Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A321 NEO - A potential replacement for Aging US 757 Fleets ?  
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 46895 times:

Airbus has been pushing the A321 to US carriers for some time now. Most 757's fly in the US.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...321-at-757-replacement-market.html

At the same time Airbus is considering reengining the A320 series with PW and/or GE LeapX engines.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...g-decision-by-farnborough-air.html

New winglets were selected by launch customer Finnair recently (replacing 757s)
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...launch-sharklet-equipped-a321.html

Airbus seems to look for a quick EIS, avoiding further complicated modifications
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-keep-it-simple-with-a320-neo.html

Other modifications, such as new cabins and cockpit upgrades are gradually introduced on A320.
http://corporate.airfrance.com/uploa.../tx_templavoila/VueCabine22_06.jpg

Altogether we'll probably see a complete revamp of the A321, clearly aimed at the US Boeing 757 replacement market. Prime targets for these new A321 NEO's seem Delta, AA, Continental and United Airlines.

Key selling points seem significant lower fuel consumption and noise, additional range and existing selling points like spacier cabins, container capability and cockpit commonality.

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/AirbusA321NEOconcept.jpg?t=1277326233

171 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinec5load From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 46900 times:

What will be the seating capacity? I think in order to replace the 757 it needs to be able to seat ~180-230 pax and still have decent performance.


"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
User currently offlineKcrwFlyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3795 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 46662 times:

Whats a sharklet??? Looks alot like a winglet to me.


Can it fly Transcon from a 5,700ft. runway?


User currently offlineshamrock604 From Ireland, joined Sep 2007, 4161 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 46551 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 5):
That is the goal with this. Transatlantic could still be a challenge at best.

Until they nail that, I cant see CO/UA in particular being interested.



Flown EI,FR,RE,EIR,VE,SI,TLA,BA,BE,BD,VX,MON,AF,YS,WX,KL,SK,LH,OK,OS,LX,IB,LTU,HLX,4U,SU,CO,DL,UA,AC,PR,MH,SQ,QF, EY, EK
User currently offlineTristarsteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3981 posts, RR: 34
Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 46513 times:

Quoting c5load (Reply 1):
What will be the seating capacity?

The BA B757 have 186 seats, and their A321 have 188 seats in the same config.
The B757s have bigger older galleys, but there is only a row in it.


User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6712 posts, RR: 32
Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46486 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Prime targets for these new A321 NEO's seem Delta, AA, Continental and United Airlines.

As mentioned in another thread, Delta is unlikely to be adding new narrowbodies within the next five years. With over 40 737-900 and 737-900ER's in the fleet, Continental (and United, if the merger succeeds) are likely to stick with the 737-900ER. And having re-committed to the 737-800, it would be more logical for AA to order the 737-900ER for this capacity segment.

The only likely operators of an enhanced A321 in the U.S. are probably US Airways, Frontier, and Spirit.


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25008 posts, RR: 85
Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46433 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ScottB (Reply 9):
The only likely operators of an enhanced A321 in the U.S. are probably US Airways, Frontier, and Spirit.

Be still, my heart. LOL.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46409 times:

Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 4):
Whats a sharklet??? Looks alot like a winglet to me.

It's an evolved winglet that it is more planar and swept back at a greater angle than the wing leading edge.

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Altogether we'll probably see a complete revamp of the A321, clearly aimed at the US Boeing 757 replacement market. Prime targets for these new A321 NEO's seem Delta, AA, Continental and United Airlines.

Key selling points seem significant lower fuel consumption and noise, additional range and existing selling points like spacier cabins, container capability and cockpit commonality.

I'm a lot less optimistic about the 757 replacement market. I just don't see airlines in any hurry to replace them. The airlines you mention have more pressing fleet replacement needs than their 757s. The capital that could be used to replace 757s would have a better return elsewhere.

I'm also inclined to believe that the 757-200 was too much airplane, a reflection of the regulated era in which it was designed. The slightly smaller 738 and A320 are generally preferred by airlines, so it doesn't necessarily stand that there will be a 1:1 replacement of 752-sized aircraft.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46357 times:

Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 4):
Whats a sharklet??? Looks alot like a winglet to me.

