Owners OperatorsGuide A320

 

 AIIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERATOR’S  A GUIDE: A320 FAMILY  i) Aircraft specificati specifications, ons, page 6 ii) Production & fleet analysis, page 9 iii) Major modification & upgrade programmes, page 14 iv) Aircraft operating performance, page 16  v) Ma Main inte tena nanc nce e re requ quir irem emen ents ts & an anal alys ysis is,, pa page ge 18  vi)) Val  vi alue ues, s, le leas ase e ra rate tess & af afte term rmar arke kett ac acti tivi vity ty,, pa page ge 32

 

6 I  AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE  I AIRCRAFT

A320 family specifications The A320 family has four main variants. Each has several gross gross weight and engine options to choose from, making many combinations possible. he evolution of the A320 family has led to four main variants: the A318, A319, A320 and A321. These share a common fuselage design, with a standard sixabreast economy class configuration, and have different lengths that accommodate between 107 and 185 seats. The range of seat se at size sizess is similar similar to tha t of fere fered d by the 737NG family, although the A321 A321 has five more seats than the 737-900ER. The fuselage is known for its passenger comfort, offering 1-inch wider seat s tha n its 737/757 riva ls. The The A320 family’s main features, how eve everr, a re: its fly-by-wire (FBW) flight control system; a

T

common flightd ec eck k and singl single e pilot pilot ty pe rating; and use of common engine types and rotable components in two or more of its variants. These features give a high level le vel of commonality t hat provide providess reductions reduc tions in fl ightcre ightcrew w - and maintenance-related operating costs. The FBW flight-control flight-control system and common flightdeck not only allow the single type rating between the four variants, but also cross-crew qualification with other Airbus types that have FBW systems and the same or simi similar lar fl ightdeck ightdecks. s. Thes hese e technical technical features and a w ide

range of seat capacities, which satisfy many airlines airlines’’ require requirements, ments, make the A320 A32 0 family a n a ttra ctive choice choice..

 A320 The A320 family’s principal variant is the A320. A320. Its cab in allow s 150 seats seats in a two-class layout ( see table table,, page 7) of 12 first-class and 138 economy seats. This can b e increase increased d t o 164 seat seat s in an alleconomy ec onomy la yout a t 31-inch 31-inch seat seat pitch, or as ma ny a s 180 seats seats at 2929-inch inch seat seat pitch. The initia l A320 model, t he A320100, has a f uel capa capa city of 4,185 US G allons (USG (USG ) and maximum ta ke ke--off weight (MTOW) of 145,504lbs. It is powered by CFM56-5A1 engines, rated at 25,000lbs thrust. Its combination of gross weight and fuel capa capa city give it a range of about 1,800nm 1,800nm with a load of 164 passengers. This initial model wa s not ordere ordered d in large numbers, since since most po tential customers showed more interest in having a higher gross weight and fuel capacity. Only 19 -100 series aircraft w ith C FM56-5A FM56-5A1 1 engines engines were ordered by British Caledonian, Air Inter and Air

France. Tw Tw o ha ve been been destroyed, leaving le aving just 17 in operation w ith British Airw Ai rw ays a nd the Air France France group. A higher w eight A320-200 A320-200 model was also available from initial offerings to potential customers. This used the same CFM 5656-5A 5A1 1 engine, engine, but had a higher MTOW of 162,040lbs (73.5 tonnes) and fuel capa capa city of 6,300 USG USG . This weight variant has a range of 2,600nm ( see table, page 7) . Lat er devel developments opments with t he CFM56 engine led to an aircraft powered by the CFM 5656-5A 5A3 3 ra ted a t 26,500 26,500lbs lbs thrust and with an MTOW of 166,450lbs (75.5 tonnes), while sharing the same fuel capacity o f 6,300 USG. This weight variant has an extended range of 2,850nm ( see table, page 7) . The CFM56-5A series could not be developed deve loped much further in additiona l thrust. Because this wo uld prevent prevent t he 5A series series being used on the stretch ed A321, the CFM 5656-5B 5B series series wa s developed to provide higher thrust growth potential. The CFM56-5B series’ main difference over the -5A was an additional high- pressure compressor (HPC) stage. Both variants have a 68.3inch wide inta ke fan a nd utilise a singlesta ge high-pressure high-pressure turbin e (HP T). The The additional HPC stage allowed the CFM56-56B to be developed up to a rating o f 33,000lbs 33,000lbs thrust, t here hereby by enabling the engine to be employed for a wider range of variants. The CFM56-5B4, rated at 27,000lbs thrust, was first offered on the A320 in th e mid-1990s. The The -5B series w a s used to power the highest MTOW variant of the A320, which had a gross weight of 169,750lbs (77.0 tonnes). With the same standa rd fuel capacity of 6,300 USG USG , the aircraft had a range of 2,850nm. The same weight varia nt is a lso ava ilable with suppl suppleme ementa nta ry fuel tanks, taking total capacity to 7,066 USG USG , and giving the aircraft a range of 3,050nm ( see table table,, page 7) . Airbus offers customers flexibility in the A320 family with several engine thrust variants of the two main engine types for each MTOW variant. The three MTOW variants of the A320 A320 are 162,050lbs (73.5 tonnes), 166,450lbs (75.5 tonnes) and 169,750lbs (77.0 tonnes).. Each ca n be pow ere tonnes) ered d by three variant s of t he CFM 5656-5B: 5B: the -5B4 rated a t 27,000lbs thrust; the -5B5 -5B5 rated at 22,00 22,000lbs 0lbs thrust; and the -5B6 -5B6 rated a t 23,500lbs thrust ( see table, page 7) .

There are five gross weight variants of the  A320-200, and CFMI offers two two variants of the CFM56-5A and three variants of the -5B series.

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

 

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

7 I  AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE  I AIRCRAFT  A320  A32 0 FAMIL FAMILY Y SPECIFI SPECIFICATI CATIONS ONS  A320  A3 20 MTOW lbs MTOW tonnes Dual-class seats Engine variants Fuel volume USG Range nm

-100 -1 00

-200 -20 0

-200 -20 0

-200 -20 0

-200 -20 0

-200

145,504 66.0

162,040 73.5

166,450 75.5

162,050 73.5

166,450 75.5

169,750 77.0

150

150

150

150

150

150

CFM56-5A1

CFM56-5A1/ V.2500-A1

CFM56-5A3/ V.2500-A1 bump

CFM56-5B5/ V.2527-A5

C FM FM56-5B6/ V.2527-A5

C FM FM56-5B4/ V.2527-A5

4,185 1,800

6,300 2,600/ 2,600

6,300 2,850/ 2,870

22,000 2,600/ 2,600

23,500 2,850/ 2,870

27,000 2,850/ 2,870

Supplementary fuel volume USG Range nm

 A321  A3 21 MTOW lbs MTOW tonnes

7,066 3,050

-200

-200 -20 0

-200 -20 0

-200

183,000 83.0

187,400 85.0

196,200 89.0

206,130 93.5

185

185

185

185

CFM56-5B4/ V.2530-A5

CFM56-5B1/ V.2530-A5

CFM56-5B2/ V.2533-A5

CFM56-5B3/ V.2533-A5

6,260 2,200/ 2,200

6,260 2,340/ 2,370

7,040 2,670/ 2,700

7,800 3,000/ 3,000

-200

-200 -20 0

-200 -20 0

-200

141,100 64.0

149,920 68.0

154,330 70.0

166,450 75.5

124

124

124

124

CFM56-5A4/-5A5/ V.2522-A5

CFM56-5B5/ V.2522-A5

CFM56-5B6/ V.2524-A5

CFM56-5B7/ V.2527-A5

6,300 1,800

6,300 2,600

6,300 2,950

6,300/7,070/7,830 3,050/3,450/3,700

Dual-class seats Engine variants Fuel volume USG Range nm

 A319  A31 9 MTOW lbs MTOW tonnes Dual-class seats Engine variants Fuel volume USG Range nm

 A318  A31 8 MTOW lbs MTOW tonnes Dual-class seats Engine variants Fuel volume USG Range nm

-200

-200 -20 0

-200 -20 0

-200 -20 0

-200 -20 0

-200

130,070 59.0

135,580 61.5

138,890 63.0

142,200 64.5

145,500 66.0

149,900 68.0

106

106

106

106

106

106

CFM56-5B8 PW6122

CFM56-5B8 PW6122

CFM56-5B8 PW6122

CFM56-5B9 PW6124

CFM56-5B9 PW6124

CFM56-5B9 PW6124

6,300 1,450/ 1,400

6,300 1,950/ 1,850

6,300 2,200/ 2,150

6,300 2,500/ 2,450

6,300 2,800/ 2,700

6,300 3,200/ 3,100

In most cases airlines select a high gross weight and highhigh-thrust thrust airfra meengine engi ne combination, w ith high-rated high-rated engines providing better field  see performance but higher fuel burn  se (  e

engine for high gross weight aircraft , engine how eve everr. Other developments of the -5B4 employed a dual annular combustor (DAC) to reduc reduce e NO x emissions. emissions. Alongside the CFM56, International Aero Ae ro Engines (IAE) developed developed t he V.2500-A1 for use on the first models of the A320-200 A320-200 in 1988, wh ich w ere rat ed

USG , a s the C FM56FM56-5A 5A11-pow pow ere ered d aircraft. This gave it a ra nge of 2,600nm (see table, this page) . The V.2500V.2500-A1 A1 w as developed w ith a thrust bump, w hich gave the engine a rating o f 26,500lbs 26,500lbs thrust fo r ta ke ke--off in hot a nd high conditions. This This engine engine wa s used us ed to pow er aircraft aircraft w ith an M TOW of 166,450lbs (75.5 tonnes), a fuel capacity of 6,300 USG USG and ra nge of 2,870nm (see table, this page) . Like the CFM56, the V.2500 had to be adapted to provide enough power for larger developments of the aircraft. The V2500-A5 V2500A5 series series w as therefore evolved, its key differences over the -A1 series

at 25,000 25,000lbs lbs thrust. N o -100s -100s were equipped w ith t he V.2500V.2500-A1. A1. The fi rst V.2500-pow ered A320-200 A320-200 had the same MTOW of 162,040lbs 162,040lbs (73.5 (7 3.5 tonnes) and fuel capacity of 6,300

being an increase in fan width from 63 to 63.5 inches, inches, and a higher coreflow  coreflow  allow ing higher thrust ratings. There There are five -A5 series variants rated at between 23,000lbs 23,00 0lbs and 32,00 32,000lbs 0lbs thrust.

 A 320 family family fuel fuel burn burn pe perf rforma ormanc nce e, page page 16 ) ).. Airlines may select select a low er er--rat ed

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

The V.2527V.2527-A5 A5 w as developed for the A320-200, rated at 26,500lbs thrust. This is used used t o pow er the three gross models of the A320, A320, the highest highest of w hich is 169,750lbs (77.0 tonnes), and has a range of 2,870nm with the standard fuel capacity of 6,300US 6,300USG G . With With supplementary fuel tanks and a total capacity of 7,066 USG, t he aircraft aircraft ’s range is extended extended t o 3,050nm.

 A321 The A321 A321 wa s the second second va riant t o be developed, developed, follow ing large sales of the similarly-sized similarly-s ized 757 in the 1980s. The A321 has a standard two-class seat capacity of 185, about 10 seats fewer than the 757-200 when the two aircraft are similarly similarly confi gured. The first ord ers for the a ircraft w ere AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

 

8 I  AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE  I AIRCRAFT IAE offers just one or two thrust variants of the V.2500-A5 for each member of the A320 family.

USG ( see table table,, page 7) . There are three variants of the V.2500-A5: the V.2522-A5 rated at

placed in 1989. Like the A320, the initial A321 A32 1 models were light and had a short range capa bility bility.. There are fi ve MTOW MTOW varia nts of the

83.0 tonnes and 85.0 tonnes and standard fuel capacity of 6,260 USG have a range of 2,200nm and 2,370nm. Aircraft with a gross weight of 89.0

A321: 183,000lbs (83.0 ton nes) nes);; 187,400lbs (85 tonn es) es);; 196,200lbs (89.0 tonnes); 205,000lbs (93.0 tonnes); and 206,130lbs (93.5 tonnes). Thes hese e are all ava ilable with the standa rd fuel capacity of 6,260 USG USG , but there are also two options for supplementary fuel tanks that take total capacity to 7,040 USG USG and 7,80 7,800 0 USG. As wit h th e A320, A320, there are several several engine thrust variants available for the CFM56-5B and V.2500-A5: the CFM565B4 rated at 27,000lbs thrust); -5B1 rated a t 30,000lbs thrust; thrust; -5B2 rated at 31,000lbs 31,000 lbs thrust; a nd th e -5B3 -5B3 rated a t 33,000lbs 33,000 lbs thrust. Each is ava ilable for all the five different different gross w eig eight ht va riants. When Whe n equipped w ith C FM56FM56-5B 5B engines engi nes,, th e 83.0 tonne and 85.0 tonne variants have a range of 2,200nm and 2,340nm with a standard fuel capacity of table,, page 7) . The 89.0 6,260 USG ( see table tonne gross weight aircraft has a range of 2,670nm, and th e 93.5 93.5 tonne gross weight aircraft has a range of 3,000nm ( see table, page 7) . Only 18 aircraft are equipped with CFM56-5B1 engines; these are operated by Air France, France, Sw iss and Austrian Airlines. Another 14 have CFM56-5B2 engines and are in operation with Alitalia, Al italia, an early customer customer for t he A321. A321. More than 170 aircraft with -5B3 engines have been ordered to date. There are two variants of the V.2500-

tonnes and fuel capacity of 2,700nm, or with a gross weight of 93.5 tonnes and fuel capacity of 7,800 USG, ha ve a ra nge of 3,000nm.

A5 available for the A321: the V.2530A5 rated at 30,400lbs thrust; and the V.2533-A5 rated at 33,000lbs thrust. When equipped w ith V.2500.2500-A5 A5 engines, aircraft with a gross weight of AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

22,000lbs; the V.2524-A5 rated at 23,500lbs; and the V.2527-A5 rated at 26,500lbs. Mo re than 110 A319s A319s powered by the V.2522-A5 have been built and are in service se rvice w ith Air China , British Airwa ys, South African Airways and United Airlines. More than 120 aircraft aircraft w ith the V.2524-A4 engine have been delivered to Air Macau, America West, Lan Airlines, Spirit Airlin es, TAC TAC A and TAM . Only a small number are powered by the V.2527-A5. The different weight and fuelcapacity variants of the A319 have the same range w hen equipped equipped w ith V.2500V.2500A5 engines as those equipped with C FM56-5B series series engines.

