RickNRoll
Posts: 1750
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 11:48 am

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 49):
The long-range narrow body aircraft we will see hit the market as the NEO's and the MAX's might therefore be the real "point to point" aircraft we have been discussing so long ever since that term was heavily marketed by Boeing when they introduced the B787. Of course, in the end every aircraft flies from a point to a point, but I hope I have made my specific question clear.

We have already seen a lot of airlines start to favor the 789 over the 788, with conversions occurring to orders. The manufacturers make plans, then the airlines start to have their own ideas.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 12:26 pm

Quoting Pacific (Reply 12):
The interesting thing about the 110kg assumption is that, the A321 will not be viable for more than 215 passengers (23,650kg). The marketing chart shows max payload at a touch below 24,000kg! For some reason, Airbus still bothered to raise the max certified capacity from 220 to 240 passengers for the NEO so the plot thickens.

Interesting. Curious.

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 13):
If you have 240 passengers, a bunch of containers with cargo and an 8 hour flight to do, there are other optimal aircraft you can use; the 788 and A332/333. The 757 niche, the FI, AA, UA, DL short transatlantic and deep south America flights have the issue they often have less then 200 passengers so a widebody wouldn't work out and for thát market the A321LR will work out very well. And if the airline often will have to bump passengers or cargo they will be happy to wheel in a 788 or A332 instead.

  
 
BlueShamu330s
Posts: 2584
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 3:11 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 12:28 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 32):
So we are back to 165 passengers and no cargo (no space for cargo because of 3 ACT) and exactly that will be why FI will fly the 757-200W a bit longer.

Isn't FI's advantage the fact it doesn't need the ACTs of the LR for FI's route structure?

Won't the 'basic' A321neo do everything its current B75Ws do now, but far more efficiently?

Rgds
Flying around India
 
astuteman
Posts: 6882
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:14 pm

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 49):
Which begs the question, will the A321-neo-(LR) and maybe the longer ranges B737-MAX's be the real next-generation point to point airplanes which might "revolutionise" air traffic?

I think that is already happening.

I believe it's one of the reasons that A300 sized and 767 sized passenger aircraft are no longer available new.

Also why I believe we'll never see a "genuine" widebody smaller than the 787-8 and A330-200 again

Rgds
 
tommy1808
Posts: 10782
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:22 pm

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 13):

If you have 240 passengers, a bunch of containers with cargo and an 8 hour flight to do, there are other optimal aircraft you can use; the 788 and A332/333.

you can, you will also have a hard time having 40 pax and cargo pay for the much, much higher trip costs. There are reasons even Airbus says an A333-regional will just match A321 on CASM.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8416
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 2:02 pm

Quoting blueshamu330s (Reply 52):
Isn't FI's advantage the fact it doesn't need the ACTs of the LR for FI's route structure?

Won't the 'basic' A321neo do everything its current B75Ws do now, but far more efficiently?

Rgds

Not on the longer routes. And the shorter ones you can do with normal B737 or A320 series.

If we talk about a A321neo HGW and leave the third or second ACT out, than I would expect a more useful frame but than the talk about "replacing the last 5% of the 757" is just talk.

The A321neoLR will be either fuel limited, fewer ACT, or cargo space limited 3 ACT, compared to the 757-200W.

The 757 is a old design with old engines and all the new narrow bodies are more efficient than it. But her capabilities will only be fully replaced by a similar sized frame. A321 with new wings, enough fuel storage in the wings to need only one or non ACT, and enough lift both to get better out of shorter runways and to climb earlier to a reasonable ceiling would do it.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6882
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 3:46 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 55):
The A321neoLR will be either fuel limited, fewer ACT, or cargo space limited 3 ACT, compared to the 757-200W.

I'm sure the reality that the A321LR isn't an absolute 1 for 1 replacement for the 757 will really matter. Somewhere.

I can't help thinking that in 99% of the cases, the issue of the restricted space below deck compared to a 752 will just be swamped by the fact that it will carry pretty much the same payload by weight, the same distance, but with 25%+ better economics.