The difference between a winglet and a sharklet is the same as the difference between a station wagon and a Crosstour.   

Actually it is probably a bit more than that, but it does the same job.

Quoting shamrock604 (Reply 7):
Until they nail that, I cant see CO/UA in particular being interested

I don't think so either. And as another poster mentioned, DL is not in need of more narrowbodies, and AA and Airbus aren't on the best terms at this point.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineVasu From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 3858 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46343 times:

It will certainly be interesting to see how the A321 develops... I can see its orders really taking off!

User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46328 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Altogether we'll probably see a complete revamp of the A321, clearly aimed at the US Boeing 757 replacement market

The current A321 range is 3,050nm. Your proposed A321NEO is estimated to have 3,450nm.

I would expect a range of closer to 3,600nm, based on 15% lower engine sfc, 4-5% from sharklets, and 2% from aero tweaking. Some of it will be offset by the higher weight due to engines and sharklets.


User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8664 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46171 times:

I see US Airways only airline in the US that I see ordering it. Most of their trans cons are A321's and this would PHL-SNN service to be started with min restrictions. I see UA sticking to Boeing as CO has the better relationship with Boeing as their is no kissing to strengthen a relationship with Airbus. For Frontier, I predict more A320's. Perfect a/c for the routes they do. If any other NA operator is going to order it; AC is the logical choice. More pax and perfect to replace A320's on existing runs.

KH



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46117 times:

I think an A320LR(NEO), capable of 4,000nm range, should have decent prospects. It could open up more p2p transatlantic routes. I can see it doing well in Asia--connecting many p2p and p2hub points in South/SE Asia and NE Asia.

User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46136 times:

@ Keesje


Are you working for Airbus...?  


I think the A321NEO will get most of the B757-200 market, as its field performance is outstanding in comparison to the B739ER.

This is the main reason for the negative success of the B739ER for european charter airlines.

If i could decide, the A321NEO would receive the higher vertical stabilizer of the A318!

Then it would really look impressive!!!


User currently offlinePITingres From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 1124 posts, RR: 13
Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46095 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Altogether we'll probably see a complete revamp of the A321, clearly aimed at the US Boeing 757 replacement market.

And the capital cost for an A321NG vs a used 757 is ...

 

Argue as you like, but as long as there are used 757's on the market for a puny fraction of the cost of a new A321, good luck with that one.



Fly, you fools! Fly!
User currently offline328JET From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46029 times:

All these used B757-200s will find a new home very soon, but as usual within cargo fleets...

User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 46027 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 14):
I would expect a range of closer to 3,600nm, based on 15% lower engine sfc, 4-5% from sharklets, and 2% from aero tweaking. Some of it will be offset by the higher weight due to engines and sharklets.

   I was a little conservative, the engines haven't flown yet..

I'm not sure all transatlantic capabilities will be out of reach. Transcon doesn't seem a real issue.
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=JFK-AMS...EA-MIA,+MAN-ORD%0D%0A&MS=wls&DU=nm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 11):
The slightly smaller 738 and A320 are generally preferred by airlines, so it doesn't necessarily stand that there will be a 1:1 replacement of 752-sized aircraft.

I think you need capacity over longer stretches to compensate / spread higher cost per unit (crew, utilization, fuel). A few dozens economy passengers realy helps. The A321 is much longer then the A320; 23 ft / 7 meters. It seems Airbus has a "gab" in it's A320 family line up  
.


Additional modifications for the NEO will be a strenghtened landing gear and outer wingbox. The total revamp is expected to costs approximately $2.5 Billion.


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7065 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 45754 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Key selling points seem significant lower fuel consumption and noise, additional range and existing selling points like spacier cabins, container capability and cockpit commonality.

I'm missing the economics of this improved A321 as it relates to the US market.
1. The initial A321 was more efficient that the 757-200 because it was lighter and did not offer comparable range/payload.
2. The A320 and 737 were touted as being able to operate 90% of the existing 757 routes more economically.
3. Will the new A321 have better efficiency over the A320 and 737 which now accomodate the 757 routes.

