IndiGo eyes 20 to 25 A321LR aircaft for its long haul operations.

IndiGo Airlines (6E, Delhi Int'l) is considering converting part of its order with Airbus (AIB, Toulouse Blagnac) for 405 A320neo to A321neo (LR)s, the Financial Express has reported. The conversion will most likely cover 20-25 aircraft slated for delivery during Fiscal Year 2018-19, according to inside sources.

The new aircraft could be used for new medium- and long-haul services planned by the carrier. IndiGo recently applied for route authorities to a number of European destinations which would supplement its existing international regional network to the Gulf region, South East Asia, Nepal, and Sri Lanka.

Article
https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news ... eolr-a350s

Ever increasing numbers of A321.

Just out of interest looking at the destinations it could open up from DEL (between 3000nm and 3600nm as a guess of where you would deploy these primarily) and you're looking at Japan, a big swathe of Europe going from Italy through Germany to Scandinavia, and interestingly a big chunk of the Indian diaspora in East Africa and the Indian ocean - e.g. Tanzania and Mauritius. Wonder what they've got in mind?

Interesting chart BaconButty.The article suggests they are applying for certain European countries so that has to be one area.I agree with the Diaspora point particularly Kenya. And Uganda.I have no idea about existing comms' to Japan but it certainly could do that.Its the beauty of this efficient a/c it does not need huge traffic to run profitably.
Fundamentally this is happening all over the globe where airlines can run the 'slide rule' over previous destinations that were either/both out of reach or could not be run profitably with traditional expensive wide bodied a/c.

Of the 6000 NEO's now on order, in the not to distant future half will be A321NEO's. Upping the real A321 backlog by 1000 from the confirmed 2000. At good margins because: demand >> supply and no real competition in terms of payload-range, cargo capability & engine choice. Boeing finally sees the light, but could have been reviewing the situation for too long. MSN7877 will fly CDG-JFK as test flight later today. IMO they must fear for the MAX-9/-10 with e.g. United, Air Canada, the "unidentified" customers and the big lessors.



Source: https://www.airteamimages.com/airbus-a321_D-AVZO_airbus-industrie_298532_large.html

Airbus are considering further increasing production. "70" seems the new horizon. https://www.bloombergquint.com/onweb/2018/02/06/airbus-mulls-raising-output-of-a320-family-jets-as-demand-soars

The big question is...will they stick with PW engines after all the misery they have experienced with their snafus?...


Faro

One would think they have a fowl taste in their mouths right about now with regards to PW issues. In due time I'd like to think PW get things figured out but one would have to assume they'd be reconsidering the engine supplier at best.

Congratulations to Airbus and Indigo, the Airbus-MOM is catching up nicely

A logical choice as they expand. A few of their A320neo family orders being the LRs makes sense.

The CFM Leap can't deliver the same max. thrust as the PW1100G, so if you want to get the most out of your A321NLR, you really need the PW engines. That being said, with today's PW engines your NEO LR is going nowhere...
IMO, the A321NEO LR is a great concept, but it's not a B752 yet.

Waterbomber wrote:

The CFM Leap can't deliver the same max. thrust as the PW1100G, so if you want to get the most out of your A321NLR, you really need the PW engines. That being said, with today's PW engines your NEO LR is going nowhere...
IMO, the A321NEO LR is a great concept, but it's not a B752 yet.

It isn't a 757 & will never be one. It has fewer but wider seats, burns 25% less, carries containers, flies further, has far lower MRO bills and is quieter in- & outside.

It seem the A321s will disturb many markets in all regions the coming years. Young opportunistic carriers now have a tool to open up long haul with minimal risks. Legacy's won't sit on their hands either. In 7-8 years Boeing MoM's will join in.

Converting a few dozen NEO's into premium LR's playing havoc on competing hubs. Converting them back if no longer needed.
E.g. STAR putting a few LHR-JFK, 3 flights a day. AA dropping into AMS twice a day. WoW creating dozens of low cost citypairs from KEF..

BaconButty wrote:

Just out of interest looking at the destinations it could open up from DEL (between 3000nm and 3600nm as a guess of where you would deploy these primarily) and you're looking at Japan, a big swathe of Europe going from Italy through Germany to Scandinavia, and interestingly a big chunk of the Indian diaspora in East Africa and the Indian ocean - e.g. Tanzania and Mauritius. Wonder what they've got in mind?

You just pointed out a few from DEL. From BOM, one could also add a swathe of E/S Africa. From BLR/MAA etc, more of SE Asia. Perhaps touch Australia.