 A318

The A319 was shortened and accommoda tes 124 124 seat seat s in a tw oo-class class configuration. It has four gross weight options of 141,100lbs (64.0 tonnes), 149,920lbs (68.0 tonnes), 154,330lbs (70.0 tonnes) and 166,450lbs (75.5 tonnes). The aircraft has a standard fuel capacity o f 6,300 USG, w hile the highest highest grosss weight variant gros variant a ls lso o has tw o suppleme suppl ementa nta ry fuel tank options t hat take fuel capacity to 7,070 USG a nd 7,830 USG ( see table table,, page 7) . The aircraft utilises both CFM56-5A and -5B engines. The -5A series engines are the -5A4 and -5A5 rated at 22,000lbs thrust an d 23,500lbs 23,500lbs thrust. The -5B5 -5B5 va rian ts a re the -5B5,-5B6 -5B5,-5B6 and -5B7 rated a t 22,000lbs 22,000lbs thrust, 23,500lbs 23,500 lbs thrust and 27,00 27,000lbs 0lbs thrust. This makes it possible for airlines to select a large number of airframe-engine combinations. The most popula r engines on the A319 are the -5A5, -5B5 and 5B6, powering more than 530 aircraft. When Whe n equipped w ith C FM56FM56-5B 5B engines, the four different gross weight models with a fuel capacity of 6,300 USG have a ra nge of 1,800nm, 1,800nm, 2,600nm,

The A318 was developed as a further shortening of the fuselage, taking twoclass seat capacity down to 107 seats. This is similar to the 737-600. The aircraft has five gross weight options of 130,070lbs (59.0 tonnes), 135,580lbs (61.5 tonnes), 138,890lbs (63.0 tonnes), 142,200lbs (64.5 tonnes), 145,500lbs (66.0 tonnes) and 149,900lbs (68.0 tonnes).. The aircraft uses the standa rd tonnes) fuel capa capa city of 6,300 USG (see table,  page  pa ge 7) . The A318 utilises the CFM56-5B series and PW6000 series. In the case of the CFM56-5B, the variants available are the -5B8 -5B8 and -5B9 rat ed at 21,600 21,600lbs lbs thrust and 23,300lbs thrust. These are simply de-rated versions of the same basic -5B engine that powers the A319, A320 and A321. The PW6000 PW6000 w as developed as a n all-new engine with two variants ava ilable: the PW6122 PW6122 rated a t 22,100lbs thrust, and the PW6124 rated at 23,800lbs 23,800 lbs t hrust. When Whe n equipped w ith C FM56FM56-5B 5B engines, the A318 at its lowest gross weight option of 59.0 tonnes has a range of 1,450nm, w hile the highest highest gross weight option of 68.0 tonnes has a range of 3,200nm.

2,950nm and 3,050nm. The higher gross weight variant has an extended range of 3,450nm with a suppl suppleme ementary ntary fuel capacity of 7,070 USG USG and range of 3,700nm with a fuel capacity of 7,830

Ra nge is slightly slightly reduced reduced for a ircraft equipped with PW6000 engines, at 1,400nm for the low es estt gross w ei eight ght aircraft and 3,100nm for the highest highest gross weight model.

 A319

 

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

9 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE

A320 family fleet analysis The A320 family fleet is dominated by the A320 and A319, which account for 85% of all aircraft sold. The fleet is split 50:50 by CFMI & IAE. he A320 family is the single most succe successful ssful commercial jetliner. Orders for the four variants ha d reached 4,283 4,283 by the end of 2005 since the first order was placed in 1983. The 737NG 737NG is closest closest to this, with 2,967 orders since 1992. The A320’s success can partly be attributed to its fly-by-wire (FBW) flight control system, system, w ide seats seats and cabin comfort, operating efficiency efficiency, family concept conce pt and commonality commonality,, and four models that offer between 107 and 185 seats. The A320 family replaced a large number of BAC 11-11s, 11s, C ara vell velles, es, F.28s F.28s

T

an d Tu-134s/ Tu-134s/-154s -154s,, bu t a lso ma na ged to win large orders from long-time Boeing and McD onnell Douglas customers customers.. Mo re than 2,600 aircraft aircraft ha ve already already been delivered, and the current backlog exceeds 1,650 units. The A320 family’s most successful year was 2005, when 918 orders w ere w on. To To keep up with demand, Airbus has had to increase its production level several times, and is now  increasing it to 32 units per month, equal to 384 per year. This is in contrast to annua l production rates of 60 to 200 aircraft up to t he end end of the 1990s. 1990s. The A320 family market is d ivided between those powered by CFM56-5A or -5B engines and V.2500-A1 or -A5 engines. engine s. A t hird engine, t he PW6000 series, is the alternative to the CFM56 on the A318. The CFM56 powered the first aircraft, and was already established on the 737 and DC-8. These factors helped it w in the majority majority of o rders rders,, altho ugh its share ha s declined declined in rece recent nt y ears. The CFM 56 has been chosen chosen to pow er 2,111 2,111 of the A320 family aircraft ordered so far. The V.2500 has been selected for 1,725 aircraft, and the PW6000 PW6000 for 30. Engine sele se lections ctions are outstand ing for about 380 aircraft ordered in late 2005.

The A320 market is split almost equally between the CFM56 and V.2500. Of t he 1,152 1,152 aircraft aircraft ordere ordered d w ith CFM 56s 56s,, 386 are pow ere ered d by CFM 56(see e A320 A32 0 family  5A1 and -5A3 engines (se  spe  sp ecifica cifications, tions, pa page ge 6) and the other 766 766 table, aircraft b y the C FM56FM56-5B4 5B4 ( see table,  page  pa ge 10) . The major operat ors of -5A1pow ere ered d a ircr ircraft aft are Air Air C ana da (4 (45) 5),, Air France (55), (55), All N ippon Airw ays (38) (38),, Iberia (22), Lufthansa (36) and

The A320 A320 wa s the first a ircr ircraft aft to be launched, w ith Air Fran Fran ce signing a letter of intent for 25 aircraft in 1981 1981 It is the most succe success ssful ful variant w ith a t ota l of 2,428 firm orders at the end of 2005 (see table,, page 10) . The A320 table A320 act ually achieved its highest annual sales in 2005, w ith 568 fi rm ord ers. The The A320 is is itself one of the most successful aircraft types. Its fi rm orders to da te excee exceed d tho se of the 727-100/ 727 -100/-200, 737 737-300/ -300/-400/-500 a nd 737-800. 737800. M oreov er er,, th e A320 will probably continue to sell sell well for a nother

No rthw est (33). (33). The largest -5A3 -5A3 fl ee eets ts are operated by C ondor Berlin (12) (12),, G ulf Air (10) and Northwest (45). M ore tha n 310 -5B4-5B4-pow pow ere ered d A320s are operated by a large number number of carriers tha t include Aer Lingus, Air Berlin, Berl in, Air Air Ca nada , Air China, Air France, Alitalia, Austrian Airlines, Airlines, Finna ir ir,, Ph ilippine Airlines, Sw iss, TAP TAP and USAirways. The largest fleets are operated by C hina Ea ste stern rn (54) (54) and Iberia (37) (37).. A further 380 -5B4-5B4-pow pow ere ered d a ircraft are on ord er from IndiG o Aviat Aviat ion (70), (70), Air One (30), Air Berlin (57), Air Asia (57) (5 7) and G ECAS (32) (32).. O ther outstanding orders have been placed by Air Cairo, Cebu Pa cific Air Air, C hina Southern, CSA

eight to 10 years before a successor is launched. The A320’s largest customers include Air Asia Asia (60), Air Air Berlin (60), (60), Air C ana da (52), Air Deccan (62), Air France (67), America West (57), CASC (100), China Eastern (63), Iberia (66), (66), In diG o (70), jetBlue (173), Northwest Airlines (80), TACA (45), TAM (41), and United Airlines (117). The aircraft is also popular w ith lessors: lessors: AERC AP (ex-Debis (ex-Debis AirFinance) has ordered a total of 61; and other large portfolios are held held by C IT Leasin g (53), (53), G EC AS/G PA (158) (158) and ILFC (19 (198). 8).

Czech Airlines, Iberia, ILFC, Jazeera Airways, USAirways and Virgin America. The V.2500 has been chosen for 1,071 A320s to date, split between the V.2500-A1 for 139 aircraft and the V.2527-A5 for 932. M ajor -A1 operators include America America West (24), Indian Airlines (47) and Mexicana (32). The largest V.2527-A5 fleets are w ith Ame America rica West West (38), British Airways (17), China Southern (24), jetBlue (82), Jetstar (20), TAM (28) and United (97). Other operators include Dra gonair gonair,, British Midland Airwa ys, Air Air New Z ealand, Air Deccan, Kingfisher, Kingfisher,

 A320 .

The V.2527-A5 has gained share of the A320 market in recent years, and the V.2530/33-A5 now have a larger share of the A321 market than their CFM56-5B series rivals.

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

 

10 I AIRCRAFT 10 I  AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE  A320  A32 0 FAMIL FAMILY Y SALES SALES & ENGINE ENGINE SELE SELECTION CTION AT DECE DECEMBER MBER 2005  Aircraftt  Aircraf type

A318 A31 8

A319 A31 9

A320 A32 0

A3211 A32

Total

Engine type CFM56-5B8/P

 A321 59

59

CFM56-5B7/P

31

31

CFM56-5B6/P CFM56-5B6/2 CFM56-5B6/2P

164 3 32

164 3 32

CFM56-5B5/P

295

295

CFM56-5B4/2P CFM56-5B4/2 CFM56-5B4/P CFM56-5B4

28 26 560 22

28 26 560 22

CFM56-5B3/2P CFM56-5B3/P CFM56-5B3

20 137 10

20 137 10

CFM56-5B2/P CFM56-5B2

9 14

9 14

CFM56-5B1/2P CFM56-5B1/2

5 6

5 6

CFM56-5B1/P CFM56-5B1

2 5

2 5

CFM56-5A5 CFM56-5A4 CFM56-5A3 CFM56-5A1

138 9

138 9 114 272

114 272

Recent orders

28

130

30

188

692

1,122

238

2,111

V.2533-A5

175

175

V.2530-A5

54

54

Total CFM56

59

V.2527M-A5 V.2527E-A5 V.2527-A5

6

6 78 744

78 744

V.2524-A5

225

225

V.2522-A5

148

148

V.2500-A1

139

Recent orders Total V.2500 PW6124 Undecided Total

0

139

16

110

30

156

395

1,071

259

1,725

30

30

8

144

205

22

379

97

1,239

2,428

519

4,283

Airw rw ays, Si Sichuan chuan Airlines Airlines,, Spanair Spanair,, Qa tar Ai Syrianair and Tiger Airways. The V.2527E-A5 has been specified by a small number of carriers, including Lan Airlines, TACA TACA a nd TAME TAME Ecu ad or. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

smaller fleets are on order for Asiana, British Airways, Mexicana, Qantas, Sichua n Airlines, Silkair, Silkair, Tiger Tiger Airw Airw ay s and Wizz Air.

More than 400 A320s, with V.2527A5s speci specififi ed, ha ve been been ord ere ered d b y Air Deccan (30), jetBlue (97), Kingfisher (37), South African Airw ay s (15), (15), TAM TAM (20 (20), ), TH Y (17) and United Airlines (19). (19). Ot her  

The A321 was the second aircraft in the family to be launched, and has won 519 firm orders since winning its first firm sale from ILFC and Egyptair in 1989. 198 9. M ore than 100 fi rm orders were w on in 2005. The A321’s A321’s biggest customers are Air France (13), (13), Alitalia (23), Asiana Airlines (13), CASC (30), C hina Ea stern (15), (15), Iberia (19), (19), IndiG o (30), ILFC (80), Lufthansa (26) and USAirwa ys (41). (41). Like the A320, the A321 market is split betw ee een n the CFM 56 and V.2500, V.2500, w ith t he V.2500 V.2500 being selected selected for 259 aircraft a nd the CFM 56 powering 238. 238. Engines have yet to be selected for 22 aircraft on o rder rder.. There are 54 A321s in service w ith V.2530-A5 engines, operated by Air Macau, ANA, Asiana, Lufthansa, Onur Air, SAS and TransAsia. Another 115 aircraft are in operation with V.2533-A5 engines. Operators include Asiana, BA, British Midland Airways, China Southern, and Lufthansa. There are 171 A321s in operation with CFM56-5Bs, and 18 aircraft with 5B1s, which are operated by Air France, Austrian Airlines, Airlines, Sw iss and TH Y. Alitalia operat es 23 -5B2-5B2-pow pow ere ered d aircra ft. There are 130 -5B3-pow -5B3-pow ere ered d aircraft in service service with Air Ca nada , Air France,, C hina Eastern, Iberia, US France Airwa Ai rwa ys, and Fi Finnair nnair.. A further 179 A321s are on order, including 67 pow ere ered d by t he CFM 5656-5B 5B for China Eastern, Iberia, IndiGo Aviatio n, a nd U SA SAirw irw ay s. V.2533V.2533-A5s A5s have been selected for another 90 aircraft on order w ith K ingfi sher sher,, TACA, TACA, TAM TAM and THY. Engines have not yet been selected for 22 other aircraft on order w ith Ae AerCap and ILFC.

 A319 The A319 is the second most successfu succe ssfull variant, w ith fi rm orders for 1,239 since its launch order in late 1992. This sales volume compares to 1,260 and 1,113 achieved by t he 727-200 727-200 and 737300,, a s w el 300 elll as 1,173 sold sold to dat e by the similarly-sized 737-700. The A319’s largest orders have been placed place d by AERCAP (35), (35), Air Air C ana da (48), Air France (44), America West (38), British Airw ay s (36), (36), C IT Leasing (37), (37), easyJet (14 (140), 0), Frontier (42), G EC AS (75), (75), ILFC (150), (150), Lufthansa (2 (20) 0),, Northw es estt Airlines (82), (82), TAM TAM (18), Unit ed Airlines (78),, a nd USAirw ay s (66). (78) (66). The C FM56 ha s been selec selected ted fo r 700 aircraft and the V.2500 for 395. ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

11 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERATOR’S OPERATOR’S GUIDE While CFMI offers several variants of the CFM56-5A and -5B across the A320 family family,, a few  engines dominate each family member. The -5B5 and -5B6 dominate the A319 fleet, the -5B4 and -5A1 dominate the A320 fleet, and the -5B3 dominates the A321 fleet.

een n the The CFM 56 is divided betw ee 5A4/-5A -5A5 5 mod els and th e -5B5, -5B5, -5B6 an d -5B7 variants. Only nine aircraft a re operated operated by Ai Airr France with the -5A4, while 131 are in service w ith t he -5A5. -5A5. The The largest fl eets are with Ai Airr Ca nada (3 (35) 5),, Lufthansa (1 (16) 6) and Northw es estt (73). (73). G erm erman an Wings and Tunis Air also opera te smaller fleets. The -5B5 -5B5 is in operatio n w ith 161 aircraft for: Air France (31), easyJet (58), Front ier (32), (32), TAP TAP Air Port uga l (16), (16), a nd other smaller fleets operated by Air China and Iberia. The -5B6 -5B6 pow ers 188 aircraft in service serv ice,, w ith th e largest fleets being operated by Air Ca nada (1 (13) 3),, Alitalia (12), (12 ), C hina Eastern (10), Frontier (10), (10), G erman Wings (15 (15), ), Mexican a (12) and USAirways (47). Other smaller fleets are operated by Austrian Airlines, China Southern, Southe rn, C roatia n Airline Airlines, s, Swiss and SN Brussel Brussels. s. A smaller fleet of 21 aircraft are in service serv ice with the -5B7, -5B7, ma inly for Air China and Ai Airr France. France. A total of 492 A319s are on order. The CFM 56 has b ee een n selected selected fo r 190 of these, wit h th e -5B5 -5B5 being chosen for 134 aircraft. Customers include easyJet (80), Frontier (11), (11), G EC AS (27) (27),, Ib eria (7) and ILFC (6). The -5B6 has been selected for 11 aircraft for Shenzen and CSA Czech, while the -5B7 has been chosen for 10 aircraft. Northwest has ordered five 5A5-pow 5A5pow ered A319s. A319s. The V.2522/24-A5 ha s been cho sen for 158 aircraft on order. The V.2522-A5 has 36 orders, including 23 aircraft for United. The V.2524-A5 has 113 orders, including America West, Kingfisher, G erman Wi Wings, ngs, TAM, TAM, LAN Airlines, Airlines, Spirit Airlines Airlines and Vola ris. Engine selections have yet to be made for 144 A319s on order. These include aircraft for CASC and AerCap.

