Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
flipdewaf
Posts: 3640
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Wed Aug 19, 2020 5:25 pm

It could be that during the covid crisis cash is king and as such they have stopped all/most discretionary spend and have focused the bulk of the Airbus employed resource on the area with the best ROI.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Image
 
astuteman
Posts: 7151
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Wed Aug 19, 2020 10:28 pm

VV wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
...
What weight penalty? Arguing via tropes is very tiresome.


I guess you are suggesting that the RCT does not have weight penalty.

Let's see it in a simple manner.

The differences between a normal A321neo and A321XLR are:
  1. MTOW is increased to 101 tonnes
  2. Main landing gear is reinforced to cope with the increased MTOW
  3. Increased Maximum Brake Energy brakes (beefed up brakes)
  4. an integrated fix rear center tank (RCT) is build-in, thus it cannot be removed
  5. one slotted flaps

Let us go to 2023. Let us assume in 2023 Airbus still produces two versions of A321neo. One is the baseline A321neo and another that is the A321XLR.
I think this is a reasonable assumption, considering the fact
  1. A321XLR has a price premium for its extra range capability
  2. some airlines will not need the A321XLR's range

So, in 2023 the baseline version will differ from the XLR
  1. The baseline version will have the same single slotted flaps too for standardization
  2. The non reinforced landing gear may be maintained for the baseline version
  3. Will have the same brakes as other A321neo
  4. the baseline version will not have the RCT

Now, I sincerely think the fact the XLR configuration has an RCT, a stronger main landing gear and beefed up brakes will be heavier.
Or perhaps someone has the magic mean to build zero weight RCT.

Airbus can also decide to produce only ONE A321neo that is XLR ready with RCT from 2023 onward, but they need to tell the airlines that do not need the range to suck up the weight penalty.

I hope I explained it clearly.


The extra weight of the reinforcement is about 100kg and is offset by the simplification of the flaps.
And if Airbus are going to "standardise the flaps" for production simplicity, I'm pretty sure they'll also standardise the reinforcements, as they already have for the A321LR.
That would be a zero sum for the weight of the standard NEO and lower production costs.

The only difference a user will then see in terms of weight is the RCT, which weighs the same as a single ACT.
And yes, there are plenty of airlines that have used 1 x ACT in an A321, and there are some that have used 2.

It would be ironic if Airbus made the RCT the production standard too
That would make the XLR nothing more than a weight variant :)

Rgds
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13463
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:54 am

Sokes wrote:
pythoniels wrote:
Noshow wrote:
LH is a hub airline focused on Frankfurt and Munich. It's no surprise that they don't favor subtypes that make hub bypassing possible.

True, however you forget that this plane can also be used for thinner routes from major hubs to still offer daily or 5x weekly connections, interesting for business people.

I remember that LH wanted to fly to Pune, India with a A320/321 aircraft and make a technical stop in Baku. This aircraft would perhaps be the ideal plane for such route to avoid a technical stop and with a decent J/W seat, can still charge a premium price.

Munich and Frankfurt are big villages compared to London, Paris or New York.


While correct, there are ~40 million people within two hours of FRA, dwarfing both London and Paris and about 20% more than within 125 miles around New York, which is probably a good deal more than 2 hours for many or those. But yes, Frankfurt isn´t a large city in itself..

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
PSA727
Posts: 850
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 7:49 am

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 5:56 am

VV wrote:
Revelation wrote:
...
Lufthansa’s CEO, Carsten Spohr, has said that while the airline is considering ordering the A321XLR, he doesn’t think the airplane is a game changer:

“The new XLR could be used in our network. We look at it. But in my view it is a niche product. It will not be a game changer.”


Ref: https://onemileatatime.com/lufthansa-a321xlr/

It seems LH wants higher standards of payload, range and comfort.


He thinks it is a niche aircraft. That's an interesting point of view from an airline CEO.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-luft ... SKCN1TP1RP

Is there any reason to believe he has a biased view?


Given that LH didn't even fly the 757, I don't see why their CEO's opinion of a competitor's replacement for that market should hold much weight in my opinion.

