olddominion727
Topic Author
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:16 pm

Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 9:55 pm

With all of the hype around the new HA purchase of the A321NEO equipment to use as far as KOA-DEN... Is this a viable and quality replacement that everyone has been looking for against the 757? It's got a few dozen more seats than the 738/739's, and can possibly make it to Western EU from Canada and US. Is this going to be a new (quality) replacement for US, UA, DL, AA, or even AS, AC & BA? I know UA (former CO, AA & DL) had all but a blood oath with Boeing, but let's face it, if the A321NEO has the range and fuel savings it claims, I think loyalties will could change. We saw that to be proven when AA bought from Airbus and HA switched to almost an exclusive Airbus fleet (after eventually axing the 763)...and possible replacement for the 717's. I know we've tossed around the the A321NEO being a viable and valuable option against the 757 but we've never had any takers. Now we have one of the largest carriers in Polynesia ordering it and making a lot of nay sayers eat a lot of crow!! I think a lot of eyes are going to be watching HA's performance levels against their own.
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9042
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:01 pm

It is awesome that Airbus has created an alternative to the Boeing 757, with a first flight in (I'm guessing 2016?) it will surpass the B757, which made it's first flight in 1982.

Good on ya, Airbus   
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:04 pm

AA and HA seem to think so. Which also goes to the point that Boeing dropped the ball.

There is a market for that type of plane, but the legacy is now 707->757->A321NEO
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Bluewave 707
Posts: 2793
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2001 8:21 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:22 pm

The 737-900ER and the 737MAX-9 are supposed to fill the 757 too ...
"The best use of your life will be to so live your life, that the use of your life will outlive your life" -- D Severn
 
olddominion727
Topic Author
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:16 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:25 pm

@IK... with all do respect, I don't think Boeing did drop the ball. I think they tried by creating the 757-300. But the 300 doesn't seem to be utilized the way the way Boeing was hoping. it's not used to the EU and barely used to HI. Boeing should go back to the drawing board and create a Boeing 757-X (crossover between the 200 & 300) with the technology of the 738/9 MAX or rename it 737-1000MAX... but to do SOMETHING. There's a need for these thinner routes (non hub to hub routes) with more density/seating...

The only thing I don't know is if the A321NEO has the legs for an all coach 6hr flight holding 225 pax...Maybe for tour companies like Apple Vacations, Britania, Thompson, Condor... etc. using them from Western EU to the Middle East or the resort cities in Southern Spain, Azores, etc.
 
olddominion727
Topic Author
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:16 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:29 pm

@blue... with all do respect if the 739MAX was supposed to be the equivalent it would've been ordered to behave that way, on the same routes that will need to the equipment in the next 10 years. But the carriers are not buying it like that. So I wonder if they're playing a waiting game on those numbers too... Is the 739-MAX supposed to be able to make it from EWR-BER the way CO/UA has them now, or ORD-BHX the way AA did for a short time? Not sure. I hope the 739-MAX lives up to the expectations Boeing has. if not, Boeing will have really missed the boat in this market.
 
User avatar
817Dreamliiner
Posts: 3209
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:12 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:34 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 2):
Which also goes to the point that Boeing dropped the ball.

Not Necessarily:

Quoting bluewave 707 (Reply 3):
The 737-900ER and the 737MAX-9 are supposed to fill the 757 too ...

  

If your basing your opinion of "Boeing dropping the ball" of the lack of replacement for the transatlantic routes then your missing the point. When the range figures for the MAX came out it was mentioned by a Boeing representative that the MAX will NOT replace the 757 transatlantic routes, which is only served by around 50 or so 757s, while the other routes can be covered. The A320NEO series will be more or less the same. The longest range 757 has a range of roughly 4100nm, the A321NEO from what I remember is no where near that.
Please let me know... If you know this is the end of the world, Let me know... If you know the truth...
 
olddominion727
Topic Author
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 8:16 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:44 pm

@817drealiner... I remember on a UA KOA-DEN flight... about 7 years ago, DEN, SLC & COS was closed due to snow and they diverted us to LNK. We obviously had the legs for it. We were flying on that thing for almost 9 hrs. I thought for sure their math was wrong for the amount of fuel we had. But we made it, and nobody seemed to bat an eye. Obviously that's not typical, but does that just show the 752 was severely under-used and how the 753 should've even been more advanced to handle HNL-ORD, HNL-DFW for instance? I am not a pilot or an aviation flight engineer and not claiming to be. I am just curious if the distance could have been increased on the 753 to do longer/thinner routes more profitably than being forced to use a 767?
 
mffoda
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:09 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:04 pm

Quoting 817Dreamliiner (Reply 6):
If your basing your opinion of "Boeing dropping the ball" of the lack of replacement for the transatlantic routes then your missing the point. When the range figures for the MAX came out it was mentioned by a Boeing representative that the MAX will NOT replace the 757 transatlantic routes, which is only served by around 50 or so 757s, while the other routes can be covered. The A320NEO series will be more or less the same. The longest range 757 has a range of roughly 4100nm, the A321NEO from what I remember is no where near that.

