Why Is the A321 so popular with US carriers?

airboeingbus · Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:32 am

Over the last few years I've noticed that most major US carriers seems to be getting as many A321's as they can get their hands on. 5 or 6 years ago it was very rare to see one and didn't really sell to well compared to the A320 which seems to have switched. What happened to the A321 that made them so appealing all of a sudden (its being flying for over 23 years now), and why is it mainly US carriers that seem to be following this trend?

globetrotter94 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:36 am

Boeing 757 replacements? Seems like the A321 is the closest aircraft specifications-wise to the 757--even more so with the new A321neos?

tommy1808 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:37 am

Transcontinental range.

Best regards
Thomas

MIflyer12 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:42 am

Rising pilot wage rates, causing upgauging in general on domestic flights. Boeing has delivered plenty of 739s to AS, UA and DL over the last five years, too.

mjoelnir · Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:43 am

It is the most capable narrow body you can buy new at this time. Most passengers, highest payload, best payload range, versatile. Good runway performance also on hot and high. In the last years airlines started to up gauge their narrow bodies to frames with higher capacity.

MrHMSH · Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:46 am

It's only fairly recent that the A321 has had performance and range increases, and while it's useful at shorter ranges, being able to operate it on longer flights may have tipped the balance for US carriers. That means of course that it's suitable for replacing 757s on lots of routes, and the 757 is getting on in years, so a few former 757 routes will now be A321s. For airlines like NK, B6 and F9, my guess is that they just grew to the stage where they could use A321s. A more obscure guess is that increases in the seating (to suit LCCs) made it more viable for them.

Keesje will be along shortly to tell you more.

As for why it's mainly US carriers following the recent trend: most other places already had A321s. They're very common in Europe, and most other places in the world have had A321s for a long time. The reason the trend isn't elsewhere is because most places already had them. But the A321 is a recent addition for LCCs, they weren't widespread among LCCs for a while.

DarkSnowyNight · Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:04 am

tommy1808 wrote:
Transcontinental range.

Best regards
Thomas

You're not wrong, but it's more than that. Field performance has dramatically improved (and will again as more 321 NEOs come online), route flexibility is also a very real factor and PAX capacity (in a far less abusive setting) set it apart from the competition.

Newbiepilot · Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:16 am

Here is a great analysis on capacity growth in the US market

Unsurprisingly, the recent yield declines appear to coincide with creeping capacity growth for US carriers systemwide, but particularly in the domestic market. Recent capacity growth in the domestic markets, once significantly slower than economic growth forecasts, is now closer to growth estimates for gross domestic product (GDP).

http://www.oliverwyman.com/content/dam/ ... 5-2016.pdf

MIflyer12 wrote:
Rising pilot wage rates, causing upgauging in general on domestic flights. Boeing has delivered plenty of 739s to AS, UA and DL over the last five years, too.

Ding ding ding! We have a winner. All the Us operators are shifting to larger airplanes. Southwest from the 73G to 738. Regional flying going from ERJ145s/CRJ2s to E170/E175/CR7. UA/AS/DL going from 738s to 739s. VX/AA/B6/NK/F9 going to A321s. All the US carriers are upgauging their fleets.

This started about 2010/2011 when the effect of the mergers happened, reducing the need for airlines to compete on routes outside of their core markets. Going after RASM with higher frequency lost importance. Airlines shifted towards going for lower CASM aircraft and pilot wages had a significant impact. Oil prices falling and airlines becoming profitable in a strong economy helped.

The A321 is a great plane, but not the only one that has seen sales dramatically rise in the last 5 years in the US. Almost all the US airlines are trying to increase capacity.

mjoelnir · Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:20 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
The A321 is a great plane, but not the only one that has seen sales dramatically rise in the last 5 years in the US.

What other frame has shown a similar rise in sales? Care to name one?

aemoreira1981 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:26 am

Congestion also plays a part. Since one can't add more flights into slot-resticted airports (or those just below that status), one has to upgauge, and right now, the largest narrowbodies are the A321 and the B739.

