Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
nomorerjs
Posts: 892
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 10:24 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:26 pm

Just a ploy by UA to get Boeing moving on the MOM.

LH is looking at 787s while UA is looking at 321LRs. Conspiracy theory for UA to dump the 359 and get LH Boeing orders and for LH to get UA Airbus orders. Not likely, but who knows.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7357
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:35 pm

DLHAM wrote:
The question is if United still wants to fly ~170 seat aircraft into deeper Europe. All 757 routes - except that one seasonal flight from Newark to Stockholm - disappeared in the recent years. Just UK/Ireland and Portugal left. I am pretty sure that this can be done by the standard A321neo too, even the 737MAX9 should be capable. Stockholm then needs an 767 upgrade or cancellation.

The 797 AFAIK is going to be much larger than A321neo/757 and also larger than the 767-300.

A lot has changed over the years. The sCO TATL 757 routes were before their alliance days. They had to rely on themselves to satisfy demand and it worked because they found their niche. Then the recession happened, then CO merged with UA that has an immunized JV with LH and AC across the Atlantic. Plus the 757s arent getting any younger and fuel has gone up. This is the perfect case of "we need a new airplane", which is qualified by UA having served DEN-LHR in the past with a 777, but couldnt make it stick, now they are making work with the 787.

Even if UA went with the neo, it is still 1980s technology (except the engines and minor details) and still would have greater costs than possibly just refurbing the 757s (yes I know it's an older plane but they are paid off and still very capable) one last time until a whole new airplane comes to replace them.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
User avatar
FlightLevel360
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:26 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:39 pm

I don't know why people think United is canceling or converting the A350 order. Before, the A350-1000 was intended to be a smaller replacement for the 747s. Now that there is the 777-300ER, they converted the order to A350-900s and pushed the timeframe back. This timeframe coincides with the beginning of the replacement of the older 777-200ERs (pmUA), and the 45 aircraft order, combined with some 787-10s to replace the 777-200As, could replace the entire 777-200 fleet. The A350 is also the perfect aircraft for this, as the capacity and range are almost identical (the A350 is slightly higher in both of these aspects). Why do people think United hates the A350 so much? If they really didn't want it they would have canceled or converted the order last year.
To me, it will always be:
- Bombardier CSeries
- Airbus A321neoLR and A321neoXLR
- EMBRACER ERJ-170, ERJ-175, ERJ-190, and ERJ-195
- MITSUBUSHI MRJ

Anti narrowbody-long range-twinjet gang. Long live the A380 and 747!
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6607
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Wed Oct 24, 2018 11:51 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
What advantage does the A321LR have over the 737-10 on transcons? It would seem to me the 737-10 would have a much better CASM because the A321LR is optimized for longer journeys.

Can the 737-10 not make EWR/JFK-SFO/LAX with a premium layout?


First of all, I think the A321neo "non-LR" would be the plane for UA, not the LR with heavy center tanks. I recognize this isn't what the article said.

The 737-10 is perfectly capable of flying the routes. The advantages of the A321neo that matter for this particular set of missions (a small set of those listed at excess length by Keesje) are:

- the range to rotate between transcons and short TATL routes
- a fuel burn advantage at transcon and longer stage lengths
- a 6" wider cabin, which allows a wider selection of premium class products

That's pretty much it.

I'd expect 15 configured with p.s. and about another 30 with a sCO 757-style configuration. I'd also expect LEAP engines for commonality with the MAXes.
 
maxholstemh1521
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 8:26 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:40 am

Wingtips56 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Let’s see, first, you need 6 crew, possibly 7 if third pilot. Second, substract about 450 nm for international reserves, then subtract about the same or more for westbound headwinds and high temp devs. Realistically, a 3800 nm plane. Plenty for DUB, SNN, LIS, MAD, KEF, OSL, but not BER, MUC, STR, NCE.

GF

Then you would also need a crew rest area. Since it can't go under the floor or above the ceiling, it would have to take up part of the passenger cabin, and therefore cut capacity.


There is no need for a crew rest area, they would just block a seat for crew rest like on they currently do on the 757's
It's not a Beaver
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:58 am

FlightLevel360 wrote:
I don't know why people think United is canceling or converting the A350 order. Before, the A350-1000 was intended to be a smaller replacement for the 747s. Now that there is the 777-300ER, they converted the order to A350-900s and pushed the timeframe back. This timeframe coincides with the beginning of the replacement of the older 777-200ERs (pmUA), and the 45 aircraft order, combined with some 787-10s to replace the 777-200As, could replace the entire 777-200 fleet. The A350 is also the perfect aircraft for this, as the capacity and range are almost identical (the A350 is slightly higher in both of these aspects). Why do people think United hates the A350 so much? If they really didn't want it they would have canceled or converted the order last year.