Basically, the easiest ones would be medium distance flights where people need to make 1-stop in ME3 or Singapore. Eliminating a stop with point-to-point service would offer reduction in 3-4 hrs of travel time. That could be a game changer.

How would the Himalayas affect possible destinations east into east Asia?

Waterbomber wrote:

The CFM Leap can't deliver the same max. thrust as the PW1100G, so if you want to get the most out of your A321NLR, you really need the PW engines. That being said, with today's PW engines your NEO LR is going nowhere...
IMO, the A321NEO LR is a great concept, but it's not a B752 yet.

Geez
Forget about the B752 already.
The A321neoLR is the new benchmark.

chiad wrote:

Waterbomber wrote:

The CFM Leap can't deliver the same max. thrust as the PW1100G, so if you want to get the most out of your A321NLR, you really need the PW engines. That being said, with today's PW engines your NEO LR is going nowhere...
IMO, the A321NEO LR is a great concept, but it's not a B752 yet.

Geez
Forget about the B752 already.
The A321neoLR is the new benchmark.

I wouldn’t go that far, there is a reason the US3 have yet to order this aircraft to replace their international 752s. The A321LR still falls short of the 752 in some areas.

ikolkyo wrote:

chiad wrote:

Waterbomber wrote:

The CFM Leap can't deliver the same max. thrust as the PW1100G, so if you want to get the most out of your A321NLR, you really need the PW engines. That being said, with today's PW engines your NEO LR is going nowhere...
IMO, the A321NEO LR is a great concept, but it's not a B752 yet.

Geez
Forget about the B752 already.
The A321neoLR is the new benchmark.

I wouldn’t go that far, there is a reason the US3 have yet to order this aircraft to replace their international 752s. The A321LR still falls short of the 752 in some areas.

Yes, most notably in the 'being paid for' area. Capability however seems right up there! if only Airbus would sell them already paid for...

Fred

Polot wrote:

How would the Himalayas affect possible destinations east into east Asia?

Only couple of Chinese cities, viz Chendu and such may be affected. But no one is possibly clamouring service there.

Most action is SE Asia or Coastal China. Japan is a good possibility with the Open Free Skies treaty. However, that might be stretching the range of the aircraft.

vadodara wrote:

Polot wrote:

How would the Himalayas affect possible destinations east into east Asia?

Only couple of Chinese cities, viz Chendu and such may be affected. But no one is possibly clamouring service there.

Most action is SE Asia or Coastal China. Japan is a good possibility with the Open Free Skies treaty. However, that might be stretching the range of the aircraft.

Japan would indeed be stretching the aircraft range as would anything northeast of India. The whole northern border of India is formed by the Himalayas. To fly from Delhi to Japan they'd first have to fly straight east to Myanmar and then northeast. That's quite a detour, but can't be avoided. China is no problem and I think they can make it as far as South Korea, but that's it.

Another thing you have to take into consideration are Russian overflight rights which they don't have. This will limit their range into Europe because they'll have to stay south and fly over Iran and Turkey. They can make it as far as eastern Europe and Greece, Poland would already be stretching it.

For destinations in Africa they'll probably need ETOPS certificates to fly over the Indian ocean. Not sure if the A321 LR comes with those, but it's also something to take into consideration.

ikolkyo wrote:

.......The A321LR still falls short of the 752 in some areas.

....that is a very short list 'ikolkyo'.

I suspect that once more airlines realise the benefits of the A321NEO and LR and get a better idea of its real-world range and marketing capabilities, they will vote with their orderbooks.

FWIW, I think this aircraft will have a huge impact in market places all over the world, in places and ways we are not yet aware of.

Speaking with a good colleague; as an example, for BA the A321NEO could be a hugely significant aircraft, and maybe have a transformational impact. It will allow BA to rediscover former markets in Pakistan and Africa where wide bodies could not be justified, and flown overnight during the LHR curfew followed by a European rotation(s) in a 24 hour period, massively improving BA's reach, productivity and fleet flexibility. All that without mentioning the mind-boggling possibilities in TATL marketing. BA have been pretty aggressive recently in developing new markets for them using the B788; the A321NEO will make them look at more North American markets I'm sure......

It isn't beyond the realms of reasonableness to think that BA alone could eventually have 100+ A321NEO based at LHR having a super-flexible fleet capable of Euro/UK short-haul and 4000nm long-haul with one super-flexible quick-change aircraft type.

It's been said many times already but damn... how good this bird looks with the raccoon eyes!

PatrickZ80 wrote:

vadodara wrote:

Polot wrote:

How would the Himalayas affect possible destinations east into east Asia?

