Updated: AA agrees to order 50 Airbus A321XLR's

Miami · Sun Jun 02, 2019 4:59 pm

UNCONFIRMED

JonNYC on Twitter said:

hearing from multiple angles that an AA order for the A321LR is imminent, potentially at the Paris air show.

https://twitter.com/xJonNYC/status/1134 ... 00229?s=20

Thoughts?

- Miami

Ishrion · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:01 pm

Would definitely need something to replace the 757s once they're gone across TATL routes like PHL-EDI/SNN and open up new routes.

AirwayBill · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:04 pm

It's never to late to make the right choice!
An A321LR order would be a logical and reasonable development for AA fleet planning.

SFOtoORD · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:05 pm

Makes a lot of sense. Anyone who does TATL with 757s needs it unless they’re giving up on tatl nb flights.

PatrickZ80 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:05 pm

Replacement for the 757 indeed, those planes are getting old.

TWA85 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:06 pm

IF this rumor is true, it makes sense for AA to do so. AA needs a replacement for the 757s flying thinner routes to Europe, South America, and Hawaii. It would not be surprising if they simply converted 20-30 of their existing A321neo orders into orders for the A321LR.

us330 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:07 pm

Considering the source, I'd put money on it. JonNYC is pretty plugged in with AA--he has tweeted several proposed/rumored actions by AA that later became official.

jbs2886 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:08 pm

TWA85 wrote:
IF this rumor is true, it makes sense for AA to do so. AA needs a replacement for the 757s flying thinner routes to Europe, South America, and Hawaii. It would not be surprising if they simply converted 20-30 of their existing A321neo orders into orders for the A321LR.

That's what I'm wondering - is this a new "order" or a conversion of existing orders?

KlimaBXsst · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:08 pm

This should be almost as much fun as who is rumored to be trying to get B6!

So will it get a TWA retrojet livery too I wonder!

BlatantEcho · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:15 pm

Can’t help but think Boeing dithering on NMA means airlines are just going to order other frames instead of waiting forever.

1989worstyear · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:25 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
Replacement for the 757 indeed, those planes are getting old.

Unlike their A320's or 772's from 2001-02. :cheeky:

hOMSaR · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:27 pm

1989worstyear wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
Replacement for the 757 indeed, those planes are getting old.

Unlike their A320's or 772's from 2001-02.

Or their 737-800s from the same timeframe. What’s your point?

Guillaume787 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:28 pm

If announced at the Paris air show, could this order actually be for the extended-range A321XLR variant? AA launch customer?

oschkosch · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:28 pm

So the window of opportunity for the introduction of a Boeing NMA is getting smaller right? Or will Boeing now launch the NMA overnight as they did with the Max?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk

1989worstyear · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:30 pm

hOMSaR wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
Replacement for the 757 indeed, those planes are getting old.

Unlike their A320's or 772's from 2001-02.

Or their 737-800s from the same timeframe. What’s your point?

A 2002-built 757 is always viewed as old/aging on this site, whereas a similar-aged 777, A330, 738, or A320 is never referred to as such.

Oh well - more material for beer cans, and it will be interesting to see if it is the XLR, what design changes A made (1988 wing or fuel tank optimization :scratchchin:

).

Ziyulu · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:31 pm

Do you know the size of the lavatories on this plane?

chepos · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:34 pm

TWA85 wrote:
IF this rumor is true, it makes sense for AA to do so. AA needs a replacement for the 757s flying thinner routes to Europe, South America, and Hawaii. It would not be surprising if they simply converted 20-30 of their existing A321neo orders into orders for the A321LR.

Hawaii 757 flying will be covered by the 321NEO, which will be for the most part a PHX/LAX based aircraft: The LR is rumored to mostly be centered around PHL/JFK.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SFOtoORD · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:37 pm

Ziyulu wrote:
Do you know the size of the lavatories on this plane?

They’ll probably be the launch customer for a new ultra small lav that gets you an extra row of seats if you pair it with a 26” economy pitch.

