A321neo best to replace 757: AirInsight

AirInsight today published a short report comparing the Boeing 737-900ER with the Airbus A321neo and concluded the neo is the best choice to replace the Boeing 757.

See the AirInsight synopsis here.

The report is particularly timely with the pending American Airlines decision we’ve all read so much about.

23 Comments on “A321neo best to replace 757: AirInsight

  1. While neither aircraft matches the range, not sure if AA actually uses the range of its 757s fully.

  2. And I would guess that a B737-900NEO is available (at least in internal sales pitches) for AA on time.

    • What good is a glass dagger?
      Airbus A320*Neo customers block all delivery slots for advanced engines afaics.
      Could RR step in in a timely fashion? I don’t think so. Not before 2002++ imho.

  3. Well, what does AA want their replacement for the B-757 do? AA uses their B-757s mostly on TRANSCON, Hawaii, and some SA routes. It does very little TATL with the B-757 and almost all of them filter through DFW every two weeks, or so. While we all agree the A-321NEO should be able to do all these missions for AA, so can the B-737-900ER.

    http://www.boeing.com/commercial/737family/pf/pf_900ERtech.html

    • Without getting into an argument about performance numbers that neither of us can properly analyse (as far as AA use is concerned), perhaps, and I say only perhaps it is not a matter of if the B737-900ER can do it but a matter of which one can do it better.

      I also think the issue of commonality is a bit of a red herring, unless Boeing offers up a 737 with modern engines.
      If Boeing offers up a new Narrow Body (or whatever “game changing” name the want to give it), it will have almost nil commonality with whatever AA is now flying. Form what I have read, that is part of the risk for Boeing).

      Whatever they do (single aisle, double aisle), the big question is if the airlines are going to jump on the Boeing PR bandwagon like they did for the 787 or will they hold back until some real, trustworthy numbers (weight, performance AND scheduling) before making orders?

      Like they say, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me!

  4. With the serious possibility of AA going for the NEO, I sincerely hope that Boeing management will now accelerate the launch of an all new 737 and not a re-engined version of it, to prevent AA and who knows how many other major US carriers, from switching over to the NEO.

    Furthermore, as Mr. Steve Hussey loudly proclaimed and I agree, the airplane should have two aisles and a seven abreast cabin-cross-section, to accelerate turnaround times and thus improve daily utilization and profitability of the aircraft beyond anything a single aircraft like
    the NEO, can possibly accomplish!

    The all new Boeing aircraft, should aim to replace the larger 737-800/900 models as well as the 757-200 and possibly -300 models, the market for aircraft with a seat capacity for up to 150 seats most likely being covered by the C-Series and other airplanes already being offered and sold in that category.

    The all new Boeing 7X7, will offer everything the NEO does and more, plus having an all composite two-isle structure, which makes it a far superior airplane compared to the NEO,
    to which Airbus is now fully committed AND sold out thru 2020 if not later!
    All that, while a re-engined 737 MAY be able to compete with the NEO, if that!

    Come on Boeing, this is the time to be decisive and make sure that worlds most successful tmedium-range aircraft, the 737, will not be replaced by it’s primary rival only!

  5. Correction to para 2: Mr. Steve Hazy NOT Hussy. Sorry Steve, if you catch my dictation
    machine error!

  6. Except for the trans atlantic flights , 737 900ER can do all that 757 does; within US , surely it can. Along with commonality and right pricing and support, it is up to Boeing to wrest this order from 321 NEO. Combine that with the option to switch to the new narrow body , come end of the decade, it is any day better than a re engined 321.
    I hope B acts boldly and decisively to retain the big all B fleet customer AA , instead of dithering and over analyzing pros and cons and playing into A’s hands , as they had done before in many orders.It is the quality cost and delivery of the total solution to AA that counts , not aircraft capabilities per se.

    • Common wisdom seems to be that a new Boeing NB will certainly be “shiny” but
      not significantly better than a comparable Airbus 320*NEO and that Airbus
      later new NB window opens on more tech opportunities than the one that Boeing
      could open now.

      Boeing looses the massive NG advantage of a grandfathered from the 60ties
      certification framework. ( lower cabin crash resistance, less demanding engine out performance, and a string of other items that create a weight penalty).

      Imho an Airbus frame done to the same framework would certainly beat the pants off a 737*NG/RE/*

      • If by “common wisdom” you mean Airbus PR and John Leahyisms, then right. Of course you must be referring to Leahy’s statement that Airbus looked at doing an all new airplane and it was only 2% better than the NEO. Of course, the fact that the NEO is what Leahy was selling, and Airbus doesn’t have the capability to do a new airplane until at least 2018 never enters your calculation, does it?