Number 3 is the real competition, not the existing 757 because even the improved A321 does not match the existing 757-200, it may be more fuel efficient, but for carriers that do not now operate any A320's, they have to weigh the improvements against the 737/A320.
AA has no A320 a/c in their fleet, DL does so certainely the cost of training new pilots will be lower, but is the A321 an improvement over the A320 / 737 that DL now uses for legacy 757 routes?


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 45677 times:

One route that the proposed aircraft would do well on is MAA-ICN(2,900 nm). Hyundai has a large auto plant in MAA, and there can be feeder traffic from MAA for NA west coast. There are many other p2hub routes like this between South Asia and NE Asia.

User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25008 posts, RR: 85
Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 45639 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting par13del (Reply 22):
I'm missing the economics of this improved A321 as it relates to the US market.

Does it relate to the US market? The OP said:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Prime targets for these new A321 NEO's seem Delta, AA, Continental and United Airlines.

But is that what Keesje thinks or what Airbus says?

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently onlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5314 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 45790 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Altogether we'll probably see a complete revamp of the A321, clearly aimed at the US Boeing 757 replacement market. Prime targets for these new A321 NEO's seem Delta, AA, Continental and United Airlines.

Even a much-improved A321 cannot replace the existing CO 752 fleet as it is used almost exclusively for TATL ops. The UA fleet might be able to use the aircraft, but it would have to have a substantial advantage over the 737-900ER to overcome commonality, assuming the merger goes through. Also, UA's 752s are not that old, and UA does a better job than anyone of leveraging their capacity.

DL is not replacing 752s in the immediate term but might be a good long-term prospect, provided Boeing doesn't go ahead with its clean-sheet airplane -- some of DL's older 752s will begin to approach the cycle limit in a few years.

That leaves AA and US. The plane is a no-brainer for US. AA could use them very well, but (sadly) there would definitely be institutional resistance to adding an Airbus type.

On the other hand, this thing seems custom-made for the Euro charter market -- Airbus should snap that business right up, again assuming Boeing doesn't come back with a new airframe.

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
I'm not sure all transatlantic capabilities will be out of reach.

With range 550 nm shorter than a wingleted 752, anything but BOS/NYC-Ireland is going to be a challenge.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 20):
All these used B757-200s will find a new home very soon, but as usual within cargo fleets...

Don't be so sure... there are a number of older frames sitting in the desert that cargo operators have rejected.


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6868 posts, RR: 63
Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 45805 times:

Quoting KcrwFlyer (Reply 4):
Whats a sharklet??? Looks alot like a winglet to me.

"A winglet by any other name would smell as sweet..."

(What's 'alot'? Is that like 'a lot'?)


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 45560 times:

Quoting PM (Reply 27):

(What's 'alot'? Is that like 'a lot'?

Looks a lot like bad grammar to me. Just like "rediculous" is spelled-out ignorance.


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6530 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 45468 times:

Quoting jetblast (Reply 25):
Oh god, please don't give anyone any ideas...

Why, is a 757 on such route a better experience ?



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6868 posts, RR: 63
Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 month 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 45266 times:

Quoting n7371f (Reply 29):
Talk with 320 operators and the 321 operator about transcontinental and their concerns. And as someone else brightly noted, still a limited role aircraft if it can't make it ETOPS across the Atlantic like the 757.

it's hard to think of a plane that has sold 793 examples to date (the A321) as "limited" but I guess everything's relative...  


