100 321 NEO Order

Reply Subscribe

Page 28 of 30

« First

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

01-27-2018 | 04:32 PM

#271

BigHitterLlama

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Aug 2015

Posts: 557

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoDeskJob

How would that be any more miserable than a 757?

Equally? I assumed the pitch in our 75 would be better than an ULCC 321 - could easily be wrong.

01-27-2018 | 04:50 PM

#272

Baradium

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Dec 2006

Posts: 2,370

Likes: 0

From: 737 FO

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigHitterLlama

Equally? I assumed the pitch in our 75 would be better than an ULCC 321 - could easily be wrong.

I presumed the same airline's 321 vs their own 757 (if they had any) is what he was getting at.

01-28-2018 | 06:47 AM

#273

BigHitterLlama

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Aug 2015

Posts: 557

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baradium

I presumed the same airline's 321 vs their own 757 (if they had any) is what he was getting at.

Got it. Not familiar with WOW’s fleet. Just saw they normally fly that route with a 330.

01-29-2018 | 09:59 AM

#274

forgot to bid

veut gagner à la loterie

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 23,286

Likes: 0

From: Light Chop

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigHitterLlama

Equally? I assumed the pitch in our 75 would be better than an ULCC 321 - could easily be wrong.

Seatguru puts wow at 30-31 inches and our 757 at 31-33 and our 321 at 31.... That kind of blows. Because you're right about the ulcc part of Wow.

01-29-2018 | 10:11 AM

#275

sailingfun

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Feb 2008

Posts: 20,877

Likes: 194

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoDeskJob

Wow. I had no idea the plane was THAT capable. I’d be curious to know how many pax were on board.
And to think that’s not the LR.....

No bags or cargo apparently. Bags had to go on another flight.

01-29-2018 | 11:17 AM

#276

forgot to bid

veut gagner à la loterie

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 23,286

Likes: 0

From: Light Chop

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailingfun

No bags or cargo apparently. Bags had to go on another flight.

Source?

....

01-29-2018 | 01:44 PM

#277

Vincent Chase

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Sep 2015

Posts: 1,034

Likes: 2

From: I got into this business so I wouldn't have to work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

Source?

....

The usual...

( . )

Or it could have been tongue in cheek, but that would be so far out of character for sailingfun. So I stand by the above.

01-29-2018 | 02:57 PM

#278

sailingfun

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Feb 2008

Posts: 20,877

Likes: 194

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vincent Chase

The usual...

( . )

Or it could have been tongue in cheek, but that would be so far out of character for sailingfun. So I stand by the above.

If you look at the fuel burn the aircraft had to have gone with full fuel for 8:40 minutes. Using the lightest operating empty weight airbus publishes that leaves about 37,000 lbs of payload. The article I saw said aircraft was full. FAA winter weights are 195lbs per passenger. If it was full they had 225 onboard with crew. No matter how you slice the pie the numbers don’t allow much if anything in the belly.

01-29-2018 | 02:58 PM

#279

80ktsClamp

Da Hudge

Joined: Oct 2006

Posts: 17,473

Likes: 0

From: Poodle Whisperer

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailingfun

Ooh... now we've gone to "not much."

He's shifting!

01-29-2018 | 03:05 PM

#280

sailingfun

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Feb 2008

Posts: 20,877

Likes: 194

Quote:

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp

Ooh... now we've gone to "not much."

He's shifting!

Actually the payload number I posted is wrong. I used a CEO weight. Should be around 50,000 with full fuel so the numbers are better. With 225 people they would have had between 3000 to 6000 lbs available in the belly or about 26lbs per passenger using best case. If the OEW is 3000 lbs heavier like most aircraft end up that drops in half. With their config it’s likely well above 107,000.