Why the Airbus A220 might be DOOMED!

[@MentourNow]

Get an Exclusive NordVPN deal here ➼ nordvpn.com/mentournow It's completely risk-free with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee! ✌

[@mycosys]

TY for choosing a reputable sponsor

[@mycosys]

@Chunkieta Nope, just an Engineer who is informed

[@Hunter_Bidens_Crackpipe_]

​@@mycosysPut your tongue back in your mouth

[@2point7182818284590]

@@mycosysI guess you must be joking? Their infinity counter markting scam which no reputable company would ever dare to pull off isn't even legal in the EU.

[@surelyyeah]

@@mycosyssurfshark is wayyy cheaper and better so mwa sponsor

[@exp2745]

Still quite miffed what Boeing did to Bombardier with the C-Series. Focus on competing rather than taking out other companies and perhaps their recent troubles might have never arrisen...

[@j_taylor]

Yes, I think Boeing's focus on breaking other companies and directing money to investors, instead of investing in and improving themselves, was part of the same business mentality.

[@alanolley7286]

America did the same with Avro Canada.Also put spooks on the labour Government to kill the TSR2.They don't like competition.

[@rorykeegan1895]

Boeing played the man, not the ball. Deserves everything rotten coming their way frankly.

[@AuralioCabal-nl8gi]

@@j_taylor Boeing with ULA can't even compete with Space X.

[@bricekoirokpi9954]

Shame on Boeing

[@ryanlittleton5615]

The A220 is my favorite current gen aircraft. It's like a baby A350 with the spirit of the 757.

[@tonymcflattie2450]

Kind of a pig in climbing, especially when using derated climb power. Climb 2 or climb 1

[@j_taylor]

​@@tonymcflattie2450Aren't derated takeoffs specifically about using only enough power to get the job done? The pilots can throttle up any time.

[@GeoStreber]

I had the chance to fly on an A350 and an A220 on the same day last year. From GRU-->CDG and then CDG-->CPH. The other direction two weeks earlier I flew 737 and 777. The airbus planes are far superior, and the A220 was just a delight (even though the seats gave me back pain due to lack of lumbar support)

[@ryanlittleton5615]

@@GeoStreber Makes sense both of those models are considerably older.

[@ryanlittleton5615]

@@tonymcflattie2450 Is that right? Do you fly her?

[@BJ-qr2bj]

I love the new Breeze A220s. As a passenger the plane is quiet, and very comfortable with large windows, large seats, excellent climate control systems, and ability to serve short airfields with long haul service.

[@PJWestfield]

The Air Canada A220s are very nice as well. The 2-3 seat configuration reminds me of the MD-80s. I honestly love the A220s.

[@AsmarterWorld]

Yeah but still it’s very low when you are tall it’s not as good as 320. Also the third passenger on the 3 seat raw when the luggage compartments are open are breaking their heads on it 😊

[@WillReims-s2s]

@@AsmarterWorld I am 6'1" (1.85 m) and always sit window side. Did not bother me at all. Suffice to say that you can ask to be seated somewhere else when making reservation.

[@Dave5843-d9m]

My car roof is very low. I have to get low to avoid hitting my head. Why is that any different to aircraft passenger seats beneath the overhead storage.

[@gandydancer9710]

@@Dave5843-d9m " Why is that any different to aircraft passenger seats beneath the overhead storage[?]" How big is your car compared with an airliner?

[@sblack48]

$5.4 billion is “staggering “ compared to initial estimates, but it’s still a fraction of what Boeing or Airbus would spend on a clean sheet twin jet. I have seen numbers for the 787 as high as $40 billion. Given the fact that it was a clean sheet design, out first under wing engine configuration, our first fbw aircraft and our first aircraft with composite primary structure, the fact that we tested and certified it in about 2 years was an incredible accomplishment. We all knew the initial estimates were completely unrealistic. So in the context of the industry as a whole 5 or even 7 billion is still dirt cheap for what has turned out to be a phenomenal aircraft. Pilots and passengers and airline accountants all love it. If we could just get the PW engines to run reliably it would be close to perfect.

[@texasabbott]

Almost all the A220's have PW1500G engines with upgraded components and are resuming service with up to 7 flights a day and increased time on wing. Aircraft with upgraded engines include former Egyptair A220's, some of which are destined for Breeze Airways. Delta, Jet Blue and Air Canada each have a small number of grounded A220's awaiting engines with upgraded parts, or are ready to fly but lack trained crews.

[@sblack48]

@@texasabbott I still hear about lots of engine issues in service although I don’t follow it closely. We had a catastrophic uncontained rotor burst during the test program, luckily on the ground. We had several other engine failures or shut downs during the program. We never had that experience on any of the dozen other programs I worked on over the years. And this was supposedly a CERTIFIED engine! It was and continues to be the Achilles heel of the program. I think the different variants on Airbus and Embraer aircraft have their own issues. I hope they finally get it all sorted out. I can’t imagine that PW has made any profit on this program. They must be paying heavy penalties to operators. I think one operator has even decided to sell all of their a220s because of the engine issues. Was it Egyptian Air?

[@Afrocanuk]

@@sblack48 Very interesting. Bombardier have been in the aircraft industry since 1942. Perhaps its time they develop their own engines. After all, they know where improvements are needed.

[@sblack48]

@@Afrocanuk Bombardier bought Canadair in 1986. I’m unaware of any involvement in the aircraft industry prior to that. If you are considering continuity between Canadair and Bombardier, which is certainly a valid way of looking at it, they go back to Canadian Vickers which started building flying boats in 1923

[@gandydancer9710]

"Pilots and passengers and airline accountants all love it. " In what universe? Did you watch the video? Airbus is flushing the plane's (highly subsidized) development costs down the toilet and it's a dead-end pilot-training wise..

[@MetalTeamster]

I think the A 220 is a wonderful aircraft. No mcas , the doors stay shut

[@MentourNow]

Haha! Yeah.

[@layeththesmacketh]

😂 "...the doors stay shut." - shots fired.

[@sobhansonicofficial9640]

Same

[@cruisinguy6024]

Despite being a pretty ignorant comment I bet you think you’re clever.

[@natus99]

and it is also very comfortable, quiet inside and on top of it - just looks great.

[@Jumpzehh]

The A220 is honestly wildly underrated. QANTAS Link is in the process of replacing all their dash 8s with A220s for all their regional domestic routes. And jetstar regularly operates A320s and A220s. I've flown sydney to launceston regularly and ended up in an A220 one week and an A320 the next. Clearly there's a market and need for both. I think alot of the appeal of the A220 is that it's a regional jet which has the capacity to do even more. Edit: Lol at the people who think jetstar doesn't operate A220s. I guarantee that they do. I know what an A220 looks like and I know how to read a safety card. And yes the A220 is replacing the 717s for now, but i bet they'll eventually replace the dash 8s. The current route replaced by the A220 was a dash 8.

[@MentourNow]

Yes, it’s an awesome aircraft there is no question about that. This video is more about its future

[@AnetaMihaylova-d6f]

​@MentourNow the way it goes Airbus won't have any future competition. So I won't say they it will fade away anytime soon

[@AviationEdition1]

JetStar doesn't?

[@texasabbott]

The A220 is a medium-haul aircraft, not a regional jet.

[@stickynorth]

@@texasabbott Bingo! Trans-Atlantic service from London City is possible on paper with the 100 variant... And if Toronto City had been allowed to expand it would already be a wildly popular route... Thanks Trudeau!

[@MilwaukeeWY]

I’m watching this as I’m sitting in a JetBlue A220. I usually fly United or Southwest and usually on a 737 NG. This aircraft is a breath of fresh air compared to the other narrow bodies. It seems to me to be a perfect replacement for the old 717. While I would be sad to see this design prematurely phased out, I have often wondered about how it would fit into Airbus’ commonality strategy, and that’s leaving aside the production headaches. Great video as usual, Petter!

[@behindthen0thing525]

Are you still sitting in one

[@MetalTeamster]

Of course, it has Canadian dna ....ehhh

[@mikewaterfield3599]

Actually, she’s more comparable to the ERJ145 or the larger CRJs

[@MilwaukeeWY]

@@mikewaterfield3599Not even close. Much larger aircraft.

[@mikewaterfield3599]

@@MilwaukeeWY yes, however designed for short hauling. Its not always about size. Intended mission profiles matter.

[@meowmeow2759]

I worked at the company that designed and built the cowl anti ice valves, an extreme piece of engineering. Used a poppet valve and a sleeve valve in series with each other, if the poppet valve failed the sleeve valve would take over with zero delay or change in regulation. Works really well together and one of the only kind in its industry. We thought the program was going to die when Trump implemented the tariffs, as it was our first modern bleed air valve in any large jet since we were mainly focused on military and bizjet.

[@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis]

That’s quite interesting! I wonder if Real Engineering might want to make a video explaining how it works.

[@meowmeow2759]

@@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis there is a patent on the tech so I'm not sure if my previous company would even allow anyone outside of them and their partners to know any of the details.

[@jeremybarker7577]

@@meowmeow2759 Having done a bit of searching my guess is that it may be either US patent application 14/801276 or US patent application 14/823345

[@FlightSimulatorXATC]

That’s really cool engineering. I fly the 220 in the states and really enjoy it. We had a remedy for the #4 bearing for quite a while… we switched the cowl anti-ice on above FL250 so that the bearing would remain lubricated. Nifty solution to keep it working.

[@pilotbenny]

dude this system is aweseome, we had a R bleed inop so we were running off of the L bleed, since we couldnt go above 31000 we couldnt get above some weather, went through a cloud and the WAI/CAI came on. the L PCE door came open and the system literally didnt act any different for icing, super cool to see work in real life not just theory

[@bernardospinelli5588]

I find it rather strange that Embraer E-jets are the main competitors of the A220 and Embraer is not mentioned even once in this video

[@arnaldopellizzaro3381]

Some morons fail to recognize that E is a far better company with better products.