RainerBoeing777 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:40 pm

I hope they convert orders from A321neo to A321neo LR! this is the plane that really works perfectly for CLT, PHL, JFK, MIA, ORD and DFW

AlexBrewster03 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:45 pm

If only DL would order the A321LR/XLR...
Very good choice on AAs part

sxf24 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:49 pm

There is truth to this rumor, but it will be a conversion of 10-15 existing A321neos at no additional cost to AA. This does not shut the door for NMA at AA, but gives them access to longer range airplanes for low density European flights with full commonality.

tealnz · Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:54 pm

Can’t see why anyone wanting an A321 for trans-Atlantic or other eight-hour plus services would buy an A321LR if the XLR is now on offer (as has been reported). The XLR would reportedly offer up to 700nm additional range and significantly more hold space. It will presumably replace the LR in the Airbus catalogue.

BA777FO · Sun Jun 02, 2019 6:41 pm

us330 wrote:
Considering the source, I'd put money on it. JonNYC is pretty plugged in with AA--he has tweeted several proposed/rumored actions by AA that later became official.

Aside from the apparently imminent IAD-LHR route where AA was supposed to start taking over a BA frequency...

There are a lot of markets AA could use an A321LR/XLR in, it could revive JFK for them. It could even challenge Delta in Boston. Depends on how far AA is prepared to go in those markets. Then again, they may just double down in PHL.

DDR · Sun Jun 02, 2019 6:46 pm

Hoping this is a brand new order and not just a conversion. A321 is a nice plane (Ok, can be depending on what the airlines does inside). I personally prefer them to the 737, but that's just personal opinion.

N292UX · Sun Jun 02, 2019 6:52 pm

Would be a smart decision by them. The AA 757s are getting pretty dingy, so some newer metal would be welcome.

PatrickZ80 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 6:53 pm

1989worstyear wrote:
A 2002-built 757 is always viewed as old/aging on this site, whereas a similar-aged 777, A330, 738, or A320 is never referred to as such.

That's because the year of production is actually less important than the year of design.

The 757 first flew in 1982 and as such it used the latest technology available in 1982. However a 757 produced in 2002 is basically identical to a 757 produced in 1982, it used the same technology. In 1982 this technology was the newest available, in 2002 it wasn't anymore. That's why, even though the plane was built in 2002, it is essentially a 1982 aircraft.

The 737NG first flew in 1997, so they were able to put in much newer technology that wasn't available in 1982. This 1997 technology was still being used in 737NGs built in 2002. So a 2002 built 737NG used much newer technology than a 2002 built 757. That's why a 2002-built 757 is considered old/aging and a 2002-built 737NG isn't. The 757 was already old before it was even produced.

1989worstyear · Sun Jun 02, 2019 6:59 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:
A 2002-built 757 is always viewed as old/aging on this site, whereas a similar-aged 777, A330, 738, or A320 is never referred to as such.

That's because the year of production is actually less important than the year of design.

The 757 first flew in 1982 and as such it used the latest technology available in 1982. However a 757 produced in 2002 is basically identical to a 757 produced in 1982, it used the same technology. In 1982 this technology was the newest available, in 2002 it wasn't anymore. That's why, even though the plane was built in 2002, it is essentially a 1982 aircraft.

The 737NG first flew in 1997, so they were able to put in much newer technology that wasn't available in 1982. This 1997 technology was still being used in 737NGs built in 2002. So a 2002 built 737NG used much newer technology than a 2002 built 757. That's why a 2002-built 757 is considered old/aging and a 2002-built 737NG isn't. The 757 was already old before it was even produced.

So a 2008-built A320 CEO is essentially a 1988 aircraft, correct?

MSPNWA · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:02 pm

I can definitely see a 10-15 frame conversion to replace 757s on select TATL routes. AA could have used a 757 replacement yesterday, and the LR is the only near-term option.

gen2stew · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:12 pm

If this order does come to fruition I hope that the Tempe management outfits these with lie flats and other international standard accoutrements and is able to run them against B6 and DL when they're not flying transatlantic or deep south on domestic flights that need them (BOS-LAX/SFO, JFK-SEA/SAN, MIA-SFO/SEA).

lightsaber · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:12 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:
A 2002-built 757 is always viewed as old/aging on this site, whereas a similar-aged 777, A330, 738, or A320 is never referred to as such.

