Page 7 of 7

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 1:31 am
by Boof02671
The 797 is more of a 767 replacement and partially a 757 replacement

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 1:34 am
by incitatus
Revelation wrote:
We don't have to be in an either/or situation.

The market supports a "warmed over" A330neo with a lot of overlap with "clean sheet" 787 and A350 that have more seats, more range and even better economy.

The market can support "warmed over" A321neo/A321lr/A321xlr with a lot of overlap with "clean sheet" NMA that will have more seats, more range and even better economy.


I am not too warm on this analogy because I see the A330neo as a bit of a flop. It is too capable and eats into the A350 territory. The A321XLR has no competitor and the NMA will not be one.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 1:34 am
by Boof02671
Aceskywalker wrote:
Not out there routes, but I can see AA doing some work in Hawaii with the XLR in servicing KOA & LIH from DFW. Maybe HNL-DCA?

You'll see more destinations to secondary EU cities.

I doubt the runways at DCA are long enough.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 1:50 am
by IAmGaroott
Boof02671 wrote:
IAmGaroott wrote:
I just listened to AAs “Tell Me Why” podcast regarding the XLR order. They had president Robert Isom speak about that aircraft and the fleet moving forward.

What caught my attention was when he spoke about “where we’re going” as far as wide bodies, he mentioned all ac, including the 772s but said nothing about the A333 nor A332.

They already announced the 332s are staying and the 333s are being kept through at least till the end of 2021.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/american- ... uary-2019/


I've read that article. I was just struck by him mentioning the 767 retirement and referring to the 772 fleet as part of the future with no mention of the A330s. Especially with the oldest of the latter two supposedly being replaced by the second batch of 789s.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:00 am
by IAmGaroott
Boof02671 wrote:
Aceskywalker wrote:
Not out there routes, but I can see AA doing some work in Hawaii with the XLR in servicing KOA & LIH from DFW. Maybe HNL-DCA?

You'll see more destinations to secondary EU cities.

I doubt the runways at DCA are long enough.


DCA received a DC10 as a weather diversion from IAD in April of 98, so it is possible. https://www.flickr.com/photos/keleivis/4271371847

But Hawaii seems unlikely for DCA. If anything, their puddle jumpers will become all E175s and you'll start seeing more domestic A321s, A320s, and 738s to bump up the existing A319 flight capacity.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:25 am
by Jetty
Bobloblaw wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
A.net is funny. Many here proclamimg the end of the 797 because of upgrades to “warmed over” 1988 A320. Yet on other threads many bash Boeing for making a “warmer over” 1968 737 MAX instead of a new “clean sheet”’737 replacement in response to the NEO back in 2011.

So which is it??? More evidence a.net is overrun with teenage boys


Big difference - 1988 technology is still state-of-the-art in 2019 for civilian jetliners.

Everyone is missing the point. If the 321XLR is enough to kill the 797, then Boeing was right to do the MAX in response to the NEO rather than a cleansheet. I realize the 797/321XLR market is probably smaller. But the logic is the same unless you just hate Boeing

There’s a 15 year difference between the time that passed between the original 737 and MAX EIS and the original 320 and 321XLR planned EIS. If you’re really looking for a comparison here it’d more valid to say that Boeing was right to do the 737NG, which I don’t think anyone doubts.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:37 am
by 1989worstyear
Jetty wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:

Big difference - 1988 technology is still state-of-the-art in 2019 for civilian jetliners.

Everyone is missing the point. If the 321XLR is enough to kill the 797, then Boeing was right to do the MAX in response to the NEO rather than a cleansheet. I realize the 797/321XLR market is probably smaller. But the logic is the same unless you just hate Boeing

There’s a 15 year difference between the time that passed between the original 737 and MAX EIS and the original 320 and 321XLR planned EIS. If you’re really looking for a comparison here it’d more valid to say that Boeing was right to do the 737NG, which I don’t think anyone doubts.


:shakehead:

It's 52 years for the 737 family (1967) and 32 years for the A320 family (1987).

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:43 am
by Jetty
1989worstyear wrote:
Jetty wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
Everyone is missing the point. If the 321XLR is enough to kill the 797, then Boeing was right to do the MAX in response to the NEO rather than a cleansheet. I realize the 797/321XLR market is probably smaller. But the logic is the same unless you just hate Boeing

There’s a 15 year difference between the time that passed between the original 737 and MAX EIS and the original 320 and 321XLR planned EIS. If you’re really looking for a comparison here it’d more valid to say that Boeing was right to do the 737NG, which I don’t think anyone doubts.