Airbus's latest range figures on the A321neo is 3650nm and the 739Max is 3595. So the most recent company specs put them at 55nm apart in favor of the A321neo. Still very short of the 757.
harder than woodpecker lips...
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:18 pm

The 321 NEO has no chance in heck of making KOA-DEN and it doesn't have near the range that the 757 does. While it may be able to perform some typical 757 missions such as Hawaii - west coast, it's by no means a catch-all replacement for the 757.
PHX based
 
neutronstar73
Posts: 659
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:57 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:18 pm

Quoting clickhappy (Reply 1):
It is awesome that Airbus has created an alternative to the Boeing 757, with a first flight in (I'm guessing 2016?) it will surpass the B757, which made it's first flight in 1982.

Surpass the 757?!? That's a laugh! I needed one today, so thank you for that!  

Can't carry the payload of a 757, can't carry anything as far as the 757, and even with the NEO, can't even reach the range of a basic 757. So please tell me how it will surpass the 757?

Long live the 757!
 
User avatar
817Dreamliiner
Posts: 3209
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:12 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:28 pm

Quoting mffoda (Reply 8):
Airbus's latest range figures on the A321neo is 3650nm and the 739Max is 3595. So the most recent company specs put them at 55nm apart in favor of the A321neo. Still very short of the 757.

Thanks, Just looked up the range figure for the A321NEO to confirm. 55nm is not that much of a difference, but still significant in any case.
Please let me know... If you know this is the end of the world, Let me know... If you know the truth...
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:36 pm

The 73?MAX has the range to cover 757 routes but I highly doubt they can serve hot and high routes such as PHX-HNL
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:51 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 2):
There is a market for that type of plane, but the legacy is now 707->757->A321NEO
Quoting bluewave 707 (Reply 3):
The 737-900ER and the 737MAX-9 are supposed to fill the 757 too ...

The A-321NEO and B-737-9MAX are far short of the B-757 capability, and not even on the same contenent for the capability of the B-707 or DC-8.

Quoting olddominion727 (Reply 4):
The only thing I don't know is if the A321NEO has the legs for an all coach 6hr flight holding 225 pax...

It doesn't. The distance between DEN and KOA is 2900 nm, about 6.5 hours at 450 KTAS. That is no winds, so the A-321NEO cannot make this distance west bound, esspecially in the winter months. The HA A-321NEOs will be doing HNL/KOA to LAX (2225 nm, 5 flying hours), and maybe to SFO (2080 nm, 4.5 hours).

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
With all of the hype around the new HA purchase of the A321NEO equipment to use as far as KOA-DEN... Is this a viable and quality replacement that everyone has been looking for against the 757? It's got a few dozen more seats than the 738/739's, and can possibly make it to Western EU from Canada and US.

All of Hawaii is an "island destination" and hold fuel requirements are for 2 hours of fuel at holding airspeeds. Yes, there are several airports in Hawaii, but that is how the FAA defines it for passenger carrier airplanes.

I also don't see the A-321NEO (or B-737-9MAX) having TATL range with full payloads. The B-737-8MAX will, and the A-320NEO might have it too, but not the bigger airplanes in those families.

The A-321NEO and B-737-9MAX will be 3500 nm airplanes, but not with full payloads. The A-321 is a 200 seat airplane, the proposed longer version will be heavier, and carry some 230 pax, but will have less range as it is heavier. The B-737-900ER 185-190 seat airplane, so I don't see where you can say it has "a few dozen more seats". In contrast, the B-752 is a 220-230 seat airplane with a range of more than 4000 nm, the bigger B-753 seats 250 and a range of 3600 nm. the -200 has a MTOW about 255,000 lbs and the -300 has a MTOW around 270,000 lbs.
 
dtw9
Posts: 893
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2003 10:09 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:54 pm

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
With all of the hype around the new HA purchase of the A321NEO equipment

What new purchase. They have a MOU with Airbus. If the A321NEO lives up to range promises they'll buy it,if not, they won't.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 12:06 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 14):
The A-321NEO and B-737-9MAX are far short of the B-757 capability, and not even on the same contenent for the capability of the B-707 or DC-8.

That's only true for the very longest-range 707 and DC-8 versions. The bulk of production was shorter-range versions which the current A321 and 737-900ER already outperform.