25 n7371f : Very true. Just take JetBlue's head, Dave Barger, and a comment from a month ago (I'm paraphrasing): We love the A320 but we keep working with Airbus
26 JAAlbert : Now, I'm not an expert, but it seems to me that the US narrow body market is huge. Why wouldn't Airbus already have made a transcontinental narrowbody
27 ScottB : Well, the topic of this particular thread is the A321 and the eventual replacement of U.S. 757 fleets, and in that respect, the plane that has sold 7
28 BMI727 : The A320 was meant to compete with the 737, and in that respect it does very well. Now, moving up to the 757 type market was a bit of a catch 22 for
29 United960 : Does anyone know if it is true that you can't put a jetway up to door 2L on an A321? I have heard that 2L is too close to the #1 engine pylon, and thu
30 Aesma : Why Boeing isn't making one currently ?
31 vctony : Currently all of the US airlines that need this capability fly the 757. In fact, the 757-200 is the ONLY aircraft type universally flown by every one
32 Aesma : 100 isn't nearly enough market to make a new plane.
33 ditzyboy : I posed the same question in the TechOps forum. Anecdotal evidence from BMI cabin crew suggest that both stairs and jetways have been used at L2.
34 MD-90 : Market saturation by the 752. I'm sure Boeing is thinking hard about launching a replacement aircraft/family for all those 757s with DL/AA/CO/UA and
35 CYatUK : Yes, but don't forget the large A319/320 fleet of UA. If you take this into account, there shoun't be aby commonality problems (assuming the merger g
36 BMI727 : UA has enough A320s, 737s, and 757s that addiing more of any type will not cause commonality issues.
37 Post contains links keesje : What Airbus says.. http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...321-at-757-replacement-market.html I think both Airbus and Boeing are sandwiched a bit. Pre
38 Tristarsteve : The short answer is, it depends. Although L2 door is adequate for pax boarding, most airlines don't leave space inside the aircraft for boarding. On
39 DocLightning : Although I bet that B6 and VS will be very interested, as will US.
40 rheinwaldner : Other types of used aircraft for a puny fraction of cost are no longer operated as well (767, 744, and yes 757). What should be different in case of
41 packsonflight : If the 321 is ever going to close the range gap with the 757 it neads higher MTOW. I think 3-5 t would do it Does anybody know If that is possible wit
42 Post contains images keesje : Airbus' Williams last month told both the landing gear and (outer) wing box will be strenghtened to carry the heavier engine. Hence the $2.5 billion
43 Burkhard : If I count correctly, there are about 60 operators of the A321 now which operate 3 or more aircraft. The A321 has already replaced most B752 in Europe
44 flipdewaf : I personally think that things will change big time when the mods to the A321 shuffle down to the A320 which would then have the range for real TATL a
45 Post contains images par13del : Either way, the 757-200 was sold and is operated mainly in the US due to the specifics of the US market, namely the need for excessive range to meet
46 art : Isn't the A321 NEO's ability to compete range-wise with the 757 principally a happy by-product of a substantial reduction in fuel burn due to new engi
47 thrufru : While range is a significant part of this topic, what about field elevation? Is the A321 NEO going to be capable of operating in and out of hot and hi
48 Post contains images caljn : And when I read the not existent "anyways" I don't even finish the post.
49 RayChuang : Actually, if Airbus can figure out a way to get the A321 NEO to fly transatlantic routes non-stop year-round, TUI, AG is definitely interested! The 75
50 STT757 : Currently there are no A319s, A320s or A321s flying to Hawaii from the West Coast of the US and Canada. Yet there are many 737-700, 737-800 and 737-90
51 Burkhard : It is a good word in British English.
52 Post contains links parapente : Spingarn concludes that Boeing will proceed with an all-new aircraft rather than a re-engine and believes that the design will be optimised for the 15
53 beechnut : Before answering that question, we should answer: "will it need to fly transcon from a 5,700 ft runway?". That would seem a very, very niche requirem
54 EA772LR : I think one thing that's been overlooked is the 737NG getting a 2% fuel burn improvement which ought to further help range, especially for the 738/739
55 nycbjr : I'm going to nit pick here.. and I'm really sorry Keesje I love reading your posts, but this gets me every time.. its "gap" not "gab". I'm terrible a