The smallest varia nt, the 107-se 107-seat at A318, has w on 97 fi rm orders since A318, since receiving its first order in 1999. Although its sales performance is disappointing compared to that of the other three variants, it nevertheless exceeds that of its

The main appeal of the A320 is the family concept, concept, w hich allows a singl single e type rating for all four variants, the common use of components, and the possibility to share the same engine between two , three or four variants. The A320 family is operated by more than 180 different airlines, the majority of which take advantage of the family concept conce pt and operate two or three variants. The main benefits of the A320 family’s commonality features are the cross--cre cross crew w qua lification (CC Q) and singl single e type rating allow ed by its FBW flight control system, and possible use of a common engine engine between tw o, t hree or even all four types. Use of the common engine across all four types is only possible with the C FM56-5 FM56-5B B series series engine. The V.2500-A5 V.2500-A5 ca n b e used acr oss t he A319/320/321, w hile t he C FM56FM56-5A 5A is restricted restricted to the A319 and A320.

is used. This process gives the engine more EG T margin, w hich can be used w hile operating on-w on-w ing w ith a smalle smallerr type, either the A320 or A319. O verall, this process extends the total time onwing between shop visits. A common engine type also contributes to lower costs related to engine inventory. Ma ny large operators operators ha ve taken taken adva ntage of t hes hese e commonality commonality benefits by ordering tw o or more A320 A320 family variants, a nd selecting selecting a common engine type for them. Airlines operating aircraft with -5A1 and -5A3 engines include Air Canada, Air France,, G erm France erman an Wings, Northw es estt Airlines, and Tunis Air. Air France and Iberia use the CFM565B across all four variants. Airlines that use the -5B -5B series series across tw o or three variants include Aer Lingus, Aeroflot, Air Canada, Air China, Alitalia, Austrian Airlines, China Eastern, CSA Czech, Finnair,, Sw iss, TAP and USAirwa ys. Finnair The V.2500-A1 V.2500-A1 only pow ers low er gross w eight varia nts of t he A320A320-200, 200, but t he V.2500V.2500-A5 A5 is used used on t w o or three family variants by several airlines. Airlines that have the A319, A320 and A321 include British Airways, British Midland, China Southern, Sichuan Airlines Airl ines and TACA. TACA. Airlines Airlines w ith t w o

closest competitor, the 737-600. The A318’s customers include 60 CFM56-5B8-powered aircraft for: Air France (18), (18), C omlux Aviation (3) Frontier (5), (5), Ib eria (10), (10), IL FC (10)

C ommon engine use gives airlines airlines the ability to operate the engine engine initially initially at a high thrust rating on the A321 or A320. The engine is then de-rat de-rat ed w hen most o f its exhaust ga s temperat temperat ure (EG (EG T) margin

family variants include Air Air Ma cau, America Ame rica West, West, D rago na ir ir,, King fi sher sher,, Qa tar Ai Airw rw ays, Spirit Airline Airlines, s, South African Airways, United Airlines and Wizz Air.

 A318

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

M exicana (10 (10), ), and Taro m (4). (4). Another 30 PW6124PW6124-pow ere ered d a ircraft have been ordered by America West (15) and LAN Airlines (15). (15). National Air Service has yet to select engines for the five aircraft it has ordered.

Common fleets

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

 

14 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE

A320 family modification programmes The A320 is compliant with recent mandatory avionic modifications. There are, however, modification and upgrade packages for the CFM56-5B and  V  V.25 .250000-A5 A5 ser series ies eng engine ines, s, des design igned ed to imp impro rove ve ope opera ratin ting g perf perform ormanc ance e and and reduce maintenance costs.

M

odification and upgrade programmes available for the A320 A320 family f all into three categories: engine upgrades; avionics; a nd f uture passenger passenger-to-freighter conversions.

Engine upgrades CFM56-5A and -5B The CFM 5656-5A 5A wa s the fi rst engine to po w er the A320 A320 into service service and to be certified for extended tw inin-engine engine operations (Etops) on the aircraft. A derivative of the ubiquito us CFM56-3 engine for the classic 737 family, the CFM56-5A and -5B series has gone through a number of thrust upgrades and performance improveme improvements. nts. CFM claims there are currently no mandato ry modifications against the engine, engin e, either eith er the -5A1/A2 or t he high er rated -5B4, which pow er the A320. A320. There are three main differences betw een the -5A -5A and -5B engines: the addition of a fo urth booster booster stage in the low-pressure compressor (LPC) of the 5B; the incorporation of the -5C core technology fro m the A340 A340 engine; engine; and an optional double annular combustor (DAC). There are nine main thrust ratings of -5B:

improvement in exha ust gas temperature improvement (EGT) margin. C FM ha s just just com pleted the Tech Tech Insertion package, an extensive 63-hour flight test programme, and announced its availability. The Tech Tech Insertion prog ram me incorporat es technologies technologies developed developed and validated as part of Proje Project ct TECH TECH 56, and includess improvements include improvements to the H PC , the combustor, and the high- and lowpressure turbines (HP T and LPT) LPT).. The package will provide operators with longer time on-w on-w ing, 5% lower

AD CN U2003-355(B) R1 mandates a fuel-cooled oil cooler (FCOC) Inspection Inspe ction w ithin every 500 hours. AD 2003-10-14 requires shutting off the engine bleed following an oil filter clog message message during fl ight, to preve prevent nt possible number-3-bearing failure. The fix is incorporated in pro duction engines. engines. AD 2003-11-23 requires inspection of the magnetic chip detector (MCD) within 125 hours of se service rvice,, a nd repetitive inspection inspe ction every 125 hours on a group of enginess that have a particular number engine number--3bearing part number number.. The fi x is

maintenance costs, 15-20% 15-20% lower o xides of nitro gen (NO (NO x) emissions, emissions, and better fuel burn. The The price for kits at t his stage is undisclose undisclosed, d, but they w ill be available from 2007. The modification can be incorporated at a normal shop visit for engine overha ul. From 2007, t he Tech Insertio Insertio n specification will become the production build standard for the -5B. It will also become the technology standard for the 7B engine on the 737-NG 737-NG . The last ma jor engine enhancement enhancement for the -5B -5B w as in 1996 w ith the intro ductio n of th e -5B/ -5B/P standard, replacing the original build standard from 1994.

incorporat ed in production engines. engines. IAE has introduced a major modification enhancement package. Called V.2500Select, it is in response to market demands and can be tailored for individual customers. It offers up to 1% fuel burn improvement and a 2020-30% 30% reduction in maintenance costs. It w ill be available from mid-2008 as a retrofittable modification package that can be incorporat ed at an engine shop visit. The The modification involves a number of hardw are and eng engine ine control control unit (ECU) software changes.

 Avionics

In 2004, CFM launched a single major modification package for the -5B

 V.2500  V .2500 International Aero Engines (IAE) offers the V2500-A5 engine on the A320 family. Tw Tw o mo dels power the A320 and A321, although the -A1 series is no longer manufactured. There are several several mand ato ry modifi cations on the engine -A5 at the moment. Airw ort hiness directive (AD (AD ) number 99-13-01 mandates a borescope inspection inspe ction fo r evidence of o il or heat damage in the HPT hardware. This AD is applicable to early engines only. only. AD 2004-12-08 adds (HPT) 1st and 2nd d isks to the Federal Aviation Aviation Administration (FAA) enhanced

There are a number of avionic modifications available on the A320 family that oper operators ators and ow ner nerss need need to consider. Airbus has decided to embar k on a fleet-wide retrofit of the previous flight warning computer (FWC) to the more recent rece nt H 22-F2 F2 standard . This This is available free of charge. Autoland is prohibited at some airports if air data inertial reference units (ADIRU) installed on aircraft have obsolete magnetic variation tables, and Airbus offers a free retrofit with a new  magnetic variation table for the ADIRU. Airbus has decided to certify the enhanced ground proximity warning system syste m (EGP WS WS)) with a direct link to

that encompasse encompassed d ma jor changes in the compressor compres sor section, section, a nd a lso some enhancements enhanceme nts in the combustor a nd turbine. These were aimed at improved fuel burn, increased durability and an

inspection a t piece part opportunity, a nd inspection is part o f a n FAA FAA life limited limited part (LLP) evaluation programme being conducted across the industry, with contributions from each manufacturer.

global positioning system (GPS) to avoid false warning caused by FM position shift. This This modifi cation is offered free of charge to a irline irlines. s. Airbus is is offering a new ele electronic ctronic

Va r ia n t C FM 56-5B 1/P C FM 56-5B 2/P C FM 56-5B 3/P C FM 56-5B 4/P C FM 56-5B 5/P C FM 56-5B 6/P C FM 56-5B 7/P C FM 56-5B 8/P C FM 56-5B 9/P

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

Th r ust lb s 30, 000 31, 000 32, 000 27, 000 22, 000 23, 500 27, 000 21, 600 23, 300

 

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

15 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE IAE has launched a modification enhancement   package for the V.2500 V.2500 termed V.2500Select. V.2500Select. This involves a retrofittable upgrade package which results in up to a 1% reduction in fuel burn and a 20-30% reduction in maintenance costs.

instrument nt system (EIS) based on liquid instrume crystal display (LCD) technology.

Mandatory modificati modifications ons There are a number of structura l and systems sys tems modifications and ADs. In ATA chapter 53, which relates to the fuselage, there are tw o engineering engineering changes. First, cracks were detected around the rivets of the keel beam side panels below  the centre wing box due to fatigue. A manda tory inspection inspection CN 200 20033-146 146 wa s introduced for this area.

the systems areas. First, there is a major AD that ad dresse dressess cracking in the MLG shock absorber sliding tube. A linear crack of

Second, in the main landing gear (MLG ) area, area, the MLG door actuator fitting installed on the keel beam and the related upper strap were found to have cracked on some aircraft, due to fatigue. Tw o AD s w ere introd introd uced, CN 20042004-189 189 and LTA 2001-120 rev.01. In ATA chapter 55, which relates to the stabiliser, there are two modifications addressing water ingress. This was detected detecte d in the honeycomb panels of A320 elevators, elevators, d ue to cra cke cked d honeycomb core. These are CN 2001-062 and LTA 2001-197. Cha pte pterr 57, w hich relates relates to w ings ings,, include inc ludess fi ve modifications. Starting w ith hydraulic lines, a finding due to modification EO1186 EO118653 53 identified chafing marks on both engine suction liness during the second structura l check, line caused by w rongly-ins rongly-insta ta lle lled d struts. This resulted resu lted in inspection EO 136097. Lufthansa has also detected corrosion in the holes and in the flanges of the gear attachment rib 5 on several aircraft. Mo dification EO1252 EO125264 64 has been been introduced to address the corrosion. Chrome flaking of the flap track aft spigot spi got ha s been been detected. detected. Mo dificat ion EO 116560 has been introduced. Again in the flap area, loosened and da maged cushion seals have been detected, due to damaged inserts, loose and missing bolts and elongated holes. This is addressed by inspection EO

ab out six inches in length length w as discovered at the intersection of the cylinder and the ax le by Luftha nsa Technik Technik during a routine visual check of the right-hand MLG. Laboratory investigations performed by Messier-Dowty have revealed that the cause of the crack was the presence of non-metallic inclusions in the shock-ab shock-ab sorber sliding tube base metal. This This led to AD C N 2004-022 2004-022 and AOT A320-32A1273 A320-32A1273 (5 Februar y 2004). The second second mo difi cation ad dresse dressess inboard fla p trunnion trunnion w ear ear,, w hich curre currently ntly only a ffects seven seven airlines, airlines, one of w hich is Luftha nsa. There There is a slot in the belly fairing of the A320 family due to the movement of the in-board flap trunnion during norma l flight. This slot is closed closed in flight b y the so-called so-called belly fa iring sliding panel, which is connected to the trunnion by a hook. To To avoid w ear dama ges ges,, the trunnion is prot ecte ected d b y cla mpmp-type type steel rubbing pads, which were introduced by SB A320-27-1117 that terminated SB A320-27-1108/C N 1996-271-092. Finally,, a n inspection regime has been Finally introduced introduc ed to comba t the cracking cracking of ram air t urbine (RAT (RAT) carbo n bla des. Currently this only affects Lufthansa aircra ft. Three chord-wise chord-wise cracks w ere found on the aft side of the carbon bla de. The af fected R AT-type w as d eveloped by Hamilton Sundstrand for A319 and A321 aircraft a nd later a lso became became a subs substitute titute for the D ow ty R AT w hich wa s installed installed

for freighter conversion, the aircraft is an ideal fi t b etween the 737- and 757-sized 757-sized market. Although it will be several years before freighter programmes will become viable, EADS-EFW EADS-EFW has ensured ensured t hat it is well prepared. Jürgen Habermann, vice president pres ident sales & customer support f or EADS-EFW in Dresden outlines the engineering and preparatory work. “ There w ill definitely be a conversion programme for the aircraft, entering service serv ice about 2010 or 2011. The The aircraf t still retain high residual values and it will take four or five years before the older aircraft in the fleet become good candid at es. To la unch a f reighte reighterr conversion programme you need two things: enough customers who want the aircraft; a nd a large enough enough suppl supplyy of economically attractive airframes. We have conducted an initial feasibility study, looking at an outline cost of conversion and at the engineering engineering aspects to ensure it w ill wo rk. The The detailed engineering engineering wo rk w ill begin in 2008. We We have to obviously install ins tall a side door a nd blank other passengerr d oors, remove the interior, passenge strengthen the floor, install smoke detection systems and change the flight deck and associated systems for freighter mode. In a ll we expect the conversion conversion to cost $3.5-4.0 million.” As with other aircraft types, undoubtedly there will be a choice of other third-party conversions made

143870. Finally,, corro sion ha s been detected Finally detected on the lower wing skin inside the dry bay, resulting in inspection EO 131951. There are three main mo difi catio ns in

on A320 under serial serial numb er MSN 1000. For this purpose the A320 RAT box had to be extended in the forward belly fa iring. AD C N: FF-20052005-212 212 ad dresse dressess the issue.

available if ma rke rkett d em emand and is strong enough. Gross weight enhancements and engine en gine modifi modifi cations may a lso be required requi red to ensure ensure that pay load range meets market needs.

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

Future freighter conversions While the current fleet of A320s is stilll far too young to have any candida tes stil

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

 

16 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE

A320 family fue fuel burn performance The fuel burn performance of the most numerous of  the airframe-engine combinations in the A320 family  va  v ariants are analysed. he A320 family has a large number of airfra meme-engine engine combinations. This is because each fa mily member has several several maximum take-off weight (MTOW) variants, as well two or three fuel capacity options. The A32 A321, 1, fo r example, has up to five different MTOW variants. Airbus also offers between two and four variant s of the C FM56FM56-5B 5B and V.2500A5 for each family member, member, w hich means that there can be more than 20 airframeengine combinations for each family member. The fleet, how eve everr, is do minated by table, page 17) 17 ) . several engine types (see table, The CFM56-5B and V.2500-A5 series

T

are available on the A320 at between 25,000lbs and 27,000lbs thrust, thrust, a nd the 5B4, -5B1, -5B1, -5B2 and -5B3 are ava ilable on t he A321 A321 ra ted betw ee een n 27,000lbs, 30,000lbs and 33,000lbs thrust. A similar similar scenario exists with the V.2500 on the A319, A320 and A321. The V.2522-A5 and V.2524-A5 rated at 22,000lbs and 23,500lbs are offered on the A319. Only the V.2527-A5 rated at 26,500lbs thrust is availab le on the A320’s three MTOW variants. The V.2530-A .2530-A5 5 a nd V.2533-A .2533-A5 5 ra ted at 31,000lbs and 33,000lbs are available for the A321’s A321’s fi ve different M TOW o ptions. While airlines may usually combine a high-rated highrated engine w ith a highhigh-MTOW MTOW

both use the same basic engine and hardware and have up to eight different thrust rat ings. Thes Thesee are controlled by the engine’s engine ’s full full autho rity d igital engine control (FADEC) system, which allows thrust ratings to be easily changed. Each thrust rating has a different list price, and upgrades to a higher rating incur a cost. Airbus offers the C FM56FM56-5B8 5B8 and 5B9 rated at 21,600lbs and 23,300lbs on f amii ly specifi specifica cati tions, ons, the A318 (see A 320 fam  page  pa ge 6) . It similarly offers the -5B5, -5B6 and-5B7 on the A319. These three variants are rated at 22,000lbs, 23,500lbs and 27,000lbs. The -5A1, -5A1, -5A3 and -5B4

airfra me variant, there is is still the option of using a lower-rated engine for an aircraft with one of the higher MTOWs. Engine and thrust ra ting influence field and operating performance, while MTOW and fuel capacity affect range. A higher--rated engine will off er better fi eld higher performance, but ha ve higher higher fuel burn.

