Horus From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, RR: 62 Posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 6651 times:
This summer BMed are upgrading their 4x weekly LHR-HBE (Alexandria) flights deploying the A321 instead of the A320. Also GB Airways are deploying the A321 on their LGW-SSH and LGW-HRG routes instead of the A320. My question is can the A321 fly non-stop between the UK and Egypt (both ways) without any restrictions? During the summer months high temperatures at Egyptian airports coupled with strong headwinds on the Egypt-UK sectors can have a significant effect on performance.
I know certain UK charter airlines face payload restrictions on their A320s (which have a greater range than the A321) when flying SSH-MAN/LGW/GLA during the winter, so the effect would be more prominent in the summer. In late 2001 MS used their A321s between CAI and LHR and I've been told they did face weight restrictions.
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22063 posts, RR: 51 Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 6620 times:
Not all A321s are the same. The higher gross weight(and longer range) A321-200 comes with several different weight options and also has increased fuel capacity as a result of up to 2 auxiliary center fuel tanks.
For instance here in the US, US Airways assigns many A321 to transcon flying as it has better range then its A320 sibling.
Also keep in mind, especially in BMeds case, the aircraft is in a low density configuration which also helps.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
A319XFW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 6558 times:
Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 2): I think Scandinavian charter carriers like MyTravel and Novair fly A321-200s with 211 and 199 seats respectively to Egypt (Hurghada) non-stop...?
Novair have got 2 ACT's in their A321's (well A321 MSN 2410 at least), so that would give them the extra legs.
And GB/BMed have 1 ACT at least in some of their aircraft, so they should be able to do it too.
Miller22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 707 posts, RR: 5 Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6527 times:
A321's have a problem with runway performance, as well as weight. The dual wheel truck places too much weight per square foot on many runways and taxiways. It weights almost the same as the 757, and has half as many main tires.
If you run that thing transcon, you're going to incur a weight penalty. I've never heard of an A321 going farther than an A320, but you can always remove passengers for fuel, I suppose.
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22063 posts, RR: 51 Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6484 times:
Quoting Miller22 (Reply 4): A321's have a problem with runway performance, as well as weight.
The A321 is very similar in bearing weight to higher gross weight B727-200s.
Quoting Miller22 (Reply 4): If you run that thing transcon, you're going to incur a weight penalty. I've never heard of an A321 going farther than an A320, but you can always remove passengers for fuel, I suppose.
As mentioned before, the A321 comes with Aux center tanks giving the aircraft significant range boost.
US Airways for years has been running PHL-West Coast runs on the A321 without a hitch. In comparison look at all the issues Jetblue has had with its A320s making fuel stops particularly heading westbound on transcon routes.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
LongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4281 posts, RR: 36 Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6429 times:
I fly the A321 from YYZ-SFO all the time. Flying time is about 5:20. Normally we hold an OAK alternate with about 30 minutes "route reserve" on top of the additional 1600 Kgs (approx :45) reserve. All told, even with a full load of pax and freight, we still have about 6000 to 7000 kgs open weight. Max takeoff weight for our A321s is 93,000 kgs, and we have provisions for one ACT.
Now ... when we fly an A320 on the route, we need sharper pencils. As, with its 75,500 kgs take off weight, things are pretty tight, and almost always take off from YYZ at max take off weight.
An interesting anomaly of which you may not be aware. Although, the in air performance of the A321 is poorer, the takeoff performance of the A321 is far far superior to the A320. At max takeoff weight for both aircraft, the A321 can use any runway at YYZ, while the A320 can only use 23/05 or 33R/15L.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15872 posts, RR: 66 Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6407 times:
Quoting LongHauler (Reply 6): An interesting anomaly of which you may not be aware. Although, the in air performance of the A321 is poorer, the takeoff performance of the A321 is far far superior to the A320. At max takeoff weight for both aircraft, the A321 can use any runway at YYZ, while the A320 can only use 23/05 or 33R/15L.
The magic of an extra slot on the flaps.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
A342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4655 posts, RR: 4 Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 6407 times:
Quoting LongHauler (Reply 6): I fly the A321 from YYZ-SFO all the time. Flying time is about 5:20. Normally we hold an OAK alternate with about 30 minutes "route reserve" on top of the additional 1600 Kgs (approx :45) reserve. All told, even with a full load of pax and freight, we still have about 6000 to 7000 kgs open weight. Max takeoff weight for our A321s is 93,000 kgs, and we have provisions for one ACT.
So you don´t have any ACT´s in the A321s ? How much cargo can you take on top of a full pax load ? Could "your" A321s make YVR-HNL unrestricted ?
Quoting A342 (Reply 8): So you don´t have any ACT´s in the A321s ? How much cargo can you take on top of a full pax load ? Could "your" A321s make YVR-HNL unrestricted ?
Yes, that was vague. Our A321s have one ACT, with provisions for an unused second ACT.
