Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Mid Size/range A322, Will It Be Offered?  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4690 times:

Will Airbus push through the 220 seat A322?

It would have similar size/range as 757 but probably significant lower fuel burn like the A321 (one of things that accelerated the end of the 757) and full cockpit commonality with 320 & 330/40 family.

A 10-15 inch higher landing gear should allow for a higher BPR CFM56-5 version and the right angles during take-off and landing.

A stretch should be around 150inch/4 meters to make room for 30 extra passengers.

An enlarger wing could take care of the extra lift/fuel and a bigger landing gear. New AWIATOR technology could be included to give superior high density airport environment performance ..

If a shrink 330 is to big Airbus could go low risc with a A322 to fill the lower part of the A321-332 gab.

Potential customers : leisure carriers, trans continental´s, intra Asia / Europe carriers already flying Airbus aircraft or older B757´s/A310´s ...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Marlo Plate - IBERIAN SPOTTERS





21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineHz747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1710 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4658 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Do you mean a trans-Atlantic A321-size plane? It would be more comfortable than a 757 for passengers, as I like the A321 (flew USAir btw PHL-PHX). There would probably be a market for that as the older 757s are approaching old age.


Keep on truckin'...
User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 859 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4659 times:

Keesje:
"Will Airbus push through the 220 seat A322"?

What you´re writing sounds great in my ears and yes, I hope so!

Mike//SE




Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4643 times:

If the 737/7E7 combo proves to not be a successful replacement for the low & high-ends of the 757.... then perhaps there's a market for such an Airbus.



User currently offlineFrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3845 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4630 times:

I must admit that as a pax, I would consider that to be just too big an aircraft for one single aisle... And maybe not all that comfy for long haul flights for that matter.

That's why I just LOVE the A310, and for me there can be no replacement for it form actual A/Cs.

Now as an operator, I guess it would be rather interesting.

And after all, Airbus is now used to stretching their designs to the limit!



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4629 times:

If they got the range to between 4000NM-5000NM's, it would certainly be an excellent tool for an airline.

User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 6, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4579 times:

The question is, can the CFM56 or V2500 reach the necessary thrust?

jetBlue always wanted an A320.5, but who knows if people want A322s.

N


User currently offlineRoberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4566 times:

wouldnt it be cool to see a 727 style A322.

Adv:Etops wouldnt be needed


User currently offlineNudelhirsch From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1438 posts, RR: 19
Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4546 times:

Not likely if a redesign of the wing is involved.
More stretch not likely too.

More likely a smaller 330, a -100 or so, but it would be a heavy airframe.
I do not see further stretching on the 321, as the tailstrike is (without bashing and battling now!) a known thing with the 321.

I, without now starting A<>B or something similar, see a higher change potential in a fleet strategy like Boeing used to have, with the 737 as small, 757 and 767 as medium and big medium, and 747 and later 777 as the real big ones.
Airbus on the other hand has great products like 320 and 330 to compete, but flexibility in the means of stretching or cropping is low, I would say.



Putana da Seatbeltz!
User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2915 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4504 times:

ETOPS will be less of an issue in the future, as at some point it is to be replaced with a similar system for any long-haul aircraft (think of the Air Transat A330 that ran out of fuel over the Atlantic - a four-engine plane would not have been safer).

As to the 322: fuselage plugs, higher landing gear and other engines seem to be fairly easy to implement from an engineering point of view, but what about the wings? If they can use easy plugs (unlikely) then it could work. But this series would only be a short-term stop gap in my opinion. And plenty of 757s around still...

Regarding the fuel efficiency: why not put some 7E7 engines underneath? If the 7E7 engines are really that much more economical, it might be interesting to offer existing aircraft types with the new engines, even if that would require recertification. Just a thought?



I scratch my head, therefore I am.
User currently offlineSandiaman From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 88 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4473 times:

To grow the A321 and boost the range, Airbus would need to redesign the wing, making it substantially heavier. In short, it would look a lot like the 757-300.

There is a really good article outlining the reasons for the dropoff in 757 sales. Here is a relevant quote from R. Aboulafia's Requiem for a Narrowbody:

"The intriguing aspect of the 757’s demise is that this is the first Boeing jetliner program to end because of market conditions, not technological obsolescence.. . ."

Full article at:

http://www.aiaa.org/aerospace/Article.cfm?issuetocid=451

The article lists a couple of reasons:
- Emergence of rolling hubs in the U.S. market, which favor smaller aircraft (as versus pulsing hubs)
-Emergence of post-deregulation LCC carriers in Europe (Easyjet/Ryanair), which have favored smaller aircraft.

Unfortunately, an upsized A321 would face similar market conditions. That said, it would have the advantage of cockpit commonality across the A320 line. Perhaps it would be received more favorably than the 757.