Also, I don't view the 321XLR as a widebody replacement for TATL flying (aside from an airline offering its business traveler base the option of 2 daily frequencies on a route with the 321XLR versus one daily frequency on a 787 or 777). On the other hand, this aircraft will allow airlines to start and develope new routes with much lower costs (and initial losses) than with a widebody.
fly high, pay low...Germanwings!
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13463
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:17 am

Revelation wrote:
If one wanted to speculate, one could see how XLR could be re-engineering the center wing box not just for the new fuel capacity, but also to be able to eventually accept (perhaps with mods) the new wing that most of us feel is inevitable for the A32x family. But that's just my speculation.


its a good speculation, just like many other people in Aviation Airbus engineers are giddy about 3-D printed parts, and replacing welded, riveted and screwed together constructs with those can combine the impossible: lighter, stronger and cheaper to make. While maybe not designed to accept a new wing down the road, this is a pretty good opportunity to make that section cheaper and lighter.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
Sokes
Posts: 1792
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:20 am

tommy1808 wrote:
...there are ~40 million people within two hours of FRA,

best regards
Thomas

Do you speak of high speed rail connections to the airport?
I believe many of these 40 million would prefer Düsseldorf or Stuttgart airport.

But then for economy of scale sake one hour extra in the train for a transatlantic flight is trivial.
So yes, agreed.
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
VV
Posts: 1858
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:39 am

PSA727 wrote:
VV wrote:
....
He thinks it is a niche aircraft. That's an interesting point of view from an airline CEO.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-luft ... SKCN1TP1RP

Is there any reason to believe he has a biased view?


Given that LH didn't even fly the 757, I don't see why their CEO's opinion of a competitor's replacement for that market should hold much weight in my opinion.
...


Should we say the same about all other airlines that do not fly the 757?
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13463
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:51 am

VV wrote:
PSA727 wrote:
VV wrote:
....
He thinks it is a niche aircraft. That's an interesting point of view from an airline CEO.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-luft ... SKCN1TP1RP

Is there any reason to believe he has a biased view?


Given that LH didn't even fly the 757, I don't see why their CEO's opinion of a competitor's replacement for that market should hold much weight in my opinion.
...


Should we say the same about all other airlines that do not fly the 757?


There are few airlines with a distaste for small aircraft like Lufthansa. They discarded their A332 as "too small" when it was all the rage, and "fly-it-till-scapping" Lufthansa got rid of its A310 very fast, most after less than 10 years. They are also exceptionally cargo heavy.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
VV
Posts: 1858
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 6:56 am

tommy1808 wrote:
VV wrote:
...
Should we say the same about all other airlines that do not fly the 757?


There are few airlines with a distaste for small aircraft like Lufthansa. They discarded their A332 as "too small" when it was all the rage, and "fly-it-till-scapping" Lufthansa got rid of its A310 very fast, most after less than 10 years. They are also exceptionally cargo heavy.
...


Do you think there are many airlines that are using their belly cargo space to generate revenue from freight?
If it is the case, how do you view the evolution of this trend for routes up to 4,500 nm - 5,000 nm?
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13463
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 7:35 am

VV wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
VV wrote:
...
Should we say the same about all other airlines that do not fly the 757?


There are few airlines with a distaste for small aircraft like Lufthansa. They discarded their A332 as "too small" when it was all the rage, and "fly-it-till-scapping" Lufthansa got rid of its A310 very fast, most after less than 10 years. They are also exceptionally cargo heavy.
...


Do you think there are many airlines that are using their belly cargo space to generate revenue from freight?


sure, but few would say it costs 10-15% flight revenue not being able to do so. Heck, plenty of airlines are on record saying cargo isn´t worth the trouble.