[@seiscaneco68]

We braziians are used to be lobbied out of major discussions, breaktroughs, awards and recognition. Research Santos Dumont, the french brazilian that actually invented the airplane. You will feel sorry for the puny little kites the wrigth brothers catapulted at great pains...

[@dashcan8479]

Brazil vs. Canada and Brazil won

[@fluffybabypolliwog]

@@seiscaneco68 Jingoism at its finest. 🚫

[@piloto_loco]

@@TELLISFLY who in the world would ever fly from NYC to Vancouver??🤣

[@sachaguilhemjouan2082]

Something I think a lot of people don't tend to see concerning the A220 is how mismanaged the whole program was. Bombardier went through a few waves of short-term hiring/firing employees. On one particular period of layoffs, the board of directors decided to award a bonus package to themselves... All the while taking money from the provincial and federal governments. On top of that, the company's rail transportation arm was in complete disarray. They ended up selling it to Alsthom. Bombardier has always been ambitious, which the CSeries certainly was; add to that incompetence from the higher ups (and the sales team who arguably DID try dumping the aircraft, as Boeing alleged), it's no wonder they had to divest themselves from their greatest potential earner. Boeing may be a scummy company now, and I'm not trying to defend them, but Bombardier deserves some of the blame for this debacle. Look at Embraer, they seem to be doing just fine!

[@gpaull2]

Im Canadian and I feel the same way. Not only because of the waste of my tax dollars, but I’ve seen Bombardier’s incompetence first hand. I also got to tour the plant and see the prototype C Series first hand while it was underdevelopment. I’ve also had the displeasure of working on Q400’s. They are garbage compared to 737 NGs.

[@jfmezei]

Not quite that way. The Rail division had been doing very well. Bombardier Cimmedial Aviation nearly banjrupted the whole company about 2003 because it mishandled how airlines would react to 9-11 and all the subsequent chapter 11 and mergers. And after it et $875m by selling its original business (skidoos etc), it then restarted C-Series but that isn't all. It also started the Lear 85 and Global 8500 jet programems AT THE SAME TIME. The C-Series was an order magnitude larger than anything Bombardier had ever built, so adding new clear seat business jets, 2 of them at same time caused severe indigestion. And when C-Series was delayed in part due to engine explosion, it ran out of cash and forced its liquidation. Prior to that, the cash to find all 3 airplane project came from the rail division who did not invest to make its production more productive and did not invest to be able to produce equipment from all the contracts that it got, and as a result, just about all its rail contracts ended up with late deliveries, and substandard quality which resulted in penalties that made Bombardier Transportation also lose money isnstead of subsidize the development of the jets. When the Québec government took on the C-Series as a serapare company with 49% ownership, the Caisse de Dépôt (CDPQ) also helped to keep Bombardier afloat by inject capital to buy 30% of Bombardier Transportation (trains), except they had a clause requiring guaranteed dividends for a money losing company. So instead of investing the money to fix production that money went back to CDPQ. Meanwhile, knowing it has set Bombardier Transportation on a path to doom, it conviniently arranged for Alstom to bid on it and Bombardier had to accept because it could not afford to either buy out the CDPQ stake, or continue to pay those dividends to CDPQ. CDPQ converted its 30% of a bankrupted company into 18% of Alstom. (ironically, all the Bombardier operations/contracts Alstom inherited has resulted in Alstom losing money). Had CDPQ injected money in Transportation without dividends, it is likely Bombardier would have kept it and would still exist as a meaningful company instread of a severely shunken company awaiting for someone to buy it so that money could go to creditros.

[@AuralioCabal-nl8gi]

Boeing " scummy" ? They are beyond that, Boeing is a murderer , almost 400 people lost their lives , now 2 US astronauts have delayed return flight to boot, and current 737 MAX problems go on , Boeing dumping allegations vs Bombardier was protectionism at best. Woe be to Boeing, and it will continue!

[@AuralioCabal-nl8gi]

@@jfmezei I'm from Toronto , Bombardier Streetcar and TTC subway projects were delayed , overpriced,and riddled with cost overruns and problems.

[@AuralioCabal-nl8gi]

Boeing is beyond " scummy" they are also murderers , almost 400 people lost their lives due to 737 MAX crashes!

[@jessiharm528]

I work as a flight attendant for a regional at operates bombardier and Breyers, and we often get deadheaded around and non-rubbed by our mainline partners. My favorite plane to fly on to date is an airbus 220. I have only flown in one once, but it was the most enjoyable, comfortable, and aesthetically pleasing experience. Well, the most enjoyable experience once you get past airbus hydraulic noises. 😂😂😂

[@sobobwas6871]

But the whole rationale for the A220 is that it is a generation ahead of B737/A320. This means the replacement for A320 can be centred around a larger size eg A321 as the smaller size A220-300/500 covers that part of the market.

[@plektosgaming]

Well, WAS. The thing is that Bombardier had the right idea but couldn't make it work. Which was to scale up business jets and make a small passenger jet with most of the advantages and a lower cost. But then Airbus came in and stopped all future momentum as it conflicts with their designs. They got the technology they wanted out of the deal and that was that. Produce the A220 as is and nothing beyond it. Embraer, though, did do this exact thing and made it work with their E-Jet family. Those fill a very good niche in the market and cost far less than anything Airbus or Boeing make, making it attractive to smaller companies as well. It's basically a modern version of the old MD planes that small carriers loved. Airbus and Boeing aren't even in that market any more, trying to build larger "do anything" planes it seems. The interesting part is where the 195 comes in, though. It's almost an A220 in capacity and size, being the already stretched version. So there is some potential market share to also take away from Airbus as the backlog of A220 orders is frighteningly long at this point. Which points to the A220 being even further squeezed out of the game.

[@AmurTiger]

@@plektosgaming The E-Jets are fundamentally different from the A220, the E-Jets best effort has 68% of the range of an A220-300 with the 195 being half. The reduced range makes it drastically less suitable for the point-to-point model that the A220 is made to thrive in and are instead more of a doubling down on the hub and spoke model with shorter ranged low capacity aircraft feeding larger hubs with larger aircraft. If Embraer want to squeeze the A220 out then the 195 and likely the whole E-Jet family are not up to the task given the gulf of difference in range there and the A220 hasn't even been trying to push that further yet.

[@sobobwas6871]

@@plektosgaming what technology did Airbus get out of the deal? Be specific please. What future momentum was lost? Airbus will only develop more when the unit cost is at breakeven, I think they have said the 500 is when and not if.

[@plektosgaming]

@@AmurTiger You would think that, but the 190 has a 2800 nm range vs the A220's 3400. If you don't need to cross large oceans, that extra 600nm is not worth the extra 25 million for the larger A220. Given that Southwest has half of its fleet as newer Max-8s, it already has all the long-distance planes it will ever need (3800 nmn). What it needs is smaller and more efficient planes that it can mix in to handle the many shorter routes. It makes zero sense to fill a plane half full for a flight from Los Angeles to Phoenix with a plane capable of flying across the Atlantic. Versus using a smaller plane for these short direct flights. The problem with the A220 is that it IS a great plane, but the backlog puts Southwest behind the 8-ball. They can't wait a decade to fill out their older fleet. They are almost required to buy out another airline just to get planes at this point, and none are selling. So.. What made their business model work was being a launch customer for the Boeing models, meaning they got most of the production per month. Boeing imploding really screwed them.

[@Infiltator2]

@@plektosgaming Thats just a full load of nonsense you put in there

[@JohnMckeown-dl2cl]

Actually, Airbus shouldn't have to receive compensation from Boeing in the Spirit deal. They should send Boeing a thank you note. The gift of the CS100/A220 has it's roots with Boeing in it's back story. The tariff issue and troubles Bombardier had were at the behest of Boeing. They tried everything they could to kill the aircraft before it was built because they saw it as competition for 737 sales. This included influencing suppliers not do business with Bombardier and getting high tariffs on their aircraft to prevent sales in the US. Some of this is what ballooned the development costs and caused delays as well as caused strains in the US-Canada relationship. Just another bad move by Boeing management.

[@jantjarks7946]

The 1 billion is the well deserved punishment for turning from free trade to protectionism on a dime. And if Belfast is shut down by Boeing, Airbus will build its own wing production plant, according to their own specifications. It sure won't cost as much. 😉

[@tomriley5790]

Yes they drove Bombardier into Airbus's arms.

[@nichendrix]

It's not about if it should or shouldn't, but it has the power to impose or not. Boeing is on shaky legs, if Airbus don't buy, they would have to pay more for that factory to later either close or sell it cheaper, there's no scenario where Boeing buys Spirit with it turn out as a profit. For a very long time they would still suffer losses. In this situation the factory makes parts of wings for a plane that is an afterthought in terms of sales for Airbus, and at the speed they are building new assembly lines, I don't doubt they could make a wing assembly line quicker than Boeing sells Ou repurpose the Belfast assembly line.

[@KuK137]

So what? The fact crasheing FAFOd once doesn't mean they should be off the hook next time, if anything, they should pay reparations to Airbus for illegal business practices right now!

[@nichendrix]

@@KuK137 also the Embraer-Boeing deal was also a questionable practice by Boeing.

[@BNU30C]

I’ve never been on a widebody, but the A220 is the nicest modern narrowbody I’ve been on by far. It’s not even close. The airlines clearly like it and several have made it clear that they want the stretch. It would be a shame to see it not come to fruition.

[@senianns9522]

It's the financial people and latterly the accounts that will dictate the future of A220.

[@planesandbikes7353]

you've been on an E195? They are very roomy, comfortable with good overhead space. Such a big step up from the CRJ and Q400. But I have yet to find a flight using a A220

[@jessebrook1688]

@@planesandbikes7353 The A220 has been a lot more successful with European carriers than with North American ones so far, because the Embraer has this market sewn up. I don't expect that to change.

[@BNU30C]

@@planesandbikes7353 I’ve been on the E190 or whatever it is that Skywest flies for United, it was also very nice. The American CRJ 900s are also nice.

