A Look At The Routes The Airbus A321XLR Could Fly
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 окт 2020
- The Airbus A321XLR was an instant hit when it was first announced at last year’s Paris Air Show. Altogether, 24 airlines have ordered over 450 units of the plane. Earlier this year, Airbus shared that, despite the global health crisis, the type is still on course to launch in 2023. So, which routes could we see the plane operate?
Article link: simpleflying.com/a-look-at-th...
Video source links:
A321xlr • A321XLR: Xtending the ...
a350 air france • Meeting with Air Franc...
757-200 united • United Airlines N514UA...
Photos:
Airbus
GCMap.com
Website: simpleflying.com/
Instagram: / simpleflyingnews
Twitter: / simple_flying
#Aviation #Flight #Avgeek
This can be a brilliant aircraft for intra African operations linking city pairs that aren't viable on widebody jets, like Harare to Accra, Lusaka to Cairo etc?
Not only that. Because it is. With a range of 4,700 nmi, the Airbus A321XLR will be the first narrowbody capable of flying [most] widebody routes, without sacrificing fuel economy by significant amounts compared to standard narrowbody planes. Granted, the Boeing 737 MAX 7, with a range of 3,850 nmi, could already fly Trans-Atlantic flights, which Norwegian Air does, but most widebody routes are longer than that. The Airbus A321XLR will enable direct flights from Portland, Oregon to London Heathrow, England-a distance of 4,270 nmi-for example, one that isn't economical with widebody planes due to low passenger demand.
@@00crashtest omg 😱such a big comment💬
@@bidhanchandraroy5524 Who asked?
For most of those city pairs existing A32x-NEO has sufficient range. Perhaps Capetown-Algiers or something like that.
@@00crashtest last I checked it’s 3000nm from NY to heathrow, and then some 2000ish NM’s from PDX to NY. Unless my math is off that’s above the max range for the XLR…
Long-haul in a single-aisle? Sounds like a good deal for the airlines.
Like the DC8 did
@@mikeyriley8959 Or the 757, that was a big favorite of charter operators, flew it Canada-UK a zillion times in the 90's.
@@mikeyriley8959 - that’s a very good point
@@simonacuthbert1 I’ll take a pencil body with tolerable seat width and pitch over what they’re selling the 787 as. If they stick to the 3 and 3 seating it is reasonably survivable economy, as opposed to 9 abreast 787’s with 17” seat width and pitch as tight as 30” that is a hellscape I never want to experience again. Human beings are -not- shaped like that
@@Hilde_von_Derp they definitely will be sticking with the 3-3 seating. It is not possible to squeeze an extra row into an A320
Man Boeing needs to the build
The 757 Plus or they’re toast in the narrow body market. They can’t just rely solely on the MAX.
the problem was boeing 757 classified as faa catagori IV aircraft because the wingspan more than 118 ft and airbus a321xlr wingspan only 117.5 ft, couple airport would catagories 757 as big aircraft an they will charge big fee for parking, if boeing wants to modify 757 they must shink thats wing and cut down thats high landing gear
@@zulharriansyahsyamsul3970 oof
737-900ER was created for that reason
@@vibesix And it still cannot replace the 757 fully.
@@mraviatorboii2510 maybe we will see a 737-900ULR ;)
I cannot wait for these things to start production. It seems like they are going to make international travel far less expensive. I'm thinking destinations in the Eastern Europe that were prohibitively expensive in the past might be an easy budget expenditure soon...
And faster, if they'll allow to go with a direct flight
While an it seems likely to have a niche, it looks like a modernization of a couple models of the 757 line several operators had yet to replace since there has not been an equivalent since they went out of production. Which 757's production halt kind of highlights where the market had been for this type was 15-20 years ago, granted it is hard to guess between growth in aviation since then and impacts of covid what the market for this is now.
@@SnowmanTF2 one thing I have been trying to research are the comparative weights of the two models. It looks like the a321 is some 13,000 kg less massive than a 757. It is hard to imagine a 757 competing with the projected a321 XLR unless it is redesigned to be considerably lighter...