56 kgaiflyer : Yes. SNA's displaced-threshold runway is basically 5701 feet. And flights to ATL, EWR (and soon JFK) do depart there.
57 airbazar : The way I see it, this revamped A321 will be used to upgrade exising routes that are flown with smaller planes because the current 739/A321 can't do i
58 EA772LR : The 739ER can easily do US TransCons and is about to get a 2% fuel burn reduction, and the A321 is even capable now. The 739ER actually has more rang
59 Post contains links and images keesje : Well if Boeing manages to stretch the landing gear (and adjust surrounding structure to take the loads) they could introduce higher BPR engines too. H
60 brilondon : AA has recently put the 757 through the new winglet program and I don't see them straying from that type anytime soon or manufacturer. The fact that
61 kgaiflyer : Meaning no disrespect to anyone, Keesje didn't make this thread into A vs B. His initial thesis was pretty straight forward. It was the fanboy-respon
62 BMI727 : Aren't these some of the things that Boeing would have to do to the 737 that would supposedly be prohibitively expensive and yield an inferior aircra
63 CFBFrame : from who? How many upgrades/modernizations do you think it will take for Airbus to get the 321 right? The 757 has been out of production for years, w
64 seabosdca : How much commonality is there between older A319/A320 frames and an A321 NEO? Different engines, at least some different systems, and a different int
65 DocLightning : Several airlines are getting rid of their 75s' and using A321's. IB is a prime example. MOST 757 routes can be flown with a 321, especially in Europe
66 Aesma : You seem confused. Airbus is now touting the forthcoming A321 NEO against the 757. The current A321 was never intended as a 757 competitor (not in it
67 columba : Interested if LH would be interested in an A321NEO, they have huge gap between the A321 and the A330. They just ordered a lot of A32x and mainly A321
68 kingfriday013 : Are these airlines even looking to replace their 757s? Delta had the largest 757 fleet of any airline in the world even before the NW takeover, and t
69 columba : Well AA could use something that could fill the gap the A300 has left so an A321NEO might be of interest for them. I know they were looking at the A33
70 brilondon : AC has the A321 in its fleet, and they are using them as intended. The Canadian aviation market is such that a plane the size of a 757 is not require
71 CFBFrame : Okay, so why this thread, and why so many attempts at using the A321 as a 757 replacement? Doc- yeah people have bought it, but the question here is
72 BMI727 : Two reasons I think this is very unlikely to happen. 1. Cargo was huge for the A300 routes. I don't know how they are doing now with some 757s on for
73 Post contains images art : I wouldn't worry too much about being terrible at grammer. Being good at grammar is what counts. If Boeing announce a 737 replacement that encroaches
74 Bluewave 707 : I don't recall mention of ETOPS in this thread ... the reason being: all the USA carriers use their 752s for mainland to Hawaii flights. There would h
75 BMI727 : The current A320 family can be certified for ETOPS, and I think a few operators have done so, though not as many as the 737. True, but that argument
76 LAXDESI : Assuming that the quoted seat counts are for single class, it doesn't seem that Boeing is looking to deviate too far from the current capacity of 73G
77 Post contains links and images keesje : I have no indications the A321 is a poor design. It continues to sell well, dominating the >200seat NB segment. Yes, many 757 are getting old. Tha
78 BMI727 : It also means that they are most likely paid for. These things are not cut and dry. Really? Manufacturers never make an unsolicited pitch for a new p
79 parapente : One point that seems to being missed here is timing.This plane won't be on the market tomorrow - or the next day - but in 5 years time - if and when t
80 Post contains images par13del : Comparing the wrong a/c, the issue is whether the A321 can carry the load of the 757, airlines in the Caribbean who operated the A321 had issues with
81 laca773 : Luckily, Airbus came out with the more advanced A321-200 as US was really struggling with their 321-100 fleet doing transcons from CLT/PHL-LAX/SFO/SA
82 seabosdca : Well, we know the A321 cannot replace that 757!
83 Post contains links keesje : It happens all the time BA, Finnair, .. http://www.aeroclix.com/2010/06/10/f...-to-launch-sharklet-equipped-a321/
84 rheinwaldner : What?! Without A321 the 757 production lines would run at quite some speed! Thus the A321 effectively killed the 757! The A321 may not overlap the 75
85 Post contains images seabosdca : Those were not 757-300s like the one in the picture you posted.