In the USA, the slot restricted airports are: DCA, JFK, and LGA. A step below are EWR, LAX, ORD, and SFO. When Spirit expanded to Newark, almost all of its frequencies became A321 frequencies. For an airline like Spirit and Frontier, the A321 allows "more sardines in the can". For JetBlue, the A321 allowed for the introduction of business class to compete against Delta One and AA's transcon A321s.

Newbiepilot · Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:27 am

mjoelnir wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
The A321 is a great plane, but not the only one that has seen sales dramatically rise in the last 5 years in the US.

What other frame has shown a similar rise in sales? Care to name one?

I don't want to be provoked into an A vs B war, so I will say look at Embraer 175 vs 170 sales ratio for US carriers in the last 5 years to see a similar shift towards the higher capacity derivative.

mjoelnir · Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:39 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
The A321 is a great plane, but not the only one that has seen sales dramatically rise in the last 5 years in the US.

What other frame has shown a similar rise in sales? Care to name one?

I don't want to be provoked into an A vs B war, so I will say look at Embraer 175 vs 170 sales ratio for US carriers in the last 5 years to see a similar shift towards the higher capacity derivative.

If we look at Embraer E-Jet family, there are the smaller frames the 170 and 175, and the larger frames 190 and 195. In the smaller size the 175 has sold more than the 170 most of the time and the 190 sells more than the 195. The 175 and 190 have sold about the same numbers. I do not see any last 5 year shift to the bigger frames.

redroo · Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:51 am

The US is not my home market, but take these comments at face value

The US prefers frequency over capacity. Key routes have been rapidly growing to 739 and A321. United flies many widebodies around domestically. How long before key trunk routes upguage from A321 to more regular widebody service?

Will we have A330/MOM size flights from JFK/LAX every minutes in 5, 10, 15 years time?

OA940 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:58 am

They can replace the 752 with it on domestic sectors without waiting 10 years for the MoM.

airbazar · Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:05 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
The A321 is a great plane, but not the only one that has seen sales dramatically rise in the last 5 years in the US.

What other frame has shown a similar rise in sales? Care to name one?

That question was answered just one reply above yours.

Newbiepilot wrote:
Ding ding ding! We have a winner. All the Us operators are shifting to larger airplanes. Southwest from the 73G to 738. Regional flying going from ERJ145s/CRJ2s to E170/E175/CR7. UA/AS/DL going from 738s to 739s. VX/AA/B6/NK/F9 going to A321s. All the US carriers are upgauging their fleets.

And of course lets not forget the recent 100 frame order by United for the 737-10MAX.

AirbusA343 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:37 pm

As has been said, 757 replacement on shorter flights.

Newbiepilot · Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:41 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

What other frame has shown a similar rise in sales? Care to name one?

I don't want to be provoked into an A vs B war, so I will say look at Embraer 175 vs 170 sales ratio for US carriers in the last 5 years to see a similar shift towards the higher capacity derivative.

If we look at Embraer E-Jet family, there are the smaller frames the 170 and 175, and the larger frames 190 and 195. In the smaller size the 175 has sold more than the 170 most of the time and the 190 sells more than the 195. The 175 and 190 have sold about the same numbers. I do not see any last 5 year shift to the bigger frames.

5 years ago the only Embraer 175s operating in the US were flown by Republic and Compass, mostly for Delta. In the last 4 years Skywest, Mesa, Envoy and Horizon have all started operating the Embraer 175s and they have been added to the fleets at American, United and Alaska as those airlines upgauge their regional flying.

Upgauging to larger airplanes has been happening across the domestic US market over the past 5 years at all the airlines. The well researched scholarly article that I posted discusses the increase in capacity over the past 5 years. CASM is going down and RASM is going down as US carriers are adding capacity. They are looking for larger and more efficient planes to reduce CASM and deal with pilot shortages.

