Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 8:16 am

AngMoh wrote:
BasilFawlty wrote:
They publish a lot of rubbish, but their financial articles are usually quite good actually, like this one. I think it's a great idea, a combination of 320neo/321neo to replace the whole 737NG fleet. All -700's, -900's, and the older -800's can go to the scrapper, while the newer -800's can go to Transavia.


Agree. They are a junk paper but in this kind of stuff they tend to be correct. And the Financieel Dagblad which is solid is confident enough to quote them. The FD specifically refers to procurement of A321 and not generic A320 series.

https://fd.nl/ondernemen/1334886/klm-ov ... ese-vloot#

And you can see 737-700 already replaced by E195. So there is just -800 and -900 to replace and for the -900 the A321 is a much better option. Note that KLM has -900 and not -900ER.

Only because of (slightly) better payload capability on the A321? Or are there other reasons? I don’t think there are a lot of differences apart from payload capability between the A321neo and the MAX 10.
KJFK - EGLL:

Concorde: 2 hours, 52 minutes, and 59 seconds

Boeing 747: 4 hours and 56 minutes
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9396
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 10:09 am

FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
AngMoh wrote:
BasilFawlty wrote:
They publish a lot of rubbish, but their financial articles are usually quite good actually, like this one. I think it's a great idea, a combination of 320neo/321neo to replace the whole 737NG fleet. All -700's, -900's, and the older -800's can go to the scrapper, while the newer -800's can go to Transavia.


Agree. They are a junk paper but in this kind of stuff they tend to be correct. And the Financieel Dagblad which is solid is confident enough to quote them. The FD specifically refers to procurement of A321 and not generic A320 series.

https://fd.nl/ondernemen/1334886/klm-ov ... ese-vloot#

And you can see 737-700 already replaced by E195. So there is just -800 and -900 to replace and for the -900 the A321 is a much better option. Note that KLM has -900 and not -900ER.

Only because of (slightly) better payload capability on the A321? Or are there other reasons? I don’t think there are a lot of differences apart from payload capability between the A321neo and the MAX 10.


Compared with the 737-9 or even the 737-10, the A321 is bigger, has more range and moves a higher payload, all while having superior runway performance. Shorter take off run and lower take off and landing speeds.
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 10:26 am

mjoelnir wrote:
FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
AngMoh wrote:

Agree. They are a junk paper but in this kind of stuff they tend to be correct. And the Financieel Dagblad which is solid is confident enough to quote them. The FD specifically refers to procurement of A321 and not generic A320 series.

https://fd.nl/ondernemen/1334886/klm-ov ... ese-vloot#

And you can see 737-700 already replaced by E195. So there is just -800 and -900 to replace and for the -900 the A321 is a much better option. Note that KLM has -900 and not -900ER.

Only because of (slightly) better payload capability on the A321? Or are there other reasons? I don’t think there are a lot of differences apart from payload capability between the A321neo and the MAX 10.


Compared with the 737-9 or even the 737-10, the A321 is bigger, has more range and moves a higher payload, all while having superior runway performance. Shorter take off run and lower take off and landing speeds.

Thanks. I don’t think KLM cares that much about the range, but I do think they really care about the payload and performance.
KJFK - EGLL:

Concorde: 2 hours, 52 minutes, and 59 seconds

Boeing 747: 4 hours and 56 minutes
 
FlyingHollander
Posts: 429
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:50 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 10:58 am

ewt340 wrote:
Flanker7 wrote:
Why in the world would they want to fly a NB to their African destination.


Because they terminated some destinations to African cities. Not all destinations across Africa or Asia are big enough to fill B787-9.


Which destinations would those be? The only recent African cuts I can recall are LUN/HRE which is not in NB range and FNA/ROB which was cut due to lack of capacity at AMS. The latter being exactly why KL should use wodebodies wherever possible.
If it ain't Dutch, it ain't much.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14021
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 12:04 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
keesje wrote:
As I said KLM used A310s, 767s and later even A330 for short haul rotations early in the morning, for high demand slots. Later in the morning they were were part of the west bound long haul wave.

https://youtu.be/rfOeFK8gRlc

KLM 737-900 are seatcount restricted (specified with 5 abreast business, coatrooom, catering etc.) And not really usefull for high capacity flights.


If the other posters are correct, those short haul widebody flights are for cargo. The A321XLR is terrible for cargo with the enlarged permanent rear center fuel tank. An A321XLR with low passenger capacity due to premium seats and low cargo capacity due to Enlarged the fuel tanks Does not sound like it will be useful for the KLM short haul network.

AMS is the 4th busiest cargo airport in Europe. KLM has a fleet of combi 747s for high cargo demand. KLM would have to carefully select destinations that dont need cargo capacity.