@@NikonF5user Even if Boeing made a new plane for that category it would be so different could justify a new name/number, the existing 757s are getting probably closer to two generations of the cycle some airlines use. So between lighter construction methods and newer engine technology instead of a more normal 20% fuel savings when airlines cycle out old aircraft, it will probably be over 40% fuel savings over 757s still working routes nothing modern till the XLR fit.
I'd like to see it used on more point-to-point routes, allowing secondary cities in the US (Sacramento or Nashville for example) more direct international access!
With a range of 4,700 nmi, the Airbus A321XLR will be the first narrowbody capable of flying [most] widebody routes, without sacrificing fuel economy by significant amounts compared to standard narrowbody planes. Granted, the Boeing 737 MAX 7, with a range of 3,850 nmi, could already fly Trans-Atlantic flights, which Norwegian Air does, but most widebody routes are longer than that. The Airbus A321XLR will enable direct flights from Portland, Oregon to London Heathrow, England-a distance of 4,270 nmi-for example, one that isn't economical with widebody planes due to low passenger demand.
@@00crashtest 4700nmi is the aircraft theoretical range. In actual, its usable range is only about 4000nmi-4200nmi due to reserves, headwinds and payload. Many of the extreme destinations quoted will need to be dial back.
Likewise the A321LR and B737max7 usable range is only around 3300nmi-3500nmi. Depending on how the airlines configured their aircraft, you need to cut about 500nmi from their range on paper and maybe a little more (like 600-700nmi) for airbus aircraft due to the lighter passengers assumption.
@@00crashtest No chance the A321XLR can fly from Portland Oregon to London. Also that is not a low demand route as evidenced by British Airways intending to start operating that route pre-Covid.
@@joefarah Why no chance?
@@00crashtest I initially thought it was on the fringe of the theoretical max range of the aircraft But looking at it more closely it looks like it is possible and maybe within its usable range. However, I question whether any passengers would be willing to fly 10 hours in a narrowbody aircraft. Even the CEO of Emirates questioned that when asked if he was worried about competition from low cost carriers.
British Airways was willing to start the PDX - LHR route in a 787 pre-COVID. Let’s hope that to still be the case post COVID.
I would want the a321xlr fly between the caribbean and England like how the a300 and a310 as well as a340 of airJamaica and bwia a340/l1011 used to do in the 90s/2000s but now they gone and Carribean Airlines just has 17 planes 12 737-800 and 5 atr aircraft
That's not even an extreme case. With a range of 4,700 nmi, the Airbus A321XLR will be the first narrowbody capable of flying [most] widebody routes, without sacrificing fuel economy by significant amounts compared to standard narrowbody planes. Granted, the Boeing 737 MAX 7, with a range of 3,850 nmi, could already fly Trans-Atlantic flights, which Norwegian Air does, but most widebody routes are longer than that. The Airbus A321XLR will enable direct flights from Portland, Oregon to London Heathrow, England-a distance of 4,270 nmi-for example, one that isn't economical with widebody planes due to low passenger demand. The A321XLR has WAY more potential than you think.
@@00crashtest don't just copy the comment
Defenitly seing it with UA in the route kiah-skbo (houston to bogota) replacing the outdated 757
Congratulations 🎉👏 of being the top comment 👍😁 (as of now 😈)
Yea!
Those are long sectors to be sitting in a narrow body with current seating configurations
Qantas could service India and other "second tier" asian destinations.
Honestly this is one aircraft i am not looking forward to as a passenger.
Of course it makes sense for the airlines but the comfort will suffer.
See Wizzair will put in like 240 seats into an A321 and fly it on an 8h route. Guess have fun with 3 lavatories onboard. Will try and stick to widebodies on long haul routes :D
On the contrary - if these planes with COVID-19 in mind aren't fitted with to small pitches - it's wonderful and silent plane. I would however LOVE if simply flying when talking about what the machine CAN do, also try to speculate about the economics - wide body's have more passengers - so is it at all viable to think of this plance on the long-hauls you are suggesting?
ye... hope that this plane's comfort doesn't go the same way as B737-900ER on domestic flights...
