Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Can't An A321-200+ Replace The 757?  
User currently offlineVC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2984 posts, RR: 13
Posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 17912 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I know this was discussed recently, but yesterday I was on a brand new A321-200 and it' length and width seemed not far off of a 757. Can a A321 be stretched more, extend it's range and have a similar seat count? It seemed like it would make a great United P.S. (from what I could see)


The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6999 posts, RR: 63
Reply 1, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 17901 times:



Quoting VC10er (Thread starter):
t' length and width seemed not far off of a 757

The A321 cabin (and A318, A319, A320) is actually wider than that of the 757.


User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 2, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 17811 times:

One big problem the A321 has is that it's got the exact same wing as the rest of the A320 family, only difference being that the A321 uses double-slotted flaps. To become a 757 replacement, it would probably need at least more powerful engines and a new wing.

User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7644 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 17601 times:

The 757 went out of production because no one wanted its pax capacity, range and cargo ability, it was in a class by itself - above the 737/A320 and below the 767-200, Airbus designed the A321 with lower specifications to be more economical and efficient, essentially another class of a/c below the 757 to cater to the European market.
Why would Airbus now want to make a 757 copy after all these years of extolling the virtues of its A321 as meeting 90% or so of what the market needs versus the niche of the 757? That would be like Boeing doing another 737-900ER stretch to meet all the specs of the 757, why not just re-start production, might be cheaper?

Lets also remember that the USA was the largest operator of the 757 which met the unique needs of their market, the increased number of TATL routes that the 757 are now flying on a regular basis came after the a/c went out of production and airlines needed an a/c to start some new long thin routes. There are a number of 757's still in use in the USA, if Airbus increases the performance of the A321 a second time - initial version struggled on US transcon - it would simply be putting the a/c into the USA market niche like the 757 before it, I don't see European airlines getting the improved version, would that be economically viable to upgrade an a/c just for the US market?


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6999 posts, RR: 63
Reply 4, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 17386 times:

In fact, in at least the case of British Airways, the A321 has indeed replaced the 757 - certainly on some routes.

But it's often (I might even say usually) a misconception that a model must be replaced with a plane of very similar size, capacity and range. Airlines make fleet planning decisions and place orders based on their best guesses at a moment in time. They then have to live with those decisions for years and decades even though the business environment may have changed radically. So AA, DL and UA, for example, ordered hundreds of 757s twenty years ago or more and so that's what they have now - for better or for worse. I guess it's still the ideal plane for some routes. But I bet it's less than ideal elsewhere and the 'replacement' for those 757s will certainly be a different concept of airliner.


User currently offlineTranspac787 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3217 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 17323 times:



Quoting Par13del (Reply 3):
There are a number of 757's still in use in the USA,

"A number"?? You underestimate it  

Just off the top of my head and mental math, there are at least 450 in the United States.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 3):
if Airbus increases the performance of the A321 a second time - initial version struggled on US transcon - it would simply be putting the a/c into the USA market niche like the 757 before it,

Significantly changing the A321 for US markets would be a lost cause anyway. Unless UA opts for an A321 order, the A321 has probably run its course and seen the extent of its sales in the United States market with US as the sole operator.


User currently offlineUncleKoru From New Zealand, joined Oct 2009, 312 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 17263 times:



Quoting Par13del (Reply 3):
The 757 went out of production because no one wanted its pax capacity, range and cargo ability, it was in a class by itself - above the 737/A320 and below the 767-200, Airbus designed the A321 with lower specifications to be more economical and efficient, essentially another class of a/c below the 757 to cater to the European market.

No one wanted it's pax capacity, range and cargo ability? Boeing did sell over a thousand of them. Fantastic machine, but then so is the A321.



It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
User currently offlineVC10er From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 2984 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 17176 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

But when the 450 757's in the USA need to go, what's the best option for all the transcons? Is it really something that doesent exist yet?


The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
User currently offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1911 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 17092 times:



Quoting VC10er (Reply 7):
But when the 450 757's in the USA need to go, what's the best option for all the transcons? Is it really something that doesent exist yet?

Well for starters there is the A321-200. Then, Airbus is working on the wingletted and upgraded A321. Finally, there is a talk about re-engine programme for the entire A320 Family.

In addition to that, there's the 737-900ER, which may also be re-engined, if Boeing goes ahead with the powerplant change to Leap-X for entire 737NG Family. As you can see, the 757 replacements for roughly 90% of its missions already exist. The transatlantic operations are really an icing on the cake for this airframe and in due course will be eliminated once 787s start comming into the current 757 operators fleets.



Now get your f***ing Jumbo Jet off my airport!!! - AC/DC "Ain't No Fun To Be a Millionaire"
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 9, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 17035 times:

The A320 family is more than 20 years old. The A321 cannot be given the payload/range performance of the 757-200 without a new wing. If Airbus produce a new wing, then they will produce an all-new airliner to replace the A320 family.