If it is the case, how do you view the evolution of this trend for routes up to 4,500 nm - 5,000 nm?


since there isn´t an aircraft for that on the drawing board, even the NMA Mk "not going to happen" wasn´t designed with belly cargo in mind, that isn´t really a relevant question. Since an aircraft full of pax and cargo is nearing MZFW, those distances are a stretch even for an A333, and closing the edge for an A339/789 anyhow.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
VV
Posts: 1858
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:27 am

tommy1808 wrote:
...
If it is the case, how do you view the evolution of this trend for routes up to 4,500 nm - 5,000 nm?


since there isn´t an aircraft for that on the drawing board, even the NMA Mk "not going to happen" wasn´t designed with belly cargo in mind, that isn´t really a relevant question. Since an aircraft full of pax and cargo is nearing MZFW, those distances are a stretch even for an A333, and closing the edge for an A339/789 anyhow.


Obviously an aircraft that can carry 255 passengers over 5,000 nm can carry passengers and some cargo over 3,000 nm.

Do you think there is not a market for that kind of situation? If there is one, how big do you it would be?
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13463
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:35 am

VV wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
...
If it is the case, how do you view the evolution of this trend for routes up to 4,500 nm - 5,000 nm?


since there isn´t an aircraft for that on the drawing board, even the NMA Mk "not going to happen" wasn´t designed with belly cargo in mind, that isn´t really a relevant question. Since an aircraft full of pax and cargo is nearing MZFW, those distances are a stretch even for an A333, and closing the edge for an A339/789 anyhow.


Obviously an aircraft that can carry 255 passengers over 5,000 nm can carry passengers and some cargo over 3,000 nm.


if there is payload left, and room to store it. Neither is obvious, only the first one is fairly given. And we are talking the 4500-5000nm market.

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
VV
Posts: 1858
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:40 am

tommy1808 wrote:
VV wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
...


since there isn´t an aircraft for that on the drawing board, even the NMA Mk "not going to happen" wasn´t designed with belly cargo in mind, that isn´t really a relevant question. Since an aircraft full of pax and cargo is nearing MZFW, those distances are a stretch even for an A333, and closing the edge for an A339/789 anyhow.


Obviously an aircraft that can carry 255 passengers over 5,000 nm can carry passengers and some cargo over 3,000 nm.


if there is payload left, and room to store it. Neither is obvious, only the first one is fairly given. And we are talking the 4500-5000nm market.


Yes, we are talking about 4500 nm - 5,000 nm market at maximum passenger load. That's how they usually define it.

What do you think about the same platform, but in a fully freighter configuration (no windows no pax wiring etc.)? Would it be as popular as the current 767-300F, but with 15% better cost efficiency on per tonne basis?
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13463
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:46 am

VV wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
VV wrote:

Obviously an aircraft that can carry 255 passengers over 5,000 nm can carry passengers and some cargo over 3,000 nm.


if there is payload left, and room to store it. Neither is obvious, only the first one is fairly given. And we are talking the 4500-5000nm market.


Yes, we are talking about 4500 nm - 5,000 nm market at maximum passenger load.


no, we don´t.

VV wrote:
tommy1808 wrote:
They are also exceptionally cargo heavy.
...


If it is the case, how do you view the evolution of this trend for routes up to 4,500 nm - 5,000 nm?


best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
rugeley123
Posts: 12
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:44 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 8:58 am

PSA727 wrote:
VV wrote:
Revelation wrote:
...
Lufthansa’s CEO, Carsten Spohr, has said that while the airline is considering ordering the A321XLR, he doesn’t think the airplane is a game changer:



Ref: https://onemileatatime.com/lufthansa-a321xlr/

It seems LH wants higher standards of payload, range and comfort.


He thinks it is a niche aircraft. That's an interesting point of view from an airline CEO.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-luft ... SKCN1TP1RP

Is there any reason to believe he has a biased view?


Given that LH didn't even fly the 757, I don't see why their CEO's opinion of a competitor's replacement for that market should hold much weight in my opinion.

Also, I don't view the 321XLR as a widebody replacement for TATL flying (aside from an airline offering its business traveler base the option of 2 daily frequencies on a route with the 321XLR versus one daily frequency on a 787 or 777). On the other hand, this aircraft will allow airlines to start and develope new routes with much lower costs (and initial losses) than with a widebody.