AndrewJM70 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 12:59 pm

They are lighter and therefore cheaper to operate than wide bodies but with up to 220 seats, carry a decent payload. Also they have the perfect range for trans-cons and West Coast to Hawaii.

ty97 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:20 pm

In addition to what has been mentioned, the US legacies for many years focused on planes like the 737-800 and 320 in a 150 seat config, with 3 flight attendants. Then they started with toying with adding more seats to those configs and eventually, most of them went all-in. If you are going to run a 160 seat 738 or a 157 seat 320 that requires 4 FAs, why not run a 188-192 seat 321 with the same 4 FAs?

cosyr · Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:36 pm

Wow! It was not that long ago that we were regularly wondering why the A321 was not popular in the US.

mjoelnir · Tue Jul 18, 2017 1:51 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:

I don't want to be provoked into an A vs B war, so I will say look at Embraer 175 vs 170 sales ratio for US carriers in the last 5 years to see a similar shift towards the higher capacity derivative.

If we look at Embraer E-Jet family, there are the smaller frames the 170 and 175, and the larger frames 190 and 195. In the smaller size the 175 has sold more than the 170 most of the time and the 190 sells more than the 195. The 175 and 190 have sold about the same numbers. I do not see any last 5 year shift to the bigger frames.

5 years ago the only Embraer 175s operating in the US were flown by Republic and Compass, mostly for Delta. In the last 4 years Skywest, Mesa, Envoy and Horizon have all started operating the Embraer 175s and they have been added to the fleets at American, United and Alaska as those airlines upgauge their regional flying.

Upgauging to larger airplanes has been happening across the domestic US market over the past 5 years at all the airlines. The well researched scholarly article that I posted discusses the increase in capacity over the past 5 years. CASM is going down and RASM is going down as US carriers are adding capacity. They are looking for larger and more efficient planes to reduce CASM and deal with pilot shortages.

Skywest, Mesa, Envoy, Horizon never used the 170. So in what way is buying the second smallest E-Jet from Embraer up gauging?

You should rather talk about down gouging, as this fleets of E 175 were to a big part replacing mainline frames on routes.

Polot · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:01 pm

Off topic but the whole E170/E175 (and CRJ700/CRJ900 for that matter) gets messy because you have to consider how regional planes were configured. F class use to be really rare in regional fleets, and in an all Y layout the E175/CRJ900 is too large for scope, with the E170/CRJ700 being the largest usable aircraft. When airlines decided to extend their F class down into the regional fleet, E175/CRJ900s became attractive as they in a 2 class layout meet scope, while the E170/CRJ700s are just giving up seats while still counting towards the same large RJ fleet caps as their larger sibling.

Newbiepilot · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:06 pm

Mjoelnir, the US airlines upgauged 50 seat regional jets to 66 and then 76 seat regional jets. The mainline airlines who ordered those 76 seat Embraer 175s are also the ones that have shifted from 737-800s to 737-900ERs as well as A321s. Every segment of the domestic US market has seen upgauging. Right around 2011/2012 there was a shift where larger derivatives like the 737-900ER, A321 and Embraer 175 all increased in popularity.

keesje · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm

cosyr wrote:
Wow! It was not that long ago that we were regularly wondering why the A321 was not popular in the US.

l

All the above plus the fact the A320 has become smallish over the last 25 years. AA and Jetblue lead the pack, Delta is catching up rapidly.

bw50505 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm

[*]

AndrewJM70 wrote:
They are lighter and therefore cheaper to operate than wide bodies but with up to 220 seats, carry a decent payload. Also they have the perfect range for trans-cons and West Coast to Hawaii.

Current max seating is 230 (F9 has Y230 and NK has W8Y220), but it increases to 240 with the up and coming new window config.

Seating configs source: planespotters.net

Channex757 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:11 pm

cosyr wrote:
Wow! It was not that long ago that we were regularly wondering why the A321 was not popular in the US.

Sharklets and other improvements have made a lot of difference. The A321 was always a little short of needed performance for US carriers, whereas the 757 was a little overpowered and flew further than needed.

Now, with the improved performance of the newer A321s, it slots in nicely to fleet planners' requirements. Add to that the fuel burn benefit over the outgoing 757 and it's more or less the ideal plane for the job at the moment. The NEO will only build on that once the engines mature and the Pratts start pushing the envelope further out.

Samrnpage · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:13 pm

The management of the US airlines have done their homework, got the facts, got the figures and have decided the A321 is a great plane for them to use. Simple as that.