The A321neo will be able to do every 757 mission except TATL and long missions from short fields.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11093
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 12:07 am

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
Is this a viable and quality replacement that everyone has been looking for against the 757?

Not the one that everyone has been looking for. You mean the one people on this site have been looking for. The importance of a "real 757 replacement" is vastly inflated on this forum compared to reality, where it is really just a blip. You need to remember that Boeing didn't end production because they got bored. Of all the people in the world jumping up and down wishing for something to replace the 757, most of them are on this site and very few are actually in charge of an airline.

Quoting olddominion727 (Thread starter):
I know UA (former CO, AA & DL) had all but a blood oath with Boeing,

Hasn't been true since 1997.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 2):
Which also goes to the point that Boeing dropped the ball.

It wasn't Boeing that stopped ordering 757s.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
User avatar
ADent
Posts: 920
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:11 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 12:21 am

The A321NEO may be able to do KOA-DEN, but I doubt it could do DEN-KOA - due to winds, ETOPS fuel requirements, and island holding fuel requirements.

AS uses their 737-800s from SEA, PDX, LAX, etc to Hawaii and a couple times of year the SEA and PDX flights have to stop in OAK for fuel before heading out to HNL. The range of a 737-800 is listed at 3,115 nautical miles on Boeing's website.

PDX-HNL is only 2262 nm, leaving the 737-800 with a 853 mile reserve or 72% of the stated range.

SEA-HNL is 74.7% of stated range and OAK-HNL is 67.2%.

So just based on ratios the A321NEO should be able to fly 2450 nm year round, and 2725 nm reliably, but with occasional fuel stops.


Anybody have a real simulation of reliable range for an A321NEO?
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 7477
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 12:37 am

Quoting clickhappy (Reply 1):
It is awesome that Airbus has created an alternative to the Boeing 757, with a first flight in (I'm guessing 2016?) it will surpass the B757, which made it's first flight in 1982.

Good on ya, Airbus

The A321 wasn't designed to have more range than the 757 in the 90s, and the neo isn't designed to have more range either.

The A321 surpasses the 757 in CASM and the neo will surpass it even more.

In the 80s Airbus had no need for a 757 equivalent, it had the A300 for that. Boeing then responded with the 757/767 program.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 12:42 am

Quoting Aesma (Reply 19):
In the 80s Airbus had no need for a 757 equivalent, it had the A300 for that. Boeing then responded with the 757/767 program.

Both the A320 and the 757 were intended as 727 replacements. They just took different paths, chasing different priorities.

The A320 was intended to replicate the capability of a 727 almost exactly, just with more efficiency (although its range eventually got significantly longer). The 757 was intended to significantly grow the capability you could extract from a 727-like trip cost.
 
Asiaflyer
Posts: 704
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:50 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:00 am

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 14):
They have a MOU with Airbus. If the A321NEO lives up to range promises they'll buy it,if not, they won't.


The MoU will be firmed up long before the A321neo flies, but contractual clauses takes care of such things. As the A321 has been existing for many years, the error margin for the A321neo performance should be very small.

Still surprises me to see people using 757 as reference considering airlines was not even so interested in the plane that Boeing could keep the production going. Current offerings with MAX and Neo are far superior 757 for most missions.
SQ,MI,MH,CX,KA,CA,CZ,MU,KE,OZ,QF,NZ,FD,JQ,3K,5J,IT,AI,IC,QR,SK,LF,KL,AF,LH,LX,OS,SR,BA,SN,FR,WF,1I,5T,VZ,VX,AC,NW,UA,US,
 
dtw9
Posts: 893
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2003 10:09 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:06 am

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 20):
. As the A321 has been existing for many years, the error margin for the A321neo performance should be very small.

Tell that to McDonnell-Douglas when the MD-11's SFC came in 7-8 percent higher than predicted for both P/W and GE engines.
 
Max Q
Posts: 5628
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 3:06 am

West coast to the islands is a piece of cake, except with strong headwinds where even this NEO will have problems.


As for the North Atlantic, forget it.


Boeing should never have stopped the 757 production.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
timpdx
Posts: 575
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:54 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 3:48 am

Agree with MaxQ. If B is prepared for many years at low level 748 production, then they should have done the same for the 757. The program properly managed, heck, even moved to a Wichita or something, could have gotten several hundred more orders, not just TATL, but thin Latin America routes, hot and high destinations. A specialty airframe, but certainly one that would be selling even today at low to modest volumes.

Not that I have a love fest for the type, I would never want to do TATL on a NB, but I think there was a lost opportunity for Boeing.
 
mingocr83
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 6:06 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 4:50 am

Well Boeing can do the harm still. If they offer a 787-4...260-290 pax on a 4000nm range...15% less fuel consumption I bet that the A321 NEO case would be closed in a heartbeat...
A380, A321, A320, A319, 757-200, 737-800WL, 737-700WL, E190
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11739
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 4:53 am

Yes. Almost there on payload and 90% of the missions for payload at range.

