Airbus A321LR to Replace Boeing 757
02-04-2015, 03:11 PM
#21
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
This wasn't an official announcement of any sort... just a poorly written article by some riddle rat.
In fact, the trans-atlantic 757s that DL has are some of the last 757s off the line (former TWA pulled from the desert after AA parked them) and will be around the longest.
There is no pay rate for the 321 yet at DL... it has to be negotiated.
In fact, the trans-atlantic 757s that DL has are some of the last 757s off the line (former TWA pulled from the desert after AA parked them) and will be around the longest.
There is no pay rate for the 321 yet at DL... it has to be negotiated.
02-20-2015, 03:14 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,716
Originally Posted by Sliceback
If Boeing would build a revised 757 with an updated wing and geared fans it would crush the A321 LR.
Estimates of geared fan efficiency put it's range around 5,000 nm. That's what the market needs.
Estimates of geared fan efficiency put it's range around 5,000 nm. That's what the market needs.
02-21-2015, 02:07 PM
#24
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A320 R
Posts: 37
Thank god its a silly article.
Otherwise flying a stretched,underpowered narrowbody as we try to compete with foreign carriers flying WB on those routes looks like a sure fire way to shoot yourself in the foot.
US airlines have tried to maintain capacity discipline to keep yields up. You can do that in- country,but overseas everyone is concerned about market share. And they will glut your markets out if you do not match seat supply with demand.
The reality is airport congestion at places like LHR will force everyone to fly bigger equipment .I do not see a 321 ever going across the pond to major hubs like LHR. And I doubt it could reach any airport farther east with any hope of coming back non stop.
Otherwise flying a stretched,underpowered narrowbody as we try to compete with foreign carriers flying WB on those routes looks like a sure fire way to shoot yourself in the foot.
US airlines have tried to maintain capacity discipline to keep yields up. You can do that in- country,but overseas everyone is concerned about market share. And they will glut your markets out if you do not match seat supply with demand.
The reality is airport congestion at places like LHR will force everyone to fly bigger equipment .I do not see a 321 ever going across the pond to major hubs like LHR. And I doubt it could reach any airport farther east with any hope of coming back non stop.
02-21-2015, 03:17 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Position: B737
Posts: 1,204
I think the A321neoLR will have the capability to at least make most closer European destinations with no problems. I don't see that we (AA) will order a ton of them, but there's a good chance we will operate some on those routes. Most of the European flying will be 777/787/A350/A330 with some scattered A321LR routes. Some of AA's newer 757s also still have a decent amount of life in them and probably won't be retired till after the end of this decade.
02-24-2015, 04:46 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Originally Posted by Sliceback
If Boeing would build a revised 757 with an updated wing and geared fans it would crush the A321 LR.
Estimates of geared fan efficiency put it's range around 5,000 nm. That's what the market needs.
Estimates of geared fan efficiency put it's range around 5,000 nm. That's what the market needs.
http://airinsight.com/2015/02/12/re-...ed-technology/
02-24-2015, 06:24 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,533
Originally Posted by ackattacker
The problem with the 757 is that it's too costly to produce. They were never really designed for efficient mass production. Designing a "revised" 757 to compete with the 321-neoLR is either going to have to be clean sheet (expensive, risky) or re-use the old blueprints and inefficient processes, also expensive, hard to sell. If Airbus can undercut you by 50% for the same market, Boeing won't bite. IMHO it is more likely that Boeing will introduce a "mini" 787 to compete instead of reintroducing the 757. Take out some fuel tanks, shorten the fuselage, voila, a 757 replacement.
RE-ENGINING THE BOEING 757 AND ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY -AirInsight
RE-ENGINING THE BOEING 757 AND ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY -AirInsight
02-24-2015, 06:56 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,097
Any idea on why they are keeping the A350, you'd think they'd focus on one over the other.
Is the 787 more capable than the A350 or vice versa? Delta went with an all Airbus order this time around. Seems so inefficient to have the two types. But then again we are king of NOT being SWA.
Is the 787 more capable than the A350 or vice versa? Delta went with an all Airbus order this time around. Seems so inefficient to have the two types. But then again we are king of NOT being SWA.
02-25-2015, 02:24 AM
#29
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A320 R
Posts: 37
Originally Posted by Name User
Any idea on why they are keeping the A350, you'd think they'd focus on one over the other.
Is the 787 more capable than the A350 or vice versa? Delta went with an all Airbus order this time around. Seems so inefficient to have the two types. But then again we are king of NOT being SWA.
Is the 787 more capable than the A350 or vice versa? Delta went with an all Airbus order this time around. Seems so inefficient to have the two types. But then again we are king of NOT being SWA.
If Emirates and gulf carriers order all your 777 production for the next
6 years you need to look at different options.
We do not operate in a vacuum.
Also buying aircraft is a huge cost. Political favoritism is a player.
I think JAL is all Boeing. When large US orders for buses take place, it allows us to apply stress to AB. Ex we need this, that and that. Those demands as a large customer are a cost to the manufacturer. those costs are shared by all buyers. At point x the other buyer may change brands.
There is more to it of course but this is the down and dirty
02-25-2015, 03:10 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 736
Check out the comparisons online, the A350 (314 pax) has a higher seating capacity than the 787, but the range is similar. So each jet can meet certain market demands. I view the 787 as an airplane for thin routes where the 350 is for higher density routes. I'm glad we will have both, should help us expand to certain markets. United will have both as well.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