Only couple of Chinese cities, viz Chendu and such may be affected. But no one is possibly clamouring service there.

Most action is SE Asia or Coastal China. Japan is a good possibility with the Open Free Skies treaty. However, that might be stretching the range of the aircraft.

Japan would indeed be stretching the aircraft range as would anything northeast of India. The whole northern border of India is formed by the Himalayas. To fly from Delhi to Japan they'd first have to fly straight east to Myanmar and then northeast. That's quite a detour, but can't be avoided. China is no problem and I think they can make it as far as South Korea, but that's it.

Another thing you have to take into consideration are Russian overflight rights which they don't have. This will limit their range into Europe because they'll have to stay south and fly over Iran and Turkey. They can make it as far as eastern Europe and Greece, Poland would already be stretching it.

For destinations in Africa they'll probably need ETOPS certificates to fly over the Indian ocean. Not sure if the A321 LR comes with those, but it's also something to take into consideration.

Actually, I am thinking even lower hanging fruit. For instance, the historic point to East was from Kolkatta (CCU). You skirt most of the issues you cited flying from there. Flying from BOM, one skirts the Russian overflight rights you mentioned.

Indigo has flights from multiple Indian cities. There is room for multiple solutions. Using this aircraft type open's up several possibilities. As I mentioned, one could fly to several SE Asian cities thru Singapore from cities like BOM/BLR/MAA and such. Eliminating that stop can shorten the journey by a few hours. That opens up possiilities.

Boeing is a conundrum, on one hand they could deliver a perfect 757 mk2, as a single asile long tube with an optimized wing, composite body, lightweight body and a limited range of 4500nm, control the price of acquisition and operations and forgo the use of containers and big cargo capability, so low cost and big carriers can have an efficient and easy on the MX and operational expenses aircraft and use its marketing power for bigger aircraft they already have. If they go to make a bigger twin aisle A310Mk2, they will have a much heavier and thus longer distance and cargo capable aircraft, that in the end will cost more to operate, to buy and to fill. I think Boeing had this same problem back in the 80´s and that is why they made 2 aircraft ...what they will do now? I think the first option is better and their target should be making a much better A321 and live with the limits it has.

Best Regards
TRB

tropical wrote:

It's been said many times already but damn... how good this bird looks with the raccoon eyes!

It does?

keesje wrote:

Of the 6000 NEO's now on order, in the not to distant future half will be A321NEO's. Upping the real A321 backlog by 1000 from the confirmed 2000. At good margins because: demand >> supply and no real competition in terms of payload-range, cargo capability & engine choice. Boeing finally sees the light, but could have been reviewing the situation for too long. MSN7877 will fly CDG-JFK as test flight later today. IMO they must fear for the MAX-9/-10 with e.g. United, Air Canada, the "unidentified" customers and the big lessors.



Source: https://www.airteamimages.com/airbus-a321_D-AVZO_airbus-industrie_298532_large.html

Airbus are considering further increasing production. "70" seems the new horizon. https://www.bloombergquint.com/onweb/2018/02/06/airbus-mulls-raising-output-of-a320-family-jets-as-demand-soars

That’s why all of this talk of a new CF wing is funny. Why would Airbus do that no matter what the Boeing 79u looks like. Airbus has 7 years of “cash” to be realized through increased production.

Interesting the GTF engine is what makes the LR the star performer it is and not the CFM engine.

Cant wait to see the A321LR's with 6E!

I don't understand the economics of small aircraft-long range ops. An airline like 6E has built itself up with aircraft doing upto 8 short/very short segments a day. Can they get the same kind of numbers with aircraft doing a single long segment/day? Did some rough numbers on the back of a tissue and I just dont get it.

It would be nice to see some sample numbers.

Example:
(Typical schedule)
# From To Dep Arr Block
576 LKO IXJ 07:10 08:45 1:35
576 IXJ SXR 09:15 09:55 0:40
576 SXR LKO 10:30 12:20 1:50
577 LKO DED 12:50 13:50 1:00
588 DED LKO 14:20 15:30 1:10
588 LKO RPR 16:10 17:40 1:30
589 RPR LKO 18:10 19:40 1:30
Total 09:10

Hypothetical scheduling of a A321NEO (non LR)
# From To Dep Arr Block
11 DEL IST 16:00 20:00 6:30
12 IST DEL 21:00 05:40 6:10
763 DEL IXZ 06:40 10:00 3:20
764 IXZ DEL 10:40 14:00 3:20
19:20

Much more utilization of the frame with lower cycle cost. But revenue potential is higher?