I worked on a proposal in 2001 for a 35k engine for the A321, so I doubt Airbus has forgotten that it is possible...

Here is a circa 2010 noting the sharklets on the A321 were intended to make it a much more competitive 757 replacement:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...-at-757-replacement-market-341981/
The airframer's chief operating officer for customers, John Leahy, believes that the new 'sharklet' winglets, which will provide a 3.7% reduction in fuel burn and around 220km (120nm) more range on the A321 from 2012, means there are "great opportunities to replace the 757-200".

Every bit of range helps. The 3650nm of the A321NEO is enough for all TCON missions and near Hawaii missions.

For HA, with the *current engines*:
He adds that the sharklet-outfitted A321 will be able to operate between Boston and San Francisco or San Francisco and Maui, Hawaii, with maximum passengers - similar to routes flown by the US 757 operators - but with a 17% per seat fuel burn advantage, based on a 185-seat A321 and 192-seat 757-200.

And the NEO has quite a fuel burn advantage allowing the opening up of LAS, PHX, and later versions of the NEO will open up SLC to Hawaii (but not DEN, the 752 has far better hot/high field performance). With a 535 nautical mile range advantage over the 738, the A321NEO will make PDX and SEA far more reliable routes. Yes, PHX and SLC would seasonally need to take on more fuel closer to Hawaii. But the A321NEO is going to allow the A321 to perform as needed to replace *most* 752s.

Quoting bluewave 707 (Reply 3):
The 737-900ER and the 737MAX-9 are supposed to fill the 757 too ...

  

Quoting olddominion727 (Reply 5):
Is the 739-MAX supposed to be able to make it from EWR-BER the way CO/UA has them now

Wait for a later high MTOW -8MAX. I doubt we'll see a -9MAX ever go TATL.

Here are the MAX specs:
Boeing 737 MAX Specs Released (by 817Dreamliiner Jul 11 2012 in Civil Aviation)

The MAX-9 is close, but the A321NEO should have the short field advantage. Although nothing matches the 752 (unless it is *much* smaller or larger).

Quoting 817Dreamliiner (Reply 6):
The longest range 757 has a range of roughly 4100nm, the A321NEO from what I remember is no where near that.

4100nm would be nice, but 3900nm is the start for TATL.   

Quoting mffoda (Reply 8):
Airbus's latest range figures on the A321neo is 3650nm and the 739Max is 3595. So the most recent company specs put them at 55nm apart in favor of the A321neo. Still very short of the 757.

Those are the EIS values. What if Pratt does indeed deliver 4% better fuel burn than promise?    That already has the A321NEO at 3800nm. Only a little more space for fuel (and the take of capability) needs to be found to make it to 3900nm. So not very short of the 757...

And the sharlets supposedly beat promise by 0.5%. That takes us to 3840nm... One engine PIP from TATL... If Airbus doesn't also keep improving the A321NEO's weight, I'd be shocked.

Quoting Max Q (Reply 22):
As for the North Atlantic, forget it.

It is a question of when, not if. Not at entry into service, but there is significant money being spent to make the A321NEO TATL capable as in 3900nm range. It is already at 3,650.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 5:34 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 13):
The A-321NEO and B-737-9MAX are far short of the B-757 capability

Define "far short"... the 752 and the A321 were about 750 nm apart at identical payload. The A321neo is supposed to cut that gap roughly in half, if not a little better. The sweetener is lower fuel burn.

When we talk about aircraft out-ranging each other, we are probably no longer operating at max payload, so the payload advantage of the 752 is moot. That is, unless you pick some very specific operating points on the payload-range curve, which is the game usually played here on a.net to keep arguments going around in circles for dozens of replies.

Here are the payload-range curves of interest, overlaid:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 13):
The A-321 is a 200 seat airplane, the proposed longer version will be heavier, and carry some 230 pax, but will have less range as it is heavier.

The longer version? None is planned as far as I know. The only change being contemplated is to certify the same fuselage for 235 passengers (up from 220) by adding exits.
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 5:39 am

Where is this "aww not this sh*t again" mem when you need it?

People just keep forgetting that using 757-200 on the transatlantic routes was NOT what Boeing intended to do initially with the airplane. That came as by-product of its excellent capability, however it represented very, VERY minimal percentage of the 757 operations.

Transatlantic replacement for the 757 already exist, entered service in late 2011 with ANA and is called - you guessed it: 787-8.

For every other operation, which represents 95% of what operators did with the 757-200, there are 737-900ERs, 737-9, A321-200 and A321neo.