We already have dozens of flights on A320/B737 that fly up to 8-9 hours today. I don't understand how suddenly A321XLR would make it worse.
We have 10 hours flight from Brasilia to Orlando on MAX8. 9 hours flight on A321LR from Montreal to Athens. 7 hours flight on B737-900ER from Istanbul to Dar Es Salaam. 7.5 hour flight from Moscow to Blagoveshchensk on A320neo.
And many 6-8 hours flight from West Coast/East Coast US domestic flights. And Flights to Hawaii.
Well - as if Wizz Air was comfortable before. Don't you think reputable airlines like United will put in their long haul product? Space wise the A321XLR will be as if not more comfortable than a comparable Boeing 777.
THE ONE DISLIKE IS FROM BOEING CEO,FIVE DISLIKES FROM BOARD MEMBER OF BOEING,3 FROM MAX FANS ,2 FROM FAA,4 FROM EMPLOYEES ,5 FROM BOEING FANBOYS 2 FROM EX EMPLOYEES
The three dislikes are from Boeing employees
And two more execs
Well....
uhmmmm........
😠
The additional 4 dislikes are from corrupt FAA members
Their whole board now plus some top managers :)
The range of the XLR is just insane. I remember my flight from Hong Kong to Sydney, that was quite a long flight! And now this could be done with the A321XLR? Just wow
when looking at the city distance pairs, it is also important to look the winter east-west flight into a strong headwind. Rome to New York in 3764nm, or a 8.4 hr flight at a cruise speed of 450kt. If headwind is 100kt, then speed over ground is 350 kt, meaning a flight time of 10.7hr, for an effective distance of 4800nm. Spend a night in Gander to appreciate this
Curitiba to miami. A few years ago this route was operated by AA with their old 767s
If this plane could bring AA back to Brazil I wouldn't be mad. They had ten destinations there a few years ago and now they're down to one, theoretically two
A lot of the examples mentioned in the video (Dallas to Hawaii, NYC to London or Paris...) really don't seem what this plane is made for. Sure, the A321 has the range, but so do the B777 or the A350 (or the A380), which would be better fits for those busy routes. The game-changer there is to allow direct long-distance flights on quieter routes where a wide-body would not be viable (like Washington to Zagreb)... i.e. to kill the hub and spoke model.
The A321 XLR is also very fuel efficient. You can beat the B777, A380, A350 etc. by flying more flights per day provided the airports are not slot limited.
awesome animation
Speaking as a Captain that will be flying it soon, I am excited to see where it will take me. I love flying the 320 NEO. And I can not wait to meet its big brother.
As for the seats... It depends on the company. We will NOT be putting in premium seats, but I am sure some others will. As a passenger on vacation, I would much rather be on a smaller aircraft, like the XLR, with plush seats. It can board faster and take us to our destination non-stop without a connection, like a wide body unfortunately would need to.
Point to point is going to change everything for my industry. And this is the plane to do it.
Congrats Airbus and Thank you,
A Very Happy Pilot
Wow with the A321XLR, A220 and A350 it really seems like Airbus is set to dominate the 2020's.
A330 neo is also a fantastic plane, and the 320 neo is still rocking
@@valet2972 well the A339neo is selling decently, the 787 is far more popular tho. the smallest a330neo plane is very unpopular tho.
Nice
Will be brilliant to see new medium and long haul potentials for low-cost airliners just like Wizz. It will be great to see cheaper possibilities to fly to the US and Asia.
In the air. I find that's the best place for any plane to fly!👍😉
The A321XLR will essentially replace long-range versions of the 757-200.
It would be nice if it had transpacific capability
@@sho1715 No thank you. A single-aisle plane can get quite claustrophic on a 9+ hour transoceanic flight.
Can't wait to see Indigo's routes
Don't worry this channel just ignores Indian airlins
@@deepakmadhukar28 all does
@@deepakmadhukar28 it doesn't
@@-NeelavBarman it does buddy... Like if u have seen the video of largest a320 family order even though Indigo is one of them they didn't mention them plus even in this video they have just said a line about Indian aviation, but the a320 ordered by Indigo will most probably fly to London from delhi which majorly explains the XLR form of the plane but again they ignored.... But never mind they have more western subscribers so the choice of content makes sense .... Talking about there hundreds of articles per week then they don't have any other option other than including them.... And for the last, I have never seen this channel using a Indian airlines plane in their videos just American and European... So I can say for now that they ignore Indian airlines if not then at least they avoid..