[@JBM425]

@@jessebrook1688Delta is actually the largest operator of the A220 family with 71 currently in service, followed by JetBlue with 31. Delta has orders for another 145 and JetBlue has 100 more on the way. While Air Baltic currently operates 47 A220s, both JetBlue and even Breeze will ultimately have larger fleets of those.

[@andresvillarreal9271]

The big question here is whether Airbus and Boeing want to be engineering companies or money-moving companies. Airbus is solving an engineering problem with the A220, and many end-customers are receiving the benefit. That is what an engineering company should be doing. On the other hand, Boeing was playing the money-moving game, looking for profit independently of the making of aircraft, and sometimes at the expense of the aircraft. And we are seeing the long-term results for Boeing. Even if the Airbus A220 is doomed to stop production in a decade, it is a great engineering solution for a real problem that the end clients need. If this is the end result of it, it will still be an engineering success.

[@leonardschoyen]

And even if the A220 series ultimately gives way for something based on the A320 because of the pilot type rating, creating a cross-fleet type rating system is an engineering solution that customers will benefit from.

[@clarification007]

All Quebec made design from A to Z.

[@johnhaller5851]

Yeah, no. Airbus had nothing to do with the engineering of the A220, it was money play. It was nearly complete when they purchased the design and facilities from Bombardier.

[@andresvillarreal9271]

@@johnhaller5851 Recognizing a solid piece of engineering and investing in it for its engineering value is still a solid engineering decision. Buying and selling companies to get fringe benefits, like less regulations and less taxes, for example, is making money by moving it. The Chicago School of Economics is a movement that emphasizes the money maneuvers over the "real economy", or the economy based on the production of products and services. It bankrupted several countries, including Chile and Argentina, and innumerable companies in these countries and others. Boeing seems to have been more interested in making money and Airbus has been more interested in making airplanes, with or without an association with Bombardier.

[@macflod]

@@johnhaller5851i think it was even in production actually

[@markdc1145]

Recently flew the 220 for the first time. While the experience wasn't that much different to other narrow bodies of this size, it was definitely an upgrade from the smaller Embraers and even the 737s.

[@ihmcallister]

The A220-300 is already there to replace the A319. If Airbus develops the -500, they will have a worthy, far more efficient, A320/737 successor. Airlines (e.g. Delta) with large fleets of A319/320 ceo variants will need replacements long before Airbus or Boeing could possibly bring any new design to the market, even if Boeing survives at all.

[@MentourNow]

JetBlue's legacy Airbus fleet was more A320s, less A321s. Their newer models are all A321neos -- zero A320neos, and they have a lot of A220-300 orders, more than their older fleet of Embraer E190s. Air France has a similar situation with its A319/320/321 fleet. So it's not unreasonable to say that the A220-300 is "stealing" some sales from the A320 already, even without the stretch version available.

[@ihmcallister]

@@MentourNow Absolutely, and any new carrier looking for that size and capability range is going to consider the A220-300. Also, if Airbus can place more A220s, A320 neo orders may decline some, but without so many line positions allocated to the A320neo, it might make crucial A321XLR deliveries easier.

[@vbscript2]

@@ihmcallister The problem is that selling an A220-300 instead of an A320neo loses money for Airbus. Great for airlines, not great for Airbus. As far as Delta specifically is concerned, though, I think they already have pretty much all of their A320/A319ceo replacements on order. They are a mix of A220-300s, A321neos, and 737s.

[@oldcynic6964]

@@vbscript2 Surely the "solution" for Airbus is to increase the price of the 220 (for new orders) to the point where it actually breaks even, or even better, to the point where is makes a decent profit ? Then they will not have to worry about cannibalizing 320neo sales.

[@vbscript2]

@@oldcynic6964 That assumes that airlines would want to buy it at that higher price. Considering how much smaller of a backlog it already has than the 737 or A320neo, that doesn't seem like an especially safe assumption. The entire history of the A220's sales is less than one fifth of the backlog alone of the 737 MAX. The 220's backlog is a tenth or less of either the 737 MAX or the A320neo. It struggled to attract customers from the beginning, which, in addition to the ballooning development costs, led to its precarious financial situation. Attempting to get orders flowing by selling frames far below cost was what prompted Boeing's trade complaint against them. If Airbus increases the price of the 220 enough to make it actually as profitable per sale as the 320, the most likely result would just be the complete death of the program with few or no new orders.

[@finalascent]

My favorite narrowbody - I just flew two back to back A220 segments - Jetblue, then Breeze - great flights, excellent aircraft!

[@dw8931]

The only reason why the A220 could be in jeopardy were profitability issues. This, however, should be manageable for Airbus. That assumed, it puts Airbus into the confortable position of just waiting what thier customers will choose in the future, the A320 or a stretched A220. I would expect that it could be an easy calculation for the operators to invest into pilot training and to finance it with the better fuel economy of the A220. Especially if Boeing should really be able to design something competitive, a longer A220 would come handy for Airbus, as their pattern is already available and proved not to crash or lose some parts during flight.

[@yves2932]

Replacing the A320 with the A220-stretch would require a huge rampup of production capacity. We're currently seeing how hard that is for a much smaller step up in the A320 program.

[@kevikiru]

@@yves2932 Not really. They would maybe, just maybe need to increase to 150% to 200% of current production output as the A320 only accounts for about 7% of new orders as compared to A321 in the family.

[@AJR-07]

I mean airbus has emphasized that its not an if but when that this aircraft gets a stretch

[@MentourNow]

Yes, but the question is about what happens after that

[@Fay7666]

​@@MentourNow Double decker A220, duh.

[@stephenspackman5573]

@@Fay7666 Quad decker. We simplify boarding procedures by pre-inserting passengers into flexible tubes, then slurping them into the plane noodle-wise. Forward thinking!

[@Fay7666]

​@@stephenspackman5573 Sometimes I do wonder if something like the loading systems used in cargo planes could be adapted to load a passenger cabin like that. No, not putting people into LD3s but like having everyone pre-seated and the seats just slot in. It would just be simpler to have assigned boarding numbers like Southwest (but with seating assigned)... but on-rails seating sounds cooler IMO.

[@stephenspackman5573]

@@Fay7666 I can see we have similar minds.

[@samuelitooooo]

Bombardier's history would be interesting to look at. Obviously they gave away the C-series, but more recently they sold off their entire rail division to Alstom, and Alstom is now the second largest train maker in the world.

[@JonDoe-ln6nl]

Didn’t know that. Shame. Always loved Bom, even (especially?) as a Canadian company (and I’m American!)

[@AbiySinta]

But for what

[@osasunaitor]

Bombardier's business model seems to be designing amazing stuff and then selling it. They also sold the regional jet CRJ series to Mitsubishi. About the rail division, I'm a train driver who operates with the former Bombardier Traxx electric locomotives often. Let me tell you that it's the best locomotive type I have driven, and I'm certified in 5 different types. They are reliable and comfortable to drive, very well designed overall. The ones I drive are 15 years old already and after more than 1 million kms of service still performing spectacularly, it's a quality product. So sad that they got out of the business.

[@Artyomthewalrus]

Also it's history is real interesting. The company started after a blizzard prevented the founder from reaching a hospital in time, leading to his son dying from appendicitis. Because of this, bombardier invented the first snowmobile. Many of his first products ended up being snow ambulances/school busses/etc. He had to shift his business focus after the government mandated clearing the roads of snow, leading to his sales being cut in half overnight. Creating tracked snowplows, and all terrain vehicles for mining, forestry, etc. After the founder died, they shifted into more recreational vehicles, and introduced the sea-doo, essentially a snowmobile for the water. Was the biggest jetski brand for a long while. Then they added 3 wheeled motorcycles. The majority of the company's history has been snow/AT/recreational vehicles. Aircraft was a relatively recent addition (in the 80s or 90s I believe). They were far too late to the game to compete with the established competition. They do make some of the nicest snowmobiles IMO - them things are wild.

[@bruceketcheson4877]

being second largest has nothing to do with being profitable

[@ifyoudontcough]

Just flew the A220-300, love the cabin. Flown 3, one with Air Baltic in 2017 and 2 with Breeze.

[@TheScottbb1]

Proudly Canadian. I’m glad the program didn’t die but it’s still sad our aviation industry couldn’t keep up with protectionist American policies helping Boeing. I’m still proud of our fully domestic business jets (Global series)! Top of the line.

[@Chorizo727]

Gulfstream is better

[@TheScottbb1]

@@Chorizo727 not anymore. Needs an update

[@Vampire.Vegan.]

Recently flew on JetBlue's A220 from Austin to Boston. Such a beautiful aircraft. Hope its future is secured.

[@MentourNow]

It’s a lovely aircraft

[@claudeboulay4296]

@@MentourNow But the video suggest clean sheet aircraft have no future besause il is different than others Airbus. Nobody said that the A350 had no future because it is different of the A330. With this video nobody will develop a new aircraft. Airbus knew all the differences in 2017 and even before de certification. I like your others video but not this one. And what Aiibus do if Southwest give an order for 400 A220 to replace the 737-700.

[@Vampire.Vegan.]

@@MentourNow and a testament to the brilliant, hardworking team at Spirit AeroSystems Belfast.

[@Sam-il7xw]

just took the a220 with jetblue from jfk to Vancouver honestly love it more then a320 series and 737 series cabin is wat more roomy and the seats were super comfortable. Plus the engines sounded amazing!