That's because the year of production is actually less important than the year of design.

The 757 first flew in 1982 and as such it used the latest technology available in 1982. However a 757 produced in 2002 is basically identical to a 757 produced in 1982, it used the same technology. In 1982 this technology was the newest available, in 2002 it wasn't anymore. That's why, even though the plane was built in 2002, it is essentially a 1982 aircraft.

The 737NG first flew in 1997, so they were able to put in much newer technology that wasn't available in 1982. This 1997 technology was still being used in 737NGs built in 2002. So a 2002 built 737NG used much newer technology than a 2002 built 757. That's why a 2002-built 757 is considered old/aging and a 2002-built 737NG isn't. The 757 was already old before it was even produced.

Do not get hung up too much on year of design. The 737NG had the wing internals redesigned twice as with the guts inside the tail. That is why the NG is aging so well. The NG used 1st generation solid modeling which allows faster/cheaper PIPs. The A320, 777, and other FWB aircraft take it further. For example the 777 moved the center of lift closer to the center of gravity saving cruise fuel.

The 757 is the lady truly old school airframe.

Lightsaber

Lightsaber

Strato2 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:17 pm

sxf24 wrote:
There is truth to this rumor, but it will be a conversion of 10-15 existing A321neos at no additional cost to AA.

If there is a conversion to a more capable aircraft you can bet It won't be at no additional cost.

cessna2 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:23 pm

AlexBrewster03 wrote:
If only DL would order the A321LR/XLR...
Very good choice on AAs part

Don’t count them out yet...

1989worstyear · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:27 pm

lightsaber wrote:
PatrickZ80 wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:
A 2002-built 757 is always viewed as old/aging on this site, whereas a similar-aged 777, A330, 738, or A320 is never referred to as such.

That's because the year of production is actually less important than the year of design.

The 757 first flew in 1982 and as such it used the latest technology available in 1982. However a 757 produced in 2002 is basically identical to a 757 produced in 1982, it used the same technology. In 1982 this technology was the newest available, in 2002 it wasn't anymore. That's why, even though the plane was built in 2002, it is essentially a 1982 aircraft.

The 737NG first flew in 1997, so they were able to put in much newer technology that wasn't available in 1982. This 1997 technology was still being used in 737NGs built in 2002. So a 2002 built 737NG used much newer technology than a 2002 built 757. That's why a 2002-built 757 is considered old/aging and a 2002-built 737NG isn't. The 757 was already old before it was even produced.

Do not get hung up too much on year of design. The 737NG had the wing internals redesigned twice as with the guts inside the tail. That is why the NG is aging so well. The NG used 1st generation solid modeling which allows faster/cheaper PIPs. The A320, 777, and other FWB aircraft take it further. For example the 777 moved the center of lift closer to the center of gravity saving cruise fuel.

The 757 is the lady truly old school airframe.

Lightsaber

Lightsaber

The 1987-88 period was truly the pinnacle of innovation in civil aviation. I believe AB used solid modelling for the A320-200 nose gear in '87.

I wonder, if this is the launch order for the XLR, will it still use the 1988 -200 wing, or will it be the fuel tank changes folks have mentioned on this site...

Revelation · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:31 pm

No big news that the world's largest A320 family operator might add A321LR and/or A321XLR to their fleet.

Both are pretty much no brainers for any A321 operator, especially if the "no cost upgrade" mentioned above is a possibility.

BlatantEcho wrote:
Can’t help but think Boeing dithering on NMA means airlines are just going to order other frames instead of waiting forever.

Ahh, dithering, something Airbus should have done rather than sinking $billions into the hole known as A380.

oschkosch wrote:
Or will Boeing now launch the NMA overnight as they did with the Max?

Somehow I don't think Boeing will be provoked this time.

Besides, if you believe the Air Current, the NMA proposal was readied for the BoD and reviewed but withheld at the last minute due to the tragic circumstances.

Thus if anything, any NMA launch will not be an overnight affair, it's already an extremely deliberate process.