  7. Howard.
    On the contrary, Airbus never had any intentions of building an
    all new A320, first because they could hang the new engines on
    their A320s without any major structural changes and secondly,
    because they made the correct assumption, in my opinion, that
    Boeing could not and would not re-engine the 737, leaving the
    whole field wide open for the NEO!
    Wrong, firstly because they sold many more NEOs than they ever
    expected at this early stage, filling their production line way past
    2020, but also they inadvertently providing Boeing with a golden
    opportunity AND the time to produce an all-new 737 for first de-
    livery around 2017/18, with an airplane which will not only compete
    effectively with the NOs, but will actually be a much better airplane,
    because it will hopefully have the two-isle seven abreast cabin cros-
    section Steve Hazy is insisting on, as well as an overall all carbon-
    fibre structure, based on the Boeing 787 experience!
    From my perspective, a win-win situation for Boeing, providing they
    decide on and offer such an aircraft, BEFORE AA and too many
    other major US airline go with the NEO!
    GO Boeing GO and build the next record breaking aicraft!

    • Airbus production line has slots available from 2018, and my guess is in reality there will still be slots in 2016/17 for good customers. They can up production to create new slots. They will produce 44×12 planes per year by then. At 1,000 sales basic math tells me that they have sold less than 2 years production thus far.

      As for Boeing delivering a new plane in 2017/18, even they say its impossible. 2019/20 is the earliest they can do, according to their own statements.

      I am still amused how Boeing aficionados try to turn 1,000 NEOs sold into bad news for Airbus. I am sure Boeing desperately wished they were in the same ‘tight’ spot. Where’s the ‘roll eyes’ smiley if you really need it?

      • “I am still amused how Boeing aficionados try to turn 1,000 NEOs sold into bad news for Airbus.”

        I haven’t seen it here..maybe you can point it out?

  8. i think boeing will do

    price competitiveness for present 737 models plus incremental tweaks at maximum production level

    do a new 797 at the 150 passenger level for 2018

    and if resources/market figures are profitable

    a simple reengine with maximum commonality of the 739er for the 757 replacement market for 2014

    • Hey, why not 2014 for the new small airplane? Or why not look at what Boeing is saying?

      “McNerney: Doug, I give you our current thinking, which is largely unchanged, I think, from the last time we discussed it. By the end of this year, we should have a sharper view of new airplane versus re-engine. As you know, most of the data and customer feedback is suggesting to us that the new airplane option is the most favorable, but we’ll — we’ll get to that decision on a timely basis. We’re 2019, 2020, that’s the timeframe that the market seems to want this new airplane and where we can deliver technologies that can make a meaningful difference. ”

      http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/2011/04/29/mcnerneys-interesting-comments-on-the-new-airplane/

      So, 2019/2020, not 2018, not 2017, and not 2012.

  9. jacobin777 :“I am still amused how Boeing aficionados try to turn 1,000 NEOs sold into bad news for Airbus.”
    I haven’t seen it here..maybe you can point it out?

    Happy to:

    “[…]but also they inadvertently providing Boeing with a golden
    opportunity AND the time to produce an all-new 737 for first de-
    livery around 2017/18, with an airplane which will not only compete
    effectively with the NOs, but will actually be a much better airplane,[…]From my perspective, a win-win situation for Boeing, providing they
    decide on and offer such an aircraft, BEFORE AA and too many
    other major US airline go with the NEO!”

    “It is the Boeing Engineers who are in the driver’s seat for the future of the NB market, Airbus has already played their hand by introducing the NEO. ”

    “Neo huge order is clearly a good news for the A320 program. But, don’t ever think that it is a bad news for the competitors. Au contraire, it confirms that Airbus has just frozen its narrowbody strategy for the coming ten years. “

    • Well its not really “aficionados”, more like management…I was thinking along the lines of “koolaiders”…

  10. jacobin777 :
    “I am still amused how Boeing aficionados try to turn 1,000 NEOs sold into bad news for Airbus.”
    I haven’t seen it here..maybe you can point it out?

    You didn’t read the message by Rudy Hillinga to which Andreas was responding?

  11. I believe if a 797 could produce enough operating cost benefit to justify what is probably a $10 million price premium, it would already be on the starting block.
    Still see a 737 re-engine albeit slightly below the 32xneo in operating costs as their only option for the next few years.
    They have the benefit of Airbus not being able to meet demand, and other potential suppliers not ready, so an 737 re-engine would still have a huge market.

  12. What is the range and payload capacity of the A321 NEO? To me, yet, the only disadvantage of the 757-200 is the fuel consumption, however, it still flies farther and is great for transatlantic.

    • Airbus says the A321neo, with sharklets, has a range of about 3800nm v 4000nm for the 757. Pretty close. Pax, two-class, 185 in A321neo.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.