The A321 will be the downfall of the 757 in UK

I am a real Boeing fan and until recently would hear nothing against them, but Airbus have impressed me, they have certainly got their act together and have listened to criticism and taken action.

Bargioni,
As a fellow Boeing to Airbus recent convert I really think you have absolutely hit the nail on the head with your posts. I would not want to go back to any Boeing product as it would be a backward step.

This message may end up totally off topic!…but anyway…
The B757~2OO is the perfect aircraft to take tourists to holiday destinations, I dont know that for a fact, but looking at holiday airports most of the aircraft there are B757s! I mean, at Tenerife, I saw excel, Thomas cook, Flyjet, Finnair for air scandic, Iberia, My travel and First choice all with B752s or B753s! Where as I only saw Monarch and First choice with A321s. Now I cannot say anything bad about the A321 as Ive never flown on one but I have flown on a B752 and all I can say is….nice!!

And what about my comments regarding the flexibility that the 757 gives tour operators to arrange charter flights from regional airports that cannot support A330 or 763. The 757 unlike the 321 is an ER aircraft that can operate long-haul from regional airports and profitably!!!

Fleet commonality is a way to seriously reduce your operating costs, and gives an operator a greater amount of flexibility. Its much easier to ‘swap’ capacity around the network, if you operate a ‘common type’, because all you do is swap out the airframe. Trying to do this when you operate several different fleets is an absolute nightmare.

The costs savings made far outweigh keeping a specific a/c type in service, to operate one or two routes, where it would allow you to carry a few more pax. It may even make commercial sense to reduce the capacity on these routes. Differences in operating costs, a possible increase in the yield on the route, maybe sufficient to warrant a 150 seater versus a 200 seater, with minimal impact on the revenue.

To be absolutely frank, apart from purchase/operating costs, there is virtually nothing else that makes one particular manufacturer stand out from another. There is literally a choice of ‘two flavours’, be it in the 50-70 seater regional jet market, or 250-350 seater medium/long haul market.

While we would all love to see ‘our own’ particular aircraft type flown, it all comes down to economics nothing else. Long gone are the days where variety ruled.

Don’t BA operate their A321s to some hairy desitnations, like Syria and Sudan?

They must be pretty demanding in terms of range and hot/high.

Great post BTW Matt 🙂

Correct, the 757 is more suited to charter flight operating from small regional airports like LBA and into hot/high/short runways which serve some Med holiday destinations, the smeller Greek Isles and GIB being perfect examples of where the 757 outperforms the 321

The 321 is OK for routes from MAN to TFS or LGW to PMI but it would struggle on a hot day with a full load out of LBA. The 321 is a runway munching, underpowered overstretched ugly thing!!

Im sure I have said this to you before but I will say it again.

The A321 has no problem operating out of LBA full on a hot day. Airtours did it for a full year a few years ago. The only problem the 321 and 738 HAD out of LBA was overheating brakes on landing which resulted in long turnarounds. This has now been sorted, and thats why full A321s and 738s take off from LBA full to the likes of TFS every week.

Ok?

mean people who say things like:

“Its airbus so it has to be better”

“Its a better aircraft because there are more orders for it”

That kinda crap.

Annoys the hell out of me.

Oh, it annoys me too, and I presume that it would be just as annoying if we substituted the word “Boeing” for “Airbus”? 😉

The type of partisan b 😡 llsh 😡 t that Sandy describes is childish and shortsighted and adds nothing to the discussion.

Of course differents types have different characteristics, different strengths and different weaknesses. What would be the point of building an identical aircraft to your competitor?

Someone observed yesterday that choice is a good thing.

They were right.

The reason GB Airways doesnt operate the 321 into GIB is it cant nor can any other operator, so there!

ZB are approved to operate into GIB, however as you have already stated it is payload restricted.

However, for an inclusive tour airline an all A321 fleet would mean abandoning a lot of regional UK departure points or operating with 60 seats haha!

Well, that is why you will never find an all A321 airline -at least I don´t know one.
The A321 is the logical development of the A320. It was built for airlines that need to fill the gap between the A320 and the bigger 757/767 or A310/A300. The A321 only makes sense if you are flying A320 or A319 aswell.
Boeing made a big mistake by not filling this gap (the 737-900 was an idea, but didn´really work out) and in the beginning not to take Airbus serious enough with the A320-Project.
So Boeing made the only right thing by looking to the market above the 737 and A320-Family by announcing the 7E7 to peplace the 757/767 and A300/A310.
It seems that Airbus learned from the mistakes of Boeing by introducing the A350 as an answer to the 7E7.

First of all, I must say I am big fan of the 757-200. I don´t like the -300, but I said that already in a different thread.

What I see here is again is the constant struggle of Boeing and Airbus fans which is the better plane.
I personally don´t have any preferences I like both Airbus and Boeing they both make great planes. Well, the key point of this conversation is that the A321 is replacing the 757 in a lot of charter airlines especially in the UK.
The only pro argument of the 757 here, which is posted here in every second answer is that “the 757 outperforms the 321 at hot and high airfields and operating from airports like GIB.”
Well it seems that is the only argument of some people here and they are holding to it as if is this the most important argument in this conversation.
But for the airlines -it looks a little bit different. They buy planes because efficeny, operating costs etc….,the arguemt mentioned above seems to be not of that importance for them.
It must make more sense to buy A321 and A320s then flying older 757.
The A321 is 15-20 years younger then the 757 and there it is clear that it has some qualities that the 757 naturally don´t have, -therefore the 7E7 will be more efficent then the A330-200 is now, that is called development.
It is clear that a modern airliner will replace some of the ” older legends of the sky”. And I rather see an A321 that at least looks like a plane, then a “blended-wing” which will probably replacing “normal aircraft” in 20 years.