I'm not sure why some people get bent out of shape about the possibility of UA canceling the A350. There is really no need to have the 767, 777, 787, and A350. Also add the possibility of the 797. They do not need five widebody types. You can fly on the A350 with Delta or lots of other airlines. It would be nice to have one major airline with an all Boeing fleet again. Delta will be all Airbus in about ten years and AA will be split. There is something for everyone.
 
User avatar
CarlosSi
Posts: 663
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:29 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:59 am

DLHAM wrote:
The question is if United still wants to fly ~170 seat aircraft into deeper Europe. All 757 routes - except that one seasonal flight from Newark to Stockholm - disappeared in the recent years. Just UK/Ireland and Portugal left. I am pretty sure that this can be done by the standard A321neo too, even the 737MAX9 should be capable. Stockholm then needs an 767 upgrade or cancellation.

The 797 AFAIK is going to be much larger than A321neo/757 and also larger than the 767-300.


Indeed. There's lots of talk about how the 757s are flown on long, thin, TATLs that can't be flown by other aircraft, but the truth is that a lot of these flights have either been upgauged or cut off altogether, like EWR-HAM recently.

AA has largely cut a lot of routes from JFK to Europe that used a 757 and built up in PHL where they upgauged. UA definitely won't be cutting routes from EWR like AA is doing to JFK, but I feel like there will be "work-arounds" to where the role of the 757 is decreased even if a good direct replacement is not readily available.

In a nutshell, upgauge or cut, or replaced by a32Ls.
 
User avatar
FlightLevel360
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:26 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:02 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
FlightLevel360 wrote:
I don't know why people think United is canceling or converting the A350 order. Before, the A350-1000 was intended to be a smaller replacement for the 747s. Now that there is the 777-300ER, they converted the order to A350-900s and pushed the timeframe back. This timeframe coincides with the beginning of the replacement of the older 777-200ERs (pmUA), and the 45 aircraft order, combined with some 787-10s to replace the 777-200As, could replace the entire 777-200 fleet. The A350 is also the perfect aircraft for this, as the capacity and range are almost identical (the A350 is slightly higher in both of these aspects). Why do people think United hates the A350 so much? If they really didn't want it they would have canceled or converted the order last year.


I'm not sure why some people get bent out of shape about the possibility of UA canceling the A350. There is really no need to have the 767, 777, 787, and A350. Also add the possibility of the 797. They do not need five widebody types. You can fly on the A350 with Delta or lots of other airlines. It would be nice to have one major airline with an all Boeing fleet again. Delta will be all Airbus in about ten years and AA will be split. There is something for everyone.


How much life do the 767s and 777s still have? By 2030 it will be time for all of them to go, and by that time (2027) the A350 will have taken their place. So the addition of the A350 will not be simultaneous at all, but rather timed to coincide with 777 retirements.
To me, it will always be:
- Bombardier CSeries
- Airbus A321neoLR and A321neoXLR
- EMBRACER ERJ-170, ERJ-175, ERJ-190, and ERJ-195
- MITSUBUSHI MRJ

Anti narrowbody-long range-twinjet gang. Long live the A380 and 747!
 
airbazar
Posts: 10202
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 12:34 pm

seabosdca wrote:
To me this sets up pretty logically. I'd expect UA to purchase A321neos without the center tanks,

By the time UA makes up its mind there will be no such thing. What we now call the A321NEOLR will become the standard A321NEO with the LR being replaced by the XLR.
 
Strato2
Posts: 567
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 12:40 pm

A thread on the possibility of a US airline ordering Airbus; a gift that keeps on giving.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 12:59 pm

seabosdca wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
What advantage does the A321LR have over the 737-10 on transcons? It would seem to me the 737-10 would have a much better CASM because the A321LR is optimized for longer journeys.

Can the 737-10 not make EWR/JFK-SFO/LAX with a premium layout?


First of all, I think the A321neo "non-LR" would be the plane for UA, not the LR with heavy center tanks. I recognize this isn't what the article said.

The 737-10 is perfectly capable of flying the routes. The advantages of the A321neo that matter for this particular set of missions (a small set of those listed at excess length by Keesje) are:

- the range to rotate between transcons and short TATL routes
- a fuel burn advantage at transcon and longer stage lengths
- a 6" wider cabin, which allows a wider selection of premium class products

That's pretty much it.

I'd expect 15 configured with p.s. and about another 30 with a sCO 757-style configuration. I'd also expect LEAP engines for commonality with the MAXes.


If we believe the Boeing marketing material, the 737-10 is lighter and will burn less fuel than the A321neo. Many on here don’t trust marketing, but I will say assuredly It is not a fact that the A321neo has a fuel burn advantage.

Leeham News has its biases, but they usually aren’t favoring Boeing. Even they found fuel burn between the 737-10 and A321neo should be very close or equal. https://leehamnews.com/2017/03/13/boein ... -analyzed/

There are ways to tweak seat counts and make weight assumptions to favor either product, but the two are very close. Decisions like how many galley carts the airline uses can sway one plane to be more efficient per seat than the other
 
EBJ68
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:20 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:00 pm

I can't figure out how United "considering" the purchase of the A321LR could in any way point to the possibility of the A350 being cancelled. The two airplanes are worlds apart in capabilities and utilization.
 
