forgot to bid

I forgot to post the source for that chart:
CSeries beats NEO, A320, 737 on CASM, plane mile costs

It is certainly a pro C-series site but that doesn't mean the numbers are wrong, it's just as bar put it, it's all a bunch of 0s and 1s right now.

Here is an interesting article from them though:

The Globe and Mail of Toronto has this recap of one element of our new Bombardier CSeries Study, and this is the greatest threat we see to BBD is the prospect of a price was initiated by Airbus and Boeing that it cannot hope to win.

As discussed in our new Study, Airbus and Boeing have the ability to make the A319/319neo and 737-700 loss-leaders, should they choose, to out-price the CSeries. With a full family of airplanes, up to and including Very Large Aircraft, Airbus and Boeing can subsidize the A319/319neo and 737-700 either within the A320 and 737 families or as part of deals with the larger brothers.

If one assumes a 25% discount off list prices for CSeries sales (and certainly this could be deeper for all we know), Airbus will have to discount the A319neo a whopping 41% off its list price (including the $6m premium over the legacy A319) just to match the CSeries discount. This discount would not be unprecedented for Airbus, but it’s not something the company wishes to do on a regular basis.

As for Boeing, which so far is resisting the idea of re-engining the 737, it, too, has pricing power afforded it through a family of airplanes. Boeing, and Airbus, also plan to boost production to as much as 40-42 737s and A320s per month. The additional production efficiencies also lend weight to pricing power, as well as being able to flood the market with airplanes at production rates Bombardier can’t match.

forgot to bid

What if Boeing's new 737 replacement is something very radical, such as a single pilot airliner?

Embraer reveals vision for single-pilot airliners

I ask because they could pitch the jet as being "safer" than a two pilot airplane because if backed up by a UAV type system they could land the plane if a pilot became incapacitated or unresponsive and they could provide pilots with a much needed break enroute. And it's cheaper.

Don't gag, just throwing diapers against the wall here and trying to see this from a engineers ROI point of view. We know the CASM on a pilot is rather small especially if it's the FO!

BUT, what if?

johnso29

Considering how long it took(and how much blood) for the FAA & NTSB to consider re-writing rest rules I think it will be a minimum of 50 years before a single pilot airliner would be approved.

forgot to bid

But they've had single pilot corporate jets since the 70s (actually I saw a Citation X being operated single pilot once... shouldn't have been ) and single pilot piston airplanes that are a lot harder to deal with for a lot longer. Give it the technology backup of a predator and you might be able to sell it.

Or just go the simple route and remove a seat:



But think of all of the benefits! Fly with your favorite Captain. No dumb conversations. No Mr. Crabby. Nobody gets antsy as you decide how far you want to til you turn base, pass gas as much as you want... well, don't gamble and lose...

iaflyer

I think 9/11 put that idea to bed. Plus, there's no one else to bring the USA Today when you forget to pick up yours.

Wasatch Phantom

Geez Bar,

Leaving out the acquisition cost makes the numbers bogus.

Years ago I remember a very good friend's Dad tell me that a car's miles per gallon wasn't important. It was the total operating cost that mattered.

A number of years ago Air Transport World had a very interesting article that discussed aircraft operating cost. The general thesis was: When fuel is cheap and interest rates are high you are better off with a gas guzzling 727. But when interest rates are low and fuel is high you are better off with a new generation expensive jet.

I'd really like to see the numbers that reflect the total cost, including the acquisition cost of the aircraft. If manufacturer "A" wants to "give away" their airplanes that has a very significant effect on their relative operating cost vis a vis manufacturer "B", who for the sake of argument wants full list price.

Too Tall

On Boeing's website they have a new United painted 737-800 that they are testing mods for main gear wheel wells and doors, the beacon and some different engines that are supposed to give it 2% less fuel burn. I wonder how that will compare to the 320 NEO. Seems that currently the 737-800 is a bit more efficient than the current A320, perhaps the NEO wont be that drastically more efficient than the 737-800 with the mods.

I also came across an article where a Boeing spokesmen said that there was no way Airbus was going to get a 15% decease in fuel burn with their planed mods (sorry no source to lazy to go find it again). I think Boeing is betting that Airbus won't be able to achieve its calms with the NEO and therefore no need for a 737 redesign, just a guess though.

Too Tall

Am I reading the graph right, that cost per aircraft mile is on the x axis, and that CASM is on y axis? This would show that the CS-300 has the lowest cost per aircraft mile, its CASM is nearly identical to the 320neo and 737-800 and that the CS-100 has the highest CASM.

80ktsClamp

From what boeing has recently released with their next gen 737, I still see that stupid cramped and loud cockpit... it just sits up a bit higher:

80ktsClamp

X is how much it costs to run the aircraft each mile. Y is CASM.

CASM of course will vary a bit as different carriers put different amount of seats with each plane, and as was stated earlier, acquisition costs factored leaves out a big portion of the equation.