User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10234 posts, RR: 97
Reply 10, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 17026 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 8):
Well for starters there is the A321-200. Then, Airbus is working on the wingletted and upgraded A321. Finally, there is a talk about re-engine programme for the entire A320 Family.

Quite right IMO. The A321-200 wil get turned into the new 757 by the incremental improvements made across the A32X, in the coming years, which, of course, will make it even more efficient than it already is in the process.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 3):
Why would Airbus now want to make a 757 copy after all these years of extolling the virtues of its A321 as meeting 90% or so of what the market needs versus the niche of the 757?

Why would they not? They'll get it "for free", so to speak, as the whole family gets upgraded

Rgds


User currently offlineADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1406 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 16888 times:

You can't replace a 757 with a single plane, but the 757 doesn't do anything some plane can replace it with.

Hot & high performance - grab an A320 or A319 (737-700/800).

Range - Again A320 or A319 (737-700/800)

Lots of people - A321 (737-900)

The A321-200 is more than 20,000 lbs lighter than a 757-200 (operating empty weights) - that is a lot of jet fuel those bigger engines on the 757 will burn to run the same number of passengers.


User currently offlineDLPhoenix From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 420 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 16739 times:



Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 8):
The transatlantic operations are really an icing on the cake for this airframe and in due course will be eliminated once 787s start comming into the current 757 operators fleets.



DL, CO and AA are using the 757 on TATL routes that can not support a 763 (even 762 in case of CO). They will have a hard time making money with an even bigger 788.

There is a need for a frame that for missions where 16J + 150-160Y pax have to be transported > 2500 mi. (note: J = a product acceptable for 6-7 hour block times, not US domestic first or Euro business class).
The wing that can lift such a frame is larger than the optimum wing required for the short hop - 180 pax and 2500mi - 150 pax frames.

Boeing decided to stop 757 manufacturing because the demand was so low that order did not cover the cost of maintaining the line open. The demand for such a capability should be much stronger to cover development costs. On top of that both A and B have to figure out how to protect the much larger A319/B73G segment that is being threatened by the C-serries.

Which will leave the airlines that operate "real 757 missions" to choose between:
- Extending the lifetime of the 757.
- Buying 762s
- Reviving the 783 (The 783 is actually in a situation similar to the 757 - it targets a niche market, A or B might as well offer a 32NG/737NG with a bigger wing rather than B offering a 788 with a smaller wing.

DLP


User currently offlineFlySSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7428 posts, RR: 57
Reply 13, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 16641 times:



Quoting VC10er (Thread starter):
Can a A321 be stretched more,

No. As mentioned, the A321 is already a stretched version of he basic A320.
Stretching it more would mean a complete new wing design, etc ...

Quoting PM (Reply 4):
In fact, in at least the case of British Airways, the A321 has indeed replaced the 757 - certainly on some routes.

So did IB and many many other airlines ...

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 8):
Well for starters there is the A321-200. Then, Airbus is working on the wingletted and upgraded A321.

 no  No. All the A321 including the -100 are wingletted.
The basic A321-100 is simply a stretched version of the basic A320-200. It features a reduction in range compared to the A320-200 as extra fuel tankage was not added to the initial design to compensate for the extra weight.
To overcome this, Airbus launched the longer range, heavier A321-200 development in 1995 with more powerful engines, minor structural strengthening and 2900 litres greater fuel capacity with the installation of an additional fuel tank wich gives the A321-200 enough range to fly U.S Transcon routes.

The A321 HGW versions enables airlines like "Spanair" or "MyTravel" to fly regularly nonstop from Finland to the Canary Islands, fully loaded (Single 212 Y seats for Spanair). Flying time 6h+.

HEL-LPA : 2538 nm
VAA-TFS : 2576 nm


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10234 posts, RR: 97
Reply 14, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 16437 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting FlySSC (Reply 13):
The A321 HGW versions enables airlines like "Spanair" or "MyTravel" to fly regularly nonstop from Finland to the Canary Islands, fully loaded (Single 212 Y seats for Spanair). Flying time 6h .

HEL-LPA : 2538 nm
VAA-TFS : 2576 nm

As has been mentioed previously on this forum, forthcoming SFC improvements, and drag improvements with the application of "sharklets" probably add 150Nm or so to this capability.
I don't know if Airbus will be able to certify the A321-200 for an extra tonne MTOW as they have with the A320...

Rgds


User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 15, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 16262 times:



Quoting Par13del (Reply 3):
Airbus designed the A321 with lower specifications to be more economical and efficient, essentially another class of a/c below the 757 to cater to the European market.