User avatar
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:25 pm

nomorerjs wrote:
Just a ploy by UA to get Boeing moving on the MOM.


That's all there is to it. Nothing else to see here. "797" at United is a given - once launched.
Proudly avoiding 737 MAX since 18.11.2020.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14115
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 1:48 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
Revelation wrote:
PlanesNTrains wrote:
If they order it, I will stand and do a slow clap for him. He will have fought the good fight.

If they order it, I will send him a bottle of computer screen cleaner to help deal with the aftermath of the celebration.

I'm talking about champagne, everyone get your mind out of the gutter.



:old: :bigthumbsup:
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:00 pm

EBJ68 wrote:
I can't figure out how United "considering" the purchase of the A321LR could in any way point to the possibility of the A350 being cancelled. The two airplanes are worlds apart in capabilities and utilization.


It’s just a hypothetical. Some have questioned UA’s commitment to the A350 and surmise that they might seek to use any deposits towards the A321 as a way out of the order.

Don’t read much into it.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
flyguy84
Posts: 770
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:07 pm

I don't know why everyone on here continues to claim the NMA/797 is the 757 replacement. It is not! It is a replacement for the 767 with a 225-seat model and a 275-seat version apparently going to be offered. That is too much airplane to replace the 757s. Therefore, it is entirely possible that United orders the A321 to replace the 757 and their role in the network. Yes the MAX10 can do the transcons but the 321 would be great for near South America flying from EWR as well as Western Europe from IAD/ORD/EWR.
SFO
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1869
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:14 pm

BlueSky1976 wrote:
nomorerjs wrote:
Just a ploy by UA to get Boeing moving on the MOM.


That's all there is to it. Nothing else to see here. "797" at United is a given - once launched.

You mean, in the same way that A.net kept saying "no more Airbus at American"??? Companies are not stagnant; otherwise, they die. Anything could happen

flyguy84 wrote:
I don't know why everyone on here continues to claim the NMA/797 is the 757 replacement. It is not! It is a replacement for the 767 with a 225-seat model and a 275-seat version apparently going to be offered. That is too much airplane to replace the 757s.

Because most people here have no clue what the NMA/797 will be, given the (lack of) information Boeing has leaked out to the public so far.
 
Elementalism
Posts: 608
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:03 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 2:53 pm

flyguy84 wrote:
I don't know why everyone on here continues to claim the NMA/797 is the 757 replacement. It is not! It is a replacement for the 767 with a 225-seat model and a 275-seat version apparently going to be offered. That is too much airplane to replace the 757s. Therefore, it is entirely possible that United orders the A321 to replace the 757 and their role in the network. Yes the MAX10 can do the transcons but the 321 would be great for near South America flying from EWR as well as Western Europe from IAD/ORD/EWR.


I think it is because the 757 has been a plane that finally found its niche after its production run ended. Long and thin routes. It has also been a hell of a versatile aircraft as well. Making money on short or long routes. And with the range numbers being thrown around and capacities it sounded like a 757-200(239 max pax) and 757-300(295 max pax) replacement. I am not sure what to think to be honest. I think it could go long narrow or a stubby widebody. It seems to me there is a gap in Boeings offerings between the 737-10 and 787. That is filled right now with the 757\767. Two planes out of production for passenger service.

Also I think the 757 replacement theory is due to Airbus constantly upgrading the A321 at airlines request to fill the role of the 757. So it sounds like the 797 would naturally fit in that arena. I do not think we will know the final details until Paris next summer. If Boeing doesn't announce the 797 then. I suspect it will never arrive.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 3:22 pm

seabosdca wrote:
But I'm also not convinced they'll want to fly A321neos around domestically with the extra weight of center tanks.


To put some approximate numbers on that, to fly the empty 3 ACTs 1000nm will require around 90-100 kg of fuel.


edit: Actually, it'll be a bit more than that due to residual fuel.
Last edited by Amiga500 on Thu Oct 25, 2018 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
SRT75
Posts: 242
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 2:42 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 3:23 pm

I assume UA's A320 crew can fly the A321LR without additional certification, so there's no significant crew issues with a small A321LR sub-fleet. And why wouldn't UA just lease some to fill the gap between retiring 757s and the next-gen permanent replacement? Seems like a solution available now for a problem that exists now, rather than banking on a plane that hasn't even been designed yet.

Of course, UA could simply do those expensive checks and maintenance on the 757s and keep them flying for a while. I know, probably a horrible example, but NW was still flying DC-9s before it merged with DL . . . .
 