@@deepakmadhukar28 yeah one perspective but you can also see that they made a sole video of Calcutta airport
Ahhhhh... I hope the SIA grip would order the A321XLR. The new thumbnail also looks fantastic!
This is such a game changer
Airbus is on a streak of great planes and decisions! Wonderful future for aviation!
✈️
My new year resolution in 2023 fly an aircraft like this Airbus is surely getting the upper hand
Seems like a great innovative aircraft. Hope Air New Zealand buys some: could be a great way into Asian destinations
My airport would love to see this flying to Italy or Amsterdam. Currently have 2 transatlantic destinations and they are both sold out. 777-300 7x a week to London is always sold out and 767-300 5x a week to Paris is always sold out and we are REALLY hoping to get the a350 to Beijing because we are a headquarters for RTI and Lenovo and also have one of the largest IBM campuses
Which Airport is it?
@@eddstraveler9177 Raleigh-Durham
With a range of 4,700 nmi, the Airbus A321XLR will be the first narrowbody capable of flying [most] widebody routes, without sacrificing fuel economy by significant amounts compared to standard narrowbody planes. Granted, the Boeing 737 MAX 7, with a range of 3,850 nmi, could already fly Trans-Atlantic flights, which Norwegian Air does, but most widebody routes are longer than that. The Airbus A321XLR will enable direct flights from Portland, Oregon to London Heathrow, England-a distance of 4,270 nmi-for example, one that isn't economical with widebody planes due to low passenger demand.
Yh im early today love simple flying
I have a few doubts about the XLR:
Although it has impressive range for a narrow body, I feel that cruising at Mach 0.78 (could be slower sometimes IRL should fuel saving be a concern) and having only 2 lavatories on board might not be comfortable for passengers traveling long haul.
Also, I heard that the MTOW would be 101 tons, which would be 15 tons shy of that of a 757-200. So I estimate that (I might be wrong) beyond around 5500 km of range, 757 might still have an operational advantage over the XLR.
B757 doesn't have any operational advantage over XLR anymore. High fuel cost, high maintenance cost, The fact that B757-200 is aging with no other replacement than A321XLR sounds like they got no where to run.
Also, A321XLR is slightly smaller and lighter compared to B757-200. Cruising speed depends on how the computer analyze the situation regarding the conditions of the flight. But I doubt it would be much different compared to B757-200 or any other narrowbody in the same class as them.
@@nntflow7058 What I mean by operational advantage is that since 757 has that MTOW advantage while not being that much heavier (only by maybe 6 tons), beyond a certain point in long range 757 offers more loading flexibility than the XLR. If you want to stretch the XLR to its max 8000+ km range, you would have to sacrifice a lot of passenger and payload capacity to make room for fuel, and that is not efficient. I've heard that in a 240 passenger configuration it can fly up to 7400 km, but I would assume that is only achievable through very strict limits on how much luggage each passenger can carry, and on long haul flights that is not attractive to passengers. Yes, the 757s have to be replaced, but I doubt that the XLR can perfectly handle the current long and skinny 757 routes without compromises.
This could be a awesome possibility to fit into point-to-point instead of hub-and-spoke. I guess it might be a great chance for Berlin, Milan, Budapest, Hamburg, Düsseldorf, Brussels, Warsaw and Manchester just to name a few examples within Europe. In case the Chinese-Russian competitor does not make it into the market within the upcoming years, markets in Asia will be lost too.
For Swiss 🇨🇭 market I think:
-Zurich to US-Midwest & South destinations like Dallas, New Orleans
and new Canada routes probably.
-Maybe new Carribean routes
-New routes to India 🇮🇳
-New African Routes like 🇳🇦
It’s amazing how a single aisle aircraft could fly this far. Definitely a good use for transcontinental flights in the US, Europe, Africa, South America, and Asia while the widebodies handle the transpacific and transatlantic routes
Hope that the aviation market recovers soon!
