The A321LR must be hand loaded as it is; the A321XLR cannot take up any more lower deck space without reducing the passenger count. .
Why? 7x LD3-45 easily take the baggage of 200 pax, let alone a probably more realistic 160-180 pax, no matter how sloppy they are packed....
Leeham covered this well . .
We can also see that Airbus has assumed non LD3-45 loaded passenger bags. The bags simply does not fit for 206 passengers in a containerized concept with normal assumptions for bags per passenger and bags per container. It requires nine containers free and we would only have seven after the three fuel tanks have been installed. With bulk-loaded bags, including using the bulk cargo area, the bags for 206 passengers will fit with a bit of room to spare.https://leehamnews.com/2015/01/15/airbu ... ats-there/
from what i can tell you from my every day work is, that an a321 is never used to it's full cargo volume because of bags. the highest bag load i ever had on a bulk a321 was 297 bags, a thing i will never forget. on top, these bags were huge... and after an hour we still had space for about 100 more. but you would never ever need this space for ops in countries that actually need such an aircraft. 7 akh is more than enaught for 200 pax.
flown on: TU3,TU5,T20,IL8,IL6,ILW,IL9,I14,YK4,YK2,AN2,AN4,A26,A28,A38,A40,A81,SU9,L4T,L11,D1C,M11,M80,M87,