Airline Pilot Central Forums - C Series Update, it is the price

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)

- - C Series Update, it is the price (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/66725-c-series-update-price.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 1171228)

DAL operates all of the ground handling for DCI in ATL and other main stations. Many outstations are subcontracted out and they service not just DCI but mainline.

Gate is DAL in all major hubs as well. Only the small outstations have DCI agents.

SLC is still DCI on the E concourse. Just a liitle FYI.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 1171465)

Delta also bills DCI for all that handling, often at above market rates. Its a profit center for many stations. Comair and ASA get charged 750 bucks just to wipe the frost off the wings in the morning. Station managers love it because it really helps their profit and loss.

That's almost as sweet as the "APU warm up" service that last time I checked was around 400 bucks to contract MX. Absolutely insane that they would strss out about a few bucks of pilot pay or a work rule that actually enhances safety but then pee money away on idiotic overpriced things like that and don't bat an eye.

And yes I realize that some planes are sensitive waking up in the cold but I'm talking about 365 days a year including perfect weather with ground air anyway and you get to the plane in the morning and the APU's already been running almost an hour. Then for the next several legs we're supposed to worry about every minute of stopping and starting it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 1170705)

Thank you for replying, and I will reply in kind.

First, I was an RJ driver, but not by choice. Only went to that class after the rug was pulled out post 9-11.

Second, CASM is great but if you have to reduce your price of tickets to fill up a jet, then the overall profit is about the same. CASM is as it states, per seat, and if you have a 100 seat jets that has a CASM equal to a 120 seat jet, the smaller jet is still cheaper to operate because there are less seats.

Third, airline marketing managers do a real poor job over time selling X amount of seats and letting the other ones go empty on routes where a 100 seat jet is the correct answer. We have seen some of this with the MD90. They are dumping seats at the last minute on the internet just to sell em. That breaks the whole model.

The C-Series is an expensive jet, but it will be a game changer. Bombardier needs a Legacy North American lunch customer. I truly believe that its lack of orders is two fold. One is the list price is high, but the larger reason is no Legacy wants to buy it and fly it at mainline and have another Legacy outsource it to the connection lift. As soon as one of these carriers puts their order in and commits to flying it at mainline, its order book will grow.

One of the benefits of this jets is it has a 100 and 130 seat variant. There is talk of a 150 seat variant too. CASM goes down as a jet is lengthened. The 318 and 319 are shorter versions of their original design and by virtue of that fact, have higher CASM's. The C-series is starting with a CASM that is equal to these jets, and as they lengthen it, that CASM will decrease.

You are clueless....as I read all these posts I find that you guys are in love with the idea of a jet...typical rj driver response!

Why would Delta, US Air, United and soon in the future American, all operates of a 319 and soon to operate 319 NEO's which have a 16% to 19% lower fuel burn than the current 319 want a new launch C series aircraft??? No commonality in parts, different type rating, new launch problems all new aircraft have????WHY????

Answer is ....They don't!!!!! None are looking at it and none are going to buy it....Period!!!

Airbus and Boeing have won! The C series and 319 NEO do the same mission at the same cost...CASM!!!! except the 319 has 95%+ parts commonality same type rating and all of these airline already have a business relationship with airbus

Why would you introduce a different type when you already have or will have a 319 and soon a 319 NEO in the fleet????WHY????

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluemonday (Post 1171780)

FYI, acl65pilot is a Delta pilot. So is Bucking Bar. They are not RJ drivers.

C Series Update:

Quote:

CSeries weight validated and will be on spec at EIS.
Aluminum Lithium is better on fatigue than normal aluminum, much better on corrosion. Combine with composites, D check goes to 15 years. C check improved by 15%.
787 first airplane with All-digital architecture, CSeries is second.
Last all-new narrowbody was A320 family.
Only aircraft with a 12:1 by-pass ratio; A320neo is 10:1, not sure what ratio Boeing will wind up with on MAX.
CSeries has better trip costs than E190, with seat costs of A3320neo. There is no magic here, there is just physics.
BBD has on order: 66 CS100, 72 CS300; 124 options, 10 purchase rights, 45 LOIs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 1171936)

C Series Update:

How much of that (small for now) order/option/intent book are dellusional regionals thinking they will get another scope windfall?

Quote:

Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1172326)

How much of that (small for now) order/option/intent book are dellusional regionals thinking they will get another scope windfall?

Ask AA........

I hate to bust your bubble u na sayers but, I have a buddy that works up there as an IT admin and has access to all company files. Sorry but a major order has been placed pending an outcome in BK and also another pending a scope relaxation. U guys can add the names I think there obvious. Oh, also this is only internal info not released to the public yet. This fight has been lost. They are investing billions in North American, Europe. And asia just look at the factories there building u really think they just plan to sell in Asia and Europe. Airline CEO's are thinking 10 years ahead when they get up every morning, most of us think today. That's why we will never understand this industry

Quote:

Originally Posted by XJT Pilot (Post 1172473)

yeah...we must have the same contact; my buddy's friend's sister-in-law's dad who works for Bombardier. nothing like solid intel...:rolleyes:

The fuel figures quoted on here don't really match up with what Airbus is claiming and I doubt they are claiming less then what the aircraft will actually end up burning. Airbus is claiming up to a 15 percent improvement in the NEO. 3.5 percent of that is from the winglets. On short flights because of the increased weight over the classics the decrease in burn is even less. More then likely between winglets and other airframe mods the actual fuel burn improvement from the geared engine will be around 10 percent if not less. They are still a long way from flight tests and there are still unresolved engineering issues with the wingbox.