Wouldn't that be a reason to select the 101t A321XLR over the 737MAX? 737's can't even handle pallets/containers and are restricted to light, bulkloaded items. Standard AKH pallet/containers can do 1000kg each, a few of them for the 2-5 hour flights offers new opportunity for KLM, like partners do. https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/18761570934/. 747Combi's are nearly all gone.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
alyusuph
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:38 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 12:15 pm

Boeing really messed up because of the pursuit of short term gains. I hope the lessons have been learnt so that they can now build a formidable product which they can sell and keep their customers for a loooong (is there such an English word?) time in the future
I am not an Airbus or Boeing fan, just an aircraft fan
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 12:20 pm

alyusuph wrote:
Boeing really messed up because of the pursuit of short term gains. I hope the lessons have been learnt so that they can now build a formidable product which they can sell and keep their customers for a loooong (is there such an English word?) time in the future

By the time that would be done we would most likely be in the 2030s.
KJFK - EGLL:

Concorde: 2 hours, 52 minutes, and 59 seconds

Boeing 747: 4 hours and 56 minutes
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:04 pm

keesje wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
keesje wrote:
As I said KLM used A310s, 767s and later even A330 for short haul rotations early in the morning, for high demand slots. Later in the morning they were were part of the west bound long haul wave.

https://youtu.be/rfOeFK8gRlc

KLM 737-900 are seatcount restricted (specified with 5 abreast business, coatrooom, catering etc.) And not really usefull for high capacity flights.


If the other posters are correct, those short haul widebody flights are for cargo. The A321XLR is terrible for cargo with the enlarged permanent rear center fuel tank. An A321XLR with low passenger capacity due to premium seats and low cargo capacity due to Enlarged the fuel tanks Does not sound like it will be useful for the KLM short haul network.

AMS is the 4th busiest cargo airport in Europe. KLM has a fleet of combi 747s for high cargo demand. KLM would have to carefully select destinations that dont need cargo capacity.


Wouldn't that be a reason to select the 101t A321XLR over the 737MAX? 737's can't even handle pallets/containers and are restricted to light, bulkloaded items. Standard AKH pallet/containers can do 1000kg each, a few of them for the 2-5 hour flights offers new opportunity for KLM, like partners do. https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/18761570934/. 747Combi's are nearly all gone.


The 737 can carry cargo containers. The 737-10 also has more useable cargo volume than the A321XLR. If KLM wants to carry more regional cargo, the 737 may be the better choice. More fits in when bulk loading than AKH containers

Image

https://www.genewsroom.com/press-releas ... -converted
 
ewt340
Posts: 1275
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:29 pm

FlyingHollander wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
Flanker7 wrote:
Why in the world would they want to fly a NB to their African destination.


Because they terminated some destinations to African cities. Not all destinations across Africa or Asia are big enough to fill B787-9.


Which destinations would those be? The only recent African cuts I can recall are LUN/HRE which is not in NB range and FNA/ROB which was cut due to lack of capacity at AMS. The latter being exactly why KL should use wodebodies wherever possible.


Addis Ababa, Abidjan, Abuja, Almaty, Basseterre, Brazzaville, Freetown, Lomé, Nur-Sultan, Monrovia. All of these african and asian destinations are terminated.

The range between these cities and amsterdam are around the ~3,000nmi mark. Which is too small for their current B737-700/-800. Let alone cargo capacity.
A321XLR with its 4,700nmi range (probably 3,500 nmi - 4,000nmi usable range) would easily reach these terminated destinations all year round with decent amount of cargo and passengers.
Sure they would lose one or two LD3-45 container. But it's not gonna make it unprofitable.

And we haven't talk about potential expansion to some destinations across the continents. TATL flights, the Middle East, India, etc.

As for slots restrictions. I'm pretty sure they are choosing A321neo for that reason. Instead of using couple of B737-700 and B737-800 on short regional routes, they could just use A321neo and decrease some frequency. Also, look at their order book for widebodies aircraft. They didn't order much. Only 2 B777-300ER and 10 B787-10 left. Not all routes could support widebodies.
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 2:52 pm

ewt340 wrote:
As for slots restrictions. I'm pretty sure they are choosing A321neo for that reason. Instead of using couple of B737-700 and B737-800 on short regional routes, they could just use A321neo and decrease some frequency. Also, look at their order book for widebodies aircraft. They didn't order much. Only 2 B777-300ER and 10 B787-10 left. Not all routes could support widebodies.

Why would they want to decrease some frequency? I’m pretty sure business travellers wouldn't like it, and I'm also pretty sure holidaymakers wouldn't like it either.
KJFK - EGLL:

Concorde: 2 hours, 52 minutes, and 59 seconds

Boeing 747: 4 hours and 56 minutes
 
User avatar
PHBVF
Posts: 184
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 4:03 pm

XLR is not relevant with current slot restrictions at Amsterdam. Simple as that.
Sure would be an interesting opportunity if (when?) things clear up, but for the time being: no.
Quite frankly given the Dutch governments current state with Nitrogen, CO2 and noise issues I think KL would much rather use their slots to fill a 300-400 seat 777/787 on a lucrative long haul route where they can carry significant cargo...

That's not to say KL isn't seriously looking at the NEO. These same slot restrictions give the A321NEO an edge over the 737-10.

