AA 321 LAX-HNL/OGG/LIH/KOA

highflier92660 · Sat May 23, 2015 7:04 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 13):
Neither would the B707 or the DC-7 ...and other archaic old birds.

I would still love to watch back in the day when United Airlines flew the stretched DC-8-61 into Lihue's 6,500 foot runways. I believe they flew LAX-LIH-HNL-LAX due to the weight restriction out of Lihue.

Okcflyer · Sat May 23, 2015 11:40 pm

Out of curiousity, how many frames are required for these Hawaii runs?

Is anyone able to estimate the approximate fuel savings AA will recognize as a result of these new birds on these longer runs?

[Edited 2015-05-23 17:22:26]

flyboy80 · Sat May 23, 2015 11:59 pm

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 49):
for that mission the A321 should need quite a bit less runway than the A320.

The A321 has better takeoff performance then the 320 with such high weights?

Does anyone know if the V2500 offers a better thrust capability for the 321 over the CFM equipped variants?

jetwet1 · Sun May 24, 2015 12:20 am

Quoting astuteman (Reply 25):
True.
But you can replace a 20 year old Ferrari with a brand new BMW M5 that:-
*won't break down
*is twice as economical
*can actually carry 4 passengers and their luggage
*goes every bit as fast as the 20 year old Ferrari could go.

none of which makes the 20 year old Ferrari any less glorious of course

A new M5 would eat a 20 year old Ferrari alive, but yeah, for some the Ferrari would be the choice.

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 22):

I would choose the 757 just to experience that great takeoff. No airbus performs like it.

Sadly we live in the days of the flex take off, getting to be on one when it shows it real performance is a rare thing.

I am old enough to remember taking a DC10 and 742 to HNL from LAX, the good old days.

tommy1808 · Sun May 24, 2015 12:30 am

Quoting flyboy80 (Reply 52):
The A321 has better takeoff performance then the 320 with such high weights?

Stronger engines and TOW well below MTOW for the A321. The A321 loses when heavy, obviously, but it is pretty hot if it isn't (T/W ratio even better than the 757s).

best regards
Thomas

n7371f · Sun May 24, 2015 12:34 am

Going to stink for the FF trying to use miles to upgrade as AA has a meager 16 seats in first class on the 321. That's a loss of 6 or 8 seats compared to the standard domestic AA 757.

flyboy80 · Sun May 24, 2015 5:07 am

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 54):

Stronger engines and TOW well below MTOW for the A321. The A321 loses when heavy, obviously, but it is pretty hot if it isn't (T/W ratio even better than the 757s).

best regards
Thomas

I'm amazed at the thrust to weight ratio- I always assumed the 757 had the highest thrust to weight ratio for the singles, and was always under the impression the 321 was significantly heavier then the 320 with only small amount of additional thrust.

How close to MTOW will a 321 destined on most Hawaii- LAX flights be? Any good indicators from operations elsewhere?

MavyWavyATR · Sun May 24, 2015 5:16 am

An interesting equipment change. I thought for sure they'd wait for either the neo or the LR to be introduced before sending the A321 to the islands. I wonder what configuration they're gonna assign to these routes? I personally hope they'll send the Transcon cabin because I can't imagine customers sitting in the basic AA 321 cabin for close to 5 hours.

Also, I hope they upgrade their Wi-Fi and AVOD so that it'll work when flying over the pacific. The last thing an AA customer wants is to stare at a blank personal screen for close to 5 hours.

b747400erf · Sun May 24, 2015 6:21 am

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 22):

I would choose the 757 just to experience that great takeoff. No airbus performs like it.

The 753 is a dog, and an uncomfortable sardine can.

scbriml · Sun May 24, 2015 6:37 am

Quoting 747400sp (Reply 7):
No!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 15):
Yet all I read on here is "Nobody needs or wants the 757! There is no route that needs a 757 anymore!"

So how does AA replacing 757s with A321s disprove that?

Quoting Max Q (Reply 23):
Correct, you can't replace a Ferrari with a Yugo.

They can, and they are.

Quoting uberflieger (Reply 26):
And a hell of a lot more reliable and economical

Exactly. Strange how the airlines latch on to that, eh?

Quoting Max Q (Reply 28):
Not that it matters but the 757 is faster !

You're right, it doesn't matter. Ask the airlines if they want to get there 10 minutes quicker or burn 25% less fuel.

Quoting flyboy80 (Reply 56):
I'm amazed at the thrust to weight ratio- I always assumed the 757 had the highest thrust to weight ratio for the singles,

Ah, you see, it's all part of the a.net 757 myth.

29erUSA187 · Sun May 24, 2015 6:39 am

Quoting B747400ERF (Reply 58):
The 753 is a dog, and an uncomfortable sardine can.

I think he was talking about the 752, which is a thrill ride.

RyanairGuru · Sun May 24, 2015 6:54 am

Quoting MavyWavyATR (Reply 57):
I personally hope they'll send the Transcon cabin because I can't imagine customers sitting in the basic AA 321 cabin for close to 5 hours.

Also, I hope they upgrade their Wi-Fi and AVOD so that it'll work when flying over the pacific. The last thing an AA customer wants is to stare at a blank personal screen for close to 5 hours

How is it any different to the 738s that AS and UA send over to the islands every day? Hell, how is it different to the 757s already flying there? Differences between seat models aside, there is nothing truly exceptional about the 757 domestic interiors per se. Put the average customer in one and they wouldn't tell it apart from a 737.

815Oceanic · Sun May 24, 2015 7:40 am

From a business perspective, why does AA only have 181 seats on the A321? With 179 on UAs 739s and 190 planned for the DL 321 one would think AA could at least get another row of F on board?

drerx7 · Sun May 24, 2015 7:44 am

Quoting B747400ERF (Reply 58):

The 753 is a dog, and an uncomfortable sardine can.

Based on what and compared to what? @ UA the 753 is not bad at all. ..except at deplaning.

b747400erf · Sun May 24, 2015 7:56 am

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 60):

I think he was talking about the 752, which is a thrill ride.

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 63):
UA the 753 is not bad at all. ..except at deplaning.

753's are cramped. I wasted $600 on a United 753 thinking I'd get a large amount of leg room in first class. This was a few years ago though. I got old torn apart leather seats with little legroom. And performance of a 753 fully loaded is nothing like a 752.

[Edited 2015-05-24 00:56:21]

tommy1808 · Sun May 24, 2015 8:35 am

Quoting 29erUSA187 (Reply 60):
I think he was talking about the 752, which is a thrill ride.

... I guess the A321 out of LIH will be quite a nice thrill ride.

Best regards
Thomas

us330 · Sun May 24, 2015 2:05 pm

Quoting OKCFlyer (Reply 51):
Out of curiousity, how many frames are required for these Hawaii runs?

Only one per route. AA used to run the LAX-LIH and LAX-KOA routes as redeyes on the return, taking an aircraft that would otherwise RON in LAX.

flyboy80 · Sun May 24, 2015 3:24 pm

would the a320 be able to fly out of LIH to SFO, or further to LAX or LGB?

drerx7 · Sun May 24, 2015 5:02 pm

Quoting B747400ERF (Reply 64):

753's are cramped. I wasted $600 on a United 753 thinking I'd get a large amount of leg room in first class. This was a few years ago though. I got old torn apart leather seats with little legroom. And performance of a 753 fully loaded is nothing like a 752.

Hmm, I'm 5'11" so I didn't find them cramped. IFE is fine in them too. Performance wise. ... its definitely not a 752, but the casm is worth the performance penalty. ..which really is moot because it can get in and out of most places a 752 can.

Sevensixtyseven · Sun May 24, 2015 9:33 pm

Quoting JDAirCEO (Reply 47):

When is the expected exit date for all the ex-HP frames? I heard it was 2015-2017, but if they're going to discard them ASAP, what is the expected date for crossfleeting?

chrisair · Sun May 24, 2015 11:16 pm

Quoting flyboy80 (Reply 41):
I've heard rumblings that DL may introduce the 739 to Hawaii, but specifically that LIH would be excluded for that short runway.

AS runs their 900ERs to HNL and KOA on occasion (I flew them last year SJC-HNL-OAK) but the 800s are required for LIH and OGG due to runway length.

Wouldn't surprise me if DL sent their 900ERs to HNL or KOA.

Cadet985 · Sun May 24, 2015 11:19 pm

I don't trust the 320/321 on any route that's mostly over water with no place to divert.

Marc

Viscount724 · Sun May 24, 2015 11:21 pm

Quoting n7371f (Reply 55):
Going to stink for the FF trying to use miles to upgrade as AA has a meager 16 seats in first class on the 321. That's a loss of 6 or 8 seats compared to the standard domestic AA 757.

It's more important to have the correct number of seats you can sell at the applicable F class fare.

b747400erf · Mon May 25, 2015 4:55 am

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 68):
Hmm, I'm 5'11" so I didn't find them cramped.

I should have specified I prefer to fly business class or first if there is an upgrade available as I am 6'5"

airportugal310 · Mon May 25, 2015 5:04 am

Quoting Cadet985 (Reply 71):

Do you say things to purposely sound ignorant or just to sound fairly dumb?

Inquiring minds would like to know

ukoverlander · Mon May 25, 2015 5:48 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 23):
Correct, you can't replace a Ferrari with a Yugo.

I couldn't agree more - who wants to pay for the fuel consumption of the Ferrari when instead you could pay for the fuel consumption of the Yugo?

BlueShamu330s · Mon May 25, 2015 5:54 am

Quoting Cadet985 (Reply 71):

I don't trust the 320/321 on any route that's mostly over water with no place to divert.

Marc

And why would that be?

Please, do educate the class...

Rgds

ukoverlander · Mon May 25, 2015 6:04 am

Quoting Cadet985 (Reply 71):
I don't trust the 320/321 on any route that's mostly over water with no place to divert.

Oh boy.....they should make pills for this.

F9Animal · Mon May 25, 2015 6:10 am

Quoting HALFA (Reply 10):
suggest that you give the A330 a try. A twin aisle 2-4-2 widebody beats a single aisle 3-3 any day of the week in my opinion.

Aloha,
HALFA

I just did my first trip ever to Hawaii. It was on a AS 737-800. Look, Alaska has a fine product... But.. 5 plus hours in coach on a 737 was not comfortable for me at all. I doubt a A321 or 757 would be any more comfortable. I have decided that my next ride to Hawaii will be on Hawaiian's 330 or 767. I love wide body jets for long hauls.

I wish airline still flew 747's, DC-10's, or other exotic large birds to Hawaii.

I do agree with others about the 757. It is still a beast, and very comfortable to me.

scbriml · Mon May 25, 2015 7:02 am

Quoting Cadet985 (Reply 71):
I don't trust the 320/321 on any route that's mostly over water with no place to divert.

Hilarious!

deltal1011man · Mon May 25, 2015 8:59 am

Quoting flyboy80 (Reply 41):

I've heard rumblings that DL may introduce the 739 to Hawaii, but specifically that LIH would be excluded for that short runway. I've heard the 321 has all around much better takeoff performance then the 739 however, so maybe LIH is a possibility. Still looking at the a321 I always think, that is almost a 757, its a big plane!

I have yet to hear of any plan to start an ETOPS program for the 737 or 32S at Delta.

also all the 75H aircraft (757s getting configed for Hawaii) are some of the newest 757s Delta has. They are doing that for a reason. Fact is, like it or not, the 321 or 739 can't do what a 757 can.

right now the plan is for the 321s to hang out on the east coast.....

Quoting N757ST (Reply 30):

the newest 321s (V2500 or CFM56 powered) aren't dogs at all.

but they still don't and wont have the legs the 757-200 does. Nor will they have the T/O performance of a 752.

miaami · Mon May 25, 2015 1:45 pm

Quoting ripcordd (Reply 12):
Same day Aug 18 the 321 replaces 5 RT 738 LAX-ORD as well..

LAX-ORD is still showing as all 738 on Aug 18. However, since the merger schedule updates have been done a lot closer in. So your information may be correct it just isn't showing on AA.com yet. I did notice that over the summer 2 of the 9 LAX-SFO flights are being up gauged to A321 from 738. One on 7/6/15 and the other on 8/18/15.

trex8 · Mon May 25, 2015 2:19 pm

Quoting American 767 (Reply 9):
I know a lot of people dislike the idea of flying on a 757 TATL but I do like to fly on it, whether TATL or domestic. I would not hesitate to choose that one over an A330

You must really miss those Dc8s and 707s.

bgm · Mon May 25, 2015 2:21 pm

Quoting Cadet985 (Reply 71):
I don't trust the 320/321 on any route that's mostly over water with no place to divert.

Glad to see your contributions are insighful as always...

Quoting airportugal310 (Reply 74):
Do you say things to purposely sound ignorant or just to sound fairly dumb?

You should read the crap he posts in non-av...

Quoting F9Animal (Reply 78):
5 plus hours in coach on a 737 was not comfortable for me at all.

You say this, but

Quoting F9Animal (Reply 78):
I do agree with others about the 757. It is still a beast, and very comfortable to me.

The 757 cabin is exactly the same as the 737 cabin, with same seats, same pitch etc. How on earth can the 757 be more comfortable than the 737?

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 80):
but they still don't and wont have the legs the 757-200 does. Nor will they have the T/O performance of a 752.

... nor does it have the excessive fuel burn of the 752...

drerx7 · Mon May 25, 2015 2:59 pm

Quoting bgm (Reply 83):
The 757 cabin is exactly the same as the 737 cabin, with same seats, same pitch etc. How on earth can the 757 be more comfortable than the 737?

Not quite. The ceiling is higher in the cabin of the 757 due to a lower floor. This imparts an aire of roominess that is noticeable. I prefer the 757 to the 737 due to this, but seat width/pitch is identical vis a vis airline configurations

us330 · Mon May 25, 2015 3:02 pm

Are there any plans to replace the 757s flying out of PHX to Hawaii with the 321s, or are they still working on a replacement?

Also, is there any reason why some of the PHX-Hawaii flights have long turn times? Some of those 757s spend upwards of 5 hours on the ground in Hawaii before heading back to PHX as redeyes. The typical pattern is a 10 am departure out of PHX, arriving between 1-2pm in Hawaii, and not heading back to PHX until 9/10pm.

From my end, it appears to make more sense to have the aircraft have a later departure time out of PHX to minimize the turn time, similar to how AA schedules their flights to and from LAX, with a typical turn time of 1-2 hours in Hawaii.

drerx7 · Mon May 25, 2015 3:11 pm

Quoting us330 (Reply 85):

Are there any plans to replace the 757s flying out of PHX to Hawaii with the 321s, or are they still working on a replacement?

I dont think even the NEO 321 would be desirable from PHX to Hawaii. ..I could be wrong tho. The current 321 can't do it as profitability. The recurring a.net AA rumor is that the 767 will take over those routes.

flyboy80 · Mon May 25, 2015 3:23 pm

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 80):
I have yet to hear of any plan to start an ETOPS program for the 737 or 32S at Delta.

also all the 75H aircraft (757s getting configed for Hawaii) are some of the newest 757s Delta has. They are doing that for a reason. Fact is, like it or not, the 321 or 739 can't do what a 757 can.

right now the plan is for the 321s to hang out on the east coast.....

The Delta Airbuses are to have the CFM56s correct? Do these engines provide the same performance as the V2500?

I'm curious why people say "the newer airbus 321s are hotter" in relation to their performance capability. Is it specifically engine related? Have the engines grown in terms of power, or did earlier 321 engines have less power more comparable to 320 engines?

DocLightning · Mon May 25, 2015 4:12 pm

Quoting drerx7 (Reply 86):
I dont think even the NEO 321 would be desirable from PHX to Hawaii. ..I could be wrong tho. The current 321 can't do it as profitability. The recurring a.net AA rumor is that the 767 will take over those routes.

You'd be wrong. The A321NEO will have higher T/W than the 752. Now whether they'll need an ACT to do PHX-HNL I don't know.

ripcordd · Mon May 25, 2015 4:29 pm

Sept 5th now is showing 5 RT 321 ORD-LAX seems they are tweeking the schedule maybe it might not go at all

allegiantflyer · Mon May 25, 2015 4:31 pm

Wouldn't it be cute if AMERICAN airlines flew more AMERICAN planes?

Just sayin.

ukoverlander · Mon May 25, 2015 4:57 pm

Quoting allegiantflyer (Reply 90):
Wouldn't it be cute if AMERICAN airlines flew more AMERICAN planes?

Makes more sense to fly the most profitable mix of air frames irrespective of who builds them. That's just good business sense. That said Airbus does plenty that contributes directly to the US economy:

"For the production of its jetliners, Airbus spends 42 percent of its aircraft-related procurement in the U.S. – buying more parts, components, tooling and other material from the United States than any other country. Workers in more than 40 states help build Airbus aircraft, supporting 245,000 high-quality jobs across the U.S. Airbus is the largest export customer for the United States aerospace industry." - http://www.airbus.com/company/americas/us/

MrHMSH · Mon May 25, 2015 5:05 pm

Quoting allegiantflyer (Reply 90):
Wouldn't it be cute if AMERICAN airlines flew more AMERICAN planes?

Just sayin.

No it wouldn't. It would just make the airlines appear small-minded and bigoted. AA, DL, UA and AS all fly big Boeing fleets. Additionally, BA, AF, LH and in the past IB all fly/flew big Boeing fleets. BA is a very enthusiastic 747, 777 and 787 operator. AF fly a huge 777 fleet. LH are again big 747 users, and are the only big 747-8i operator. They've alreay ordered 777-9Xs. SU have big Airbus and Boeing fleets.

Bottom line: airlines should be free to fly whatever fits their needs best, not buy just to appear 'American'. In which case they should also avoid the 787.

910A · Mon May 25, 2015 5:27 pm

Quoting allegiantflyer (Reply 90):

Wouldn't it be cute if AMERICAN airlines flew more AMERICAN planes?

Just sayin.

Let see 787 parts are made in Australia, Japan, Italy, France, Korea, Sweden, United Kingdom, and Canada along with the United States, and that's just the outside.

https://www.aei.org/publication/boeing-787-dreamliner-assembled-in-the-us-made-on-earth/

Point is both Airbus and Boeing uses parts from all over the globe.

So, when American receives it's first Airbus assembled in Mobile, will that be American made?

dlflynhayn · Mon May 25, 2015 8:35 pm

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 80):
I have yet to hear of any plan to start an ETOPS program for the 737 or 32S at Delta.

Talked to a Mechanic the other day about this and he said the same thing,he is very familiar with DL's ETOPS program and hasn't heard anything about the 737-900ER going etops,but did say who know's it may happen in the future.DL's LAX-KOA is on a 757-300 now nice upgrade with nice PTV's and more seats im happy my home airport is finally getting some love...

bgm · Mon May 25, 2015 9:44 pm

Quoting allegiantflyer (Reply 90):
Wouldn't it be cute if AMERICAN airlines flew more AMERICAN planes?

Just sayin.

I really hope you don't own a passport.

Fact is that both Boeing and Airbus make excellent planes, and airlines purchase and operate fleets that work best for them.

"Just sayin'"

trex8 · Mon May 25, 2015 10:24 pm

Quoting allegiantflyer (Reply 90):
Wouldn't it be cute if AMERICAN airlines flew more AMERICAN planes?

Lets see, 35% 787 airframe from Japan, not sure what Alenias share is now with B having taken over Voughts share but Alenia-Vought was 25% split pretty evenly at the beginning of the program. Throw in the smaller non US suppliers and Rolls engines and you probably got well over 50% easily made outside the US.

No idea what the US sourced share of a US assembled A32X will be, for sure probably even higher non US content than the 787, but is an Alabama made A320 any less American than a US assembled Toyota or Mercedes??

Cadet985 · Mon May 25, 2015 10:25 pm

Quoting airportugal310 (Reply 74):
Do you say things to purposely sound ignorant or just to sound fairly dumb?

Why do I say it? I've had pilots respond when I ask them about prolonged over water flights that they wouldn't want to do it in a 320/321 with no place to divert.

Pilots I've spoken to from one American carrier tell me that across the Atlantic "isn't too bad since you're never more than a couple hundred miles from land..." If you're flying LAX/SFO/SEA to HNL/OGG/LIH/KOA, and you have engine issues, older 320/321's may not be ETOPS qualified, and if something happens halfway into the flight, you're over 1000 miles from land. Newer ones are ETOPS-120, but let's call a spade a spade...from LAX-HNL is a 5.5 hour (or more, depending on winds) flight. You lose an engine halfway, or your electricals go, you might not make it.

There's a reason B6 isn't currently considering a LAX/LGB-Hawaii route...

Marc

scbriml · Mon May 25, 2015 11:08 pm

Quoting Cadet985 (Reply 97):
Why do I say it? I've had pilots respond when I ask them about prolonged over water flights that they wouldn't want to do it in a 320/321 with no place to divert.

So what planes would they be happy to do it in? Because all those planes would also have "no place to divert"?

Do you understand how stupid the argument is?

Clipper136 · Mon May 25, 2015 11:43 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 98):
Do you understand how stupid the argument is?

The saddest part is ....he doesn’t.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net