100 321 NEO Order
#181
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
You appear to have a continued problem in admitting you are wrong. Now you’re doubling down on the single axle truck thing and refuse to acknowledge you were wrong on the thrust and start up.
The AA 321s are mostly legacy US aircraft with lower thrust engines without the sharklets, thus the weight restriction. Ours do not have those issues.
The AA 321s are mostly legacy US aircraft with lower thrust engines without the sharklets, thus the weight restriction. Ours do not have those issues.
#182
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,877
Likes: 194
#183
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 4,116
Likes: 1
LOL and it probably would be "better" from a performance standpoint. But at what cost? We like climb perf. Airlines only care about it to the extremely limited extent that the lack of it actually prohibits you from doing a market. That's rare and that's the extent of it. If a GTF 757 made the amount of sense plane loving pilots wish it would they'd build it.
#184
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
From: Port Bus
You appear to have a continued problem in admitting you are wrong. Now you’re doubling down on the single axle truck thing and refuse to acknowledge you were wrong on the thrust and start up.
The AA 321s are mostly legacy US aircraft with lower thrust engines without the sharklets, thus the weight restriction. Ours do not have those issues.
The AA 321s are mostly legacy US aircraft with lower thrust engines without the sharklets, thus the weight restriction. Ours do not have those issues.
Keep in mind also that the 321 NEO’s brake system is not that of the 321 CEO. It is an entirely new revamped system and works quite well, this has always been a lackluster system on the CEO. I have landed several times in DCA with the 321 NEO and have never even seen the temps in the orange, this is without brake fans even being on. Its an awesome machine, the NEO will climb right up to 350 with 185 passengers on a transcon and the burn between 2700-2800 Lbs/h per side at cruise. It is so quite that you could go without a headset the entire flight from takeoff to touchdown. We operate the LEAP 1 engine and have been told that it can take up to 5 minuets to start the engine. I have never experienced this, however it does do a lot more motoring though, start times range from 1-3 minuets or so I would say. I wish the “new Alaskan Airways” would get their heads out somewhere and place an order like you guys did. What type engines are you getting with your order?
#186
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,299
Likes: 0
From: A320 Capt
You appear to have a continued problem in admitting you are wrong. Now you’re doubling down on the single axle truck thing and refuse to acknowledge you were wrong on the thrust and start up.
The AA 321s are mostly legacy US aircraft with lower thrust engines without the sharklets, thus the weight restriction. Ours do not have those issues.
The AA 321s are mostly legacy US aircraft with lower thrust engines without the sharklets, thus the weight restriction. Ours do not have those issues.
#187
Keep in mind also that the 321 NEO’s brake system is not that of the 321 CEO. It is an entirely new revamped system and works quite well, this has always been a lackluster system on the CEO. I have landed several times in DCA with the 321 NEO and have never even seen the temps in the orange, this is without brake fans even being on. Its an awesome machine, the NEO will climb right up to 350 with 185 passengers on a transcon and the burn between 2700-2800 Lbs/h per side at cruise. It is so quite that you could go without a headset the entire flight from takeoff to touchdown. We operate the LEAP 1 engine and have been told that it can take up to 5 minuets to start the engine. I have never experienced this, however it does do a lot more motoring though, start times range from 1-3 minuets or so I would say. I wish the “new Alaskan Airways” would get their heads out somewhere and place an order like you guys did. What type engines are you getting with your order?
#190
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,299
Likes: 0
From: A320 Capt
I guess it's too far back to pull up the flight plan. I'd like to see the reason.
In the last year or so I've seen some strange weight restrictions. The 321 sometimes runs into balance issues with lighter loads, and the load system doesn't allow a restriction for balance(didn't, I haven't seen it in a while), so the load planner would put a weight restriction on it instead. I've had to intervene to let folks know we really didn't have an issue. I recently had a restriction eastbound because the dispatcher was planning way too much fuel.
We rarely have a weight issue on the 321 transcon from CLT. The 320 is the one we have issues with. Sorry you had a problem.
But back to your initial point-the 321 is no 757. It does a lot of what the 757 can do, and much cheaper, but there are compromises. I say that it has a great smooth ride detector, it always seems to be 500' above recommended max alt!
In the last year or so I've seen some strange weight restrictions. The 321 sometimes runs into balance issues with lighter loads, and the load system doesn't allow a restriction for balance(didn't, I haven't seen it in a while), so the load planner would put a weight restriction on it instead. I've had to intervene to let folks know we really didn't have an issue. I recently had a restriction eastbound because the dispatcher was planning way too much fuel.
We rarely have a weight issue on the 321 transcon from CLT. The 320 is the one we have issues with. Sorry you had a problem.
But back to your initial point-the 321 is no 757. It does a lot of what the 757 can do, and much cheaper, but there are compromises. I say that it has a great smooth ride detector, it always seems to be 500' above recommended max alt!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post




