https://www.fliegerfaust.com/mirabel-cs ... 88647.html

It's one of the parked "gliders" outside, that were never delivered (no engines, no interiors, no avionics, no systems). I liked the rather dramatic pic...

Did not have sufficient counterweight in the nose I guess. Recent snow (well, freezing rain) accumulations could have shifted the center of gravity.

Arion640 · Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:32 pm

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
One of the early production aircaft, MSN 50007, suffered an incident in Mirabel:
https://www.fliegerfaust.com/mirabel-cs ... 88647.html

It's one of the parked "gliders" outside, that were never delivered (no engines, no interiors, no avionics, no systems). I liked the rather dramatic pic...

Did not have sufficient counterweight in the nose I guess. Recent snow (well, freezing rain) accumulations could have shifted the center of gravity.

I think the Concorde at Heathrow was in a similar position and was weighed down with flight magazines for ages, until being emptied and properly tied down.

beechnut · Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:41 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
One of the early production aircaft, MSN 50007, suffered an incident in Mirabel:

https://www.fliegerfaust.com/mirabel-cs ... 88647.html

Hah! Nothing new to Cessna 150 owners! Come by my airfield after a snowstorm and most of the C150s have their noses in the air and tails on the ground like that due to the snow load!

Beech

Jetsouth · Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:17 pm

Once again, there seems to be very little production/deliveries of CSeries. Bombardier, I believe Bombardier forecast 40 deliveries this year. For the past two years, they were not even close to their forecasted production levels. In the past, I understand it was issues related to the engines, but from what I understand, Bombardier has sufficient engines now. So far this year, only one plane has been delivered to AirBaltic. So what is the issue that there are no higher production levels? 75 planes are forecast just to be delivered to Delta. Based on current production levels, it will take years to just fill that order alone. At a current delivery rate of 1 in almost two months so far this year, I cannot see more than 10 or 20 planes being delivered this year again...so what is the issue?

SamYeager2016 · Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:43 pm

KarelXWB wrote:

A second FAL is just a strategic decision. Airbus' A320 plants in Alabama and Tianjin didn't make much sense either (from an economic point of view), except Airbus' narrow body market share in China jumped from 20 to 50% as Chinese carriers ordered A320s by the hundreds since then. It's the same reason Boeing feels it needs an 737 completion centre in China, even when cabin fit in Renton is more efficient.

Somewhat OT but how easy would it be for Airbus to use all or part of the space in that new FAL for Airbus aircraft after the physical building is constructed?

I believe there has been talk of increasing the rate in Mobile from four aircraft. Is that feasible with the existing FAL or would it need extension?

trex8 · Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:19 pm

SamYeager2016 wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:

A second FAL is just a strategic decision. Airbus' A320 plants in Alabama and Tianjin didn't make much sense either (from an economic point of view), except Airbus' narrow body market share in China jumped from 20 to 50% as Chinese carriers ordered A320s by the hundreds since then. It's the same reason Boeing feels it needs an 737 completion centre in China, even when cabin fit in Renton is more efficient.

Somewhat OT but how easy would it be for Airbus to use all or part of the space in that new FAL for Airbus aircraft after the physical building is constructed?

I believe there has been talk of increasing the rate in Mobile from four aircraft. Is that feasible with the existing FAL or would it need extension?

The Mobile buildings were designed like the Tianjin ones and are capable of 6/month without major changes.

r2rho · Mon Feb 19, 2018 1:12 pm

I believe there has been talk of increasing the rate in Mobile from four aircraft. Is that feasible with the existing FAL or would it need extension?

The Mobile buildings were designed like the Tianjin ones and are capable of 6/month without major changes.

Not wanting to go off topic as this is a CSeries thread, but the facilities at Tianjin and Mobile are both sized for 4/month. If they can do 6, this is news to me.
There is, however, talk of increasing production at those sites, which would involve an expansion.

trex8 · Mon Feb 19, 2018 7:18 pm

r2rho wrote:
I believe there has been talk of increasing the rate in Mobile from four aircraft. Is that feasible with the existing FAL or would it need extension?

The Mobile buildings were designed like the Tianjin ones and are capable of 6/month without major changes.

Not wanting to go off topic as this is a CSeries thread, but the facilities at Tianjin and Mobile are both sized for 4/month. If they can do 6, this is news to me.
There is, however, talk of increasing production at those sites, which would involve an expansion.