Lufthansa themselves didn’t operate 757s, but Condor operated both the 757-200 and 757-300 (and still fly the 757-300 to this day), both of which I think were purchased/leased by the airline during the Lufthansa-ownership years. Further, I’m sure Lufthansa at least contemplated using 757s for their own operations as the natural 727 replacement. However, we know that they instead operated the A310 (which were also flown by Condor).

I do see the wide body ‘replacement’ strategy too, and this being based on frequency. However, I don’t think it’s going to be on routes where there is already a daily widebody service. Instead, I would say they’re more likely to fly on route where there is a 3-5x weekly schedule, in a similar way to how Aer Lingus swapped their one A330 flying from SNN to JFK/BOS, with both served a few frequencies a week, to a daily 757 service on each route. Obviously, smaller markets such as Hartford / Bradley might open up to more transatlantic services too as a result of the aircraft.
 
Noshow
Posts: 1657
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:11 am

Lufthansa actually tested some Condor 757-300 (D-AQVT) in her colors and network without finally taking any.
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Aug 20, 2020 1:55 pm

Given the topic and points under discussion, I think this article (published 2 days ago) may offer some insight or be a springboard for more discussion:

Aer Lingus to use A321neos to Newark + Toronto, with its A330-300s having 50% higher costs, RDC Apex platform shows

https://www.anna.aero/2020/08/18/aer-li ... orm-shows/
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24568
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Sep 17, 2020 1:47 pm

MoKa777 wrote:
Given the topic and points under discussion, I think this article (published 2 days ago) may offer some insight or be a springboard for more discussion:

Aer Lingus to use A321neos to Newark + Toronto, with its A330-300s having 50% higher costs, RDC Apex platform shows

https://www.anna.aero/2020/08/18/aer-li ... orm-shows/

Interesting. We already has AirAsiaX tell us before covid broke out that A321 was doing routes it once wanted A330neo for. Now IE doing a similar thing post-covid. Seems the load factors are going to have to be pretty high before A330s return to the skies.
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
AECM
Posts: 326
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:52 am

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Sep 17, 2020 2:02 pm

Revelation wrote:
MoKa777 wrote:
Given the topic and points under discussion, I think this article (published 2 days ago) may offer some insight or be a springboard for more discussion:

Aer Lingus to use A321neos to Newark + Toronto, with its A330-300s having 50% higher costs, RDC Apex platform shows

https://www.anna.aero/2020/08/18/aer-li ... orm-shows/

Interesting. We already has AirAsiaX tell us before covid broke out that A321 was doing routes it once wanted A330neo for. Now IE doing a similar thing post-covid. Seems the load factors are going to have to be pretty high before A330s return to the skies.


The A321LR is being very usefull, TAP Portugal has currently 6 and all are flying international routes

BOS
IAD
YUL
YYZ
EWR
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8236
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Sep 17, 2020 2:04 pm

Revelation wrote:
MoKa777 wrote:
Given the topic and points under discussion, I think this article (published 2 days ago) may offer some insight or be a springboard for more discussion:

Aer Lingus to use A321neos to Newark + Toronto, with its A330-300s having 50% higher costs, RDC Apex platform shows

https://www.anna.aero/2020/08/18/aer-li ... orm-shows/

Interesting. We already has AirAsiaX tell us before covid broke out that A321 was doing routes it once wanted A330neo for. Now IE doing a similar thing post-covid. Seems the load factors are going to have to be pretty high before A330s return to the skies.


MoKa777's link to anna aero refers to trip cost, not CASM. Don't ignore this:

Naturally, lower-capacity aircraft result in higher unit costs as there is less output over which to spread costs, and therefore higher breakeven fares.

Based on Dublin – Newark, RDC indicates that the A321neo would have a 15% higher unit cost, requiring a 15% higher average fare to breakeven: EUR€199.53 against €173.15.