TL;DR: One member thinks Boeing moves too slow, another thinks Boeing moves too fast.

Eyad89 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:37 pm

Revelation wrote:
Ahh, dithering, something Airbus should have done rather than sinking $billions into the hole known as A380.

Whataboutism.

BlueberryWheats · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:39 pm

1989worstyear wrote:
The 1987-88 period was truly the pinnacle of innovation in civil aviation.

I'd say for pure innovation and thinking outside the box, the postwar/dawning of the jet age was where it's at!

Aviation saw some huge leaps back then, granted some of that innovation produce some awful ideas, but some definite original thinking.

sxf24 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:39 pm

Strato2 wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
There is truth to this rumor, but it will be a conversion of 10-15 existing A321neos at no additional cost to AA.

If there is a conversion to a more capable aircraft you can bet It won't be at no additional cost.

Airbus needs some momentum and a blue chip customer. It is no different than the 737-10 conversion orders at launch and Delta’s A330neo order, which had airplanes at A LOWER PRICE than prior NW sales.

PlanesNTrains · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:53 pm

oschkosch wrote:
So the window of opportunity for the introduction of a Boeing NMA is getting smaller right? Or will Boeing now launch the NMA overnight as they did with the Max?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk

Define “overnight”? They’ve apparently been working on it for quite some time. Unless they announced it before Paris, I’m not seeing a correlation.

compensateme · Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:59 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
oschkosch wrote:
So the window of opportunity for the introduction of a Boeing NMA is getting smaller right? Or will Boeing now launch the NMA overnight as they did with the Max?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk

Define “overnight”? They’ve apparently been working on it for quite some time. Unless they announced it before Paris, I’m not seeing a correlation.

Any “work” on the NMA is minimal at best (re: not very meaningful). New planes require huge amounts of cash, and Boeing is required to disclose that.

smartplane · Sun Jun 02, 2019 8:00 pm

sxf24 wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
There is truth to this rumor, but it will be a conversion of 10-15 existing A321neos at no additional cost to AA.

If there is a conversion to a more capable aircraft you can bet It won't be at no additional cost.

Airbus needs some momentum and a blue chip customer. It is no different than the 737-10 conversion orders at launch and Delta’s A330neo order, which had airplanes at A LOWER PRICE than prior NW sales.

Very rare to get a more feature heavy model, at no cost. The extra cost may be covert, for instance by scaling back previously agreed retrospective credits, or the first delivery may not qualify for credits at all.

For the A320 (and A220), Airbus doesn't need more momentum or blue chip customers. It has enough of both. It needs to manage customer delivery expectations, lift production, lower production costs. Ditto for all three of it's engine OEM's.

Airbus has some earlier A320 slots available, due to existing customer deferrals. But these are being bundled with A330 and / or A350 purchases. Could an airline and leasing company or two announce new double acts at Paris?

behramjee · Sun Jun 02, 2019 8:01 pm

Even if this turns out to be true, I still foresee AA ordering dozens of Boeing NMA aircraft along with being a launch customer for the type.

AA can use the A321Neo-LR well out of MIA/DFW to LATAM + out of PHL to UK/Western Europe.

MIflyer12 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 8:05 pm

1989worstyear wrote:
So a 2008-built A320 CEO is essentially a 1988 aircraft, correct?

Or a 2019-build CEO. Don't expect intellectual rigor.

The 757 South America and TATL runs of the last week have all been 17-19 year-old frames. There are some older frames doing PHX-Hawaii runs. There is no urgency to replace the SA/TATL frames - apart from what will likely be a pretty quick drop from 32 757s to zero at some point.

JamesCousins · Sun Jun 02, 2019 8:06 pm

What will be more interesting to me is whether this is a conversion or a new order - I could easily see AA ordering 20-30 LR/XLR in addition to the firm and options on their 321neo order

45272455674 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 8:20 pm

Revelation wrote:

BlatantEcho wrote:
Can’t help but think Boeing dithering on NMA means airlines are just going to order other frames instead of waiting forever.

Ahh, dithering, something Airbus should have done rather than sinking $billions into the hole known as A380.

What has the A380 got to do with AA or the A321?