[@LAXERJK]

The engines sound sooo good spooling up 🥰

[@jfmezei]

Bombardier started to toy with the C-Series back in late 1990s. (Similar to Airbus toying with a 747 competitor for years before launching A3XX). It was driven by two trends: Airlines wanted bigger regional jets (henced Bombardier had to stretch the CRJ from the 200 to 700- to 900 and 1000 and that was beyond the desirability of a long very narrow tube aircraft with tail mounted engines. But back then, Bombardier was seill producing CRJ200s by the dozens and fuselage sectiosn from Belfast couldn't come fast enough so we got to see AN124s deliverying them at Dorval to up production. Thos were the heydays. The other aspect driving Bombardier towrads to the C-Series project was the DC-9 replacement market. Yes, Boeing (by that point) had the MD95/717, but it was basically a DC-9 with modern cockpit with updated engines but would be very easy to bveat with a clean sheet design. The USA was a huge DC-9/MD8x replacement market, with Northwest being the target launch customer, having a HUGE fleet of original DC-9s. Then came 9-11. Airbus and Boeing immediatly realized the impact, and dropped plans to increase production or scaled back production. Bombardier bragged that it would not be affected and increased production of CRJ200 and the then new CRJ-700. And was very silent when large customers started to defer deliveries and eventually cancel orders for the CRJ200s. Meanwhile, the C-Series initial/concept design was chugging along. Bombardier Commercial aircraft started to lose a lot of money from overproduction and CRJ200 cancellations. Its face saving way was to induce a strike which would lower production and save BBD lots of money. But that was not enough and the whole company risked bankruptcy and in 2003, it raised $875m by spinning off its original roots (snowmobiles, snow clearing equipment and now included summer equipment such as seadoos and ATVs). The descendants of Armand Bombardier (founder of company) the Beaudoin family still own controlling interest in Bombardier Inc and purchased 35% of BRP (recreational producuts didn't have the rights to use the Bombardier name, but were allowed to get the sprocket logo ( representing the big sprokets that drive the tracks in snow mobiles). However, that put a pause on the C-Series as Bombardier (as a whole) regrouped, and Bombardier Commercial Aviation had to deal with shutting down the CRJ200 and finding a place for the overproduced units. Then 2 more blows came: Northwest entered bankruptcy and exited as part of Delta Airliens with huge surplus of planes so the need to replace those old DC-9s evaporated. Secondly, American Airlines, who had been interested i the C-Series couldn't wait and bought a whole bunch of 737s which covered the needs of replacing its MD8x fleet. So Bombardier lost 2 huge launch customers. Advance a few years, and Pratt & Whitney unveils the geared turbofan project, and Bombardier jumps on them and gets an exclusive for its C-series for a few years giving it a big edge over anyone else. And it then find Swiss and Air Baltic as launch customers and proceeds with project. But it is important to remember that this is no when design started, design started way before in the late 1990s with on-off work. (The delay in getting C-Series in the air meant its exclusive ran out and Mitsubishi got in and later Airbus for its 320neo project). A big even that sealed Bombardier's fate was an uncontained engine failure of the P&W geared turbofan in ay 2014 which delayed project by a long long time causing Bombardier to run out of cash. Air transportation safety investigation A14Q0068 Uncontained turbine rotor failure Bombardier Inc. BD-500-1A10 (C Series CS100), C-FBCS Montréal International (Mirabel) Airport, Quebec 29 May 2014 you can look for it on the www tsb gc ca web site. Bombardier helped debuig the GTF design, at the cost of its own life.

[@HarmanatorNYC]

Late 90s is still 20 years newer than any other narrow body jet on the market. A320 series being an 80s launch and the 737 going back to the 60s. That's 20 years of tech innovation on the smallest competitor airframe and remember the A318 is way to heavy for its capacity. Boeing also tried to buy their way into this market again (see 717) with the Embrair acquisition that was blocked.

[@jfmezei]

@@HarmanatorNYC Embraer transaction suspended due to coming financial strain caused by COVID and 737 suspension, it was not regulatory. In terms of the C-Series, while it was optimized for that size which is what gives it the advantage over 737 or 320 shrinks. It may be 20 years younger, but its technology is on par with the 320 neo, of 737 max. It has standard aluminium fuselage and composite wings (and the layup process is conventional with fabric as opposed to robot application of tape.)

[@HarmanatorNYC]

@@jfmezei ultimately that was true but in 2018 the merger was blocked by the Brazil AGU / Solicitor general. That got overturned as government overreach in lat 2019. The two sides then spent 2019 not getting to closure in the MTA and yes gave up in April 2020 when lockdown occurred. I'm not entirely wrong here.

[@jfmezei]

@@HarmanatorNYC Thanks. Had not been aware Brazil regulator had tried to block it. Thought is was signed sealed, but the "delivered" cancelled at last minute.

[@spinkid2000]

The 900 and 1000 series weren't disliked for the long narrow tube, but the major U.S. carriers signed pilot contracts that capped Regional Jets at 76 seats so that made operating them unprofitable in the largest market.

[@Inkling777]

Sad to think the A220 might not have a long and prosperous future. It's at the top of my 'want to fly on' list. The real failure is perhaps that Bombardier had to sell it off. While it may not fit into the Airbus family, it could have been integrated into that of Bombardier's, being the largest of their smaller shuttle aircraft.

[@ytzpilot]

To be honest Bombardier was smart to get out of Passenger Airliners, just like it was the best decision MacDonald Douglas ever made, both companies made great passenger aircraft but both companies have stronger futures abandoning them. Passenger Airliners are too risky

[@timothystamm3200]

​@ytzpilot that's a problem, we don't have roads that go everywhere, and cars are not space efficient anyway. We need publicly accessible and publicly ticketed transit options including Airlines for anything across water and further than High Speed Rail's current effective range and for any route without it or a bus. If it comes down to sure profits and ever rising profits and risk reduction then the whole public transit industry risks becoming like the old American Railroads. Many of them would be shut down and only the most sure bet freight routes would remain and the same for passenger routes. Hell you can see this in America with the state of Greyhound as well as Delta, United, and American constantly flirting with bankruptcy, Southwest having its archaic booking system, the ultra low cost carriers treating passengers like cargo and also flirting with bankruptcy, and Boeing being in the state it's in. This is the problem with pure unadulterated capitalism: It usually results in a race to the bottom unless the actors can discipline themselves to enough profit, and trying to make money by serving their customers and thus attacting more of them, and not rampant cost cutting.

[@thewoode1050]

Nothing in the US economy is "pure unadulterated capitalism" it's heavily regulated, controlled as anything and expensive because politicians constantly interfere

[@stickynorth]

Maybe DeHavilland Canada can become a co-venture partner again like it did with Q400 and add another assembly line at the new factory/airport being built east of Calgary as we speak... Alberta is hungry for all jobs, all people, all growth so it would be a great fit.. Especially since house prices may be the highest in Calgary itself but east of the city? Some of the lowest in Canada... Seriously... Delia, AB about 45 minutes away was literally giving away free lots to those willing to build...

[@gpaull2]

You’d think that the east with its high unemployment would want the work more…guess that would cut into the equalization payments from those hard working Albertans.

[@juanpablo681]

Shutting down (or even throttling production) the A220 by Airbus would be a HUGE mistake. The A320 that I fly today (all Neo fleet) is a wonderful aircraft but it is a rehash of 1980 technology. Of course it has been made more efficient and reliable over time, but the writing is on the wall, it is a technological dead end eventually. What, Airbus is going to make a NeoNeo with further engine enhancements and more exotic wingtips? Boeing already went down that road with the 737 without very happy results. Plus, look at A320 sales… isn’t the A319Neo sitting dead on the water already? Isn’t the A321 outselling the A320 already? If this trend continues, a further stretched a220-500 or whatever might give a killing blow to the A320Neo if it can provide a significantly lower CASM/CASK. The problem is for Airbus to ramp-up production for the A220 because there is a future there, but none in and A320NewNeo, NeoNeo, MaxNeo or whatever they might want to call it. The A220 might be a weird child within Airbus’s line-up for sure, but the efficiency and technological benefits far, far outweigh the costs for airlines to train/retrain crews. The crews might not like it, though, because they might get stuck on the A220 for too long, but that is something minor. Airbus has to use it’s weight to renegotiate with providers to EXPAND production, not to curtail it. Even bringing out a LEAP alternative engine might further push sales of an already successful order book; 900 units and counting is a pretty healthy number. And there is one more thing, an idea I already expressed here; what if Embraer “fattens” its fantastic E2 in a 2x3 or even 3x3 seating arrangement and offers that around to Lockheed or Northrop with a factory site in the US? That would not only crush the Max, it could potentially threaten the A320 Neo, and whatever Airbus does… they have to keep and eye on Embraer, too.

[@Infiltator2]

Thats why Airbus does the oppsite. They just wanto to first build the structure around the aircraft and not the aircraft first. They just build up a flight test centre in mirabel. It has killed the A319 but that isn't a problem for Airbus. And as you said with the Neo the sales from the A321 skyrocketed and are now about 70%. Thats also why for the the rate of 75 its the same share in production. The A220 is in terms of supply chain just not ready to deliver more and a stretch is therefore not sensible at the moment but they know the potential it has. But also for now the priority is on the a320 family ramp upbecause that brings more profit which is needed for future developments and ramp up for the A220

[@vaska00762]

Embraer is near dominant in the STOL airliner market. The reason the likes of the E170/175 and the E190/195 sell well with certain airlines is simply because it can do the routes to weird, small airports without much fuss. It's why KLM Cityhopper moved to them from Fokkers and why Lufthansa CityLine moved from BAe 146 and the CRJ. I don't know if Embraer wants to enter into a market which could prove unfruitful, especially if airlines which have already aligned tightly to Airbus or Boeing really want to go through the mess of changing all the maintenance and crew training.

[@GustavoOliveira-hq2dr]

@@vaska00762 Embraer has actually just started to pitch to airlines that they should buy 2 E2s instead of one A320 or 737 since they have a shorter delivery date on the models and they are also ramping up production.

[@GeekmanCA]

There's an airline in Canada called Porter which is making a big splash right now by using those Embraer jets to run low cost point-to-point routes between major cities - something that's very appealing to cost-conscious travellers. One wonders what might have been if WestJet hadn't been sold on the MAX family and instead went in on the 220...

[@Dexter037S4]

@@GeekmanCA Porter isn't low-cost, it's around the same as the others, it's just the Service hasn't been Spirit-ified in response to the 52nd bajillion attempt at ULCCs in a Country where ULCCs don't work.

