Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Drucocu
Topic Author
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2017 9:17 am

A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:14 am

WOW air subbed an A321Neo for an A330.
Flight time was 8:40h westbound, 8:15 eastbound. Probably a one-off situation, I have taken a look and have only seen the A333 scheduled to LAX.

I had no clue the A321neo could fly this far. Will this really be stretching it or could it be used it to fly even further? And given that the non-LR apparently can fly up to almost 9 hours, what can we expect from the A321LR?

Source (in Dutch):
https://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/nieuws/ ... -negen-uur
 
Varsity1
Posts: 2223
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:34 am

When?

Going back to January 1st, all I see is the A330.


26-Jan-2018
04:10PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:25PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330 9h 15m

Wednesday
24-Jan-2018
04:04PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:06PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
9h 2m

Tuesday
23-Jan-2018
03:52PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
04:40PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 48m

Monday
22-Jan-2018
04:20PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
04:54PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 34m

Friday
19-Jan-2018
04:23PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:36PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
9h 13m

Wednesday
17-Jan-2018
04:48PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:25PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 37m

Tuesday
16-Jan-2018
04:55PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:22PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 27m

Monday
15-Jan-2018
05:39PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:52PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 13m

Friday
12-Jan-2018
04:14PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:04PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 50m
"PPRuNe will no longer allow discussions regarding Etihad Airlines, its employees, executives, agents, or other representatives. Such threads will be deleted." - ME3 thug airlines suing anyone who brings negative information public..
 
timpdx
Posts: 693
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:54 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:40 am

Here is the text from the Dutch article run through google translate:

Flight WW173 left at 16.00 from Keflavik Airport last Tuesday and arrived at Los Angeles Airport exactly 8 hours and 40 minutes later. The return flight on Wednesday lasted 25 minutes shorter.

The Airbus A321neo has a wider range of flight than the previous generation A321s, thanks to more efficient engines. Starting next year, the first A321LRs (Long Range) will be delivered, which can continue to fly due to an additional fuel tank.

Previously, these kinds of long flights were reserved for the Boeing 757 and widebody aircraft, but due to the arrival of the A321neo and the 737 MAX more and more intercontinental flights with narrowbodies will be carried out in the coming years.
Flown 2018: LAX, ARN, DXB, ALA, TAS, UCG, ASB, MYP, GYD, TBS, KUT, BER, TLS, SVO, CCF, DUB, LGW, MEX, BUR, PDX, ORD, SLC, SNA
Upcoming 2018: STL, MIA, BZE, IAH, BHM, LHR, DFW, PHX
 
Clydenairways
Posts: 1293
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:27 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:46 am

Very impressive
 
timpdx
Posts: 693
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:54 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:46 am

And Flightradar 24 does indeed indicate an A321NEO

24 Jan Los Angeles (LAX) Reykjavik (KEF) A21N (TF-SKY) 8:15 11:20 AM 11:42 AM 4:20 AM
Flown 2018: LAX, ARN, DXB, ALA, TAS, UCG, ASB, MYP, GYD, TBS, KUT, BER, TLS, SVO, CCF, DUB, LGW, MEX, BUR, PDX, ORD, SLC, SNA
Upcoming 2018: STL, MIA, BZE, IAH, BHM, LHR, DFW, PHX
 
peterinlisbon
Posts: 1809
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 3:37 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:52 am

I suppose it's good for them in that it gives them more operational flexability any time the A330 is down for maintenance and perhaps sometimes if demand varies they can swap the A320 and A330 around to add and subtract capacity as needed. For example, if there was a lot of demand to New York and not much to LA a certain time of year they could swap the aircraft around.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 2388
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:04 am

The A321NEO continues to impress, I must say :)

WOW also uses the A321NEO on TLV-KEF, so now you can fly TLV-LAX on the A321NEO if you're really lucky (via KEF of course). Who needs a Dreamliner ;)
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3578
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:34 am

Does WW have the need for an A330 anymore, unless they plan to serve Anchorage, given that most of the WOW air A321s have extra tanks? (To reduce restrictions, I wonder if a Y200 configuration might be ideal systemwide, also to avoid paying the 5th cabin crew member.) What routes might UX be planning with the A333s they get back, as those at Y342 are much harder to fill? This is the good thing about newer, longer-range small narrow-body planes; you no longer need the wide-body.
 
cschleic
Posts: 1806
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:47 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:46 am

Varsity1 wrote:
When?

Going back to January 1st, all I see is the A330.


26-Jan-2018
04:10PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:25PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330 9h 15m

Wednesday
24-Jan-2018
04:04PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:06PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
9h 2m

Tuesday
23-Jan-2018
03:52PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
04:40PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 48m

Monday
22-Jan-2018
04:20PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
04:54PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 34m

Friday
19-Jan-2018
04:23PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:36PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
9h 13m

Wednesday
17-Jan-2018
04:48PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:25PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 37m

Tuesday
16-Jan-2018
04:55PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:22PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 27m

Monday
15-Jan-2018
05:39PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:52PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 13m

Friday
12-Jan-2018
04:14PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:04PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 50m


I happened to be at LAX yesterday and saw it depart from runway 24L.
 
910A
Posts: 1883
Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:11 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:51 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
Does WW have the need for an A330 anymore, unless they plan to serve Anchorage, given that most of the WOW air A321s have extra tanks? (To reduce restrictions, I wonder if a Y200 configuration might be ideal systemwide, also to avoid paying the 5th cabin crew member.) What routes might UX be planning with the A333s they get back, as those at Y342 are much harder to fill? This is the good thing about newer, longer-range small narrow-body planes; you no longer need the wide-body.


Just for the record ANC (2940nm) is significantly closer to KEF than LAX (3749nm). :lol:
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3578
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:03 am

910A wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
Does WW have the need for an A330 anymore, unless they plan to serve Anchorage, given that most of the WOW air A321s have extra tanks? (To reduce restrictions, I wonder if a Y200 configuration might be ideal systemwide, also to avoid paying the 5th cabin crew member.) What routes might UX be planning with the A333s they get back, as those at Y342 are much harder to fill? This is the good thing about newer, longer-range small narrow-body planes; you no longer need the wide-body.


Just for the record ANC (2940nm) is significantly closer to KEF than LAX (3749nm). :lol:


Now that is odd, given that LAX was flown with an A321neo. The A321LR in a Y200 configuration could work very well.
 
User avatar
FA9295
Posts: 1770
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:44 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:07 am

Varsity1 wrote:
When?

Going back to January 1st, all I see is the A330.


26-Jan-2018
04:10PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:25PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330 9h 15m

Wednesday
24-Jan-2018
04:04PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:06PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
9h 2m

Tuesday
23-Jan-2018
03:52PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
04:40PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 48m

Monday
22-Jan-2018
04:20PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
04:54PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 34m

Friday
19-Jan-2018
04:23PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:36PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
9h 13m

Wednesday
17-Jan-2018
04:48PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:25PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 37m

Tuesday
16-Jan-2018
04:55PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:22PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 27m

Monday
15-Jan-2018
05:39PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:52PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 13m

Friday
12-Jan-2018
04:14PM GMT
Keflavik Int'l - KEF
05:04PM PST
Los Angeles Intl - LAX
A330
8h 50m


I sincerely hope you're not getting this information from flightaware. :lol: I'm not sure what's going on there, but for whatever reason, lots of the information stored there is VERY inaccurate.
 
timpdx
Posts: 693
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:54 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:11 am

And flightradar24 was spot on with correct equipment, inc. Registration #.
Flown 2018: LAX, ARN, DXB, ALA, TAS, UCG, ASB, MYP, GYD, TBS, KUT, BER, TLS, SVO, CCF, DUB, LGW, MEX, BUR, PDX, ORD, SLC, SNA
Upcoming 2018: STL, MIA, BZE, IAH, BHM, LHR, DFW, PHX
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21837
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:46 am

I just want to point out that the A321 can't possibly do 752 routes.

I read it on A.net so it must be true. ;)
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3619
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:57 am

Wonder what load restriction they had. As per Airbus the range maxes out at 3500nm with 206 seats and around 3700nm with 185 seat layout.
 
User avatar
BawliBooch
Posts: 1475
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:24 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:07 am

Hmm.

According to gcmap, LAX-KEF is 3800nm? I thought the standard A321NEO range was 3500nm?

What am I missing?
Mr.Kapoor's favorite poodle!
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3619
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:13 am

BawliBooch wrote:
Hmm.

According to gcmap, LAX-KEF is 3800nm? I thought the standard A321NEO range was 3500nm?

What am I missing?


As above that range is the A321neo with 206 seats. While range with 185 is 3700nm "still shorter than LAX-KEF" these routes are still air without headwinds. I could see tham doing it eastbound LAX-KEF with tailwinds, but did they stop for fuel westbound? They would not be carrying 200+ passengers on that flight though.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2988
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:13 am

BawliBooch wrote:
Hmm.

According to gcmap, LAX-KEF is 3800nm? I thought the standard A321NEO range was 3500nm?

What am I missing?


Weight restriction...
 
MaksFly
Posts: 367
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 5:50 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:38 am

Impressive for the A321 but no way in hell would I want to be on a narrow body for that long if I have neighbors sitting next to me.

767 like 2-3-2 is the perfect way of hopping the atlantic if in economy especially with a spouse sitting on the 2 side.
 
opticalilyushin
Posts: 787
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 6:35 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 9:06 am

I never really understood why people are so 'narrowbody-phobic' on long flights? Unless you specifically like widebodies so that you can walk circuits of the aircraft, down one aisle and up another (imagine the crew's reaction if everyone did that!) there is no difference or benefit. I've flown 7+ hours in a 737 and 8+ in a 757, and the big difference for me is that it is much quicker to board and disembark from. Id rather not be at the back of the queue of 340ish passengers trying to get off a WOW A330 in LAX. I find as long as the legroom is ok I am more than happy to fly TATL in a little plane :)

Maksfly- yes the 767 is nice in the 2-3-2 config, as is the 330/340 in the 2-4-2 config if you and your partner get the window seats.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9308
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 9:13 am

DocLightning wrote:
I just want to point out that the A321 can't possibly do 752 routes.

I read it on A.net so it must be true. ;)


Back to your alternate time line <whip-snap> ! :-)))
Murphy is an optimist
 
thgsr08
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:02 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 9:42 am

FR24 shows:
23 Jan Reykjavik (KEF) Los Angeles (LAX) A21N (TF-SKY) 8:40F/T - 4:00 PM - 4:00 PM - 5:35 PM
:checkeredflag:
 
fsabo
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:32 pm

DocLightning wrote:
I just want to point out that the A321 can't possibly do 752 routes.

I read it on A.net so it must be true. ;)


But how much fish can it haul?
 
airbazar
Posts: 10164
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:39 pm

There's already another thread talking about this. I believe the aircraft is limited to 150pax.
 
fsabo
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:54 pm

airbazar wrote:
There's already another thread talking about this. I believe the aircraft is limited to 150pax.


Consider that the bleed on the 1A is pinned open causing 5 to 6 percent fuel burn penalty.
 
User avatar
flyingturtle
Posts: 5855
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:56 pm

fsabo wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
I just want to point out that the A321 can't possibly do 752 routes.

I read it on A.net so it must be true. ;)


But how much fish can it haul?


One very big fish!
Reading accident reports is what calms me down
 
MontaukMonster
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 2:41 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:06 pm

Hope the pilots has themal socks on
 
User avatar
DLHAM
Posts: 513
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 1:10 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:28 pm

Impressive: yes! But: do we know how much payload hit they had to take? Thats a lot longer than the longest 757 TATL routes like CDG-RDU or HAM-EWR. But I think KEF-LAX does not have to deal with the jetstream that much or at all, unlike these other TATL routes.

But when the A321neo makes such a route, also with payload hit, the A321LR seems promising.
My Instagram Account: Instagram
 
thepinkmachine
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 4:43 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 1:52 pm

Other thread suggested the load was limited to approx 150 pax, so there was a significant payload reduction.

A 321 NEO LR could probably take another 20-30, due to its higher MTOW.

I think this offers good a glimpse of the prospective capabilities of the NEO LR.

Airbus’s claim of [email protected] would translate to real-world [email protected] (and no cargo). Impressive for a NB airplane, but I think 3000NM+ flights will still remain the domain of wide bodies for some years to come...
"Tell my wife I am trawling Atlantis - and I still have my hands on the wheel…"
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8807
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 2:08 pm

MaksFly wrote:
Impressive for the A321 but no way in hell would I want to be on a narrow body for that long if I have neighbors sitting next to me.

Sorry that is an absurd comment, the seats on an A321 are visibly wider than a 10-abreast 777 or 9-abreast 787, and the same as a 747, A330/340 or A380. The only difference with an A321 is 150 people at check in, boarding, immigration, baggage claim etc instead of 300.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
777PHX
Posts: 962
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:36 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:32 pm

I'd rather fly an A321 in economy than something like AA's 10 abreast 777s.
 
MaksFly
Posts: 367
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 5:50 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:56 pm

cedarjet wrote:
MaksFly wrote:
Impressive for the A321 but no way in hell would I want to be on a narrow body for that long if I have neighbors sitting next to me.

Sorry that is an absurd comment, the seats on an A321 are visibly wider than a 10-abreast 777 or 9-abreast 787, and the same as a 747, A330/340 or A380. The only difference with an A321 is 150 people at check in, boarding, immigration, baggage claim etc instead of 300.


Why is that an absurd comment?

Would you rather be stuck on a long road trip in a Smart Car or be riding in the back of a large SUV?

It has little to do with Seat width and more to do with the size of the sardine can you are stuck with.

I do not know about you, but unless I am sitting in first class, and even then, more than 4 hours gets old... you want to be able to go walk around the airplane, stretch, etc. It is completely unhealthy to be stuck in your seat for hours at a time without moving.

I would rather be on a 10 abreast 777 than a single aisle tube if it is more than 4 hours....

This is why folks far prefer flying the A380.

Granted, the new interior upgrades such as the sky interior with the more streamlined baggage bins do help create a more open environment, but it does not at all beat having a cabin that is nearly twice as wide.

That is why I mentioned the 767 with a 2-3-2 as the perfect balance with the 2-4-2 A330/340 coming in second after.
 
tvh
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 7:41 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 4:07 pm

777PHX wrote:
I'd rather fly an A321 in economy than something like AA's 10 abreast 777s.

Specially with only 150 people on board.
 
WIederling
Posts: 9308
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 4:14 pm

777PHX wrote:
I'd rather fly an A321 in economy than something like AA's 10 abreast 777s.


Recently had the opportunity to ride BA A319 and then BA 777-200ER and back in reverse sitting in Y.
All the seats had "flat spots"
A319 is ok the 777 for a longer ride even in 9 across unpleasant.
( 777 way back the guy towards the aisle overfilled his seat.
Surprised the Trent 777 was much louder than the GE90 one.
BA made the additional error to provide open earphones on the Trent and closed earbuds on the GE90 flight.
A319 in comparison was an absolute "silent liner" )
Murphy is an optimist
 
highflier92660
Posts: 723
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 2:16 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 4:32 pm

For any aircraft it isn't about the nautical or statute miles covered but total flight time. I would love to know how many pounds of fuel were left in that A321 when they blocked-in at LAX after 8:40h westbound. Granted they probably didn't have to file an alternate with the VFR weather at LAX.
 
airbazar
Posts: 10164
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 4:47 pm

thepinkmachine wrote:
Other thread suggested the load was limited to approx 150 pax, so there was a significant payload reduction.
A 321 NEO LR could probably take another 20-30, due to its higher MTOW.
I think this offers good a glimpse of the prospective capabilities of the NEO LR.
Airbus’s claim of [email protected] would translate to real-world [email protected] (and no cargo). Impressive for a NB airplane, but I think 3000NM+ flights will still remain the domain of wide bodies for some years to come...


Uh? 3 problems with your assertion:
1) WOW is flying KEF-MIA right now with an A321NEO. That's 3,200nm. So we know a plain NEO is good for that distance.
2) My understanding is that the LR will add 500nm. So if a non-LR can do 3,200nm routes then the LR should be good for 3,700nm.
3) Most airlines will be flying TATL with a 3 class A321 (J, Y+, Y). So like the TATL 752 today, the TATL 321LR will have nowhere near 180 seats, let alone 200 seats.
 
thepinkmachine
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 4:43 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 7:14 pm

airbazar wrote:
thepinkmachine wrote:
Other thread suggested the load was limited to approx 150 pax, so there was a significant payload reduction.
A 321 NEO LR could probably take another 20-30, due to its higher MTOW.
I think this offers good a glimpse of the prospective capabilities of the NEO LR.
Airbus’s claim of [email protected] would translate to real-world [email protected] (and no cargo). Impressive for a NB airplane, but I think 3000NM+ flights will still remain the domain of wide bodies for some years to come...


Uh? 3 problems with your assertion:
1) WOW is flying KEF-MIA right now with an A321NEO. That's 3,200nm. So we know a plain NEO is good for that distance.
2) My understanding is that the LR will add 500nm. So if a non-LR can do 3,200nm routes then the LR should be good for 3,700nm.
3) Most airlines will be flying TATL with a 3 class A321 (J, Y+, Y). So like the TATL 752 today, the TATL 321LR will have nowhere near 180 seats, let alone 200 seats.


Yes, it has been demonstrated, that the 321NEO can do a 3200-3700Nm sector, but at a significantly reduced payload. The LR will have it MTOW increased by 3,5 tons, which enables some 20-30 pax more for the same distance. More, but still way below 200 pax

So yes, it is possible to operate this way, but the economical viability is, IMHO, marginal at best.

There surely will be flights like this, but it will still be a market niche - the same way as the 752 is... Widebodies will still be the backbone of TATL for now../
"Tell my wife I am trawling Atlantis - and I still have my hands on the wheel…"
 
airbazar
Posts: 10164
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 11:22 pm

thepinkmachine wrote:
Yes, it has been demonstrated, that the 321NEO can do a 3200-3700Nm sector, but at a significantly reduced payload. The LR will have it MTOW increased by 3,5 tons, which enables some 20-30 pax more for the same distance. More, but still way below 200 pax
So yes, it is possible to operate this way, but the economical viability is, IMHO, marginal at best.
There surely will be flights like this, but it will still be a market niche - the same way as the 752 is... Widebodies will still be the backbone of TATL for now../


It's not significantly payload reduced. In fact IIRC it's not payload reduced at all. The economic viability depends on the mission and market. There are plenty of markets where a 250 seat widebody is not viable, for example. i can't imagine LAX-KEF being a market with huge demand.
I think we're already beyond the "niche" category. There are at least a dozen airlines operating narrowbodies on TATL routes and the number will only increase. And yes, of course widebodies will still make up the majority of routes. No one is debating that. Narrowbodies will never entirely replace widebodies in the TATL market simply because it's a huge market. But there are countless untapped markets that an efficient narrowbody can tap into.
 
arcticcruiser
Posts: 455
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 2:16 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Fri Jan 26, 2018 11:45 pm

airbazar wrote:
thepinkmachine wrote:
Yes, it has been demonstrated, that the 321NEO can do a 3200-3700Nm sector, but at a significantly reduced payload. The LR will have it MTOW increased by 3,5 tons, which enables some 20-30 pax more for the same distance. More, but still way below 200 pax
So yes, it is possible to operate this way, but the economical viability is, IMHO, marginal at best.
There surely will be flights like this, but it will still be a market niche - the same way as the 752 is... Widebodies will still be the backbone of TATL for now../


Oh yes it is reduced payload. Very reduced. Wlederling provided a p/r graph in a different thread. Look at it.
 
LAXLHR
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 10:07 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 2:05 am

MaksFly wrote:
cedarjet wrote:
MaksFly wrote:
Impressive for the A321 but no way in hell would I want to be on a narrow body for that long if I have neighbors sitting next to me.

Sorry that is an absurd comment, the seats on an A321 are visibly wider than a 10-abreast 777 or 9-abreast 787, and the same as a 747, A330/340 or A380. The only difference with an A321 is 150 people at check in, boarding, immigration, baggage claim etc instead of 300.


Why is that an absurd comment?

Would you rather be stuck on a long road trip in a Smart Car or be riding in the back of a large SUV?

It has little to do with Seat width and more to do with the size of the sardine can you are stuck with.

I do not know about you, but unless I am sitting in first class, and even then, more than 4 hours gets old... you want to be able to go walk around the airplane, stretch, etc. It is completely unhealthy to be stuck in your seat for hours at a time without moving.

I would rather be on a 10 abreast 777 than a single aisle tube if it is more than 4 hours....

This is why folks far prefer flying the A380.

Granted, the new interior upgrades such as the sky interior with the more streamlined baggage bins do help create a more open environment, but it does not at all beat having a cabin that is nearly twice as wide.

That is why I mentioned the 767 with a 2-3-2 as the perfect balance with the 2-4-2 A330/340 coming in second after.


You must be referring to Domestic First Class, because 4 hours in International First never ever gets old that quickly. At least for me, my threshold is at the 10 hr mark and yet I'm still good to go in Business or Int First up to 15 hrs, and I do a lot of these flights. Dinner over the first 2-3 hrs a movie then up to 8 hours sleep, followed by tv or work then arrive....all good. It's all about how one utilizes their time and their mind! Domestic Y, I just watch a movie on my tablet or work/read...arrive. 10 across on a 777 is awful unless you are 5.6 and slim built.
BA IB ET JM EA GK PA VS AA SN HP CO W7 WN NW DL UA AC US LH LX OS JL QF QR WY MH CX U2 EK 9W UK TP VY VN LO OK OZ UL SQ LA

707 727 L10 732-NG 741 742 743 744 752 753 762 763 772 773 787 DC8 DC9 DC10 M80 M11 100 AB3 310 318 319 320 321 330s 340s 350 380
 
Wingtips56
Posts: 1291
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:26 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 2:14 am

At $79 fares, can WOW make money with the reduced payload? Or is the A321 a temporary fill-in on the LAX route?

I assume WOW isn't a freight hauler, so they can suck up some of the payload restriction with more passengers than might be otherwise. Such economics wouldn't work for the hybrid operations of a UA, AA, DL, BA, etc.
Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines (Retired). Flight Memory: 181 airports, 92 airlines, 78 a/c types, 403 routes, 58 countries (by air), 6 continents. 1,119,414 passenger miles.

Home airport : CEC
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3619
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 2:57 am

fsabo wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
I just want to point out that the A321 can't possibly do 752 routes.

I read it on A.net so it must be true. ;)


But how much fish can it haul?


There it is!
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3619
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:03 am

thepinkmachine wrote:
Other thread suggested the load was limited to approx 150 pax, so there was a significant payload reduction.

A 321 NEO LR could probably take another 20-30, due to its higher MTOW.

I think this offers good a glimpse of the prospective capabilities of the NEO LR.

Airbus’s claim of [email protected] would translate to real-world [email protected] (and no cargo). Impressive for a NB airplane, but I think 3000NM+ flights will still remain the domain of wide bodies for some years to come...


Airbus notes 3500nm with 206 passengers & 3700 with 185 passengers in the A321neo & 4000nm with 206 passengers in the LR. These are also with basic 199 lb./passenger and standard galley/lavatories.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3619
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:14 am

airbazar wrote:
thepinkmachine wrote:
Other thread suggested the load was limited to approx 150 pax, so there was a significant payload reduction.
A 321 NEO LR could probably take another 20-30, due to its higher MTOW.
I think this offers good a glimpse of the prospective capabilities of the NEO LR.
Airbus’s claim of [email protected] would translate to real-world [email protected] (and no cargo). Impressive for a NB airplane, but I think 3000NM+ flights will still remain the domain of wide bodies for some years to come...


Uh? 3 problems with your assertion:
1) WOW is flying KEF-MIA right now with an A321NEO. That's 3,200nm. So we know a plain NEO is good for that distance.
2) My understanding is that the LR will add 500nm. So if a non-LR can do 3,200nm routes then the LR should be good for 3,700nm.
3) Most airlines will be flying TATL with a 3 class A321 (J, Y+, Y). So like the TATL 752 today, the TATL 321LR will have nowhere near 180 seats, let alone 200 seats.


Uh? 1 problem with your comment:
WOW A321neo has 218 seats., their A321-200 has 200. So let alone there will be 200 seats flying.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3619
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:16 am

thepinkmachine wrote:
airbazar wrote:
thepinkmachine wrote:
Other thread suggested the load was limited to approx 150 pax, so there was a significant payload reduction.
A 321 NEO LR could probably take another 20-30, due to its higher MTOW.
I think this offers good a glimpse of the prospective capabilities of the NEO LR.
Airbus’s claim of [email protected] would translate to real-world [email protected] (and no cargo). Impressive for a NB airplane, but I think 3000NM+ flights will still remain the domain of wide bodies for some years to come...


Uh? 3 problems with your assertion:
1) WOW is flying KEF-MIA right now with an A321NEO. That's 3,200nm. So we know a plain NEO is good for that distance.
2) My understanding is that the LR will add 500nm. So if a non-LR can do 3,200nm routes then the LR should be good for 3,700nm.
3) Most airlines will be flying TATL with a 3 class A321 (J, Y+, Y). So like the TATL 752 today, the TATL 321LR will have nowhere near 180 seats, let alone 200 seats.


Yes, it has been demonstrated, that the 321NEO can do a 3200-3700Nm sector, but at a significantly reduced payload. The LR will have it MTOW increased by 3,5 tons, which enables some 20-30 pax more for the same distance. More, but still way below 200 pax

So yes, it is possible to operate this way, but the economical viability is, IMHO, marginal at best.

