CSeries launch customer

Profile picture for user Paolins92

Member for

7 years 7 months

Posts: 77

Form this article on Aviation Week:
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/avd_05_08_2012_p04-02-455602.xml

Bombardier expects the first flight for its CS100 by the end of this year, and entry-into-service in December 2013. Fuller declines to name the launch operator, although it is listed as an undisclosed firm order and according to Fuller it is one of the oldest operators in the world.

I am following up closely the CSeries story and this article enlights details of the launch customer (still undisclosed).
Many people on the net (and also journalists) keep saying that without orders from well-estabilished airlines (famous ones) the CSeries orders will not come so quickly...
Who might be this one then? Could it be one of the "big guys"?
from the original BBD's PR we have:
http://www.bombardier.com/en/aerospace/media-centre/press-releases/details?docID=0901260d80183825
Bombardier Aerospace announced today [june 20, 2011] that a major network carrier will be the first operator to take delivery of the first CSeries aircraft.

Comes to my mind that several "major network carriers" like the US ones would firm orders for some more a/c than the firmed 10+6...
So... checking the oldest airlines still in operations here comes the list!
  1. KLM (1919)
  2. Qantas (1920)
  3. Aeroflot (1923)
  4. Czech Airlines (1923)
  5. Finnair (1923)
  6. Delta Air Lines (1924) - I'd exclude DAL since last year stated that decision on small NBs would come in 2012
  7. Tajik Air (1924)
  8. Jat Airways (1927)
  9. LOT Polish Airlines (1929)
  10. LAN Airlines (1929)
  11. Iberia (1929)
  12. Aeropostal (1929)

Please share your opinions on this misterious airline! :D
Original post
Profile picture for user tenthije

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 4,887

KLM is not one of the oldest airlines, it is the oldest, so not them. But I´ll leave it as a maybe. There was talk about KL/AF looking at the C-series to replace the F70s.

QANTAS has outsourced their small planes. They are unlikely to order the C-Series for themselves, but perhaps for a subsidiary. Network Aviation flies six F100s with another 6 on order. So probably not Network Aviation, otherwise the six F100s on order would have been cancelled. Perhaps Qantaslink to replace their 717s?

Aeroflot is already going for SSJ.

CSA is a good bet, to replace their 735s. They got 8 of them, so 10+6 would be a good replacement with minor growth. But I do not think they are really a mayor network carrier.

Finnair, not likely with their young Embraer fleet.

Delta Air Lines, too small an order for such a large airline.

Tajik Air, in no way shape or form are they a mayor network carrier.

JAT, only a marginal network carrier at best.

LOT Polish, not likely due to the large fleet of Embraers. Also, hard to describe them as a mayor network player.

LAN Airlines, certainly would not rule them out.

Iberia, another good possiblity. Perhaps for their new Iberia Express venture?

Aeropostal, not a mayor airline.

Profile picture for user Paolins92

Member for

7 years 7 months

Posts: 77

Almost forgot! this statement rules out Gulf Air from being the launch customer... It's long being rumored that the Gulf carrier could be the launch customer for the CS100, but when early this year they did not announce any order at the Bahrain Air Show some doubts raised....
The fact that GFA was founded in 1950 does not place them among the oldest operators...

Talking about KLM:
Yep is the oldest! and if they're the "launchers" is wise just saying "among the oldest", without revealing the identity...
With their subsidiary KLM Cityhopper, they currently operate 26 F70, 5 F100 (in phase out) and 21 E190 (+1 order yet to deliver, soon).
Since they have 100 seaters E190 and not the 115 seater E195 (and phasing out the 105 seater F100) it could be very likely that they opted for the CS100...

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 2,163

KLM is not one of the oldest airlines, it is the oldest, so not them. But I´ll leave it as a maybe.

As Paolins alludes to, it would make sense to describe KLM as among the oldest - as to state the oldest would completely give the game away.

My question is - why would an airline keep an order quiet?

Profile picture for user J-20 Hotdog

Member for

11 years 8 months

Posts: 3,442

Almost forgot! this statement rules out Gulf Air from being the launch customer... It's long being rumored that the Gulf carrier could be the launch customer for the CS100, but when early this year they did not announce any order at the Bahrain Air Show some doubts raised....
The fact that GFA was founded in 1950 does not place them among the oldest operators...

