|Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 177):|
I’m struggling to find a referance at the moment, but there has been a recent 200NM range bump for the A321NEO which was applicable to BOTH engine types. As you say if Pratt really do have a little left in the bag then the P&W equipped A321 could be a TATL bird right out of the box.
My best sources are being *very* quiet (in other words, respecting NDAs). However, about two years ago they babbled on about a variety of changes Airbus was considering to further increase the A321NEO range. The focus is definitively on the A321NEO for TATL as US was (is?) willing to be a *large* customer but is insisting on TATL range with guarantees (read steep penalties that place the *entire* cost of range risk on Airbus and the engine vendor selected); in other words, Airbus/Pratt will not commit to US's demands until they have some 'range margin in the bank.' However, US will not wait forever before ordering. My rumor mill has insisted in the past (over a year old discussion) that Boeing/GE are working on a 738MAX with TATL range as a counter proposal.
Note: Airbus is not going to side with any engine vendor with *any* order. However, my 'rumor mill' believes Pratt will be willing to improve fuel burn guarantees for this one order, but needs more flight test data before committing due to the extreme cost penalties.
Note: Things will have changed in a year. But the next generation TATL narrowbody launch customer will be able to 'drive the show.' A year ago, US was in the driver's seat. However, it is reasonable to speculate that UA
and Boeing/GE came to an agreement that includes a TATL version (again, rumors I'm hearing is a 738MAX, not a 739MAX). The difference is, per rumor, US wants an earlier TATL EIS. (In other words, UA
is willing to wait a few more years for the MAX to mature.)
|Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 177):|
Of course, as this is an Airbus it couldn’t possibly replace the 752. Boeing need to re-open a defunct line and produce a 30 year old design that nobody wanted in order for that to happen
Of course. We all know that.
I wish I had a source on how the sharklets were doing in flight test.
In particular drag at high weights to allow for a fuel load increase. e.g., remove the issues B6
had with the ACT
not improving range of their A320s at high payloads!
|Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 178):|
I also find it interesting that the biggest operator of 757s across the Atlantic seems to be rejecting the A321NEO.
What are the stats for TATL 752 flights? In other words, how many daily (or weekly) by UA
, US, BA
, etc. I would assume UA
/CO is whom you are referring too (it is a UA
thread and combined they are a large 752 TATL operator). IMHO, the 738MAX will make more profit per TATL flight than the 752. I've been hearing rumors about such an option for a while. I would be shocked if UA
/CO orders the MAX without a 738 (or 739ERMAX) version that is TATL capable.
My rumor mill insists US is *very* interested in a TATL A321NEO. While probably not the largest TATL operator, I suspect they will grow. If either the larger (larger than 73G/319) MAX or NEO meets the 752 range (under similar restrictions), they will both sell due to the tremendous CASM and cost per flight reduction.
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.