I have to agree with the Boeing-fans here tthat the A321 is the ugliest of the A320 family and if it would be for me Lufthansa, Condor, Hapag Lloyd, Air France etc (and Dan Air -if would still exist – I made my first flight in a Dan Air Bac 1-11) would still fly 727-200 Adv. which is the best looking airliner ever, but it had its days.

My sentiments exactly.
Only better worded

I dont dislike Airbus, I like the A330 and love the A300 and the A310. However, for an inclusive tour airline an all A321 fleet would mean abandoning a lot of regional UK departure points or operating with 60 seats haha!

Also aiprots like Samos and Mykonos would be unable to be operated profitably. Also the 757 has ER capability, invaluable to a charter airline as it can fly to Sanford, albeit with a stop, making long-haul flights from regional airports a reality!!!!

First of all, I must say I am big fan of the 757-200. I don´t like the -300, but I said that already in a different thread.

What I see here is again is the constant struggle of Boeing and Airbus fans which is the better plane.
I personally don´t have any preferences I like both Airbus and Boeing they both make great planes. Well, the key point of this conversation is that the A321 is replacing the 757 in a lot of charter airlines especially in the UK.
The only pro argument of the 757 here, which is posted here in every second answer is that “the 757 outperforms the 321 at hot and high airfields and operating from airports like GIB.”
Well it seems that is the only argument of some people here and they are holding to it as if is this the most important argument in this conversation.
But for the airlines -it looks a little bit different. They buy planes because efficeny, operating costs etc….,the arguemt mentioned above seems to be not of that importance for them.
It must make more sense to buy A321 and A320s then flying older 757.
The A321 is 15-20 years younger then the 757 and there it is clear that it has some qualities that the 757 naturally don´t have, -therefore the 7E7 will be more efficent then the A330-200 is now, that is called development.
It is clear that a modern airliner will replace some of the ” older legends of the sky”. And I rather see an A321 that at least looks like a plane, then a “blended-wing” which will probably replacing “normal aircraft” in 20 years.

I have to agree with the Boeing-fans here tthat the A321 is the ugliest of the A320 family and if it would be for me Lufthansa, Condor, Hapag Lloyd, Air France etc (and Dan Air -if would still exist – I made my first flight in a Dan Air Bac 1-11) would still fly 727-200 Adv. which is the best looking airliner ever, but it had its days.

:confused:

I mean people who say things like:

“Its airbus so it has to be better”

“Its a better aircraft because there are more orders for it”

That kinda crap.

Annoys the hell out of me.

A more reasoned response. Well balanced and exactly what I mean too.

I sick of people who think the A321 is worlds better than the 757 when the fact is that is simply not true.

:confused:

Isn’t that the key to it?

The 757 has a better performance out of those airports. Fair enough.

Not many European airports fill that criteria. And therefore, for airlines that don’t usually operate out of those airports, the A321 is a superior a/c to the 757, at least as far as economics and maintenance are concerned.

For airlines that operate out of hot and high, short runway airports, then the 757 is a superior a/c to the A321.

As is almost always the case, what makes an a/c superior to others is its ability to perform to the airline’s specific requirements most efficiently. So the 757 is superior to the A321 in some ways, and the A321 is superior to the 757 in other ways.

A more reasoned response. Well balanced and exactly what I mean too.

I sick of people who think the A321 is worlds better than the 757 when the fact is that is simply not true.

Correct, the 757 is more suited to charter flight operating from small regional airports like LBA and into hot/high/short runways which serve some Med holiday destinations, the smeller Greek Isles and GIB being perfect examples of where the 757 outperforms the 321

The 321 is OK for routes from MAN to TFS or LGW to PMI but it would struggle on a hot day with a full load out of LBA. The 321 is a runway munching, underpowered overstretched ugly thing!!

The A321 is being used on route where the hot and high, short field performance is not required.

Isn’t that the key to it?

The 757 has a better performance out of those airports. Fair enough.

Not many European airports fill that criteria. And therefore, for airlines that don’t usually operate out of those airports, the A321 is a superior a/c to the 757, at least as far as economics and maintenance are concerned.

For airlines that operate out of hot and high, short runway airports, then the 757 is a superior a/c to the A321.

As is almost always the case, what makes an a/c superior to others is its ability to perform to the airline’s specific requirements most efficiently. So the 757 is superior to the A321 in some ways, and the A321 is superior to the 757 in other ways.

Simple things that make life easier, for example panel numbers on the outside as opposed to having to check the manual on a Boeing to find out the number of a panel because it is written on the inside!

I am a real Boeing fan and until recently would hear nothing against them, but Airbus have impressed me, they have certainly got their act together and have listened to criticism and taken action.

Airlines will buy whatever is best for their operation and if the A321 is pushing out the B757 in the UK (and elswhere), it is obviously a better product.

Thats the thing though.

Its not an overall better poroduct. Its the worst performer out of the A320 series.

BA may be replacing their 757’s witrh A321s. But that is only because they do not need the capabilities of the 757 on the route they currently usde them on.

Despite its age you will not see anyone replace a 757 with an A321 directly on a strict performance basis. If you NEED a 757’s performance base. The A321 is certainly not the solution. In terms of charter ops the 757 runs rings round the A321.

The A321 is being used on route where the hot and high, short field performance is not required.

The 757 outperforms the 321 at hot and high airfields and operating from airports like GIB.

For a charter operator an all A321 fleet would be restrictive as it would not be able to operate to or from certain smaller airfields.