[@andyortaaslan80]

I worked on the C Series development in Mirabel for 5 years. But Petter, let's get a few facts straight. That development price tag of $5.5 billion is not staggering for a clean sheet or the 7 years to get it certified. Please compare that to the 787, 777X (still under development), and even the A350. When you say the A220 is being sold at a loss, there are two solutions, reduce the cost or increase the price, or how about both? Given that airlines prefer the economics of the A220-300 over the A319neo or the 737-7, they should be willing to pay a price premium in exchange for the lower operating costs and attracting customers. I think that with the A220-500 they will attain those sought cost saving with the greater scale of the 3 variants. The A220-500 will have the same systems, even the APU as the smaller variants that makes it a much smaller development cost while it open the opportunity for the greater scale. The A220-500 hits the sweet-spot of the single aisle market, it will have a huge impact to Boeing. Finally, Boeing has a huge credibility challenger and a poor talent pool to get a 737 replacement . Just look at how long it is taking them to develop a 777 variant.

[@putneg97]

Bravo mon chum. De quoi être fier avoir travaillé la dessus!

[@claudeboulay4296]

Merci pour ces informations, comme cette avion est le futur, il est normal qu'il ait un grand futur.

[@yummysatay]

Increasing the production rate will go a long way in helping the solution. That hasn't been easy last few years due to covid, engine durability issues, supply chains, unions, etc. To ramp up production, you also need PW to ramp up their production and they also have their own supply chain issues. Spirit to ramp up their wing production. Don't know if the sale of Spirit is going to affect this ramping process (at least short term wise).

[@mitchdaks6363]

the price tag was staggering, because it was not accounted for at the outset, and quite literally drove its OEM out of the business. would BBD have embarked on the project if the ultimate cost had been known? Would government investment had been as forthcoming? No one knows these answers, we only know that the end result was not desireable. Airbus is certainly trying to reduce production cost, but that is easier said than done. Asking customers to pay more... well, that isn't exactly easy either, when it must compete with a less performant, but cheaper EMB offering, along with cheap and available used A320's... which have the large advantage of Airbus commonality. The CS is fantastic, but there are commerical realities that it cannot escape.

[@kevikiru]

You have said to compare the price tag to 787, 777X and A350. One problem though, those are all widebody aircraft. And they come with an increased cost of development. It would have been more appropriate to compare it to smaller rivals and justify the cost by the fact that Bombardier were not experience in non-regional aircraft, the fact that it was clean sheet design and sourcing problems.

[@richardpeugeot6062]

A good friend of mine flies the 220 for JetBlue here in the states. We have several planes parked for required inspections related to the powder coating issue on the P&W 1524G blades. As you stated in your video, it is a very efficient airplane but we are having some “teething” issues with it at our airline. Always appreciate your detailed reports Petter!

[@NomenNescio99]

As a passenger I absolutely love going on the a220. Much better comfort than the A3xx or Boeing 737.

[@KuK137]

LOLno, crasheing, sure, but you apparently never saw modern Airbus up close never mind flying one...

[@EvoraGT430]

@@KuK137 Hey troll, I flew Airbus for 14 years and Boeings for 11 and the guy is right. You are truly pathetic.

[@planesandbikes7353]

737Max is really roomy and nice inside. huge overhead bins too. big step up from the 727 NG wow

[@NomenNescio99]

@@planesandbikes7353 I never been a pax on 737max, nice to hear it's improved. The 787 is definitely my preferred long haul choice, so I'm not hating on Boeing.

[@jheasley2]

I had the misfortune of flying an A220 from ATL to BUR the other week. It was tiny, amazingly loud in the cabin (both engine noise and slipstream), had ridiculously small overhead space for a “non-regional” jet, and cramped lavatories. And that was in First! Almost 5 hours in that thing and I was wishing for an Embraer 175! No it’s not comparable to a 737 or an 320 class jet. It’s a fancied up regional jet good for a couple hours max. It is by no means fit to be a main line jet and I’m sure the ONLY reason Delta and other airlines are buying it is because Airbus is offering them discounts and so they can torture their passengers by using it on overly long flights. It doesn’t fit the needs for a main line jet and doesn’t fit into Airbus’ current offerings. I suspect the current version of the thing will be the last and good riddance.

[@laurentiupopa5001]

I flew on the Bombardier before being renamed as A220, and I absolutely loved it. I loved it more than the Embraer.

[@chuckyskunk]

Same here. My first flight was on Air Baltic and I had never heard of the CS100. When I saw the plane I thought it was a Sukhoi Superjet.😂

[@scottrosen9308]

I love it when I see that I’ll be flying on an A220. Normally it’s JetBlue. Comfortable, not overcrowded and I love the two seat side (no middle seats). I hope they can work things out and deliver more A220s to more airlines. …And, 12 hours later…I just boarded an A220 on ITA! 😊

[@EmpReb]

A Southwest Airlines appears to save the day until it forces the A220 to stay around to long 50 years from now. XD

[@MentourNow]

😂

[@plektosgaming]

This all depends on which airline Southwest may or may not buy out. There are currently 900+ orders for the aircraft from 30 carriers. Which is a worrying 5 years before you see even one plane, given current production numbers and Southwest being put at the back of the list at this point. And another 5 to finish their production run, if not longer, as they need 400+ planes. I think Southwest missed the "A220 bus" as it were and might be forced to look at other options, as everyone else got there first.

[@oadka]

@@plektosgaming I would say with an order that big Airbus would just scale up and open another line. 400 out of a total of 1300 orders is huge

[@plektosgaming]

@@oadka I don't think so. The A220 is a one-off certification for pilots and is a dead-end for Airbus. They won't spend another billion or so to build more capacity. Their reply will be wait or buy a REAL airbus. The A320 - they will add more capacity as that's their future line/path forward. ALL of the small regional carriers are struggling as the race to build "do everything" jets by Airbus and Boeing isn't exactly what they want. What they need is a replacement for the MD-90. Not what Airbus and Boeing are offering. Note - currently, there are two companies that could make one. Embraer and Antonov. Every other company is military- focused. (and Antonov has other fish to fry right now) I mention Embraer as it would just require a change to single class with the 195-E2 to fit up to 144 PAX. Just what the small carriers need. Currently they aren't making huge numbers or have a huge backlog, so I suspect an order for 400 would put SW at the front of the list - and start delivering about 100 planes a year. Now. Not in 2030.

[@texasabbott]

What do you think about the takeoff performance and the climb capability?

[@matthewmatthew638]

5:34 The GTF issues are also affecting the A220, although not to as severe an extent as the 320neos, on-wing time is just not where it needs to be and with the shitshow that is Pratt trying to produce more spare GTFs and parts/LLPs as well as fulfill existing backlogs during a supply chain crunch, this has meant delays on new deliveries (for the A220) as well as supremely long wait times to get the engines fixed when they inevitably need a check-up (which is happening too soon). Pratt needs to sort their shit out for the A220 to be as successful as it ought to be.

[@MentourNow]

Thanks!

[@ztevkonrad6329]

Regarding the Belfast plant owned by Spirit for the A220 wings theres a significant difference from most separate airframe suppliers plants. Spirit owns the IP for their unique dry fibre with resin infusion carbon fibre wing construction. When Airbus got control of the Cseries project all they got was the final assembly plant at Mirabel and the IP for the plane as a whole for C$1. Any airframe construction came separately and came from different factories owned by Bombardier around Montreal, Belfast and I believe part of the fuselage came from China. Airbus bought the major assemblies plants at Montreal for close to$600 mill. The Belfast plant and critically the IP for the unique dry fibre placement went to Spirit - who also bought the Bombardier plant at Prestwick Scotland for A320 parts (flaps etc). Spirit also own a plant at Kidston NC which makes the major wing spars for the A350 wing , again in carbon fibre but the traditional resin infused wet fibre placement. I also note that according to Spirits financials this A350 work also loses money, which raises the question is any carbon fibre wing from an outside supplier profitable ? The special feature of dry fibre placement and then the resin added when the wing parts -skins, spars etc -are ready for the autoclave , is this is the pathway for out of autoclave carbon fibre airframe structures . This is the capital investment required at Belfast

[@grahamariss2111]

My expectation is that we will see a A220 Neo with an Airbus cockpit architecture, with the A320 family replacement having a centre of gravity around a A321 sized aircraft. The A220 will live on, because the price point for smaller aircraft needs to be lower so will favour an upgraded existing design over an all new design.

[@MentourNow]

That would create A220s with two different typeratings, so pilots currently flying the A220 would need retraining for the newer one. I'm not sure that would please the airlines.

[@blastercorps]

@@MentourNow Would that not make it easier for A320 pilots to move over or have operations flexibility? When there are many more A320 planes and pilots than there are for A220 I would think that would be attractive enough. Come to think of it, does A220 share any type ratings with other Bombardier models?

[@MichaEl-fr9pm]

If the A220 is not developed any further airlines need another plane. So the cockpit has no future either way

[@2adamast]

If a change of cockpit is a breaking point then indeed the A220 is a dead end. The cockpit price is probably one of the many reasons the plane doesn't break even.

[@grahamariss2111]

@@MentourNow True, but there are many more A320 along with A330,A350vand A380 pilots out there and many more airlines with A320 that will need replacing in the coming decade.

[@andyvu4577]

A220-500 is coming with 180seats and range around 3900nm. It may replace a320 neo in the future

[@erictremblay4940]

And less many A320neo sold frees up slots for more A321neo (more profitable) to be produced. A win-win for Airbus.

[@jantjarks7946]

There's a simple question. How much does it cost to turn the A220, with a -500 version in mind, into a true Airbus? And how much would a complete new development of a true Airbus A220 cost? Both numbers will have a massive influence on the fate of this plane. And the CFM Rise is knocking on the door too. It's quite likely that the A220 will remain Airbus odd sibling, with only the absolute necessary changes being done.