Mea culpa, you are correct, 4/month.

SteelChair · Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:11 pm

Regarding the dumping claim and the MOB factory, Boeing have promised in their ITC testimony that additional claims will be forthcoming with the larger Cseries, imho the purposes of the MOB facility is to address that claim.

LockheedBBD · Wed Feb 21, 2018 5:18 am

Airbus and Bombardier visited Mobile today:

https://twitter.com/gregcanfield/status ... 1750169605
https://twitter.com/MayorStimpson/statu ... 6594662400

Slash787 · Thu Feb 22, 2018 10:37 am

Will Gulf Air receive their aircrafts this year?

KarelXWB · Fri Feb 23, 2018 9:54 am

EgyptAir is due to receive its first CS300 aircraft between November this year, and January 2019:

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... very-dates

micstatic · Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:53 am

it's been asked numerous times in this thread. What the heck is going on with the delivery rate?

Jetsouth · Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:48 pm

So far only one delivery this year to SWISS. There were supposed to be two further deliveries by now, one to SWISS, which did not accept the plane due to issues with the interior, and another to Korean, which did not accept the plane when smoke appeared in the cockpit during its acceptance flight. Obviously, there are problems, but from what I read, engine deliveries is no longer the issue.

OA940 · Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:09 pm

So basically the CSeries i the most unlucky plane ever.

Jetsouth · Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:16 pm

OA940 wrote:
So basically the CSeries i the most unlucky plane ever.

No, I would say the most unlucky plane is the ARJ21.....10 years late in production, I think only 3 or 4 built to date.

KarelXWB · Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:17 pm

P&W delivered 374 GTF engines in 2017, which is basically in line with its forecast of "350 to 400" engines. PW1500G is also not affected by the latest engine snags, presumably something else is holding up deliveries.

Jetsouth · Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:26 pm

Its no wonder that Bombardier wants to get out of commercial aircraft. Its Q Series line is still apparently running at a loss, its CRJ line badly needs an update and has few orders, and they just cannot get CSeries deliveries together. They would probably get many more orders for the jet, the jet itself is great, if they could just produce them and deliver as promised.

bigjku · Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:40 pm

Jetsouth wrote:
Its no wonder that Bombardier wants to get out of commercial aircraft. Its Q Series line is still apparently running at a loss, its CRJ line badly needs an update and has few orders, and they just cannot get CSeries deliveries together. They would probably get many more orders for the jet, the jet itself is great, if they could just produce them and deliver as promised.

The whole program is kind of in a box. You can’t get production price where you need competition wise without building them on a scale that at least approaches the A320neo and 737max. Right now there are some orders for airlines that really want a smaller jet so long as Canadian tax payers swallow the loss. Logically this thing needs probably billions of investment to get its build rate up. Maybe Airbus will write that check maybe they won’t in the end.

Jetsouth · Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:29 pm

The positive part is, that they have 5 CS300 under various stages of flight testing currently: 3 for SWISS, and 2 for Korean. The negative is, as mentioned above, two of these planes were not accepted because of problems. If they could resolve these problems and get all of these delivered over the next few weeks, that would be impressive: 5 deliveries.

ExMilitaryEng · Fri Feb 23, 2018 3:47 pm

bigjku wrote:
The whole program is kind of in a box. You can’t get production price where you need competition wise without building them on a scale that at least approaches the A320neo and 737max. Right now there are some orders for airlines that really want a smaller jet so long as Canadian tax payers swallow the loss. Logically this thing needs probably billions of investment to get its build rate up. Maybe Airbus will write that check maybe they won’t in the end.

You summed up the situation pretty well.

Furthermore, the barriers to entry are pretty steep. Boeing will keep dumping its planes (like B737-700@$22M ea) anywhere the CSeries is contemplated. Boeing aim was to eliminate/bankrupt BBD. (If BBD stays alone, they'll keep trying)

Don't expect any new CSeries sales until the Airbus partnership is official.

Now, with Airbus owning the CSeries, that's another ball game.

Just by integrating the CSeries into its supply chain alone, Airbus expects to shave 15% on production costs. Also, the Airbus after-sale support (+ eliminating bankruptcy risks) should considerably increase the overall attractiveness (thus selling prices) of the CSeries.

