PDA

View Full Version : UK charter airlines 321 as 757 replacement?


peachair732
8th Apr 2011, 10:45
Seems first Monarch now TCX trying to replace their remaining 757 fleet with 321s. Must be very difficult for them, more so with the rise of Sharm and Hurghada, as far as I know even the 321 with extra tank might struggle with a fully laden pax load and all their luggage too, especially to likes of NCL. OK LGW might be a squeeze, bring pax home but leve their dirty washing behind, so as to avoid tech stops. Im thinking of the 321s performance at high temperature airfiles like SSH with a full load.

I think the 757 is so very difficult for IT UK charter ops to replace. Some routes like the Banjul route, cannot be done with full 321 but can with a 757. A A330 is also a bit big for banjul or sharm from regional airports so what will the charter ailrines do without the verstile 757 which has served them so very well all thee years!!!

kazzie
8th Apr 2011, 11:01
Problem is the 757 within charter airlines are at age and are nearing the end of their leases, Operational life even... And the only real replacement for it in terms of distance is the 738/9.. or looking bigger at the 330 767 which can be limited to which airfields they can operate from like you said.

I think once the 787 comes into the picture we will see an easier life for SSH operations.. or even when we see what the 797 will bring us..

A321 is a nice aircraft yes, but very limited.

Skipness One Echo
8th Apr 2011, 11:08
A321 is a nice aircraft yes, but very limited.

Does > 90% of what the B757 is currently used for and does it for less cost so it's a better overall deal. The < 10% that it can't do is still offset by the fact it does the rest at a better cost than the Boeing alas.

peachair732
8th Apr 2011, 11:37
Yes but increasingly charter airlines are placing increasing emphasis on mid haul routes, particularly ssh etc from regional airports. This has become important as the no frills sector steals more of their traditional work. The 757 seems the only option for the moment for regional ops to Egypt and for example, Banjul, Cabo Verde even recently. the 332 would be too large and anyway is needed for long haul IT work so how the 321 can do this important regioal SSH work etc. I know with max capacity in charter config plus everyone taking luggage for their two week holiday and high temps at the foreign airfields, well as much as airlines like TCX and MON would like to replace the 757 with the cheaper to run 321, they seem to struggle. 757 still does majprity of regional work to SSH etc. They have a problem that no manufacturer has an imediately suitable replacement. The lighter weight 321 even with enhancements will struggle from 30 degree plus temps out of SSH or BJL to say even EMA!!! pax may get taken home but will their pushairs get left behind? I fear if it means no expensive tech stop, luggage left behind may become a problem in future if the 321 is utilised for missions it isnt designed for.

MUFC_fan
8th Apr 2011, 11:47
To answer your question bluntly; there isn't a jet out there that can reliably do what the UK charter airlines want it to do.

The 757 is unique in being as over powered as it is. She's a beautiful machine and I believe that she now never makes a full power take-off, even when fully loaded. Or can someone correct me?

It's ability to fly 235 people from Egypt to the UK in the height of the summer and laughing down the runway at the challenge can't be met by any other plane out there at this moment in time.

Reports suggest that the 797 will actually come at a later date than planned. The 757, as previously mentioned, only has a certain life span and the most economical alternative is the A321. However if you're an all Boeing carrier (TUI for example) then the 738/9ER is the better option.

Does anyone know if the 9ER has the legs for Egypt from smaller UK airports?

The 767/330/787 is perfect for MAN, LGW and BHX (when demand returns anyway) but for the smaller airports like BRS, NCL and GLA I would hazard a guess that they'll either just reduce capacity to 189 seats or increase frequency.

At the moment I think it's the least of their worries with 757s still plodding along and Egypt demand so low.

Bring on the 787...:}

TSR2
8th Apr 2011, 11:50
You can leave my pushairs behind anytime ;)

750XL
8th Apr 2011, 12:00
The 757 is unique in being as over powered as it is. She's a beautiful machine and I believe that she now never makes a full power take-off, even when fully loaded. Or can someone correct me?

I think I'm right in saying that TOM do not de-rate on their 757/767's anymore? At least that's what I've seen/been told at work :hmm:

Skipness One Echo
8th Apr 2011, 13:23
The last GLA-LHR B757 on G-CPET was full power....quite impressive from over the engine!

Tom the Tenor
8th Apr 2011, 13:35
What is to be the expected performance improvement of the new A321NEO? Match or better the 737-900ER?

Thanks.

Evanelpus
8th Apr 2011, 13:42
or even when we see what the 797 will bring us

Read something in the week about Mr Boeing saying that the development of the 737 would go ahead of anything to do with the 797.

MUFC_fan
8th Apr 2011, 14:04
Read something in the week about Mr Boeing saying that the development of the 737 would go ahead of anything to do with the 797.