And hows this?
DEL-LGW : 3636nm, ATQ-LGW:3418nm (2 aircraft rotation)
# From To Dep Arr Block
001 DEL LGW 13:00 17:00 9:30
020 LGW ATQ 18:00 08:30 9:00
019 ATQ LGW 09:30 13:20 9:20
002 LGW DEL 15:20 05:50 9:00



Can a A321LR with 220 seats + bags do 3700nm sector? Max range 4100nm?

I am not sure of the economics of long haul with small planes yet. And I think Indigo will be killing themselves if they go head to head with the majors with the A321LR out of DEL/BOM.

But the A321LR can be the perfect aircraft for Tier-2 stations with large expat populations and tourist traffic. 2 different examples:

1. ATQ - large expat population in the UK spread out across the London area, BHX, MAN. Most of them travel at the lowest cost. Many CIS airlines have been deploying capacity to ATQ for this reason - I saw Turkmenistan Airlines 767's here many times and they seemed full!

2. GOI - charter traffic - mostly seasonal Nov-Mar. Many charter operators mostly from Russia/CIS/Eastern Europe and some from UK/Germany(757's via AUH). Indigo has a realistic chance for a slice of this business if they can manage to wade into the mess that is GOI airport. The tiny civil Apron at this Naval base gets pretty crowded in the tourist season with charter Il-86's & 757's jostling for the limited space.

keesje wrote:

Boeing finally sees the light, but could have been reviewing the situation for too long. MSN7877 will fly CDG-JFK as test flight later today. IMO they must fear for the MAX-9/-10 with e.g. United, Air Canada, the "unidentified" customers and the big lessors.

Airbus are considering further increasing production. "70" seems the new horizon. https://www.bloombergquint.com/onweb/2018/02/06/airbus-mulls-raising-output-of-a320-family-jets-as-demand-soars

Depends on how many of those customers and lessors really need the extra range capability of the 321NEO. I'd bet relatively few will need the 'LR' variant. Among the standard offerings, we've accepted that the MAX has a fuel-burn advantage up to 1000 nm because it's a bit lighter. For those operators who fly mostly shorter stage lengths, the MAX is fine for their needs. The 321NEO adds flexibility and capability if you need it. I doubt Boeing fears for the MAX10 but not range because it will carve out a tidy and profitable share of the NB market where capacity but not so much range is needed. If the MAX9 goes away it won't be so bad; at this point it's a largely redundant model anyway. While the MAX line will likely never get above 40% of this market segment, it will still remain a huge cash cow for Boeing who can bide its time contemplating a truly competitive replacement.

BawliBooch wrote:

And hows this?
DEL-LGW : 3636nm, ATQ-LGW:3418nm (2 aircraft rotation)
# From To Dep Arr Block
001 DEL LGW 13:00 17:00 9:30
020 LGW ATQ 18:00 08:30 9:00
019 ATQ LGW 09:30 13:20 9:20
002 LGW DEL 15:20 05:50 9:00



Can a A321LR with 220 seats + bags do 3700nm sector? Max range 4100nm?

Absolutely impossible. Look at the map, that route leads over Russia. Indigo doesn't have Russian overflight rights, they can't fly there. The route to Europe for them leads over Iran and Turkey, that would make Gatwick even further than it already is.

TheRedBarron comments.Yup way back then they decided to go with 2 'conventional ' aircraft.
It strongly appears that this time they are creating a hybrid of the two.
Right down the middle.Which is apposite considering its MOM working title.Carbon construction Ovoid X7 using NB containers for cargo.Better range than a 757 but a little inferior to a 767.Using only 50klbs thrust with state of art engines.I think they said they were aiming for circa -30% sfc on a 767.
Yup they will have to 'suck it up' against the LR for the next 5-10 years.But these projects last over 40-50 years- best to get it right.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

Absolutely impossible. Look at the map, that route leads over Russia. Indigo doesn't have Russian overflight rights, they can't fly there. The route to Europe for them leads over Iran and Turkey, that would make Gatwick even further than it already is.

Would Russian overflight rights be difficult/expensive to get?

2 Indian carriers - Jet & AI do operate to London area - and I assume both operate through Russian airspace?

PS: Is that something the airlines have to be concerned with - airspace access? I assume the govt's negotiate these things for them? So the Indian govt would clear the airspace access issues for aircraft flying the Indian flag?

BawliBooch wrote:

1. ATQ - large expat population in the UK spread out across the London area, BHX, MAN. Most of them travel at the lowest cost. Many CIS airlines have been deploying capacity to ATQ for this reason - I saw Turkmenistan Airlines 767's here many times and they seemed full.