Lots of routes have the demand to support widebody passenger use, even across multiple carriers. You would would seldom see a widebody in use for deregulated routes under 2,500 nm if they didn't.
 
tomcat
Posts: 598
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 4:14 am

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Sep 17, 2020 2:13 pm

Revelation wrote:
MoKa777 wrote:
Given the topic and points under discussion, I think this article (published 2 days ago) may offer some insight or be a springboard for more discussion:

Aer Lingus to use A321neos to Newark + Toronto, with its A330-300s having 50% higher costs, RDC Apex platform shows

https://www.anna.aero/2020/08/18/aer-li ... orm-shows/

Interesting. We already has AirAsiaX tell us before covid broke out that A321 was doing routes it once wanted A330neo for. Now IE doing a similar thing post-covid. Seems the load factors are going to have to be pretty high before A330s return to the skies.


Based on Dublin – Newark, RDC indicates that the A321neo would have a 15% higher unit cost
(than the A330-300)

Bearing in mind that this is just one data point, I would have thought that the A321NEO would have a unit cost closer to the A330-300 unit cost. It means that the A339 unit cost must be 17 to 18% lower that the A321NEO unit cost. This shows that there is still a significant incentive for the airlines to use widebodies when the demand will return. At the same time, we have the confirmation that the A321NEO unit cost is low enough to be profitably operated on thin routes.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24568
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Sep 17, 2020 2:46 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
MoKa777's link to anna aero refers to trip cost, not CASM. Don't ignore this:

Naturally, lower-capacity aircraft result in higher unit costs as there is less output over which to spread costs, and therefore higher breakeven fares.

Based on Dublin – Newark, RDC indicates that the A321neo would have a 15% higher unit cost, requiring a 15% higher average fare to breakeven: EUR€199.53 against €173.15.


Lots of routes have the demand to support widebody passenger use, even across multiple carriers. You would would seldom see a widebody in use for deregulated routes under 2,500 nm if they didn't.

Right, but the cheapest seat on the A330 on DUB-EWR is probably selling more than 15% below the cheapest seat on A321 in the current travel climate, and things won't be changing much for the next two years according to most industry sources.

However, with 42% fewer seats to fill, it is likely that the low capacity will result in stronger control over pricing year-round, with less discounting in winter and even stronger pricing in summer.
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
 
tomcat
Posts: 598
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2000 4:14 am

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Fri Sep 18, 2020 8:19 pm

Revelation wrote:
MIflyer12 wrote:
MoKa777's link to anna aero refers to trip cost, not CASM. Don't ignore this:

Naturally, lower-capacity aircraft result in higher unit costs as there is less output over which to spread costs, and therefore higher breakeven fares.

Based on Dublin – Newark, RDC indicates that the A321neo would have a 15% higher unit cost, requiring a 15% higher average fare to breakeven: EUR€199.53 against €173.15.


Lots of routes have the demand to support widebody passenger use, even across multiple carriers. You would would seldom see a widebody in use for deregulated routes under 2,500 nm if they didn't.

Right, but the cheapest seat on the A330 on DUB-EWR is probably selling more than 15% below the cheapest seat on A321 in the current travel climate, and things won't be changing much for the next two years according to most industry sources.

However, with 42% fewer seats to fill, it is likely that the low capacity will result in stronger control over pricing year-round, with less discounting in winter and even stronger pricing in summer.


The current travel climate has this unique characteristic: the demand is artificially capped by the travel restrictions. The residual demand is incompressible while it has no more or little price elasticity. In such a context, competition and lower pricing is of little help to stimulate the demand so the only reasonable thing to do is to supply the market just enough to cover the residual demand. There are evidences of this when we see Ryanair and the likes mass cancelling flights when the travel advises become dissuasive. It shows that even the most competitive airlines cannot stimulate the market with agressive pricing. People just won't fly.

At this stage, I would not make any definitive conclusion about the benefit of using an A321NEO over the small widebodies. In the long term, I see the A321NEO (xlr) useful to operate long and thin routes and to fine tune the supply of seats and belly capacity on trunk routes, helping to improve yields on both passenger trafic and belly cargo on flights up to 9 hours or so. This is where I believe the XLR will shine.
 