User avatar
BaconButty
Posts: 825
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:42 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 3:54 pm

There's a bit of a misconception maybe on the nature of ACT's. The tanks themselves are removable - they can be installed in an 8 hour shift per Airbus. The aircraft has to be provisioned for them, which will carry a tiny weight penalty. But no need for subfleets and no need to install the tanks in all aircraft necessarily.

Which is why I don't think the A321LR will make much of a dent in the 797 business case - assuming it exists. The A321's can simply be stripped of their ATC's, have their paper MTOW reduced and rolled into the domestic fleet, or sold on. The LR's commonality with other A321NEO's is it's strength, but also works against it as a 797 spoiler, since it will work well as an interim purchase to develop routes while waiting for the 797. The XLR might turn out to be different, it looks like they're increasing base fuel volume somehow, so presumably permanent, lighter tanks integrated into the fuselage structure. Depending on other changes this might be an aircraft that diverges enough that it really needs to be bought specifically for 6hr+ routes. We'll see.
Down with that sort of thing!
 
flyguy84
Posts: 770
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 4:18 pm

SRT75 wrote:
I assume UA's A320 crew can fly the A321LR without additional certification, so there's no significant crew issues with a small A321LR sub-fleet. And why wouldn't UA just lease some to fill the gap between retiring 757s and the next-gen permanent replacement? Seems like a solution available now for a problem that exists now, rather than banking on a plane that hasn't even been designed yet.

Of course, UA could simply do those expensive checks and maintenance on the 757s and keep them flying for a while. I know, probably a horrible example, but NW was still flying DC-9s before it merged with DL . . . .

Yes - difference training at most. Wouldn’t be surprised to see them add some used 321 in the interim.
SFO
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 4:48 pm

Some very good points there Baconbutty.Makes a much easier decision to make -if it is made.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6607
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:12 pm

BaconButty wrote:
Which is why I don't think the A321LR will make much of a dent in the 797 business case - assuming it exists. The A321's can simply be stripped of their ATC's, have their paper MTOW reduced and rolled into the domestic fleet, or sold on. The LR's commonality with other A321NEO's is it's strength, but also works against it as a 797 spoiler, since it will work well as an interim purchase to develop routes while waiting for the 797. The XLR might turn out to be different, it looks like they're increasing base fuel volume somehow, so presumably permanent, lighter tanks integrated into the fuselage structure. Depending on other changes this might be an aircraft that diverges enough that it really needs to be bought specifically for 6hr+ routes. We'll see.


The question in my mind is whether having ACTs installed at all would be more of a benefit or a detriment to UA. On the plus side it would open up routes from EWR to the closer part of continental Europe. On the minus side, they weigh 400 kg each, plus a bit extra (100kg?) for provisioning. On an aircraft the size of the A321 that's a significant empty weight difference, especially if you have two or three ACTs which is what you would need to really extend range. But UA is increasingly using bigger aircraft to continental Europe, restricting 757 flying to the UK and Ireland, and using the international 757 fleet mostly for premium transcons. An A321neo without the ACTs can fly all of that service.

Newbiepilot wrote:
If we believe the Boeing marketing material, the 737-10 is lighter and will burn less fuel than the A321neo. Many on here don’t trust marketing, but I will say assuredly It is not a fact that the A321neo has a fuel burn advantage.


The consensus seems to be that the MAX has an advantage on shorter routes because of its lower weight while the neo has an advantage on longer routes because of higher BPR leading to better fuel burn in cruise. The A321neo fleet I'm imagining would spend most of its time on 4-6 hour flights.
 
Turnhouse1
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:55 pm

The ACTs aren't unique to the A321LR, they're an available option on all A320 series aircraft, though only 2. Is it a common option to have 1 or 2 fitted, if so the weight difference might be less than expected?

Also, the seating config is will be harder to change than the extra fuel tanks, lie flat J and plenty of Y+ seating make sense on 5-8 hour routes, not so much on 1 hour hops from EWR. United have a big enough fleet to dedicate a reasonable number of planes to the longer routes, if the 797 materialises in 10 years time then they will need to refit the cabin for shorter trips as well as remove the tanks.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 6:15 pm

seabosdca wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:
If we believe the Boeing marketing material, the 737-10 is lighter and will burn less fuel than the A321neo. Many on here don’t trust marketing, but I will say assuredly It is not a fact that the A321neo has a fuel burn advantage.


The consensus seems to be that the MAX has an advantage on shorter routes because of its lower weight while the neo has an advantage on longer routes because of higher BPR leading to better fuel burn in cruise. The A321neo fleet I'm imagining would spend most of its time on 4-6 hour flights.


I have a hard time beleiving a consensus opinion that the A321neo burns less fuel than the 737-10 when the 737-10 has never flown and we dont even know specs like OEW.

The 737-10 should be lighter due to smaller cabin doors, no cargo door actuators, smaller diameter fuselage, lighter engines, single slotted vs double slotted flaps, etc. Those help with efficiency whereas the bigger fan likely helps the A321. We dont really know how these planes compete head to head on transcon missions.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5098
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 6:29 pm

flyguy84 wrote:
Nicknuzzii wrote:
According to, ainonline.com United is considering purchasing some a321lr's to take over the current 757-200 trasnatlantic flights. It is possible that they will install 16 Polaris Seats, 72 economy plus and 90 regular economy. It is to be presumed that they will be based at EWR. What are your thoughts?


Source;
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... ic-service

Do you think it's credible or just another tactic to scare Boeing into an extended range Max 10?

I don’t think United really wants to fly a 737 TATL and the NMA is likely to be too much plane for a 757 replacement. I wouldn’t at all be surprised to see United order the A321LR.

United can already fly a B737 TATL if they choose to. the A321 was in talk Long Before Now and If they wanted the airplane? They could have had it at a MOMENTS notice just about. There's nothing more that Airbus would want than United to fly A New Airbus airplane even if they swap the A3221's for the A350's
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6607
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 6:32 pm

Turnhouse1 wrote:
The ACTs aren't unique to the A321LR, they're an available option on all A320 series aircraft, though only 2. Is it a common option to have 1 or 2 fitted, if so the weight difference might be less than expected?


Each tank weighs 400 kg, and obviously affects the aircraft's empty weight accordingly. So the impact of one tank would be less than three. I'm just not sure UA needs any. An A321neo in a UA premium configuration with the regular tanks full can make England-EWR, and I don't think there's much advantage in having them fly longer routes than that.
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1158
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 6:52 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
seabosdca wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:
If we believe the Boeing marketing material, the 737-10 is lighter and will burn less fuel than the A321neo. Many on here don’t trust marketing, but I will say assuredly It is not a fact that the A321neo has a fuel burn advantage.


The consensus seems to be that the MAX has an advantage on shorter routes because of its lower weight while the neo has an advantage on longer routes because of higher BPR leading to better fuel burn in cruise. The A321neo fleet I'm imagining would spend most of its time on 4-6 hour flights.


I have a hard time beleiving a consensus opinion that the A321neo burns less fuel than the 737-10 when the 737-10 has never flown and we dont even know specs like OEW.

The 737-10 should be lighter due to smaller cabin doors, no cargo door actuators, smaller diameter fuselage, lighter engines, single slotted vs double slotted flaps, etc. Those help with efficiency whereas the bigger fan likely helps the A321. We dont really know how these planes compete head to head on transcon missions.


Weight doesn't necessarily mean one aircraft will burn more or less than the other. We see that with with the current ceo vs ng and we know from in service reports that the GTF is burning 1-2% less than the LEAP on the neo. Those small % points could level the playing field on 7-8 hour sectors.

Whilst I don't think there's any merit to the weight discussion, to entertain you (and others), my guesstimates put the empty weight of a 321LR in a UA config at 52-52.5t. The 737-10max should fall 49.5-50t. I'm being very conservative with the 737-10max weight assuming there's no additional gain from the gear mods.
 
B764er
Posts: 144
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2018 2:19 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 7:01 pm

Oh 797, where art thou?
 
User avatar
asuflyer05
Posts: 2123
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 8:53 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:47 pm

Could it be United senses an upcoming downturn in the market and is positioning itself to take on A321s that less stable airlines (i.e. WOW) have committed to?
 
DobboDobbo
Posts: 1157
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:02 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 10:06 pm

Irrespective of whether you think UA are using the A321 as posturing to force Boeing’s hand with the NMA (the strength of which depends on whether Boeing perceives the A321 as a credible alternative) this suggests UA remain committed to narrowbody TATL flying.
 
fun2fly
Posts: 1618
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 10:44 pm

DobboDobbo wrote:
Irrespective of whether you think UA are using the A321 as posturing to force Boeing’s hand with the NMA (the strength of which depends on whether Boeing perceives the A321 as a credible alternative) this suggests UA remain committed to narrowbody TATL flying.


I think that UA has to consider this for short distance TATL to compete with FI/WW and other ULCC's and have the right aircraft for the right market. Air Canada is even using the MAX to fly TATL.

If it's the 321LR, I'd guess it's 30 TATL designated frames spread across EWR/IAD and possibly ORD.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8525
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 10:59 pm

asuflyer05 wrote:
Could it be United senses an upcoming downturn in the market and is positioning itself to take on A321s that less stable airlines (i.e. WOW) have committed to?


Eh. There's lots of demand for Airbus narrowbodies. It's not like waiting for Emirates to dump a bunch of A380s where they could flood the market and drive down prices.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8525
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:01 pm

fun2fly wrote:
DobboDobbo wrote:
Irrespective of whether you think UA are using the A321 as posturing to force Boeing’s hand with the NMA (the strength of which depends on whether Boeing perceives the A321 as a credible alternative) this suggests UA remain committed to narrowbody TATL flying.


I think that UA has to consider this for short distance TATL to compete with FI/WW and other ULCC's and have the right aircraft for the right market. Air Canada is even using the MAX to fly TATL.

If it's the 321LR, I'd guess it's 30 TATL designated frames spread across EWR/IAD and possibly ORD.


From ORD they wouldn't get much past DUB. Well they could - they just couldn't back in winter without a visit to Newfoundland and Labrador!
 
Flighty
Posts: 9963
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:02 pm

Revelation wrote:
Flighty wrote:
United does not "propose" to get the A321. Instead Airbus proposes that United buy some A321. United "considers" the proposal.

All in all, not really news.

Also this: " Lyons pointed out the Airbus had flown an A321neo a distance of 4,750 nm in that configuration non-stop from Mahé in the Seychelles to Toulouse with the aircraft’s weight configured for the test flight to represent 162 passengers and with 11 technicians and five crewmembers aboard."
How do you "configure the aircraft's weight to represent 162 passengers" if not with fuel? Were they carrying ballast? Could they have made it the other direction?

Yes, the A321neo test flight aircraft had water barrels with pumps to move water around to simulate different loads.

Presumably they filled the barrels to get to 162 pax weight.


Thanks for reminding me/us. Still as clear as mud what that flight actually meant for 2-way transoceanic scheduled flying. Over the years, nothing matters until carriers begin service and we watch what happens! Does it mean an honest 4,000 sm bidirectional range with a commercial load? That is the 757's practical maximum. Does the A321LR beat that? Will it do 4,250? More? Time will tell.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5098
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:03 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
DLHAM wrote:
The question is if United still wants to fly ~170 seat aircraft into deeper Europe. All 757 routes - except that one seasonal flight from Newark to Stockholm - disappeared in the recent years. Just UK/Ireland and Portugal left. I am pretty sure that this can be done by the standard A321neo too, even the 737MAX9 should be capable. Stockholm then needs an 767 upgrade or cancellation.

The 797 AFAIK is going to be much larger than A321neo/757 and also larger than the 767-300.

A lot has changed over the years. The sCO TATL 757 routes were before their alliance days. They had to rely on themselves to satisfy demand and it worked because they found their niche. Then the recession happened, then CO merged with UA that has an immunized JV with LH and AC across the Atlantic. Plus the 757s arent getting any younger and fuel has gone up. This is the perfect case of "we need a new airplane", which is qualified by UA having served DEN-LHR in the past with a 777, but couldnt make it stick, now they are making work with the 787.

Even if UA went with the neo, it is still 1980s technology (except the engines and minor details) and still would have greater costs than possibly just refurbing the 757s (yes I know it's an older plane but they are paid off and still very capable) one last time until a whole new airplane comes to replace them.

The only rub is?? United is still on the hook for the A350's and frankly? They don't really want them. So? Until the B797 comes out?
Why Not get the A3221neo and have a true Transcon aircraft to replace the B757's and also get a TATL airplane in the mean time??
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24836
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:31 pm

Flighty wrote:
Thanks for reminding me/us. Still as clear as mud what that flight actually meant for 2-way transoceanic scheduled flying. Over the years, nothing matters until carriers begin service and we watch what happens! Does it mean an honest 4,000 sm bidirectional range with a commercial load? That is the 757's practical maximum. Does the A321LR beat that? Will it do 4,250? More? Time will tell.

I'm pretty optimistic that A321neo would do a good job for UA on the routes someone mentioned above, mainly US to Ireland and Britain, which is a strong market.

I'm less optimistic it will be go much deeper into Europe reliably, but I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised as more data becomes available.

I think UA probably will give it a go.

If they don't, I think B6 will.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
gatibosgru
Posts: 1775
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:48 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:43 pm

It'd make my day is UA beat everyone to the punch (no shade towards Primera) and ordered LRs to go across the pond.
@DadCelo
 
EssentialBusDC
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:06 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 4:09 am

strfyr51 wrote:
United can already fly a B737 TATL if they choose to. the A321 was in talk Long Before Now and If they wanted the airplane? They could have had it at a MOMENTS notice just about. There's nothing more that Airbus would want than United to fly A New Airbus airplane even if they swap the A3221's for the A350's


The airplane can do it, but the company can’t. For two main reasons. The pilots contract and FAR117.

Per the pilots contract:

5-J-1-i For 737, A320/319/321, and 757-300 aircraft, for 757-200 aircraft equipped with lie- flat seats but not covered under Section 5-J-1-h, and for 757-200 aircraft not equipped with lie-flat seats, one (1) premium seat grouping in the highest class of service.

5-J-1-i-(1) This crew rest configuration may only be used for single-augmented Basic Flights.


A basic flight is defined as:
Basic Flight means a Flight that operates within the fifty (50) United States, Canada, Mexico, Central America, that portion of South America which is north of fifteen (15) degrees south latitude, Bermuda, and the Caribbean Islands.