So the net cost to get the build rate up should not be as much. (10 / months was considered the most cost efficient rate for one completed FAL)

AvroLanc · Fri Feb 23, 2018 7:16 pm

Jetsouth wrote:
So far only one delivery this year to SWISS. There were supposed to be two further deliveries by now, one to SWISS, which did not accept the plane due to issues with the interior, and another to Korean, which did not accept the plane when smoke appeared in the cockpit during its acceptance flight. Obviously, there are problems, but from what I read, engine deliveries is no longer the issue.

My guess is that there is a lot more going on than meets the eye. BBD should be able to supply aircraft at a least 2 per mth. I sense an employee problem is compounding supplier issues. The work environment may be leading to less than desirable morale. Just a thought. How else explain aircraft not being accepted by a customer already flying type? I love this airplane and wish it all the success but come on.

ExMilitaryEng · Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:18 pm

AvroLanc wrote:
BBD should be able to supply aircraft at a least 2 per month

The GTF was essentially the bottle neck for many months. Other supplier's issues could have contributed, but the engine issues provided some slack to tackle those.
However, above delays compounded the lack of FAL floor space problem. Aircrafts stayed longer inside, thus using more floor space. (Remember, the FAL is only half completed). That causes lots of useless shuffling planes around, with a domino effect. Last December, BBD had to ferry an AirBaltic CS300 to YUL just for temporary storage.

Skywatcher · Fri Feb 23, 2018 10:18 pm

Let's face it-Bombardier is badly managed. I hate to say it but what the heck, one delivery in 2 months? Ultimately it is a management failure.

hkcanadaexpat · Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:33 pm

According to today's DL 10K filed with the SEC today, Delta expects to receives (18) CS100s in 2018, (25) in 2019 and (16) in 2020.

ikolkyo · Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:35 pm

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
According to today's DL 10K filed with the SEC today, Delta expects to receives (18) CS100s in 2018, (25) in 2019 and (16) in 2020.

These numbers almost made me spit out my drink, no way in hell these numbers are going to happen unless a massive increase in production occurs.

ExMilitaryEng · Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:52 pm

Then it goes down to only 16 in 2020, for some reasons. Those numbers are bizarre.

777Mech · Sat Feb 24, 2018 4:15 am

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
According to today's DL 10K filed with the SEC today, Delta expects to receives (18) CS100s in 2018, (25) in 2019 and (16) in 2020.

It may have been discussed before, but what happened to the frames that were to have been delivered this spring?

The first one was to be delivered in April, so theoretically that frame should have been rolled out by now.

Is there a glut of planes just parked outside of Mirabel awaiting rework?

Polot · Sat Feb 24, 2018 4:45 am

777Mech wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
According to today's DL 10K filed with the SEC today, Delta expects to receives (18) CS100s in 2018, (25) in 2019 and (16) in 2020.

It may have been discussed before, but what happened to the frames that were to have been delivered this spring?

The first one was to be delivered in April, so theoretically that frame should have been rolled out by now.

Is there a glut of planes just parked outside of Mirabel awaiting rework?

Theoretically if BBD was actually ever going to delivery the planes to DL in time yes they would have been rolling out soon. But those planes were never going to be ready for April delivery independent of the tariff issue. The tariff drama provides BBD a nice cover for delays through.

Hence why the first planes are now scheduled to be delivered late this year despite the tariff issue being resolved (it’s not like BBD halted the entire production line awaiting the outcome).

777Mech · Sat Feb 24, 2018 6:29 am

Polot wrote:
777Mech wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
According to today's DL 10K filed with the SEC today, Delta expects to receives (18) CS100s in 2018, (25) in 2019 and (16) in 2020.

It may have been discussed before, but what happened to the frames that were to have been delivered this spring?

The first one was to be delivered in April, so theoretically that frame should have been rolled out by now.

Is there a glut of planes just parked outside of Mirabel awaiting rework?

Theoretically if BBD was actually ever going to delivery the planes to DL in time yes they would have been rolling out soon. But those planes were never going to be ready for April delivery independent of the tariff issue. The tariff drama provides BBD a nice cover for delays through.

Hence why the first planes are now scheduled to be delivered late this year despite the tariff issue being resolved (it’s not like BBD halted the entire production line awaiting the outcome).

