Max Kingsley-Jones/LONDON
The journey to Airbus Industrie's entry into the 100-seat market has been long and sometimes controversial. The consortium took its time studying the smaller end of the "big jet" market, and had planned an all-new collaborative programme with Asian companies, before finally adopting a derivative approach.
Until the launch of the 124-seat Airbus A319 in 1992, the 150-seat sector was the smallest category into which Airbus had dipped, with its hugely successful A320. In the early 1990s a move into the sub-150-seat sector was fraught with complications for Airbus as the consortium's partners were either actively participating in the market (British Aerospace and Daimler/Chrysler Aerospace - Dasa - through Fokker), and/or had advanced plans to enter it (Dasa with its MPC 75 and, later, with the Aerospatiale/Alenia consortium ATR on the Regioliner). There were also issues over where the smaller Airbus should be built - Toulouse, where the A320 was being assembled, or Hamburg, which had the A321 assembly line.
The issues were resolved, and the partners agreed to the launch of the A319 in May 1992, with production allocated to Dasa in Hamburg. Seven frames shorter than the 150-seat A320, the A319 provided Airbus with a direct rival to the 737-300 (and now the similarly sized 737-700). While not providing a counter to Boeing's "baby" 737-500/600 (108 seats), the A319 nevertheless seemed to represent the natural lower branch of the A320 family tree.
During the early 1990s, the 80-120-seat regional aircraft sector was busy, with many developments and new aircraft planned. McDonnell Douglas doggedly pursued launch customers for its new technology DC-9 derivative, the 100-seat BMW Rolls-Royce-powered MD-95 (now the Boeing 717).
After a spate of re-organisation and rationalisation among the regional manufacturers, the only new project to emerge by the mid-1990s was the MD-95. Fokker was wound up in 1996 after continuing financial woes. The European regional manufacturing industry crystallised around the now defunct BAe/ ATR consortium AI(R), which forged ahead to form a joint-venture company with the Chinese to produce an all-new regional aircraft. During 1996, Airbus Industrie Asia (AIA - a joint venture between Airbus and Italian AI(R) partner Alenia) was formed to take over from AI(R) at the European helm of the joint-venture programme.
AE31X emerges
Full details of the $2 billion programme, dubbed the AE31X, emerged in May 1997. The all-new twinjet family included two models, the 95-seat AE316 and 105-seat AE317, both powered by a new generation engine, with service entry slated for 2003. A consortium led by China's AVIC (46%), with AIA holding 39% and Singapore Technologies the remaining 16% was created to manage the programme.
In the meantime, Boeing's merger with McDonnell Douglas was under way, with the MD-95 - by then renamed the 717 - adopted for the US company's direct assault on the 100-seat market. This, combined with the existence of the similarly sized -600 derivative of the 737, increased the pressure on Airbus to establish its own presence at the small end of the market.
Although the concept of the AE31X family was straightforward, other aspects of the new project were more complex, particularly the drawing up of a business case to justify the huge investment required for the programme. There were also concerns that the benefits of an all-new design, aimed specifically for the regional market (eg, a narrower five-abreast fuselage, new wing and engines), were outweighed by the lack of any direct commonality with the six-abreast A320 family. "One of the clear requirements that came out of the market studies we undertook with AVIC was the need for commonality with existing [Airbus] aircraft", says A320 family product manager Stuart Mann.
By late 1997, amid growing concerns that the AE31X project faced too many obstacles to succeed, Airbus launched secret studies of a 107-seat A319 derivative shortened by five fuselage frames (and dubbed "A319M5"). AIA and AVIC still decided to move forward with the pre-development phase of the AE31X, despite the lack of support from Singapore Technologies, and still with no formal business agreement.
At Singapore Aerospace in February last year, Jean Pierson, then Airbus managing director, hinted that the future of the AE31X was still not assured, saying that the issue of projected development costs versus selling price "still gives us some headaches".
It quickly became apparent that Airbus' future in the small jet market lay with an A320-based derivative, rather than a new aircraft. "We would have to have engineered commonality into the new aircraft. It became clear that it would be more cost-effective to base the design on our existing [A320] family," says Mann. "The AE31X wouldn't have provided the 'seamless-service' that we wanted," he adds.