[@Elementalism]

Too much when considering a -500 would compete directly with Airbus's A320 NEO.

[@alannichols7025]

I'd love a definition of a true airbus - designed in Europe? Does Quebec count as part of France😅

[@fasteddiegr]

Very interesting, as always. But the overall premise, that the 220 is doomed because it will not merge into the new Airbus family that will come in ten years or so, is not so important when you see that major airlines are already demanding more 220s and stretched 220s in spite of the non-similar cockpit interface and, more significantly, that the new family is most likely to be slightly larger than the present 320 family leaving even more room for the 220 to develop until the new technologies slide down to the smaller aircraft sizes. I would guess that the 220 series has at least a good 20 years ahead of it. If that means it is in a dead end then maybe that's OK. Doomed it's not.

[@NicolaW72]

Indeed, exactly. The A 220 is forming even now an own Family, which will probably be extended.

[@M167A1]

It's too much of a problem for the other Airbus products.. kinda like the 717

[@Elementalism]

The plane has been available for order for 15 years and only 906 confirmed orders. Are airlines really demanding this in great numbers? Meanwhile the A320NEO which has been available for order since a bit after 2009 has 4103 confirmed orders.

[@fasteddiegr]

the aircraft are not competitors, they are complimentary. The successor to the A320neo series will be a bit larger leaving plenty of room for the A220 series including the -500.

[@NicolaW72]

@@fasteddiegr That´s exactly the point. And Airbus has even started to work for the Successor of the A 320neo series.

[@user-iz3gv5vo6b]

Yeah, you're wrong. There are always costs and difficulties in ramping up production, but Airbus has a growing backlog of orders and is doing its best to fulfill them. They will eventually work out these issues and this model will be profitable. With the problems Boeing is facing, especially with its 737 Max, but also with their 787, Boeing has enough of its own issues to address before causing any more for Airbus. Airbus will continue to gain market share. The A220's competition is as much with Embraer as it is with Boeing, particularly the A195-E2.

[@davidgamper6726]

It will depend on Airbus strategy, but if the A220 can be made more efficiently, I don't see why it can't co-exist with other larger Airbus types. Could the crew rating issue be solved somehow?

[@davidgamper6726]

Anyway it's a great piece of Canadian engineering..bravo

[@schanche1965]

Petter, please don't ever think your in-depth analysis of the future if your industry is too much like hard work, am sure a great many people including myself really enjoy the education brought by your videos, keep it up!

[@RobMiami787]

The a220 is such a terrific plane its hard to imagine it not being hugely successful. Such a storied past to where it is today. I like to point out the 3 design clues the 220 has used that mimic boeing: Same-similar nose - 787 No main gear doors - 737 Screwdriver tail cone - 777

[@Waldo801]

True, but to be fair for the "no main gear doors", this is something Bombardier (and Canadair previously) had already been doing for decades with the Challenger 600 series, the CRJ family and also the Challenger 300 series.

[@RobMiami787]

@@Waldo801 good to know

[@chrismckellar9350]

I am not sure what the issue is. The A220 was designed for a specific market segment that Boeing didn't cater for after the production of the B717 stopped. The A220 fits between the Embraer E-Jet 2's and the A320neo's. The A220 compliments the A321neo/lr/xlr and Airbus knows this hence grabbing the CSeries programme and since the A220 airframe is a clean sheet design, gives a production life of 30 years or possibility longer allowing for the A220neo. Yes, the A320 in all variants needs updating and a next generation of the A320 can be based on the technology gained from the CSeries/A220 programme using latest in manufacturing and engine technology.

[@Elementalism]

I think an issue is up-gauging. The A220 slots in with the 717, DC9, MD80, 737 Classics. Planes designed 50 years ago for a market that was smaller. Today the 737-800\-8 and A320\321 are the base aircraft fleets and routes are designed around. So it is a plane that is in kind of a no-mans land right now in terms of role. Too big for the regionals, too small for mainline.

[@chrismckellar9350]

@@Elementalism - The A220 is fulling a void left by the B717/DC9/MD80, Those airlines who are using the A220 are using its operational flexibility especially what Qantas is planning to do with their A220 both domestically and international short haul operations.

[@Elementalism]

@@chrismckellar9350 That may be in some scenarios. My point is this is a mainline aircraft with a capacity for the 1980\90s. The base mainline aircraft for airlines is the 737-800 to A321. That is why the A220 has ~900 orders in 15 years. While the A320\321NEO and 737 MAX combine for 16,777 orders.

[@chrismckellar9350]

@@Elementalism - I aware of that A320/A321neo and B737 MAX variants are mainline aircraft due to their various variants over the last 40 odd years. The A220 is a new aircraft type which is still developing its own markets so there is no reason why the A220 can't be a mainline aircraft.

[@philipgrice1026]

Airbus should use their digital design tools to produce an 'Airbus' style cockpit to replace the existing one in the A220, making the type easy for existing 'Airbus' trained pilots to cross train quickly. They can then leave the earliest A220s 'orphans' but still viable for smaller single aircraft type airlines. Some creative leasing programs would help here.

[@jfmezei]

Changing the A220 cockpit to be an Airbuys cockpit would require the aircraft undergoe full certification process as a new type aircraft. Existing A220 pilots would not be allowed to fly the version with Airbus cockpit and vice versa.

[@johnwinkler5361]

It is not only the cockpit but all the systems. The FBW system is completely different compared to an Airbus. It is more similar to the 777 actually

[@zenjempire]

I have been flying the A220-300 for the past 6 years and having been a pilot before on almost all B737 variants , Airbus 320 and Embraer 195, this is the best of all of them, yes all points raised by @mentourpilot are real facts , to kill or keep this type is upon what Airbus will decide at the end of the day.

[@AnetaMihaylova-d6f]

A 220 isn't dead end .737MAX is dead end

[@michaelreeves8164]

I hope.

[@erictremblay4940]

So true

[@MrGus.1]

Please! Don't tell SWA.

[@johnwoodall3791]

Dear Petter. Thankyou for this Post. I am sure you know that here in Australia Qantas has Purchased the A220 for Domestic Regional Services & Possibly Short Haul Overseas Runs Depending on ETOP's Ratings on Certain Routes. I recently went for a ride on the Qantas 717-200 which is the Aircraft the A220 will Replace & then Compared it to a a ride on the A220. The Things that Strike you are Immediate such as the Overall Airframe Structure, The Instrumentation & Flight Controls as well as The Chosen Power Plants & the list would Extend well beyond this I am sure. From an All Important Passenger Perspective is the On Board Experience in terms of Comfort, Noise Levels & Speed / Duration of Flight compared to the 717. A Very Worthwhile Exercise for me. The Two Jets are from a Differing Era & despite any Upgrades on the Qantas Link 717 Aircraft they remain just that, An Ageing Platform of Aircraft where as the A220 is a Quantum Leap Ahead. The Fuel Efficiency Itself is Par for the Course for this Modern Aircraft. I loved the 717 but we need to keep up to Date & field what is Considered to be a Worthwhile Aircraft & Modern Airframe with a Reliability to Match. Others may have been considered including Embraer as they Operate already on Our Regional Network. The Airbus A220 would have been Chosen I believe not because Qantas were looking for a Perspective Deal with Airbus Industries Alone given that we have Purchased the A350 & for which we are awaiting our First of type from Airbus Industries but Instead For all the Right Reasons. The reason why Qantas opted to Choose the Airbus A220 is that taken by all Airlines & again that underpins that we already know. I think the A220 has a Viable Market Place. Respectfully John

[@williamcosgrove1558]

Thank you, this is something I have not thought of. I enjoy flying in the A220 as a passenger over some of the other types. As always, wonderful job and analysis.

[@MentourNow]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@EM_life-gr8sn]

Was a captain on this wonderful airplane - really loved it. Spoilers weren’t effective enough but I guess thats why they were called spoilers and not speedbrakes! Now a 787 Captain - another awesome airplane. Many similarities between the two. I now call the 220 a mini 787.

[@dev_theysleader3184]

Love you mentour, watching your videos really inspires me to become a pilot and I learnt so much from your channel.

[@MentourNow]

Happy to hear that! That’s awesome

[@drbichat5229]

One reason for Airbus to acquire the 220 model is that its sell to US carriers is not subjected to import tariffs because it is made in North America

[@felixli5279]

One reason for Airbus to *build & deliver* the *320 family since 2016 from its Alabama FAL* is that it's sell to US carriers is not subjected to import tariffs because it is made in North America.... Sorry about the economic facts re tariffs thru paraphrasing...

[@josephmagana6235]

@@felixli5279 Both A320s and A220s are assembled in the Alabama FAL.

[@dwrb321]

I really hope we get to see an A220-500

[@wmwadsworth]

Not happening , work for tier 1 supplier … is not on table ever , from Airbus-Canada

[@clarification007]

I agree! But there non mention if they are still thinking about the A220-500! About the A220-300XLR?

[@maxxq]

I just watched a walk-through tour of the manufacturing plant in Mirabel for the A220, and one thing that blew my mind was the middle-seat on every A220 is actually an inch larger than the 2 on either side. This way, it gives the person in the middle a little compensation for having people on both sides. That's quite a huge improvement as compared to current planes.

[@deanwood1338]

I would say it’s needs a stretch to keep airlines happy and get more orders. And Neo version to potentially avoid the P&W issues. But i can’t see airbus moving away from the 220 anytime soon. It has a lot of potential and airbus will make it profitable soon enough.

[@texasabbott]

Almost all the A220's have received engines with upgraded components, and Airfleets shows very few of them (one or two out of a fleet of 32 to 60) are now parked, considering that some of them are doing anywhere between 3 to 7 flights a day. Even Egyptair's former A220 fleet (a leased fleet previously grounded for engine troubles) got upgraded engine parts and is ready to fly for a new customer!

[@mohamedalisomji5392]

As a former Bombardier employee (albeit on the transportation side) I am well aware of the emotional impact this aircraft had on our company. It would be very sad to see an incredible aircraft like this be ditched.