As many other before me said: Boeing wanted to keep the 757 alive. The lack of orders killed it.
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11739
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 5:49 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 26):
Here are the payload-range curves of interest, overlaid:

Thank you. That helps the discussion. Basically, the 752 has 800nm more 'economic range' than the current (non-sharkleted) A321 while it will have a 350nm version over the current promise NEO. That gap will close...

The 752 is a great plane. But it has been out of production a while due to the cost per flight.

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 26):
The only change being contemplated is to certify the same fuselage for 235 passengers (up from 220) by adding exits.

And small changes to interior configuration to free up space for seats... But nothing longer. The A321 needs more wing area for a stretch and a couple thousand more pounds of thrust. The later might happen, I'm hearing nothing about more wing area...

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 27):
For every other operation, which represents 95% of what operators did with the 757-200, there are 737-900ERs, 737-9, A321-200 and A321neo.

   But the -9MAX and A321NEO really make TCON and Hawaii to the West coast much better sells. The 752 has really been 'bullet proof' on TCON missions. With the -9MAX and A321NEO, it has found its replacement. The added payload of the 752 will not pay its added costs. Its a great plane destined to serve out its final days on a few long routes, a few short-field routes, and many freighter conversions.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
User avatar
CARST
Posts: 859
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:57 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 26):

Sorry, but that payload chart is totally misleading on the first look. I know all the charts look like this, but it would not be right to use it as an argument that the A321NEO and the 737-9MAX now are close to the 757s TATL or Westcoast/Hawaii missions. And that is what this thread is about.

When talking about these TATL missions you have to include all the reserve fuel in your planning taking away quite a bit of the theoretical maximum range. So the TATL 757s all operate on the far right site of this chart. Where a 757 still could fly its TATL mission with a 18000kg payload, a A321NEO would be at 12000-13000kg. No comparison at all, not economical viable. Not a chance we will see 737s and 321s being used on the routes served by 757s today. These routes will either be 767, 787 or A332 routes when the 757s get retired. (Perhaps excluding Eastcoast/Ireland.)

As I assume Boeing and Airbus will leave the 120 seat segment to the manufactures of regional jets and focus on the market of 738s/A320s upwards. So that could result in a proper 757 replacement when both companies present the successor to the 737/A320 family. Let's talk again in 15 years...

[Edited 2013-01-10 22:58:01]
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:05 am

There are like, 50 total 757s flying Transatlantic.

50. That is ZERO market.

None. Not at all.

NS
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:13 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 22):
Boeing should never have stopped the 757 production.
Quoting timpdx (Reply 23):
Agree with MaxQ. If B is prepared for many years at low level 748 production, then they should have done the same for the 757.

  

Boeing tried for two years to sell more 757s. They didn't sell a single one.

If they had kept producing airplanes, they would have been white tails piling up at Renton or Boeing Field.

The reason why is straightforward. The 738 had just become readily available and was doing the same job as early 757s. Operators had already acquired all the later 757s they needed for things like TATL, South America, and hot/high/short airports. No one needed any more.

Even today, the 757 secondary market is only strong because of FedEx. Birds FedEx rejects are getting scrapped.

[Edited 2013-01-10 23:15:02]
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:15 am

I will say, I do think if the 757-300 had come earlier in the lifecycle, they might still be delivering them today.

NS
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:17 am

Quoting CARST (Reply 29):
Sorry, but that payload chart is totally misleading on the first look.

It's only as misleading as Boeing and Airbus's own figures, which I used to create this chart.

Quoting CARST (Reply 29):
it would not be right to use it as an argument that the A321NEO and the 737-9MAX now are close to the 757s TATL

I made no such argument.

Quoting CARST (Reply 29):
When talking about these TATL missions you have to include all the reserve fuel in your planning taking away quite a bit of the theoretical maximum range.

That goes for both aircraft, equally. The Boeing and Airbus payload range curves make similar assumptions on fuel reserves.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 25):
It is a question of when, not if.

   the 757 isn't improving. The A321 is, and will continue over the next decade.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6340
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:42 am

Quoting olddominion727 (Reply 4):
The only thing I don't know is if the A321NEO has the legs for an all coach 6hr flight holding 225 pax

Yes

Quoting 777STL (Reply 9):
The 321 NEO has no chance in heck of making KOA-DEN

I suspect it does. It might be about 150Nm shy of making the return journey year-round though

Quoting neutronstar73 (Reply 10):
Can't carry the payload of a 757, can't carry anything as far as the 757, and even with the NEO, can't even reach the range of a basic 757. So please tell me how it will surpass the 757?

doing 95% of its missions at 75% of the cost?   

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 13):
I also don't see the A-321NEO (or B-737-9MAX) having TATL range with full payloads. The B-737-8MAX will, and the A-320NEO might have it too, but not the bigger airplanes in those families.