I also think that Americans had a strong favouritism to anything american and overtime this has diminished. An american airline flying american aircraft was always the best stigma to go with. Its like turboprops and the American public thinking they are dangerous in comparison, the public perspective on anything in america can have a huge impact on business . Now that Airbus have the mobile factory, they can put "Made in america, by americans - A321" and airlines are loving it. ( This could be a very ignorant viewpoint though)

KarelXWB · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:13 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
I don't want to be provoked into an A vs B war, so I will say look at Embraer 175 vs 170 sales ratio for US carriers in the last 5 years to see a similar shift towards the higher capacity derivative.

Though not many airlines have upgraded E175 orders to the larger E195/E195. An upgrade from E170 to E175 is rather small and not even in the same ballpark as upgrading A320 capacity to A321.

Newbiepilot · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:21 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
I don't want to be provoked into an A vs B war, so I will say look at Embraer 175 vs 170 sales ratio for US carriers in the last 5 years to see a similar shift towards the higher capacity derivative.

Though not many airlines have upgraded E175 orders to the larger E195/E195. An upgrade from E170 to E175 is rather small and not even in the same ballpark as upgrading A320 capacity to A321.

Fair enough. The A321 is a big upgauge from the A320. I was just answering his question with regards to how the shift towards the A321 in the US is likely related to the larger shift towards higher capacity as discussed in this economic analysis:

http://www.oliverwyman.com/content/dam/ ... 5-2016.pdf

From page 47 of the analysis

The graphs show the expected correlation between longer stage‐length or greater number of seats and lower CASM. To help achieve lower CASM and accommodate higher demand, US carriers have increased the number of seats per aircraft by both increasing seat density and transitioning their fleets to the larger models of the same aircraft. For example, the average seats per domestic departure on 737‐family aircraft increased from 141 in 2009to 145 in 2014. Similarly, the average number of seats on a domestic A320‐family aircraft increased from 140 to 147 for this same period. Globally, the average seats per departure on a 737‐family aircraft increased from 148 to 160 for this period, while globally the average seats per departure on an A320‐family aircraft increased from 154 to 160.

mjoelnir · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:40 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
Mjoelnir, the US airlines upgauged 50 seat regional jets to 66 and then 76 seat regional jets. The mainline airlines who ordered those 76 seat Embraer 175s are also the ones that have shifted from 737-800s to 737-900ERs as well as A321s. Every segment of the domestic US market has seen upgauging. Right around 2011/2012 there was a shift where larger derivatives like the 737-900ER, A321 and Embraer 175 all increased in popularity.

Yes the regional airlines up gauged from 50 seats regional jets to 76 seats regional Jets. But, and here you get your thinking wrong, they cut down on routes to small for 76 seats regional jets and replaced mainline on quite a few routes. In replacing mainline it is was usual a down gauge, as mainline does not fly such small jets.

And the A321 is not only about up gauging, but also about replacing the 757 and occasionally wide bodies. 3,205 A321 and A321neo have been sold up to now.

Super80Fan · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:48 pm

I could be wrong, but didn't Airbus tweak the A321 so it can complete transcon flights instead of sending the A320?

bw50505 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:57 pm

bw50505 wrote:
[*]
AndrewJM70 wrote:
They are lighter and therefore cheaper to operate than wide bodies but with up to 220 seats, carry a decent payload. Also they have the perfect range for trans-cons and West Coast to Hawaii.

Current max seating is 230 (F9 has Y230 and NK has W8Y220), but it increases to 240 with the up and coming new window config.

Seating configs source: planespotters.net

Should read exit configuration, not window config.

tcfc424 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:08 pm

Pretty much everything said above is spot on. The biggest factor, that has been mentioned but somewhat overlooked, is that the capability of the CEO versus the original A321 are significantly improved allowing greater mission flexibility. The original 321 had trouble in hot and high performance and ate up a lot of runway. The CEO isnt exactly launching into the sky either, but its performance has improved to the point where flying into Phoenix for example is not an issue (as it was for USAir).