FAR 117 stipulates minimum standards for a pilot rest seat. No 737 currently at United, except for a few specially configured Guam birds that do the Island Hopper, have a seat that complies with the FAR. So any route that requires augmentation can not be flown by a 737 currently.

And if they did install a FAR117 compliant lie flat seat product on the Max or 321, United would still have to negotiate with the pilots, before it could be flown.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7357
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 6:31 am

strfyr51 wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
DLHAM wrote:
The question is if United still wants to fly ~170 seat aircraft into deeper Europe. All 757 routes - except that one seasonal flight from Newark to Stockholm - disappeared in the recent years. Just UK/Ireland and Portugal left. I am pretty sure that this can be done by the standard A321neo too, even the 737MAX9 should be capable. Stockholm then needs an 767 upgrade or cancellation.

The 797 AFAIK is going to be much larger than A321neo/757 and also larger than the 767-300.

A lot has changed over the years. The sCO TATL 757 routes were before their alliance days. They had to rely on themselves to satisfy demand and it worked because they found their niche. Then the recession happened, then CO merged with UA that has an immunized JV with LH and AC across the Atlantic. Plus the 757s arent getting any younger and fuel has gone up. This is the perfect case of "we need a new airplane", which is qualified by UA having served DEN-LHR in the past with a 777, but couldnt make it stick, now they are making work with the 787.

Even if UA went with the neo, it is still 1980s technology (except the engines and minor details) and still would have greater costs than possibly just refurbing the 757s (yes I know it's an older plane but they are paid off and still very capable) one last time until a whole new airplane comes to replace them.

The only rub is?? United is still on the hook for the A350's and frankly? They don't really want them. So? Until the B797 comes out?
Why Not get the A3221neo and have a true Transcon aircraft to replace the B757's and also get a TATL airplane in the mean time??

That is a good point, but i have to counter with the fact that the order has been changed an modified so many times (and increased on the last go around) that I still believe they will take them. It is the perfect 77E replacement for them,especially TPAC where the 78J doesnt have the range (unless Boeing gets convinced to make a 787-10ER, then I see UA going nuts for that while converting the A350 to the A321LR).
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
Boeing74741R
Posts: 1439
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:44 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 6:48 am

CarlosSi wrote:
AA has largely cut a lot of routes from JFK to Europe that used a 757 and built up in PHL where they upgauged.


Not strictly true for all the routes AA have axed from JFK. Before the merger, US Airways operated MAN-PHL with an A330-200 (occasionally a -300) and AA operated MAN-JFK either with the 757 or the 767. The latter route has been axed and MAN-PHL hasn't been upgauged, though there's more competition on the MAN-JFK route now than there was 5 years ago.

MIflyer12 wrote:
From ORD they wouldn't get much past DUB. Well they could - they just couldn't back in winter without a visit to Newfoundland and Labrador!


AA used to use the 757 MAN-ORD in the winter which is further than DUB-ORD. I'm not sure how many times that had to stop for fuel in the winter months, but given the A321neoLR is supposed to have a tad more range than the 757-200 I'd have thought it wouldn't be any more of a challenge than it is now to fly DUB-ORD non-stop (config and payload dependent).
 
hibtastic
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 9:54 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 7:07 am

Boeing74741R wrote:

AA used to use the 757 MAN-ORD in the winter which is further than DUB-ORD. I'm not sure how many times that had to stop for fuel in the winter months, but given the A321neoLR is supposed to have a tad more range than the 757-200 I'd have thought it wouldn't be any more of a challenge than it is now to fly DUB-ORD non-stop (config and payload dependent).


UA still operate the 757 on ORD-EDI albeit this is seasonal. It carries good loads though so can see this getting further extensions to its season.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 7:56 am

BlueSky1976 wrote:
nomorerjs wrote:
Just a ploy by UA to get Boeing moving on the MOM.


That's all there is to it. Nothing else to see here. "797" at United is a given - once launched.


Yes, once the 797 is launched. Perhaps UA has realized that there will not be any 797 in the near future and has to make alternate provisions.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2654
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:37 am

keesje wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
seabosdca wrote:
I think the A321neo is a no-brainer for p.s. unless UA has something really different with the 797 up its sleeve. That's true even though UA is ordering so many MAXes.

The trickier part is TATL.

The "A321LR" is a standard A321neo with auxiliary center tanks and a higher MTOW. I'm not convinced that UA will want a dedicated fleet of A321neo frames to fly TATL. But I'm also not convinced they'll want to fly A321neos around domestically with the extra weight of center tanks. An A321neo without center tanks could do the shortest TATL routes from EWR, but not every route currently flown by sCO 757s, and wouldn't be any use from IAD.

To me this sets up pretty logically. I'd expect UA to purchase A321neos without the center tanks, and to outfit some of them in p.s. and others in a configuration more like the sCO 757s. The latter would fly primarily non-p.s. transcons but also some rotations on route between EWR and Ireland or the UK. Longer TATL routes will continue to be flown by 757s until the 797 is in service.