The -8MAX and A320NEO only have 150Nm more range than the A321NEO.
They will be very little more capable than the A321NEO

Quoting dtw9 (Reply 21):
Tell that to McDonnell-Douglas when the MD-11's SFC came in 7-8 percent higher than predicted for both P/W and GE engines.

Don't know about the Leap-X, but the smart money on the Pratt GTF is for the fuel burn to be going the other direction.
The first engine has just been assembled, and should run any time now, so we shouldn't have long to wait

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 28):
Thank you. That helps the discussion. Basically, the 752 has 800nm more 'economic range' than the current (non-sharkleted) A321 while it will have a 350nm version over the current promise NEO. That gap will close...

Good summary   

Quoting CARST (Reply 29):
Sorry, but that payload chart is totally misleading on the first look

Only if you read something into it which you're not intended to.

It says what it says, and pretty much backs up Lightsaber's summary.   

If either Lightsaber or Wingedmigrator had then used the chart to say "see the A321NEO IS a TATL 757-200 replacement, then THAT would have been misleading. But they didn't   

Rgds

[Edited 2013-01-10 23:43:27]
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:54 am

Quoting gigneil (Reply 32):
I will say, I do think if the 757-300 had come earlier in the lifecycle, they might still be delivering them today.

My feeling is Boeing would have sold a *lot* more of them, and they might have lasted a couple of years longer, but I don't think they'd still be around today. The technology is old and they don't have the freight/military business to keep the older airframe going like the 767 does.

[Edited 2013-01-10 23:55:42]
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:13 am

Perhaps, it has been a number of years. But I bet both DL and UA at this moment wish they could grab a few more.

NS
 
packsonflight
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 2:55 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:54 am

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 35):
My feeling is Boeing would have sold a *lot* more of them, and they might have lasted a couple of years longer, but I don't think they'd still be around today. The technology is old and they don't have the freight/military business to keep the older airframe going like the 767 doe

The 753 was hit by a abudance of cheap second hand 752 after 9/11 It really made no sense to buy brand new 753 when you could pick up a few year old 752 for half price.

The 753 and the 764 did not get any improvement engine wise, only a little throttle push which did not make them verry future proof, and thus shared the same faith. To summarize: To late to little.
 
Eagleboy
Posts: 1699
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:29 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:25 am

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 27):
People just keep forgetting that using 757-200 on the transatlantic routes was NOT what Boeing intended to do initially with the airplane. That came as by-product of its excellent capability, however it represented very, VERY minimal percentage of the 757 operations.....

...For every other operation, which represents 95% of what operators did with the 757-200, there are 737-900ERs, 737-9, A321-200 and A321neo.

This is the salient point in all of this. Why add complexity to the A321NEO/B739MAX for such a niche market? Neither program needs that capability to sell well.

Quoting gigneil (Reply 36):
But I bet both DL and UA at this moment wish they could grab a few more.

I know of an Euro airline who were in the market for 3-4 last year, but no-one is selling their B752's atm.
 
okapi
Posts: 161
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:15 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:19 am

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 26):

plus

Quoting astuteman (Reply 34):

make for a very interesting conclusion to that thread, if ever needed. Fact is aircraft manufacturer's logics are close to airline management's economic requirements. Most aircraft today are not flown at maximum range. The hope for airline managers is to fly them at their maximum payload. Many of the A32x series operators that also have the A321 will use them combined with smaller models on routes that are usually within the 120 minutes timeframe. Hence BA removing the 757s from their fleet in favour of the Airbuses narrowbodies. We need to compare what is comparable and in Europe, for example, most missions are less than 2 hours so airlines will pick up what costs less to operate and ensure maximum profit. A321 (NEO) is the answer (as could any B737NG by the way.)

My two cents...
 
HAL
Posts: 1740
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 1:38 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:40 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 13):
All of Hawaii is an "island destination" and hold fuel requirements are for 2 hours of fuel at holding airspeeds. Yes, there are several airports in Hawaii, but that is how the FAA defines it for passenger carrier airplanes.

Those holding rules only apply if there is no other suitable alternate airport. With the number of airports available in Hawaii, that 'two hour' rule is never used. The ETOPS fuel requirements almost always leave enough fuel in the tanks to cover the usual alternate and holding contingencies in a west coast - Hawaii flight plan. Heck, if the weather is nice and it's under six hours, the flight doesn't even need to list a single alternate.