@Barry Harry .... fingers crossed but I think it will be not happening before next year late spring or late summer ... unfortunately
@@wolfgangselle4307 true, the vaccine needs to be properly distributed and developed only then will people start to travel
102k wow
🎊 🎊 🎊
XLR seems fun, Charlotte to London for me
Looks like a good airplane ✈ 👌 👍.
There are many potential routes from India to west asian/southeast and east asia.
In India Indigo is the only airline to order the aircraft at the moment...
I live in Kolkata and CCU (Kolkata International Airport) is lacking in international routes because the passenger load is less for wide bodies.
I would love to see the A321XLR on routes from Kolkata to -
Dubai, Doha, Abu Dhabi, Beijing, Shanghai and a few shorter routes like Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh City
I would also like to see these jets fly from other Indian cities like Chennai, Hyderabad, Bangalore, Kochi, New Delhi and Mumbai to destinations like -
Istanbul, Cairo, Cape Town, Mauritius, Taipei, Osaka, Seoul, Tokyo, Warsaw, Vienna, Rome etc...
I think the A321XLR is going to be an absolut gamechanger and I think is going to be sold in the thousands….
I still prefer wide bodies if there's a choice. They tend to be more stable in turbulence and the A350 / 787 are noticeably quieter.
What do you mean the A350 and B787 are noticeably quieter? The A321 XLR is not even flying.
I think it would suit the polish medium-long haul aviation market beautifully
I'm pretty sure that it will be heavily used connecting North and South America. Point to point will become even more common, with flights like Brasilia, Manaus, Bogota, Quito, Lima to majors hubs in the USA like Atlanta or Dallas.
How long is the minimum runway length for this aircraft (full seated)? Can you tell something about this?
All I want is a return of United‘s operations to Hamburg...
The a321xlr sounds sick
ikr
Because it is. With a range of 4,700 nmi, the Airbus A321XLR will be the first narrowbody capable of flying [most] widebody routes, without sacrificing fuel economy by significant amounts compared to standard narrowbody planes. Granted, the Boeing 737 MAX 7, with a range of 3,850 nmi, could already fly Trans-Atlantic flights, which Norwegian Air does, but most widebody routes are longer than that. The Airbus A321XLR will enable direct flights from Portland, Oregon to London Heathrow, England-a distance of 4,270 nmi-for example, one that isn't economical with widebody planes due to low passenger demand.
Yes
Confirm that with either a nasal swab or PCR test.
willi
Commercially is a hit!
For passengers, travelling 8 hours on a single aisle? No way!
I struggle to fly those for more than 2.
Yeah, but with this aircraft flying will be cheaper, and many people will accept it in order to fly to new places that they're not able to do it beacause it was too expensive for them.
How many aisles there are has no bearing on comfort. It all depends on seat pitch and width. A 17 inch seat width sucks whether there's one aisle or two. I recently flew from New York to Istanbul on a Turkish Airlines 787 with 17 inch seat. The return trip was on a 777 with 18 inch seat width, which made a huge difference.
Harden up Princess 👸🏼
What’s the point on single or double aisle..? It’s a matter of seat. That’s it. If not consult a doctor.
There are dozens of airlines that fly their narrowbody on 8-9 hour flights today.
Most flights from East-West Coast US is around 6-8 hours already.
The Jorge Chavez International Airport in Lima may only receive these aircraft in the future
What a cool route Reykjavik - Abu Dhabi
How about Newark to Copenhagen? It seems to be a great plane. Perhaps Scandinavian Airlines might buy it.
It won't be a game changer for SAS, as they already have LRs.
But if that's not sufficient they may go for sime XLRs as well.
SAS need to add more destinations in Oslo and Stockholm. They got pretty lazy in recent years now.
Oslo - Chicago, Atlanta, Toronto, Vancouver, DC, Philadelphia, etc.
Stockholm - Miami, Boston, Atlanta, Toronto, etc.
They could use the XLR instead.
Hey you forgot to mention Dublin to Newark.......I took this route on Aer Lingus A321 XLR NEO in March 2020.