User avatar
FiscAutTecGarte
Posts: 140
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Fri Sep 18, 2020 8:33 pm

RJMAZ wrote:
If point to point really takes off then another option would be a A320XLR. A simple shrink of the current A321XLR down to A320 fuselage length would see the range go up to 5500nm.


You'd take it down to Keesje's A320.5NEO size plane... aimed directly at 738 capacity.

Everytime I look at what's possible, I always come away so impressed by the wise decisions made early on with the A321 program that continue to pay dividends today... And it's still never had a new wing (just slot/trailingedge differences between models) after more than 33 years since first roll-out.
learning never stops...

FischAutoTechGarten is the full handle and it reflects my interest. It's abbreviated to fit A.net short usernames.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:25 am

FiscAutTecGarte wrote:
You'd take it down to Keesje's A320.5NEO size plane... aimed directly at 738 capacity.

The desire to size a plane to perfectly fit 199 seats in a full economy layout is a laughable fantasy on this forum.

It is pointless for an A320XLR aircraft that will be flying longhaul. No airline will fly 5000+nm with a full economy cabin.

A potential A320XLR aircraft will probably have 99 seats in 3 class. It has only 44% of the cabin area of a 787-8. JAL has 161 seats on some of their long haul international 787-8 aircraft. Most premium carriers have around 200 seats on the 787-8. United has 219 seats 44% of 219 is 96 seats in a A320 cabin.

Qantas has 236 seats in their larger 787-9. This density would mean 89 seats on an A320. Once you take into account crew rests a A320 with 99 seats would actually have higher than average seating density when it comes to your average widebody.
 
User avatar
FiscAutTecGarte
Posts: 140
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Sat Sep 19, 2020 12:50 am

RJMAZ wrote:
FiscAutTecGarte wrote:
You'd take it down to Keesje's A320.5NEO size plane... aimed directly at 738 capacity.

The desire to size a plane to perfectly fit 199 seats in a full economy layout is a laughable fantasy on this forum.

Your opinion. Thank you for thinking so highly of us.

In your scenario an A320.5XLR might seat 116-120 and do 5k... And yes, for domestic flying... 175pax to 198pax depending on classes/pax capacity, when you don't need the size and TCO of the 200-240pax A321NEO. Folks seem a bit nervous over the prospect of the A320 approaching 738 capacities.
learning never stops...

FischAutoTechGarten is the full handle and it reflects my interest. It's abbreviated to fit A.net short usernames.
 
User avatar
BawliBooch
Posts: 1489
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:24 am

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Sat Sep 19, 2020 4:18 am

gloom wrote:
I see many smaller destinations for Lufthansa that XLR will open. Middle East perhaps, even if they go mostly via hubs? India, definitely. Some cities in Russia or ex Soviet republics. Canada, USA smaller destinations perhaps. All of these would help your business case, since you don't have to pay for local partner airline anymore, or reduce their share.


Speaking of India, there is a grand total of ONE station where direct flights will work - PNQ/VAPO. LH used to send all business class Privatair A319/73G there because widebodies cannot operate there. At the height, they had 6 flights/week to FRA and 3 flights/week to MUC. The A321XLR will certainly work there with better economics. But PNQ/VAPO is a special case - large german community in the area with dozens of German automakers based there. How many other stations in India are there which wont support a widebody? if LH can send a widebody they will do that.

Personally, i think Airbus is moving to split the A321XLR from the baseline A320-A321. The 4 year development time shows this IMO. Baseline A319-A320-A321 for short/medium haul and A321XLR/322/323 for 200-270 seat NMA market.
Mr.Kapoor's favorite poodle!
 
Loovethkoo
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 10:48 am

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Mon Sep 21, 2020 1:51 pm

FiscAutTecGarte wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
FiscAutTecGarte wrote:
You'd take it down to Keesje's A320.5NEO size plane... aimed directly at 738 capacity.

The desire to size a plane to perfectly fit 199 seats in a full economy layout is a laughable fantasy on this forum.

Your opinion. Thank you for thinking so highly of us.