HAL
One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
 
art
Posts: 2665
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:54 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 28):
Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 26):
Here are the payload-range curves of interest, overlaid:

Thank you. That helps the discussion. Basically, the 752 has 800nm more 'economic range' than the current (non-sharkleted) A321 while it will have a 350nm version over the current promise NEO. That gap will close...
Quoting astuteman (Reply 34):
Don't know about the Leap-X, but the smart money on the Pratt GTF is for the fuel burn to be going the other direction.
The first engine has just been assembled, and should run any time now, so we shouldn't have long to wait

Given that the GTF is "new" technology, can one expect incremental improvements exceeding those of the Leap-X (assuming Pratt chooses to make the investments necessary to pull ahead of Leap-X)? Since we will not be seeing any GTF's slung under 737MAX wings it might make commercial sense to tap the potential of the GTF to give the A32XNEO as much advantage as possible in selling against the 737MAX. But then Pratt may be busy, busy, busy on their various iterations of GTF for years and would not welcome more R&D costs/engineering resource demands on one engine that is selling well as is...
 
User avatar
CARST
Posts: 859
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 1:58 pm

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 33):

It's only as misleading as Boeing and Airbus's own figures, which I used to create this chart.

I know, that is why I wrote:

Quoting CARST (Reply 29):
I know all the charts look like this, but it would not be right to use it as an argument that the A321NEO and the 737-9MAX now are close to the 757s TATL or Westcoast/Hawaii missions.
Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 33):
I made no such argument.
Quoting astuteman (Reply 34):
It says what it says, and pretty much backs up Lightsaber's summary.

I took this part of WingedMigrators' post as an argument to say the 739MAX/321NEO are on par with the 757, as you are basically saying it is on par, just not in that "unimportant" specific operating points to the right of the curve:

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 26):
When we talk about aircraft out-ranging each other, we are probably no longer operating at max payload, so the payload advantage of the 752 is moot. That is, unless you pick some very specific operating points on the payload-range curve, which is the game usually played here on a.net to keep arguments going around in circles for dozens of replies.

Perhaps I read something into it, what wasn't there. But the OP didn't just started a thread about the 95% of the missions, where the 739 and 321 are perfect alternatives to the 757. He started a thread specifically asking about the routes to Hawaii and the TATL routes. So we should only look at the far right part of the payload-range curve, the 5% where only the 757 can do the missions physically and performs economical viable compared to the newer generation single-aisle twins.

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 33):
That goes for both aircraft, equally. The Boeing and Airbus payload range curves make similar assumptions on fuel reserves.

I know, my comment wasn't geared against Airbus' curve. I was just pointing out that we won't see the 757 fly 4000nm and the 321NEO/739MAX 3500nm. And that these two aircraft still are 700nm behind the 757, more than 90 minutes of time in the air, making them not useful for TATL crossings or flights to Hawaii from airports located outside of California.


I agree that it is not worthwhile discussing the whole point over and over again, regarding the current aircraft and aircraft in development right now (NEO/MAX). Boeing or Airbus won't build an aircraft for a market of 50-100 aircraft. But it makes sense to discus the point regarding the complete new replacement aircraft which will follow on the NEO and MAX.
That is why I pointed out, that I expect Boeing and Airbus to surrender the 120 seat market to the likes of Bombardier, Embraer etc. and focus on the 140-220 seat market with a new family of aircraft, perhaps in 3-4 models. And this new aircraft, paired with the engine technology available in 15 years, will be aircraft able to fly all routes the 757 is serving today, including TATL and Hawaii to inner mainland US.
I could be proven wrong, but seeing that the 319NEO and 737-7MAX don't gain traction show me that these aircraft are already to heavy for this size-class of aircraft, because of all the structure in place to support the larger models of both aircraft families. And we could expect an aircraft family designed for 140-220 seats to be even heavier.
Continuing speculating, it could be that A goes for the 120-190 seat market, with a lightweight A320 family replacement and Boeing goes for the 150-220 seat market with the 737 family replacement, so both don't have to go head-on-head while selling their aircraft. Or one or both of the companies could come up with two aircraft families as replacement. Many options, interesting times ahead. After the NEO and MAX are rolling out the factories and the development starts, we will know more when the first ideas will be presented to the airlines and start floating around the Internet...
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11739
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:33 pm

Quoting mingocr83 (Reply 24):
Well Boeing can do the harm still. If they offer a 787-4...260-290 pax on a 4000nm range...15% less fuel consumption

But it wouldn't be 15% less fuel consumption than the 788, it would be more like 2% less. In other words, NOT WORTH IT! The 789 will be the dominant 787 as it costs little more per flight than the 788 and has more revenue. The A321 comfortably has an empty weight advantage.

788: 109.8t
A321 (not NEO): 48.5t


So unless the 787 can drop HALF ITS WEIGHT, the A321NEO will have a lower CASM within its range as well as a substantially lower cost per flight. That is the cost of an airframe built to fly 8,000 nm. There is weight and thus cost not needed for shorter flights. But that is ok, they compete in very different markets. BOS-NRT is not on the radar for any NEO.  

