Order of the Year!

[tsv]

http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/forums/irkut-signs-usd-5-bln-contract-for-supply-of-50-49529.aspx

Forgive my enthusiasm but this has to be the order of the year.

Firstly the MS-21 is the only project in the melting pot that can break the A-B Duopoly of supplying virtually all the world's Passenger Jets (other than Regional Jets).

Secondly if it meets claimed performance parameters it will likely force A and B to fast track replacing the A320/737 families.

Thirdly it has the potential to revive the Russian Aviation Industry, which was a major contributer to Global Aviation until about 25 years ago.

Frankly I'm astonished that anyone, especially a non Russian Company, would order $5 Billion worth of Civilian airplanes from the Russians. Their recent projects (eg TU-204, IL-96, AN-148 ) have been plagued by poor after sales support and, in the case of the TU-204 and IL-96, by poor engine reliability. The Superjet may fare better but it is also well behind schedule because the new Motor is not ready.

Also it is hard to understand how the MS-21 will be "15% more efficient than current offers" when Boeing concedes it would be difficult to get more than a 2 or 3% improvement in efficiency on the 737 without a new motor. But Malaysia operates a number of Sukhoi Fighter Jets so perhaps it is this experience that makes them believe the Russians can deliver on the MS-21.

Anyway it is an amazing and unexpected order and it will be fascinating to see if this aircraft arrives on time and how it performs, both in the sky and in the sales arena.

[CathayPacific]

This sounds a bit fishy though. Who is the buyer? Yea, it says it's "Malaysia". Well, it's not Malaysia Airlines. So it's probably a new leasing company which is set up to just buy 50 of these aircraft and try to lease them out. It may be a leasing company set up with Russian capital. Or it may be a speculative move by someone setting up this leasing company (if some airlines come in to lease the aircraft, they get good leasing business, if no customers come up, then they can just fold this leasing company and there will be no loss since this company has no other assets)

There are just too many question marks left by this. But it does push a message to Boeing and Airbus that their 737 and A320 product life is reaching their end-of-life and they should start to think about something new.

[LH-B744]

[...]

Secondly if it meets claimed performance parameters it will likely force A and B to fast track replacing the A320/737 families.

[...]

New a/c types are always welcome, but a first flight maybe in 2014, that's a long time to wait.
And there are some questions even before 2014. There are airlines who operate A, there are airlines who operate B, and there are airlines who operate both + Bombardier, + BAe, etc etc.
My first question would be, how many MS 21s are available within the first year of delivery and how many airlines will more or less likely sign contracts?
As we now see, BAe 146 and comparable is a good a/c size, but these ones are not available today to replace anything.
My second question, is a MS 21 cockpit compatible to A or B? I can't imagine that orders that belong to A or B are cancelled although a third type rating is necessary which is completely different from the two established ones.
I don't know if B733s and B735s have to be replaced after 25 years of service, but I'd guess a replacement rate for such immediately needed a/c should be 10% per year or more. I.e. 6-10 a/c per year, i.e. 1 a/c in 6 weeks for 1 airline.
So my conclusion with a view from outside the a/c industry is, the usual way would be to stick to the known manufacturers, i.e. if you need 130 or 180 seats today there is not much choice. And the requirements are high.

[AA 1818]

My first question would be, how many MS 21s are available within the first year of delivery and how many airlines will more or less likely sign contracts?

I agree with your sentiment here in that they will only make a major impact if they can do it better, faster or cheaper. If they can do two of those things, they will dominate. I think that unless they are able to crank out quite a few of these aircraft (and by that I mean safe and well produced versions) quickly after launching - then they could perhaps lure a customer that is not too hevily tied to Airbus and/or Boeing. But, they would need to be speedy to get their products out there ahead of any of the competitors, and perhaps at such a discount in order to further lure customers away. People will not go away from an establishment easily...

My second question, is a MS 21 cockpit compatible to A or B? I can't imagine that orders that belong to A or B are cancelled although a third type rating is necessary which is completely different from the two established ones.

I doubt that it will be compatibale with either, although being similar would likely be an asset to them. I am sure copyright infringement would be an issue (from Boeing or Airbus's end). If they are able to fulfill their conception (with a full product line that ranges from A319-A321 and/or 737-700 to 757-200 product ranges), then perhaps again, they could take away a few smaller carriers here and there. However, that is higlhly conditional on them being able to produce a full product line. No one will jump product lines, and product ratings for only one type/size of aircraft knowing that they will have to jump back to Boeing or Airbus for a higher capacity.

I don't know if B733s and B735s have to be replaced after 25 years of service, but I'd guess a replacement rate for such immediately needed a/c should be 10% per year or more. I.e. 6-10 a/c per year, i.e. 1 a/c in 6 weeks for 1 airline.

Replacement is not a requirement when the aircraft reaches that age, but the cost associated with maintaining that aircraft becomes such a burden that you can't help but look at other options with desire. The rate of delivery that you are discussing is difficult for already established manufacutrers, and I can only imagine that to accomplish those economies of scale required years of learning. I simply do not think that they can do this in that time scale.

So my conclusion with a view from outside the a/c industry is, the usual way would be to stick to the known manufacturers, i.e. if you need 130 or 180 seats today there is not much choice. And the requirements are high.

I agree with you here completely.

[AA 1818]

The first supplies will begin in 2014, he said.

“After that the planes will be leased to air lines,” the official said, adding that several Southeast Asian air carriers have already expressed interest in the Russian MS-21 plane.

“This is a breakthrough-like product that should enter the global market in 2016-2017 and be 15 percent more efficient than the current offers,” he said earlier.

Ok, so aren't the first and third lines contradictory? I mean for a press release, shouldn't they have been more concise in their diction (regarding the term "supplies")? Was I the only one it that way?