[@peonwarrior]

I’m flying this plane very often with Swiss air, departing from Geneva. Love it! Very easy to distinguish because of its peculiar “whale noise” ✈️

[@ohheyitskevinc]

Great video as always Petter! Imagine if Boeing had looked at the Bombardier instead of developing the plane I won’t mention. Airbus may be losing money on the A220, but not as much as Boeing are currently. Plus Southwest might have some new planes right now. Love the CFM Leap engine variant on these and the huge windows. Just missing yokes ;) That said - some early A220 flight crew seats do have the seat cut out to support a yoke - presumably due to CRJs having a yoke and Bombardier originally designing with a yoke in mind.

[@SteveBlancoMusicianWarrior]

I love the A220. It's become my favorite aircraft and I fly in them a lot with JetBlue. It's really beautiful inside and out.

[@danecowan678]

A separate point somewhat unrelated to the video, There is an almost weekly flight to and from Belfast International Airport to transport these A220 wings. It’s operated by Antonov Airlines and we regularly see the majestic Antonov 124 arriving into our little airport. Fantastic for Av-geeks, especially when it’s only A320s and 737s that fly out of our Airport. Bit of a treat!

[@MentourNow]

Great information, thanks!

[@edwinleyda7883]

Instead of breaking up Spirit, Boeing buys the 220 from Airbus and then has a modern replacement for the 737.

[@MentourNow]

😀😀

[@BoitumeloMabena-jj2kf]

And Rename it the 797

[@stephenpollard3739]

Yeah...no...they had their chance.....chose to be childishly spiteful instead.

[@mp4373]

God forbid

[@ETTechnologis]

I think it would make total sense for Airbus to build the A220-500. Let's imagine a little bit: First, they need to solve the problem with the cockpit you already mentioned. If they managed to get an Airbus like cockpit in the A220, it would solve some of the problems when switching between aircraft, although system wise it will always be an Bombardier aircraft. Second, let's imagine that the new aircraft, Airbus is building and which you mentioned, has roughly the size of the A321 nowadays. What a perfect lineup that would be! You got the ultra efficient A220 in a range up to ~160-170 Pax. Then you have the new development replacing old A321s, as well as the complete middle of the marked segment, as well as smaller widebody aircraft such as A330-200s. And at the end, there is still the really modern A350 (maybe someday as NEO). And for that new development, Airbus could get inspired by the newly designed Bombardier C Series. They could use the best from two worlds, the Airbus world (represented by the A350) and the complete newly thought C-Series. IMHO the A230-500 would make perfect sense to build!

[@andrewy.3636]

Given that A220 is fly-by-wire. Why not simply offer a A220 version with a A320 cockpit? With 320 controls? With A320 flight dynamics? Pilor training compatibility problem solved!

[@rayyacht4342]

Commonality includes more. All the aircraft systems should behave and be handled similar. NC and NNC must be almost identical. Otherwise the 1 week changeover is impossible, maybe you can cut the 2 month T/R to a 1,5 month, but no way you could have mixed operations

[@kenoliver8913]

@@rayyacht4342 So it only takes two months to certify a 320 pilot for the 220? That makes having dual-certifed pilots pretty cheap. I thnk it is the lack of commonality in MAINTENANCE that is a bigger issue.

[@trevorrobinson2941]

Because they don’t fit

[@josephmagana6235]

Just because they're both fly-by-wire doesn't mean you can just emulate one on top of the other like a piece of software. That would be a major re-design, basically a new aircraft.

[@eheis5]

Also worth noting Ben Smith recently shared their A220 engines are struggling to hit 25% of planned time on wing. I think there's a promising future for A220 with smaller or emerging airlines with less institutional inertia to fight against. We already saw the E Jets E2 and Mitsubishi fall victim to this in the US.

[@syedputra5955]

Make a long range version of A220. Up to 10 flight hours.

[@goblinkok]

Was an AMT on the A220 since 2016. My favorite plane to maintain and fly on. Hope she lives on for a long time.

[@os9706]

I really like the a220. It’s small, modern, elegant. I’d love to fly it one day

[@gargoyle7863]

I opened booking website in another tab right now. 🤣

[@os9706]

@@gargoyle7863 I meant to fly it as a pilot but yeah it would be a great experience as a passenger too

[@MinksMotorsandMore]

As a mechanic who works on these aircraft regulary (I am on break right now from working on one) they have their issues and lots of mechanics hate them. I see them as this generation's A320, in the sense tbat they are conplelty different from any commercial plane right now and have lots of teething issues. I enjoy their maintenence features, and i see the PW1500Gs as the Achilles heel right now, with some other system issues that will all be worked out to normal things in about 5 years. If your team would like a first hand account from a maintainer I'd love to provide more details.

[@juliogonzo2718]

Why are they hated? Are they difficult to work on or just different?

[@MinksMotorsandMore]

@@juliogonzo2718 I think they are great in a lot of ways for maintenance, but there are quirks they have that no other plane has. For instance when troubleshooting problems, the manuals want you to be very precise on how to configure the plane for the test. Almost all the systems talk to each other, and if one is not configured correctly the test will fail and you will be ripping your hair out after trying it 4 or 5 times. This is in contrast to an A320 or B737, where you simply swap known good components around to see if things work again, or just throwing whatever parts the manual says to throw at it. These aircraft are still very new in aircraft terms (The A320 is a 40yr old design and there are aircraft over 30yrs old flying right now) so there are many things just unknown to most technicians and it's a completely different way of thinking on how to work on them, so there's lots of frustration if you try what works on other planes.

[@MS940]

A220 is nicely thought out plane which didn't exist before. Ideal for flights within capacity in Europe or other similar range. Travelled to Northern Africa with one few months ago.

[@glennshaw5718]

Nice airplane but with teething problems when introduced. We were on a Delta A220 that taxiied out at Dallas for a flight to Detroit. We had an indication of brake overheat, and parked for 20 minutes while the brakes cooled. Then we got a warning that the toilet tanks were full. We taxiied back to the gate and were put on another A220. We got to Detroit OK.

[@mike499]

Alot of amazing aircraft didn't last even if they were better than other or more advanced, Lockheed 1011 comes to mind

[@aleksanderkawinski7366]

This is absolutely the best and the most practical aircraft ever created and the fact that once again we here that there is some trouble with it's place on a market is just an evidence that we don't deserve good things.

[@patrlcksreaLView]

Im a simple man: Sees mentour pilots new video: clicks to watch

[@MentourNow]

And here I am, appreciating! 💕

[@jamesengland7461]

Likewise

[@ChinnuWoW]

How would a complex man be any different in this case? It’s a simple task, there’s no complex way to do it.

[@go4ride]

The basic problem with any plane less than 150 or so seats is that it costs about as much to develop and manufacture as a larger plane, but will never generate enough revenue in its entire life to pay for that, even if its trip operating costs are attractive.

[@PassiveSmoking]

0:33 Huh, I didn't know that there was a Spirit factory where Harland and Wolff used to be!

[@kennztube]

It’s beside Harland and Wolff shipyard, they’ve both been there for over one hundred years and are still side by side, I worked at both.

[@normanstewart7130]

Formerly Bombardier, formerly Short Brothers and Harland (or Short and Harland for short😂). Harland and Wolff had a half share at the beginning. My father worked there during the Second World War, making Stirling bombers.

[@rorykeegan1895]

Short Bros, site next door ... not Harland & Wolff.

[@wwsoapbox6921]

While it may look like a no-brainer to stick with the old Airbus cockpit, we see what happened to Boeing deciding to stretch additional dollars out of the 737. The wise long term choice is to go the newer A220 cockpit; let the chips fall where they may.

[@KensaiLazarus]

I feel it will go the way of the 717. It will survive as long as it sells and will be axed as soon as it doesn't

[@alannichols7025]

Sorta like the A380 - except the C300 will make money eventually even if it doesn't last.

[@michaellicko2746]

This is really similar to the situation with Boeing and the 717 after the merger with McDonnell-Douglas. It was part of the Boeing lineup, but was never really a “Boeing” plane, and they eventually discontinued it.

[@claudeboulay4296]

The huge difference the 717 first flight 1999 and the DC9 first flight 1965. The 717 is an old conception 34 years . The A220 is a clean sheet with the first flight with Swiss in 2016.

[@braketurnaccelerate]

With the A320 replacement about a decade away, the A220 will get a stretch and hopefully a NEO (CFM's, please), and take over all 318/319, and most of the 320 market, while the 321 will compete for longer haul single aisle routes. The A320 replacement is likely going to grow. I would expect it to be as large as 321 is currently, and it might even stretch to compete with the hole left by the 757. That leaves room for the A220 to take over all 318/319/320 and some 321 routes.

[@M167A1]

I don't see it. It's a threat to the 320 and successors. In fairness that they could actually use the 220 as an a320 replacement but only at the expense of a European production line which Airbus will never do in a million years.

[@braketurnaccelerate]

@@M167A1 The number of 321 orders have exceeded 320 orders, with a number of those being 321XLR orders. Airliners are wanting larger single aisles to take over certain widebody routes, and even some international routes. Moving the A320 successor up in size will cover these routes, and even offer the ability to lengthen it further, into the 757 market, and take away even more of the market for under-utilized widebody routes. Making the A320 successor bigger, gives the A220 room to grow. There won't need to be a reason to shutdown any production lines. The A320 successor should be fine being built in the 4 plants (2 EU, 1 USA, 1 China). If anything, the demand for A220's might see the need to expand beyond the 2 plants (1 USA, 1 Canada)

[@TheColinChapman]

the A220 is a nice plane, but most airlines that already own an A320 fleet would rather buy the A319neo instead. less training for the pilots, less stockpiling for spare parts.

[@richardshiggins704]

Well explained . As I remember the C-Series threatened to be stillborn when Trump was president . He increased import tariffs on Canadian products including aircraft . So Bombardier were very happy to offload the commercial division onto Airbus which then produced the A220 series in the USA (Alabama) and thus avoid import tariffs . As a plane I feel it has good prospects though some airlines on shelving their fleets (Egyptair comes to mind) though major legacy carriers (AF) seem committed .

