According to https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers ... 84.article ANA has jumped on the A321LR train.

All Nippon Airways (ANA) has placed its first orders for the A321neo Airbus Cabin Flex (ACF) version, which it will take as the A321LR extended range variant. The decision is significant as the airline had previously retained its contract for the original A321neo cabin configuration.

The A321LR order has been placed by parent company ANA Holdings through a swap of two existing A320neo orders. The A321LRs will be delivered in FY 2022 and 2023.

I'm actually surprised, I assumed nobody would order the LR anymore after the XLR was launched. After all, the LR is more compromised than the XLR.

PepeTheFrog wrote:

After all, the LR is more compromised than the XLR.

But it is also cheaper to buy and operate if you don't need all that additional range.

PepeTheFrog wrote:

According to https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers ... 84.article ANA has jumped on the A321LR train.

All Nippon Airways (ANA) has placed its first orders for the A321neo Airbus Cabin Flex (ACF) version, which it will take as the A321LR extended range variant. The decision is significant as the airline had previously retained its contract for the original A321neo cabin configuration.

The A321LR order has been placed by parent company ANA Holdings through a swap of two existing A320neo orders. The A321LRs will be delivered in FY 2022 and 2023.

I'm actually surprised, I assumed nobody would order the LR anymore after the XLR was launched. After all, the LR is more compromised than the XLR.

"Compromised" in what way?

VSMUT wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

After all, the LR is more compromised than the XLR.

But it is also cheaper to buy and operate if you don't need all that additional range.

And more versatile since you can remove the auxiliary tanks whereas the XLR rear fuel compartment is baked in.

A321LR is literally the baseline A321neo now. Essentially any ACF A321neo is an A321LR.

ikolkyo wrote:

A321LR is literally the baseline A321neo now. Essentially any ACF A321neo is an A321LR.

*nods*

I don't think any A321-200neo model has been delivered without at least one ACT installed.

If you need more than one, you order the XLR since the RCT takes up less room than two ACTs and offers more fuel volume.

Pudelhund wrote:

VSMUT wrote:

PepeTheFrog wrote:

After all, the LR is more compromised than the XLR.

But it is also cheaper to buy and operate if you don't need all that additional range.

And more versatile since you can remove the auxiliary tanks whereas the XLR rear fuel compartment is baked in.

I suspect ANA has spoken with Airbus on what their requirements are and decided the LR was enough plane. Also they are to be delivered in 2022 and 2023 which is probably before any XLR slots would be available.

Pretty clear some of these frames will end up at Peach as the order is not from ANA but ANA Holdings and they chose a door configuration allowing up to 240 seats.

ANA Holdings had previously stated they wanted to offer LCC product for broader Asia region and needed something with 6-8 hour range. For a while they spoke about using 767s but more recently their investor presentation have mentioned a narrowbody.

[quote="JohanTally"

I suspect ANA has spoken with Airbus on what their requirements are .[/quote]

You honestly expected them NOT to talk to Airbus AND place an order?

ikolkyo wrote:

A321LR is literally the baseline A321neo now.

and has now long been reflected as such on Airbus' site in terms of technical numbers, if not in name.

edealinfo wrote:

[quote="JohanTally"

I suspect ANA has spoken with Airbus on what their requirements are .

You honestly expected them NOT to talk to Airbus AND place an order?[/quote]

That was sarcasm on my part sorry if you didn't infer it. Obviously ANA and Airbus had deep discussions about what was needed and the original order was modified while probably utilizing the slots ANA already had.

Assuming a 4000nm range, the A321LR can reach destinations NH doesn't serve, like Moscow, northern Australia, secondary destinations in Hawaii, secondary destinations in India, Kazakhstan, and maybe Calgary or Edmonton

Rossiya747 wrote:

Assuming a 4000nm range, the A321LR can reach destinations NH doesn't serve, like Moscow, northern Australia, secondary destinations in Hawaii, secondary destinations in India, Kazakhstan, and maybe Calgary or Edmonton

At 4100nm against headwinds I don’t think the XLR would make Moscow, let alone the LR.

Thread title is wrong, as it actually are A320neo orders they are converting

ANA has so far taken delivery of 11 A321neo with a further 15 on order will they still be recived the standard 4-door configurion? Also since Airbus plan was to switch production to the ACF as the new standard by mid-2020 is it still fizzbale?

Stitch wrote:

ikolkyo wrote:

A321LR is literally the baseline A321neo now. Essentially any ACF A321neo is an A321LR.

I don't think any A321-200neo model has been delivered without at least one ACT installed.

Turkish and British A321neos don't have any installed to my knowledge.

Chaostheory wrote:

Stitch wrote:

ikolkyo wrote:

A321LR is literally the baseline A321neo now. Essentially any ACF A321neo is an A321LR.

I don't think any A321-200neo model has been delivered without at least one ACT installed.

Turkish and British A321neos don't have any installed to my knowledge.

Definitely Turkish. They're operating their A21Ns at 89t, while I believe British Airways is at least at 93t.

Now, as for the A321LR, that could be a desire to operate a denser configuration at the same range as the original A321neo order. Probably means Peach Aviation in a configuration of around 228 seats. Could this also be for ANA proper, pushing some older A320s and A321s to Air Do? to replace their 763s and 73Gs?

Someone83 wrote:

Thread title is wrong, as it actually are A320neo orders they are converting

Yes, it is its A320Neo orders that have been upscaled - here is the Flightglobal story:

https://www.flightglobal.com/ana-a321lr ... 84.article

I am confused. I thought the A321NEO was the A321LR. And the A321XLR was just an A321LR with extra fuel tanks.

Mayday111 wrote:

I am confused. I thought the A321NEO was the A321LR. And the A321XLR was just an A321LR with extra fuel tanks.

No the LR was the first extended range version of the NEO. It has a slightly higher MTOW and the extra tanks. The XLR has an additional MTOW bump compared to the LR, and a new permanent tank inside the hold that offers more fuel volume. You don't buy an XLR unless you need the range. The LR can have the tanks removed and basically be a standard NEO.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Chaostheory wrote:

Stitch wrote:

I don't think any A321-200neo model has been delivered without at least one ACT installed.

Turkish and British A321neos don't have any installed to my knowledge.

Definitely Turkish. They're operating their A21Ns at 89t, while I believe British Airways is at least at 93t.

easyJet's A321NEOs are the baseline model certified at 89t MTOW.

I referenced a few of the BA models via G-INFO and they also are listed as 89t variants.

Is YYC too far for the A321LR from NRT?

YYZORD wrote:

Is YYC too far for the A321LR from NRT?

It's 4300NM, or about a 10 hours flight. That would be a hell of a long flight, even for an XLR. Would have to be severely payload restricted. Not to mention Calgary isn't exactly an in vogue destination.

ANA is actually converting A320neo to A321LR. It would be nice to correct thread title.

Those two A321LR will be the first ACF that ANA orders, their other A321neo are the normal four door type.

mjoelnir wrote:

ANA is actually converting A320neo to A321LR. It would be nice to correct thread title.

Those two A321LR will be the first ACF that ANA orders, their other A321neo are the normal four door type.

So the new aircraft will be able to hold 20 more people than the current A321neos they have due to ACF, and will be able to make room for more pax bags and/or cargo because RCT enables two ACT storage in one ACT space.

It seems they could go for increased pax/payload over similar range, or keep pax count constant and take the additional range.

Unfortunately the article gives no clues as to which is desired.

PlymSpotter wrote:

easyJet's A321NEOs are the baseline model certified at 89t MTOW.

That shows what a capable aircraft the A321NEO is... easyJet flies the A321NEO on nearly six-hour/4,000km flights (HRG-LGW) with 235 pax and their baggage.
No wonder then the LR and XLR can fly pretty far with higher MTOW and fewer passengers/baggage.

CRJ900 wrote:

PlymSpotter wrote:

easyJet's A321NEOs are the baseline model certified at 89t MTOW.

That shows what a capable aircraft the A321NEO is... easyJet flies the A321NEO on nearly six-hour/4,000km flights (HRG-LGW) with 235 pax and their baggage.
No wonder then the LR and XLR can fly pretty far with higher MTOW and fewer passengers/baggage.

The A321neo should be ok for long flights like what you mentioned. When I flew LGW-HRG it was in an A320ceo and it was fine.

Hi Guys, do please forgive my ignorance...I'm getting slightly confused now between variants...

1) I (wrongly?) assumed that ALL 321neo's now came ONLY with three doors, and the 4-door configuration was no longer available - is that so?
2) Am I wrong in assuming that the -ceo321 was never available with the 3-door option?
3) Do ALL 3-door 321s also have the flexi-space toilets 'squeezed in the tailcone', or is this just an option?

Thanks for clarifying....

oldannyboy wrote:

Hi Guys, do please forgive my ignorance...I'm getting slightly confused now between variants...

1) I (wrongly?) assumed that ALL 321neo's now came ONLY with three doors, and the 4-door configuration was no longer available - is that so?
2) Am I wrong in assuming that the -ceo321 was never available with the 3-door option?
3) Do ALL 3-door 321s also have the flexi-space toilets 'squeezed in the tailcone', or is this just an option?

Thanks for clarifying....

From my understanding:

1) The standard now for the A321NEO is the Airbus Cabin Flex configuration (three doors) but if a client wants the 4 doors Airbus should be able to do it for a price.
2) No CEO has this configuration.
3) The toilets location is related with the cabin configuration and total seating.

AECM wrote:

oldannyboy wrote:

Hi Guys, do please forgive my ignorance...I'm getting slightly confused now between variants...

1) I (wrongly?) assumed that ALL 321neo's now came ONLY with three doors, and the 4-door configuration was no longer available - is that so?
2) Am I wrong in assuming that the -ceo321 was never available with the 3-door option?
3) Do ALL 3-door 321s also have the flexi-space toilets 'squeezed in the tailcone', or is this just an option?

Thanks for clarifying....

From my understanding:

1) The standard now for the A321NEO is the Airbus Cabin Flex configuration (three doors) but if a client wants the 4 doors Airbus should be able to do it for a price.
2) No CEO has this configuration.
3) The toilets location is related with the cabin configuration and total seating.

Everything you state is correct I just want to add the old 4 door configuration is only available on the base A321neo mode (ie the 89t MTOW). Higher MTOW requires the ACF.

I flew for the first time on an A321neo with the ACF, I was surprised by how sprightly it was on departure for a 6 hour flight (KIX-SGN). Though I'm not enamoured with the experience of being on it, even with the extra legroom I had (har har), it's the future of flying, and 6+hr flights are already the norm. I do find it a little strange that NH would go for the LR rather than XLR, but we'll see where they go in due course!

YYZORD wrote:

Is YYC too far for the A321LR from NRT?

The XLR has a rang eof 4700 nm with 200 pax so it should be doable...demand is another story.

MrHMSH wrote:

I flew for the first time on an A321neo with the ACF, I was surprised by how sprightly it was on departure for a 6 hour flight (KIX-SGN). Though I'm not enamoured with the experience of being on it, even with the extra legroom I had (har har), it's the future of flying, and 6+hr flights are already the norm. I do find it a little strange that NH would go for the LR rather than XLR, but we'll see where they go in due course!

These planes will be delivered in 2022 and 2023. Can’t get XLRs then.