321 xlr
#111
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,860
Yeah, better to have a plane sit 12 hours doing nothing and get a 90% on time vs the plane actually making money and having a 80% on time.
(What's a flagship long haul flight?? You must have this mistaken for the Concord and 1978).
Again look at how 757s get utilized. They don't sit for 12 hours. There aren't 757's sitting in Buenos Aires, Rio or Sao Paulo all day waiting for return flights. The 757's that UAL/AA/DAL use go to Europe from NY as well as head West to Denver/SFO during the day.
(What's a flagship long haul flight?? You must have this mistaken for the Concord and 1978).
Again look at how 757s get utilized. They don't sit for 12 hours. There aren't 757's sitting in Buenos Aires, Rio or Sao Paulo all day waiting for return flights. The 757's that UAL/AA/DAL use go to Europe from NY as well as head West to Denver/SFO during the day.
Not to mention, these will have 24-30 Mint seats with all aisle access and set up for premium long-haul... You gonna send that down on an MCO turn?
#112
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: Back in right seat
Posts: 206
How do you not understand the difference between a 757 and an XLR? If one of Americans 757s gets stuck at an outstation, they can sub any other ETOPS 757. That's not true of an XLR. If it gets stuck in a wx groundstop or gets hours behind schedule, the XLR flight gets cancelled or runs hours late because they can't just sub another A321.
Not to mention, these will have 24-30 Mint seats with all aisle access and set up for premium long-haul... You gonna send that down on an MCO turn?
Not to mention, these will have 24-30 Mint seats with all aisle access and set up for premium long-haul... You gonna send that down on an MCO turn?
Similarly, in the case of JB, you keep your spare XLR/LR doing BOS-MCO turns and if there's an issue you use it for Europe and replace that tail on the BOS-MCO route with your spare all-core 321. I don't see the difference.
Last edited by IrishNJ; 06-22-2019 at 07:28 PM.
#114
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,860
Not sure what you're saying here (meaning I'm open to learning something new) . I don't know anything about American but if I remember correctly; Continental had 757's with 255,000 LBs MTOW while United’s are only 240,000 so basically they can't use United's 757's to bail out any Europe mx cancellations.
Similarly, in the case of JB, you keep your spare XLR/LR doing BOS-MCO turns and if there's an issue you use it for Europe and replace that tail on the BOS-MCO route with your spare all-core 321. I don't see the difference.
Similarly, in the case of JB, you keep your spare XLR/LR doing BOS-MCO turns and if there's an issue you use it for Europe and replace that tail on the BOS-MCO route with your spare all-core 321. I don't see the difference.
So the configuration is all wrong for a JFK/BOS turn and it puts the long-haul flights at risk. I don't see them doing that. Could be wrong obviously.
#115
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,999
Not sure what you're saying here (meaning I'm open to learning something new) . I don't know anything about American but if I remember correctly; Continental had 757's with 255,000 LBs MTOW while United’s are only 240,000 so basically they can't use United's 757's to bail out any Europe mx cancellations.
Similarly, in the case of JB, you keep your spare XLR/LR doing BOS-MCO turns and if there's an issue you use it for Europe and replace that tail on the BOS-MCO route with your spare all-core 321. I don't see the difference.
Similarly, in the case of JB, you keep your spare XLR/LR doing BOS-MCO turns and if there's an issue you use it for Europe and replace that tail on the BOS-MCO route with your spare all-core 321. I don't see the difference.
Seriously dude....how do you not understand the difference?!
Maybe cause you’re just a line pilot like the rest of us. Some like to pretend they know more than they actually do.
#116
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,445
Literally every other airline with a first class product would disagree with you.
#117
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Posts: 442
That’s an extreme example, but I don’t see a < 3 hour NY-FL flight working in a Mint config.
I’ll also point out that at any given time there are a ton of DL widebodies sitting on the hard stand for hours at JFK. These intl planes don’t necessarily have to have the same utilization as any of the other planes in the network if they make up for the revenue when they are working.
But I have a feeling there will be a decent schedule to keep them moving, provide a buffer for delays/maint, and keep a much smoother Europe op than the domestic op. If you figure 7-8 hours block there, couple hours to turn/maint, 9 block back, couple hours to turn and do maint, that will be a 24 hour cycle with some buffer. I don’t see a need (or ability) to get much more utilization out of 6-9 hour plane.
#118
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,445
A prem heavy (lie flat biz) config only works on some routes. Other airlines with a regular domestic first class have about as many total seats in their planes as all core JB planes with no first class due to JB’s greater seat pitch. JFK-MCO with a 140 seat premium heavy 321 is not the same as a 191/197 seat delta A321 with their domestic first. It’s kind of like AA’s A321T which has 102 seats (with 20 lie flat biz and 10 lie flat first) they use on a couple transcons from JFK. They just added it to BOS as well, and they actually run a JFK-BOS flight on that plane, but it’s for repo/sked purposes, not because there’s demand for lie flat on a 30 min flight. I can’t imagine they make much money on that flight.
That’s an extreme example, but I don’t see a < 3 hour NY-FL flight working in a Mint config.
I’ll also point out that at any given time there are a ton of DL widebodies sitting on the hard stand for hours at JFK. These intl planes don’t necessarily have to have the same utilization as any of the other planes in the network if they make up for the revenue when they are working.
But I have a feeling there will be a decent schedule to keep them moving, provide a buffer for delays/maint, and keep a much smoother Europe op than the domestic op. If you figure 7-8 hours block there, couple hours to turn/maint, 9 block back, couple hours to turn and do maint, that will be a 24 hour cycle with some buffer. I don’t see a need (or ability) to get much more utilization out of 6-9 hour plane.
That’s an extreme example, but I don’t see a < 3 hour NY-FL flight working in a Mint config.
I’ll also point out that at any given time there are a ton of DL widebodies sitting on the hard stand for hours at JFK. These intl planes don’t necessarily have to have the same utilization as any of the other planes in the network if they make up for the revenue when they are working.
But I have a feeling there will be a decent schedule to keep them moving, provide a buffer for delays/maint, and keep a much smoother Europe op than the domestic op. If you figure 7-8 hours block there, couple hours to turn/maint, 9 block back, couple hours to turn and do maint, that will be a 24 hour cycle with some buffer. I don’t see a need (or ability) to get much more utilization out of 6-9 hour plane.
#119
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,860
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post