User avatar
American 767
Topic Author
Posts: 3924
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 7:27 am

Jetblue A320.5: Why Not A320-300?

Mon Apr 21, 2003 8:01 pm

Hy everyone,
I was reading the other day an article in Airways all about Jetblue. They are doing very well, they seem to be expanding network and fleet and as you know Jetblue's future fleet plan is exclusively the Airbus A320 aircraft, at least for the near future. But something in Jetblue's profile caught my attention: at the request of Jetblue, Airbus is going to make an A320.5 which will simply be an A320 with two extra rows in the main cabin, don't you think this variant should be named A320-300? I really think so. There was originally the A320-100 which wasn't produced in many units, then the A320-200 which is the current variant in production today, so logically the next variant should be the A320-300. Maybe they mean it will fill the gap between the A320 and the A321, but to me A320-300 seems to be a more logical move than A320.5.
In Jetblue's computer reservation system, if the aircraft is an A320-300, the abbreviation would be 323. If it's a regular A320 then the abbreviation is simply 320. The A323 doesn't exist so there will not be any confustion at all.

Ben Soriano
Brussels Belgium
Ben Soriano
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 6:46 am

RE: Jetblue A320.5: Why Not A320-300?

Mon Apr 21, 2003 8:43 pm

How about a 325 on the reservation system?

From what I know, it won't be a stretch, it will only be a change in the interior, right?
Posts: 351
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 4:06 pm

RE: Jetblue A320.5: Why Not A320-300?

Mon Apr 21, 2003 8:48 pm

sounds like the same idea boeing technics have to put 220 pax in the 739,

just replace the bubbled pressure wall (whats the exact name of the thing in the aft of the a/c?) with a flat one.
boeing has to add a type 1 exit to the 739 but then it can suit 220 pax in Y.
Posts: 5539
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 1:11 am

RE: Jetblue A320.5: Why Not A320-300?

Mon Apr 21, 2003 10:29 pm

Airbus has already made it clear that they will not physically stretch the aircraft due to recertification costs. Interior mods only to accomodate the extra rows.

The extra two rows are the ones that are missing when they opted for the 320 instead of the 738 (the original business model used the add'l seating as marginal revenue....).

It really doesn't matter what they call it.

I imagine it will also be popular with IT Charter carriers as well....

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, admanager, Baidu [Spider], CHCalfonzo, d8s, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Indy, MAH4546, NolaMD88fan, tcaeyx, xiaotung, Yahoo [Bot], ZKLOU and 137 guests