User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:18 pm

Airbus has been upgrading the A321-100 since 1993 into new more capable variants;
- A321-200,
- A321 Sharklets,
- A321-NEO,
- A321-LR,
- A321-XLR.

Image
https://pointsmilesandmartinis.boardingarea.com/2014/06/delta-adding-15-new-airbus-a321-aircraft-to-fleet/

The NEO and the XLR included the biggest upgrades.The NEO obviously offering the High BR PW GTF and LEAP engines, the XLR offering new flaps, increased wing area, enlarged integral fueltank and a 4t MTOW bump over the 97t -LR.

Analyst and Airbus foresee the A321versions matching A320 deliveries in the not to distant future. https://leehamnews.com/2019/09/12/a321-accounts-for-50-of-future-deliveries-few-production-gaps/

Image
Airbus.com

Would it make sense to standarize on the XLR version, also for short haul LCC operations?

Advantages:
:arrow: longer term networkflexibility for operators
:arrow: re lease flexibility / value for lessors
:arrow: increased cargo capability on short / medium flights
:arrow: improve airfield performance operated below MTOW
:arrow: standarized production simplification for Airbus
:arrow: reduced need for (heavy) ACT auxilliary fuel tanks
:arrow: weight / MRO benefits new single slotted flap
:arrow: rest value for cargo conversion after 20-25 yrs goes up, could reducing initial lease rates.

Disadvantages
:arrow: added empty weight (how much?) not required for short haul operations
:arrow: higher production costs (questionable if A321 standarized)
:arrow: harder for Airbus to get a premium for long haul capabilities if so many "XLR's" around

If think if the weight / cost gain of the XLR is limitted, the avantages of setting a new standard might compensate / prevail in the next decade. At that point all new A321s could be re-configured to cross the Atlantic or carry significant cargo.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2324
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:21 pm

You forgot the disadvantage of reduced cargo space vis-a-vis the no-ACT variants

... and is there really any need for the photos? Doesn't really tell us anything and clogs the thread.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9480
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:22 pm

The LR will go the way of the dodo when the XLR is out-it has no advantage and is now a stopgap product. The XLR and regular A321 will probably not be merged-it is just more weight and less cargo room (not more like you state, that is only relative to LR) for carriers who don’t need the range. Some things like the new flaps may be transferred over of course.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2666
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:45 pm

LR will most likely become the base A321neo since it kinda already is and its tanks are already removable and whatnot, while the XLR will remain a separate variant.
 
User avatar
PacoMartin
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 8:18 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:44 pm

keesje wrote:
Analyst and Airbus foresee the A321versions matching A320 deliveries in the not to distant future. https://leehamnews.com/2019/09/12/a321-accounts-for-50-of-future-deliveries-few-production-gaps/

That article states: A321 long-term future depends on Boeing’s decision over the New Midmarket Airplane.


I think it should read : Boeing’s decision over the New Midmarket Airplane depends on the long-term projection of A321 orders.
 
lowfareair
Posts: 260
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:40 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:54 pm

Until a Boeing NMA is launched and depending how that looks from a capacity/price standpoint, Airbus will keep the XLR separate from neo/LR (which may become a single line) because they need a value product (321neo) to compete against the MAX commercially, but the XLR's range commands a premium as there is no comparable product at the moment.
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 1:58 pm

The biggest factor is cost. Airbus charges a premium for all these upgraded models. Airlines don’t want to pay for features and options that they don’t need. It’s like buying a car with a more expensive turbocharged engine or all wheel drive. Sure it is nice to have, bust if you don’t need it, what is the point of paying 5% more for the price of your car?

Weight hurts fuel burn. The vast majority of flights are under 1500 miles. Standardizing the A321 to make it heavier may result in a competitive disadvantage versus the lighter weight 737-10 especially on shorter flights .

Cargo volume is also a reason. The 737-10 has more cargo volume than the A321. On short haul, aux tanks aren’t needed. Delta bought A321 without any aux tanks to save weight, cost and provide more room for cargo with the consequence of not being able to use them on longer transcons (they use the 737-900ER instead).

If Airbus standardized in the heavier version that is less efficient and costs more to purchase, they will lose orders. Airbus heavily markets the A321 and its various upgraded models because it is more profitable for them to sell. Given the production issues going on at the Airbus factories, the profit margin on a basic low weight A320neo is small if not nonexistent. Airbus needs airlines to upgrade to more expensive A321 versions to make the A320neo family more profitable. However it is important to have a basic stripped down version for airlines looking to keep capital and acquisition costs down. Airbus will lose sales to budget airlines wanting to fly short haul if the price of 4 A321s equals the price of 5 737-10s.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21423
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:21 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
... and is there really any need for the photos? Doesn't really tell us anything and clogs the thread.

Harsh, but you're not wrong.

Polot wrote:
The XLR and regular A321 will probably not be merged-it is just more weight and less cargo room (not more like you state, that is only relative to LR) for carriers who don’t need the range. Some things like the new flaps may be transferred over of course.

There's always one airline that will ask for the old config just to keep commonality with their existing fleet.

That's one reason why we see CEO production overlapping NEO production, etc.
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
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18142
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:23 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
The biggest factor is cost. Airbus charges a premium for all these upgraded models. Airlines don’t want to pay for features and options that they don’t need. It’s like buying a car with a more expensive turbocharged engine or all wheel drive. Sure it is nice to have, bust if you don’t need it, what is the point of paying 5% more for the price of your car?

Weight hurts fuel burn. The vast majority of flights are under 1500 miles. Standardizing the A321 to make it heavier may result in a competitive disadvantage versus the lighter weight 737-10 especially on shorter flights .

Cargo volume is also a reason. The 737-10 has more cargo volume than the A321. On short haul, aux tanks aren’t needed. Delta bought A321 without any aux tanks to save weight, cost and provide more room for cargo with the consequence of not being able to use them on longer transcons (they use the 737-900ER instead).