I have seen as much as 4000 Kgs of cargo, on top of Pax baggage, but only as I queried this. It is not normally split on our weight and balance .... pax baggage and cargo are usually one weight item.
It would appear that the A321 could fly from YVR to HNL. Only problem is that ACs A321s are not HF nor liferaft equipped.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
Bomber996 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 364 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 6036 times:
What do you think the advantage would be for an A320 if they offered an option to have the extra slotted flaps. Would this help performance? Maybe even make the A320 better then the A321?
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15872 posts, RR: 66 Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 6028 times:
Quoting Bomber996 (Reply 12): Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 7):
The magic of an extra slot on the flaps.
What do you think the advantage would be for an A320 if they offered an option to have the extra slotted flaps. Would this help performance? Maybe even make the A320 better then the A321?
Well maybe. But remember that the extra slot makes the wing heavier and more expensive to both buy and maintain. So the economic advantage may well be offset.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
LongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4281 posts, RR: 36 Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 5985 times:
We have recently added new A320s to our fleet that have 27,000 lbs thrust engines, vice the previous 25,000 lbs engines. THAT makes a huge difference. Surprising for only 2,000 lbs of thrust.
In fact, we can take off from 01L at SFO and make YYZ with lots of open weight, only a dream in an A320 with the smaller engines!
Also, the MTOW of all of our A320s has been increased by roughly 2000 kgs, which helps on the longer transcon flights.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
LongHauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4281 posts, RR: 36 Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5947 times:
Also, another minor point.
I think it is the engines, not the wings of the A321 that makes it more capable than the A320 with respect to runway performance. A fully loaded A321 has V speeds no less than the A320, (and not much more), but is capable of taking off of a shorter runway, or second segment restricted runway.
That would make me think, it gets to those speeds over a shorter distance .... as a result of the more powerful engines.
Now, if the V speeds were quite a bit less than the A320, then yes that would be a result of the wing.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
A319XFW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5928 times:
Quoting Bomber996 (Reply 12): What do you think the advantage would be for an A320 if they offered an option to have the extra slotted flaps. Would this help performance? Maybe even make the A320 better then the A321?
We prefer the A321 wing, as it's got a simpler fuel system
No messing about with those transfer valves etc!
Mikkel777 From Norway, joined Oct 2002, 370 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5912 times:
Quoting LongHauler (Reply 15): I think it is the engines, not the wings of the A321 that makes it more capable than the A320 with respect to runway performance.
The 321 have thrust/weight-ratio roughly the same as 319, far superior to the 320. The 320 have one of the lowest ratios of narrowbodies, but the 319 and 321 are one of the best of the narrowbodies.
Acceleration is dependent of thrust and weight. Take-off speed is dependent of wings, weight and thrust.
So, I agree 100%.
Persotvik From Norway, joined Nov 1999, 274 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5839 times:
Spanair opererate charterflights LPA-TRD with A321 ( 212 seats). According to Great Circle Mapper this is 4380 KM. Must be one of the longest A321 flights??
Prebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6019 posts, RR: 55 Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5716 times:
Quoting Mikkel777 (Reply 17): The 321 have thrust/weight-ratio roughly the same as 319, far superior to the 320. The 320 have one of the lowest ratios of narrowbodies, but the 319 and 321 are one of the best of the narrowbodies.
Well, it all depends on the engine version selected by the operator.
The A319/A320 has come with eight different versions of the CFM56 alone.
Of course an A319 with 27k lbs engines will outperform an A320 with 25k lbs engines. But what about an A319 with 22k engines against an A320 with 27k?
And sure an A320 with 27k will overtake an A321 with 30k on the runway. While a 33k shows tail to a 25k A320.
There is a tendency to assume that CFM56 is one engine. The reality is that it is a family of 25+ engine versions of similar design. They vary from the CFM56-3B1 with 20k lbs thrust on the B733 to CFM56-5C4 with 34k lbs thrust on the A343.
Most plane subtypes come with 3 or 4 different CFM56 versions which may vary as much as 20% in take-off thrust.
The lower powered versions are by far the most common out there. The high powered versions are chosen when needed, mostly for hot and high ops and and for marginal range ops with extra fuel tanks.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
Anxebla From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (7 years 2 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 5596 times:
Quoting Persotvik (Reply 18): Spanair opererate charterflights LPA-TRD with A321 ( 212 seats). According to Great Circle Mapper this is 4380 KM. Must be one of the longest A321 flights??
I think so, but keep in mind also JK makes with A-321 MAD-SSG-MAD as a schedule flight. From SSG to MAD there is 4252 km but the Malabo's hot and humid climate is an important issue for the MTOW and ops calculations. JK uses --or used last year-- on this route a 321 with 2 auxiliary center fuel tanks.
Sponsor Message: 
From Egypt, joined Feb 2004, 5230 posts, 
From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22063 posts, 
From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2080 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15872 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4655 posts, 
From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 3298 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6019 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