In your scenario an A320.5XLR might seat 116-120 and do 5k... And yes, for domestic flying... 175pax to 198pax depending on classes/pax capacity, when you don't need the size and TCO of the 200-240pax A321NEO. Folks seem a bit nervous over the prospect of the A320 approaching 738 capacities.

Will be great if everything will be like that. Hope with software they will not have some trouble
 
oschkosch
Posts: 596
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Mon Sep 21, 2020 3:20 pm

BawliBooch wrote:
gloom wrote:
I see many smaller destinations for Lufthansa that XLR will open. Middle East perhaps, even if they go mostly via hubs? India, definitely. Some cities in Russia or ex Soviet republics. Canada, USA smaller destinations perhaps. All of these would help your business case, since you don't have to pay for local partner airline anymore, or reduce their share.


Speaking of India, there is a grand total of ONE station where direct flights will work - PNQ/VAPO. LH used to send all business class Privatair A319/73G there because widebodies cannot operate there. At the height, they had 6 flights/week to FRA and 3 flights/week to MUC. The A321XLR will certainly work there with better economics. But PNQ/VAPO is a special case - large german community in the area with dozens of German automakers based there. How many other stations in India are there which wont support a widebody? if LH can send a widebody they will do that.

Personally, i think Airbus is moving to split the A321XLR from the baseline A320-A321. The 4 year development time shows this IMO. Baseline A319-A320-A321 for short/medium haul and A321XLR/322/323 for 200-270 seat NMA market.



They also had an old 737 which was 50% C, 50% economy class (50% in terms of space used by each class). Been on the FRA-PNQ flight many times. Always easier than going via BOM and then spending 3-6 hours in the car. Only pain was the return trip to FRA had a fuel stop in either TBL or OTP.
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1865
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Tue Sep 22, 2020 7:05 am

oschkosch wrote:
Only pain was the return trip to FRA had a fuel stop in either TBL or OTP.

(IATA?) TBL = Tableland airport (TBL), Tableland, Australia?
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
oschkosch
Posts: 596
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:22 am

rheinwaldner wrote:
oschkosch wrote:
Only pain was the return trip to FRA had a fuel stop in either TBL or OTP.

(IATA?) TBL = Tableland airport (TBL), Tableland, Australia?



Sorry, I meant Tbilisi International Airport, aka TBS.....
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5027
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Airbus is stepping up development A321XLR

Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:42 pm

enzo011 wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
Business class seats on long haul aircraft are much larger than on short haul flights. Seating density rapidly reduces once flights exceed 8 hours. The traditional narrowbody flights use large recliners for business class as they rarely fly over 6 hours.

The A220XLR could see widebody beds fitted as flights exceed 8 hours. Seating would be entirely airline specific. 2+1 business class lie flat beds sounds good. 2+2 premium recliners and 2+3 economy seats would create a good 3 class cabin. It has similar cruise speed to the A321 but the A220 can fly higher much earlier making it more optimised for long flights

One thing worth noting is the vast difference in seating density on long haul widebody aircraft.. Qantas for instance has 236 seats in their 787-9 with a cabin area of 265m2. The A220-100 has only 78m2 cabin area so with similar density that is only 70 seats. The A321XLR would seat only 110 passengers



But why would a flight of around 8 hours have the same seating density as a flight of 17 hours which you seem to be comparing? Wouldn't it be better to compare the seating densities of a Etihad 789 rather than the Qantas 789, because your flights will not be super long and those seats should be sufficient for passengers? I understand that density reduces for Qantas, but they are the one of only a few that does that and only because the flight is 17 hours long. Etihad uses the same 789 on routessouth america and South America from less than 8 hours to 14 hours.

Quantas has a Unique situation as does Air New Zealand. They're as both as far away and as remote as one can get. They could get to South America or Hawaii in inder 6 hours but where they want to really go? Is one Long Haul. And they have to do it in Style or why would you FO?? the A321 even in an XLR Config? would be pretty tight unless you installed premium seating maybe in a 2+2 row even in Coach otherwise? I don't see it. Because they might want to sell it down Under? Doesn't equate to it being a Hit!

Who is online

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