By the middle of last year, the AE31X programme had stalled, with the two sides "unable to put together a programme that would generate enough margin to make it worthwhile making the heavy investment necessary", said one industry source. It is known that the revelation that Airbus had its own 100-seat project in parallel with the AE31X angered the Chinese, and the Europeans have pledged to develop other joint ventures to fill the void.
The A320-based 100-seater was formally unveiled during the Farnborough air show in September last year. Officially designated the "A318", it incorporated a 4.5-frame shrink over the A319 and was equipped with the all-new Pratt & Whitney PW6000. The commercial launch provided Airbus with "the authority to offer" it to customers and to take commitments to support a full programme go-ahead by the end of last year. In the end, the new model did not get its full launch approval until 26 April this year, but the delay enabled the sales tally to mushroom well beyond the 50-commitment target set by the Airbus supervisory board.
The go-ahead, which came a week after Airbus delivered the 1,000th A320, was underwritten by 109 orders and commitments from six customers, including Air France, Egyptair, International Lease Finance, TWA and two other undisclosed customers, believed to be Air China and Lufthansa.
Workshare battle
At the launch, it was revealed that the A318's final assembly will be undertaken by Dasa Airbus in Hamburg, alongside the A319 and A321. Production start-up, however, is being hindered by an internal battle between the partners over workshares. Aerospatiale believes that it is facing an unreasonable financial commitment because the aircraft is unlikely to generate adequate returns to cover the investment needed to perform the fuselage modifications that account for the major portion of work.
The new programme is expected to cost "a few hundred million dollars", which helps overcome the "cost versus selling price" dilemma facing the $2 billion AE31X programme. The A318 is being offered at a sticker price of $36 million - about the same as the rival 737-600, but about $3-5 million ahead of the 717.
With the market for 100-seat aircraft sitting on the cusp of both the regional airlines' and major carriers' territories, which market is centred in the Airbus cross-hairs? It forecasts a demand for more than 1,300 aircraft in the A318's size category over the next 20 years. With the consortium's self-stated target of winning no less than half of each market in which it fights, Airbus apparently aims to produce an average of at least 30 A318s a year from late 2002, when deliveries begin.
According to Airbus, 194 airlines worldwide operate with five or more aircraft in the 70 to 124- seat category and the total fleet represents more than 4,000 aircraft. "About 20 airlines account for 50% of this fleet [over 2,000 aircraft], and more than half of these carriers already operate the A320 family aircraft," says Mann .
These 20 major airlines include carriers such as American Airlines, Continental Airlines, Sabena and US Airways, where clear decisions have been taken on the future direction of their short-haul fleets - with either the Next Generation 737 or A320 families having been selected. Fleet strategy is not so clear-cut, however, with other carriers like Northwest Airlines, Ansett Australia and United Airlines, and they represent the battleground for the Boeing and Airbus 100-seaters.
Where other versions of the 737 are already in service, the 737-600 is seen as the prime opposition. "Boeing may use the 717 as a spoiler for us in some cases," says Mann. Carriers with large DC-9 fleets may favour the 717.
Airbus does not intend to ignore the smaller, but important, regional market: "We hope to dent the smaller commuter market-this sector is one of our targets," says Mann. Here, where the 100-seater could represent the largest aircraft in the fleet, the 717 is the greater threat, along with specialised regional types being developed by Bombardier, Embraer and Fairchild.
Boeing describes the Airbus decision to develop the A318 as a "reaction" to its 717 and 737-600 programmes. It argues that, as a "double-shrink" development of the A320, the A318 carries a great deal of excess weight (some 8t more than the 717) and will not be as efficient as either Boeing offering.
Airbus counters that the 737-600 is just as much of a shrink derivative as its own product, while the one-member 717 family has no commonality benefits. It also says that both Boeing aircraft are derivatives of 1960s' designs, a factor which it claims is reflected in lower efficiency and higher operating costs.
Since the A318's Farnborough unveiling, the PW6000 has been the only engine offered on A319 and it remains "the engine of reference for the programme", says Airbus. Although there are no firm signs yet of the incumbent A320 family powerplants (the CFM International CFM56-5 or International Aero Engines V2500) being offered to provide commonality for existing operators, Airbus has left the door open to other manufacturers.