Fuel burn performance The diff erences in fuel burn b etw een the different engine types types pow ering the same MTOW variant of a family member have been examined. Only a few 

examples of the A319, A320 and A321 have been studied, studied, b ut these demonstrate the differences differences in fuel burn of some of the V.2500-A5, CFM56-5A and CFM56-5B series se ries varia varia nts on each mo del. The present study has been conducted on a typical European route represe repre sentat ntat ive of many operated by these aircraf t: London H eathrow -Munich. To illustrat illus trat e the effects effects of w ind strength and direction the aircraft have been analysed for operations in both directions. The tracked d istance for t his sector sector is 536nm. The The flight performa nce and plans for each aircraft have been calculated using historical winds and temperatures for January, with 85% reliability for winds and 50% reliability for temperatures. tempe ratures. The The flightpla ns for all aircraft have been examined with the aircraft cruising at a speed of Mach 0.80. In all ca se ses, s, the aircraf t ha ve been been studied w ith payloads of a full two-class two-class passenger layout. The A319 has been ana lyse lysed d w ith 124 passengers, passengers, the A320 w ith 150, and the A321 A321 w ith 185. The The standard weight for each passenger has been taken as 220lbs. 220lbs. The The payloa d fo r the A319 is therefore 27,280lbs, for the A320 A32 0 33,000lbs and for the A321 40,700lbs ( se see e table, table, page 17) . The aircra ft experi experience ence a small headwind of only 2 knots flying south south from London to Munich, so so the equivalent still air dista nce is almost equal to the tracked distance, and the flight time is 78-80 minutes. The aircraft experience a 60-knot headwind fl ying north from Munich to Londo n, w hich increases increases the tracked tracked distance from 549nm to 628nm (see table, page 17) . This subsequently increases flight time to 90-92 minutes. Tw o A319 variant s with an M TO W of 154,330l 154,330lbs bs (70 tonnes) and 166,450lbs (75.5 tonnes) have been studied w ith fo ur different engine types: types: the V.2524-A V.2524-A5, 5, t he C FM56-5B5 (see table, page 17) . The two MTOW variants have the same fuel capacity capacity of 6,300 US G allons (USG). (USG). The first point from t he analysis on the A319 is that aircraft powered by the V.2524-A .2524-A5 5 burn less fuel tha n th eir CFM56-powered counterparts. In the case of the A319, with an MTOW of 154,300lbs 154,300l bs (70 tonnes), tonnes), fl ying fr om London to Munich, the CFM56-5A5 is the least fuel-efficient, fuel-efficient, b urning 2.4% more fuel tha n the V.2500-pow V.2500-pow ered aircraft. Aircraft Aircraft powered by the C FM56-

In most cases, the V.2500 is more fuel efficient  than the CFM56-5A/-5B in the order of 0.5-5%.

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

 

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

17 I AIRCRAFT 17 I  AIRCRAFT OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S & OWNER’S GUIDE GUIDE FUEL BURN PERFORMANCE PERFORMANCE OF A319, A320 & A321 A321 City-pair

London-Munich

Munich-London

Aircraft  variant  variant

MTOW lbs

Engine model mod el

Fuel USG

Flight time

Passenger payload payl oad

Fuel USG per passeng pass enger er

ESAD nm

Wind speed factor  fact or 

A319 A319 A319 A319

154,330 154,330 154,330 154,330

V.2524-A5 CFM56-5B5 CFM56-5B6 CFM56-5A5

1,030 1,037 1,048 1,055

1:18 1:18 1:19 1:16

124 124 124 124

8.31 8.36 8.45 8.51

536 536 536 536

-2 -2 -2 -2

A319 A319

166,450 166,450

V.2524-A5 CFM56-5B5

1,030 1,037

1:18 1:18

124 124

8.31 8.36

536 536

-2 -2

A A3 3119 9

116 66 6,,4 45 50 0

C CFFM M5 56 6--5 5B A6 5

11,,0 04 58 5

11::119 6

112 24 4

88..4551

5 53 36 6

--2 2

A320 A320 A320

166,450 166,450 166,450

V.2500-A1 CFM56-5A1 CFM56-5B4

1,027 1,031 1,144

1:19 1:17 1:20

150 150 150

6.85 6.87 7.63

536 536 536

-2 -2 -2

A320 A320 A320

169,800 169,800 169,800

V.2527-A5 CFM56-5A3 CFM56-5B4

1,078 1,094 1,144

1:20 1:19 1:20

150 150 150

7.19 7.29 7.63

536 536 536

-2 -2 -2

A321 A321

196,200 196,200

V.2530-A5 CFM56-5B2

1,297 1,256

1:19 1:19

185 185

7.01 6.79

536 536

-2 -2

A319 A319 A319 A319

154,330 154,330 154,330 154,330

V.2524-A5 CFM56-5B5 CFM56-5B6 CFM56-5A5

1,153 1,160 1,167 1,175

1:32 1:31 1:31 1:30

124 124 124 124

9.30 9.36 9.41 9.48

627 627 627 627

-60 -60 -60 -60

A319

166,450

V.2524-A5

1,153

1:32

124

9.30

627

-60

A319 A319 A319

166,450 166,450 166,450

CFM56-5B5 CFM56-5B6 CFM56-5A5

1,160 1,167 1,175

1:31 1:31 1:30

124 124 124

9.36 9.41 9.48

627 627 627

-60 -60 -60

A320 A320 A320

166,450 166,450 166,450

V.2500-A1 CFM56-5A1 CFM56-5B4

1,139 1,144 1,270

1:33 1:29 1:33

150 150 150

7.60 7.62 8.46

627 627 627

-60 -60 -60

A320 A320 A320

169,800 169,800 169,800

V.2527-A5 CFM56-5A3 CFM56-5B4

1.192 1,204 1,270

1:33 1:33 1:33

150 150 150

7.95 8.03 8.46

627 627 627

-60 -60 -60

A321 A321

196,200 196,200

V.2530-A5 CFM56-5B2

1,390 1,365

1:32 1:31

185 185

7.51 7.38

627 627

-60 -60

Source: Jeppesen

5B5 and -5B6 burn 0.7% and 1.7% more table, thi s page). fuel respectively (see table, These differences are reduced w hen flying in the other direction, which increases incre ases the travelled travelled d istance by a bout 17%. In this case the CFM56-5A5pow ere ered d a ircraft b urns 1.9% more fuel than that pow ere ered d b y t he V.2524V.2524-A5. A5. The The CFM 5656-5B6 5B6 burns 1.2% more fuel and table, thi s page). the -5B5 0.6% more (see table, The second second point is that a n aircra ft w ith an MTOW of 166,450lbs (75.5 (75.5 tonnes) burns the same amount of fuel as that w ith a low er gross gross w ei eight ght and equipped w ith th e sam sam e engines. engines. This This is because the actual take-off weight of the tw o a ircraft is the same despite despite the higher higher gross-w grossw eight variant being used. used.

and CFM 5656-5B4 5B4 engines. engines. In this case the V.2500-A1 has the lowest fuel burn, with the CFM56-5B4 burning 11.4% more fuel. This engine w as developed developed fo r higher gross weight variant s of the A320, however, however, and also for a ll other models of the A320 family. family. The V.2500-A1 was only used on earlyproduction producti on aircraft with low er gross gross weights. Aircraft with the CFM56-5A1 burn less than 1% more fuel than tho se table, thi s page). w ith t he V.2500-A V.2500-A1 1 (see table, Similar differences in fuel burn are seen with aircraft operating in both directions. The A320 with the higher gross weight of 169 169,800 ,800lbs lbs wa s analysed analysed w ith V.2527-A5, CFM565-5A3 and CFM565B4 engines. This is more representative

6.5% higher higher fuel burn, w hile the CFM565A3 has a 1.5-5.5% higher burn (see table tab le,, thi thiss page), page), despite the V.2527-A5equipped aircraft having a 4,000lbs higher operating empty w eight (OEW). (OEW). Of the five MTOW MTOW variants of the A321 the highest is 206,130lbs (93.5 tonnes).. The varian t a nalysed here has an tonnes) MTOW of 196,200l 196,200lbs bs (89 tonnes), tonnes), a nd a fuel capa capa city of 7,040 USG . This This variant has been analysed with V.2530-A5 and CFM56-5B2 engines. In this case, the V2527--equipped aircraft has a margina lly V2527 table, higher fuel burn of 1.8-3.3% ( see table, thiss page) thi page) . Besides differences in fuel burn between different engine types on t he same aircraft, the analysis also shows that

The A320 has been analysed with MTOWs of 166,450lbs (75.5 tonnes) and 169,800lbs 169,800l bs (77 tonnes). tonnes). The aircraft w ith a gro ss weight of 166,450l 166,450lbs bs have been analysed with the V.2500-A1, CFM56-A1

of later-built aircraft, which are also currently curre ntly b eing ordered by airlines airlines.. As with all other cases, aircraft with the V.2500 engine are the most fuelefficient. The CFM 5656-5B4 5B4 has a 6.1-

the A321 is the most fuel-efficient family member in terms of fuel burn per seat (see table, table, thi s page). The A319 burns about 1.5 USG more per passenger than the A321, equal to about $2.4.

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

 

18 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE

A320 family maint nte enance analysis & bu budge dget maintenance planning document (MPD), the A320’s maintenance programme was similar to that of all other Airbus types, comprising comprisi ng th ree main groups of independent checks: A Check, C check and structural inspections. The The ba sic 1A group of tasks had three multiples and an interval of 500FH. If performed as block checks, the A cycle would be completed at the fourth check, the A4, which has an interval of 2,000FH. The 1C tasks had an interval of 15 months, and comprised four multiples of 1C, 2C, 4C and 8C items. These could be grouped into b lock checks, checks, forming a programme that terminated terminated at the C8 check with an interval of 120 months, equal to 10 years. The tw o structura l checks checks had intervals of five and 10 years. For the sake of simplicity, simplicity, most operat ors combined the fi veve-year year structura l check with the C4 check and the 10-year structural check with the C8. The ability of most operators to utilise interva ls betw betw ee een n ba se checks meant that the D check was being performed after eight or nine years of operation. The oldest aircraft that entered service se rvice in in 1988 a nd 1989 will therefore go through their second D checks betw ee een n 2005 and 2007.

available downtimes for maintenance. Performing a ll former A check check tasks togetherr for a n operator w ith an FC time togethe of 1.5–2.0F 1.5–2.0FH H wo uld mean mean only a bout 300-400F 300400FC C w ould be reached w hen the 600FH 600F H interval w as reached. It is likel likely, y, however, that most operators will still perform a generic A chec check.” k.” While A check check inspections h av e been splitt into three different spli different int erval categories, Emil Frehner, planning at SR Technics, explains th at there ar e still three multiples. multiple s. “ The 600FH 600FH tasks ha ve multipless of 600FH, 1,200FH a nd multiple 2,400FH 2,400F H . The 500F 500FC C ta sks have multipless of 1,000F multiple 1,000FC C and 2,000F 2,000FC. C. The calendar items have intervals of 100, 200 and 400 days. The utilisation pattern of most operators means that these intervals coincide relatively closely, so most perform generic A checks and group these three types of ta sks together. together. M ost carriers accumulate about 400FC and 600FH in about 80 days, so they will take advant age of the escalated escalated interval.” interval.” “ Some operators that Lufthansa Tec echnik hnik supports have a n FH: FC ra tio of about 1:1 and fly a bout 200FH 200FH pe perr month, so w e try to ma ke maximum maximum use of their intervals,” intervals,” continues Osto jic jic.. “ We give syste system m ta sks an interval of 600FH and zonal tasks a 100-day interval. This This different different gro uping of t asks means we now have to consider complex planning issues issues such as lab our requirements, spares availability, and the discovery of non-routine work in the case of short maintenance dow ntime ntimes.” s.” A similar similar escalation and rere-definition definition of task intervals has been made to C check chec k items. “ C chec check k items have been split into three groups based on taskspecific spe cific primary usage para mete meters rs of 6,000FH for system tasks, 4,500FC for structural items and 20 months for zonal tasks,” says Ostojic. Ostojic. “ This allow allow s greater greater flexibility in planning. Some fleets we support get to 4,500FC and 4,500FH at

The latest revision to the A320 family’s MPD contains several changes, including the introduction of some new  new  ta sks. Its main effect, how eve everr, is to replace letter letter checks checks with a usage parameter concept and to further escalate intervals. Former A and C chec check k ta sks, for example, now have intervals in one of three task primary usage parameters of FH, FC or calendar time. “ The interval interval for 1A check check tasks wa s changed from 500FH into system tasks with an interval of 600FH or 750FC based on the primary usage parameter, and zona l tasks with an interval of 100 100 days,” expl explains ains Da mir Ostojic, Ostojic, project project manager of maintenance programmes at Luftha nsa Techni Technik. k. “ The decision decision to perform those tasks together in one work package or to split them into two or three separa se para te ones depends depends on the operato r’s FH:FC rat io, monthly utilis utilisation ation a nd

about the same time, so we would lose about 1,500FH of our 6,000FH interval on system system tasks.” Like the A check items, the C check items have retained th ei eirr multiple intervals. “ The four intervals in the old MP D have been retained, so the multiples multiples are now: 6,000FH, 12,000FH, 24,000FH and 48,000FH 48,000FH for tasks with a n FH parameter; 4,500FC, 9,000FC, and 18,000FC for tasks with an FC parameter; paramete r; and 20, 40 and 80 months for tasks with calendar time as a prim primary ary usage para meter meter,” ,” says Ostojic. The structural t asks ha ve also b ee een n escalated from five- and 10-year to sixand 12-year intervals. These new  intervals allow more flexible planning of base checks, checks, but Fre Frehner hner explains tha t most operators will still group the three groups of C check tasks together which causes diffi cultie cultiess in planning. “ The

The A320 A320 family has the benefit of a low line and ramp check maintenance requirement and a long  base check cycle interval.

T

he oldest oldest A320s are now more than 18 years old. They have completed comple ted their fir st full heavycycle check and are approaching their second. New aircraft continue to be delivered at a high rate. M ore tha n 1,400 A320s, A320s, 750 A319s and 340 A321s A321s are in operation. The A320 A32 0 is already th e second second most popular jetliner je tliner in service service,, ma king it a n importa nt aircraft for most maintenance providers. Its order backlog, and the likelihood that it will remain in production for another eight to 10 years, will take the total number built beyond the 6,000 mark, until a successor is launched. This implies that the A320 could continue operating in large numbers for another 40 years.