Which given the development cost (or distinct lack of) .........

But I'm sure that there will forever be a corner of A-net that looks down its nose at the A321LR because it's "just not a 757"

Rgds
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8416
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 5:21 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 56):

It does matter for certain routes, but I completely agree, it does not matter for 95% of the flights and routes the 757-200 has been used for.
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 5:32 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 56):
I'm sure the reality that the A321LR isn't an absolute 1 for 1 replacement for the 757 will really matter.

Of course not. I personally think the LR is more than adequate for 757 users.
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21192
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 5:43 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 53):
I believe it's one of the reasons that A300 sized and 767 sized passenger aircraft are no longer available new.

Actually Boeing will build you a nice new 767-300ER pax model if you pony up the money:

http://www.boeing.com/boeing/commerc...al/767family/767-300er/index.page?

Your point is solid, though - it's hard to imagine anyone purchasing a new model any time soon.

Seems they shipped one a year ago:

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=20295&item=128680
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17906
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 5:50 pm

Quoting seahawk (Reply 20):
And that is why I think we will see quite a few LRs being bought just for the hight MTOW. Probbaly with just one or 2 ACTs.

Agreed.

Quoting Pacific (Reply 42):
It seems I struck a nerve here but I cannot see how. I would think it is natural to compare the A321LR to the aircraft it is replacing. I compared payload/range and you now compared costs!

No nerve struck, that wasn't my intent. My intent was to highlight the LARGE weight difference of the two aircraft. Weight in aircraft always translates into costs: fuel, maintenance (e.g., tire and brake wear), ATC fees).

We have people complaining about a slight potential payload drop when the real issue is controlling costs. There are two sides to a profit. Sometimes it is to pursue yield, sometimes it is cost management. For TATL, I believe the later is critical as long as a good lie flat product is offered to grab the front cabin yield. The back cabin is internet search filled discount fares.  
Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 55):
If we talk about a A321neo HGW and leave the third or second ACT out, than I would expect a more useful frame but than the talk about "replacing the last 5% of the 757" is just talk.

The A321neoLR will be either fuel limited, fewer ACT, or cargo space limited 3 ACT, compared to the 757-200W.

That last little bit should be replaced by a widebody. The much higher cost per flight of the 757 dooms it. Either the route will support a widebody, or that last little bit of payload will be left behind and passengers will have to bid it up. Cargo will be trucked to the nearest widebody airports and moved that way. With more belly cargo space coming online due to the better 'combi' nature of the 78J, A35J, and 779 going across the atlantic, there just won't be as much revenue in narrow bodies.

Iceland has already bought A321NEOs. They'll go that way. The final few routes... they'll have to decide how to do it. I think the A321LR is perfect for them. Longer routes will get fewer seats and no cargo will shorter in routes will have fewer ACTs and more "fish."

By 2022 the cost per flight difference will be too brutal to continue on 757 operations.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
airbazar
Posts: 9617
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 6:14 pm

Quoting zululima (Reply 224):

There is still no 1 to 1 replacement option. I wouldn't expect to see too many flying out of Vail, CO or MEX for example.

Why not? Airbus says it can. I'll take their word for it. The runway length handicap of the A321LR compared to today's most powerful 75W is only 500ft. I'm pretty sure MEX will be no problem. I'm not entirely sure about Vail but with a 9,000ft runway and relatively short stage length's, I don't see it being a problem either.

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 55):

The A321neoLR will be either fuel limited, fewer ACT, or cargo space limited 3 ACT, compared to the 757-200W.

As is the 75W, which is why it regularly makes fuel stops on its TATL routes. It's funny how people conveniently ignore that fact for the sake of their own argument.
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3272
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 6:23 pm

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 49):
the A321-neo-(LR) and maybe the longer ranges B737-MAX's be the real next-generation point to point airplanes which might "revolutionise" air traffic

100% agree.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 53):
I believe it's one of the reasons that A300 sized and 767 sized passenger aircraft are no longer available new.
Also why I believe we'll never see a "genuine" widebody smaller than the 787-8 and A330-200 again
Quoting astuteman (Reply 56):
But I'm sure that there will forever be a corner of A-net that looks down its nose at the A321LR because it's "just not a 757"

Truer words have never been spoken on A net ...
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
aacun
Posts: 442
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 2:47 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 6:30 pm

It shouldnt be a problem for La Paz' 13,000+ feet runway right? I must confess....I am so sad to see the 757 go. I remember working on them when they were brand new and up to today, it is still my favorite airplane to work on.
 
Natflyer
Posts: 636
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 9:29 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 6:33 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 32):
So we are back to 165 passengers and no cargo (no space for cargo because of 3 ACT) and exactly that will be why FI will fly the 757-200W a bit longer.
Quoting blueshamu330s (Reply 52):
Isn't FI's advantage the fact it doesn't need the ACTs of the LR for FI's route structure? Won't the 'basic' A321neo do everything its current B75Ws do now, but far more efficiently?Rgds

Looking at FI's network, they would probably have no need for 3 ACT's. 1-2 would do it with probably seating 170-180 pax and acceptable cargo capability, still less than on the B752 for both weight and volume reasons.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17906
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:36 pm

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 62):
Quoting astuteman (Reply 53):
I believe it's one of the reasons that A300 sized and 767 sized passenger aircraft are no longer available new.
Also why I believe we'll never see a "genuine" widebody smaller than the 787-8 and A330-200 again
Quoting astuteman (Reply 56):
But I'm sure that there will forever be a corner of A-net that looks down its nose at the A321LR because it's "just not a 757"

Truer words have never been spoken on A net ...

Agreed. To carry LD3 sets a baseline cost which forces a minimum size of aircraft. But thanks to better cargo hauling widebodies that are immanent, I'm not worried about cargo.   

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 49):
The long-range narrow body aircraft we will see hit the market as the NEO's and the MAX's might therefore be the real "point to point" aircraft we have been discussing so long ever since that term was heavily marketed by Boeing when they introduced the B787.

They are. We will see much greater fragmentation except at the most difficult airports (e.g. hot/high), some of those will just feed a hub in a more aviation friendly climate. Cest la vie.

Quoting Aacun (Reply 63):
It shouldnt be a problem for La Paz' 13,000+ feet runway right?

That will be a problem due to the over 13k ft altitude. Either fly a 738, C-series, MRJ, or another good hot/high performance aircraft. The reality is great hot/high costs per flight if it is needed or not. The A321LR is not the aircraft for that airport.   So there are exceptions, just not enough of them. Oh, the 757 might spend its last few years at those airports, but only if the yield is sufficient to justify the service.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
eaa3
Posts: 938
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:49 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sat Jan 17, 2015 11:55 pm

Quoting Natflyer (Reply 64):
Looking at FI's network, they would probably have no need for 3 ACT's. 1-2 would do it with probably seating 170-180 pax and acceptable cargo capability, still less than on the B752 for both weight and volume reasons.

That is interesting. Their current network assumes that the planes make one trip to Europe per day and one trip to the US (not all of the fleet though as they have more Europe destinations that US destinations). The Europe round-trips take place over a 6-7 hour time period leaving around 8 am to and returning around 3 pm (Iceland time). Then the US round-trips take place over a 13.5 hour time period, leaving at 5 pm and returning at 6:30 am. The destinations that can't make it to the US and back in 13.5 hours (such as SEA, MCO, DEN etc.) just add a 22 hour layover on the ground and return at 6:30am the day after. You can do that on an old, paid for, B757 but it would not be wise to leave a brand new A321LR on the ground for 22 hours.