Boeing778X · Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:18 pm

AA is now the largest A321 operator, and will have over 300 in a few years, with a good portion inherited from US, and they've been nothing but miracle workers. They replace domestic 757s, 1:1, perfectly, capacity wise. Our oldest units are aging, but they've got years left!

DL is getting theirs, B6, NK and HA.

Only one not getting them is UA! Oh well. The A321 is too good for them anyway.

Newbiepilot · Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:29 pm

Boeing778X wrote:
AA is now the largest A321 operator, and will have over 300 in a few years, with a good portion inherited from US, and they've been nothing but miracle workers.

Miracle workers? What Miracles are they working for AA? The study I posted included CASM per operator per fleet type. The AA or US A321s don't have a particularly miraculous CASM compared to AS, DL or B6. The A321 is a great plane and very popular but how is it creating miracles?

mjoelnir · Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:02 pm

Super80Fan wrote:
I could be wrong, but didn't Airbus tweak the A321 so it can complete transcon flights instead of sending the A320?

The A321-200 with 2 ACT since 1996. Range increased again with sharklets.

airbazar · Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:41 pm

tcfc424 wrote:
Pretty much everything said above is spot on. The biggest factor, that has been mentioned but somewhat overlooked, is that the capability of the CEO versus the original A321 are significantly improved allowing greater mission flexibility. The original 321 had trouble in hot and high performance and ate up a lot of runway. The CEO isnt exactly launching into the sky either, but its performance has improved to the point where flying into Phoenix for example is not an issue (as it was for USAir).

The biggest factor in my opinion is basic timing. The 757's are getting old and need replacement, and the market is growing. Until recently when the 737-10MAX was launched, there wasn't anything else available. In the rest of the World the 757's have long been replaced by A321's. All other benefits listed are true and a nice plus but not as critical as mere good timing. US started flying A321's on tcon routes well over 15 years ago, so that's certainly not the reason. Its not like the A321 just became capable of doing it.

CRJ900 · Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:27 pm

Boeing778X wrote:
Only one not getting them is UA! Oh well. The A321 is too good for them anyway.

It will be interesting to see how UA configures their newly-ordered B737 MAX 10. If UA plug the Type II exit behind the wing (like on the B739ER), then the MAX 10 can seat maximum 189 pax, indicating that they wish to use it in more premium-heavy configs. If they need more seats per flight to compete with LCC's, they can either have a sub-fleet of MAX 10 with 190-220 seats or go for the A321NEO with 210-240 seats.

Boeing778X · Wed Jul 19, 2017 1:29 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
AA is now the largest A321 operator, and will have over 300 in a few years, with a good portion inherited from US, and they've been nothing but miracle workers.

Miracle workers? What Miracles are they working for AA? The study I posted included CASM per operator per fleet type. The AA or US A321s don't have a particularly miraculous CASM compared to AS, DL or B6. The A321 is a great plane and very popular but how is it creating miracles?

The aircraft provided as a perfect platform for a few of our services, like the A321 Transcon cabin (previously served by the 767-200) and dedicated Hawaii service. Because they seat almost exactly the same number of people as our domestic 757 fleet, it allowed AA to retire those aging frames.

The product on, particularly the AA bought A321s, is great. I personally look forwards to riding on it when I get to.

Because the fleet is so large, CASM doesn't really seem to be an issue.

The aircraft was really a great investment for AA.

mjoelnir · Wed Jul 19, 2017 2:08 pm

airbazar wrote:
tcfc424 wrote:
Pretty much everything said above is spot on. The biggest factor, that has been mentioned but somewhat overlooked, is that the capability of the CEO versus the original A321 are significantly improved allowing greater mission flexibility. The original 321 had trouble in hot and high performance and ate up a lot of runway. The CEO isnt exactly launching into the sky either, but its performance has improved to the point where flying into Phoenix for example is not an issue (as it was for USAir).

The biggest factor in my opinion is basic timing. The 757's are getting old and need replacement, and the market is growing. Until recently when the 737-10MAX was launched, there wasn't anything else available. In the rest of the World the 757's have long been replaced by A321's. All other benefits listed are true and a nice plus but not as critical as mere good timing. US started flying A321's on tcon routes well over 15 years ago, so that's certainly not the reason. Its not like the A321 just became capable of doing it.

