Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- American (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/american/)

- - 321 pay ... (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/american/94221-321-pay.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MatchPoint (Post 2104507)

Correction, the max capacity for the 757-200 (the model the 321 was designed to compete against) is 238 passengers, max capacity for the A321 is 236. That's 2 pax which is nowhere near 5%. I do agree the 757 is a much much better performer but the A321 wasn't designed for the exact same role as the 757. It was designed to be an efficient high capacity short to mid haul aircraft which much lower cost than the 757. For that reason the CPASM is significantly less on the 321, significantly. We do need to retain a fleet of 757s for long routes into high terrain/short runway airports but for domestic (48, Canada, Island, most of Central) there's no need to fly an aircraft that torches more $$.

With the exact same interior seating the 757 seats a few more. At the high end that you are posting the limit is often exits or evac time. Delta as a example with brand new interiors and seats on the 757-200 is seating 199. Their new A321's are seating 189. Same basic seats and galley configurations. A lot of legacy 757's still have old seats and extensive galleys from the days when some fool thought passengers wanted to eat. Configured alike the 757 is usually about 10 seats more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhatNow (Post 2104515)

Even though at max capacity the two ships seat almost the same we all know it comes down to the config. Regardless in the real world Boeings can usually be configured with 5-10 more seats than its rival Airbus (319 vs 737-7, 320 vs 737-8 and 757-2 vs 321). But in this extremely price sensitive and highly competitive industry where the largest cost to a carrier is fuel there’s no comparing the two (312 vs 757) when it comes to CASM. The 321 may be a crappy performer when it comes to takeoffs, climb rates and cruise speeds but it burns significantly less fuel. Even with 5-10 fewer seats it’s far cheaper to operate, this is why Sir Parker has chosen the pathetic 321 over our beloved 757.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MatchPoint (Post 2104586)

No, that is why he chose the 321 over an even crappier 737-900. That's the comparison to make.

Stupid rumor. Did not negotiate it. No way the APA would have ever negotiated it. It would have impacted the SLI arguments to the favor of former USAir pilots.

Win APA. Win Dougwiser.

Distracted by the 319 being in Group 1 in LBFO1 and the 1113

"Won" that battle, lost sight of the 321

Would be nice, absent Group III pay, to have an override for the 321.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle (Post 2125876)

Stupid rumor. Did not negotiate it. No way the APA would have ever negotiated it. It would have impacted the SLI arguments to the favor of former USAir pilots.

Win APA. Win Dougwiser.

It's been said many times before, this was done pre-Dougweiser.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheddar (Post 2126603)

It's been said many times before, this was done pre-Dougweiser.

The current JCBA (that is still not properly implemented) was negotiated and ratified by the Great Paper Tiger in collaboration with Dougwiser.

Any talk about rationalizing 321 pay (as the 757 replacement jet), outside of the next negotiations/capitulations, is all just talks of pie in the sky. Pathetic pacifier dreams for folks too scared to admit they foooked up.