They is not really true. Even the a320 is transcontinental limited in the winter. JetBlue has been in the news many times for all their fuel stops. The HNL flights have the additional problem of having to carry decompression and single engine fuel. We came from JFk to SFO the other day with stiff headwinds and had to listen to VA crying about their fuel state and a possible divert for almost the whole flight in the319.

No worries. We keep plenty of tissues in the cockpit.

"Tissues for a lot of issues".. Hehehe... sorry couldn't help it. Cheers !

There's an article on Aviation News | Aviation Industry & Airline Statistics | flightglobal.com titled "Hawaiian Order Reveals Reduced Range estimate for A321 NEO".

I can't view the article, but the title seems pertinent to this discussion.

It's a god thing HAL is not using JB's A-320's then huh.... Lets all decide what an a/c, thats not even in production yet, can or cannot do.. I mean we are all experts and know much more than Boeing or Airbus engineers:rolleyes:

And we certainly know more than all the MBA's who get paid to decide fleet planning,..

I had a doctor tell me I had a rotator cuff tear once.. I told him he was wrong, because I'm a pilot and I know everything:D

Do you fly an Airbus? Have you flown a 321? Have you flown the tracks out to Hawaii? The reason people are bringing this up is that there are some real issues with this route. It is the longest overwater segment in the world. Hawaiian is ordering a paper airplane at this point and Airbus has a history of over promising and under performing. Every Boeing airplane outperforms the Airbus equivalent in its market niche. That is why you see airbus narrow body's stuck at FL 390 and below. And FL 380 and 390 are rarely seen unless you are light or in a lighter 319. Airbus has used the same wing for the 319 to the 321. There are issues.

And if you think there is no difference in flying at FL 320 versus being able to get up to 380 or 400 then you have not flown a large jet.

Hawaiian has been making some really great moves for the past couple of years and I give them credit. Clearly the team running the show is smart and seems to do good research and planning. However, this announcement has left me a little puzzled. I would’ve guessed that HA might’ve hedged their bet by ordering a mix of all 3 NEOs or at least the A320/A321. I guess they believed fleet standardization and the advertised lower cost/seat mile was worth the risk.

I've flown the A319/A320/A321 with both the CFMs and IAEs, and the airplanes all have their strengths and some weaknesses. The A321 is great on sectors up to 4- 4.5 hours long at zero fuel weights that are at, or very close to max. If longer than that, there are usually some restrictions (especially if the airplane has 218 seats- I know HA mentioned 190). NK tried ACTs initially, but decided against them due increased DOW and reduced bulk cargo capacity. There is no way around it, performance wise, the airplane is a dog. Airbus promises a 15% improvement, I believe; however, I am not sure if that is enough to offer many of their existing city pairs (HNL-PHX/LAS) or to open many routes that are much further away than SMF/SJC/SFO/LAX.

I remember once FLL to the Caribbean with a full ship and I think MAX ALT was about FL345 (don't quote me, it's been years, but I remember it was mid-summer with temps much higher than ISA) with fuel for a less than 2 hrs flight. We ended up at FL330. Maybe the passenger profiles are different to the Hawaiian Islands than to the Caribbean Islands, but the Jamaicans, Haitians and others travel with many heavy bags. We used most of KFLL 09L- we flexed (not a wide margin between OAT and flex), used CONF 2, but still not a lot of margin for such a short flight. KFLL is ~ 9,000' long; while in comparison OOG is just less than 7,000'. An OGG departure to the mainland would be sporty even at CONF 3, packs off, TOGA. I can’t imagine an A321 with 190 passengers, their bags and fuel for 5-6 hours plus reserves getting off of a 7,000’ runway even 90% of the time at typical island temps. I’ve done departures out of LGA and DCA, but not at weights that approached MTOW.

I’m not sure if any B738 pilots will chime in or not, but I hear rumors of delayed bags being sent on other non-restricted aircraft and sometimes a re-route for a fuel stop in say OAK on the way to the islands?

As was mentioned earlier, it’s roughly the same wing on all models- flaps and slats extension changes the properties of the airfoil differently for each variant; additionally, the A321 has double-slotted flaps. IMO, the A319 has enough wing, the A320 could’ve used a bit more, and the A321 is woefully under-winged. As mentioned earlier, a big problem when using an organized track system that utilizes procedural separation between the mainland and the islands is not being able to get to (higher) OPT/planned altitudes sooner. The A321 NEO will most likely be competing for the same altitudes on the same tracks as all the B738s that make the run every day. And once stuck low beyond radar coverage, there are no vectors for climb or reduced separation to climb through another flight’s level. Unless the flights that are higher vacate their level, you are stuck. I believe that with the fuel margins, as low as I guess them to be, there won’t be much time available to be stuck 2 or 3 levels below OPT/planned.

Regarding paper airplanes- both Boeing and Airbus want to sell airplanes. They paint as rosy a picture as possible to prospective buyers. My post refers to my experience operating the CEO variants. I don’t claim to know for sure how these airplanes will perform, but I think it’ll be fascinating to see what happens. The GTFs are unproven (both reliability and fuel-burn) and, though I couldn’t find the reference, IIRC, they will have a slightly lower max thrust rating than the CEO for the A321.

All I'm saying is many are bashing an airplane that's not even being produced yet. And bashing Hawaiian's decision making on an order specifically for crossing the Pacific.

Kingairfun - Your assessments, IMO, are right on. It's refreshing to see posts made without emotion or personal hang-ups. It will be interesting to see how the A321 NEO "actually" performs. OBTW, do you mind me asking what aircraft you flew at FL510? Great response by the way, gave me a chuckle.

dundem - Thanks for the "real world" perspective. Once upon a time one of the airlines I flew for (now bankrupt) had a tough time getting the 737-700/800 to HNL from the West coast for all the previously stated reasons which I will not delve into. I remember stopping short into ITO or KOA on occasion.

It's easy to get caught up in Boeing vs. Airbus. I always considered myself a Boeing guy, love the planes that I was fortunate enough to fly. Now I'm on Airbus, and it's been good to me, no complaints. Was I hesitant at first? Yup, pilots don't like change, but once I got over that, it was mostly all good. I guess my long-winded point is, lets get all the facts first before we come to any conclusions. But in the mean time, I'm all for a healthy and factual discussion. But lets steer clear of the "sound bight" reporter tactics of reporting half-truths and misinformation. Ironically, I saw a news report today concerning the JAL 787 Dreamliner, and some fuel leak (valve?) issues Boeing will eventually work out. You see, both Airbus and Boeing have their fair share of hick-ups, they will work them out, they have to.

Hawaiin should shoot the works and order a fleet of 787's.