Adam Smith

In many cases, the larger derivative of another aircraft, or legacy aircraft sticking around the fleet, have filled those gaps. For instance, AA and UA both have large fleets of 319s (both) and 73Gs (UA only). They also have a sizeable capacity gap between 76-seat RJs and those, although those aircraft are configured with fewer seats (128 AA, 126UA) than AC's 223s, so it's a bit smaller jump. DL also as also gone on many times about the value of having jets in that bracket, which is why they've kept the 717s and ordered a bunch of 221s. Meanwhile, in Europe, airlines have held on to their E90/E95s, and some are ordering the 295. LX is even operating E90s, 290s, 295s, 221s, and 223s all at the same time (although how that makes sense, I have no idea). So it's not as though there's zero way for any airline to make money with aircraft offering between 76 and 137 seats.

Obviously not, but recent trends in airline orders have demonstrated a limit to economies of scale with aircraft types, and at 45, the 223 fleet would be getting pretty big.

That's not at all what I was talking about. None of those aircraft need to be replaced soon, and if they do, presumably it will be with new E75s or something like that.

D582

A 221 in AC config would have probably around 115-117 seats. If filling a 223 with a 221’s worth of pax doesn’t really have a substantial increase in operating costs compared to an actual 221 then they likely deemed it’s not worth to have.

entropy

I suspect the operational cost differential isn't so great to justify the additional type.

I enjoyed flying on the CS300 a few times, both in front and back. Hopefully they can do YYZ-SNA on it in the future

Leyland1989

That's the exact reason why the -100 is sold so poorly.

It has its niche, (e.g. LCY ops) but the seat count is too close to -300.
The opening cost savings is minimal, for a bit extra capital cost, a -300 will give you the opportunity to sell a few more seats (or lower the average cost/seat to boost sales to give you a higher overall profit). Despite in the same family, having a larger pool of the same equipment will still give you more flexibility to maximize utilisation, including last minute equipment change.

787-8 has the same problem.

Stranger

Meanwhile, talk about a 225 is getting louder. Although for AB, that would cut significantly into the 320 market.

Leyland1989

A223 (and A320neo) has effectively killed off the A319neo.

A321NEO/LR/XLR has been the sales leader in the past few years in the A320 family.

As long as the A220 family continue to gain prominence and become profitable, Airbus should have no problems letting the A220-500 to take A320's place. They are more happy to sell more A321 or even the A322 if it ever happens, at a higher margin.

A320 will still have an edge in longer range route when the capacity of the A321 is not needed (same can be said about the A319, but the market has proven otherwise)
Both families can coexist and move up slightly in size occupancying different places in the market.

Stranger

Don't hold your breath.

The 223 is really a 320 replacement. Too big for most US routes operated with E75 or CR9s.

Stranger

Seems like Airbus might be getting serious about a 220-500. But possibly renamed A221...

And possibly with composite wings.

https://theaircurrent.com/aircraft-d...me-into-focus/

visitor

Already has composite wings (made in Belfast). Option is whether they will modify them - I would hazard that would likely require some fairly expensive tooling, process, equipment modification as well as testing over and above the cost of a fuselage stretch by adding a section. Highly unlikely they would revert to an aluminum wing - track record for composite wings is pretty compelling.

theBeachBoy

Love the TCA livery it made me happy to board it today

The Lev

Was flying out of ZRH a few weeks back and noticed a couple of forlorn LX A220's missing their engines. A fair number of airlines have been reporting issues with low time-on-wing for the GTF.

Anyone have info on whether AC is also having these issues with their A220 fleet?

foothills county flier

I believe they have 3 parked because of the engine shortage issue.

briantoronto

C-GUPK last seen on the trackers in YMX in May.
C-GROV last seen on the trackers in YUL late last year.
C-GUPG last seen on the trackers in YUL in April.
C-GWUS last seen on the trackers in YUL in June.

StuMcIlwain

Are those parked because of technical issues or a lack of pilots?

Adam Smith

The A220 engines have required major maintenance at significantly shorter intervals than had been forecasted by P&W. P&W had not set up sufficient maintenance capacity to handle these maintenance requirements, so there are a lot of A220s around the world that are flyable but waiting for engine maintenance. Here's a story from Airways about it.