Back to Squawk list
  • 46

Air France/KLM wants to see the A220-500 variant as alternative to 737 Max

The Air France-KLM Group CEO Ben Smith thinks that Airbus should consider the production of A220-500, an elongated variant of the current A220-300. Last week, Air France-KLM Group signed an order commitment for 60 Airbus A220-300 jets. But, it seems that the Franco-Dutch Group's interest in the Airbus's A220s is not limited with the -300 variant. The Group CEO Ben Smith calls for an extended version of the aircraft. Although the European manufacturer has no specific plans for a new… ( More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

airuphere 16
The article reads “as a alternative to a320 NEO and 737Max”
Not only the article, but also the headline mentions the A320neo and the 737MAX.
airuphere 8
Yeah that too.. the squawk headline didn’t mention it.. and with all the max hate as of late, it seemed biased - not representing the article.
Exactly, there seems to be a bias as the headline of the squawk does not represent the original headline.
Andrew Heenan 3
Not sure I see the point.
Airbus already make a number of narrow bodied alternatives, offering a wide variety of capacity options. Why spend millions to compete with their own products?
lecompte2 6
The answer is obvious the A220 is way ahead in technology and performance. This explains Boeing's predatory behavior of the past.
Andrew Heenan 2
I agree it's ahead ... but not so far ahead of the latest A320. I think your answer certainly applies to the B737, which has probably been revised once too often, as recent events have demonstrated.
When Airbus do update, chances are the new plane will replace the largest A32x; that will be the time to stretch the A22x, if there's a gap at the smaller end.
Point is, Airbus currently have a complete range of capacities, and their narrow bodies are all near the top of the technological tree. Boeing have a problem (besides the MAX), and are losing sales to the A321XLR. Airbus aren't losing sales, so don't (yet) need to be bounced into a new design, as they were on the A350.
airuphere 4
The 320 would obliviously have a place but the 185 seat could be held by the 220-500 which will be way beyond the current offerings in the same category
Andrew Heenan 6
"This explains Boeing's predatory behavior of the past"
Actually, it doesn't. Boeing's 'shoot yourself in the foot moment' was simply that they had nothing to offer when Delta wanted the A22x (as is now).
Boeing's predatory behaviour now - the deal with Embraer - is a belated and probably misguided way of dealing with the issue.
lecompte2 4
Boeing's management decisions in the C-series and 737 Max stories show a confidence in being backed up by political friends that explains why they are still there.
Andrew Heenan 4
Only just!
And the lawsuits haven't hit home yet.
Rich James 1
Much as do the political friends for Airbus. The A380 has been a financial disaster which would have closed a fully independent business. Luckily the minibuses notably the Neo and the A330 in various configurations have limited the damage of the A380. A shame really because if Air us had received the open checkbook that Concorde received in France if not the UK, it could probably have continued. Both Concorde and the A380 were fantastic engineering achievements but is does seem Airbus business management grew up in and still needs a subsidy from Governments.
Andrew Heenan 8
The A380 hasn't been a financial disaster. Over the years of its life, it has almost - but not quite - broken even. Given a few more years, it would have. Which just proves how unreliable forecasting is; similarly, the B787 and A350 have not sold in anything like the predicted numbers (though enough to turn a profit).
Meanwhile the A321 extensions have quietly cleaned up - which nobody predicted a few years ago.
The 'Airbus subsidy from governments' is simply a lie - and a tired old lie at that. It comes from Boeing, who have failed, several times, to back up the accusation with evidence, while they have been shown time and again to be receiving tax breaks and other benefits from the US governments (including over-payments for useless fighters, but that's another story.
Po Lau 1
Sounds more like a medium term development target for a 2 pilots single aisle narrow-body, twin-engine, medium-range jet for 180+ PAX, say, for 2030 certification?
Andrew Heenan 0
And you could call it ... A320?
Buy now, 10 years before it hits the shelves in a supermarket near you!
Peter Fuller 1
The notional A220-500 would have roughly same passenger capacity as the A319neo and 737-7 MAX, for which there’s been very little demand: backlog of 35 and 60 respectively, according to Wikipedia. An A220-500, being a stretch derivative, could be a lighter hence more fuel-efficient and lower-operating-cost alternative in that space. Maybe that’s what Ben Smith and the broader market want, ‘cuz they sure haven’t been beating down the doors to order the 319neo or 7 MAX.
Rico van Dijk 0
“According to Smith, it can be easily extended by a few meters, ” - Whom is of course a seasoned aircraft engineer and is not at all biassed being a Canadian....
History repeats, take a good aircraft and stretch it to it’s limits. :(
Roch Comeau 13
I think comparing a new design (that certainly had some room for stretching in mind when designing) to a 50+ year old design that has been stretched and stretched and stretched again is not entirely fair. Every jet plane has been stretched over the years, so it can be expected. When to say enough is enough is the key decision.
siriusloon 2
His nationality isn't n issue. He still. has to answer to a board of directors, shareholders, and banks. He wouldn't last long in his job if his passport was the basis of his decisions.