[@kennztube]

It was Boeing who took Bombardier to court over subsidies. The case was an open and shut affair as Boeing do not have an aircraft in the same category.

[@mailgovindpillai]

Those tariffs were later overturned because they had no legitimate basis. The almost 300 percent tariffs on these planes were likely a gimmick by Boeing and the Trump administration to force Bombardier to sell the aircraft to Boeing in very favorable terms. It appears that Bombardier execs got so enraged by this that they decided they would rather give Airbus a controlling stake in c series for free than sell the plane to Boeing. This blew up in Boeing's face so fast!

[@clarification007]

Boeing did everything to assassinate the C-Series. = They lost!

[@rorykeegan1895]

@@kennztube Boeing called the kettle black and Trump made the issue far worse with his ill advised tariffs. Really pleased when the entire episode blew up in Boeing's face and confirmed that Trump is a mindless moron who understands nothing. Serves Boeing right for lashing out when they didn't have too, utter wankers.

[@jfmezei]

At the time of the Boeing tariff in 2017, Airbus was already majority shareholder of CSALP, Bombardier had 30% and Québec 19%. And Québec had already injected the $1b to create/fund CSALP, a separate company to run the C-Series project. By 2018, Bombardier was out of it with Airbus having 75% of project and Québec 25%. Bombardier cease to be able to finance the C-Series circa 2015 requiring the bailout and change of ownership, well before the Boeing tariffs (who was to large extendt due to this bailout). It was no secret Bombardier had taken on way too much at same time and headed to bankruptcy. This is why both Boeing and Airbus refused Bombardier's offers for C-Series. But when Québec invested, and Airbus got in to do marketing and give project credibility, winning that big Delta order, Boeing got scared and went on its tariff lobbying stage.

[@g-3409]

Regarding cockpit similarity, it also pays off when it comes to simulators. One can simulate different aircraft in the same simulator. This lowers costs for smaller companies with multiple aircraft types in their fleet.

[@allanlees299]

It may make excellent medium-term sense for Airbus to retain an old-style cockpit design going forward. But as every tech company discovers eventually, backward compatibility prevents a great deal of essential innovation and eventually customers go elsewhere because the backward-compatible products are so old-fashioned and clunky to use. Of course switching from one CRM to another is trivial compared to adjusting a fleet of aircraft, but ultimately backward compatibility is always a dead-end over the longer term. Airbus may make excellent profits for the next 15 years - and ensure the current crop of executives do extremely well financially as a result - but today's smart move may become 2040's upgrade crisis.

[@jadziadax1969]

Thanks for the video and the blooper, P-p-p-petter!

[@MentourNow]

Haha! Glad you enjoyed it! 💕

[@tomjoseph1444]

When Boeing was trying to knock Douglas down, the bought up all the titanium that they could depriving Douglas. The also bought up all of Douglas' sub contractor time with the proviso that they could not expand their hours to cover the Douglas work. They were also selling 737s basically at cost if the customer would also buy 747s or other wide bodies.

[@TheMrFishnDucks]

You're absolutely right the Cross Crew Qualification is absolutely necessary, hopefully the implement that when they launch the A220 Neo. Airbus must remember what Steve Jobs said "If you don't cannibalize your own sales someone else will". Nice video. Keep up the good work.

[@bussosoren]

Tack vare dig har jag lärt mig massor om säkerhet och prosser. Sånt som jag tidigare har fnys åt. Super bra och hälsningar från Finland!

[@MileHighFlyer]

The A220 will do just fine and could be used as a replacement for several different airplanes...

[@elestromusicgamesfun1101]

Yeah, feel he's being very negative here. Maybe cuz he's a Boeing 737 pilot..

[@fduran6993]

I would say that for an airline that is uniquely focused on narrow jets then the entire family of aircrafts could be A220 having in mind a future stretched version. In the case of a airline with narrows and wide bodies then should be A320 family because of its commonality with A350-330-380. Airbus could have a great advantage in front of Boeing.

[@thoughtful_criticiser]

It maybe better from a cost basis to move wing production from Spirit. Putting at Broughton would have a number of benefits, the key one being transport. The Beluga flies in a few times a week, they could load the 220 wings and take them to Canada or Alabama. I get to see it on finals to Broughton more often. Airbus could re-engineer the flight deck and fly by wire to match the rest of its philosophy, this would make further development more viable. The CFM Rise engines would probably be more efficient on an aircraft designed to maximise their potential, this way kills the 220. No matter where the future takes it, aircraft component production in Belfast is rapidly running out of time. Which is a shame, they brought the world massive Sea planes, the Skyvan, the 330 and 360. Anyone who flew to the Isle of Man in the 80s from Liverpool would have been on one of the latter two. Known as the vomit Comet to we who trained and flew from Liverpool, unpressurised the flight was usually very turbulent at 7000 or 8000 feet, with most passengers in need of one or two of those special bags.

[@MentourNow]

I hear that some of the newer Belugas have ETOPS approvals, which could indicate that someone at Airbus is thinking this way..!

[@ryangjewell]

Still major issues related to the PW1500Gs. There is an immense shortage of serviceable engines at the moment leading to a large number of A220s sitting on the ground awaiting engines.

[@ManzAviation]

The Airbus a220 is one of the best amazing narrow bodies! From its technology to it's cockpit. Sad to see it was sold to airbus.

[@MentourNow]

Well! It’s better than it being cancelled like the Mitsubishi space-jet but sure..

[@Zyo117]

We in Canada can't manage to hold onto aircraft manufacturing it seems.

[@ManzAviation]

@@MentourNow For sure!

[@j_taylor]

I was excited for the C-Series, and kept hoping it would get to market despite Bombardier's management. Well, technically it did.

[@TheBloodhound58]

Another factor was growing dissatisfaction from taxpayers outside of Quebec who were sharing the burden of Bombardier development. This tension affects all industries in Canada as politicians are keenly aware . Rarely do taxpayers outside of Quebec appreciate the development of anything made in Quebec as it feeds into the much touted line that Quebec gets an unfair amount of money from other parts of Canada. This meant less money being available for Bombardier. The design of the C Series is amazing. It was proudly Canadian for those of us who could see the rest of the world consider it a Canadian design. It's a comfortable aircraft for those of us who sit in the back. Air Canada has over 30 of them, and I hope they will continue to buy them.

[@DrDoom-qh6iw]

I recently posted a response to a response to a short video you posted about a year ago on a pilot who planted his cup of coffee on the flight controls of an airplane, right next to engine control levers. This reminded me of a movie plot from a 1964 movie titled "Fate is the Hunter", where a commercial airliner crashes because a cup of coffee is placed on the control console and is spills, eventually causing the plant to crash. It stars iconic actors from the past, Glenn Ford, Rod Taylor and Suzanne Pleshette! I highly recommend it for all you aircraft enthusiasts out there. As the crash takes place early in the movie, the plot revolves around Ford's character, the airline executive, attempting to prove that his friend and pilot who was in command, Taylor, was not the cause of the accident as the media and other executives attack his character in the media and blame him! A theme not uncommon in the modern times!

[@paulqueripel3493]

Wasn't it in the news this week that Boeing and Airbus were in talks about each buying the parts of Spirit they want? Aren't all aircraft developmental dead ends in the long run (apart from the 737 obviously, as Boeing refuses to replace it)?

[@MentourNow]

That’s part of what I discuss in this video

[@MentourNow]

That’s part of what I discuss in this video

[@paulqueripel3493]

​@@MentourNowsorry, I typed that at the start of the video.

[@Inkling777]

Yeah, I've heard that one reason Boeing went with yet another version of the 737 is that over the decades the company and optimized its production to reduce costs. A new aircraft like the A220 does not have that benefit.

[@cruisinguy6024]

Did you consider actually watching the video? 🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️

[@nrml76]

Regardless of it's future or profitability, the A220 has been a remarkable success for Airbus in that it has made Boeing's 737max woes a critical issue by taking away a ''get out of jail free'' card for Boeing. It is very easy to see how Boeing could have used the A220 and stretched versions to replace the 737 cheaply while keeping it's powder dry for the next generation design.

[@Di_RECs_Flights]

On May 21, 2023 you posted a video titled "Why the Airbus A220 might END the A320!"

[@Cursory3]

And that was more than a year ago. Times change.

[@jantjarks7946]

And?

[@MentourNow]

I did! And things could still go that way instead, but time *might* not be in the A220's favour.

[@frankpinmtl]

@@MentourNow Time is everything. You forgot to add that Quebec still owns 25% of the program and Airbus will not do anything with the program until they own it outright. That and the A320 backlog are the largest impediments.

[@judyArsh]

The A220 is just a bonus for Airbus. They can’t build the A220 or the A320 fast enough to fill orders. They have gotten lots of help with manufacturing from various levels of government. When they finish shaking down Boeing over the Spirit plant they will be profitable.

[@CharlesLambert137]

Born and lived in Canada my whole life and used to work as an accountant. With hindsight viewed from Canada, this great aircraft type is a great example of Canadians not understanding their place in the world. Bombardier failed the C Series because they didn't understand the costs and, especially how important productivity is in the modern economy. (Productivity is a significant problem in the macro Canadian economy and it's rooted in Canadian culture.) If they had designed this program with some humility they'd have foreseen Boeing or Airbus purchasing (at least) a stake in this aircraft and, as a part of that, included type compatibility in the design. Of course, this would require making a bet on which company would take that stake. From a pilot's point-of-view, I'm guessing the type is closer to the A230 family than the B737 family. Ultimately, with such large amounts of money involved, it will be finance that dictates the future of the A220. In that case, a brand new type is probably in the making and the A220 will have a long but abbreviated career. Think of the (amazingly awesome) B757.

[@TheRuben_music]

I love air baltic and sas's airbus aircrafts