Talk:Airbus A220

Serial Numbers when Cseries changed to A220

I'm not sure the statement the marketing designations changed to A220-100 and A220-300 at serial numbers 50011 and 55003 respectively. When I read an older version of Type Certificate No. T00008NY , my interpretation of that is, from those serial numbers on, the holder of that Type Certificate changed from Bombardier to CSALP, not for change in the marketing designation (see the note 5).

Especially as Flight Global states, in the also referred link, this was only with the 10th CS300/A220 delivered to AirBaltic , which, as the images show, is registration YL-CSJ, which is serial number 55038

Who knows for sure? Antheii (talk) 17:09, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

55003 was the first cs300 to be delivered to a customer (55001 and 55002 were/are prototypes). There were a number of cs300 delivered under Bombardier ownership, so the change can't have happened with those serials numbers. At least not in that sense that those were the first to be delivered as A220. Similar for cs100, 50011 must have been one of the first, if not the first to be delivered. Perhaps all delivered (i. e. non-prototype aircraft) fall under the new marketing designation with the change or so.--2001:BB8:2002:2400:749F:6755:1302:BDC8 (talk) 18:31, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, @Antheii you are right! The serial numbers mentioned show the change in type certificate (TC) holder from Bombardier to CSALP or the limited partnership (JV) which was later renamed ACLP (Airbus Canada LP) when Bombardier exit the JV. The only aircraft not delivered under the JV is the very first delivery to Swiss (MSN 50010) which made the EIS in July 2016. MSNs 50001 to 50006 were the prototypes (FTV1 to FTV6), while MSNs 50007 to 50009 were unfinished or undelivered. Ich-Du-De (talk) 04:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

References

Not To Be Confused Headnote

Can we add head note “Not to be confused with Airbus A320”, because both aircraft looks similar? Emery Cool21 (talk) 10:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done as hatnotes are intended to help people who have arrived at the page with the wrong search term, not for other similarities

Marketing brochure

@Ich-Du-De: Despite my warnings of avoiding WP:Puffery, you continue to add bloated material as if it came from a marketing brochure. This has to stop.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 22:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Maybe from your perspective, but from a technical point of view it's not bloated or WP.puffery. The "design goal" of the CSeries was quite unusual (unique) for a narrow-body A/C: "comfort" (wider fuselage/cabin => more wetted area => more drag => more fuel burn) will affect efficiency, it's normal for wide-body aircraft, since comfort is required on the long haul and a longer range also helps to increase efficiency. To compensate that and to achieve more efficiency than existing aircraft in its class, CSeries/A220 needs to apply more advanced technologies, which in turn affects its production rate (it is very low compared to A320/737). Only the Irkut MC-21 does follow the same strategy, but Comac C919 doesn't, it follows the "standard goal/strategy" of narrow-body A/C, IMO. Ich-Du-De (talk) 06:12, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

WP:NOTFORUM We're not here to discuss our opinions on technical choices. Your opinion, and mine, don't matter. We're here to build a neutral encyclopedia. "efficiency and comfort of a wide-body long haul airliner" don't exist. "previous generation of airliners in the same class" is misleading without a clear comparison. Be careful. Avoid stating your opinion disguised in marketing language.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:31, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Seconded. Marketingspeak has its place in the Airbus product sheet, but Wikipedia sticks to facts and encyclopedic language. And we also try to restrict ourselves to the key notable facts, rather than giving almost every detail from sources. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:47, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, and I would add WP: NOTOPINION, WP:NOTPROMO and WP:indiscriminate.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 05:16, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Infobox: Designer

The lead sentence at the top is well worded: "It was originally designed by Bombardier and had two years in service as the Bombardier CSeries." This means that the aircraft was launched, developed and manufactured by Bombardier, certified and entered service for two years as the CSeries. In line with the lead sentence, to reflect the phrase "originally designed by Bombardier" I wanted to add the following chronic in the infobox, "designer" section:

- Bombardier Aviation (until 2020)

- Airbus Canada LP (2020-present)

While the "manufacturer" section is actually not just Airbus Canada LP, but also Airbus Mobile. However, it is okay to write in this regard only the main assembly line. Ich-Du-De (talk) 03:03, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

"This means that the aircraft was launched, developed and manufactured by Bombardier, certified and entered service for two years as the CSeries" This is why Bombardier should be listed under manufacturer. "Design Group" is intended for Soviet-style design bureaux, not full manufacturers, which you admitted Bombardier was. If you want to add the specific dates, that's fine, but I didn't do that as I was uncertain of the dates. BilCat (talk) 23:32, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Also, you were using "Designer", which is only for people. See Template:Infobox aircraft type/doc for how these parameters are intended to be used. BilCat (talk) 23:41, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

The Designer parameter in the infobox was set in 2017 and I just know that it is intended for a 'natural' person, not a 'legal' person like Bombardier. Therefore we should use "developed by" instead of "designed by" in the lede. This fits the infobox better, while the phrase "two years in service as Bombardier CSeries" implies that the aircraft was manufactured by Bombardier and delivered as a CSeries within that period.

There are two ways to set the value of the Manufacturer parameter in the infobox:

1. By the program owner:

- Bombardier (until 2016)

- C Series Aircraft LP (2016-2019)

- Airbus Canada LP (2019-present)

2. By majority stake owner (simpler):

- Bombardier (until 2018)

- Airbus (2018-present)

Let's use the first variant till consensus can be reached. Ich-Du-De (talk) 05:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm fine with doing it by majority stake owner. BilCat (talk) 07:05, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Accident Swiss LX1885

Should the 17 hospitalized (1 ICU) of the Swiss flight LX1885 earlier this week due to heavy smoke in cabin not be mentioned? 2A02:21B4:A054:1D00:11C6:1D9E:463E:69B5 (talk) 16:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)