I'm a HUGE fan of the 787, but on short routes, the MAX and NEO will eat its lunch unless there are significant slot constraints. Here are examples of narrow body 500nm CASM. A market the 787 will never be really competitive.

http://airinsight.com/2010/12/06/cse...a320-737-on-casm-plane-mile-costs/

Quoting art (Reply 41):
Given that the GTF is "new" technology, can one expect incremental improvements exceeding those of the Leap-X (assuming Pratt chooses to make the investments necessary to pull ahead of Leap-X)?

Maybe... The LEAP-X also has some "new" technology, in particular on the low spool as well as the new higher temperature turbine blades. So which has more room for growth would be a matter of opinion.

Quoting art (Reply 41):
But then Pratt may be busy, busy, busy on their various iterations of GTF for years and would not welcome more R&D costs/engineering resource demands on one engine that is selling well as is...

That is a valid point... Pratt is going to be stretched thin for years.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain
 
airbazar
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 2:38 pm

Quoting neutronstar73 (Reply 10):
Surpass the 757?!? That's a laugh! I needed one today, so thank you for that!

What's so funny about it? The A321 will outsell the 757 by a loooong shot. Is that not the primary goal of producing an airplane? In addition it makes the airlines more money, and in a not too distant future it will just about have the same range and be able to fly the same missions. But none of this should be a surprise to anyone. The 757 was designed in the 70's.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 25):
And the sharlets supposedly beat promise by 0.5%. That takes us to 3840nm... One engine PIP from TATL... If Airbus doesn't also keep improving the A321NEO's weight, I'd be shocked.

I think at the end of the day that's what it boils down to. I don't hear Boeing selling their 739MAX on its future improvements while all we hear from Airbus is how much better this A321NEO will become with time. It sounds to me like the A321NEO's ceiling is a lot higher than it's competitor.

Quoting gigneil (Reply 36):
Perhaps, it has been a number of years. But I bet both DL and UA at this moment wish they could grab a few more.

I doubt it. As it is I'm of the opinion that they are still operating the 757's because they need to squeeze as much of the ROI as they can. That's really why we have TATL 757's. It's because there's no place else to put them to make them earn their worth after their routes were replaces by more efficient 737NG and A320/1 aircraft.
 
ytz
Posts: 3032
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 3:17 pm

What an odd thread and even stranger arguments?

HA isn't buying the 321NEO to replace any 757s. They are buying the airplane to beef up West Coast service. And for that, the plane is perfect.

It doesn't need to make KOA-DEN. And whether it can or not, is irrelevant. That's what the widebody fleet is there for.

HA will be a feather in Airbus' cap. They'll be flying the 321NEO to the limit and doing it with a substantially lower capital outlay and lower operating costs than their competitors who deploy 787s or A330s for HNL-West Coast.
 
aerobalance
Posts: 4308
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:35 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 3:22 pm

Quoting ytz (Reply 45):

HA will be a feather in Airbus' cap. They'll be flying the 321NEO to the limit and doing it with a substantially lower capital outlay and lower operating costs than their competitors who deploy 787s or A330s for HNL-West Coast.

Those competitors would be whom?
"Sing a song, play guitar, make it snappy..."
 
Aviaponcho
Posts: 782
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:13 pm

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 4:26 pm

Hello

Quoting astuteman (Reply 34):
The -8MAX and A320NEO only have 150Nm more range than the A321NEO.
They will be very little more capable than the A321NEO

For what I remember, A320NEO and A321NEO will have the same range. That is, i think, quite impressive, and shows the the A321 design is not so constrained as we might think (big engines, double slot slats, small wing area increase, not so bad rotation on take off and so on).
And for the A320NEO to match the A321NEO airbus has raised the A320NEO MTOw by 1 t.



Lightsaber,
In 09/2012 in the Morgan Stanley commercial update, for a 3000 Nm (2class layout marketing standard) Airbus says the A321NEO is 20% less COC per seat than the 787-8 (and -40% per trip). It should be a little Airbus biased, but i shows some trends (and on a 3000 Nm trip !),
Off course this comparison doesn't include the big load of cargo the 787-8 can move for a marginal cost increase at this range...
 
ytz
Posts: 3032
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 4:31 pm

Quoting aerobalance (Reply 46):
Those competitors would be whom?

Conventional competition from the majors.
 
sweair
Posts: 1816
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:59 am

RE: Seems The New A321NEO Is A Good 757 Replacement?

Fri Jan 11, 2013 5:26 pm

With the engine gen of the neo/max what would a theoretical payload range be of the 752? Close to 4500nm?

Who is online