:shakehead:

It's 52 years for the 737 family (1967) and 32 years for the A320 family (1987).

And how many years are there between MAX and XLR EIS? :wave:

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:45 am
by MSPNWA
I can see these used for a return of DFW-LIH and year-round DFW-KOA, but personally I won't be flying that long in a narrowbody.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:08 am
by 1989worstyear
Jetty wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:
Jetty wrote:
There’s a 15 year difference between the time that passed between the original 737 and MAX EIS and the original 320 and 321XLR planned EIS. If you’re really looking for a comparison here it’d more valid to say that Boeing was right to do the 737NG, which I don’t think anyone doubts.


:shakehead:

It's 52 years for the 737 family (1967) and 32 years for the A320 family (1987).

And how many years are there between MAX and XLR EIS? :wave:


It should be six between the 7M8 and XLR according to the EIS date from Airbus (2017 vs. 2023).

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:21 am
by Jetty
1989worstyear wrote:
Jetty wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:

:shakehead:

It's 52 years for the 737 family (1967) and 32 years for the A320 family (1987).

And how many years are there between MAX and XLR EIS? :wave:


It should be six between the 7M8 and XLR according to the EIS date from Airbus (2017 vs. 2023).

Ok, a 14 year difference then. My point still stands: generation wise the NG is more comparable to the XLR than the MAX.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:36 am
by Boof02671
IAmGaroott wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
Aceskywalker wrote:
Not out there routes, but I can see AA doing some work in Hawaii with the XLR in servicing KOA & LIH from DFW. Maybe HNL-DCA?

You'll see more destinations to secondary EU cities.

I doubt the runways at DCA are long enough.


DCA received a DC10 as a weather diversion from IAD in April of 98, so it is possible. https://www.flickr.com/photos/keleivis/4271371847

But Hawaii seems unlikely for DCA. If anything, their puddle jumpers will become all E175s and you'll start seeing more domestic A321s, A320s, and 738s to bump up the existing A319 flight capacity.

A Dc10 has three engines and wasn’t fully maxed out on takeoff for a short hop over to IAD, a full loaded A321XLR is a different story.

XLR can’t make, distance between DCA and HNL is 4,833 miles.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 4:00 am
by rheinwaldner
Revelation wrote:
The market can support "warmed over" A321neo/A321lr/A321xlr with a lot of overlap with "clean sheet" NMA that will have more seats, more range and even better economy.

B.t.w. Boeing just hopes to build a widebody aircraft with the same economics as narrowbodies, but not better economics.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 5:48 am
by Strato2
Congrats to AA, Airbus and flying pax! Another nail in the MOM/NMA/whatever coffin.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:10 am
by Mboyle1988
Boof02671 wrote:
IAmGaroott wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
I doubt the runways at DCA are long enough.


DCA received a DC10 as a weather diversion from IAD in April of 98, so it is possible. https://www.flickr.com/photos/keleivis/4271371847

But Hawaii seems unlikely for DCA. If anything, their puddle jumpers will become all E175s and you'll start seeing more domestic A321s, A320s, and 738s to bump up the existing A319 flight capacity.

A Dc10 has three engines and wasn’t fully maxed out on takeoff for a short hop over to IAD, a full loaded A321XLR is a different story.

XLR can’t make, distance between DCA and HNL is 4,833 miles.


Range is 4700 NM so plenty of range to get to HNL. Whether it can take off is a different story.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:54 am
by Olddog
Boof02671 wrote:
IAmGaroott wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
I doubt the runways at DCA are long enough.


DCA received a DC10 as a weather diversion from IAD in April of 98, so it is possible. https://www.flickr.com/photos/keleivis/4271371847

But Hawaii seems unlikely for DCA. If anything, their puddle jumpers will become all E175s and you'll start seeing more domestic A321s, A320s, and 738s to bump up the existing A319 flight capacity.

A Dc10 has three engines and wasn’t fully maxed out on takeoff for a short hop over to IAD, a full loaded A321XLR is a different story.

XLR can’t make, distance between DCA and HNL is 4,833 miles.


No it is 4200 nautical miles....

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 7:48 am
by TTailedTiger
Strato2 wrote:
Congrats to AA, Airbus and flying pax! Another nail in the MOM/NMA/whatever coffin.