Mr Airbus was also saying the same thing - and he seems to know what's going on on both sides of the Atlantic more than anyone else!

Bealzebub
8th Apr 2011, 14:05
De-rating is done to increase engine life, reduce noise and reduce fuel burn in specific segments of a climb. It doesn't particularly have anything to do with the age of the airframe.

Where runway lengths permit it, de-rating (which is an assumed temperature method in any event,) is nearly always performed. During the climb fixed rate de-rates are also utilized.

I fly some of the highest time/cycle 757's in the world, and can assure you that where required full power take off's are routinely performed. Conversely, where possible, fully de-rated take off's are also routinely performed, as is everything in-between.

In the 210-230 seat transport category the A321 is significantly better on fuel burn due to a combination of lighter operating weights, less powerful engines and more modern design applications. On a typical 2-4 hour (Mediterranean) run, the direct seat mile cost is very much in the A321's favour.

On a 5-6 hour sector, the 757 comes into its own. Despite higher fuel burns, greater fuel capacity and better operating performance gives the aircraft the flexibility to operate 3000 mile sectors (including ETOPS and trans-oceanic sectors,) in this seat capacity bracket with no problems at all.

The 757-200 can operate a roundtrip to Innsbruck in the morning, and then set off for West Africa or North America (non-stop) in the afternoon. It is a very versatile aircraft, but in certain popular market segements it is not as cost efficient as newer aircraft specifically designed for those market segments. For operators with a need to operate outside of those short range markets to destinations such as Egypt, West Africa, North Eastern USA and Eastern Canada and the Middle East, it still works very well. This is why traditional 757 operators continue to keep these aircraft in their fleets.

The 787 (although a much bigger aircraft and more in the 767 category) brings with it its own new generation set of technologies and fuel efficiencies. Also of significant importance, the construction technologies mean that unlike the 757, A321, and everything that has gone before, the airframe is not life limited by pressurization cycles. This will make the 787 a very flexible proposition on short and mid range routes as well as the headline ultra long range routes that it is better known for.

The problem of course is that airlines expected to have been operating this type in their fleets now. Delays of 3-5 years have meant that transitional fleet replacement plans have been thrown into disarray, with older airframes having to be kept in service longer than planned to cover the market segments the 787 is intended to operate in.

Drakestream
8th Apr 2011, 16:36
There was a very interesting on Flight Global yesterday regarding US Airways requesting that Airbus give the A321NEO enough range do do transatlantic in order to directly replace their 757 fleet.

It really makes a great deal of sense. US Airways stated that they can't get their hands on enough 757s now with the likes of UPS and DHL buying up every aircraft going. I've always felt that Boeing closed the 757 production line too early as a knee jerk reaction to the general downturn in aircraft production at the time. I very much doubt the line could be reopened now, but I dare say if it were then Boeing would still be receiving new orders for the 75.

Mr Angry from Purley
8th Apr 2011, 18:50
I thought SSH would have been on the downward spirral with the current probs in the area. It's only a matter of time (weeks,months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years) before some gaddafi loyalists go looking to blow some tourists up). Or am i wrong?

Cyrano
8th Apr 2011, 22:19
Flightglobal piece on US Airways and A321NEO is here (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/04/07/355309/us-airways-wants-a321neo-to-have-europe-and-hawaii-range.html). I agree with Drakestream - if Airbus can deliver an A321NEO which can provide North Atlantic capability then they stand to win some big replacement markets.

N707ZS
9th Apr 2011, 07:23
Shame they stopped production, would they of still sold in todays market?

WHBM
10th Apr 2011, 17:58
Boeing stopped making the 757 for the very practical reason that people had eased right back on buying them; not many ordered or produced in its last years.

But the 757 only went out of production a few years ago, they have plenty of life to be around in considerable numbers until the next generation come along.

The parcel shifters are interested in it, sure, but generally in the high time, low priced ones, to strip out and run a limited number of daily hours. If US Airways are whining that they are buying up everything then I suspect they are saying that about the low priced ones.

As soon as the 787 gets going in the US market I suspect you will see a good number of 757 coming on to the market as US carriers switch their fleets around, and this is a major throttling of the 757 secondhand market at present.

The A321NEO appears to have all the necessary to turn current A321 marginal flights like UK-Hurghada, or Canary Islands-Scandinavia, into straightforward operations easily in its capability. I would expect the European holiday operators to be among its early purchasers.

