Ce site web utilise des cookies. En utilisant et en naviguant davantage sur ce site, vous acceptez cela.
Rejeter
Saviez-vous que le suivi des vols FlightAware est soutenu par la publicité ?
Vous pouvez nous aider à garder FlightAware gratuit en autorisant les annonces de FlightAware.com. Nous travaillons dur pour que notre publicité reste pertinente et discrète afin de créer une expérience formidable. Il est facile et rapide de mettre les annonces en liste blanche sur FlightAware ou d’examiner nos comptes premium.
Rejeter
Back to Squawk list
  • 32

The Airbus A321XLR Is A Bigger Deal Than You Think

Soumis
 
It seemed as if there were just two conversations taking place at the Paris Airshow last month: Airbus' launch of a new long-range aircraft called the A321XLR and Boeing’s slide... (www.forbes.com) Plus d'info...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


patpylot
patrick baker 3
i yearn for the redesign/enhancement of the 757- what a proven thoroughbreed it has become.....but lacking that, what a reluctant bride the nuptuals of the 787 has become. When??? When???
spursno1
Ben Wind 6
5000nm in a single aisle seems miserable to me. I prefer widebody aircraft for long haul travel
tobinsparfeld
Tobin Sparfeld 9
Of course, but perhaps you would prefer a nonstop instead of having to connect through a hub. A long distance narrow-body potentially opens up more direct routes.
kbeller44
Kyle Beller 6
exactly! throwing in a stop greatly increases your chances of "weather" delays and everything else. yeah thats a long time to sit, but you're at your destination when its all over. Should help open new markets and also help keep ticket prices lower.
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 10
A single isle can be made very confortable, just give everybody enough space plus a descent aisle and it’s not worse than a wide body.
united1889
united1889 3
Seat width and pitch are the same as a wide body, it's just in people's heads because they are used to flying wide bodies.
lrunger
LARRY UNGER 2
One aisle - more people take longer to load and unload. No alternatives to pass carts or people on way to lavs, etc. The old 76s are better than the 777 or A330s because you have 2 aisles for LESS people.
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 1
Very true. But on the other hand these aircraft are used for longer distances and the quick turnarounds are not as important, and more aisle space means that there is more « unproductive » real estate in the air, and bean counters do not like this. The longer loading and unloading can be mitigated by using both front and aft doors, which happens quite often at the smaller airports in Europe these aircraft will be flying to.
lrunger
LARRY UNGER 2
Agreed. But in the US, they only used the rear door on some "shuttles", like BOS - LGA. Normal boarding is only one door and the process adds to the turn-around time - on the ground and not making money. Southwest was the best model when the 737s were "short", they could turn a craft in less than 30 minutes. Now they spend about an hour at each gate. Bags in the overheads also contribute to the loading time, but one aisle and more people do not make for a more pleasant journey.
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 1
Last month I had two shorter flights in Europe on TAP, and they have a new twist to expedite boarding. People with roller-equipped carry on luggage are boarding last. As for the one aisle not making for a pleasant journey, I agree partly, it basically comes down to the living space for each passenger. On a Swiss CSeries I had more space than on an Air France B787, so it comes down to the airlines.
30west
30west 3
Based upon the below quoted paragraph from the Forbes article, I believe a more accurate title for the squawk would be "Airbus and Boeing Will Both Soldier on with Ups and Downs".

"Nevermind that Boeing secured an order for 200 new 737 MAX jets from British Airways parent IAG, even as the aircraft remains grounded following two deadly crashes last year. Nevermind that Airbus publicly accepted the long-predicted defeat of its $16 billion blunder merely four months ago: the majestic but uneconomic four-engined A380. Airbus and Boeing will both soldier on with ups and downs."
speshulk99
john kilcher 3
Boeing received a LOI, not a firm order as we know it.
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 3
I have another take on this article. The important idea is to see that the A321XLR is a paradigm shift. Once Boeing gets around to design an aircraft to be competitive in this new market we will see a lot more direct flights between secondary markets, to the detriment of the hub and spoke model.
30west
30west 3
I agree with your premise. Boeing needs a new narrow body to compete in the long, thin narrrow body routes. It missed the opportunity, as many have stated previously stated, that Boeing should have designed a replacement for its 757, but with longer range than the 757.
wopri
Wolfgang Prigge 3
Exactly, hindsight is always easy, but the decision to not design a replacement for the 757 seems to bite them now.
VMGR352
Robert Jennings 1
Refurb the Yak-40, problem solved. ;-)
patpylot
patrick baker 1
whoops, i made a goof.... we are awaiting the nuptuals for the 797.... there are hundreds of 787's flying all over the place deftly connecting cities with high load factors. How hard a sell will the 797 be, in terms of confidence from the flying public, and acceptance from the carriers by ordering the new plane in large numbers. There had better be more offered by the new Boeing 797 other than just a second aisle in a comparable aircraft to the 321xlr, to be used in simiar city-pairs, which carries boeing's baggage along with the passenger's bags
patpylot
patrick baker 1
the destinction between various A321 models is where the additional fuel tanks are and how much fuel can be carried to safely fly those longer ranges. Airbus may have reached the end of the road on making longer range A321 aircraft, unless they use infight refueling- a joke, a joke,, so the aviation world awaits new planes from boeing and airbus to make generational leaps again. THere is no comparable worry , like boeing and the boeing bucking bronco Max, for airbus did not do large redesign and reconfiguration of things like engines.....
nasdisco
Chris B 1
I fear the history of the 737 has this massive black mark against it called the Max. It is taking the fall for Boeing's failure to replace the 757.
Greg77FA
Greg77FA 0
Lets hope its not a 737Max. Planes built for original purpose do sometimes serve one purpose.
Jackx9
Don Quixote -1
I can't WAIT for the 797 to come out. I'm sorry, I like the A321, but I'm just a 757 guy. Always have been, always will be.

Se connecter

Vous n'avez pas de compte? Inscrivez-vous maintenant (gratuitement) pour des fonctionnalités personnalisées, des alertes de vols, et plus encore!