User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4451 times:

An upsized 321 wouldn't generate much interest IMHO.

The proposed 739X from Boeing hasn't exactly stirred up much enthusiasm either.

That market segment appears to be dormant, which is why the 757 has finished. Just because there is a perceived gap in the market doesn't mean that there is an actual market. If there was a demand Boeing could have updated the 757; obviously they didn't see it being worthwhile.


User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 12, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4433 times:

While the a supersized A321 sounds like a good idea, I think Airbus would have problems with a further strech of the wildly popular A320 series - first, the wing issue as discussed above and, second, the power plant issue. New and different engines would be needed to boost performance of this larger airliner and the choices currently available are limited.

The other issue: is there are market for a large single aisle type at this point in time? Airlines worldwide are using smaller airliners for short to medium haul routes and larger aircraft for long haul, where does the A322 fit into the picture? The 757 remains a great aircraft, and one of the most economical ways to move +/-200 passengers, but airlines simply dont want 200 seats....the A319 and A320 are more popular than the A321 and the 739 is not a hot seller over at Boeing. With airports again becoming more crowded, one would think that larger aircraft would make more sense, instead airlines add more frequency and adjust hub operations.

While its true that Airbus has a gap in its lineup between the A321 and A332, and has no easy solution to plug this gap, maybe its not a big deal, as airlines are not looking for airliners in that size category.


User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1597 posts, RR: 17
Reply 13, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4419 times:

In my opinion... as also noted in a previous post - the closing of the 757 and the lack os support for 737 X suggests that Airbus should also not look into this A322...

Instead, Airbus should flex its new found muscles and propose a new generation of aircraft to directly compete with the 7E7 - before its too late... of course, they would need more state sponsored loans and bah blah blah....



Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlineBohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2749 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4347 times:

If Airbus could add a taller landing gear and re-engineer the plane to be able to handle the PW2037 or the RR RB211-535 engines, It might make a good 757 replacement. Just my thoughts.

User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4324 times:

A 10-15 inch higher landing gear should allow for a higher BPR CFM56-5 version and the right angles during take-off and landing.

The question is, can the CFM56 or V2500 reach the necessary thrust?


Regarding Keesje and Gigneil's comments on the CFM engine, I don't suppose the current CFM56-5C4 would be of much use as it is still a far cry from the lowest powerplant available on the 757. Re-engining the A32X family for the RB211 or PW2000 would be a serious headache unless a cantilevered engine pylon was used... oh wait that happens to be a Boeing patent.

10-15 inches of landing gear for a larger engine would be a necessity. The CFM website touts that 36k of sustained thrust has been achieved by the CFM56-5, but does the A322 have the market to justify a new engine derivative? And a lack of market is the reason the 757 line is closing in the first place,

Regarding the fuel efficiency: why not put some 7E7 engines underneath? If the 7E7 engines are really that much more economical, it might be interesting to offer existing aircraft types with the new engines

As of now, the 7E7 engines are incompatible with just about every airplane in current service. Refer to the many "bleedless engine" discussions in Tech/Ops

Will Airbus push through the 220 seat A322?

To the real question.. I hope the answer is a resounding NO

Airbus has just completed a major aircraft development (the A345 and A346) which are now seriously threatened by the 777LR family. This drama isn't over, the A346HGW and Boeing's counter have yet to debut. Airbus is still working on the A380, which itself has had its share of headaches. I'm sure Airbus will heave a sigh of relief when it takes to the skies, but it too will require follow-up.... maybe an oversized wing wasn't a good idea. Now we come to the 7E7, an aircraft which has (arguably) already dug into A330 sales. Then there is the issue of both the A320 and A330/340 reaching the golden years in the next decade.

Sorry Airbus, but your resources are not that infinite. Ration your RD dollars, keep design teams efficiently moving from one project to another, don't worry about catering to every demand of every airline (cough cough SQ), and don't start frivolous developments. There is little market for aircraft the size of a 757, that is why the 757 is leaving.. it still has many excellent merits, but zero demand. An Airbus copy would have the same fate I suspect.

Regards,
DFW


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4110 times:

would be of much use as it is still a far cry from the lowest powerplant available on the 757
That´s not a disadvantage, airlines tend to be more impressed by low fuel cost then steep climb angles ..

a serious headache unless a cantilevered engine pylon was used... oh wait that happens to be a Boeing patent
Are you really sure this is a Boeing patent ?  Big grin

does the A322 have the market to justify a new engine derivative? And a lack of market is the reason the 757 line is closing in the first place
If it sells like the 321/757 during the last 15 yrs, yes. Some of the 757/762/310´s will have to be replaced & 7E7-3 might be to big & expensive for many ..