 A320 in operation operation Most A320s operate average flight cycle (F (FC) C) times of a bout 1.5 flight hours (FH), and accumulate about 2,800 FH per year. The A320 has been embraced by severa seve ra l low -c -cost ost car riers in in recent years, including includi ng jetBlue, easyJet, Frontier a nd Air Asia. These airlines achieve utilisat utilis at ions closer closer to 10F 10FH H per day. In some cases aircraft are flown on routes where flight times approach 2-3FH. The pattern of operation, average FH:FC a nd a nnual utilisation utilisation all influence the number of checks and MH consumed over a year of operation or a complete heavy-cycle check. This analysis assumes an a ver verage age FC time of 1.5 FH, FH, and annual utilisation utilisation o f 2,800FH 2,800FH and 1,850FC. Based on 355 days of actual operations, ope rations, w ith an a ve verage rage of 10 days for downtime for base checks and other maintenance, the aircraft completes an average of 5.3FC and 8.0 per day. Aircraft operating for 10FH per day, at a n average FC FC t ime of 2.0FH, 2.0FH, w ould complete up to 3,500FH per year. Aircraft older than nine years will be approa ching their second heavy -chec check k cycle,, a nd experiencing cycle experiencing mat urity in t heir airframe and engine maintenance costs.

Maintenance programme Until the lat es estt revision revision to its AIRCRAFT COMMERCE  

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

19 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE generic 4C a nd 8C chec generic checks ks have intervals of 80 and 160 months, months, compared compared to the 72- and 144144-month month intervals of th e struct ura l checks. The The timing o f th e C4/6year an d C 8/12-ye 12-year ar checks closely closely coincides, coincide s, because the full structura l check chec k intervals can rarely be ut ilis ilised ed due to factors relating to operating schedules, and maintenanc maintenancee planning planning and ava ilability ilability.. C ombining these checks checks avoids increased maintenance downtime and simpl simplifies ifies base-chec base-check k planning.”

there are no a ctual PF or TR checks, but still reta reta in them. The routine ta sks can be performed by the flightcrew. Only some technical technic al d efe efects cts ha ve to be cleared cleared between flights, which is the only time tha t line mec mechan han ics are required.” The 36-hour 36-hour int erval for the ‘da ily’ check means that operators are no longer forced to do this check check every single single night. On most occasions the check can now be done at an oper operator’s ator’s home base, base, w hen the aircraft returns home. “ We actua lly have a 48-hour interval for the daily check on the aircraft operated by Swiss,”

PF check check is mainly limited to a visual walk around and check of emergency equipment that can be performed by the flightcrew, flightcre w, so that no man hours (MH (MH ) have to be consumed consumed b y line mechanics mechanics for t he routine part s of these chec checks.” ks.” Nevertheless, on some occasions line mechanics do carry out the routine parts of t hes hesee checks. checks. “ Longer ground t ime imess between flights when there is a change of flight crew ma y result result in line mechanics mechanics having t o perform t he visual visual inspection,” inspection,” explains Lenz. As a result of t hese inspections inspe ctions or t echni echnical cal defects that arise

Line & ramp checks Traditional line and ramp maintena nce schedule scheduless and progra mmes have specified pre-flight pre-flight (PF (PF), ), tra nsit (TR), daily and weekly checks. These checks have included routine inspections from the MPD, but have also been used to cle clear ar technical defects defects a s they ar ise in operation. “ The MPD is not intended intended to be a complete maintenance progra mme, and so, with the exception of some ‘weekly’ tasks with an eight-day interval, it on ly suggests suggests ma intenance items below  below  the former A check. check. The The MPD does not actually have any inspections or tasks w ith an interval lower than 36 hours,” explains expl ains Ostojic. Ostojic. “ Operators define

says Jean-Marc Lenz, line maintenance Switzerland a t SR Techni Technics. cs. “ This allows virtually a ll of these checks checks to b e done at the home base.” Besides the daily checks, the weekly check is the largest in the line-and-ramp check cycle. PF checks are performed before the first flight of the day, and TR checks chec ks prior to a ll subsequent subsequent fl ights. “ The PF check check is actua lly a requireme requirement nt of Joint Aviation Requirements Operations (JAROPs) or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), so it is the responsibili responsibility ty o f operat ors to include it in the maintenance concept. Most local authorities accept delegation of those tasks to the flightcrew, but some may still

in operation , line mechan mechan ics are required to work on non-routine maintenance. D aily checks generally generally include the visual inspection inspection of PF and TR chec checks ks on items such such as engines and the bra ke system, as w ell as items such such a s draining fuel tan ks, replenishing replenishing engine engine oil, a nd checking ty re pressures. These These checks are usually done overnight and are also often used to clear technical defects. Weekly checks comprise daily checks plus more in-depth inspections of items such as cabin lighting, crew oxygen system, and emergency actuators.

checks that are smaller than the former A check. Many A320 operators have found

require the PF chec check k to be performed by the station mechanic,” mechanic,” says Ostojic. Ostojic. “ The

The process of clearing technical defects starts with logging and trouble-

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006  

OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE 20 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA

Technical defects d efects

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

The A320’s MPD does not require routine items  for transit or pre-flight pre-flight checks. checks. These These can be accomplished by flightcrew, although defects would have to be cleared by line mechanics. The routine tasks in the MPD with the lowest interval are 36 hours.

While PF checks for A320s are mostly carried out a s a visual wa lkroun carried lkround d inspection of the aircraft, followed by flightd ec eck k systems checks checks performed by the flightcrew, MH are consumed for non-routine work that arises. An allowa nce of 0.5MH and $7.0 for materials and consumables, but excluding rotables and LRUs that might be exchanged, should be made for PF checks. On the assumed pattern of operation, 355 PF checks checks will be perfor med each yea r. These These will consume about 180 180MH MH pe perr year, year, and cost about $12,600 at a labour rate of $70 per MH. The additional annual cost for materials w ill be $1,260. $1,260. The The tota l annua l cost for PF checks will be ab out $1 $14,000. 4,000. While TR checks can also be made by flightcrew, some carriers use line mechanics instead. Non-routine work also arises, so MH from line mechanics are consumed. United Services terms its TR checks Number 1 service checks, and usess an average of 0.5MH for the routine use inspe ins pection ction and 2.1MH for the nonroutine work. LTU Maintenance records a si simil milar ar total expenditure expenditure of 3.0MH for the check. check. A similar similar budget of $7 can be used use d fo r mat erials and consuma bles bles.. The assumed pattern of utilisation means that abo ut 1,480 TR TR chec checks ks w ill be performed performed each year. This will take annual total MH consumption for these chec checks ks to a bout 4,40MH, which will cost in the region of $275,000. $2 75,000. Use of consuma bles and mat erials will be abo ut $10,400 per per year. Daily checks can be performed by one

shooting, followed by either clearing or deferring them. This is streamlined with the aid of the on-board fault detection and analysis system, transmission of default messages to ground stations and automatic on-the-ground analysis. The A320’s centralised fault display system (CFDS) receives system failure messages mes sages from th e aircraf t’s components’ built-in t est equipm ent (BITE). These These messages are displayed on the electronic centralised aircraft monitor (ECAM), w hich is the top screen screen in t he centre centre of the flightdeck’s main panel. These ECAM messages mes sages are sent to the centralised centralised f ault display interface unit (CFDIU), which sends them to the multifunction control and display unit unit (MCD U), but can also transmit them to the operator’s maintenan ce operat operat ions control centre via the aircraft communication and reporting system (ACARS) if this is installed on the aircraft. This allows maintenance control

equipment list (MEL). This system is designed to reduce both the time spent analysing faults, and the number of MH spent on non-routine maintena nce in line-and line-and -ramp maintenance. The system also makes it possible for line mechanics mechanics to be ready w ith the required line replaceable replaceable units (LRUs), other spare parts, tools and required labour when the aircraft arrives at the gate. This can avoid an extension of scheduled scheduled time at the gat e, thereby thereby leading to fewer flight delays and cancellations. While Whi le the system system can not influence the number of MH spent on routine items in line--and -ramp chec line checks, ks, it has contributed to a reduction in MH expenditure on non-routine items. items. “ The on-board computer provides good indications for troub le leshooting shooting defects,” defects,” says Lenz. Lenz. “ The system saves operational time and MH in clearing defects because it provides more

staff to analyse fault messages while the aircraf t is in fl ight. Tec Technicians hnicians can independently analyse many of the fault messages to a deeper level using the MCDU. The flightcrew are also required to log EC AM messages messages in the post-flight post-flight technical technic al log. The ECAM mes messages sages are automatically recorded and produced by the CFDIU, a nd in ad dition, these these fault and BIT BITE E codes can be printed and downloaded. The messages and data on the post-flight report (PF (PFR) R) a re used used b y line mechanics mechanics to isolate and troubleshoot t he faults. Fault messages that are transmitted transmitted in fl ight by ACARS can automa ticall ticallyy be analysed analysed a nd displayed by AIRMAN, a computerised

accurate information, and is more efficient in locating the exact component w ith th e problem. This This reduces reduces the incidence incide nce of no-fault-found.”

As described, described, there are ro utine and services tasks in PF and TR checks. These are defined by the operators operators and are required by local authorities in addition to the MPD. Some airlines airlines can t here herefore fore a void using line mechanics for PF and TR checks, although they may be required on some occasions when the flightcrew are unavailable.. “ Z ero MH are require unavailable required d for

mechanic, and are often done overnight. Estimates Esti mates of tota l MH re required quired vary, vary, and largely depend depend on the number of d efec efects ts tha t a re sele selected cted to b e cleared, cleared, or remain deferred until weekly checks or A checks. Realistic MPD task quantification estimates es timates are that up to a tota l of 3.55.0MH are consume consumed d during a daily check, chec k, being split abo ut 50:50 betw ee een n routine and non-routine work. A budget of $500 should be allowed for materials. G ive iven n that the pattern of operation w ill be 355 355 da ys per year, year, 250 da ily checks chec ks w ill be performed ann ually, resulting in a total MH expenditure in the region reg ion of 1,250MH 1,250MH , w ith a cost of about $90,000. $9 0,000. Annual cost of ma terials for

tool Airbus that analyses fault developed codes usingbyelectronic versions of troubleshooting and fault isolation manuals, as well as the minimum

PF and TR technical checks,alalthough somethat will be used use d w hen technic d efe efects cts arise canno t be deferred until the daily check is is performed,” explains Osto jic jic..

these checksinto checks willaccount be abo ut Taking t he$125,000. MPD t asks for w ee eekly kly checks, checks, it is estimated estimated tha t they require about 8MH to complete.

Line & ramp inputs

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

22 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERATOR’S OPERATOR’S GUIDE Again, the split between routine and non-

Other maintenance providers report

routine is about 50:50. Others consume up to 12.0MH, and United Services says that average routine consumption is 3.7MH, and fo r non-routine non-routine wo rk it is 7.6MH. The actual MH used will depend on an operator’s policy for clearing defects. defec ts. About $700 of ma terials and consumables are used. While the MPD interval for weekly checks is eight days, operational and planning constraints mean that checks are actua lly made every every six to se seven ven days. Considering the aircraft will operate for 355 days a year, about 60 weekly checks w ill therefore be perfor med. Taking a conse conservat rvat ive average of 11.0MH for a weekly check means that about 660MH will be consumed annually for these chec checks, ks, at a cost of $4 $46,000. 6,000. Materials and consumables will cost about $42,000. The tota l annua l cost for t hese line line-and -ramp chec checks ks w ill be $595,000 $595,000,, eq ual (see ee table table,, page to a rate of $212 per FH (s  31) . This cost per FH would fall with a longer average FC time of 2.0FH . The number of TR chec checks ks w ould be reduced to a bout 950, with a cons conseque equent nt drop in total M H and ma teri terials als consume consumed. d. Small reductions in the number of MH used in line and ramp checks can significantly

 A checks checks

lower maintenance costs.

A check intervals have been extended, and tasks split into three groups, as a result res ult of revis revision ion 28 to the A320’s A320’s MPD . The pattern of operation, average FH:FC rat io and le leve vell of a irc ircraft raft utilis util isation ation mean tha t ma ny operators group t hes hesee tasks together a s a generic A check. This also simplifies planning. The interval of 600F 600FH H for syste system m tasks means that the interval of 500FC for structural tasks will only be partially used use d if th es esee tw o groups a re performed performed together. With an annual utilisation of 2,800FH 2,800F H , the 600FH limit w ill be reached in about 78 days, meaning that the calendar limit of 100 days will not be reached. A checks are more likely to be performed every every 450FH, given typical operational oper ational a nd planning constraints. constraints. O n this basis, six to seven A checks will be performed each year. Realistic MPD quantifications estimate es timate MH cons consumpti umption on f or routine tasks to be 80MH, versus about 27MH speci spe cified fied by the MPD . “ About another 10% should be added to this for nonroutine items and cle clearing aring defec defects. ts. Interior work, such as cleaning and replacing a few items will add about anotherr 10MH anothe 10MH to the total,” total,” says Ostojic Ostoj ic.” .”

similar M H consumption. “ The generic similar generic A check consumes about 80MH in the case of the aircraft that w e manage,” says Lenz. LTU LTU M aintenan ce reports reports up t o 86MH for larger A checks, while United Service Se rvicess records records a n a verage tota l of 75MH for A checks. This will w ill result result in abo ut 520MH per year being consumed for A checks, with a cost of up to a bout $36,500 $36,500,, w hen charged at a typical industry rate of $70 perr MH . pe Ma teri terial al a nd consumables consumables consumption is in t he region of $5 $5,000,0006,000 per check. Six or seven A checks per year year w ill use use about $4 $40,000, 0,000, taking the total annual cost for A checks to abo ut $77,000. $77,000. This This will be equal to a table,, page 31) . rat e of $28 per per FH ( see table

Base check inputs Despite revision 28A splitting C check tasks into three groups, many operators still combine these as a generic C check. The content of these checks is different to the C checks under the previous MPD,” explains Ostojic. “ This is due to ‘dro p out’ tasks, ones that have not been escalat es calat ed under Revision Revision 28A.” Under the new new MPD , the C4 check check has an interval of 80 months, which is

FULL TECHNICAL SUPPORT FROM AN EXPERT IN FLYING  Take advantag adva ntagee of our long expe rien ce in both f lying and main maintena tenance. nce. Our full tech technica nicall suppor su ppor t cov ers engin es, airframes & modifications, components, landing gear, pooling, engineering and technical training for ATR 42/72, Airbus 320-family and MD-11 aircraft. Turn to us; we'll take good care of your fleet.