However I do not believe KL will order NEO's because:
- Historic preferences have shown otherwise
- Smith's grand plan to simplify fleets only appears to be on a per airline basis (otherwise either KL would've ditched the 787 or AF the A350)
- Transavia management has already announced they want the MAX in 2021. Transavia and KLM do have an aircraft interchange (as opposed to AF and KL), so it would make sense to continue this with the MAX.
- On the subject of cockpit commonality: training costs may be covered by either manufacturer, however there is also such a thing as training capacity and slack needed with crew scheduling. That may prove to be prohibitive.
- From what I gather the MAX/NEO are close performance wise (though definitely not equal). Definitely in the sub 1800nm sector KLM is using their NG fleet in. Pricing (both upfront and for support will be key). Quite frankly I'm sure Boeing is willing to suffer more than Airbus given what's at stake: getting a foothold with the only legacy carrier in Europe not having chosen the NEO for their shorthaul fleet and getting an airline with a great safety track record on board with the MAX again after the debacle of the past year....
- The MAX and NEO are likely the last generation before Airbus will go to an A360 and Boeing to a 797. Retraining pilots to the NEO and within two decades to another type, while they could do with only one minor and less invasive retraining to the MAX seems like a lot of effort for little gain.
- Given that 17 of the -800's (and less relevantly all 16 -700's) are under fifteen years old I would not be surprised to see KL operating a mixed fleet of MAX's and NG's. Perhaps this is one of the larger advantages of the MAX over the NEO for KL. There is no rush to replace all aircraft within a short timeframe and the NG's would be able to sit out their remaining life cycle.

Despite the points made I would still not count the NEO out. I don't think AFKL management is going to order the MAX before production is resumed and who knows when that may happen....
Licensed 777/787 driver
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 546
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 4:19 pm

ewt340 wrote:

Addis Ababa, Abidjan, Abuja, Almaty, Basseterre, Brazzaville, Freetown, Lomé, Nur-Sultan, Monrovia. All of these african and asian destinations are terminated.

The range between these cities and amsterdam are around the ~3,000nmi mark. Which is too small for their current B737-700/-800. Let alone cargo capacity.
A321XLR with its 4,700nmi range (probably 3,500 nmi - 4,000nmi usable range) would easily reach these terminated destinations all year round with decent amount of cargo and passengers.
Sure they would lose one or two LD3-45 container. But it's not gonna make it unprofitable. .


The A321XLR Doesn’t have useable cargo volume. Those African destinations tend to Have cargo demand. Without it would the route be profitable with passenger demand alone?
 
LJ
Posts: 5356
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 4:35 pm

keesje wrote:
As I said KLM used A310s, 767s and later even A330 for short haul rotations early in the morning, for high demand slots. Later in the morning they were were part of the west bound long haul wave.

https://youtu.be/rfOeFK8gRlc

KLM 737-900 are seatcount restricted (specified with 5 abreast business, coatrooom, catering etc.) And not really usefull for high capacity flights.


Different times. The frequency and options (especially in case of LHR) for travellers have increased dramatically. Hence why you don't see the 739 that often at LHR anymore (only KL1007 is a frequent 739). MAD gets them also on a regular basis (KL1703 and KL1705) as does Stockholm (usually KL1115). All the other European flights cabn easily be covered with 738s ERJs and 73Gs and can get a 739 when it's needed. Therefore you don't need an A321 for shorthaul as the 739s are just fine for this purpose.
 
Swiss03
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 2:50 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 4:41 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:

Addis Ababa, Abidjan, Abuja, Almaty, Basseterre, Brazzaville, Freetown, Lomé, Nur-Sultan, Monrovia. All of these african and asian destinations are terminated.

The range between these cities and amsterdam are around the ~3,000nmi mark. Which is too small for their current B737-700/-800. Let alone cargo capacity.
A321XLR with its 4,700nmi range (probably 3,500 nmi - 4,000nmi usable range) would easily reach these terminated destinations all year round with decent amount of cargo and passengers.
Sure they would lose one or two LD3-45 container. But it's not gonna make it unprofitable. .


The A321XLR Doesn’t have useable cargo volume. Those African destinations tend to Have cargo demand. Without it would the route be profitable with passenger demand alone?


Furthermore, African passengers tend to carry 2+ check in suitcases that a A321 might no be able to carry
As an example TK had to upgauge their Nigeria routes to A330 from 739 because the cargo hold was not big enough for suitcases alone, nevermind cargo
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 546
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 5:02 pm

Swiss03 wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:

Addis Ababa, Abidjan, Abuja, Almaty, Basseterre, Brazzaville, Freetown, Lomé, Nur-Sultan, Monrovia. All of these african and asian destinations are terminated.

The range between these cities and amsterdam are around the ~3,000nmi mark. Which is too small for their current B737-700/-800. Let alone cargo capacity.
A321XLR with its 4,700nmi range (probably 3,500 nmi - 4,000nmi usable range) would easily reach these terminated destinations all year round with decent amount of cargo and passengers.
Sure they would lose one or two LD3-45 container. But it's not gonna make it unprofitable. .


The A321XLR Doesn’t have useable cargo volume. Those African destinations tend to Have cargo demand. Without it would the route be profitable with passenger demand alone?


Furthermore, African passengers tend to carry 2+ check in suitcases that a A321 might no be able to carry
As an example TK had to upgauge their Nigeria routes to A330 from 739 because the cargo hold was not big enough for suitcases alone, nevermind cargo


We know 737NGs Can fly to west Africa since airlines like TUI and Transavia fly to cities like Dakar. Neither KLM nor other network European airlines have chosen to fly narrowbodies to west Africa. They’ve all chosen to fly widebodies on the 5-6 hour sectors. Is cargo the reason? If so, I don’t see KLM purchasing A321XlRs for Africa.
 