Are you trying to start an A-v-B flame war?

Back on topic, I think these long range A321 aircraft are going to unfortunately become more popular. I hope I can somehow avoid very long range flights on single aisle airliners.

Bobloblaw · Sun Jun 02, 2019 8:31 pm

RainerBoeing777 wrote:
I hope they convert orders from A321neo to A321neo LR! this is the plane that really works perfectly for CLT, PHL, JFK, MIA, ORD and DFW

I bet that is what is going to happen. It won’t be net new orders.

Cointrin330 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 8:39 pm

chepos wrote:
TWA85 wrote:
IF this rumor is true, it makes sense for AA to do so. AA needs a replacement for the 757s flying thinner routes to Europe, South America, and Hawaii. It would not be surprising if they simply converted 20-30 of their existing A321neo orders into orders for the A321LR.

Hawaii 757 flying will be covered by the 321NEO, which will be for the most part a PHX/LAX based aircraft: The LR is rumored to mostly be centered around PHL/JFK.

What JFK routes do you see getting the A321LR?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sxf24 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 8:49 pm

smartplane wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
Strato2 wrote:

If there is a conversion to a more capable aircraft you can bet It won't be at no additional cost.

Airbus needs some momentum and a blue chip customer. It is no different than the 737-10 conversion orders at launch and Delta’s A330neo order, which had airplanes at A LOWER PRICE than prior NW sales.

Very rare to get a more feature heavy model, at no cost. The extra cost may be covert, for instance by scaling back previously agreed retrospective credits, or the first delivery may not qualify for credits at all.

For the A320 (and A220), Airbus doesn't need more momentum or blue chip customers. It has enough of both. It needs to manage customer delivery expectations, lift production, lower production costs. Ditto for all three of it's engine OEM's.

Airbus has some earlier A320 slots available, due to existing customer deferrals. But these are being bundled with A330 and / or A350 purchases. Could an airline and leasing company or two announce new double acts at Paris?

The A321neoXLR is not a feature heavy upgrade. It carries more fuel and has received lukewarm interest at a higher price point. It is clear within the industry that Airbus will need to launch with some conversions at level prices, not unlike how it and Boeing have launched other new types.

acavpics · Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:00 pm

BA777FO wrote:
us330 wrote:
Considering the source, I'd put money on it. JonNYC is pretty plugged in with AA--he has tweeted several proposed/rumored actions by AA that later became official.

Aside from the apparently imminent IAD-LHR route where AA was supposed to start taking over a BA frequency...

There are a lot of markets AA could use an A321LR/XLR in, it could revive JFK for them. It could even challenge Delta in Boston. Depends on how far AA is prepared to go in those markets. Then again, they may just double down in PHL.

I highly doubt AA is gonna restart international/TATL flights out of BOS.

BA777FO · Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:29 pm

acavpics wrote:
BA777FO wrote:
us330 wrote:
Considering the source, I'd put money on it. JonNYC is pretty plugged in with AA--he has tweeted several proposed/rumored actions by AA that later became official.

Aside from the apparently imminent IAD-LHR route where AA was supposed to start taking over a BA frequency...

There are a lot of markets AA could use an A321LR/XLR in, it could revive JFK for them. It could even challenge Delta in Boston. Depends on how far AA is prepared to go in those markets. Then again, they may just double down in PHL.

I highly doubt AA is gonna restart international/TATL flights out of BOS.

With their current fleet, of course not. That's why the A321LR could be a game changer. Emphasis on could, as per this comment and my original. It just depends on how adventerous and how competitive the AA/BA/IB JBA wants to be from Boston.

aemoreira1981 · Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:35 pm

Almost certainly a lock for PHL and PHX if ordered. Given the AA retreat from JFK, I'd be surprised if any of these go to JFK, as these would basically be Hawaii birds (PHX) and TATL birds (PHL). It then puts pressure on UA to do the same, as the B39M isn't large enough to do TATL and have Polaris on it. I expect DL to convert some of its A21N order to the LR variant as well, and B6 already has the LR variant of the A21N on order, which will be used to launch LON service, and could also be used for South America service.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net