86 328JET : Some people here do not mention that the B752 would most probably have a much shorter life without getting these fantastic APB winglets. They improved
87 par13del : The winglets essentially became a hot commodity when fuel started rising, by that time orders for the 757 had already dried up and Boeing was shuttin
88 328JET : @ par13del I never wrote anything about new B757-sales after introduction of the winglets. They just improved the performance and CASM of existing B75
89 Aesma : Surely the A319LR used for ACJs are ETOPS certified ? Head of states use them, including Sarkozy. The thread is about the A321 NEO. Not the current A
90 Revelation : Sigh. Several people including Boeing engineers have explained that there is no need to stretch the landing gear to introduce a higher BPR engine on
91 LAXDESI : I am not disagreeing with you, but I don't fully understand why Boeing is leaning towards a replacement. B738 is lighter than A320, and offers more c
92 Post contains links and images keesje : To effectively compete with the CSeries and NEo we are talking BPR 1:10 - 1:12. not just "higher" Frankly I do not see a BPR of 10 or higher being re
93 LAXDESI : I am not sure if a lower BPR will necessarily put B738NEO at a disadvantage as it has the following advantages:
94 BMI727 : That's what I think, but look at the post I quoted: Boeing closed the 757 line because the orders just weren't there anymore. Anyone who wanted one,
95 Post contains links keesje : Airbus Receives 180 Minute ETOPS Approval For A320 Family Aircraft Toulouse, 28 April 2004 Leading aircraft manufacturer Airbus has received approval
96 328JET : @ LAXDESI The B737 is only lighter because of: - a narrow fuselage in comparison to the A32x, which might also offer less comfort per seat than the CS
97 Post contains images columba : I have an even better idea, a 727-800 Take the 727 fuselage (basically the same as the 737-800) with 737NG technolgy. Put two Leap X/GTF engines at t
98 DocLightning : It's hard to make the A320 family's airframe any more efficient than it already is. *maaaybe* CFRP, but there are issues with that. Although an all-n
99 wn676 : US never operated any -100s.
100 astuteman : I thought that Aesma answered your question in the quoted text which you used to prompt it... The current A321 was never intended to be a 757 competi
101 einsteinboricua : I loved that. I'm not sure I agree with you. If it had been like that we would see more A321s flying and they have yet to meet the 757s number. Maybe
102 LHCVG : What is Boeing's plan if (hypothetically) this A321 v.2 takes off, so to speak? As in, does the 737 have headroom for a similar re-engine and maybe so
103 Post contains links and images keesje : Sometimes you have to revive a sleeping thread just to plug a photo. View Large View MediumPhoto © Bastian Ding
104 Post contains images EA772LR : No it doesn't. The 739ER has equal takeoff performance to the 738, which is much better than the standard 739, and better than the A321. All of these
105 rheinwaldner : ? And why were no more orders? Why did nobody want one? Airlines did order enough equally sized aircrafts to let the production line run ... but thos
106 BMI727 : It's simple. You can break down the 757 customers into two rough groups: those who need the extra performance over the A321 and those that didn't. Ma
107 rheinwaldner : In other words: the overall demand that existed was satisfied by the A321. Again in other words: (edited to sound less aggresive)
108 BMI727 : Except that the demand for the 757 was dropping anyway, since it had been around for some time and most airlines had all of them that they wanted. I
109 rheinwaldner : Demand dropping away is without doubt the reason for any stopped production line. But we are discussing why the demand dropped away! Saturated market
110 Burkhard : Looking out of the window now, I can clearly see that usage of A321 must be very different in different parts of the world for good reasons. Here in a
111 328JET : @ 772LR Believe me! The take-off and landing performance of the A321 is better than the B739ERs. In my airline group we did many calculations about it
112 Post contains links A342 : Like 328JET, I don't know where you got this from. If anything, the standard 739 has equal takeoff performance as the 738, because they share the sam
113 Post contains images EA772LR : Interesting. I stand corrected.
114 Post contains images 328JET : @ EA772LR I stood corrected in this forum several times and will do so in the future. It is really a pitty for us, as we still have no clue when we co
115 BMI727 : Truthfully, I am not sure that such a plane will happen soon. The low end can be covered quite well, and the 73G and A319 have fine field performance