There surely will be flights like this, but it will still be a market niche - the same way as the 752 is... Widebodies will still be the backbone of TATL for now../


With the lower CASM & trip fuel burn than the 757 I would disagree the viability will be more than best & better than the 757 cost wise.
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3619
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:18 am

arcticcruiser wrote:
airbazar wrote:
thepinkmachine wrote:
Yes, it has been demonstrated, that the 321NEO can do a 3200-3700Nm sector, but at a significantly reduced payload. The LR will have it MTOW increased by 3,5 tons, which enables some 20-30 pax more for the same distance. More, but still way below 200 pax
So yes, it is possible to operate this way, but the economical viability is, IMHO, marginal at best.
There surely will be flights like this, but it will still be a market niche - the same way as the 752 is... Widebodies will still be the backbone of TATL for now../


Oh yes it is reduced payload. Very reduced. Wlederling provided a p/r graph in a different thread. Look at it.


I would look at it if you included the thread or a title for the thread!
 
airberlin2017
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 4:40 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:31 am

KEF-LAX 01/30 and LAX-KEF 01/31 are also planned on the A321neo with the Registration TF-SKY.

TF-WOW A330 has technical problems.
 
Swadian
Posts: 562
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 4:56 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:41 am

airbazar wrote:
thepinkmachine wrote:
Other thread suggested the load was limited to approx 150 pax, so there was a significant payload reduction.
A 321 NEO LR could probably take another 20-30, due to its higher MTOW.
I think this offers good a glimpse of the prospective capabilities of the NEO LR.
Airbus’s claim of [email protected] would translate to real-world [email protected] (and no cargo). Impressive for a NB airplane, but I think 3000NM+ flights will still remain the domain of wide bodies for some years to come...


Uh? 3 problems with your assertion:
1) WOW is flying KEF-MIA right now with an A321NEO. That's 3,200nm. So we know a plain NEO is good for that distance.
2) My understanding is that the LR will add 500nm. So if a non-LR can do 3,200nm routes then the LR should be good for 3,700nm.
3) Most airlines will be flying TATL with a 3 class A321 (J, Y+, Y). So like the TATL 752 today, the TATL 321LR will have nowhere near 180 seats, let alone 200 seats.


Um, AA's 75L has 176 seats wit flat-bed J, so hardly "nowhere near 180 seats".
 
User avatar
VCEflyboy
Posts: 1237
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 7:23 pm

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:56 am

Wingtips56 wrote:
At $79 fares, can WOW make money with the reduced payload? Or is the A321 a temporary fill-in on the LAX route?

I assume WOW isn't a freight hauler, so they can suck up some of the payload restriction with more passengers than might be otherwise. Such economics wouldn't work for the hybrid operations of a UA, AA, DL, BA, etc.


That’s exactly what I was thinking. With only 150 passengers the flight would be loss making regardless of the equipment. Probably wow decided to cut their losses. But it’s not something sustainable for wow. For a legacy airline selling more expensive tickets than it would be feasible.
 
737max8
Posts: 614
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 am

Re: A321Neo flying KEF- LAX

Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:36 am

opticalilyushin wrote:
I never really understood why people are so 'narrowbody-phobic' on long flights? Unless you specifically like widebodies so that you can walk circuits of the aircraft, down one aisle and up another (imagine the crew's reaction if everyone did that!) there is no difference or benefit. I've flown 7+ hours in a 737 and 8+ in a 757, and the big difference for me is that it is much quicker to board and disembark from. Id rather not be at the back of the queue of 340ish passengers trying to get off a WOW A330 in LAX. I find as long as the legroom is ok I am more than happy to fly TATL in a little plane :)

Maksfly- yes the 767 is nice in the 2-3-2 config, as is the 330/340 in the 2-4-2 config if you and your partner get the window seats.


Wait what? Every double aisle aircraft I have ever been on (see below, all of them) disembarks WAY faster than any 737/757/A321.

Also, I just prefer the environment/atmosphere of a widebody so much more on a long haul flight. It's just a different experience.
The thoughts and opinions expressed in my comments do not represent that of any airline or affiliate.
Flown on: 717 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 7M8 744 744ER 752 753 762 763 772 773ER 788 789 A220 A319/20/21 A332 A333 A339 A343 A346 A359 A388

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