Airbus says the PW6000 has been chosen by "several" A318 customers, but concedes "certain operators of CFM56-powered aircraft have not announced their engine decisions and wish to study a possible CFM alternative which is being discussed with the engine manufacturer".
CFMI is studying for the A318 a derated, 23,000lb-thrust (102kN), version of the -5 engine which powers the other A320 family members, but has yet to reach a formal agreement with Airbus, "The PW6000 is the only deal that is on the table. CFMI will have to come to us with an offer if it wants to be on the programme," says Mann.
Airbus deal vital
P&W had been determined to secure an airframe application that enabled it to launch development of the PW6000, which shares the core with the planned geared-fan PW8000. The deal with Airbus was vital to safeguard the engine's future and some observers believe it will prove a tough challenge for CFMI to match its rival's financial terms.
Mann dismisses suggestions that the current lack of engine commonality with the other A320 models is a major issue to potential customers. "Flightdeck and crew training provides the biggest slice of commonality cost savings to operators," says Mann. The A318 is able to satisfy this with its A320 family cockpit.
"The vast majority of cost for short-haul carriers is based on maintenance requirements, which is where the PW6000 scores," he says. "P&W has designed the PW6000 as a rugged engine, and is offering its fleet management programme, which enables airlines to choose from a huge 'shopping list' of support services."
P&W's "power-by-the-hour" engine maintenance programme "takes away a lot of the potential down-side resulting from the lack in engine commonality", says Mann. "We can get a greater improvement in overall cost by using another tack, and switching to an optimised engine [like the PW6000] can do that."
For the A318, two PW6000 versions are offered, including the baseline 20,000lb PW6122 and the more powerful, 23,000lb PW6124 for the increased gross weight versions. P&W will begin test runs of the PW6000 in July/August, and the engine is due to make its first flight on the company-owned Boeing 720B testbed in April next year. The first A318 (powered by the PW6000) will be flown late in the third quarter of 2001, with certification and first deliveries due about 12 months later.
"Changes on the A318 have been kept to an absolute minimum" to keep costs down, says Mann. Some structural weight reduction is being undertaken, but most of the aircraft's components will be common to the other A320 models. "We have increased the airframe's design life goal, and moved the threshold for the fatigue inspection interval further out."
The A318 is being offered with three maximum take-off weights, including the baseline 59t, and optional 61.5t and 66t. These provide range performance of 2,775km (1,500nm), 3,700km and 5,180km, respectively, with 107 passengers. Mann says that he envisages that the A318 will be deployed predominantly on 650-925km missions, but adds that the 66t option was recently introduced to satisfy the needs of potential North American customers with US transcontinental requirements.
The A318's 4.5-frame fuselage reduction over the A319 is achieved by removing 1.5 frames forward of the wing, and three aft. This reduces the A318's overall length to 31.45m (103ft). To compensate for the A318's shorter moment-arm, the surface area of the vertical stabiliser had to be increased. Design engineers initially favoured the insertion of a small dorsal fin extension, "but, when we began windtunnel testing, this proved to be less effective than we hoped," says Mann.
The surface area increase will be achieved through extending the fin tip by about 0.8m. Airbus says this provides greater stability and control at low speeds, and enhances the A318's field length capability. Mann says that, although the A318 has good short field performance, tight runways like that at London City are not a "prime market consideration".
The 34.1m-span A319 wing is unchanged, with the single slotted flaps and leading edge slats retained. The engine pylon and interfaces are identical to the existing aircraft. "We simply use an adopter plate which bolts on to the existing pylon for the PW6000," says Mann.
The other major change is a reduction in the width of the belly cargo doors (from 1.81m to 1.28m), and the deletion of the containerised cargo system option. The smaller cargo doors ensure that the nacelle and wing trailing edge clearances are maintained during ground handling, despite the shorter fuselage.
With over 100 commitments on the books at launch, Airbus has given itself one of the best starts to a new programme. The challenge now will be to show the airlines that it genuinely understands the peculiar demands of the regional market and can fulfil its promises.
Source: Flight International