116 328JET : @BMI727 No, we do not fly transatlantics with our 75s very often, it is more about field performance on a lot of smaller southern airports in europe o
117 BMI727 : If field performance is the limiting factor, then the 73G or A319 is the best choice, although the economics probably aren't great. Honestly, I don't
118 FX1816 : Really?? So then the DC9's that DL operates are the most expensive aircraft in their fleet??? I mean they are all over 30 years old and much older th
119 BMI727 : To operate on a CASM basis probably. But the payments on those DC-9s is $0. You can buy a lot of gas for the price of a new A320. Well, considering t
120 par13del : Neither OEM believes that the 757 market deserves a replacement. Boeing sold 757's to all customers who wanted the unique capabilities, the majority
121 BMI727 : It is very much the same affliction that hurts the 767-200 and 787-3. The market is not nearly large enough to justify an optimized, dedicated replac
122 keesje : I would put the 757, 767-200, TU154 and A300/A310 in the same segment. 180-250 shrot-medum range. The 787-3 is much bigger and e.g. twice as heavy an
123 6thfreedom : I can see other potential users, including A320/321 operators like Jetstar. From Australia alone, the A321 NEO opens up some interesting unserved rout
124 Baroque : Close to SYD-CGK too, but probably not close enough. So also not that short of SYD-SIN. Possibly smaller NEO-A32xs might have that in range too.
125 par13del : Australia is an interesting market in terms of size and range of a/c required, how many 757's were used or did they opt for wide bodies on their dome
126 6thfreedom : Not many, if any, B757 have ever been flown in Australia. domesti services are either widebody (767) or narrowbody (737/320.
127 Post contains images TSS : I thought it was a given that the top version of the 797/737RS, the one with the long body, the big wing, the big engines, and the big fuel tank, wou
128 BMI727 : Not even that. The difference is five inches. There is some difference, and every pound counts. Plus, with the plane lower to the ground, loading, un
129 XT6Wagon : and at my shoulder level the A320 is a bit narrower due to the high floor level. So its not all beer and skittles if you are tall in a A320.
130 parapente : We have had a range of threads on the 320/737 replacement debate.Covering both airframes and all engine possibilities. Most of these threads are gener
131 keesje : Agree. More factors putting up the pressure at Airbus are major airlines like AF/KLM, Easyjet and Southwest saying just new engines aren't good enoug
132 laca773 : Really? So the 321s US was operating that had perfomance problems on transcons were 321-200s with less powerful engines compared to the more advanced
133 Burkhard : Looking into the photos on a.net, the mostly have A321-211 with CFM engines, and now some -231 with V2500, and no -1xx
134 PITingres : You can't possibly seriously believe that either A or B have been twiddling their thumbs and whistling. Making an airplane isn't like making breakfas
135 seabosdca : Correct. A 321-100 wouldn't have even come close to operating the transcons.
136 laca773 : Thanks for the information, Burkhard & seabosdca! I appreciate it. So what it came down to was the CFW engines had remarkably less power and thru
137 EA772LR : I believe US uses the CFM56-5B3/P rated at 32,000lbs for their later A321-211, and have the V2533-A5 rated at 33,000lbs on some of their latest A321-
138 wn676 : The difference can't be that remarkable considering US doesn't concentrate a certain type of A321 to any specific mission or station. Having worked o
139 Aesma : Thanks. Well, you forget that the A321NEO is clearly feasible, while a comparable 737 redesign might not be so easy (cheap). My guess is this : Boein
140 Revelation : I think they are generating more light than heat. "The market" doesn't have to make the decision to go the $2-$4B route vs the $10-$15B route, the ve
141 A342 : At least for the A321, this is not correct. If desired by the customer, the A321's max. structural payload can be in fact a tad higher than on the 75
142 Tristarsteve : Just read through the whole thread, am very interesting. Until now, I did not know there was an A321-100, now I know all about it, but in the data sec
143 AADC10 : That is a very specialized situation. The only airport where that might apply that I am aware of is SNA. BUR could also apply during a Santa Ana wind
144 beechnut : Displaced threshold is for landing, not takeoff. Beech
145 Post contains images kgaiflyer : **Details** I got the runway length right, yes?