Talking about KLM:
Yep is the oldest! and if they're the "launchers" is wise just saying "among the oldest", without revealing the identity...
With their subsidiary KLM Cityhopper, they currently operate 26 F70, 5 F100 (in phase out) and 21 E190 (+1 order yet to deliver, soon).
Since they have 100 seaters E190 and not the 115 seater E195 (and phasing out the 105 seater F100) it could be very likely that they opted for the CS100...

hmm you never know.. maybe the recent incident with the SSJ (RIP to those onboard) may scare away customers who now have cold feet.
CSeries main rival is the Mitsubishi MRJ.. same engine but all those delays will benefit the CSeries who can beat MRJ to the punch.

but the problem is.. the E series is so well established. what do the SSJ, MRJ, and CSeries have over the latest E series?

Profile picture for user Paolins92

Member for

7 years 7 months

Posts: 77

As Paolins alludes to, it would make sense to describe KLM as among the oldest - as to state the oldest would completely give the game away.

My question is - why would an airline keep an order quiet?


Well... this is not clear to me... I guess that there may be so many reasons but I can't figure any of them...

hmm you never know.. maybe the recent incident with the SSJ (RIP to those onboard) may scare away customers who now have cold feet.
CSeries main rival is the Mitsubishi MRJ.. same engine but all those delays will benefit the CSeries who can beat MRJ to the punch.

but the problem is.. the E series is so well established. what do the SSJ, MRJ, and CSeries have over the latest E series?


I think that the SSJ accident (RIP to all on board) cannot mine the CSeries sales at all, otherwise.... airlines which were still deciding may opt for other aircraft other than the SSJ but this is all to see from what happened to the SSJ....
An example may be Helvetic Airways (switzerland) which has a fleet of 6 F100 and stated in late 2011 that in 1 year and a half to 2 years (guess what, when the CS will "prove itself" with the 1st flight and the EIS) they would decide on a replacement aircraft and their CEO already said they've examined closely the CS100 and the SSJ100 at the Paris Airshow in 2011....
So in this case they may opt for the CS...

Anyway the CSeries advantage over the Embraer's E-Jets is still there due to the famous "all-new design" BBD's promoting since the project started... Furthermore the CS has a really wide fuselage over the E195 and the seating range for the CSeries family intercepts the E-Jets only on the lower end (100 to 150 vs 70 to 125 - talking about the whole family).
Sure the re-engining of the E-jet will provide further advantages... we'll see... It is still a paper-project...

Profile picture for user Paolins92

Member for

7 years 7 months

Posts: 77

Bahrain Air: another example of airline currently watching both CSeries and SSJ100:
http://www.arabianaerospace.aero/d-day-looms-for-bahrain-air-seeks-niche-market.html?utm_source=googleNews&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=news_feed

[...] By around that time [June 2012] it should be close to deciding which modern twinjet – CSeries or Superjet – will be the chosen contender to take it into the future. [...]

Member for

14 years 5 months

Posts: 1,101

Biggest E-jet - E195AR
maximum no-frills seating 122
range 2200 nm
Smallest CSeries - CS100
maximum no-frills seating 125
range 2200 nm

Differences?
CS100 is more plane than E195AR: MTOW CS100 54,9 t, E195AR 52,3 t.

What is the difference in empty weights, and how does fuel burn differ?

CS100 also takes off, at ISA sea level, in 1500 m - E195AR needs 2200 m.

E-jets go smaller than this (E195 down to 1400 nm of STD, E170 down to 80 seats at no frills and 36 t MTOW STD) CSeries bigger than this (CS100ER and CS300ER up to 2950 nm, CS300ER up to 145 seats no frills and 63,1 t MTOW).

Profile picture for user Paolins92

Member for

7 years 7 months

Posts: 77

Chornedsnorkack basically made the point.... While the CS100 makes 2200 nm of range in the standard version (up to 2950 for the ER) the E195 requires it to be the AR version (Advanced Range) to range 2200 nm...

For fuel burn they currently advertise IIRC around 16% less than the E195, as they show on the "animated" mockup at airshows.
For other data, they are still unknown (like the Basic Empty Weight).

Re-reading the statements and the above mentioned list.... I actually think that we'll see the KLM livery on the CS100....

Profile picture for user seahawk

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 4,202

Swiss maybe? - ok they are not undisclosed.

Profile picture for user Paolins92

Member for

7 years 7 months

Posts: 77

Swiss is one of the first operators "launcher of the CS program" via Lufty but the first aircraft (at EIS - end of 2013) will be of this, yet undisclosed, operator.

Member for

14 years 5 months

Posts: 1,101

A318OEO

How does CSeries compare against A318OEO - considering no A318NEO is offered (and no 737-600MAX either)?