What advantage does the A321LR have over the 737-10 on transcons?


- Wider seats/ aisle
- quieter cabin
- quieter roomier cockpit
- container/pallet options
- engine choice, Leap or GTF
- higher BPR quieter, more efficient engines
- better runway performance
- rear galley/ lavatory options
- 4000NM range, Hawaii, South America
- more payload on same flights
- Airbus NB/WB FBW cockpit commonality
- proven performance, certification
- early availability via lessors


Why would United want a narrow body with wider seats than their 787's? Wouldn't they want consistent seats between aircraft for the same class of service? Extra aisle width would be more useful for single aisle aircraft on long routes.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14115
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 10:00 am

The A321LR can't carry the same number of seats of 757-200 and is payload range limited on many of the TATL routes. Specially west bound during the winter. And the bigger 767 is on the way out also, few left after 2022. Until then, they will be used on routes where they provide offer maximal value. The A330/787 are 2 steps up in operating costs & capability.

Image

Compared to the 757, operating costs will implode & an NMA is far away. So United has limited options. I see AA & DL getting LR's for the same reasons. Even for big legacy's the A321LR provides a fighting tool to break into new markets or strategically defend low margin city pairs / slots etc.

Airbus has thousands of A321NEO's in the backlog, so dramatic discounts are off the table for the foreseable future. After A321LR EASA / FAA certification a few weeks ago, first delivery can take place any moment.

Image
https://www.picbon.com/media/1892147470536859487_2139112195
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 1:31 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
keesje wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:

What advantage does the A321LR have over the 737-10 on transcons?


- Wider seats/ aisle
- quieter cabin
- quieter roomier cockpit
- container/pallet options
- engine choice, Leap or GTF
- higher BPR quieter, more efficient engines
- better runway performance
- rear galley/ lavatory options
- 4000NM range, Hawaii, South America
- more payload on same flights
- Airbus NB/WB FBW cockpit commonality
- proven performance, certification
- early availability via lessors


Why would United want a narrow body with wider seats than their 787's? Wouldn't they want consistent seats between aircraft for the same class of service? Extra aisle width would be more useful for single aisle aircraft on long routes.


That isn’t how an airline thinks. None of them are making this decision based on seat width. It’s solely in the minds of people on this forum.
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 1:59 pm

SFOtoORD wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
keesje wrote:

- Wider seats/ aisle
- quieter cabin
- quieter roomier cockpit
- container/pallet options
- engine choice, Leap or GTF
- higher BPR quieter, more efficient engines
- better runway performance
- rear galley/ lavatory options
- 4000NM range, Hawaii, South America
- more payload on same flights
- Airbus NB/WB FBW cockpit commonality
- proven performance, certification
- early availability via lessors


Why would United want a narrow body with wider seats than their 787's? Wouldn't they want consistent seats between aircraft for the same class of service? Extra aisle width would be more useful for single aisle aircraft on long routes.


That isn’t how an airline thinks. None of them are making this decision based on seat width. It’s solely in the minds of people on this forum.


Cabin width is the favorite design aspect for discussion on this website even though other design parameters are far more important in making the purchase decision.
 
Blockplus
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 3:55 pm

Re: United proposes purchasing the a321lr for trasnatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 2:03 pm

Wingtips56 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Let’s see, first, you need 6 crew, possibly 7 if third pilot. Second, substract about 450 nm for international reserves, then subtract about the same or more for westbound headwinds and high temp devs. Realistically, a 3800 nm plane. Plenty for DUB, SNN, LIS, MAD, KEF, OSL, but not BER, MUC, STR, NCE.

GF

Then you would also need a crew rest area. Since it can't go under the floor or above the ceiling, it would have to take up part of the passenger cabin, and therefore cut capacity.


Crew rest can be class 3 or 2 if the plane is equipped with layflats and a curtain. Either first or last row in f. With a 2 -2,1-1 seating a 1seat row will suffice
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14115
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: United proposes purchasing the A321LR for transatlantic flights

Fri Oct 26, 2018 2:43 pm

In the US Delta, American, Spirit, Jetblue, Alaska, Frontier, Hawaiian have been committing to the A321. WoW , Norwegian and Rouge have been coming in. If an United A321 order would come as a surprise for you, just don't become an investor, planner or strategist.

https://airlinegeeks.com/2017/11/21/the-hero-we-never-expected-the-rise-of-the-airbus-a321-in-the-u-s-market/
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 747m8te, 777ER, A320B737NGCapt, airwaysglasgow, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], ClassicLover, CrimsonNL, dcs921, dstblj52, Eiszeit, Fiend, Google [Bot], greg85, hic787, HPRamper, Kent350787, ktachiya, LaunchDetected, nicode, Opus99, Rifitto, TC957, tcfc424, trees, VolvoBus, wil381, workhorse and 176 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos