Airbus's Boss Names Extended A220 Variant as A221 rather than A220-500

From the article : " ...Beyond the current GTF option by Pratt & Whitney, Airbus aims to have the A221 certified to accommodate engines like the CFM LEAP. This move would significantly broaden the aircraft's appeal to potential buyers by offering them a wider array of propulsion systems. "

IMO that's the underSTATEMENT of the year. Other tidbits in the article ... composite wing ?

Ummm..if I remember correctly, original design allowed for a slight fore and larger aft exctension total 4 rows with a larger composite wing. Only thing I see different, and it took them long enough, was getting a 2nd engine option.
Sorry Pratt..love your engines but that GTF is a dog's breakfast.

As we all know, 220 originated from Bombardier. Starting from the imposition of high tariffs on C series by Boeing and the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bombardier has realized that the impact of overlapping competition with Boeing and Airbus products is far more serious than expected. It is difficult for Bombardier to achieve greater development by relying solely on its own weak strength. It is more like a helpless move to sell itself to Airbus at a low price. However, it is only in this way. The C series can go further.Although Airbus's changes to it will make some people think that it does not respect Bombardier's original aircraft.But Bombardier had no choice but to sell it to Airbus for future development.I think the change is good, and it will certainly bring benefits to Airbus and even the international civil aviation industryAt the same time, some countries (such as China) are more likely to buy the 220 series that they did not buy before.

The engine choices is crucial to the A22x long term success, and greater production.

A220-100 should be called the A219.

A220-300 remains A220.

Stretch should be called A221. As he's saying.

Keeps family similarity.

Though keeping with that A350-900 should be A350 and -1000 A351!!

Every one gets excited about new aircraft concepts, but you have to ask what's going on here. Does it make sense to create new models that compete with your "cash cow"? Would this jet reduce seat/mile costs enough to compete with a clean sheet design? How will the European labor unions respond to an off-shore organic competitor? Why talk about aircraft branding based on a vague concept? Is this a new development "me too" because of NASA's X-66 program? Is this a "head fake" aimed at competitors?

Now the A220-100 is known as the 221 and the A220-300 is known as the 223, The new plane should start a new series. Such as A520-100 or A521 to be known as 521.