I don't think either Airbus or Boeing designs aircraft to cater to just one market. As US Airways has shown, they do quite well in the US as well. I would not be surprised in the least if UA were to order the a321 as well. Same goes for CO with the 739ER. They seem to be very fond of this aircraft as well. Again, the a321/739 cannot replace the 752 on all missions, but it can on most.

Quoting PM (Reply 4):
But it's often (I might even say usually) a misconception that a model must be replaced with a plane of very similar size, capacity and range.

Indeed. Look at how many airlines will soon be replacing the 763 with the 788, a much bigger and much more capable aircraft. And LH that essentialy replaced the a306 with a321. There are plenty of examples.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 10):
Quite right IMO. The A321-200 wil get turned into the new 757 by the incremental improvements made across the A32X, in the coming years, which, of course, will make it even more efficient than it already is in the process.

IIRC the a321 is the first of the family to get the winglet and the other planned improvements.

Quoting FlySSC (Reply 13):
All the A321 including the -100 are wingletted.

No, they have wingtip fences, not nearly as efficient as the winglets they will get (sharklets they are called IIRC).



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1911 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 16085 times:



Quoting DLPhoenix (Reply 12):
DL, CO and AA are using the 757 on TATL routes that can not support a 763 (even 762 in case of CO). They will have a hard time making money with an even bigger 788.

I have read somewhere that the 787 will burn similar amount of fuel the 757 burns on its typical transatlantic segment, therefore the trip cost will not be a lot higher than it currently is. Granted, the cabin crew and the airport landing/handling fees will increase, but overall cost would still be lower than that of the 767.



Now get your f***ing Jumbo Jet off my airport!!! - AC/DC "Ain't No Fun To Be a Millionaire"
User currently offlineFlySSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7428 posts, RR: 57
Reply 17, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 16085 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 15):
No, they have wingtip fences, not nearly as efficient as the winglets they will get (sharklets they are called IIRC).

What I meant is that, unlike the A320-100 & the A320-200, there is no such difference on the wings between the A321-100 (right) & A321-200 (left) :


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Jongeneelen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Daniel R. D'herbe - Iberian Spotters



User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8496 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 13128 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting PM (Reply 4):
In fact, in at least the case of British Airways, the A321 has indeed replaced the 757 - certainly on some routes.

BA used the 757 more for its need of a 200 passenger short-haul airplane then the Atlantic, it only had a few routes operated briefly from JFK to UK regionals with 757's. BA has replaced most 737's and 757 with A320 planes.


User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 13099 times:



Quoting VC10er (Thread starter):
Can a A321 be stretched more, extend it's range and have a similar seat count? It seemed like it would make a great United P.S. (from what I could see)

Well I think this has been addressed pretty well so far, but I'll have a go too. The A321-200's biggest limiting factor is it's common wing with the A32X family. When the A321 EIS it was more of a high capacity A320, and was never designed with the 757's mission capabilities, so it's rather unfair to dog the A321 as not being 'as capable' as the 757. The A321 does in fact replace the 757 very well on a solid 90% of its missions, and as Astuteman pointed out below:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 14):
As has been mentioed previously on this forum, forthcoming SFC improvements, and drag improvements with the application of "sharklets" probably add 150Nm or so to this capability.

this will only further the A321's role as the best choice of a 200 seater out to about 2500nm which more than covers most missions the 757 runs currently.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 14):
I don't know if Airbus will be able to certify the A321-200 for an extra tonne MTOW as they have with the A320...

Are you sure Airbus will need an extra tonne MTOW boost if it's getting the SFC improvements, sharklets, etc.?? IMHO, Airbus is in a good spot with the A32X family with what they've got planned.



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 20, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 13099 times:



Quoting FlySSC (Reply 17):
What I meant is that, unlike the A320-100 & the A320-200, there is no such difference on the wings between the A321-100 (right) & A321-200 (left) :

Ah, I misunderstood that. You are of course right about that. All aircraft in the a32X family have the same wingtip fences (excluding the a320-100 of course).



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31702 posts, RR: 56
Reply 21, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 12393 times:

Add two 40,000lbs + powerplant & yes it could.
regds
MEL.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15831 posts, RR: 27
Reply 22, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 12290 times:



Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 8):
Then, Airbus is working on the wingletted and upgraded A321. Finally, there is a talk about re-engine programme for the entire A320 Family

The performance gap is larger than what is probably going to be made up by whatever mods are in the works. It would probably take a full blown A321NG to match the 757 on the upper limit.

Quoting Kappel (Reply 15):
I don't think either Airbus or Boeing designs aircraft to cater to just one market.

It is less true today than it was, but there are certainly characteristics of the design which make them better suited to one side of the Atlantic or the other. The 757 works quite well for US airlines, but the A300 had relatively limited success in America.

Quoting Kappel (Reply 15):
a much bigger and much more capable aircraft.