As I understand it, the majority of MAN-India traffic is (unsurprisingly) with DEL and BOM. Relative to that, I don't believe ATQ is a big draw. The likes of Turkmenistan don't serve MAN for that reason.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

BawliBooch wrote:

And hows this?
DEL-LGW : 3636nm, ATQ-LGW:3418nm (2 aircraft rotation)
# From To Dep Arr Block
001 DEL LGW 13:00 17:00 9:30
020 LGW ATQ 18:00 08:30 9:00
019 ATQ LGW 09:30 13:20 9:20
002 LGW DEL 15:20 05:50 9:00



Can a A321LR with 220 seats + bags do 3700nm sector? Max range 4100nm?

Absolutely impossible. Look at the map, that route leads over Russia. Indigo doesn't have Russian overflight rights, they can't fly there. The route to Europe for them leads over Iran and Turkey, that would make Gatwick even further than it already is.

......absolutely right 'PatrickZ80', and folks should not make the assumption that even Gatwick slots are ten a penny. They are not. At certain times of day, Gatwick is pretty much at capacity. This makes BA's recent 'acquisition' of Monarchs former slots very significant.

LCCs looking at London may need to look at STN.

Boeingphan wrote:

One would think they have a fowl taste in their mouths right about now with regards to PW issues

GTFs, like everything else, taste like chicken.

Waterbomber wrote:

The CFM Leap can't deliver the same max. thrust as the PW1100G, so if you want to get the most out of your A321NLR, you really need the PW engines. That being said, with today's PW engines your NEO LR is going nowhere...
IMO, the A321NEO LR is a great concept, but it's not a B752 yet.

And considering that you would be running PW1100G on ETOPS routings with long, transoceanic sectors...it would seem a relatively risky proposition...really hope PW sorts out the GTF issues soon...


Faro

BawliBooch wrote:

I am not sure of the economics of long haul with small planes yet. And I think Indigo will be killing themselves if they go head to head with the majors with the A321LR out of DEL/BOM.

But the A321LR can be the perfect aircraft for Tier-2 stations with large expat populations and tourist traffic. 2 different examples:

1. ATQ - large expat population in the UK spread out across the London area, BHX, MAN. Most of them travel at the lowest cost. Many CIS airlines have been deploying capacity to ATQ for this reason - I saw Turkmenistan Airlines 767's here many times and they seemed full!

2. GOI - charter traffic - mostly seasonal Nov-Mar. Many charter operators mostly from Russia/CIS/Eastern Europe and some from UK/Germany(757's via AUH). Indigo has a realistic chance for a slice of this business if they can manage to wade into the mess that is GOI airport. The tiny civil Apron at this Naval base gets pretty crowded in the tourist season with charter Il-86's & 757's jostling for the limited space.

Continental Air pioneered this market, EWR-secondary Europe using 757's. Rakesh Gangwal obviously is aware of this; he is taking this to the next level.

Now lots of airlines use narrow bodies from US West Coast to Hawaii.

A320neo delay may derail plans of IndiGo and GoAir

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/transportation/airlines-/-aviation/airbus-pw-put-a320-neo-deliveries-on-hold-indigo/articleshow/62875258.cms

Some highlights:

Airbus SE’s decision to halt deliveries of its A320neo planes is likely to impact the expansion plans of low fare carriers IndiGoBSE 1.75 % and GoAir, two of the European aircraft maker’s most prominent customers for the plane.

The two together account for 40% of all A320neo (new engine options) planes that have been globally delivered so far. While IndiGo has 45 A320neo planes in operation, GoAir has 13. The two carriers have more than 450 pending deliveries.

Specific to Indigo's plans:

The airline has sought permission to launch flights to countries such as Vietnam, Malaysia, Myanmar, China, Brunei, Thailand, Singapore and some destinations in West Asia. A chunk of the orders will be converted to the stretched A321s that will be used to fly to Bahrain and Kuwait. The airline said it is expecting deliveries of A320ceos — the older version of the plane — which will help in its expansion.

Waterbomber wrote:

The CFM Leap can't deliver the same max. thrust as the PW1100G, so if you want to get the most out of your A321NLR, you really need the PW engines. That being said, with today's PW engines your NEO LR is going nowhere...
IMO, the A321NEO LR is a great concept, but it's not a B752 yet.

Apologies that it's not a fuel inefficient, loud, heavy plane by today's standards with over-engineeered wings, oh and apologies it's fly by wire too

Also, that 'concept' that is the 321LR appears to be selling a bit better than Boeing's self-proclaimed 757 replacement