146 beechnut : Sorry, I thought you meant that the length considering the displaced threshold was 5701 ft. You're right the runway itself is 5701 ft. That's short f
147 seabosdca : Not that it changes your point, but an A321 can't operate a transcon from DCA either. Airlines needing transcon capability from these places will jus
148 BMI727 : What I meant was that there are enough planes in each fleet that it will not significantly help or hurt them to choose one for commonality reasons.
149 Post contains links A342 : Are the wheels larger than on the A320? If yes, by how much? An interesting fact about the double bogie: It limits MTOW to 73.5 tonnes, instead of up
150 EA772LR : Makes sense if you think about it because otherwise Airbus would have to increase MTOW on the A32X to allow for the extra structure and weight of the
151 Aesma : I think the reason is that you want the double bogies for runways of a lesser quality. That means more bumpy and less braking effectiveness, so the re
152 Viscount724 : Many A320 operators choose wider aisles rather than wider seats to make it easier to move around the cabin. On most A320 family aircraft I've been on
153 AADC10 : That is really specialized since there are only a few beyond perimeter slots. There are only a tiny number of transcon flights out of SNA and DCA com
154 ikramerica : As a taller person, I've never noticed any comfort improvement on the A320 series over the 737/757. Most airlines don't provide a wider seat, and as
155 Viscount724 : As far as I know, 4-engine jets never served DCA. One exception was a special pre-inaugural Pan Am 707 flight that was christened at DCA by the wife
156 328JET : @ Ikramerica I am flying Lufthansa very often and whenever possible i avoid the flights with the B737s. There is a huge difference in comfort.
157 antoniemey : That all depends on where you sit. I will give you that if you walk onto an A320 it looks larger than a 737 inside. But if you're sitting in 19B, it'
158 Post contains images kgaiflyer : This is off topic I, too, can't remember ever seeing a 4-engine jet at DCA. But there were sure were 4-engine props at DCA.
159 frmrCapCadet : Few would call or consider such a plane as obsolete I think this is right. A and B will build or re-engine when they show the specs of what they can
160 Post contains links LAXDESI : An update on A320 NEO plans. It doesn't look like Airbus is willing to go for a replacement as most of the fuel burn gains come from the new engine. W
161 Post contains links rheinwaldner : Airbus seems convinced that even the simple A321 with sharklets (without NEO) has the pole position to replace 757's: Summary of page 26-33: http://ww
162 Antoniemey : Yeah... But in most cases the 757s that ARE making those hops are: A: Paid For B: Repositioning for a longer flight C: Already replaced by a 737 D: S
163 rheinwaldner : A lot of "paid" aircrafts have quickly been replaced once 15..20% more efficient competitors arrived...
164 328JET : @ Antoniemey Which airlines replaced their B752s with B737s?
165 Sulley : Contniental. Many domestic routes once handled exclusively by the 752 have been replaced by the 739.
166 328JET : @ Sully And how many B752s were taken out of the fleet of CO?
167 Sulley : None, however most are now on international ops across the Atlantic serving a different mission...
168 328JET : @ Sulley Ok, none is taken out of the fleet. What does that mean? No B752 is replaced by a B737 in the United States.
169 Sulley : Semantics. Domestic routes that were once exclusively serviced by the 757-200 are now done with the 737-900, at least for CO. The 757-200 is now prima
170 A342 : Wow, when did they do that? It is certainly not on the Airbus website yet.
171 Antoniemey : The frames themselves were not replaced, no... but they were replaced on the routes that the A321 or A321NEO would replace 757s on by 737-900ERs and
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...
Shaping Up To Be A Bumper Year For A&B posted Fri May 27 2005 00:19:25 by Art
Cathay To Acquire Up To Eight A300 Or 757 posted Wed Apr 17 2002 13:21:07 by James768
Heads Up: US 757 To Get New Livery On The 4th posted Fri Dec 2 2005 01:36:17 by SonOfACaptain
US Airways To Give Their 767/757 The XM Treatment posted Sun May 20 2007 01:22:11 by Gilesdavies
US To Serve BUF With 757 posted Fri Jan 26 2007 23:18:48 by BUFJets
Threat Level Up To Orange US Domestic Flts posted Thu Aug 10 2006 09:59:15 by A340Spotter
US 757 To DUB posted Sun Jul 30 2006 00:24:15 by EIRules
US Cuts Fares Up To 66% @ GSO posted Mon Feb 13 2006 16:47:00 by Ewmahle
New US-Mexico Agreement: Up To Three Airlines! posted Tue Dec 13 2005 04:36:05 by SFOMEX
Follow Up To NW 757 Rumor... posted Wed Aug 24 2005 03:13:52 by FlyBoeing