...but with a relatively small jump in trip costs.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineCEO@AFG From Norway, joined Jan 2001, 249 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 12096 times:

Spanair operates 220 seat A321s from TOS to LPA. 7h flight 3091nm according to Great Circle Mapper. To add to the equation TOS has a short runway and is surronded by high mountains. The A321 isn't as capable as the B757, but it's no slouch either.


"Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue." Steven McCroskey, Airplane!
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12951 posts, RR: 25
Reply 24, posted (4 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 11220 times:



Quoting UncleKoru (Reply 6):

Quoting Par13del (Reply 3):
The 757 went out of production because no one wanted its pax capacity, range and cargo ability, it was in a class by itself - above the 737/A320 and below the 767-200, Airbus designed the A321 with lower specifications to be more economical and efficient, essentially another class of a/c below the 757 to cater to the European market.

No one wanted it's pax capacity, range and cargo ability? Boeing did sell over a thousand of them. Fantastic machine, but then so is the A321.

757 was certified in Dec 82, A321 was certified in Dec 93 so most of those 757s sold with no direct twin-engine competition.

757's orders and deliveries:



Big sales years were in the 80s, not bad in the 90s, pathetic after 9/11/2001 and thus the line closed.

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 19):
Well I think this has been addressed pretty well so far, but I'll have a go too. The A321-200's biggest limiting factor is it's common wing with the A32X family. When the A321 EIS it was more of a high capacity A320, and was never designed with the 757's mission capabilities, so it's rather unfair to dog the A321 as not being 'as capable' as the 757. The A321 does in fact replace the 757 very well on a solid 90% of its missions

The real question is can you justify building a model with bigger wings and larger engines just to capture the extra 10% of the A321/737-900ER market?



Inspiration, move me brightly!
25 N328KF : 767-400ER?
26 Post contains images Par13del : Which does not apply to the current 757 issue as this is the reverse, the 757 is being replaced by smaller a/c the calim being that they are more eff
27 Comorin : I've always wondered as a pax why a 757 feels bigger than either A32x or B73x. Is it because of its height off the ground? Too bad the shift in the fu
28 Packsonflight : The 75 went out of production because the 738 and the 321 did 90% of the job it did, at a lower cost, and after sept 11. the marked for the 75 colapse
29 Ckfred : Some things to remember about the 757. First, it was supposed to be the successor to the 727. Eastern, however, sweet-talked Boeing into stretching it
30 R2rho : This seems to be one of the most popular a.net topics... The A321 (and the 739ER) can do 90% of the 757 missions, and do it more efficiently. For the
31 Post contains images Kappel : That is key IMHO. The opportunity to make more money, and that is all that counts. That was also partly because airbus was not a serious competitor a
32 Packsonflight : If Airbus goes ahead with the 320 family, the benefits will probably be: 8% for the CFM genx, 3.5% for the sharklets 1.5% for 15% smaller stab, and po
33 Viscount724 : The A319 and A320 replaced far more BA 757s than the A321. BA only has 11 A321s. At one point they had 50 757s. Also, if you would check the list of
34 Flighty : Very well said. In addition, by 2016, the new jets will be that much more fuel efficient and maintenance-friendly. The 757 will finally be under real
35 Prebennorholm : Reading this thread one might imagine that B757 is just one type of plane. Like practically all other plane types there comes a lot of variations. Th
36 Post contains links and images TransIsland : ... not quite the only one... View Large View MediumPhoto © Stephen B. Aranha
37 Aesma : You mean, like Boeing did when the 737 was 20 years old ?
38 PM : Only some of the BA 757s had the earlier engine. Quite a few had the -535E4.
39 SEPilot : There is a perception that once an aircraft has proved successful that when it becomes obsolete an exact replacement needs to be produced. Airlines of
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...
Can Boeing Ever Replace The 757? posted Mon Aug 28 2006 23:10:24 by KSUpilot
Can The A321 Do What The 757 Does? posted Mon Mar 8 2004 22:54:20 by Kbuf737
Tap's First A321-200 With The New Color Scheme. posted Mon Mar 6 2006 21:11:40 by WINGS
What Will Replace The 757? posted Wed Jan 14 2004 06:50:31 by Wilax
Why Can't We Do This In The U.S? posted Thu Jul 17 2003 10:03:24 by Jhooper
Why Did Boeing Decide To Build The 757? posted Wed Mar 19 2003 22:06:20 by BeltwayBandit
Can An A330-200 Make Toulouse-Syd? posted Mon Jun 3 2002 16:44:58 by Tsentsan
Who Likes The 757-200 And Why? posted Sat Aug 16 2003 06:25:20 by Kevin752
Why Did TWA Wait So Long To Order The 757? posted Wed Mar 7 2012 14:20:03 by MaddogJT8D
Did GE Propose An Engine For The 757? posted Thu May 13 2010 09:25:42 by overloaduk