Nothing wrong with stretching an aircraft to its limits. The idea is not to stretch it beyond those limits.
Eric Crone -2
Is it too much to expect that author/s of the article know the difference in usage and meaning of meter v metre or is this just another example of the pervasive/ corrosive americanisation of standard English.? ( I suspect it is as spell check doesn't like my use of metre)
Andrew Heenan 5
It's a US article, they use US spelling. get over it.
Eric Crone -3
Why do I have to compromise my standards - US culture is a bit of a cancerous behemoth that consumes the rest of the English speaking world - sorry Andrew - I will hang on to my Australian/English spelling and as a former English teacher have no intention of "getting over it!"Just saying! haha
Andrew Heenan 5
You don't have to compromise your standards. You simply have to accept that other people aren't you, and have different standards.
You can hang on to UK spelling (as will I!), but what Americans do on American web sites is up to them, surely?
Even if 'wrong', there's certainly no need to get offended about it.
I'll stick to being offended about Johnson. Much more productive! ;-)
Eric Crone 0
Mate - I am Australian - Johnson is irrelevant to me. I don't think I was ever really offended - just bemused or maybe initially confused. To me a "meter"is a device or gauge for measuring something (eg electricity use, fuel, air pressure etc) while "metre" refers to distance or length ( which the article was concerned with) and is the spelling used in international athletics - when used as such the meaning is clear and indisputable. (Offended? Sometimes I get a little bit offended by Mr Trump especially when our strong ANZUS alliance might drag us into conflict with Iran) Anyway Andrew - enough said - and in future I will focus on aviation. All good. Cheers.
siriusloon 1
Keep posting, you look like a bigger bozo with each one.
Mr. Crone, as an English speaking American(we have many languages spoken about this fine country, so I do need to clarify), English is the most bastardized, hodge podge of all modern languages. What other language has a pronounced word spelled 2-3 different ways with 2-3 different definitions. It's quite maddening for someone learning the language. More accurately English is a result of pervasive/corrosive Europeanism; given that the language is a mix of German, French, Latin, Norwegian, Swedish, ancient Celtic languages and Gaelic(yes...even the Irish--there I said it!). We Yanks are simply throwing in our twist for good measure. And why not, everyone else has. I say this all with good humor, and is not meant to offend.

Good Morrow Sir.
paul gilpin 0
i don't think the airlines know what they want. today. yesterday was different. tomorrow will be different. routes change. destinations come/go. BTW lets not forget to CHANGE THE AIRCRAFT TO MATCH THE OUTDATED INFRASTRUCTURE. lets put some flaps on those wings so we can park these planes at the gates we built in 1968. maybe one day we can land one on the Ford.
airplanes are meant to fly. if the airlines don't like it, build their own.
Ivan Blakely 1
</rant> ?
Rich James -4
A220 is a Regional Jet like a Fokker or an Embraer, it is not suitable as a substitute for the A321 neo or 737 max which are regular narrow bodies. Reduced headroom, reduced leg space and substandard overhead bins name it unsuitable in all but the most basic short hop budget airlines.
Have you ever set foot in an A220? Have you ever seen the overhead bins with your own eyes?
lecompte2 6
Overhead bins better than 737 Max in which I cannot turn around inside the washroom it's so small.
siriusloon -1
Maybe pass on the bag of peanuts next time? :-)


Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.