Flanker7
Posts: 486
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:38 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 5:37 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Swiss03 wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:

The A321XLR Doesn’t have useable cargo volume. Those African destinations tend to Have cargo demand. Without it would the route be profitable with passenger demand alone?


Furthermore, African passengers tend to carry 2+ check in suitcases that a A321 might no be able to carry
As an example TK had to upgauge their Nigeria routes to A330 from 739 because the cargo hold was not big enough for suitcases alone, nevermind cargo


We know 737NGs Can fly to west Africa since airlines like TUI and Transavia fly to cities like Dakar. Neither KLM nor other network European airlines have chosen to fly narrowbodies to west Africa. They’ve all chosen to fly widebodies on the 5-6 hour sectors. Is cargo the reason? If so, I don’t see KLM purchasing A321XlRs for Africa.


As said before, cargo big factor luggage big factor. The airlines you mention are predominantly charter flight with Holliday makers and not your transfer pax with humongous amounts of baggage.
Flying blue only if possible
 
LJ
Posts: 5356
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:03 pm

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
We know 737NGs Can fly to west Africa since airlines like TUI and Transavia fly to cities like Dakar. Neither KLM nor other network European airlines have chosen to fly narrowbodies to west Africa. They’ve all chosen to fly widebodies on the 5-6 hour sectors. Is cargo the reason? If so, I don’t see KLM purchasing A321XlRs for Africa.


You cannot compare a chater airline with KLM. A reasonable comparison would be AF or SN. Both fly widebodies to West-Africa. Even without the cargo argument, KLM probably wants to sell business class tickets. Given their NGs do not have business class and installing a business class in an A321XLR would seriously impact the number of seats, this is another reason why an A321XLR on West-Africa in something which will remain a dream for some. Also note that it doesn't make any sense for KLM to fly to most of the destinations in West Africa as AF is already strong in this area. AF flies to all destinations previously served by KLM (OK with the exception of Kano) and thus CDG is the hub for this part of the world (with the exception of ACC and LOS, but that's more due to economic and /or historical ties). Other destinations are either not interesting or KLM doesn't even have any traffic rights to them.

KLM needs the cargo space for the destinations it serves in Eastern Africa. Other destinations do not make much sense for KLM.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3616
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:27 pm

ewt340 wrote:
FlyingHollander wrote:
ewt340 wrote:

Because they terminated some destinations to African cities. Not all destinations across Africa or Asia are big enough to fill B787-9.


Which destinations would those be? The only recent African cuts I can recall are LUN/HRE which is not in NB range and FNA/ROB which was cut due to lack of capacity at AMS. The latter being exactly why KL should use wodebodies wherever possible.


Addis Ababa, Abidjan, Abuja, Almaty, Basseterre, Brazzaville, Freetown, Lomé, Nur-Sultan, Monrovia. All of these african and asian destinations are terminated.

The range between these cities and amsterdam are around the ~3,000nmi mark. Which is too small for their current B737-700/-800. Let alone cargo capacity.
A321XLR with its 4,700nmi range (probably 3,500 nmi - 4,000nmi usable range) would easily reach these terminated destinations all year round with decent amount of cargo and passengers.
Sure they would lose one or two LD3-45 container. But it's not gonna make it unprofitable.

And we haven't talk about potential expansion to some destinations across the continents. TATL flights, the Middle East, India, etc.

As for slots restrictions. I'm pretty sure they are choosing A321neo for that reason. Instead of using couple of B737-700 and B737-800 on short regional routes, they could just use A321neo and decrease some frequency. Also, look at their order book for widebodies aircraft. They didn't order much. Only 2 B777-300ER and 10 B787-10 left. Not all routes could support widebodies.


ADD requires a wide-body because of its elevation. The others could be handled through CDG, except maybe TSE, as west Africa has French links.
 
User avatar
FlyRow
Posts: 854
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 10:05 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:46 pm

Are we seeking problems for a A321 as a solution, or is the A321 the solution to KLM's problems?

I think a lot of us are doing the first, while it is the second which is KLM's deciding factor. Nothing new has been said again, we are just chasing possible problems to which a A321 could be the solution.

It's a great aircraft, but that doesn't mean it's for every airliner.
F70-F100-RJ85-RJ70-E190-319-320-321-733-734-735-737-738-752-753-763-764-772-744-380
 
majano
Posts: 277
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:45 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 7:03 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
keesje wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:

If the other posters are correct, those short haul widebody flights are for cargo. The A321XLR is terrible for cargo with the enlarged permanent rear center fuel tank. An A321XLR with low passenger capacity due to premium seats and low cargo capacity due to Enlarged the fuel tanks Does not sound like it will be useful for the KLM short haul network.

AMS is the 4th busiest cargo airport in Europe. KLM has a fleet of combi 747s for high cargo demand. KLM would have to carefully select destinations that dont need cargo capacity.


Wouldn't that be a reason to select the 101t A321XLR over the 737MAX? 737's can't even handle pallets/containers and are restricted to light, bulkloaded items. Standard AKH pallet/containers can do 1000kg each, a few of them for the 2-5 hour flights offers new opportunity for KLM, like partners do. https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/18761570934/. 747Combi's are nearly all gone.