If Airbus standardized in the heavier version that is less efficient and costs more to purchase, they will lose orders. Airbus heavily markets the A321 and its various upgraded models because it is more profitable for them to sell. Given the production issues going on at the Airbus factories, the profit margin on a basic low weight A320neo is small if not nonexistent. Airbus needs airlines to upgrade to more expensive A321 versions to make the A320neo family more profitable. However it is important to have a basic stripped down version for airlines looking to keep capital and acquisition costs down. Airbus will lose sales to budget airlines wanting to fly short haul if the price of 4 A321s equals the price of 5 737-10s.

Cost us a big one. We will eventually see a standardization to vanilla A321 (optional ACTs) and xLR. Don't worry about the rest, the have or soon will leave production, it is too late to discuss them.

The NEO gives the plain A321 enough range to be very useful without ACTs, so that gives Airbus a discount model to sell.

Airframes and engine companies have business models to profit off options, upgrades, and ancillary sales. Going all A321xLR would cost Airbus about half the A321 profit. So manufacturing complexity is forced by the business model.

Too much of what is being discussed is sunk costs forced by the natural technological evolution with time.

What Airbus needs is more A321 production as there is too much competition on the A320 size to achieve desired profits.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2420
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:54 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
LR will most likely become the base A321neo since it kinda already is and its tanks are already removable and whatnot, while the XLR will remain a separate variant.


The extra weight and expense is not needed for most routes flown by variants of the A321. Even if the the ACT's can be removed, the extra fuel system plumbing associated with them is not. They have higher gross weights, so they have to pay higher landing fees.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2666
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:05 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
LR will most likely become the base A321neo since it kinda already is and its tanks are already removable and whatnot, while the XLR will remain a separate variant.


The extra weight and expense is not needed for most routes flown by variants of the A321. Even if the the ACT's can be removed, the extra fuel system plumbing associated with them is not. They have higher gross weights, so they have to pay higher landing fees.


Can always do paper derates, a lot more common then you think.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2420
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:10 pm

lowfareair wrote:
Until a Boeing NMA is launched and depending how that looks from a capacity/price standpoint, Airbus will keep the XLR separate from neo/LR (which may become a single line) because they need a value product (321neo) to compete against the MAX commercially, but the XLR's range commands a premium as there is no comparable product at the moment.


Even when the Boeing NMA is launched, Airbus will still need to compete against the MAX 10 for shorter missions. Till Airbus replaces the A320 series, there will be a need for both ends of the A321 market.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2420
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:19 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
LR will most likely become the base A321neo since it kinda already is and its tanks are already removable and whatnot, while the XLR will remain a separate variant.


The extra weight and expense is not needed for most routes flown by variants of the A321. Even if the the ACT's can be removed, the extra fuel system plumbing associated with them is not. They have higher gross weights, so they have to pay higher landing fees.


Can always do paper derates, a lot more common then you think.


Paper derates are one thing. Having extra equipment built in that adds to maintenance cost is another. The market for the A321 is large enough for both ends of marketing line to be maintained. If anything, the middle option will disappear. In the future customers wanting extra range are likely to order the XLR and forget about buying an LR that may have lower residual value. It will probably be cheaper for Airbus to do a paper derate of the A321 XLR than to keep manufacturing 3 different varieties of the A321.
 
Strato2
Posts: 446
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:27 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Given the production issues going on at the Airbus factories, the profit margin on a basic low weight A320neo is small if not nonexistent.



This is a statement of fact. Could you show the financials that lead you to this conclusion?
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2666
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:28 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:

The extra weight and expense is not needed for most routes flown by variants of the A321. Even if the the ACT's can be removed, the extra fuel system plumbing associated with them is not. They have higher gross weights, so they have to pay higher landing fees.


Can always do paper derates, a lot more common then you think.


Paper derates are one thing. Having extra equipment built in that adds to maintenance cost is another. The market for the A321 is large enough for both ends of marketing line to be maintained. If anything, the middle option will disappear. In the future customers wanting extra range are likely to order the XLR and forget about buying an LR that may have lower residual value. It will probably be cheaper for Airbus to do a paper derate of the A321 XLR than to keep manufacturing 3 different varieties of the A321.


I’m pretty the A321NX is essentially an A321LR. It’s just a matter of if the customer opts for the increased MTOW and fuel tanks.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 10872
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:28 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
You forgot the disadvantage of reduced cargo space vis-a-vis the no-ACT variants.


I am not eure there are all too many A321 flying without 1 ACT. Did Airbus even deliver A321-200 w/o ACT post-2002?

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:30 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:

The extra weight and expense is not needed for most routes flown by variants of the A321. Even if the the ACT's can be removed, the extra fuel system plumbing associated with them is not. They have higher gross weights, so they have to pay higher landing fees.


Can always do paper derates, a lot more common then you think.


Paper derates are one thing. Having extra equipment built in that adds to maintenance cost is another. The market for the A321 is large enough for both ends of marketing line to be maintained. If anything, the middle option will disappear. In the future customers wanting extra range are likely to order the XLR and forget about buying an LR that may have lower residual value. It will probably be cheaper for Airbus to do a paper derate of the A321 XLR than to keep manufacturing 3 different varieties of the A321.


you'll see some other changes first.
Like single slotted flaps. A massive reduction in complexity ( and weight?)
More swapping out of hydraulics for electric actuation

I expect the LR to remain as the base model and the XLR as long range.
derate the LR to your liking.
Murphy is an optimist
 
astuteman
Posts: 6897
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:41 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Given the production issues going on at the Airbus factories, the profit margin on a basic low weight A320neo is small if not nonexistent. Airbus needs airlines to upgrade to more expensive A321 versions to make the A320neo family more profitable. However it is important to have a basic stripped down version for airlines looking to keep capital and acquisition costs down. Airbus will lose sales to budget airlines wanting to fly short haul if the price of 4 A321s equals the price of 5 737-10s.