Seat count - no frills maximum:
CS100 125
A318 132
Seat count - manufacturer "typical":
CS100 110
A318 107
MTOW, highest
CS100ER 58,1
A318 68
Range at maximum TOW and "typical" payload
CS100ER 2950 nm
A318 3200 nm
But at lower TOW-s:
CS100 non-ER at 54,9 t 2200 nm
A318 weight variant at 63 t 2200 nm
Takeoff distance at ISA sea level:
CS100ER in 1500 m, and range 2950 nm
A318 in 1800 m
but A318 at 63 t in 1500 m.

How far would Better on a Camel CS100ER fly out of London City?

Profile picture for user Paolins92

Member for

7 years 7 months

Posts: 77

Based on statements, the CS100 has a 22,5 lower fuel consumption over the A318 and has a significantly lower CASM (.755 for the A318 and .638 for the CS100)

Furthermore the A318 is restricted to operate from LCY with lower MTOW, indeed BA operates the A318 in all-busines 32-seat configuration on the LCY-JFK route.

Member for

14 years 5 months

Posts: 1,101


Furthermore the A318 is restricted to operate from LCY with lower MTOW, indeed BA operates the A318 in all-busines 32-seat configuration on the LCY-JFK route.

No, they don´t and cannot. A318 only gets as far as Shannon, even with the 32 seats.
Profile picture for user Paolins92

Member for

7 years 7 months

Posts: 77

Yeah, I meant the only A318-operated flight form LCY is BA's LCY-SNN-JFK.
That's another "bonus" for the CSeries, which (analyzed by Flightglobal) would make it straight to JFK without the stop at SNN...
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/2011/12/analysis-a318-and-cseries-go-h.html
In all-business the CS100 will hold 44 pax against the 32 of the A318, considering that it is longer...

Profile picture for user tenthije

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 4,887

How does CSeries compare against A318OEO - considering no A318NEO is offered (and no 737-600MAX either)?
I am not sure I quite understand what you're asking? YOu want us to compare the C series against a plane that Airbus has not even proposed (neither Boeing for the 600MAX)? Both the A318s and the B736s are lemmons. Neither Airbus nor Boeing will go through the trouble of redesigning them. There´s a reason why already several A318s have gone to the scrapper!

That's another "bonus" for the CSeries, which (analyzed by Flightglobal) would make it straight to JFK without the stop at SNN...
I thought that one of the reasons for the stop at Shannon, apart from the obvious lack of range for the A318, is that City does not have sufficient customs and security available for flights to the USA? The Shannon stop is in part for pre-clearance to the USA. Is it possible / economically feasable to make City capable of handling scheduled US flights?

Member for

14 years 5 months

Posts: 1,101

I am not sure I quite understand what you're asking? YOu want us to compare the C series against a plane that Airbus has not even proposed (neither Boeing for the 600MAX)? Both the A318s and the B736s are lemmons. Neither Airbus nor Boeing will go through the trouble of redesigning them. There´s a reason why already several A318s have gone to the scrapper!

No. Against the OEO, which in contrast to NEO, exists and flies.

And Airbus will at least put sharklets on A318 - but not new engines.

How much range boost (or runway cut at constant range) shall A318OEO get from the sharklets? Because CSeries shall be competing against the sharkletted A318OEO, not the existing one.

Profile picture for user tenthije

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 4,887

What's the OEO? Is it just the identified for sharklets? If so, then I am willing to bet the point is still moot. If Airbus develops it, and that is a big if, then no airline or leasing company will order the A318OEO. It's too big for the job. Apparantly the A319 has practically the same running costs but has several more seats to raise the revenue. And if the A319 is too big, cheaper Embraers can be found. Much cheaper Fokkers if you don't mind going 2nd hand.

Member for

14 years 5 months

Posts: 1,101

It seems that A318OEO - defined as any A318 which is not the nonexistent NEO - has a total of 4 orders.
In January-April 2012, net orders +1. 1 cancellation, 2 gross orders - both from private customers.

E195 simply will not approach the performance of A318, with its mere 2200 nm range and needing 2200 m runway for that. As well as being 95 cm narrower than A318, while CSeries is mere 41 cm narrower.

How does the takeoff distance of an abused/lightly loaded A319 compare against 318? I have not heard of 319 having steep approach capability.

Profile picture for user tenthije

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 4,887

It seems that A318OEO - defined as any A318 which is not the nonexistent NEO - has a total of 4 orders.
Still not following you. So you say the A318OEO is the original A318? The A318"classic" if you will? If that is the case, it's not competitive at all. As I already mentioned, several have already been scapped since it is more valuable as a spare parts source for A319s and A320s.