The 737 can carry cargo containers. The 737-10 also has more useable cargo volume than the A321XLR. If KLM wants to carry more regional cargo, the 737 may be the better choice. More fits in when bulk loading than AKH containers

Image

https://www.genewsroom.com/press-releas ... -converted

This is a solution tailored for dedicated cargo operators. It is expensive and cumbersome. It has been on offer for greater than 2 years and I am yet to learn of any pax operator that has installed it.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14021
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 7:32 pm

majano wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
keesje wrote:

Wouldn't that be a reason to select the 101t A321XLR over the 737MAX? 737's can't even handle pallets/containers and are restricted to light, bulkloaded items. Standard AKH pallet/containers can do 1000kg each, a few of them for the 2-5 hour flights offers new opportunity for KLM, like partners do. https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/18761570934/. 747Combi's are nearly all gone.


The 737 can carry cargo containers. The 737-10 also has more useable cargo volume than the A321XLR. If KLM wants to carry more regional cargo, the 737 may be the better choice. More fits in when bulk loading than AKH containers

Image

https://www.genewsroom.com/press-releas ... -converted

This is a solution tailored for dedicated cargo operators. It is expensive and cumbersome. It has been on offer for greater than 2 years and I am yet to learn of any pax operator that has installed it.


Since when does reality any place here? :wink2:

KLM having the option between NEO and MAX
selecting the MAX.

Because we can come up with some (farfetched) disadvantages. Rich
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 7:35 pm

FlyRow wrote:
Are we seeking problems for a A321 as a solution, or is the A321 the solution to KLM's problems?

I think a lot of us are doing the first, while it is the second which is KLM's deciding factor.

I totally agree. So why aren’t we talking about the second? ;)

In my opinion both the A321neo and 737 MAX 10 are KLM 737NG replacement candidates.

keesje wrote:
KLM having the option between NEO and MAX selecting the MAX.

So if I understand your post correctly you think KLM will select the MAX? I’m just curious :)
Last edited by FlyingBlueKLM on Tue Mar 10, 2020 7:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
KJFK - EGLL:

Concorde: 2 hours, 52 minutes, and 59 seconds

Boeing 747: 4 hours and 56 minutes
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 11907
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 7:42 pm

FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
FlyRow wrote:
Are we seeking problems for a A321 as a solution, or is the A321 the solution to KLM's problems?

I think a lot of us are doing the first, while it is the second which is KLM's deciding factor.

I totally agree. So why aren’t we talking about the second? ;)

In my opinion both the A321neo and 737 MAX 10 are KLM 737NG replacement candidates.


Still, put my money on the MAX10 and some MAX8. Somehow I can't see the A321NEO in KLM colours, although it would actually be my favourite.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 4302
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Tue Mar 10, 2020 9:25 pm

Please keep the thread on topic. This thread is not about the 737. Please also avoid terms like "fanboys" — it isn't necessary or relevant to the discussion.

✈️ atcsundevil
 
ewt340
Posts: 1275
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Wed Mar 11, 2020 1:28 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
FlyingHollander wrote:

Which destinations would those be? The only recent African cuts I can recall are LUN/HRE which is not in NB range and FNA/ROB which was cut due to lack of capacity at AMS. The latter being exactly why KL should use wodebodies wherever possible.


Addis Ababa, Abidjan, Abuja, Almaty, Basseterre, Brazzaville, Freetown, Lomé, Nur-Sultan, Monrovia. All of these african and asian destinations are terminated.

The range between these cities and amsterdam are around the ~3,000nmi mark. Which is too small for their current B737-700/-800. Let alone cargo capacity.
A321XLR with its 4,700nmi range (probably 3,500 nmi - 4,000nmi usable range) would easily reach these terminated destinations all year round with decent amount of cargo and passengers.
Sure they would lose one or two LD3-45 container. But it's not gonna make it unprofitable.

And we haven't talk about potential expansion to some destinations across the continents. TATL flights, the Middle East, India, etc.

As for slots restrictions. I'm pretty sure they are choosing A321neo for that reason. Instead of using couple of B737-700 and B737-800 on short regional routes, they could just use A321neo and decrease some frequency. Also, look at their order book for widebodies aircraft. They didn't order much. Only 2 B777-300ER and 10 B787-10 left. Not all routes could support widebodies.


ADD requires a wide-body because of its elevation. The others could be handled through CDG, except maybe TSE, as west Africa has French links.


I'm not sure expansion through CDG would be counted as a growth for KLM. While they have partnership with each other, I'm sure there are enough demand for direct flights from and to Amsterdam.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1275
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Wed Mar 11, 2020 1:33 pm

Also, as mentioned before by some members, the slots restrictions in AMS would be one of the deciding factor for them. Then surely A321neo would pop up in their mind first for such missions.

Besides, maybe the group are looking to streamline their regional operations by only using A320neo family. I mean, it's a bit inefficient for both airlines to have soo much different types of aircraft.
 
User avatar
Momo1435
Posts: 1165
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:33 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Wed Mar 11, 2020 1:40 pm

The problem in this discussion is that the A321neo is mixed up with the A321XLR.