The irony of the end of 757 production was that the assembly space at Renton was reallocated to the anticipated demand for the 737-900ER. But this has been a poor seller, although the smaller sizes continue of course to be very popular. Boeing hasn't had a lot of luck with this biggest 737 - the original 737-900 never got many orders, and after the substantial rework as the 737-900ER it hasn't been that much better. Some who went for it seem to have stepped back, and reordered 737-800s instead. For some reason, Boeing seem to have had this issue with a number of their stretches (eg 757-300, 767-400) in recent times.

clareview
10th Apr 2011, 18:59
Its all very well talking about charter routes but it seems to me that the bulk of the remaining B757's are now doing long haul - look at American, Delta, Continental and US Air.

What will replace that need?

I note that Sun Country can do Gatwick from the US and Air Canada can do Newfoundland to LHR with the A319 and Alaska do Hawai with the B737-900.Are they options?

MUFC_fan
10th Apr 2011, 20:21
The A321NEO appears to have all the necessary to turn current A321 marginal flights like UK-Hurghada, or Canary Islands-Scandinavia, into straightforward operations easily in its capability.


Is the problem not runway performance as opposed to the journey length? There is no doubt that the A321NEO will be comfortably able to do Egypt etc however how well would it do fully loaded on BRS, NCL etc runways?


I note that Sun Country can do Gatwick from the US and Air Canada can do Newfoundland to LHR with the A319 and Alaska do Hawai with the B737-900.Are they options?


Sun County 738 flights stop on route. An A319 has a greater range than all of it's A320 family brother and sisters, much to the misconception that the smaller it is the shorter the legs. The 737-900ER is the nearest current jet to the 757.


Its all very well talking about charter routes but it seems to me that the bulk of the remaining B757's are now doing long haul - look at American, Delta, Continental and US Air.


Personally I think that this is the niche to suffer most however I would guess that markets mature and the 787 would be the nearest alternative, unless the A321 really can push itself...

WHBM
10th Apr 2011, 20:23
Its all very well talking about charter routes but it seems to me that the bulk of the remaining B757's are now doing long haul
Not at all. There are almost 500 757s in the fleets of the current 5 largest US majors, nearly half the total number built. Less than 10% of these do long haul ops daily. The vast majority are on US domestic routes. Most US carriers have created a differently-configured subset in their fleet for international work - in part so they don't have to do all the ETOPS documentation etc on all of these aircraft when most stay in the US.

gazpodel
22nd Apr 2011, 09:23
Seems first Monarch now TCX trying to replace their remaining 757 fleet with 321s

Well that being said, I've had it confirmed over on the monarch thread that they are continuing to use B757's for the upcoming sailing season for Charter flight's to & from greece (Sailing Holidays).

And i've seen them popping up on "Planefinder" during this week too. :)

peachair732
10th Jan 2012, 20:47
It seems the 757 still reigns on those lengthy short mid hauls that the 321 cannot match it, either in carrying capacity, hold capacity, range requirements, and thrust. also the 321 cannot carry a full load from airfield like some smaller Greek Islands, where as the 757 can do these short runways with a fuller payload able to reach the charter airlines Northern gateways like Manchester, nCL and GLA. The 321 is not the replacement for the 757 that TCX and MON first thought, seems they will heve to continue too flog a few old 757s (in Monarchs case, the 757s are aincient, even the 300-6rs are babys compared to some of those 83 vintage 757s, yet Monarch need them, the sharm El sheiks from Northern airports, try a 321 on a say newcastle to Sharm, with a full load of passengers all travelling with full load of suitcases for there two week holiday, monarch know the 321 is useless for these missions so does TCX, tour ops need to be able to operate their aircraft at full capacity, like 235 in a 757, sharm no problem for the 757, with 235 and plenty of luggage for the holidaymakers. I think Monarch and Thomas Cook have recently realised the limitations of the 321 as a 757 replacement, as for the next gen 321 neo, we will see, but if they do meet the range requirements of UK holiday airlines they still carry 15 passengers less! Long rule the charter workhorse 757!!!

TartinTon
10th Jan 2012, 22:37
peachair...the A321 with the ACT is quite capable of operating a SSH with full pax/bag load from the bases that Monarch fly. Even with the ACT it costs considerably less than the thirsty 757. As for airports north of MAN...there isn't a stampede of tour ops looking to operate to Egypt at the mo...

TSR2
10th Jan 2012, 23:43
compared to some of those 83 vintage 757s, yet Monarch need them

If Monarch really need the 757, surely they would have purchased some second hand models by now to replace those they disposed of in the last couple of years. There must be plenty around as Jet2 do not appear to have a problem sourcing them.

Mr @ Spotty M
11th Jan 2012, 04:51
I agree with some of your comments, yes the A321 can not completely replace what the B757 can do.
However its operating costs are way higher than the A321, hence MON and TCX using them.
By the way the MON B757 are not 83 vintage but 87/88, so are not that much older than the A300-600s they operate.
Now as for TCX, you forgot the fact that they are going to replace the B757s with a fleet of Airbus A320 Family aircraft. :ok: