The current 220 seat limit is raised by the addition of an overwing exit and the SpaceFlex aft galley. EIS in 2017.
I assume this will only be achieved with slim seats and LCC-style 28-29" pitch. This is likely aimed at European holiday carriers currently using 757's such as Thomson, and other similar operations.
Note that this is not a stretch as misunderstood in previous discussions, but a new high-density config.
Previous rumor thread for reference purposes: Airbus Considers 235 Seat A321 NEO(by lostsound Dec 14 2012 in Civil Aviation)
31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
Thank you r2ho
So the A321NEO will be in a class of its own ? the 737MAX9 has 21 less seats in high density (10% less)
- High density short haul / charter will be interested
- Legacies 2 class low density will be happy with the deactived door2 opportunity... with should also raise the 2 class seat count
It's no small upgrade in my opinion
However that leaves a widening gap between the A320 and A321 in high density configuration (and a nice sweet spot for the 737-MAX8 : Z wall / optmised toilets ...)
Quoting r2rho (Thread starter): This is likely aimed at European holiday carriers currently using 757's such as Thomson, and other similar operations.
Quite a good market there, clearly some serious effort gone into attracting these customers.
Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 1): However that leaves a widening gap between the A320 and A321 in high density configuration (and a nice sweet spot for the 737-MAX8 : Z wall / optmised toilets ...)
good point, although maybe with the economics of A321neo, a bigger aircraft with more flexibility might be favoured by some operators.
Good news for Airbus. Will they issue free shoe horns to get everyone in their seats ?. I will give this one a miss, thank you. Where possible I never turn right it can get very dark, crowded and uncomfortable.
Quoting r2rho (Thread starter): The current 220 seat limit is raised by the addition of an overwing exit and the SpaceFlex aft galley. EIS in 2017.
Will the extra overwing exit be standard on the A321NEO? I suspect it will boost resale value more than it costs in maintenance...
Quoting Bthebest (Reply 2): Quite a good market there, clearly some serious effort gone into attracting these customers.
Have any ordered the NEO? IIRC Thomson, but anyone else?
Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 1): However that leaves a widening gap between the A320 and A321 in high density configuration (and a nice sweet spot for the 737-MAX8 : Z wall / optmised toilets ...)
Size doesn't matter, it is cost per flight and there isn't that much of a difference between the -8MAX and A321NEO's cost per flight. So fly the extra seats and when they pay for themselves, enjoy!
Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 1): - Legacies 2 class low density will be happy with the deactived door2 opportunity... with should also raise the 2 class seat count
I missed that detail, thank you. It does present better economics for 2-class opperators with moderate pitch Y.
Lightsaber
My guess is the range will take a big hit for the new A-321CATTLECAR. Is it going to have the same MTOW as the A-321NEO? If it does, that means it must carry LESS fuel, another hit to its range.
I seriously doubt most of the enthusiasts on this site will ever want to be shoved into this thing. No thanks, Airbus, you can keep the flying sardine can.
One can only imagine how uncomfortable this aircraft will be.
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
My guess is the range will take a big hit for the new A-321CATTLECAR. Is it going to have the same MTOW as the A-321NEO? If it does, that means it must carry LESS fuel, another hit to its range.
Something's gotta give.
Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 1): - Legacies 2 class low density will be happy with the deactived door2 opportunity... with should also raise the 2 class seat count
Does anyone know what the exit limit will be in this config? It should be greater than 189, since it has larger door capacity than a 737-800, unless there is limitations due to the distance between door 1 and the overwing exit.
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 4): Will the extra overwing exit be standard on the A321NEO? I suspect it will boost resale value more than it costs in maintenance...
I will probably be popular as it adds flexibility. With the overwing exit you can have up to 236 seats with all exits activated, 220 with overwing deactivated and 189-200 somewhere (I'm guessing) with door 2 deactivated. Without it you are stuck with one exit config.
Funny how the aircraft is getting the flak, instead of the airline who chooses the actual configuration. Good on Airbus, hope air travel remains affordable as a result in this age of rising costs.
Anyone remember how an extra exit on the 737-900ER led to highly valuable sales to Lion Air? May Airbus have the same fortune.
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5): Is it going to have the same MTOW as the A-321NEO? If it does, that means it must carry LESS fuel, another hit to its range.
As noted in another A321 thread, the biggest range restriction is not what the aircraft can lift, but what the aircraft can carry. With its small efficient wings, fuel capacity is limited, even with the main centre tank.
Basic fuel tankage is 18,605 Kgs, which can be increased to 23,302 Kgs with two ACTs.
So with our present A321s, it is possible to load full fuel, and carry full passengers and still be 8000 Kgs below MTOW. Now our A321s carry 174 passengers, if you added another 6448 Kgs for the additional 62 passengers and baggage, you would still be roughly 1500 Kgs below MTOW.
The A321neo would be very similar, but with the added range of the more efficient engines and sharklets.
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5): My guess is the range will take a big hit for the new A-321CATTLECAR. Is it going to have the same MTOW as the A-321NEO? If it does, that means it must carry LESS fuel, another hit to its range.
I suspect the airlines that will buy it fully understand the concept of a payload/range curve. ??
No more uncomfortable than any "pack 'em in" airline flying today.
If, as I suspect, neither of you actually read the PR, the modifications present the airlines with a much more flexible cabin in both 2-class and all economy configurations. But hey, why miss an Airbus-bashing opportunity?
Hello
High density "real life" A321CEO should be able to fill more than 90% of wing and center tank with a 22.4 t payload (236 PAX)
NEO should be the same (or better in case of MTOw increase)
We can assume 2300-2500 Nm in the real life (and I think I take conservative estimates)
Is it that bad ?
Quoting scbriml (Reply 10): No more uncomfortable than any "pack 'em in" airline flying today.
If, as I suspect, neither of you actually read the PR, the modifications present the airlines with a much more flexible cabin in both 2-class and all economy configurations. But hey, why miss an Airbus-bashing opportunity?
Errmm..no. How about taking a breath, and have a seat before you reflexively defend "anything that remotely appears to bash Airbus"?
And, unfortunately, I did read the release, and I read the original configuration on AW&ST a couple of months ago. And I don't care what airplane manufacturer builds a sardine can; Boeing or Airbus, I will avoid any airline that uses that high-density, utterly uncomfortable configuration. So don't make an ass our yourself jumping to conclusions. Last I checked, this was a thread on the A321; I didn't see any thread or mention of some ridiculous high-density 737 sardine can.
But please, continue to imagine this as an Airbus bashing thread when it wasn't in the first place.
.
The aditional emergency exits are also necessary to opt for the A321 /236 planes also for a lower density configuration with alarger premium class in the front and still enough Y pax behind.
In this case the over wing exits are used and the front side emergency exits can be closed and used for premium class cabins accoring to airbus.
Regards
Flyglobal
[Edited 2013-01-17 08:01:14]
This is not only a high density solution.
For low density, high J, configurations, the new over wing exits allow the door 2 exits just forward of the wing to be deactivated, for more seats to be fitted.
Quote: "In conjunction with the additional over-wing exit door, a second new option is available whereby the forward exit is de-activated. This creates a seamless, undivided forward cabin allowing additional seats and even more flexibility in multi-class seat arrangements. This option will be of particular use in longer range markets where high comfort standards are needed in Premium class."
As a result, the 321neo will address both 757 replacement markets - short haul "cattle class" leisure with 236 seats, and long haul low density including J seats.
Quoting Pacific (Reply 8): Anyone remember how an extra exit on the 737-900ER led to highly valuable sales to Lion Air? May Airbus have the same fortune.
Yes I think it's almost the same move (spaceflex, new exists), just missing the MTOW increase, unless you consider that going NEO is almost the same
So airbus almost launched an A321NEO-ER !
Waiting for the MTOW increase now (for PAS maybe ?)
Quoting longhauler (Reply 9): As noted in another A321 thread, the biggest range restriction is not what the aircraft can lift, but what the aircraft can carry. With its small efficient wings, fuel capacity is limited, even with the main centre tank.
Basic fuel tankage is 18,605 Kgs, which can be increased to 23,302 Kgs with two ACTs.
So with our present A321s, it is possible to load full fuel, and carry full passengers and still be 8000 Kgs below MTOW. Now our A321s carry 174 passengers, if you added another 6448 Kgs for the additional 62 passengers and baggage, you would still be roughly 1500 Kgs below MTOW.
The A321neo would be very similar, but with the added range of the more efficient engines and sharklets.
Might not forget the weight of the seat also...
Your A321 seems lighter than the one I found on the net (THY and RJ )
Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 14): For low density, high J, configurations, the new over wing exits allow the door 2 exits just forward of the wing to be deactivated, for more seats to be fitted.
I assume this means that the fuselage is fabricated with no door at all in the Door 2 position and with regular cabin windows instead, or is the door frame simply plugged with a fixed fuselage panel?
Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 15): Might not forget the weight of the seat also...
Your A321 seems lighter than the one I found on the net (THY and RJ )
I think it would be a tough one to forecast. I was only using our present aircraft, and our present weights, for a rough guideline.
As you note, there are a lot of other factors to consider, among them being the 62 additional seats. But also, we would be removing the 20 heavy J class seats, with their powered controls, etc. Also, the forward galley on our A321s is huge ... able to serve 20 J passengers an elaborate J service, twice. I keep thinking of all the china, crystal, linen and silverware that would be unnecessary and not carried.
But until you work the numbers, as I am sure Airbus and potential Customers have, you wouldn't know for sure.
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5): My guess is the range will take a big hit for the new A-321CATTLECAR. Is it going to have the same MTOW as the A-321NEO? If it does, that means it must carry LESS fuel, another hit to its range.
There are masses of short range holiday routes in Europe so range is not an issue for many carriers.
Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 11): We can assume 2300-2500 Nm in the real life (and I think I take conservative estimates)
Is it that bad ?
Depends on where the airplane needs to fly. For US TRANSCON, it is bad. For shorter routes in the EU, it works perfectly. I can see this being an airplane custom built for FR.
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5): My guess is the range will take a big hit for the new A-321CATTLECAR. Is it going to have the same MTOW as the A-321NEO? If it does, that means it must carry LESS fuel, another hit to its range.
A realistic DOW for a 230 seat A321neo is around 53t, that includes weight for neo mods, extra seats etc. Add catering and 230 pax which brings you some 24t, now you are at 77t. MTOW is 93.5t so you have some 16.5t fuel, at 2.6t average fuel consumption the endurance will be 6.3 hours, that is including your reserves.
Now I don't want to sit in a SA more then 5 hours and I don't think others would at 230 seats below 30'' pitch. Most holiday destinations would be found within that endurance me thinks.
[Edited 2013-01-17 09:05:23]
Quoting Pacific (Reply 8): Anyone remember how an extra exit on the 737-900ER led to highly valuable sales to Lion Air? May Airbus have the same fortune.
Airbus did it before when they added an overwing exit to the A319 for Easyjet, who dumped the 737 for it in return.
It seems many people on here are not familiar with the "old 757's in Euro-Charter Airlines. The basic config on a B757 was 235Y, and latterly 229Y. People like Jet2 and Thomson could be interested in such a plane, flying at 28" pitch, full loads from the North of Europe to The Med. However that model is outdated and being fast replaced / overtaken by LCCs. So it remins to be seen if anyone "bites" in this market.
MAC
I know that everyone keeps saying Euro charter airlines, but this sounds like a perfect airplane for Spirit too. It doesn't need the range, but the capacity. This A321Neo is perfect for FLL to anywhere in the Carrabbean. It also could fly from FLL to most cities in their system. Trans-cons may not happen, but how many of those flights do they currently fly? I would not be shocked to see an announcement that NK is a launch for this new varriant of the A321.
Wingnut
Quoting scbriml (Reply 10): the modifications present the airlines with a much more flexible cabin in both 2-class and all economy configurations.
That is the most exciting detail. The flexibility as noted by:
Quoting speedygonzales (Reply 7): I will probably be popular as it adds flexibility. With the overwing exit you can have up to 236 seats with all exits activated, 220 with overwing deactivated and 189-200 somewhere (I'm guessing) with door 2 deactivated. Without it you are stuck with one exit config.
Thank you for the explination.
Quoting Pacific (Reply 8): Anyone remember how an extra exit on the 737-900ER led to highly valuable sales to Lion Air? May Airbus have the same fortune.
?? This will sell planes.
Quoting scbriml (Reply 10): I suspect the airlines that will buy it fully understand the concept of a payload/range curve.
Na, we armchair CEOs no better.
Quoting neutronstar73 (Reply 12): And I don't care what airplane manufacturer builds a sardine can; Boeing or Airbus, I will avoid any airline that uses that high-density, utterly uncomfortable configuration.
Then you are not a customer of the charter airlines. Every mature market will eventually break down into at least 5-identifiable sub-markets. For airlines, we have charter/first class, business class, Y+, coach (with legroom), and ULCC coach and then variations with and without luggage. This change means that a standard 2-class A321 will have a better layout and then a charter/ULCC configuration is an option. Why not celebrate Airbus selling more planes instead of bashing how you don't like the market?
Are you against the 757 because so many are used by charters? Or the infamous 8-across narrow pitch 767s? Boeing 767 - Charter Configuration(by CTFLYER May 8 2001 in Civil Aviation)
Every can use seatguru, so there shouldn't be any surprises.
?? I think B6 will benefit from the flexibility too.
Quoting Phen (Reply 16): or is the door frame simply plugged with a fixed fuselage panel?
There are standard door plugs with an interior panel to hide the door opening from the passengers (so they don't try to use it in an emergency).
Lightsaber
26 Burkhard: I always wondered why Airbus did not try this. This 236 A321 will be the same density as 186 seater B737-800 or 180 seater A320. If you fly in such pl
28 airboe: Now I don't want to sit in a SA more then 5 hours and I don't think others would at 230 seats below 30'' pitch. Most holiday destinations would be fo
29 neutronstar73: Reading comprehension is REALLY HARD HERE. Ahem: from my post above: "And I don't care what airplane manufacturer builds a sardine can; Boeing or Air
30 Boeing74741R: Don't forget Thomas Cook and Monarch, the former with a decent size 757 fleet (including aircraft from the days of Flying Colours!) and the latter wi
?
? This will sell planes.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home