As a replacement of the European fleet the A321neo is a likely option. An A321XLR order for long haul flights is less likely due to the slot restrictions at AMS.

For the European fleet it's between the A321neo and the MAX. The A321XLR would compete with the widebody fleet.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9396
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Wed Mar 11, 2020 3:30 pm

Momo1435 wrote:
The problem in this discussion is that the A321neo is mixed up with the A321XLR.

As a replacement of the European fleet the A321neo is a likely option. An A321XLR order for long haul flights is less likely due to the slot restrictions at AMS.

For the European fleet it's between the A321neo and the MAX. The A321XLR would compete with the widebody fleet.


When one talks about the A321neo, one does of course talk about the different versions.

The standard for the A321-2xxAFC is at least one AFC, often two. MTOW between 93t and 97t. When the talk is about leaving an ACT at home to increase space, the talk is about the additional second ACT. One ACT is standard, as it is also on a 737-9 or 737-10.
The A321-2xxLR offers up to three ACT and a MTOW of 97t.
The A3212xxXLR offers fuel volume equal to 4 ACT while taking up space for 2 ACT (compared to the ACF and LR)

The standard four door A321neo will soon drop out and there will be two main versions on offer, the AFC with 1, 2 or 3 ACT and the XLR with the big central tank and 1 possible ACT.

But the advantages of the new A321neo versions is not only range. You do not have to use the ACTs. With the ACF/LR comes an increased MTOW, 4t more, that can be used for fuel or alternative used for increased payload. The XLR sees an payload increase of 9 t. That again can be used for fuel or payload.

So looking at the ACF or XLR can bring advantages not connected to range. As the additional fuel is stored in the belly, there will be no restriction to replace it by additional payload.
The XLR will have more space for cargo or bags compared to an LR, while carrying either more fuel or more payload.
 
User avatar
Momo1435
Posts: 1165
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:33 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Wed Mar 11, 2020 4:17 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Momo1435 wrote:
The problem in this discussion is that the A321neo is mixed up with the A321XLR.

As a replacement of the European fleet the A321neo is a likely option. An A321XLR order for long haul flights is less likely due to the slot restrictions at AMS.

For the European fleet it's between the A321neo and the MAX. The A321XLR would compete with the widebody fleet.


When one talks about the A321neo, one does of course talk about the different versions.

The standard for the A321-2xxAFC is at least one AFC, often two. MTOW between 93t and 97t. When the talk is about leaving an ACT at home to increase space, the talk is about the additional second ACT. One ACT is standard, as it is also on a 737-9 or 737-10.
The A321-2xxLR offers up to three ACT and a MTOW of 97t.
The A3212xxXLR offers fuel volume equal to 4 ACT while taking up space for 2 ACT (compared to the ACF and LR)

The standard four door A321neo will soon drop out and there will be two main versions on offer, the AFC with 1, 2 or 3 ACT and the XLR with the big central tank and 1 possible ACT.

But the advantages of the new A321neo versions is not only range. You do not have to use the ACTs. With the ACF/LR comes an increased MTOW, 4t more, that can be used for fuel or alternative used for increased payload. The XLR sees an payload increase of 9 t. That again can be used for fuel or payload.

So looking at the ACF or XLR can bring advantages not connected to range. As the additional fuel is stored in the belly, there will be no restriction to replace it by additional payload.
The XLR will have more space for cargo or bags compared to an LR, while carrying either more fuel or more payload.

If KLM orders the A321 it is for the extra capacity, not for the extra range.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14021
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Wed Mar 11, 2020 4:33 pm

I think looking at the airlines' current networks, currrent fleet applications and required aircraft replacements, the A321XLR shouldn't exist.

But it apparently fits a gap that's been there & the airlines pulled their check books.

A lean, standarized long haul NB, with eye-watering cost per unit and low risk, that they didn't have.

Image
https://www.airnerd.co.uk/indigo-partne ... p-airlines

Legacy's didn't take long to smell the coffee and joined the backlog within weeks/months

Image
https://airlinestravel.ro/nl/internatio ... 21xlr.html

and even Boeing seems to have changed course after doing their home work. And AA and United jumped ship.
https://www.investors.com/news/boeing-7 ... 21xlr-jet/
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
marcelh
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Wed Mar 11, 2020 5:00 pm

Momo1435 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Momo1435 wrote:
The problem in this discussion is that the A321neo is mixed up with the A321XLR.

As a replacement of the European fleet the A321neo is a likely option. An A321XLR order for long haul flights is less likely due to the slot restrictions at AMS.

For the European fleet it's between the A321neo and the MAX. The A321XLR would compete with the widebody fleet.


When one talks about the A321neo, one does of course talk about the different versions.

The standard for the A321-2xxAFC is at least one AFC, often two. MTOW between 93t and 97t. When the talk is about leaving an ACT at home to increase space, the talk is about the additional second ACT. One ACT is standard, as it is also on a 737-9 or 737-10.
The A321-2xxLR offers up to three ACT and a MTOW of 97t.
The A3212xxXLR offers fuel volume equal to 4 ACT while taking up space for 2 ACT (compared to the ACF and LR)

The standard four door A321neo will soon drop out and there will be two main versions on offer, the AFC with 1, 2 or 3 ACT and the XLR with the big central tank and 1 possible ACT.