The nothing else available would have been hard disputed half a year ago. Boeing offered the 737-900ER and the 737-9. And according to Boeing, Airbus would have a lot of work to catch up with those frames. Boeing brought now the 737-10 to the market and now Airbus has to do some more catching up.

Polot · Wed Jul 19, 2017 2:30 pm

CRJ900 wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
Only one not getting them is UA! Oh well. The A321 is too good for them anyway.

It will be interesting to see how UA configures their newly-ordered B737 MAX 10. If UA plug the Type II exit behind the wing (like on the B739ER), then the MAX 10 can seat maximum 189 pax, indicating that they wish to use it in more premium-heavy configs. If they need more seats per flight to compete with LCC's, they can either have a sub-fleet of MAX 10 with 190-220 seats or go for the A321NEO with 210-240 seats.

The only way a A321neo will have 210-240 seats at the US3 if they severely reduce or eliminate the F class from the plane. The 737-10 will probably be configured with ~189 seats. That is similar to DL and AA's A321s ( 192 and 181 seats respectively) and 10 more than the 737-9s (which seat 13 more than most of the 738s).

aeromoe · Wed Jul 19, 2017 3:10 pm

Just a minor nit...but many are throwing around the term "upgauge" incorrectly. IMHO an upgauge is a change in fuselage diameter: for example narrow body to wide body. A320 to A321 is not an upgauge. E170 to E190 is not an upgauge. Upsize, not upgauge. An E135/145 to E170/190 would be an upgauge. Just an observation.

ElroyJetson · Wed Jul 19, 2017 3:42 pm

It is simple. The A321 is much more efficient than the 757's it is mostly replacing.

MKIAZ · Wed Jul 19, 2017 4:41 pm

Industry consolidation has also played a huge role. Going from 6 major network carriers to 3 means that traffic can be condensed more. And as the economy expands, more people want to travel. So you have fewer airlines and more people travelling, you're going to need larger planes.

parapente · Wed Jul 19, 2017 5:06 pm

Certainly the US has led the way but I am not sure the ROW is far behind now.Simply a matter of global increasing pax demand.In Europe we are seeing EasyJet and WOW to mention a couple and Ryanair taking a good look at the 737-10.So things are moving quite quickly.(ooops forgot to mention IAG from a legacy POV).
I am sure this speedy and relentless movement has not been lost on the manufacturers crystal ball gazing either.

Elementalism · Wed Jul 19, 2017 5:18 pm

Think it has been mostly covered here why the A321 is becoming very popular in the states. Boeing really dropped the ball on dropping the 757 completely. Meaning they weren't looking into a Max version of said aircraft. MOM should rectify this. In the meantime A321 will be very very popular.

capitalflyer · Wed Jul 19, 2017 6:30 pm

Will the A321 be able to cover some of the narrowbody East Coast-Europe flights? This could be beneficial for LCCs who want to break in to the transatlantic market.

It seems this market is all mixed up right now, no one way to service. For example, IAD has six flights today to LHR. Every flight uses a different kind of airplane. BA uses 744 and 388, UA uses 757, 777, and 789, and VX uses 333.

JFK seems much more organized. BA uses 747 and 777, DL uses 767, AA uses 777, VX uses 333, 346, and 789.

Boeing778X · Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:43 pm

ElroyJetson wrote:
It is simple. The A321 is much more efficient than the 757's it is mostly replacing.

In a domestic environment, perhaps. The 757 is still an excellent TATL hauler.

And no plane has the performance like a 757, mind you!

willenglish · Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:40 pm

Better range the the 739.... it's basically a 757. Also in terms of comfort, I'd much rather spend 5 hours from JFK-LAX on a 321 then a 739.

LSZH34 · Sun Jul 23, 2017 10:18 pm

cosyr wrote:
Wow! It was not that long ago that we were regularly wondering why the A321 was not popular in the US.

If you told me 10 years ago that so many Airbuses operate now at US airlines, I'd have laughed at you.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net