Why wouldn't you want to see a new aircraft? I don't want to see any aircraft disappear or not make it into production. What a strange/sad view you have.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 7:51 am
by marcelh
TTailedTiger wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
Congrats to AA, Airbus and flying pax! Another nail in the MOM/NMA/whatever coffin.


Why wouldn't you want to see a new aircraft? I don't want to see any aircraft disappear or not make it into production. What a strange/sad view you have.

Maybe the same view of those who want to see the Airbus WB fail. Also known as “fanboism”

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:56 am
by Boof02671
Olddog wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
IAmGaroott wrote:

DCA received a DC10 as a weather diversion from IAD in April of 98, so it is possible. https://www.flickr.com/photos/keleivis/4271371847

But Hawaii seems unlikely for DCA. If anything, their puddle jumpers will become all E175s and you'll start seeing more domestic A321s, A320s, and 738s to bump up the existing A319 flight capacity.

A Dc10 has three engines and wasn’t fully maxed out on takeoff for a short hop over to IAD, a full loaded A321XLR is a different story.

XLR can’t make, distance between DCA and HNL is 4,833 miles.


No it is 4200 nautical miles....

You are forgetting an ETOPS flight must carry extra fuel for alt diversions.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:58 am
by Olddog
You are trying to invent an excuse to your mistakes ;)

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 9:27 am
by cpd
MSPNWA wrote:
I can see these used for a return of DFW-LIH and year-round DFW-KOA, but personally I won't be flying that long in a narrowbody.


I share that thought, but if these really do work - they might just make twin-aisle planes obsolete, then these will be the only way.

It is always said on airliners.net by those most esteemed aviation planning experts that people prefer frequency instead of larger planes, so this may be the ultimate solution.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 10:09 am
by Polot
Boof02671 wrote:
Olddog wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
A Dc10 has three engines and wasn’t fully maxed out on takeoff for a short hop over to IAD, a full loaded A321XLR is a different story.

XLR can’t make, distance between DCA and HNL is 4,833 miles.


No it is 4200 nautical miles....

You are forgetting an ETOPS flight must carry extra fuel for alt diversions.

The point is moot anyways because the flight requires an out of perimeter slot, and I doubt AA is going to use one of their few transferable slots on HNL rather than a west coast business market.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 11:39 am
by PRAirbus
wonder if these A321XLR's will be equipped with PTV/IFE unless they will be basic bare bones like USAirways planes, let's hope NOT!

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 11:46 am
by Elementalism
Strato2 wrote:
Congrats to AA, Airbus and flying pax! Another nail in the MOM/NMA/whatever coffin.


268 XLR frames sold at PAS19. The business case cant be anymore clear imo.

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 11:55 am
by MIflyer12
PRAirbus wrote:
wonder if these A321XLR's will be equipped with PTV/IFE unless they will be basic bare bones like USAirways planes, let's hope NOT!


You recognize that AA's plan to to rip out AVOD from ex-AA planes, too, right?

cpd wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
I can see these used for a return of DFW-LIH and year-round DFW-KOA, but personally I won't be flying that long in a narrowbody.


I share that thought, but if these really do work - they might just make twin-aisle planes obsolete, then these will be the only way.

It is always said on airliners.net by those most esteemed aviation planning experts that people prefer frequency instead of larger planes, so this may be the ultimate solution.


It'll be just like the way 757s obsoleted DC-10s from the West Coast, only in turn to be obsoleted by 738s. Carriers will chase CASM (and minimum seat count to boost fares).

Re: Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:10 pm
by h1fl1er
Polot wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
Olddog wrote:

No it is 4200 nautical miles....

You are forgetting an ETOPS flight must carry extra fuel for alt diversions.

The point is moot anyways because the flight requires an out of perimeter slot, and I doubt AA is going to use one of their few transferable slots on HNL rather than a west coast business market.


correct. westbound would be a challenge for that plane and would probably not be favorable against a widebody.

the outside-perimeter slots tend to go to the major's hubs. AS has the best operation imaginable at DCA, they have LAX, SFO, PDX, SEA, all the major west coast cities covered. the others fly to whatever "hub" they have, usually LAX.

the XLR will be heavier and if low-density, will have higher seat-mile vs other configs. also a good bit slower than a widebody.

but there are no shortage of airlines looking to do long missions with NBs. Copa has made their entire business model out of this...I've flown PTY-GIG, like an 8hr mission on a 738. they have a pretty decent product up front. they can't wait for their Maxes