Airbus has just completed a major aircraft development (the A345 and A346) which are now seriously threatened by the 777LR family
I thought the -600 is flying for more then 3 yrs now, about the serious thread of the 777LR family, lets not talk about the 772LR sales ...

Now we come to the 7E7, an aircraft which has (arguably) already dug into A330 sales
ANA deal was too politically loaded (like JAL..) ANZ is a small order, the two (I forgot their names, excuse me) leisure carriers probably opportunistic, how much did they pay ? ...

Sorry Airbus, but ... keep design teams efficiently moving from one project to another, don't worry about catering ....
Well, now that won´t be a problem in the south of France  Big thumbs up




User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 859 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4081 times:

 Big thumbs up Way to go Keesje  Big thumbs up

Mike/SE



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4068 times:

That´s not a disadvantage, airlines tend to be more impressed by low fuel cost then steep climb angles ..

Tell that to SQ  Big grin

The last thing Airbus needs is an underpowered aircraft that leads to performance penalties like the A321-100.


Are you really sure this is a Boeing patent ?

99% ... if anyone is able to confirm I'll be open to reconsidering"

ANZ is a small order, the two (I forgot their names, excuse me) leisure carriers probably opportunistic, how much did they pay ? ...

12 months ago, these orders, however small, would have been shoe-ins for the A330. No longer. In many respects, the First Choice/Blue Panorama (or Panorama Blue?) is more important than the ANA order: it shows the 7E7 could be on its way to acceptance from charter/LCC airlines.

One way or another, does anyone think Boeing would have won these three new customers with the 767? Absolutly not, and therefore, 62 potential A330 orders are now Boeing's.

I thought the -600 is flying for more then 3 yrs now, about the serious thread of the 777LR family,

Yes it has been flying for three years, but a better than expected 777-300ER has led to a A346HGW. This aircraft is not expected until 2007 and the 773ER still has growth potential, so like I said, the drama between the 773ER and A346 is not over.

Further, the 773ER is winning customers faster than the A346, blostered by the 7E7. Remember that AirNZ deal included 773ER options, and SQ is widely reported to be in the process of signing the 7E7. Only time will tell in this transaction.

Well, now that won´t be a problem in the south of France

Give me good 'ol texan BBQ ribs any day  Big grin
lets not talk about the 772LR sales ...

Rather irrelevant, as the A345 hasn't exactly set the world on fire either...


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 19, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3976 times:

36,000 pounds of thrust is sufficient to offer an A322 with 220 seats, assuming they don't really want to add a ton more range.

N


User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2750 posts, RR: 58
Reply 20, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3921 times:

"Are you really sure this is a Boeing patent ?"

Yes, it is.

Hamlet69



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineAzmd80 From Italy, joined Nov 2003, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3765 times:

A321 is a good A/C with a good success, but I'm not sure that 322 will be a such success.

The 321 is used mainly on short trunk route, with the pourpouse of obtaining more pax without increasing frequencies, or by charter operator.

I think that the main carriers are going to offer higher frequencies to fit better the market, in fact 321 aircraft seems to be used only on route such CDG-LHR or MXP FCO, etc.. Also BA seems to prefer chanching is 757 with smaller A/C.

The carther carriers aren't so happy with their 321 due to the range that doesn't allow medium route.
321 is considered a bit underpowered so i don't know if it coud be increase performance without main structural innovation.

if develloped, 322 will be a niche aircraft, so it couldn't be a great success. It worth the devoppement cost only if it will nor require maior structural changings.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will It Be Possible To Relieve The Relief Pilot? posted Tue Sep 26 2006 20:51:07 by Tangowhisky
When Will It Be One Look? posted Sun Jun 11 2006 17:54:40 by JetBlueGuy2006
NZ -OKE 777 - Will It Be New Colors? posted Sat Apr 15 2006 02:51:26 by Clickhappy
AirTran Growing At MDW. Will It Be A Success? posted Sun Jan 1 2006 01:30:36 by N742AT
The 787 Interior - How Successful Will It Be? posted Mon Nov 21 2005 21:06:22 by 1337Delta764
Will It Be Possible To Tell An A350 From An A330? posted Tue Aug 30 2005 23:58:01 by Grantcv
787 - Inflight Cabin Air, Will It Be 100% Fresh? posted Tue Apr 26 2005 18:02:00 by Leigh pilgrim
Kingfisher - How Sucessfull Will It Be posted Wed Sep 22 2004 12:03:41 by HAWK21m
The A340-500...will It Be Profitable For Airlines? posted Sun Mar 7 2004 07:13:38 by CPDC10-30
Next Big Order. Who Will It Be By? posted Sat Feb 28 2004 15:51:48 by Horus