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

23 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERATOR’S OPERATOR’S GUIDE eight months longer tha n the six-year six-year structural check. The The C8 check has a n interval of 160 months, 16 months longer

interior refurbishment and stripping and re-painting. repainting. The extended interval of the full base-check cycle means that some

about $90,000. Diez-Barturen DiezBarturen adds tha t the tota ls for C1 a nd C 3 checks checks vary. vary. The The total M H for

tha n the 12-year 12-year structural check. Since the basic C check has a 6,000FH and 20month limit, and most airlines will only be able to use about 18 months of this interval, inte rval, a n a irc ircraft raft compl completi eting ng ab out 2,800FH per year will have a C check performed ab out every 4,200FH 4,200FH . This This means that the C4 check will actually come due after about 16,800FH and 72 months, making it convenient to combine it w ith the six-year six-year structura l check. check. The C8 check w ill come due aft er

airlines decide decide to strip a nd re-paint at every heavy check. Sincee no o perators h ave experience Sinc experience of an aircraf t completing a b asease-chec check k cycle under Revision 28A, all MH and materials cost cost inputs are draw n from aircraft oper operating ating under earlier earlier M PDs. Light C1, C3, C 5 and C 7 checks checks include the C1 tasks and require about 800MH for routine tasks. In the first base-check cycle, they experience a nonroutine ratio of 20-30%, which adds

C1 checks will be about 1,700MH, but up to 3,000MH for C3 checks. Consumption of ma teri terials als and consumables is at $2 $20 0 per MH , so $36,000 $36 ,000 should be bud gete geted d f or t hese checks. chec ks. The The tota l check check cost w ill be about $126,000. C2 and C6 checks include the C1 and and C2 task items. This This increases increases the numberr of routine MH to a bout 950, numbe while a non-routine ratio of about 30% adds a further 300MH 300MH . D ie iezz-Barturen Barturen

about 34,000FH and 144 months, so it will be convenient to combine it with the 12-year 12year structural chec check. k. This compares to a shorter actual C8/D chec check k interval of ab out n ine years and 26,0 26,000F 00FH H that aircraft ha ve been been achieving under the previous previous MPD . Since Revision 28A is only about a year old, most a irline irliness w ill still still be bridging their aircraft onto new maintenance programmes. Under R evi evision sion 28A, the six light C checks in the base-check cycle will include routine inspections and non-routine work arising as a result, cabin cleaning, modifi cations and se service rvice bulletins bulletins (SBs). (SBs). The two heavy checks, the C4 and C8

about 200 200MH MH . Ignacio D ie iezz-Barturen, Barturen, commercial commerci al director a t Iberia t echni echnical cal division, explains that it records a nonroutine ratio of 20-30% for C1 and C3 checks. This takes the number of routine and no nn-routine routine MH for the C1 check check to 1,250-1,500, 1,2501,500, and to b etween 1,600 and 1,750 for the C 3 check. check. The number of MH required to complete modifications, SBs and out-ofphase items varies, but an average of 700MH can be used for lighter C checks on a ircraft in their fi rst ba se se--chec check k cycle. cycle. Airlines will also have to add about 100MH for interior cleaning and cabin work, taking the total to about 1,800MH 1,80 0MH . Base maintenance labour labour

says that Iberia uses uses about 1,250MH for routine work, w ith a non-routine non-routine ratio of 25-40% adding about another 650MH. Mod ifications, SBs and inte interior rior works add a nother 800MH, 800MH, t aking the total to 2,050-2,500MH 2,0502,500MH , equa l to $1 $102,500. 02,500. Materials and consumables will be about $41,000, taking the total cost for the check to $143,500. The C4 check includes routine items for C4 tasks and five- or six-year structural inspection, and so requires a lot of a cce ccess ss.. M H for routine tasks and access w ill total in t he region region of 4,500. A non-routine ratio of 55% will add another 2,500MH, and modifications another 1,800MH. A further 4,000MH

checks, will include these items, as w ell as

charged at $50 per MH takes this cost to

w ill be used used for interior refurbishment refurbishment

R e  e m ov al   of   t h e  C abi n  W i nd ow  T  A  A  S K  : 

56 -2

1- 13 -

A 32 0  0  A M M  M  F IN 

I ns t al l at  i on  of   t h e   V e  e r  r t  t ic al S t abi l i z e  e r  r  Le ad in g E d  d ge  T  A  S K  : 

0 00 -

001

55 -3 2

- 1 1-

40 0- 0

0 1   F 

D e  e t  t ai l e d  d  V i s ual   I ns p e c  c t  t io n of   t he   R o l l e r  r s T  A  A  S K  : 

52 -1

3- 31 -

2 20 -

R ud d  d e  e r  r  Si d e  e  P ane l s   i n t he  Ar e  e a of  t he   R ud d  d e  e   r r    B e ar i ngs and  ar ou nd  t he  T r  r ailing E d  F as t e  d ge  e ne r  r s  an d  H  oi s t i ng P oi nt s ,  S P C  C 

0 01

T  A  A  S K  : 

I ns t al l at  i o n of  t h e  N o. 4  F l ap  T r  r ac k  k  T  A  A  S K  : 

57 -5 1

- 33 -

4 00 -0

04

C a r go  C o m p ar t  t m e n t  D e  e c  c om p r e  e s s i on,   F  l oor  an d  Li ni ng  P a ne l s ,  GV C  C 

T  A  A  S K  : 

2 5- 5

0 -0 0-

20 0-

D e  e t  t ai le d  d  V i sual  I nsp e c  c t  t i on of  R  P r  r e  e s s ur e  e ar  e  e  B ul k he  ad  F or w  w ar d  be l ow   C a d  F ac e  e  bi n F l oor    Le v  v e  e l T  A  A  S K  : 

0 0 3   F 

email: technical.sa [email protected] [email protected] m

5 3- 5

1 -0 0-

21 0-

5 5- 40

-0 0-

21 0- 0

0 1   F 

T H  H S R H  H T r  r aili ng E d  d ge  Low e  A c c  e r  r  c e  e s s   D oo r  s ,  I ns t al l a t  i o n T  A  A  S K  :  5 5- 1

3 -1 1-

40 0-

0 0 1   F  02

0 0 2   F 

 www.f innai r.com/t echn ical ser vice s

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

 

OPERATOR’S GUIDE 24 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERATOR’S Diez-Barturen estimates that on average there is a d ifferenc ifferencee of a bout 5% betw betw ee een n the A320 and its two smaller counterparts. Aircraft that have been through their

second base-check cycle will experience an increase in MH, due to more routine tasks, higher non-routine ratios and a higher level of modifications and SBs. Tota l M H for the ba se se--chec check k cycle can reach 48,500. The consumption consumption of materials will also also rise w ith MH , and as more components ar e removed removed f or repair. Tota l mat erial expenditure will reach up to $1 $1.5 .5 million. This This will ta ke tota l cost for tion, he eight ew ight ba w seillchecks checks to athe bout $3.9 million, mill hich increase increase basecheck reserve to about $150 per FH. This could be kept down to about $115 per FH for aircraft operating under under a Revision 28A MPA and with a basecheck chec k interval o f 34,000FH.

Heavy components

and in the region region of 1,50 1,500MH 0MH for stripping and painting. Diez-Barturen estimates that stripping and painting during this check will add about 1,200MH 1,20 0MH and a further $14,0 $14,000 00 for the cost of the paint. This takes the total for the check to about 14,300MH. Aircraft that have lower non-routine non-routine ratios, ratios, a nd use fewer MH for interior interior w ork, w il illl have lower total M H cons consumptions umptions of about 12,500MH. The labour portion will have a cost of about $625,000715,000.

20,000. The The tota l expenditure expenditure for ma ny aircraft drops when MH use used d for modifications, SBs, and routine routine,, nonroutine and interior work are reduced. This has taken labour down to 18,000MH, equal to charge of $900,000. Consumption of materials will be at a rate of a bout $25 $25 per per MH , so equal to about $450,000. Additional materials for interior refurbishment refurbishment w ill be in in the region of $100,000, $100,000, w hile the cost cost of oncondition and soft-time component repairs w ill be about $60 $60,000. ,000. This This will

Ma teri terials als and cons consumable umabless will total $250,000-285,000 $250,000285,000.. An add itional cost of about $50,000 can be expected for the repair of sof t-time or on -condition components removed during the check, as well as another $60,000 for materials used use d in cab in refurbishment. refurbishment. The total f or materials and component repairs will therefore be $360,000-395,000. The composition of C8 checks is similar to C4 checks. MH for routine items and access have been in the region of 7,500MH 7,500MH for aircraft in their first cycle. Defect ratios of 50-60% increase this to 11,500-12,000. 11,500-12,000. An An a dditiona l 2,000MH 2,00 0MH shoul should d be a ll llow ow ed for modifications and SBs, 5,000MH 5,000MH for cabin and interior refurbishment, and 1,500MH 1,50 0MH for strippi stripping ng and painting. painting. This will take the total M H to a bout

take the total cost for the check to about $1.5 million. A total of 43,5 43,500MH 00MH are used used for the fi rst ba se se--chec check k cycle. cycle. The tota l labo ur and mat erial cost for t he full base-chec base-check k cycle w ill be $3.3-3.5 $3.3-3.5 million. When amo rtise rtised d over the interval of 26,000F 26,000FH H tha t is achieved achieved by most a irline irliness over a nine-year nineyear period, the to tal res reserve erve for these base checks is $128 per FH (see table, page 31) . If the MH and material consumption are the same for an aircraft completing 34,000FH in its base-check cycle,, w hen operating under a Revisi cycle Revision on 28A MPD , this reserve reserve will fa ll to $98 per FH. There are, however, small differences betw ee een n t he A320, A320, a nd t he smaller smaller A319 and the large A321. A321. While While many t asks are the same irrespec irrespective tive of a ircraft type,

Heavy components comprise four groups: wheels, tyres and brakes; landing gears; thrust reversers; and the auxiliary pow er unit (APU). These These ar e sometimes referred to as ‘off-aircraft components’, because they have independent maintenance programmes. The maintenance of these four groups of components is FC related, and their (see ee table table,, page 26) costs are summarise summarised d (s by repair intervals, factors affecting the number and cost of repairs, the total cost for repairs and replacement over the repair cycle, cycle, a nd the resulting resulting cost per FC. This is $15 per FC for the retreading and replace replacement ment of t yres, $9 $9 per FC for w hee heell inspections, inspections, $64 per per FC for bra ke repairs, $19 $19 per FC for landing gear exchange and repair repair,, $29 per per FC f or thrust reverser reverser repairs an d overha ul, $44 per FC for APU maintenance. This totals $180 $1 80 per FC FC for a ll heavy components, and equals $120 per FH for the aircraft operated ope rated at an FC time of 1.5FH 1.5FH (see table, page 31).

Rotable support The majority o f t he A320’ A320’ss rota ble and repairable components are oncondition. While some will be inspected and may be removed removed during b ase checks, checks, the majority ca n be removed relat relat ive ively ly easilyy during line easil line,, ra mp a nd A checks. checks. Few airlines have their own repair shops and comple complete te inventories to be selfsufficient in rotable and repairable component support. Rota ble support support contracts can be provided on the basis of the airline leasing a homebase stock from the rotable support provider. This usually includess high-failureinclude high-failure-rat e an d ‘no-go’ components. “ The value of stock for a fleet of 20 A320s each operating at about

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE 26 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA  A320  A32 0 FAMIL FAMILY Y HEAVY HEAVY COMPONE COMPONENT NT MAINT MAINTENANC ENANCE E COSTS COSTS Tyre retreads & replacement Main wheels Nose wheels

Number

Removal FC

Number retreads

Total life FC

Retread cost/tyre

Shipset retread $

Total all retreads $

New tyre $

Shipset new tyre $

Total cost $/FC

4 2

300 200

4 4

1,500 1,000

600 300

2,400 600

9,600 2,400

1,600 400

6,400 800

11 4

Wheel inspections

Number

Removal FC

Repair $

Shipset repair $

4 2

300 200

450 45 250

1,800 500

6 3

Main wheels Nose wheels Brake repairs

Landing gear

Thrust reversers

 APU : GTCP GTCP 331-250

Number

Heat pack life FC

Repair $

Repair $/FC

Shipset repair $/FC

4

2,100

33,000

16

64

Interval

FH interval

FC interval

$ exchange

$/FC

10

28,000

18,350

340,000

19

Number

FC interval

Workscope

Repair $

Total $

$/FC

2

12,000

Intermediate

170,000

340,000

29

FC interval interval

Shop visit $

$/FC

4,600

200,000

44

APU hours APU hours/FC SV interval 5,500

2,600-2,800FH per year will be $10 million, and will have a lease rate of $120,000 $12 0,000 per per month, ” says Joerg Asbrand, As brand, manager a irc ircraft raft compone component nt service se rvicess at Luftha nsa Techni echnik. k. “ This equates to about $28 per FH for each aircraft.” airc raft.” Rotable support providers also give airlines access to serviceable units of all other types of components as they fail and nee need d t o be removed. These These are provided within an agreed time limit and on an exchange basis. Asbra As bra nd sa ys the cost fo r th is ele element ment of the contract will be about $30 per FH. The largest element, how ever ever,, w ill be the fee for the repair and management of the fa ile iled d compon ents. “ This will be $110$110115 per FH for an airline that has reasonable transport time and customs costs when considering the location of the support provider,” provider,” continues Asbrand. This results in an overall cost of $170180 per FH. The SB and modification status of the components must also be considered.

Repair   $/FC

1.2

The informa tion here applies to the

As described, the A320 family is dominated by aircraft pow er ered ed by the C FM56-5B series a nd V.2500-A .2500-A5 5 series (see A 320 family fleet fleet analysi analysis, s, page 9) . These tw o engine types provide the aircraft with similar levels of operational performance, and so their maintenance

The C FM56-5B series can b e split into three main main groups that power the A319, A320 and A321. The majority of A319s A31 9s are pow ere ered d b y th e CFM56-5B5 and -5B6. These These are ra ted a t 22,000lbs and 23,500lbs thrust and have high initial production exhaust gas temperature (EG T) margin s of 110-165 degrees centigrade. Most A320s are powered by the CFM56-5B4 rated at 27,000lbs thrust, which has an initial production EG T margin of ab out 110 degrees degrees centigra ce ntigra de. The The majority of A321s are powered by the CFM56-5B3 rated at 33,000lbs thrust, which has an initial production producti on EG T margin of a bout 66 degrees centigrade. “ The initial initial rat e of EG T margin loss is about 15 degrees degrees in in th e first 1,000 engine flight cycles (EFC),” (EFC),” says R usse ussell ll Jones, programme mana ger at Tota Tota l Engine Support. “ This then falls to a bout five degrees per 1,000EFC thereafter.” This implies that the -5B3 could theoretically remain on-wing for up to ab out 11,000EFC 11,000EFC befor e losing losing all EGT margin. Low er er--rat ed engines engines with higher margins can remain on-wing for longer.

deteriorate by 2.0-2.5 degrees per 1,000EFH at an average EFC time of 1.5EFH 1.5EF H ,” says PierrePierre-Emmanuel G ires ires,, vice presi president dent of customer operations a t Snecma Services. This is equal to 3-5 degrees per 1,000EFC. Firstt removal interva ls for the low er Firs er-rat ed engines engines pow ering the A319 A319 can therefore be up to about 16,000EFC. “ The -5B -5B series series w ill have fir st on-wing intervals of 10,000-15,000EFC in most cases when operating in average conditions with a take-off temperature of 64 degrees fahrenheit, a 10% de-rate and an a ver verage age EFC EFC time of 1.5EFH 1.5EFH ,” says Gires. “ Most fi rst on-wing on-wing intervals intervals for the 5B5 and -5B6 engines on the A319 are 10,000--16,000E 10,000 16,000EFC FC in a verage conditions,” says Jones. “ The -5B7 -5B7 powering the A320 averages about 10,000EFC for its first interval in the same circumsta nces, while the -5B3 -5B3 pow ering the A321 A321 w ill have intervals in the region region of 7,000EFC.” 7,000EFC.” All engines usually require a hotsection restoration at their first shop visit. “ The amount of EG T margin that eng engine iness recover depends on their shop visit workscope, but will be about 60% of initial margin following a hot-section restoration or inspection, and 80% following a full performance restoration or overhaul,” overhaul,” expl explains ains Jones, Jones, “ A hotsection se ction restorat ion w ill result result in margins

cost is an import ant iss issue ue in influencing influencing engine selection. selection.

Actual Ac tual rates of EG T margin vary w ith the engine flight hour (EFH) to EFC ratio.

of about 40 degrees centigrade for the highest-rated highes t-rated engines engines that pow er the

Engine maintenance

C FM 56-5B/P a nd V.2500-A5 engin engines, es, under a generic operation with an FH:FC ratio of 1.5. Actual figures obviously vary with specific operating conditions.

“ After the initial loss, loss, EGT margin will

CFM56-5B series

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

OPERATOR’S GUIDE 28 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERATOR’S

The latest revision to the A320’s MPD has extended the basic C check interval to 6,000FH, and the C8 to 48,000FH. The structural checks have had their intervals increased to 6 and 12 years. Considering planning and operational constraints, this will allow the base check cycle to be completed about every 12 years, the C8 and 12-year check combined.

about 5,00 5,000EF 0EFC, C, fan a nd LPT LLPs would be replaced at the fourth shop visit. While the varying lives of LLPs in the CFM 5656-5B 5B require careful management with respect to on-wing

A321.” This implies implies tha t the engine could have a second on-wing run of up to 6,000EFC. 6,000EF C. Low er er--rat ed engines engines w ill be capable of longer intervals of about 7,500EFC, but other limiting factors have to be considered. One factor concerns the remaining lives lives of life limited limited par ts (LLPs). The lives of some LLPs can be completely used during the second onw ing run, depending on engine thrust rating, and so force removals. Some low erer-thr thr ust-rat ed engines ach ieve longer intervals in friendly environments, environments, and a core performa performa nce restora restora tion is likely likely to be more suitable. The CFM56-5B series has 19 LLPs with varying lives. Jones explains that the three parts in t he fan se section ction ha ve lives lives of 25,000EFC when powering the A319 and A320, and 20,000EFC when powering the A321, A321, w ith a lis listt price of $380,000. $380,000. The high-pressure compressor (HPC) LLPs ha ve lives lives of 18,200 18,200EFC EFC f or engine enginess pow ering the A319 A319 and A320, and live livess of 17,200E 17,200EFC FC for higher higher--rat ed engines engines

LLPs. These These will ha ve abo ut 5,200EFC remaining, rem aining, which is about equal to t he expected expec ted interval f ollow ing the second second shop visit, and so could be left in the engine and removed at next shop visit. Low er er--rat ed engines engines w ill have accumulated accumu lated a to tal time of about 17,500EFC 17,500E FC a t t heir second second shop visi visit, t, which will be forced by expiry of the HPT and HPC parts. LPT and fan LLPs w ill remain remain in the engine until the third shop visit after about another 7,500EFC and a total time of 25,000EFC. At this stage the engines w ill have accumulated a total time of about 25,0 25,000E 00EFC, FC, equal to the life limits of the fan and LPT parts. Probable on-wing intervals and timing of LLP replacement replacement ha ve to b e considered considered together with shop visit workscopes. “ Whi While le all engines engines will have a hot-se hot-section ction restoration at their first shop visit, the level le vel of pa rts replacement replacement o r repair w ill depend depe nd on engine rat ing, w ith higherrat ed engines requiring requiring heavier restorations,” res torations,” says Jones. Jones. “ The lowerlower-

intervals and shop visi visitt w orkscopes orkscopes,, many of the LLPs can be used in other variants. Parts with stub lives can probably be used on other CFM56 engines, engine s, such as the C FM56FM56-5C, 5C, due to its low cycle usage of only a few hundred EFC per year. “ Most eng engine iness will follow a shop visit visit pattern of alternating core restorations and full overhauls, with on-wing intervals for mature engines on the A321 being in the region of 5,000EFC, and 7,0008,000EFC 8,000EF C for engine enginess on t he A319 A319 and A320,” A3 20,” says G ire ires. s. Depending Depe nding on thrust rat ing, first shop-visi shopvisitt core restorat ions require 2,7003,100MH 3,10 0MH , and a t otal of $6 $625,0 25,00000700,000 700,00 0 in mat erials and sub-contra sub-contra ct repairs. A labour rate of $70 per MH would take the total shop visit cost to $800,000-920,000, depending on engine rating. This equals a reserve of $49 per EFH for t he engine engine pow ering the A319, $56 $56 per EFH for the engine powering the A320 A32 0 and $8 $87 7 per EFH f or t he engine engine pow ering the A321. A321. Second Se cond shop visi visits, ts, w hich comprise an overhaul, require higher labour inputs of 3,700-4,500MH and $775,000-975,000 in materials and sub-contract repairs. This takes the cost of these heavier visits to a bout $1.05 milli million on f or engines pow ering the A319, A319, $1.15 million million for enginess pow ering the A320 and $1.3 engine

pow ering the A321. A321. They They ha ve a lis listt pr ice of $440,000. LLPs in the high-pressure turbine (HPT) have a list price of $450,000, and lives of 17,600EFC when powering the A319 and A320. They have shorter lives of 14,300EFC when powering the A321. LLPs in the low -pres pressure sure turbine (LPT)) have lives of 25,000EFC w hen (LPT powering all A320 variants, and a list price of $610,000 (including LPT case). The engines powering the A321 are likely to have accumulated a total of 12,000-13,000EFC by the second removal, with only a little over 1,000EFC remaining on their HPT LLP lives. These LLPs certainly have to be replaced at the

rat ed engines engines pow ering the A319 A319 and A320 A32 0 w ill require require a full performance restoration as well as the replacement of HP T and H PC LLP li limits mits after accumulating a bout 17,500E 17,500EFC. FC. Their Their LPT and fan LLPs would be replaced at the third shop visit, after a total time of 22,000-25,000EFC. The engine powering the A321 A321 w ill have accumulated a shorter time of about 12,000EFC at the second visit, and so only require a full core performance restoration. HPT LLPs should be replaced at this stage, but HPC LLPs could be left in. Engine management would probably be simpler if all core LLPs were replaced, with a stub life of 5,000-6,000EF 5,000-6,000EFC, C, and sold on t he

million for engines pow ering the A321. A321. This is equal to a reserve of $106 per EFH fo r engines engines pow ering the A319 A319 and A320, A32 0, a nd $172 per per EFH for engine enginess pow ering the A321. A321. Reserves for LLPs have to be added. While LLPs have different lives depending on thrust rating, engines powering the A319 A31 9 and A32 A320 0 can gene generally rally b e expected to replace core LLPs at every second se cond shop visit a nd every 15,000EFC, 15,000EFC, while fan and LPT LLPs would be replaced repl aced a t every third shop visit and every eve ry 22,500EFC. Without assuming any remaining value for stub LLPs, res reserve ervess would be about $105 per EFC. In th e case of A321 engines engines,, H PT and

se second cond shop visit, consideration mustbut be careful given to HPC

aftermarket.” In this scenario, sce nario, and with probable mature on-wing intervals of

HPC wouldfabe replaced aboutevery every third LLPs shop visit, n LLPs replaced eve ry

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE  30 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA The A320’s total maintenance costs are influenced most by the cost of line and ramp checks, base checks, rotables, and engines. Bridging to the latest MPD can allow operators to save about $30 per FH on the cost of base check reserves. Increasing average FC time from 1.5FH to 2.0FH reduces total cost per FH by  about $110.

fourth, and LPT parts every fourth or fifth. These replacement intervals result in an L LP reserve reserve of a bout $11 $110 0 per EFC. EFC. When Whe n shop visit a nd LLP rese reserves rves are combined, the low er er--rat ed engines engines on t he A319 A31 9 and A32 A320 0 w ill have a to ta l reserve reserve of $120-126 $120-126 per per EFH for the fi rst interval, a nd r es eserve ervess vary ing betw ee een n

replacement. Lo w er replacement. er--rat ed engines engines a re not limited by EGT margin, and removals are forced by d istre istress ss or replacement replacement of LL Ps. “ The V2527-A5 V2527-A5 on the A320 will typically run for about 10,000EFC until the first shop visi visit,” t,” says Stott. Stott. “ The V.253 .2530/ 0/33 engines engin es pow ering t he A321 run for 7,000EFC until the first shop

likely like ly to go through a pa ttern of tw o consecutive hot-section refurbishments, followed by a full refurbishment every third shop visit. The w orkscope of the second se cond hot-se hot-section ction refurbishment ma y be a little heavier than the fir st. Tota Tota l time at the third shop visit would be about 17,000EFC, making it appropriate for LLPs to be replaced.” replaced.” Under this pattern of management LLPs in most engine enginess w ould be replaced after a total time of 17,000-18,000EFC. The shipset list pr ice of $1.9 million means tha t LLP rese reserves rves will be in the region of $105-110 per EFC. A hot-section refurbishment shop visit will consume 3,500-3,750MH, about $100,000 $1 00,000 in sub-contra sub-contra ct repairs, a nd $450,000$4 50,000-475,000 475,000 in part s a nd mat erials. A labour labour ra te of $70 $70 per per MH w ould take tota l cost for t his shop visit visit to $7 $795,00095,000840,000. This results in a reserve rate of $53$5 3-56 56 per EFH EFH w hen amor tise tised d over t he

$157 and $1 $157 $176 76 per EFH fo r the second table,, page 31) . and third interval interval ( see table The engine engine pow ering the A321 w ill have a res reserve erve of $161 $161 per EFH d uring the fi rst interval, and then $215-245 per EFH during the second and third interval (see table, page 31) .

Like the CFM56-5B, the V2.500-A5 series has a high EG T margin. “ The series production ma rgin for new engines is is 90115 degrees centigra de f or the V.2522/24A5 pow ering the A319, 70-80 degrees degrees for the V.2527-A V.2527-A5 5 pow ering the A320, a nd 40-60 degrees centigrade for the

visit.” It is not unusua l to see engines visit.” engines staying o n-wing longer. longer. All engines will go through a hotsection refurbishment at their first shop visit. visi t. At t his stage proba ble second second onwing intervals and the remaining life of LLPs should be considered. The V.2500A5 benefits from having a set of 25 LLPs with uniform lives of 20,000EFC for current pa rt numbers. This This simplifies simplifies engine management. LLPs removed with more than 3,000EFC remaining can often be sold on the aftermarket to operators that have a long average EFC time. “ The V.2500V.2500-A5 A5 has a reputation for being able to recover up to 90% of its initial EG T margin. Low er er--rat ed engines engines

first on-wing interval of 15,000EFH. When Whe n combined w ith LLP r es eserve erves, s, tota l reserve for engine maintenance is $126130 per EFH f or t hese low er er--rat ed enginess on their fi rst on-wing run. engine The follow ing refurbishment workscope at the second shop visit will use 4,750-5,000MH, $200,000-250,000 in sub-contra sub-contra ct repairs, a nd $670,000$670,000700,000 700,00 0 in part s and mat erials. This This takes the total cost of this refurbishment to $1.2-1.3 million. Amortised over the shorter interval of about 11,500EFH, this results in a reserve of about $108-116 per EFH. The addition of LLPs takes this to a tota l of $1 $18080-188 188 per per EFH (see table,  page  pa ge 31) .

V .2530/Stott, 33-A5 33A5programme pow ering thmanager e A321,”at say s Phillip Tota l Engine Support. M ost A319s are pow ered by V.2522-A .2522-A5 5 a nd V.2524-A .2524-A5 5 engines, most A320s by the V.2527-A5, V.2527-A5, and most A321s by the V.2533-A5. After initial EG T margin loss, deterioration rates are about 4 degrees per 1,000EFC 1,000EFC fo r low -rat ed engines, engines, 4.5 degrees per 1,000EFC for medium-rated engines, engine s, an d a bout 6 degrees degrees per 1,000EFH 1,000EF H for highhigh-rat rat ed engines engines w hen operating at an average FC time of 1.5FH. The EG T ma rgin on t he higher-thr higher-thr ust V.2530/3333-A5 A5 can be low enough fo r it to limitt th e on-w limi on-w ing interval achieved achieved by the engine. Typica Typica lly lly,, ho w ever ever,, th is will coincide with the third shop visit and LLP

for t he A319 A3 and A32 A320 0 can aafter chieve chie ve intervals of19about 7,500EFC their first shop visit, visit, taking tota l time at the second removal to about 17,500EFC,” explains Stott. “ Thes hesee engines engines can be expecte expe cted d to conform to a pattern of shop visits that alternate between a core restoration and full refurbishment. The total time at the second removal and similar third run of 7,500EFC means the LLPs would have to be removed at this shop visi visit, t, w ith a stub life of about 2,500EF 2,50 0EFC.” C.” “ H igher igher--rat ed engines engines w ill remain remain onwing for about 5,000EFC during the run to the second shop visit, and so will have a t otal a cc ccumul umulated ated time of about 12,000EFC 12,000E FC a t the second removal,” continues Stott Stott . “ These engine enginess are more

The initial w orkscope t he highrat ed engi engine ne pow ering the of A321 A321 will consume about 4,000M H , $100,000 $100,000 in sub-contra subcontra ct repairs, a nd $500,000 in in parts and materials, resulting in a shop visit with a cost of about $880,000. This has a rese reserve rve of a bout $84 per per EFH EFH . The The total reserve will increase to $158 per EFH when reserves for LLPs are added. The second second w orkscope, a h eavie eavierr ho tsection refurbishment with limited HPC wo rk, w il illl consume consume about another 500MH and $250,000 in materials, parts and subsub-contra contra ct repairs, resulting resulting in a total shop visit cost of about $1.15 million. This will have a higher reserve of $155 per EFH. Additional reserves for LLPs will take total reserves to about $230 per per EFH ( see table table,, page 31) .

 V.2500-A  V .2500-A55 maintenanc maintenance e

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

OPERATOR’S TOR’S GUIDE  31 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERA The third visi visit, t, a full refurbishment, refurbishment, w il illl use use up to about 5,000MH 5,000MH and a bout $1 million million in pa rts a nd repairs. The higher shop visit visit cost of abo ut $1.35 million will have a reserve of $180 per EFH, and will total $255 per EFH when LLPs are added (see table, this page) .

Engine inventory Opera tors must a lso consider consider engine inventory. Airlines have the choice of

DIRECT MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR A319/A320/A321 A319/A320/A321 Maintenance Item Line & ramp checks A check Base checks Heavy components:

Cycle cost $

Cycle interval

595,000 77,000 3,500,000

2,800 2,800 26,000

Cost per FC-$

Cost per   FH-$ 212 28 128

180

120

engine ownership and long- or short-term leasing. Engines that are constantly being utilised will always be owned, although the major engine lessors lessors are availa ble for sale and leaseback transactions if operators want to release the cash value of their assets. The supply of V.2500 and C FM56-5A/B engines is tight , a nd ha s reduced as the average engine shop-visit rat e across the fleet has increased. increased. “ V.2500-A .2500-A5s 5s are effectively at list price, which for a bare engine is about $7.5 million milli on f or a V.2527,” says Tom Tom MacAleavey, senior vice president of sales and marketing a t Willis Willis Lease Finance. Finance. “ The value increases increases to a bout $8 $8.0 .0 million for a V.2530 and is $6.0 million fo r a V.2522. V.2522. There There are few o r no engines available in the market to buy, and values only decrease decrease by a n amount equal to the cost of a cc ccrue rued d maintenance.” maintenance.” This shorta ge has a lso strengthened strengthened lease rat to es..buy, es “ Whi While le lease there market there is a shorta engines the is ge of strong,” says Richard Richard H ough, vice vice president pres ident technical a t Engine Lease Finance. “ LongLong-term term lease lease rates are competitive compe titive,, a nd lease rate factors a re abo ut 0.8% per per month of ma rke rkett va lue lue.. Long-term lease rates for V.2500-A5 enginess w ill therefore be betw ee engine een n $48,00064,000 64,00 0 per per month, d epe epending nding on varia nt.” The long-term lease market for the CFM 56 is simi similar. lar. “ Mo re CFM56-5Bs CFM56-5Bs are ava ilable than V.2500V.2500-A5s A5s,” ,” says M acAle acAleavey. avey. “ A CFM56-5B4 CFM56-5B4 for the A320 A32 0 ha s a ba re engine engine value of $7.2 million, milli on, and $8.7 million million w hen equipped equipped w ith a q uic uick k engine engine change change (QEC (QEC ).” Hough estimates similar values for the CFM 5656-5B, 5B, w ith the -5B3 at $9.1 million million for an engine with a QEC, and about $7.2 million for a -5B5 with a QEC. “ These values wo uld put lon gg-term term lease rat es for the CFM 5656-5B 5B at $58 $58,000,00073,000 per per mont h, depending on th rust rating.” Values for CFM56-5As have come under pressure pressure in recent recent y ears w ith a large number of aircraft on the market, but have increased again to about $5 million. Short-term Short-te rm lease rates also have to be considered, considere d, a nd a re relat relat ive ively ly high, but Hough explains that few engines are ava ilable. “ Short-te Short-term rm rat es for engines engines like the V.2500-A5 can be in the region of $4,000 per day, equal to $120,000 per

LRU component support

180

Total airframe & component maintenance * ±5% variation about $668 per FH for A319 and A321 Engine maintenance: 2 X CFM56-5B5/-5B6 (A319) 2X CFM56-5B4 (A320) 2X CFM56-5B1/-5B2/-5B3 (A321)

635-700*

314-352 314-352 430-490

2 X V.2522/24-A5 (A319) 2 X V.2527-A5 (A320) 2 X V.2530/33-A5 (A321)

360 380 460

Total direct maintenance costs: A319 (CFM56-5B5/-5B6) A320 (CFM56-5B4) A321 (CFM56-5B1/-5B2/-5B3)

950-987 982-1,020 1,130-1,190

A319 (V.2522/24-A5) A320 (V.2527-A5) A321 (V.2530/33-A5)

995 1,048 1,160

 Annual utilisati utilisation: on: 2,800FH  1,830FC  FH:FC ratio of 1.5:1.0

month, due to lack of supply,” supply,” says M acAle acAleavey. avey. “ Short-te Short-term rm rates for the CFM 5656-5B 5B a re lower, lower, w ith more engines engines available on the market, and rates are in the region of $2 $2,500,500-2,800 2,800 per day. D aily rat es for the CFM 5656-5A 5A are in the region region of $2,300 $2,300.” .”

Summary There is a variation of $160-240 per FH in the total maintenance costs of the A319, A320 and A310 (see table, this  page  pa ge)) . The main f actor in this difference is due to engine engine--related ma intenance costs. The total of airframe- and component-related component-re lated costs va ries between $635 and $700 per FH for aircraft in their first base-check cycle. These can be reduced by about $30 per FH if aircraft are changed to a maintenanc maintenancee programme base on Revision 28A of the MPD. Base check reserves increase by about $20 to $150 $15 0 per FH FH for a ircraft in their second second cycle, but would be about $115 per FH if operating un der Revision Revision 28A. Engines account for up to 40% of total costs. Other main constituents are line and ra mp checks, checks, ba se checks checks,, a nd

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

LRU component support. The effect effect of incre increased ased FH:FC rat io to 2.0 w ould reduce the number number of line and ramp checks performed, with a corresponding corres ponding d rop in cost per FH. This would be mainly due to fewer TR checks being required required over a given period, period, a nd would reduce costs by about $10 per FH. The same change w ould a lso result result in a drop in engine reserves. The amortisation of LLPs would be reduced from their current level level of a bout $75 per per FH (w hen the ra te of $105-110 $105-110 per EFC is amortised over 1.5EFH) to about $55 per EFH; reducing total aircraft maintenance costs by about $40 per FH. Engine reserves would also be reduced by about $30-40 per EFH, and so maintenance costs for both engines would be reduced reduced by ab out $65 per per EFH. The change of ma intenance programmes to one based on Revision 28A of the MPD could also reduce reserves for base-related checks by about $30 per FH. It is therefore possible for aircraft to have total maintenance costs in the order of $110 per FH less than shown if an average FC FC time of 2.0FH 2.0FH is flow n. AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

 

OPERATOR’S OR’S GUIDE  32 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERAT

A320 family values & af aftermarket acti activi vity ty The availability of A320 family aircraft has dried up, and values and lease rates have strengthened as a consequence. Values Values and lease rates are analysed.

$169,000, and a 1988 aircraft $143,000$160,000. $16 0,000. N orthw es estt Airl Airlines ines recently recently renegotia rene gotia ted its lease rates on 1992 and 1993 A320s to $165,000, b ut these were probably aircraft nearing heavy checks. Meanwhile, lease rates for the oldest A320-200s still appear to be rising. A rental of $20 $200,000 0,000 is being being sought fo r a 1989, CFM-powered A320 available from summer 2006, according to one lessor les sor.. “ Eve Even n C M Vs for 19871987-88 88 A320100s are holding up surprisingly surprisingly w ell at

abo ut $8.3 $8.3 milli million on toda y, says G each. he large number o f A319s, A320ss and A321 A320 A321ss built, and

it is clear that many are undergoing maintenance checks and repainting before

Mid production A320s

their popularity with lessors, mean that they are often offered for lease or sa le. Recent Recent US a irline bankruptcies bankruptci es have made a dditional aircraft a vailable. But they remain much much in demand a nd, in toda y’s strong strong market, lease rates and trading values continue to fi rm. Values Values for the newest, smaller A318 remain relatively strong as sales grow. The A320 family is one of the most successful succe ssful commercial jet pro grammes. Its 918 orders in 2005 exceeded the previous annual sales record for any jet airliner family. The next industry downturn may affect delivery of A320 family aircraft ordered in 2005, but it is still more popular popul ar now than a ny other type. type. Although the 11 initial-model A320-

T

shortly go ing to new lessees. lessees. The failure of Independence Air and Flyi, Fl yi, and the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of Northwest Airlines, have put at least 22 A319ss on t he market. C IT Ae A319 Aerospace rospace has placed its four ex-Independence Air aircraft w ith the new new Mexican low -cost carrier Vola Vola ris, how eve everr, a nd ILFC is believed to h av e secured secured new lesse lessees, es, including Turkey’s Izmir Airlines, for at least some of the eight ex-Flyi ex-Flyi A319s A319s tha t it has parked at Lake Charles, Louisiana. Louisiana. However, the rejection by Northwest of leases on 10 A319s and three A320s close to heavy checks, checks, and now parked at Ma rana, Ari Arizona, zona, ha s created created a sur surplu plus. s. These surplus aircraft and 25 A320s advertised in January, prompt Kelly to

The A320’s A320’s productio n mid-point w as in 1996 and 1997. N o renta l premium premium is evident for a CFM56-powered A320 compared w ith a V.2500.2500-pow pow ere ered d aircraft of this age. A 1996, half-life A320 on a five-year lease to an average credit cre dit will now attra ct a monthly rental of $225,000-$249,000, a 1997 A320 a rental o f $235,000-$26 $235,000-$260,000 0,000 and a 1998 aircra ft a rental of $24 $245,0005,000-$270 $270,000. ,000. The CMV of a 1997 A320 is $24.9 million, so the value loss for aircraft in that age band is $1.3 million for each preceding year of build. Both the top and bottom values in the monthly rental ranges for A320 A320ss built in the midproduction period are falling by $10,000 for each year year of age. Mo nthly rental rental

100s had CFM 5656-5A1 5A1 engines engines,, fro m the outset the A320-200 (1988), the A321 (1994) an d A319 (1996) w ere offered w ith either the CFM56 or V.2500. V.2500. At first airlines found the -A1, -A1, the initial V.2500 V.2500 varia nt, less reliable reliable tha n the CFM 5656-5A, 5A, but John Leech, Orix Aviation Systems’ head of marketing, says that things have changed. IAE V.2500-A1 enginess now have mean t imes betw ee engine een n removals (MTBRs) of 12,000-14,000 flight hours (FH), while Mexicana even achieved 17,000FH 17,000FH w ith one of its -A1s -A1s.. Sales of C FM56-p FM56-pow ow ere ered d A320s exceeded those of aircraft powered by the V.2500. IAE improved the reliability o f its engines, and the A320 market split evenly w ith the introd uction of the CFM 5656-5B/ 5B/P series and V.2500-A5 series. Slightly more opera to rs use IAE engines, engines, w hile slightly slightly more aircraft aircraft are powered by C FM engines. While Leech says that there remains a sma ll lease lease rat e premium premium for CFM56-5A versus V.2500 power on the oldest A320-200s, A320-200s, Bryson M onteleone, managing director of globa l sales and marketing for Morten Beyer & Agnew  (MBA),, says tha t there is (MBA) is “ no measurable difference”” in lease difference lease rates between aircraf t w ith C FM56-5B or V.2500-A V.2500-A5 5 pow er er.. The market fo r A320-fa A320-fa mily aircra ft is alwa ys active. active. “ Ai Aircraft rcraft are constantly being bein g leased leased a nd placed,” says Doug Kelly,, vice president Kelly president of a sse ssett va luation for Avitas. Airclaims currently lists 27 A319s,

suggest tha t “ some softness suggest softness may still exist in the A320A320-fa fa mily leasing market” . Yet the number available is a reflection of the number built, an d A320s and A319s undoubtedlyy continue to fi nd operators. undoubtedl Monteleone says that, since 2005, leasing prospects prospects for the A320 family have improved. As industry demand for capacity increases increases and airline airliness w orldwide bolster or launch operations with A320family aircraft, lease rates on the oldest A320--200s have strengthened by at least A320 $30,000 $30 ,000 a mo nth. N ew o r recent-buil recent-build d A320s are achieving lease rates close to those of comparable 737-800s, which did not suffer as much in the downturn.

“ An average airline credit should should be able to negotiate a rental of $155,000$179,000 for a five-year lease on a halflife, 1989, IAE-pow IAE-pow ere ered d A320-200,” A320-200,” says Leech, whose company Orix owns several old er V.2500-A1.2500-A1-pow pow ered air cra ft. “ The current current ma rket value (CM (CM V) of a 1988 A320-200 powered by a CFM565A is $13 $13.5 .5 million,” comments Ow en G each of Bureau Bureau Veritas, Veritas, “ but a 198 1988 8 V.2500.2500-A1A1-pow pow ere ered d aircra ft may sel selll fo r $2 million million less. less. The CM V of a 1989, CFM -pow ere ered d A320 is $14.5 $14.5 million and for a 199 1990 0 aircraft it is $15.1 $15.1 milli million.” on.” G each continue continuess that the CFM powered 1989 A320 should attract a

values are fa lling by only $5,000-$7,00 $5,000-$7,000 0 per year of a ge for much older A320s, A320s, but by nearly $20,000 for newer ones. Toda y a bra nd-ne nd-new w A320 entering entering a five-year lease should have a rental in the $357,000-$395,000 range. Aer Lingus was recently quoted a $375,000 rate, accord ing to one executive executive.. “ H ow eve everr, a 2005 200 5 aircraft w ould now le lease ase for $340,000$34 0,000-$37 $378,000,” 8,000,” says G each. “ The actual price paid fo r new  aircraft ca nnot be ta ke ken n in isolation,” says Leech. Leech. “ Customers and appra ise isers, rs, mustt ta ke into mus into a ccou ccount nt not only the manufacturer’s net pricing, but also the af terter-sales sales support support o n of fer fer,, the a irframe and engi engine ne wa rranties available, available, the residua l value and/or fi rst-loss defi ciency guarantees that the maker is willing to provide, and the relationship between the manufacturer and the customer.” As a result, result, w hile Airbus Airbus is known to have priced new A320s at $36 million million net, and Lee Leech ch says it is still cutting deals for $38 $38--$40 million, million, C M Vs for new  A320ss delivered A320 delivered und er smaller ord ers, or for sa le/lease leaseba ba cks of new a ircraft a re now in ab out $44 million. This This is close to (and in some cases even even higher higher tha n) Boeing’s net prices for 737-800s. A 2005 A320 now has a CMV of $42.3 million. “ Although the -A5 -A5 is now IAE’s standard V.2500 engine variant, the V.2500.2500-A1 A1 wa s ava ilable for new A320 A320ss until 2003. A 2003 A320 A320 pow ere ered d by -

18 A320s A320s and f our A321s in in stora ge, but

monthly lease rat e of $150,000$150,000-

A1 engines now has a CMV of $33.8

Early production A320s

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE

 

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

 

 33 I AIRCRAFT OWNER’S & OPERATOR’S OPERATOR’S GUIDE mill million,” ion,” says G each. “ An A320 A320 built built in either year and powered by the later V.2500-A5 should b e more expensive.”

 A319s The oldest A319 is eight years younger tha n t he oldest A320-200. A320-200. Monteleone says that A319s’ youth and continuing attractiveness to operators mean that they were retained by airlines throughout the downturn, and fell less in

aircraft built in the downturn falls by nearly $2 million for each additional year of a ge. The The CM Vs of the oldest A319s, A319s, built early in 1994, w ill be $16 $16 million.

 A321s  A32 1s The A321 was first delivered in 1994. For a year o nly the shorter-range shorter-range A321100 was built, but Airbus then offered an A321--200 version A321 version w hose max imum gross ta keke-off off w eight (MTO (MTO W) could be

$281,000-$306,000 and an A321-200 for $293,000-$330,000. A 1997, earlyproduction A321 A321--200 w ill lease for $260,000-$300,000, $260,000$300,000, w hile a A321A321-100 100 from 1994, the first year of build, has a CMV of $22.5 million and will lease for $220,000-$245,000.

 A318s Airbus’ss newest A320-fa Airbus’ A320-fa mily va riant, the A318, A318, ha s been dismissed dismissed as a niche

value tha n A320s. A319 A319 values mirrored those of 737-700s 737-700s too. “ Toda y, a fi veyear lease of a 1996, half-life half-life A319 A319 to a n average credit credit should attra ct a monthly

upgraded to provi upgraded provide de add itional range or payloa d if necessary. necessary. While While both the A321-100 and the A321-200 feature the same 2,200nm basic range with typical

type with limited market appeal, but sales have been galva nise nised d b y the A318 Elite corporate jet, 10 of which were sold immediately af ter launch. The The 26 already

rat e of $204,000$204,000-$219 $219,000,” ,000,” says G each. The A319’s mid-production point is 2000-2002: 20002002: a 2000 A319 A319 should a ttra ct a rental of $231,000-$253,000; a 2001 aircra ft $240,000-$26 $240,000-$260,000; 0,000; and a 2002 A319 $252,000-$276,000. $252,000-$276,000. A 2005 A319 w ill achieve a lease rate of $290,000$325,000 $32 5,000 and a 2006 A319 A319 a little more. The CM V for a new A319 delive delivered red now is $38 $38 million, for a late-2 late-2005 005 model $37.3 million, and for an early-2005 one below $37 million. million. H ow eve everr, net prices of $33-$34 million have recently been realised. realise d. Toda Toda y, the CM V for a midproduction 2002 A319 is $29.5 million, for a 2001 aircraft $27.6 million and for a 2000 A319 A319 $25.8 $25.8 million. The CM V of

payloa d, the A321-200’ A321-200’ss fuel capa capa city can be upgraded t o operat e 3,000nm sectors. sectors. Airbus still offers both variants, but the A321-200 has become more popular. “ In toda y’s market a 2005 A321 A321--100 should realise a lease rat e of $361,000$387,000, and a 2005 A321-200 $369,000$36 9,000-$409 $409,000,” ,000,” says G each. Some net prices may be lower, particularly for lessors les sors or ca rriers buying in volume, but the CMV of a new A321-200 is near its theoretical boo k value of $48 million. The same goes for a new A321-100, w hose book value is $47 million. million. Since A321 deliveries began in 1994, the midproduction po int is currently 2000. An A321-100 delivered in 2000 will lease for

in service are being joined by 22 in 2006, and 18 in 2007. The The first w as delivered delivered in 2003. The orderbook totals almost 100, but Air Cairo’s order for six has become an order for four A320s. ILFC’s order may also be changed to A320s or A319s. “ A3 A318 18 CM Vs and lease rates remain remain theoretical, as there have been no trading transactions and leases, leases, but for a n aircraft delivered now the CMV would be $32.2 million,” mill ion,” says G each. “ A 2005 2005 A318 A318 has has a C MV of $3 $30.6 0.6 million million and a le lease ase rate of $214,000$214,000-$238,000. $238,000. A 2004 A318’s CMV will be $27.9 million and its lease $206,000-$226,000. A 2003, first-yearbuild A319’s A319’s CM V w ill be $25.75 $25.75 million and its rental $195,000-$21 $195,000-$214,000.” 4,000.”

ISSUE NO. 44 • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006

AIRCRAFT COMMERCE