But the advantages of the new A321neo versions is not only range. You do not have to use the ACTs. With the ACF/LR comes an increased MTOW, 4t more, that can be used for fuel or alternative used for increased payload. The XLR sees an payload increase of 9 t. That again can be used for fuel or payload.

So looking at the ACF or XLR can bring advantages not connected to range. As the additional fuel is stored in the belly, there will be no restriction to replace it by additional payload.
The XLR will have more space for cargo or bags compared to an LR, while carrying either more fuel or more payload.

If KLM orders the A321 it is for the extra capacity, not for the extra range.


I don't think those slot restrictions will last forever, so switching to the A320/321neo will also intoduce the possibility of adding some (10-15?) A321XLR to the fleet.
 
User avatar
Momo1435
Posts: 1165
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 2:33 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Wed Mar 11, 2020 6:08 pm

marcelh wrote:
I don't think those slot restrictions will last forever, so switching to the A320/321neo will also intoduce the possibility of adding some (10-15?) A321XLR to the fleet.

It's far from certain that the slots limitations will end anytime soon, it remains a big factor for any current plans for the future.

Of course it will be easier to still take the A321XLR in the future if KLM decides to order the standard A321neo for the short haul network. But I wouldn't rule out a future XLR order if they remain loyal to the 737. If the you look at the number of A330s in the current fleet it will not be an issue for KLM to add a similar number of A321 for longer thin flights. But such an order will only happen if there's room for growth at Schiphol.

And as far as we know now, the A321 has only been mentioned by KLM for the European network. They haven't hinted anything about any other role in the fleet than for the short haul operations. I would say that an A321XLR order for Air France is far more likely right now, they have more room to grow at several French airports and have more historical ties with African countries.
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 8:38 am

Could the corona virus possibly have any impact on these decisions?
KJFK - EGLL:

Concorde: 2 hours, 52 minutes, and 59 seconds

Boeing 747: 4 hours and 56 minutes
 
User avatar
2nd2none
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2018 8:05 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 9:01 am

FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
Could the corona virus possibly have any impact on these decisions?


Slot restrictions could become a pre-Corona issue?
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14021
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 10:20 am

FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
Could the corona virus possibly have any impact on these decisions?


Anything cash-out will be cancelled / reduced. KLM often proved faster & more decisive than most airlines in crisis. In the past they came out relatively stronger because of it.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
marcelh
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 10:27 am

keesje wrote:
FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
Could the corona virus possibly have any impact on these decisions?


Anything cash-out will be cancelled / reduced. KLM often proved faster & more decisive than most airlines in crisis. In the past they came out relatively stronger because of it.


A bit off-topic, but KLM won't order anything soon. What are the possibilities of a AF-KLM break-up?
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 10:42 am

marcelh wrote:
What are the possibilities of a AF-KLM break-up?

I was also wondering about that. Would KLM possibly join IAG or Lufthansa Group if that would happen? It seems like a trend to be part of an airline group these days.
KJFK - EGLL:

Concorde: 2 hours, 52 minutes, and 59 seconds

Boeing 747: 4 hours and 56 minutes
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4591
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 10:44 am

marcelh wrote:
A bit off-topic, but KLM won't order anything soon. What are the possibilities of a AF-KLM break-up?


0.0%

FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
I was also wondering about that. Would KLM possibly join IAG or Lufthansa Group if that would happen? It seems like a trend these days to be part of an airline group.


AF-KLM already is an airline group.

The EU would never accept KLM being taken over by IAG or Lufthansa. Don't know why anybody would want that either. IAG would turn it into a low-cost mess in no time and Lufthansa would turn it into an Eurowings franchise operator.
 
Flanker7
Posts: 486
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:38 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 10:47 am

marcelh wrote:
keesje wrote:
FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
Could the corona virus possibly have any impact on these decisions?


Anything cash-out will be cancelled / reduced. KLM often proved faster & more decisive than most airlines in crisis. In the past they came out relatively stronger because of it.


A bit off-topic, but KLM won't order anything soon. What are the possibilities of a AF-KLM break-up?

At this point non, if anything they might need one and other more then ever.
Flying blue only if possible
 
PANAMsterdam
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 7:45 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 11:21 am

marcelh wrote:
keesje wrote:
FlyingBlueKLM wrote:
Could the corona virus possibly have any impact on these decisions?


Anything cash-out will be cancelled / reduced. KLM often proved faster & more decisive than most airlines in crisis. In the past they came out relatively stronger because of it.


A bit off-topic, but KLM won't order anything soon. What are the possibilities of a AF-KLM break-up?


AF-KLM is one big company consisting of two separate companies, but because the name of the mothership is the same as of the two sub-ships it is a bit confusing.

See it as this: Air France and KLM are two separate airlines part of the one company called Baguette avec Gouda Cheese Incorporated.

Now the crazy idea of KLM joing IAG: that was the idea by the late 90’s, but the first thing British Airways wanted to do after the merger was to get rid of the KLM name and change it into “British Airways Netherlands” or something like that. Amstelveen said: hell no and the deal fell through.
Every country has an airline. The world has Pan Am.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 14021
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 11:36 am

Or get independent, buy Easyjet, grow aggresively and do global codeshares opportunistically. The world changed since the nineties. E commerce, loyalty, "home market" and customer loyalty aren't the same anymore. What's in the interest of KLM and their now biggest stake holder? Cathay and Singapore aren't in airline groups.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 11:38 am

PANAMsterdam wrote:
Baguette avec Gouda Cheese Incorporated.