Therefore, the longest destination today that fits within the 13.5 hour time period is Minneapolis which is around 2600nm from KEF. They probably wouldn't need 3 ACT's for anything under 2600nm (although you need extra fuel when flying to Iceland because the alternative is sometimes Glasgow)

As they grow, I think that they will need to develop two different hub peaks in KEF, like they do in summer, year-round so that they can have longer flights fit within a 30-36 hour cycle and therefore avoid the overnight 22 hour stops on their routes that are longer than 13.5 hours round-trip.
 
art
Posts: 2914
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 1:58 am

I appreciate that 100Kg of cargo will earn more revenue than 100Kg of Y passenger so I'm a little mystified why airlines don't just restrict the number of seats for sale if a full pax load restricts ability to carry higher revenue earning cargo.

As for A321LR range against B757 range, would it matter that much to an airline if A321LR could not substitute for B757 on every route? A 30% improvement in fuel burn is an enormous saving and surely enough to offset using other aircraft on the relatively few routes A321LR could not serve that were so important that they could not be dropped.
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6501
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 5:07 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 41):
The cargo will fly on the widebodies to the cities that fill those planes. The added frequencies and smaller cities will see the A321LR.

Agreed. Which in PR's case will be the ~500mi or so from BNE and MEL to SYD. Highly doubtful that PR would start its own PALkargo arm despite cheap airframes becoming available.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 41):
Cargo must pay its own way (which I think you agree with).

I do, so I see to it that my box stays within the limit...   .

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 41):
Business travelers value their time and direct flights thus earn a premium.

OTOH, traffic to and from the Philippines has always been Y heavy.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 41):
Or PR loses the business (say another AirAsia...).

.....and/or Cebu Pacific (with no premium product) steps in...though their LCC configuration would require the most seats resulting to even less allowance on the A321LR for revenue cargo. Unless ASEAN's open skies program really gets strong and allows a productive stop somewhere in Indonesia, obviating the need for the ACTs.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 60):
Cargo will be trucked to the nearest widebody airports and moved that way.

Or for non time-sensitive freight -- brought to the nearest forwarder and shipped by sea.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
tommy1808
Posts: 10782
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 7:48 am

Quoting art (Reply 67):

I appreciate that 100Kg of cargo will earn more revenue than 100Kg of Y passenger so I'm a little mystified why airlines don't just restrict the number of seats for sale if a full pax load restricts ability to carry higher revenue earning cargo.

Nah, on average cargo earns you a lot less then pax. Cargo sometimes travels for 0,- $/kg plus fuel surcharge, insurance and fees. Good cargo routes are also often one way. You can charge a lot to carry cargo out of HKG, but demand into HKG is a whole different story e.g..

Quoting art (Reply 67):
As for A321LR range against B757 range, would it matter that much to an airline if A321LR could not substitute for B757 on every route? A 30% improvement in fuel burn is an enormous saving and surely enough to offset using other aircraft on the relatively few routes A321LR could not serve that were so important that they could not be dropped.

They can use it for more or less all missions, with the operating costs being so much lower, they can block a lot of seats to trade for range/cargo/lower TOW for better field performance etc. before losing the whole advantage.

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 68):
Or for non time-sensitive freight -- brought to the nearest forwarder and shipped by sea.

Or send by sea to a widebody airport somewhere in the middle if by ship is too slow and by air all the way not necessary and too expensive.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
airbazar
Posts: 9617
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 2:47 pm

Quoting art (Reply 67):
I appreciate that 100Kg of cargo will earn more revenue than 100Kg of Y passenger so I'm a little mystified why airlines don't just restrict the number of seats for sale if a full pax load restricts ability to carry higher revenue earning cargo.

That's an a.net myth. Anyone who's ever traveled by plane often enough has seen cargo being unloaded to make room for passengers but hardly ever the opposite is true.

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 69):

Nah, on average cargo earns you a lot less then pax. Cargo sometimes travels for 0,- $/kg plus fuel surcharge, insurance and fees. Good cargo routes are also often one way. You can charge a lot to carry cargo out of HKG, but demand into HKG is a whole different story e.g..

  
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8416
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 3:53 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 70):
That's an a.net myth. Anyone who's ever traveled by plane often enough has seen cargo being unloaded to make room for passengers but hardly ever the opposite is true.