This needs a response.

Firstly, where do you think Airbus Commercial Aircraft's operating margin of 9%+ (or nearly E5Bn ($6Bn) in 2018) comes from?

https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... TATION.pdf

The A330NEO? Just getting started and fighting against the 787?
The A350? Recognised as expensive and fighting against a cheaper 787?
The A380? :faint:

The profit margin on the A320 family is clearly considerable, verging on enormous. The A321NEO is virtually (not quite, but virtually) unchallenged.
2 700+ A321NEO orders vs c. 600 737MAX 9/10?
It's a money printing machine

There's no question that there are inefficiencies in the A32X production system.
But the REAL problem with that isn't cost - it's the fact that even at 600+ per year, they have a backlog of over 9 years production, and could be absolutely making hay while the 737MAX has its issues and NMA isn't in play yet.

Airbus need to be making 750+ A32X per year
As for losing orders, there's no question that a 9 year backlog is a far bigger drag on A32X orders than pricing is.
That's just fact.

Rgds
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2420
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 5:53 pm

WIederling wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:

Can always do paper derates, a lot more common then you think.


Paper derates are one thing. Having extra equipment built in that adds to maintenance cost is another. The market for the A321 is large enough for both ends of marketing line to be maintained. If anything, the middle option will disappear. In the future customers wanting extra range are likely to order the XLR and forget about buying an LR that may have lower residual value. It will probably be cheaper for Airbus to do a paper derate of the A321 XLR than to keep manufacturing 3 different varieties of the A321.


you'll see some other changes first.
Like single slotted flaps. A massive reduction in complexity ( and weight?)
More swapping out of hydraulics for electric actuation

I expect the LR to remain as the base model and the XLR as long range.
derate the LR to your liking.


Sure the flaps and electric actuators will find their way into the base model, but with the range improvements of the A321 NEO over the CEO, there's even less reason to haul ACT's around and have the capability to install them on most A321 routes.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:15 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
WIederling wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:

Paper derates are one thing. Having extra equipment built in that adds to maintenance cost is another. The market for the A321 is large enough for both ends of marketing line to be maintained. If anything, the middle option will disappear. In the future customers wanting extra range are likely to order the XLR and forget about buying an LR that may have lower residual value. It will probably be cheaper for Airbus to do a paper derate of the A321 XLR than to keep manufacturing 3 different varieties of the A321.


you'll see some other changes first.
Like single slotted flaps. A massive reduction in complexity ( and weight?)
More swapping out of hydraulics for electric actuation

I expect the LR to remain as the base model and the XLR as long range.
derate the LR to your liking.


Sure the flaps and electric actuators will find their way into the base model, but with the range improvements of the A321 NEO over the CEO, there's even less reason to haul ACT's around and have the capability to install them on most A321 routes.

ACT's are optional. Even for the LR.
The LR brings changed door arrangement and higher MTOW.
This will stay.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12501
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:42 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
LR will most likely become the base A321neo since it kinda already is and its tanks are already removable and whatnot, while the XLR will remain a separate variant.

Agree completely. I'm guessing that that's why we haven't seen it done already, because they really have no reason to rush the decision, especially since Boeing's response isn't firm.



Revelation wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
... and is there really any need for the photos? Doesn't really tell us anything and clogs the thread.

Harsh, but you're not wrong.

Why are either of you pretending as though your own personal preferences are representative of anything here? :irked:

I'd for one encourage users to throw more pics, because they break up the monotony of blocks of texts, especially by posters who don't write in paragraphs or are crap with their punctuation.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 5852
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Thu Sep 12, 2019 11:40 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
I'd for one encourage users to throw more pics, because they break up the monotony of blocks of texts, especially by posters who don't write in paragraphs or are crap with their punctuation.


Pics are great when the contribute to the story: 'Yup, that pilot landed that 737 on the nose gear.' They are great when they contribute to analysis: a dimensioned comparison, for example, on the largest possible engine diameters on 737MAX versus 32XNeo. Try slipping ten irrelevant pics into your next presentation to a Board of Directors. See how they react to your waste of their time.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12501
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:42 am

MIflyer12 wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
I'd for one encourage users to throw more pics, because they break up the monotony of blocks of texts, especially by posters who don't write in paragraphs or are crap with their punctuation.

Pics are great when the contribute to the story: 'Yup, that pilot landed that 737 on the nose gear.' They are great when they contribute to analysis: a dimensioned comparison, for example, on the largest possible engine diameters on 737MAX versus 32XNeo. Try slipping ten irrelevant pics into your next presentation to a Board of Directors. See how they react to your waste of their time.

Here's of course the obvious difference: one might value their opinion in that regard.

But back to reality: who are (any of) you to say whether a presented pic is relevant or not? ...seeing as someone wanting to accent their post with one, it's not a TOS violation.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:32 am

astuteman wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Given the production issues going on at the Airbus factories, the profit margin on a basic low weight A320neo is small if not nonexistent. Airbus needs airlines to upgrade to more expensive A321 versions to make the A320neo family more profitable. However it is important to have a basic stripped down version for airlines looking to keep capital and acquisition costs down. Airbus will lose sales to budget airlines wanting to fly short haul if the price of 4 A321s equals the price of 5 737-10s.


This needs a response.

Firstly, where do you think Airbus Commercial Aircraft's operating margin of 9%+ (or nearly E5Bn ($6Bn) in 2018) comes from?

https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... TATION.pdf

The A330NEO? Just getting started and fighting against the 787?
The A350? Recognised as expensive and fighting against a cheaper 787?
The A380? :faint:

The profit margin on the A320 family is clearly considerable, verging on enormous. The A321NEO is virtually (not quite, but virtually) unchallenged.
2 700+ A321NEO orders vs c. 600 737MAX 9/10?
It's a money printing machine

There's no question that there are inefficiencies in the A32X production system.
But the REAL problem with that isn't cost - it's the fact that even at 600+ per year, they have a backlog of over 9 years production, and could be absolutely making hay while the 737MAX has its issues and NMA isn't in play yet.

Airbus need to be making 750+ A32X per year
As for losing orders, there's no question that a 9 year backlog is a far bigger drag on A32X orders than pricing is.
That's just fact.

Rgds


I think you missed the point. Smaller Low MTOW basic airframes have little profit margin. Larger High MTOW airplanes with all the latest and greatest features (sharklets, HUD, Cat IIIb no decision height, electronic flight bag, aux tanks, spaceflex, etc) have much higher profit margins for Airbus. Airlines pay more for features and higher MTOW which in turn earns Airbus more profit, however some airlines don’t want to lay as much for all the capability that they may not need.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12501
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:32 am

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Airlines pay more for features and higher MTOW which in turn earns Airbus more profit, however some airlines don’t want to lay as much for all the capability that they may not need.

The MTOW issue is somewhat moot, considering that airlines can buy the pinnacle upon delivery, or pay for an increase on the same essential hardware should it be desired later. OEMs don't really lose either way.

For an airline who wants the capacity but not the features.... where else would they go:
To a 737-10, that's going to have all the same things standard?
To the Chinese, which at this point is not the same caliber of product.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
JonesNL
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:20 am

astuteman wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Given the production issues going on at the Airbus factories, the profit margin on a basic low weight A320neo is small if not nonexistent. Airbus needs airlines to upgrade to more expensive A321 versions to make the A320neo family more profitable. However it is important to have a basic stripped down version for airlines looking to keep capital and acquisition costs down. Airbus will lose sales to budget airlines wanting to fly short haul if the price of 4 A321s equals the price of 5 737-10s.


This needs a response.

Firstly, where do you think Airbus Commercial Aircraft's operating margin of 9%+ (or nearly E5Bn ($6Bn) in 2018) comes from?

https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... TATION.pdf

The A330NEO? Just getting started and fighting against the 787?
The A350? Recognised as expensive and fighting against a cheaper 787?
The A380? :faint:

The profit margin on the A320 family is clearly considerable, verging on enormous. The A321NEO is virtually (not quite, but virtually) unchallenged.
2 700+ A321NEO orders vs c. 600 737MAX 9/10?
It's a money printing machine

There's no question that there are inefficiencies in the A32X production system.
But the REAL problem with that isn't cost - it's the fact that even at 600+ per year, they have a backlog of over 9 years production, and could be absolutely making hay while the 737MAX has its issues and NMA isn't in play yet.

Airbus need to be making 750+ A32X per year
As for losing orders, there's no question that a 9 year backlog is a far bigger drag on A32X orders than pricing is.
That's just fact.

Rgds


Agreed, the biggest problem in Airbusland is production efficiency. They need increase speed for A32x and A220 lines and make production of A350 cheaper. But to make a multibillion dollar investment in capacity increase with an forecasted recession is not easy bet to make...
 
astuteman
Posts: 6897
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:26 am

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
astuteman wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Given the production issues going on at the Airbus factories, the profit margin on a basic low weight A320neo is small if not nonexistent. Airbus needs airlines to upgrade to more expensive A321 versions to make the A320neo family more profitable. However it is important to have a basic stripped down version for airlines looking to keep capital and acquisition costs down. Airbus will lose sales to budget airlines wanting to fly short haul if the price of 4 A321s equals the price of 5 737-10s.


This needs a response.

Firstly, where do you think Airbus Commercial Aircraft's operating margin of 9%+ (or nearly E5Bn ($6Bn) in 2018) comes from?

https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... TATION.pdf

The A330NEO? Just getting started and fighting against the 787?
The A350? Recognised as expensive and fighting against a cheaper 787?
The A380? :faint:

The profit margin on the A320 family is clearly considerable, verging on enormous. The A321NEO is virtually (not quite, but virtually) unchallenged.
2 700+ A321NEO orders vs c. 600 737MAX 9/10?
It's a money printing machine

There's no question that there are inefficiencies in the A32X production system.
But the REAL problem with that isn't cost - it's the fact that even at 600+ per year, they have a backlog of over 9 years production, and could be absolutely making hay while the 737MAX has its issues and NMA isn't in play yet.

Airbus need to be making 750+ A32X per year
As for losing orders, there's no question that a 9 year backlog is a far bigger drag on A32X orders than pricing is.
That's just fact.

Rgds


I think you missed the point. Smaller Low MTOW basic airframes have little profit margin. Larger High MTOW airplanes with all the latest and greatest features (sharklets, HUD, Cat IIIb no decision height, electronic flight bag, aux tanks, spaceflex, etc) have much higher profit margins for Airbus. Airlines pay more for features and higher MTOW which in turn earns Airbus more profit, however some airlines don’t want to lay as much for all the capability that they may not need.


No, I don't think I did.

The strategy of standardising on the A32X clearly works.
It doesn't lack sales - in fact it has the opposite problem. Airbus can't make them fast enough
It doesn't lack profit, as I outlined in my earlier post.

What it does lack is output, and standardising is the best way to do that.
The extra deliveries will massively outweigh any perceived loss from not being able to tailor the product line for what you describe as a low profit variant, which, by definition would be the LAST aircraft that Airbus want on the production line when they still have 5 700 planes in backlog.

And in that sense, I think your post contradicts itself. Like any manufacturer, Airbus want the highest margin product on their line, and they seem to managing that just fine.
I would ask where these disgruntled budget airlines wanting a no-frills A320/A321 on the cheap are going to go.
Boeing?
For what its worth they are pursuing the same strategy, so in this market, you get what you get

As a final point, not only does standardising maximise throughput, it also has a beneficial impact on production cost, allowing pricing to be more competitive.
I'm fairly sure that an airline that really didn't want sharklets, or Cat lllb no decision, or EFB, or spaceflex, could specify them to Airbus, but they would probably end up paying more, not less, for its "stripped out" narrowbody
So rather than the case being

"low budget airlines wanting less capability are stuck paying more for capability they don't want",

it's more a case of

"low budget airlines wanting less capability are very fortunate to be getting extra capability for free"

Rgds
 
astuteman
Posts: 6897
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:29 am

JonesNL wrote:
astuteman wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Given the production issues going on at the Airbus factories, the profit margin on a basic low weight A320neo is small if not nonexistent. Airbus needs airlines to upgrade to more expensive A321 versions to make the A320neo family more profitable. However it is important to have a basic stripped down version for airlines looking to keep capital and acquisition costs down. Airbus will lose sales to budget airlines wanting to fly short haul if the price of 4 A321s equals the price of 5 737-10s.


This needs a response.

Firstly, where do you think Airbus Commercial Aircraft's operating margin of 9%+ (or nearly E5Bn ($6Bn) in 2018) comes from?

https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... TATION.pdf

The A330NEO? Just getting started and fighting against the 787?
The A350? Recognised as expensive and fighting against a cheaper 787?
The A380? :faint:

The profit margin on the A320 family is clearly considerable, verging on enormous. The A321NEO is virtually (not quite, but virtually) unchallenged.
2 700+ A321NEO orders vs c. 600 737MAX 9/10?
It's a money printing machine

There's no question that there are inefficiencies in the A32X production system.
But the REAL problem with that isn't cost - it's the fact that even at 600+ per year, they have a backlog of over 9 years production, and could be absolutely making hay while the 737MAX has its issues and NMA isn't in play yet.

Airbus need to be making 750+ A32X per year
As for losing orders, there's no question that a 9 year backlog is a far bigger drag on A32X orders than pricing is.
That's just fact.

Rgds


Agreed, the biggest problem in Airbusland is production efficiency. They need increase speed for A32x and A220 lines and make production of A350 cheaper. But to make a multibillion dollar investment in capacity increase with an forecasted recession is not easy bet to make...


It depends.
If its billions on additional facilities, then, perhaps.
If its money spent making the existing infrastructure much more efficient, then that is always going to be a win.

With a 9 year backlog, I would have thought that the A320 line was the safest investment in civil aviation today, to be honest.

Rgds
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 7:13 am

JonesNL wrote:
astuteman wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Given the production issues going on at the Airbus factories, the profit margin on a basic low weight A320neo is small if not nonexistent. Airbus needs airlines to upgrade to more expensive A321 versions to make the A320neo family more profitable. However it is important to have a basic stripped down version for airlines looking to keep capital and acquisition costs down. Airbus will lose sales to budget airlines wanting to fly short haul if the price of 4 A321s equals the price of 5 737-10s.


This needs a response.

Firstly, where do you think Airbus Commercial Aircraft's operating margin of 9%+ (or nearly E5Bn ($6Bn) in 2018) comes from?

https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... TATION.pdf

The A330NEO? Just getting started and fighting against the 787?
The A350? Recognised as expensive and fighting against a cheaper 787?
The A380? :faint:

The profit margin on the A320 family is clearly considerable, verging on enormous. The A321NEO is virtually (not quite, but virtually) unchallenged.
2 700+ A321NEO orders vs c. 600 737MAX 9/10?
It's a money printing machine

There's no question that there are inefficiencies in the A32X production system.
But the REAL problem with that isn't cost - it's the fact that even at 600+ per year, they have a backlog of over 9 years production, and could be absolutely making hay while the 737MAX has its issues and NMA isn't in play yet.

Airbus need to be making 750+ A32X per year
As for losing orders, there's no question that a 9 year backlog is a far bigger drag on A32X orders than pricing is.
That's just fact.

Rgds


Agreed, the biggest problem in Airbusland is production efficiency. They need increase speed for A32x and A220 lines and make production of A350 cheaper. But to make a multibillion dollar investment in capacity increase with an forecasted recession is not easy bet to make...


That does not compute.
Good margins in an environment of direct effectiveness of losses ( no "deferred cost tool")
while a range of projects are in start up mode ( intrinsically sinking money ) isn't really an indicator
of lacking in production efficiency.

Obviously you can improve anything.
But Boeing's current problems ( MAX on the cheap, massive pressure on contractors and the workforce where afaics the full fallout is not yet visible, 787 snitching on papers and safety, ..) shows where not to go.

Against all detractors I do think that Airbus distributed production model is much more synergistic than
the "profits, use force by all means!" setups we see pushed in the US.
There is a reason why US corporations can usually only gut acquired companies unable to keep the Euro clockwork efficiencies running. ( i.e. the euro socialist inefficiencies are what makes Airbus the better company.)

Demands that Airbus be a "real commercial entity" as done by forex Leeham are destructive.
Murphy is an optimist
 
JonesNL
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 9:51 am

WIederling wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
astuteman wrote:

This needs a response.

Firstly, where do you think Airbus Commercial Aircraft's operating margin of 9%+ (or nearly E5Bn ($6Bn) in 2018) comes from?

https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... TATION.pdf

The A330NEO? Just getting started and fighting against the 787?
The A350? Recognised as expensive and fighting against a cheaper 787?
The A380? :faint:

The profit margin on the A320 family is clearly considerable, verging on enormous. The A321NEO is virtually (not quite, but virtually) unchallenged.
2 700+ A321NEO orders vs c. 600 737MAX 9/10?
It's a money printing machine

There's no question that there are inefficiencies in the A32X production system.
But the REAL problem with that isn't cost - it's the fact that even at 600+ per year, they have a backlog of over 9 years production, and could be absolutely making hay while the 737MAX has its issues and NMA isn't in play yet.

Airbus need to be making 750+ A32X per year
As for losing orders, there's no question that a 9 year backlog is a far bigger drag on A32X orders than pricing is.
That's just fact.

Rgds


Agreed, the biggest problem in Airbusland is production efficiency. They need increase speed for A32x and A220 lines and make production of A350 cheaper. But to make a multibillion dollar investment in capacity increase with an forecasted recession is not easy bet to make...


That does not compute.
Good margins in an environment of direct effectiveness of losses ( no "deferred cost tool")
while a range of projects are in start up mode ( intrinsically sinking money ) isn't really an indicator
of lacking in production efficiency.

Obviously you can improve anything.
But Boeing's current problems ( MAX on the cheap, massive pressure on contractors and the workforce where afaics the full fallout is not yet visible, 787 snitching on papers and safety, ..) shows where not to go.

Against all detractors I do think that Airbus distributed production model is much more synergistic than
the "profits, use force by all means!" setups we see pushed in the US.
There is a reason why US corporations can usually only gut acquired companies unable to keep the Euro clockwork efficiencies running. ( i.e. the euro socialist inefficiencies are what makes Airbus the better company.)

Demands that Airbus be a "real commercial entity" as done by forex Leeham are destructive.


I am not comparing Airbus against Boeing. I am just saying that Airbus can be much more successful if they are able to improve their production.

They are doing really well, but there is room for improvement...
 
JonesNL
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:02 am

astuteman wrote:
JonesNL wrote:
astuteman wrote:

This needs a response.

Firstly, where do you think Airbus Commercial Aircraft's operating margin of 9%+ (or nearly E5Bn ($6Bn) in 2018) comes from?

https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... TATION.pdf

The A330NEO? Just getting started and fighting against the 787?
The A350? Recognised as expensive and fighting against a cheaper 787?
The A380? :faint:

The profit margin on the A320 family is clearly considerable, verging on enormous. The A321NEO is virtually (not quite, but virtually) unchallenged.
2 700+ A321NEO orders vs c. 600 737MAX 9/10?
It's a money printing machine

There's no question that there are inefficiencies in the A32X production system.
But the REAL problem with that isn't cost - it's the fact that even at 600+ per year, they have a backlog of over 9 years production, and could be absolutely making hay while the 737MAX has its issues and NMA isn't in play yet.

Airbus need to be making 750+ A32X per year
As for losing orders, there's no question that a 9 year backlog is a far bigger drag on A32X orders than pricing is.
That's just fact.

Rgds


Agreed, the biggest problem in Airbusland is production efficiency. They need increase speed for A32x and A220 lines and make production of A350 cheaper. But to make a multibillion dollar investment in capacity increase with an forecasted recession is not easy bet to make...


It depends.
If its billions on additional facilities, then, perhaps.
If its money spent making the existing infrastructure much more efficient, then that is always going to be a win.

With a 9 year backlog, I would have thought that the A320 line was the safest investment in civil aviation today, to be honest.

Rgds


Money is already being spent on improving existing infrastructure, usually that is standard in manufacturing facilities. In the case of the 32x I would expect the lines are already highly optimized and the next big improvement will only bring 1 or 2 % improvement. They need to produce 25% more planes, which is only feasible with another line. If they do that the backlog will shrink to 6,5 years, which is about the preferable amount according to Airbus(5,5-6 was mentioned in an interview somewhere, sorry don't have the link).

But the billion dollar question is; will there be 750 orders per year to sustain that backlog or will an economic slowdown lead to 400-500 orders per year?
 
ewt340
Posts: 820
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:29 am

No, but they should at least scrapped the LR variants after XLR arrived.

So, A321neo and A321LR.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3937
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:42 am

PacoMartin wrote:
keesje wrote:
Analyst and Airbus foresee the A321versions matching A320 deliveries in the not to distant future. https://leehamnews.com/2019/09/12/a321-accounts-for-50-of-future-deliveries-few-production-gaps/

That article states: A321 long-term future depends on Boeing’s decision over the New Midmarket Airplane.


No the New Boeing has nothing to do with the A321 Except in Airbus's eyes. The 797 will be it's OWN airplane with it's OWN mission.
Airbus can choose tp copy it or not but I seriously doubt it will make the airplane any Less viable except to the airlines that say Where've you Been?? Been waitin' for you!!
And that's about it!! Airbus will freak out and come up with some back burner kind of airplane Just like they did for the B787 with the A350 and then decided to pit the A350 against the 777 since the 787 took off so well after they got around to building it themselves. All the 787's problems were self inflicted By Boeing On Boeing. Not a damn problem was caused by Airbus or the A350. Not even the Batteries which Airbus wound up after Boeing found the Fix...
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3594
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:09 am

strfyr51 wrote:
PacoMartin wrote:
keesje wrote:
Analyst and Airbus foresee the A321versions matching A320 deliveries in the not to distant future. https://leehamnews.com/2019/09/12/a321-accounts-for-50-of-future-deliveries-few-production-gaps/

That article states: A321 long-term future depends on Boeing’s decision over the New Midmarket Airplane.


No the New Boeing has nothing to do with the A321 Except in Airbus's eyes. The 797 will be it's OWN airplane with it's OWN mission.
Airbus can choose tp copy it or not but I seriously doubt it will make the airplane any Less viable except to the airlines that say Where've you Been?? Been waitin' for you!!
And that's about it!! Airbus will freak out and come up with some back burner kind of airplane Just like they did for the B787 with the A350 and then decided to pit the A350 against the 777 since the 787 took off so well after they got around to building it themselves. All the 787's problems were self inflicted By Boeing On Boeing. Not a damn problem was caused by Airbus or the A350. Not even the Batteries which Airbus wound up after Boeing found the Fix...


Wow! Bitter much? Both manufacturers are in the business of making good planes. Both succeed in it. You don’t appear to enjoy that.
come visit the south pacific
 
astuteman
Posts: 6897
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:15 am

strfyr51 wrote:
PacoMartin wrote:
keesje wrote:
Analyst and Airbus foresee the A321versions matching A320 deliveries in the not to distant future. https://leehamnews.com/2019/09/12/a321-accounts-for-50-of-future-deliveries-few-production-gaps/

That article states: A321 long-term future depends on Boeing’s decision over the New Midmarket Airplane.


No the New Boeing has nothing to do with the A321 Except in Airbus's eyes. The 797 will be it's OWN airplane with it's OWN mission.


I assume you realise that your assertion works both ways ….
i.e the decision around the 797 will have no impact whatsoever on the A320/A321...

Rgds
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 2894
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:30 am

strfyr51 wrote:
PacoMartin wrote:
keesje wrote:
Analyst and Airbus foresee the A321versions matching A320 deliveries in the not to distant future. https://leehamnews.com/2019/09/12/a321-accounts-for-50-of-future-deliveries-few-production-gaps/

That article states: A321 long-term future depends on Boeing’s decision over the New Midmarket Airplane.


No the New Boeing has nothing to do with the A321 Except in Airbus's eyes. The 797 will be it's OWN airplane with it's OWN mission.
Airbus can choose tp copy it or not but I seriously doubt it will make the airplane any Less viable except to the airlines that say Where've you Been?? Been waitin' for you!!
And that's about it!! Airbus will freak out and come up with some back burner kind of airplane Just like they did for the B787 with the A350 and then decided to pit the A350 against the 777 since the 787 took off so well after they got around to building it themselves. All the 787's problems were self inflicted By Boeing On Boeing. Not a damn problem was caused by Airbus or the A350. Not even the Batteries which Airbus wound up after Boeing found the Fix...


WOW! at least there's lots of salt to go with the chip on your shoulder. You also seem to know what the 797 mission is, please enlighten us.

From airbus perspective it would make sense to simplify the production and get more out the door easier.
From the airlines perspective (those who will be buying it so will have influence on airbus' decision) the answer would have to be a big non committal "it depends".
I think the only scenario(s) that that you really care about having the production simplified is if your fleet has aircraft to the current A321CEO/NEO/LR standard and you will be receiving NEO/LR to the XLR standard and this could hamper with spares and maintenance activities. If you are planning on receiving XLRs anyway it matters very little as the decision on multiple standards will have already been made. I think the operational differences between the standards in the day to day sense will be minimal (fuel burn, flexibility etc).

I would expect airbus to standardise.

Fred
Image
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:17 pm

JonesNL wrote:
They are doing really well, but there is room for improvement...


Could you point out some major ( or smaller ) inefficiencies ?

Any low hanging "duh, simple .. " fruit?
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:29 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
That article states: A321 long-term future depends on Boeing’s decision over the New Midmarket Airplane.


No the New Boeing has nothing to do with the A321 Except in Airbus's eyes. The 797 will be it's OWN airplane with it's OWN mission.
Airbus can choose tp copy ...


copy: like Airbus did with the A330 from the 787 ( still remember John Leahy: "Chineese Copy" :-))))

As long as the design missions overlap ( and they do ) for any new type, be that from A or B dependencies exists.
Murphy is an optimist
 
FatCat
Posts: 962
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:02 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:35 pm

WIederling wrote:
copy: like Airbus did with the A330 from the 787 (


Something's not sounding right in this statement: wasn't the A330 launched way before the B787?
Aeroplane flies high
Turns left, looks right
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8521
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:37 pm

I think the talk here is about many versions, when in reality there will be only two versions left. The A321neo ACF/LR and the A321neoXLR, the A321ceo and the A321neo standard are on the way out.

Than we will have the A321neo ACF that will become a LR only with 3 ACT and the A321XLR with more tankage, higher MTOW and changed flaps.

As the A321neo ACF has a slightly lower MEW than the A321neo with the four doors on each side, it can also be the light version with a lower "paper" MTOW.

I assume that with time the standard A321 flaps will disappear and the A321neo AFC will get the same flaps as the A321neoXLR.
Last edited by mjoelnir on Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
United857
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:37 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:49 pm

All Airbus Cabin Flex A321neos (denoted by A321neo-2**NX instead of A321neo-2**N) have the MTOW 97t so in terms of structure the A321LR is already the base variant. The only difference is the additional plumbing for the 3rd ACT on the LR (the normal A321neo can only go up to 2 ACTs).

Since Airbus plans to standardize on the cabin flex door arrangement in 2020 (https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... o-acf.html), the 97t LR structure will become standard.
A319 A320 A321 A333 A343 A346 A388 B712 B733 B737 B738 B739 B744 B748 B752 B764 B772 B77L B77W B788 CRJ2 E145 E17S E190 MD88 MD90
AA AC B6 CA CX CZ DL EK FM HU JL KA LH LX MU NH TK UA US
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:52 pm

United857 wrote:
All Airbus Cabin Flex A321neos (denoted by A321neo-2**NX instead of A321neo-2**N) have the MTOW 97t so in terms of structure the A321LR is already the base variant. The only difference is the additional plumbing for the 3rd ACT on the LR (the normal A321neo can only go up to 2 ACTs).

Since Airbus plans to standardize on the cabin flex door arrangement in 2020 (https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... o-acf.html), the 97t LR structure will become standard.


There never was a limit to ACT installations ( except via available hold space.)
( IMU you can get an A(CJ)319 with six ACT's if you are so inclined :-)
Only that did not make sense before the LR('s MTOW markup).
Not enough MTOW for to add 3 ACT's worth of extra fuel and keep a reasonable payload available.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
DLHAM
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 1:10 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:44 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
... and is there really any need for the photos? Doesn't really tell us anything and clogs the thread.


Thats true but I for myself usually enjoy the photos. Makes the thread a little bit more fun and more pleasing to the eyes.
My Instagram Account: Instagram
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:09 pm

FatCat wrote:
WIederling wrote:
copy: like Airbus did with the A330 from the 787 (


Something's not sounding right in this statement: wasn't the A330 launched way before the B787?

:-) attentive, I see.
Murphy is an optimist
 
astuteman
Posts: 6897
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:32 pm

JonesNL wrote:
astuteman wrote:
JonesNL wrote:

Agreed, the biggest problem in Airbusland is production efficiency. They need increase speed for A32x and A220 lines and make production of A350 cheaper. But to make a multibillion dollar investment in capacity increase with an forecasted recession is not easy bet to make...


It depends.
If its billions on additional facilities, then, perhaps.
If its money spent making the existing infrastructure much more efficient, then that is always going to be a win.

With a 9 year backlog, I would have thought that the A320 line was the safest investment in civil aviation today, to be honest.

Rgds


Money is already being spent on improving existing infrastructure, usually that is standard in manufacturing facilities. In the case of the 32x I would expect the lines are already highly optimized and the next big improvement will only bring 1 or 2 % improvement. They need to produce 25% more planes, which is only feasible with another line. If they do that the backlog will shrink to 6,5 years, which is about the preferable amount according to Airbus(5,5-6 was mentioned in an interview somewhere, sorry don't have the link).

But the billion dollar question is; will there be 750 orders per year to sustain that backlog or will an economic slowdown lead to 400-500 orders per year?


It is probably worth reading Airbus' own commentary on the A320 production process.
There is major work in process aimed at transforming the effectiveness of the final assembly lines

https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-r ... line0.html

The new technologies and processes applied in the new line were designed and implemented in close coordination with employees and following the principle of Design Thinking. This resulted in a modern and much more efficient working environment with an optimised provisioning of all required materials at the work stations within a range of three metres, shorter walking distances and already unpacked components ready to mount. Many of the new technologies and processes will be transferred to other Airbus production lines worldwide.


There is a major re-think of the FAL process in progress.
The advent of a lot more A321's and the cabinflex layout have caused substantial issues at existing FAL's in the effort to grow output.

I don't think 750 planes per year needs another FAL.
At c. 11.5 working months per year, the rate 65 proposed in 2022 will give them that.

https://airlinerwatch.com/airbus-to-inc ... t-in-2022/

But they do need to grow efficiency.

With nearly 6 000 A32x's in backlog, including CEO's, 750 per year from more efficient use of facilities that already exist doesn't look remotely risky.
Hitting 750 by 2022 will still take a full 8 years (till Q3 2027) to discharge just the existing orders, and I don't for one second believe there will be no more A320 orders
As far as the investment is concerned, the FAL's are already there.
The efficiency increases will pay for themselves in more planes produced for less cost.

I think Airbus know what they are doing :)

Rgds
 
Sokes
Posts: 239
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:59 pm

"Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black."
Henry Ford

Should Airbus also introduce only one paint scheme for the A321?
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 13178
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Mon Sep 16, 2019 11:53 am

At the launch Airbus communicated:

In particular, the new optimised RCT holds more fuel than several optional Additional Centre Tanks (ACTs) did previously, while taking up less space in the cargo hold – thus freeing-up underfloor volume for additional cargo and baggage on long range routes.


Loosing luggage cargo space wouldn't be much of a disadvantage of standarizing on the XLR configuration. I never hear complains on A321 cargo capability / space, e.g. compared to similar aircraft, contrary. An XLR bumps cargo capacity by 3-4t's compared to an LR, and more versus an A321NEO.

Image

The big question would be, how significant would be additional empty weight and associated costs. The landing gear etc. would be beefed up (200kg?) the flaps sytem would made lighter (100kg)? TheCRT tank weighs more, specially if you never needed to use ACT's. But how much?

About selling XLR capability for a premium, that would still happen. If you need a MTOW of 95t and 28k lbs engines, you pay the rate for that. If the aircraft gets a new role (re leased, sold) and needs more capability, a MTOW 101t and associated range and 33k lbs engines, the required software changes, engine plugs and maintenance management, administration come at a price to be paid at the moment of change. This rating already happens at the engines.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
OB1504
Posts: 3680
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:13 pm

tommy1808 wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
You forgot the disadvantage of reduced cargo space vis-a-vis the no-ACT variants.


I am not eure there are all too many A321 flying without 1 ACT. Did Airbus even deliver A321-200 w/o ACT post-2002?

Best regards
Thomas


Delta’s newly delivered A321s come to mind. None of them have ACTs.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1158
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:43 pm

Sokes wrote:
"Any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black."
Henry Ford

Should Airbus also introduce only one paint scheme for the A321?


Ah yes. The customer. Old Henry didn't care too much about them since demand was so great for his products. I'm betting that Airbus (and Boeing) care a lot about what the customers want, and more importantly, what they are willing to pay for.

The customers will ultimately decide what versions of any particular type are built. Sometimes, customers send manufacturers on a wild goose chase (A310, B764, etc.). The manufacturers will try to avoid those types of small runs while still responding to customer needs. The answer to the question posed in this thread is TBD, and none of us will be party to those discussions.
 
texl1649
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Should Airbus standarize A321NEO/LR/XLR into a single version.

Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:45 pm

Airbus is pretty nifty in it's optional upgrades/options, here as on the A330 for instance for many years. Lot's of different MTOW's were offered there, and we don't know how the actual real world pricing for those worked out, but I suspect it's roughly analogous to how top trims on cars are massively more profitable for the manufacturers.

Boeing by comparison surely tries to play a similar game, but I don't think they've done it quite as well (making safety features optional for instance).

I don't see any real reason to decrease offerings on the A32x series today, unless it's absolutely needed for a rate increase. As indicated some of their largest users (DL) seem fine without the added $$ options. The opportunity is there for the future, as is the A322 one keesje has posited repeatedly over the years, though I think at this point (given the MAX and LH blocking off the back row on the current A321's), stability would need to be tested/validated further than before.

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