Lovely plane but lacks that transatlantic experierence of the twin ailes
I have a feeling that the a321XLR will the reason for the boom in Indian aviation with indigo and Air Asia along with Air India.
A very flexible Airplane both for long haule and short hops +1h. the right plane for this time and market
Easyjet will probably fly those aircraft because they already use the A320 series. It would also be great if Wizzair used those aircraft to fly from Luton (which is Wizz's biggest UK hub) to different US destinations. It would be epic!
Airbus: a321Xlr
Boeing :
If Alaska airlines orders a321xlr and flies transpacific I’m definitely gonna try flying with them
Maybe Cebu Pacific could expand to Hawaii via CEB, MNL, or DVO
I'd love to see JB fly from EWR to NCL as it would really put the wind up BA
Do 757 vs. A321XLR
Wow. Super long duration flights while being seated like a caged animal. Spectacular.
Yeah great for the airlines $$$ but terrible for the paying customer
757 geeks: Look how they massacred my boy
Exactly!
To be fair, my boy was not exactly in his golden days
Eh 757 is ugly as shit so good riddance
@@sd8313 it was not so different from the A321XLR I think... I don't know why it failed so miserably. Anyway, it belongs in the past now.
The 757 is absolutely gorgeous, you must have poor vision.
Frontier ordered in, but only god knows where they’ll fly it
They'll most likely utilize it on transcons (allows for a full load both ways), Hawaii from their Denver & Vegas base, Latin/South America from their Orlando & Miami base, and maybe (slim) transatlantic from their Philadelphia base.
And PHX to Hawaii, Caribbean flights.
I want the A321XLR to fly in routes like Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Kannur, Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata etc.
EasyJet from Luton to Newark would be nice
I would not imagine sitting in cramped configuration economy for more than 5 hours
I was traveling United 787 in economy class was horrible 17 inches wide seat
Everything comes down to seat pitch and width. How many aisles there are doesn't matter.
It doesn't have to be cramped though. Single aisle is a bit of a pain, but seat pitch can be made comfortable.
But you’d do it on a 777, A380, A350? Economy is economy no matter if you have one isle or two
@@joshuacam8175 The A350 Eco is way more comfortable than 777 imo. flown both in long range
I think this will bring the transatlantic flights further east, for example US east coast to Czechia, Hungary, Poland ...
That's not even an extreme case. With a range of 4,700 nmi, the Airbus A321XLR will be the first narrowbody capable of flying [most] widebody routes, without sacrificing fuel economy by significant amounts compared to standard narrowbody planes. Granted, the Boeing 737 MAX 7, with a range of 3,850 nmi, could already fly Trans-Atlantic flights, which Norwegian Air does, but most widebody routes are longer than that. The Airbus A321XLR will enable direct flights from Portland, Oregon to London Heathrow, England-a distance of 4,270 nmi-for example, one that isn't economical with widebody planes due to low passenger demand.
Could this be replacement for customers who need to replace ageing 757s? It may not have the speed and power but this seems to be a trend, slower but more economical aircraft.
I really hope airlines don't start replacing wide-bodies with single aisle planes.
Los Angeles to Lima and other South American cities would also be possible. Point to point connectivity from California to South America is dismal and this could help improve it
Glad that Saudi Arabian Airlines have ordered it!!!
Greetings from Saudi Arabia 🇸🇦😄😁😆😆🇸🇦😂👍❤️😂
Wondering about the RCT; the specs, the maker & it's sustainability for other aircrafts🛫🤓
I don’t like the idea of flying long haul on a narrow body plane... but I do understand the demand issue...I will book widebodies however for my long haul flights!
Seems like Ho Chi Minh City to Melbourne is a good route for the A321XLR
I think after the covid-19 pandemic the XLR is even more interesting. It could be the plane to bring back real long haul flights to Luxembourg.