You are completely right cargo is off loaded for passengers, but when you have important cargo on a regular basis (high paying cargo) you either take a frame that will both manage the passengers and cargo or you block seats, that means you do not sell them for example after you booked the cargo.
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 5:21 pm

Does any airline currently fly a 321 with 170-180 pax?
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
art
Posts: 2914
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 6:22 pm

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 69):
I appreciate that 100Kg of cargo will earn more revenue than 100Kg of Y passenger so I'm a little mystified why airlines don't just restrict the number of seats for sale if a full pax load restricts ability to carry higher revenue earning cargo.
Nah, on average cargo earns you a lot less then pax. Cargo sometimes travels for 0,- $/kg plus fuel surcharge, insurance and fees. Good cargo routes are also often one way. You can charge a lot to carry cargo out of HKG, but demand into HKG is a whole different story e.g..

Oh dear! I sit corrected. Always thought 1Kg of freight earned more than 1Kg of Y passenger. So what's the big deal over how much cargo can be carrried if there is a full load of pax?
 
dank
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:35 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 6:28 pm

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 72):
Does any airline currently fly a 321 with 170-180 pax?

Swiss seats 176, Iberia 174 (i think), JetBlue 169 on their transcon configuration), the BritishMed planes that BA flies 154
American, BA, Vietnam Airlines both seat 184 (the 321Ts are just over 100)
 
eaa3
Posts: 938
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:49 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:02 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 71):
You are completely right cargo is off loaded for passengers, but when you have important cargo on a regular basis (high paying cargo) you either take a frame that will both manage the passengers and cargo or you block seats, that means you do not sell them for example after you booked the cargo.

I really think the A321LR's cargo capabilities or lack there of have been discussed to death in the main thread a few months ago. No need to be stubborn.

Also, I highly doubt that any airline that uses the range of the plane for transatlantic travel will pack 200+ seats on the plane.

[Edited 2015-01-18 13:03:35]
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17906
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:24 pm

Quoting art (Reply 67):

Airlines often block seats for cargo. What they do is a function of incentive (yield). Capitalism is amazingly efficient at finding solutions.

I do not think the W321LR is the optimal plane for TATL combo routes. That will be the stretched wide bodies.

Quoting eaa3 (Reply 75):

The limits of the A321LR are well known. But so is the cost savings. Well managed, the plane is a money maker.
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
Clipper136
Posts: 288
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:07 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:47 pm

Quoting dank (Reply 74):
JetBlue 169 on their transcon configuration

B6 also has non Mint A321s with 190. US is 187. DLs will be 190 (IIRC)

If AA were to use the A321LR to replace the Tatl B757 , with a flex cabin at the back and no second door forward of the wing and using the Business lie flat that they currently use on the transcon A321s up front. I think they would be right at the current B757 config (176) with 172-178 pax.

I also want to point out that some have been comparing apples to oranges. The Leeham analysis linked above noted that Airbus' 206 seat A321LR config is bulk loaded and not containerized, leaving more "cargo" space than 1 container position as others have summerized. With a reduced passenger payload (172 vs 206), airlines can choose to use that additional payload for cargo (bulk loaded) or fuel (addional range beyond 3500 - 4000nm).
You can't beat the Experience.
 
Natflyer
Posts: 636
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 9:29 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Sun Jan 18, 2015 10:00 pm

Quoting eaa3 (Reply 66):
That is interesting. Their current network assumes that the planes make one trip to Europe per day and one trip to the US (not all of the fleet though as they have more Europe destinations that US destinations). The Europe round-trips take place over a 6-7 hour time period leaving around 8 am to and returning around 3 pm (Iceland time). Then the US round-trips take place over a 13.5 hour time period, leaving at 5 pm and returning at 6:30 am. The destinations that can't make it to the US and back in 13.5 hours (such as SEA, MCO, DEN etc.) just add a 22 hour layover on the ground and return at 6:30am the day after. You can do that on an old, paid for, B757 but it would not be wise to leave a brand new A321LR on the ground for 22 hours. Therefore, the longest destination today that fits within the 13.5 hour time period is Minneapolis which is around 2600nm from KEF. They probably wouldn't need 3 ACT's for anything under 2600nm (although you need extra fuel when flying to Iceland because the alternative is sometimes Glasgow)As they grow, I think that they will need to develop two different hub peaks in KEF, like they do in summer, year-round so that they can have longer flights fit within a 30-36 hour cycle and therefore avoid the overnight 22 hour stops on their routes that are longer than 13.5 hours round-trip.

Well a friend that flies for FI told me that the "layovers" at SEA, SFB, DEN are all well utilized for planned maintenance and aircraft rotated into those stations for that purpose. So no (or fewer) maintenance stops at home base. Seems like a good idea. So those stops are not "dead time".
 
User avatar
northwestEWR
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:45 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 5:06 am

Quoting Clipper136 (Reply 77):
DL's A321 (non-NEO) will be 192 seats in F20/W23/Y149
As much as I expect DL to fly their 757s until they cycle/time out, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see them order the A321LR and they would probably configure them in the 165 seat ballpark.

Cargo shouldn't be a problem on the TATL routes since we usually route cargo via AMS/CDG anyway. I believe UA does the same on its longer 757 routes via FRA/MUC/ZRH. I think it's being overstated as an issue.

[Edited 2015-01-18 21:27:39]
Northwest Airlines - Now You're Flying Smart
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1750
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 5:22 am

Quoting eaa3 (Reply 75):
Also, I highly doubt that any airline that uses the range of the plane for transatlantic travel will pack 200+ seats on the plane.

I thought one part of the range equation was less weight due to less passengers. That is, the A321LR does not work in a high density configuration, but a standard two or three class.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 6:30 am

The 236 seat configuration will not work for TATL any way. No premium seat and a seat pitch that few passengers would accept for 8 hour flights. A realistic TATL configuration would probably be between 160-190 seats.

Forget the LR see it as a IGW A321. This will come in handy for many operators, not only those aiming at a certain range, but also those aiming at carrying more load.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 10782
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 7:47 am

Quoting RickNRoll (Reply 80):
I thought one part of the range equation was less weight due to less passengers.

The point of the higher MTOW is that you don't have to offload pax for fuel anymore.
Max useable fuel on today's A321 is 23.3 ton with 2 ACTs. If you fill that all the way up, your max zero fuel weight is just 70.2 ton, 3.6 ton below the aircraft MZFW. With a realistic airline OEW, that is not enough payload for any higher density configuration. I guess that is why Airlines so far pretty much stuck to no or one ACT.
With the LR, you can fill 3 ACT to the brim, and still have 71.3 ton of zero fuel weight available. Or you can use 2 ACT full and lift almost max. structural payload.
A two ACT A321NLR will have an economic advantage over the 93.5 ton version on any missions beyond 2200nm if you can use the additional payload. Since room for Cargo is scarce, that has to be seats. I think we will see charter operators to use 234-240 seat A321NLR with 2 ACT, because the 93.5 ton version runs out of TOW long before all seats are filled. For European charter airlines that extends their narrow body operating radius from Egypt/Canary Islands all the way to cap verde. Heck, B6 could fly one across from JFK on the weekends.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
bobdino
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 6:55 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 8:33 am

Bjorn Fehrm at Leeham has posted more on the configuration of the A321LR, and in particular, how much of it will be rolled into the A321neo:

http://leehamnews.com/2015/01/18/a32...onfigurations-and-a320-production/

Highlights, assuming I've understood it all correctly:
- A321neo will launch with current A321 cabin config.
- Airbus Cabin Flex (ACF) involves deleting door 2, adding an overwing, and moving door 3 aft. Allows up to 240 pax.
- ACF is being introduced in 2018.
- ACF is expected to take over from the current cabin config, but won't be forced on customers.
- The weight savings from ACF mean that all A321neo with ACF, from 2019, will have the LR mods without affecting empty airframe weight.
 
r2rho
Posts: 3096
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 9:16 am

Quoting bobdino (Reply 83):
- ACF is expected to take over from the current cabin config, but won't be forced on customers.

Indeed very few operators and airports use dual jetbridges for boarding, although where I've seen it it certainly makes a difference. And it would make even more of a difference when they will routinely carry 230ish pax around, that will be "fun" to watch...
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2191
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 9:32 am

I think next up for Airbus will be an A322-100. A simple A321neo stretch with the possibilities of multiple ACTs, using the same engines and range between 3000-3500 nm. Pax capacity would be something like 280 pax in high density config, or 220 in two-class layout. Perfect for US coast-to-coast routes, US west coast - Hawaii, Europe - Middle East, Europe - Canary Islands or intra South east Asia routes. Airbus already have everything they need; ACT system, optional double bogie MLG, etc.

Airlines tend to move towards the larger frames, and when Boeing announces their NSA, I'm certain they will announce a variant in that size category. If they haven't already launched it by then, Airbus will need to respond to that. It will fit nicely under the A330neo without cannibalizing sales simply because it's smaller and lacks the range of the A330neo.

It might not be launched any time soon, but I'm pretty sure we'll see it announced within 10 years. And it will probably be built in Mobile, Alabama.
 
User avatar
speedbored
Posts: 2207
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 10:18 am

Quoting JetBuddy (Reply 85):
Airbus already have everything they need; ACT system, optional double bogie MLG, etc.

I'm pretty sure that if they try to stretch the 320 much further, it would need a new (or significantly enhanced) wing.
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 10:20 am

Reply 85
280 pax in high density ??

Would anybody want that? (Perhaps?) Just that would take a hell of a long time to plane and de plane I would have thought.
Also sounds like one hell of a stretch too (tail scrape etc?). If 97T is max weight ( which I assume it is) it would also eat a long way into range I would have thought.Perhaps more like a 264 max pax ( 4 extra rows)? Even that's a lot (of people) for a narrow body that usually has tight turn round times.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17906
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 12:39 pm

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 82):
I think we will see charter operators to use 234-240 seat A321NLR with 2 ACT, because the 93.5 ton version runs out of TOW long before all seats are filled. For European charter airlines that extends their narrow body operating radius from Egypt/Canary Islands all the way to cap verde. Heck, B6 could fly one across from JFK on the weekends.

This is a great charter plane, in particular with the thrust increase.

I could see B6 flying the mint configuration with 3 CAT TATL. High density across the atlantic? I doubt it.

Quoting bobdino (Reply 83):
- The weight savings from ACF mean that all A321neo with ACF, from 2019, will have the LR mods without affecting empty airframe weight.

That is great new and means the option will be more popular than otherwise.

So that means we wait for 2019...

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
airbazar
Posts: 9617
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 2:05 pm

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 79):
Cargo shouldn't be a problem on the TATL routes since we usually route cargo via AMS/CDG anyway. I believe UA does the same on its longer 757 routes via FRA/MUC/ZRH. I think it's being overstated as an issue.

  
I would be surprised if any of the current TATL 757 routes, other then FI's, are taking any meaningful cargo. However, I believe that cargo is still relevant on Latin American routes which is why we see 767's and now 787's operating there.

Quoting bobdino (Reply 83):
- The weight savings from ACF mean that all A321neo with ACF, from 2019, will have the LR mods without affecting empty airframe weight.

  
As I mentioned in part 1 of this thread, when asked which airlines will opt for the LR, I will be very surprised if the A321LR doesn't become the standard A321 at some point, which means all airlines will have the "LR".
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1374
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Mon Jan 19, 2015 2:12 pm

From the Leeham article quoted above:

" Airbus can thereby rationalize the build standard for A321neo so that for AFC versions there will only be one version of the aircraft which has the stronger LR structure for all variants of A321neo."

Which suggests to me that LRs will be "convertible" to non-LRs and vice versa, assuming engine thrusts can be similarly adjusted, if specified with the new AFC fuselage.
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6501
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Tue Jan 20, 2015 2:23 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 81):
The 236 seat configuration will not work for TATL any way. No premium seat and a seat pitch that few passengers would accept for 8 hour flights.

5J will be all over this!...    ...

http://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/AFC-fpr-A321neo.png
http://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/AFC-fpr-A321neo.png

http://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Airbus_A321neo_240_seats_Airbus-Cabin-Flex_Cabin_Layout.png
http://leehamnews.com/wp-content/upl...Airbus-Cabin-Flex_Cabin_Layout.png
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
eaa3
Posts: 938
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:49 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Tue Jan 20, 2015 2:43 am

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 91):


I'm curious, how many seats would an A321NEO be allowed to carry without door 2 or 3 but with two overwing exits? Essentially, in the same exit configuration as an A320. Actually, how many is the A320 allowed to carry?

It would be interesting for premium heavy configurations to be allowed to have only the front and back exits and overwing exits, like an A320, as that would allow them to reclaim some space around exit 2 and 3.
 
YYZatcboy
Posts: 1171
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 2:15 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Tue Jan 20, 2015 3:34 am

Two lavs for 240 pax? ouch. Don't know how well that will fly with the pax or regulators.
DH1/3/4 MD11/88 L1011 A319/20/21/30/50/80 717 727 735/6/7/8/9 744 762/3 77E/W E40/75/90 CRJ/700/705 CC150
J/S DH8D 736/7/8 763
 
User avatar
northwestEWR
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:45 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Tue Jan 20, 2015 3:42 am

That 240 pax config looks like torture. 2 bathrooms and 1 boarding door? Count this guy out.

The couple of times I've been on the DL 753s that hold 234 and had plenty of bathrooms, emergency exit rows and used dual bridges were already painful.
Northwest Airlines - Now You're Flying Smart
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17906
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Tue Jan 20, 2015 4:12 am

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 93):
Two lavs for 240 pax? ouch. Don't know how well that will fly with the pax or regulators.

It technically meets regulation in most countries. If the 'underhold capacity' is great enough, that is.   

There should be a 3rd Lav IMHO, but that will cost 6 seats (or would it be 9?). Not much incentive there...

For flights under 3 hours, 2 Lavs is fine. It is the longer runs the A321LR is quite capable of that will be an issue. In particular when 1 lav goes tech.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
Clipper136
Posts: 288
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:07 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Tue Jan 20, 2015 4:17 am

There are 3 lavs in the 240 config.
The flex space has 2 lavs at the rear pressure bulkhead.
You can't beat the Experience.
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6501
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Tue Jan 20, 2015 4:22 am

Quoting eaa3 (Reply 92):
I'm curious, how many seats would an A321NEO be allowed to carry without door 2 or 3 but with two overwing exits?

From the article.....

Quote:
"the new fuselage concept that Airbus has made to allow the A321neo to carry up to 240 passenger, Figure 1. It deletes the second door pair, moves the third doors further back and offers up to two overwing exits.

[.....]

It enables a larger exit limit of up to 240 passenger when operators orders it with the second overwing exit. It also does away with the second doors just ahead of the wing"


[Edited 2015-01-19 20:40:31]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17369
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Tue Jan 20, 2015 8:42 am

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 93):
Two lavs for 240 pax? ouch.

Three lavs. Look at the diagram.

Quoting northwestEWR (Reply 94):
That 240 pax config looks like torture. 2 bathrooms and 1 boarding door? Count this guy out.

There are three bathrooms, look at the diagram. In my not inconsiderable experience, more widebody flights are boarded through just a single door than not.

I think some people are finding "issues" where there are none.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: Airbus Launches A321LR Aircraft - Part 2

Tue Jan 20, 2015 9:08 am

This ACF cabin will not be used on long routes anyway. They would be running out of catering space for a long haul flight. It works for holiday carriers and max. to 5 hour routes. It does not work for 8 hour routes. (at least not with the service levels used on today´s 757 TATL routes)

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