Blood in the water!

[Maximilian_Jenius]

That'll make quite the difference!

Will a larger wing allow for it to operate out of hot and high fields?

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Will a larger wing allow for it to operate out of hot and high fields?

It would improve performance, yes.

 

[CamYZ125]

 

[Ecl!pse]

Where did this diagram come from? I have yet to see anything that suggests a new wing and MTOW over 97.5T.

 

[mshunter]

Hey that's a near graphic. Now what kind of performance does it have? Boeing has a horrible track record with stretching things and killing the performance. 739 comes to mind. All the crews I've talked to say it's a pig.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

Hey that's a near graphic. Now what kind of performance does it have? Boeing has a horrible track record with stretching things and killing the performance. 739 comes to mind. All the crews I've talked to say it's a pig.

Because it is, the same with the current 321!

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

Where did this diagram come from? I have yet to see anything that suggests a new wing and MTOW over 97.5T.

Indeed where @CamYZ125, photoshop?

 

[Ecl!pse]

This will likely have the same wing as the NEO itself (likely just reinforced for the added weight), so hot and high will struggle relative to the base 321neo. Not sure how exactly it will compare to the 752 with the neo improvements, but I wouldn't anticipate it to outperform the 752 in that regard - this is to replace aging 752's on the TATL/similar long & thin markets.

That being said, that "A322neoXR" in the above photoshop looks beautiful - more 753's, please!

 

[Burrito]

This will likely have the same wing as the NEO itself (likely just reinforced for the added weight), so hot and high will struggle relative to the base 321neo. Not sure how exactly it will compare to the 752 with the neo improvements, but I wouldn't anticipate it to outperform the 752 in that regard - this is to replace aging 752's on the TATL/similar long & thin markets.

That being said, that "A322neoXR" in the above photoshop looks beautiful - more 753's, please!

So, if it's got the same wing, but we throw PW4000-sized engines underneath, she won't be trimmed out and gasping for breath around FL300....right?

 

[Autothrust Blue]

Sounds good to me. I distinctly remember riding a DL 757-300 from LAX to HNL and thinking it was the least comfortable flight I had ever ridden; knees pressed against the seat in front of me the whole time. Granted, I am fairly tall (6' with long legs).

Short of riding in Economy Comfort (Economy Plus or whatever your respective carrier calls it), that's probably going to be the case for the foreseeable future on every airliner, ever.

 

[ASpilot2be]

Short of riding in Economy Comfort (Economy Plus or whatever your respective carrier calls it), that's probably going to be the case for the foreseeable future on every airliner, ever.

I was in the exit row on a super empty CRJ from LAS to SEA. That was the most comfortable ride I have taken in a while. Beat 30A from SEA to ANC. Ugh.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

I was in the exit row on a super empty CRJ from LAS to SEA. That was the most comfortable ride I have taken in a while. Beat 30A from SEA to ANC. Ugh.

I would rather ride on the CRJ-900 or the EMB-175 (depending on which seats are in the 175, possibly) than in the 737. Especially a certain LCC's high density configuration.

 

[ASpilot2be]

I would rather ride on the CRJ-900 or the EMB-175 (depending on which seats are in the 175, possibly) than in the 737. Especially a certain LCC's high density configuration.

I really dont mind the 737. Especially the new seats on Alaska. But any full airplane sucks.

 

[CamYZ125]

Indeed where @CamYZ125, photoshop?

Came from a VERY reliable source: Facebook.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

This will likely have the same wing as the NEO itself (likely just reinforced for the added weight), so hot and high will struggle relative to the base 321neo. Not sure how exactly it will compare to the 752 with the neo improvements, but I wouldn't anticipate it to outperform the 752 in that regard - this is to replace aging 752's on the TATL/similar long & thin markets.

That being said, that "A322neoXR" in the above photoshop looks beautiful - more 753's, please!

Came from a VERY reliable source: Facebook.

Probably all fakes. I think that the only one to see reality will be the A321NEO. But the 21NEOXR and 22NEOXR are a step in the right direction.

@Ecl!pse I don't think that the 321NEO will have the performance of the 752, just the range, and again that's only because of the added fuel tanks.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

So, if it's got the same wing, but we throw PW4000-sized engines underneath, she won't be trimmed out and gasping for breath around FL300....right?

With extra fuel tanks on board, it might be grasping for breath even sooner, than FL300!

 

[CamYZ125]

With extra fuel tanks on board, it might be grasping for breath even sooner, than FL300!

Yeah, we stop at FL280 initially going to the West coast pretty often.

It doesn't need new engines/more power, it needs a new wing/more lift.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

Yeah, we stop at FL280 initially going to the West coast pretty often.

It doesn't need new engines/more power, it needs a new wing/more lift.

I flew two 321's from PHX-Vegas and back, granted we're not that far. But both times the pilot gave his long briefing about winds aloft, which direction they're landing at the destination airport. Cruising altitude, etc.

Is it a regulation that you guys give out all that info?

Anyway, PHX-LAS was 280, LAS-PHX was 300.

I talk a lot of crap about the 321, but it's my favorite of the 3210 series. But it's no 757.

 

[Ecl!pse]

Probably all fakes. I think that the only one to see reality will be the A321NEO. But the 21NEOXR and 22NEOXR are a step in the right direction.

@Ecl!pse I don't think that the 321NEO will have the performance of the 752, just the range, and again that's only because of the added fuel tanks.

Absolutely. It won't have the same performance, just have the legs to complete the missions. This will be a delicate analysis for airlines - the range comes at the expense of payload (pax + freight), so yields will have to be strong to make it work. There are certainly markets that can handle it, but not sure there are enough to make this variant sell like wildfire. We'll see.

 

[jynxyjoe]

Absolutely. It won't have the same performance, just have the legs to complete the missions. This will be a delicate analysis for airlines - the range comes at the expense of payload (pax + freight), so yields will have to be strong to make it work. There are certainly markets that can handle it, but not sure there are enough to make this variant sell like wildfire. We'll see.

Hope the "adding extra fuel for range" doesn't turn the 321 whatever into a 340-500 disaster for payload and WB