:lol: :lol: :lol: That sounds very funny

PANAMsterdam wrote:
Now the crazy idea of KLM joining IAG: that was the idea by the late 90’s, but the first thing British Airways wanted to do after the merger was to get rid of the KLM name and change it into “British Airways Netherlands” or something like that. Amstelveen said: hell no and the deal fell through.

I’m happy KLM didn’t join IAG. :)

PANAMsterdam wrote:
AF-KLM is one big company consisting of two separate companies, but because the name of the mothership is the same as of the two sub-ships it is a bit confusing.

Now I get it. Thanks for your help. :)
KJFK - EGLL:

Concorde: 2 hours, 52 minutes, and 59 seconds

Boeing 747: 4 hours and 56 minutes
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 11:40 am

keesje wrote:
Or get independent, buy Easyjet, grow aggresively and do global codeshares opportunistically. The world changed since the nineties. E commerce, loyalty, "home market" and customer loyalty aren't the same anymore. What's in the interest of KLM and their now biggest stake holder? Cathay and Singapore aren't in airline groups.

Why would they buy easyJet? They already bought Transavia. I don’t see KLM going independent. I don’t know if Pieter Elbers or the Dutch Government wants KLM to be independent, but if they really want it I’m sure they’ll do it.
KJFK - EGLL:

Concorde: 2 hours, 52 minutes, and 59 seconds

Boeing 747: 4 hours and 56 minutes
 
User avatar
FlyRow
Posts: 854
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 10:05 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 11:51 am

Maybe make a different topic?
F70-F100-RJ85-RJ70-E190-319-320-321-733-734-735-737-738-752-753-763-764-772-744-380
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4591
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 11:52 am

keesje wrote:
Cathay and Singapore aren't in airline groups.


They are. They are the Lufthansa to Lufthansa group:
Singapore Airlines has Silk Air, Scoot, Vistara, NokScoot and Singapore Cargo.
Cathay has Cathay Dragon, Air Hong Kong, HK Express and Cathay Pacific Cargo.

But they aren't properly comparable. Cathay and Singapore are based in small city states and don't benefit from a massive single market. They will always be smaller as a result.
 
FlyingBlueKLM
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2020 9:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 11:57 am

FlyRow wrote:
Maybe make a different topic?

Okay.
KJFK - EGLL:

Concorde: 2 hours, 52 minutes, and 59 seconds

Boeing 747: 4 hours and 56 minutes
 
Amsterdam
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 12:52 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 12:04 pm

Buy easyJet lol

EasyJet has a larger market cap than whole AF-KLM
 
Jomar777
Posts: 563
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 8:45 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 1:00 pm

Sorry - I do not think fleet diversity is the issue here. Actually, I do not think it is the MAX present demise either.
I feel the issue here is what the A321XLR can do and the fact that Boeing does not have anything like it to offer at the moment.

I know people here hate all those B757s lovers but I have been telling also all along the same as they did: the market needs a Medium Haul-Narrow Body aircraft. For those that continue saying that Boeing did not invest on a B757 upgrade (or a B797 Narrow Body back then) for lack of market here is the proof - A321XLR selling really well.

Boeing´s response for this would be to review the B797´s proposal (it is already doing this...) but it might be too late.
 
mig17
Posts: 325
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 2:10 pm

Jomar777 wrote:
Sorry - I do not think fleet diversity is the issue here. Actually, I do not think it is the MAX present demise either.
I feel the issue here is what the A321XLR can do and the fact that Boeing does not have anything like it to offer at the moment.

I know people here hate all those B757s lovers but I have been telling also all along the same as they did: the market needs a Medium Haul-Narrow Body aircraft. For those that continue saying that Boeing did not invest on a B757 upgrade (or a B797 Narrow Body back then) for lack of market here is the proof - A321XLR selling really well.

Boeing´s response for this would be to review the B797´s proposal (it is already doing this...) but it might be too late.

A321xlr is a relativ succes. Yes there is a market for planes with 757 capability, but maybe not enough to justify a entire type. That was the problem Boeing encountered with 797.
A321xlr is an A321 neo. It doesn't cost the same as a brand new cleensheet to developpe and shares comonality.
A mixfleet of A321n and E2 seem to be the right deal to replace 737 at KLM and then, if the opportunity comes some xlr can be added later.
727 AT, 737 UX/SK/TO/SS, 747 UT/AF/SQ/BA/SS, 767 UA, 777 AF, A300 IW/TG, A310 EK, A318/19/20/21 AF/U2/VY, A332/3 EK/QR/TX, A343 AF, A388 AF, E145/170/190 A5/WF, Q400 WF, ATR 72 A5/TX, CRJ100/700/1000 A5, C-150/172, PC-6.
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 546
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: KLM considers A321 order

Sun Mar 15, 2020 11:38 pm

A prolonged recession could have KLM looking towards smaller narrowbodies again. More flying could shift to Embraer E2s.

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