In light of that I wonder is DL is receiving any compensation for the delays, on an already dirt cheap airplane, maybe not.

It's insane that BBD hasn't even built the DL frames, and yet they have only delivered one frame year to date.

Seems like some really serious issues going forward.

KarelXWB · Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:54 pm

Korean Air's 3rd CS300, the one that had smoke in the cockpit, performed another test flight today:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BBA532

Maybe delivery will follow shortly.

KarelXWB · Sat Feb 24, 2018 3:10 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
According to today's DL 10K filed with the SEC today, Delta expects to receives (18) CS100s in 2018, (25) in 2019 and (16) in 2020.

These numbers almost made me spit out my drink, no way in hell these numbers are going to happen unless a massive increase in production occurs.

Well, Bombardier does forecast 40 deliveries this year, so delivering 18 aircraft to DL would fit that schedule. I suspect there may be a big delivery push in the second half of the year.

Bricktop · Sat Feb 24, 2018 3:47 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
According to today's DL 10K filed with the SEC today, Delta expects to receives (18) CS100s in 2018, (25) in 2019 and (16) in 2020.

These numbers almost made me spit out my drink, no way in hell these numbers are going to happen unless a massive increase in production occurs.

Well, Bombardier does forecast 40 deliveries this year, so delivering 18 aircraft to DL would fit that schedule. I suspect there may be a big delivery push in the second half of the year.

Color me skeptical that that will happen. Vegas ain't taking that bet I'm sure.

AvroLanc · Mon Feb 26, 2018 9:32 am

KarelXWB wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
hkcanadaexpat wrote:
According to today's DL 10K filed with the SEC today, Delta expects to receives (18) CS100s in 2018, (25) in 2019 and (16) in 2020.

These numbers almost made me spit out my drink, no way in hell these numbers are going to happen unless a massive increase in production occurs.[ss/quote]

Well, Bombardier does forecast 40 deliveries this year, so delivering 18 aircraft to DL would fit that schedule. I suspect there may be a big delivery push in the second half of the year.

I share your optimism, however we have heard this too many times. They still owe 13 frames from last year, have only delivered 1 frame this year only 10 months left. The smoke is clearing and the mirrors are being removed. No frames out the door means no cash flow. Not sure 4 per month is an attainable rate at thus time.

gokmengs · Mon Feb 26, 2018 9:47 am

so much potential with this plane yet such horrid management, airbus needs to step in and step in fast.

Jetsouth · Thu Mar 01, 2018 10:41 pm

Does anyone know what the heck is happening with the CSeries and deliveries? Only one delivery so far this year? And it is apparently not a result of delays in receiving engines.

What is the problem? Poor management? Delays in assemblies or parts? Labour?

Some blame the issue on lack of production space. But even so, one would expect more than one delivery two months into the year even with less than ideal space.

ExMilitaryEng · Thu Mar 01, 2018 10:52 pm

Jetsouth wrote:
Does anyone know what the heck is happening with the CSeries and deliveries?

Keep asking the same question every 72 hr or so, maybe we'll get a different answer eventually. :smile:

The current layout does not allow more than 2.5 per month, probably much less. FWIW, we had a very slow production start last year too.

KarelXWB · Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:34 pm

Second delivery of the year:

Bombardier CS 300 55021 HB-JCH Swiss International regd & delivery 02mar18 YMX-ZRH ex C-FOWF

PlanesNTrains · Fri Mar 02, 2018 5:12 pm

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
Jetsouth wrote:
Does anyone know what the heck is happening with the CSeries and deliveries?
Keep asking the same question every 72 hr or so, maybe we'll get a different answer eventually.

The current layout does not allow more than 2.5 per month, probably much less. FWIW, we had a very slow production start last year too.

It'd be interesting to know how they expect to deliver 40 frames this year when 12 X 2.5 = 30.

wjcandee · Fri Mar 02, 2018 5:32 pm

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
According to today's DL 10K filed with the SEC today, Delta expects to receives (18) CS100s in 2018, (25) in 2019 and (16) in 2020.

That's not what it says. It's reporting its contractual obligations ("purchase commitments"). Has nothing to do with what we all understand will be delays in fulfilling those orders by the manufacturer.

