Me too. But if I fly transcon to LAX or SFO from JFK I would still choose to fly on a 767 even if I've already been on it many times. Simply because the 767 will be pulled out of these routes soon. The last 200 leaves the fleet in May of 2014. I can fly on the 321 later, when JFK-LAX and JFK-SFO will both be all A321 in a year from now. I'll get to see those all the time for many years to come if I live in New York.
Quoting Blueshamu330s (Reply 1): I'm so looking forward to seeing her complete and how she looks when fully fitted out.
I have no doubt it will be a great airplane, but I would still choose to fly on a 767 for the reason I explain above.
Thanks KarelXWB for posting the picture. For those who are anxiously waiting to experience flying on this new airplane with American, transcon JFK-LAX service starts in January of 2014.
tortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3446 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (11 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 53109 times:
Great to see, I am extremely excited by this aircraft. It will be fun to fly. What is it 105 seats in three classes on a narrow body? AA is getting creative on a very difficult route and I wish them luck. It keeps the industry on their toes.
Also, agree that the engines look a little petite. The larger engines will help the aesthetics.
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4471 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (11 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 52053 times:
Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 10):
Hopefully not. I would rather have the 777s and 763 that AA currently operates between LAX-MIA.
Oh, I'm not hoping the 777s stop running on MIA-LAX-MIA. Just hoping that these special "JFK-LAX/SFO" A321s at some point replace the 738/757 that they run on the route. The 763s... I avoid them, though if the new J class will match the new 772 J class then I'd be OK with riding their 763 once again.
Pitching up will cause the entire engine to raise further off the ground no matter what the pitch angle is due to it being ahead of the pivot point (main landing gear). The only time it might possibly hit the ground is if they pull a SWA and land nose first or if maybe all the mains are flat and they slam it in. Just depends on the amount of travel there is between the typical compression of the strut and a completely compressed strut (which I don't know the number).
I personally don't like the size increase aesthetically. It looks really close to the fuselage width from the front and appears funny to me. I typically love huge engines too.
commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11641 posts, RR: 61
Reply 15, posted (11 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 51584 times:
The more I see the new livery and logo, the more I like it. Unlike some, I actually think the new livery looks particularly excellent on the A319s. I very much look forward to seeing these A321s - outside and especially inside.
brilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4237 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (11 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 43152 times:
Quoting N62NA (Reply 8):
I'm hoping that at some point some of these premium configured A321s show up on MIA-LAX-MIA
I hope that they will be able to use them all over their system. The looks of the seating is very interesting. Does anybody know if there will be different configurations once they integrate them into the system such as they have with the 757 or is this going to be a standard seating layout?