I'll always prefer wide-bodied jets, but I accept that there are some routes that don't merit them. I'd love to see more transatlantic routes into Manchester, and the A321XLR would be right for them. United and Delts used to fly 757s into Manchester from the eastern US - Newark, Washington, Atlanta - and this aircraft would fit those routes well. Who knows, if they become popular they could be replaced by 787s or A350s.... (It's an astonishing fact that, until Covid brought everything to a standstill, there was better provision from Manchester to Asia, mainly via the Middle-East, than to N America.)
I think Airbus should make another version of A321XLR for Transpacific and polar routes because it would be longer than transatlantic routes.
Kolkata (CCU) is the biggest and busiest airport in Eastern India but we don't have a direct flight to London or Frankfurt because even Boeing 787 isn't filled up so I would like to see Indigo operating a direct all economy A321 XLR between Kolkata and London. That will be profitable for Indigo as well as serve well passengers on this route.
United Airlines - to eventually replace the 757 on the Denver - Hawaii routes.
IAD-BER would be a great route for it.
i think that the a321XLR would do very well in micronesia, as part of united's guam base
Please add nonstop flight from EWR or IAD to BSL. It will be nice. I can take on A321XLR aircraft.
I would like to see the A321XLR fly to many smaller UK airports that don't have flights to the USA, Asia or Central Africa, some of those UK airports are Bristol, Newcastle, Leeds Bradford and Liverpool
Air Mauritius - you should buy this airplane. More frequent routes instead of twice-thrice weekly flights on a350s and a340s
A lot of whinging here about long haul on narrow body aircraft. The "comfort" or perceived comfort is a product of the AIRLINE's decisions, NOT the manufacturer. I've been on US transcon flights on narrowbodies, as well as west coast to Hawaii. Would I fly an A321XLR? Sure, depending on the airline. On Qantas, or American, probably. On VietJet, or Wizz absolutely not.
American already flies to Anchorange from Dallas... on an a321neo....
I see United staring Newark to Hamburg, Stuttgart, Oslo, Copenhagen, Lyons, Birmingham and Belfast plus a few Destinations in the Mediterranean.
And Basel, as well. I can fly again for next year.
GRZ to JFK / GRZ to DBX and GRZ to DOH would be 3 great routes
United’s flights from Newark to Glasgow and Edinburgh
hope airbus upgrade the cabin comport 8-9 hours on singles isle very challenging
The A321 will never replace the 757 in my eyes. The 757 is far more special.
Hopefully Boeing will make a 757 Plus as they said...
Indeed, and maybe a 767 MAX/Plus.
Notably missing were any flights from North America to Africa: Morocco, Accra, Dakar, Lagos?
Swiss A321XLR😻🇨🇭
The A321XLR should be used to fly direct flights between Hobart, Tasmania and Southeast Asian airports like Bali Denpasar Ngurah Rai and Singapore Changi
Id like it to land at Modlin airport or Dublin
Somewhere at Boeing HQ a CEO is yelling why did we discontinue 757 instead of an update
757MAX anyone...nah, didn't think so either.
Turin (or Milan Malpensa) to Detroit. To connect the two headquarters of FCA.
To those who are bellyaching about the A321 on longhaul flights, that they'll fly other carriers that use widebodies, what do you do if this becomes an industry trend? What about when the 767 was used exclusively over the Atlantic instead of the 747, but nobody was using the 747 on these routes anymore? It's not as if you could take a steamship or swim. You are stuck. One time, I was on a bereavement flight on a TW Express Embraer EMB-120 Brasilia from Birmingham to St. Louis for two noisy, vibration-filled hours. I couldn't say no, because I needed to be somewhere. Bereavement flights, you ask? They don't exist anymore.
My question is how many passengers will it really be able to carry on these flights. All they did was add an extra fuel tank. They also have to calculate cargo weight as well as how many passengers will be allowed to fly on each flight. Just food for thought
They raised the maximum takeoff weight to allow for more fuel, but still i guess fully fueled it will cost on maximum passengers and cargo it will be able to carry.
It is, it’s not built for long range. In that case just beef up the 747 max engines and add more fuel tanks and the 737 max 10 can do the same thing
I hope to see my city (Milan) connected with American cities such as Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago or Atlanta 😍
My only worries are that airlines are cheap and put short haul seats in. Which would definitely make be choose a different carrier on these long routes!