10Ks are super-precise in their use of language. They're scrubbed by lawyers inside and outside the corporation, and reviewed extensively with management and the accountants. They mean what they say and they say what they mean. No more, no less.

ExMilitaryEng · Fri Mar 02, 2018 6:07 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
It'd be interesting to know how they expect to deliver 40 frames this year when 12 X 2.5 = 30.

They won't, unless they sell some unfinished early "gliders" they have (including some stored indoor), and sell some FTVs.

To go beyond 2.5 / month will require additional capital investments. Whether those investments go first to Mirabel (to complete the first FAL) or Mobile (or even Wichita) will depend (among other factors) on the outcome of the Airbus partnership negotiations.

CRJ900 · Fri Mar 02, 2018 6:09 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Second delivery of the year:

Bombardier CS 300 55021 HB-JCH Swiss International regd & delivery 02mar18 YMX-ZRH ex C-FOWF

Best news all week

KarelXWB · Fri Mar 02, 2018 6:17 pm

CRJ900 wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
Second delivery of the year:

Bombardier CS 300 55021 HB-JCH Swiss International regd & delivery 02mar18 YMX-ZRH ex C-FOWF

Best news all week

HB-JCH had 4 customer flights before it was accepted by Swiss and is currently crossing Germany on its delivery flight: https://fr24.com/SWR5201/10967c79

flyingclrs727 · Fri Mar 02, 2018 6:57 pm

r2rho wrote:
Doubt a US assembly facility will ever happen if there is no more dumping claims against C-Series. Makes no sense to have two lines within about 1000 miles of each other, two hours flying time, for such a low rate of C-Series production...for now it would be a factory just for Delta.

I agree and hence why I have stated in the past that the Mobile FAL is a bluff - which has worked brilliantly so far. Of course Airbus will keep the idea of Mobile floating around, to make sure the decision does not get reverted, but at 40 a/c per year there is no business point in a 2nd FAL (political point is another issue).

Just 40 a year? They need enough customers to do 30 to 40 per month to really compete with Boeing. Considering the CS-100 and 130 are for market segments not addressed by the 737-7Max and A319 Neo, there should be room for lots more orders than 40 units per year production.

ExMilitaryEng · Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:00 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
Just 40 a year? They need enough customers to do 30 to 40 per month to really compete with Boeing. Considering the CS-100 and 130 are for market segments not addressed by the 737-7Max and A319 Neo, there should be room for lots more orders than 40 units per year production.

FWIW, BBD calculated (back when the program was at about $4.5B) they would make a profit at 10/month, even with only one FAL.

So excluding the sunked costs (you know, that $1...), and incorporating 15% production cost savings (as per Airbus), I definitely see this program to succeed, even if less than 10/month are prodcuced.

ExMilitaryEng · Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:26 pm

wjcandee wrote:
(about 18 committed for 2018) It's reporting its contractual obligations ("purchase commitments").10Ks are super-precise in their use of language. They're scrubbed by lawyers inside and outside the corporation, and reviewed extensively with management and the accountants. They mean what they say and they say what they mean. No more, no less.

If I understand well, that report would have been the same even with the 300% anti-dumping duties still standing. It would have been modified only when a new delivery schedule is agreed upon and signed.

wjcandee · Fri Mar 02, 2018 11:09 pm

ExMil: Yeah. They're reporting the obligation, which appears still to be that if BBD somehow produced that many for them this year, DL would take them. But we know that isn't happening. If the parties amend the agreement to reduce DL's obligation, then that will be reported, presumably, in the next 10Q.

deltal1011man · Sat Mar 03, 2018 12:25 am

ExMilitaryEng wrote:
wjcandee wrote:
(about 18 committed for 2018) It's reporting its contractual obligations ("purchase commitments").10Ks are super-precise in their use of language. They're scrubbed by lawyers inside and outside the corporation, and reviewed extensively with management and the accountants. They mean what they say and they say what they mean. No more, no less.
If I understand well, that report would have been the same even with the 300% anti-dumping duties still standing. It would have been modified only when a new delivery schedule is agreed upon and signed.

Correct. Till Delta and BBD sit down and work all this out it would show in the 10K as the original delivery schedule.

Latest from the rumor mill is at best 15 planes this year and probably not showing up till AUG at very best. Also sounds like the 339 deliveries might be later than expected...... (i think that part was in the 10K)

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net