A321 NEO cert to 7400 km by EASA and FAA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A321 NEO cert to 7400 km by EASA and FAA
The long-range variant of the A321neo has been certified to fly routes of up to 7,400km by regulators in the USA and Europe.
The single aisle A321LR (long range) can carry up to 206 passengers and has three additional fuel tanks so it can fly further than the standard A321’s range of 5,950km.
The EASA and FAA this week jointly certified the addition of three underfloor fuel tanks on the A321, including their use to carry extra fuel for Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards (ETOPS) routes. The ETOPS authorization also enables up to 180 minutes single-engine diversion time, which is sufficient for performing any transatlantic route.
The single aisle A321LR (long range) can carry up to 206 passengers and has three additional fuel tanks so it can fly further than the standard A321’s range of 5,950km.
The EASA and FAA this week jointly certified the addition of three underfloor fuel tanks on the A321, including their use to carry extra fuel for Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards (ETOPS) routes. The ETOPS authorization also enables up to 180 minutes single-engine diversion time, which is sufficient for performing any transatlantic route.
I always thought ETOPS was Extended Twin engine OPerationS.
Have I got it wrong?
Have I got it wrong?
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New York City
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
206 passengers
Is that the max density single class config? Because if it’s two class it’s starting to look like the 752 in terms of capacity and range but with modern technology which makes me wonder if it could fill the MMA role.
A321 NEO cert to 7400 km by EASA and FAA
I don't like to nit-pick, but the A321NEO has not been 'certified' to 7,400 km by EASA, FAA or any other authority. It has been granted Type Certificate approval by the authorities which refers to its airworthiness, but the range is a matter under the control of the manufacturer and the operator.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What fun, I can't wait to try A321 long haul, oh! wait a minute.. yes I can!
while they can stretch these variants that far...... well
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure you do, in 2 sectors, largely with a nice div field no more than a hundred miles away! Seriously, its going to be safe, of course, but from an operational point of view a fully gassed and loaded 321, even with magic winglets is not going to get much altitude to dodge the weather across the Atlantic. Having seen (from the outside) the Primera operation I don't think its going to be much fun for the crews and finally, to make money its going to be packed like a sardine tin on modern hard seats. I'm sorry, but frankly I'd rather not go, front or back of the aircraft. It is aviation sunk to the gutter and now exploring the drainage system. I'll take may chances with the 10 seats across a nice 330 (other airframes are available) and hope for an upgrade ;-)
This is a game changer as a hub buster in a more reasonable 2-class layout at 31" pitch. I'd much rather 7 hours in this than two 5hr legs via a megahub.
Look at the configs used by EY and QR in their narrowbodies, the seats are the same as fitted to the widebodies, with plenty of legroom and IFE. You don't notice the difference (in economy class).
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Here and there....currently here.
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
3 Posts
The Regulatory Context
ICAO Requirements for Extended Range Twin-engine Operations (ETOPS) have been in place since 1985, when they were introduced to apply an overall level of operational safety for twin-engined aeroplanes which was consistent with that of the modern three and four-engined aeroplanes then flying, to which no restrictions were applied. As aeroplane reliability and range improved, it became clear that all multi turbine-engined aircraft were pushing the boundaries of flight away from nearby alternates to increasingly distant ones and a review of the existing arrangements for ETOPS began.After many years of discussion about how to broaden the facilitation of international flights for all large transport aeroplanes which necessitated tracks with no close-by diversion aerodromes (or could be more efficiently routed with the use of these tracks), led in 2012 to changes to ICAO Annex 6 Part 1 under Amendment 36. This introduced the Extended Diversion Time Operations (EDTO)regime in place of ETOPS. However since then, although the EDTO regime has been widely accepted, the term EDTO has not been universally adopted the continued use of ETOPS is explicitly allowed for in Annex 6 provided that EDTO concepts "are correctly embodied in the concerned regulation or documentation". Given this flexibility, the term 'ETOPS' has been retained by the FAA and others by redefining it as an abbreviation for 'ExTended range OPerationS' rather than as previously 'Extended range Twin OPerationS'. EASA currently continues to use ETOPS as originally defined and the abbreviation 'LROPS' (Long Range OPerationS) for extended range operation by three and four-engined aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as i know it is quite possible to configure the A321NEO LR with up to 240 passenger seats, but of course the maximum range will decrease and there might an issue with cargo for the bags. The 206 quoted is a generic 2 or 2,5 class layout.
EASA and FAA certify long-range capability for A321neo
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: hang on let me check
Posts: 654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure you do, in 2 sectors, largely with a nice div field no more than a hundred miles away! Seriously, its going to be safe, of course, but from an operational point of view a fully gassed and loaded 321, even with magic winglets is not going to get much altitude to dodge the weather across the Atlantic. Having seen (from the outside) the Primera operation I don't think its going to be much fun for the crews and finally, to make money its going to be packed like a sardine tin on modern hard seats. I'm sorry, but frankly I'd rather not go, front or back of the aircraft. It is aviation sunk to the gutter and now exploring the drainage system. I'll take may chances with the 10 seats across a nice 330 (other airframes are available) and hope for an upgrade ;-)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Impressive performance improvements, BUT even onboard shorter neo sectors (nominal duration 1:30 hrs at LH as an example) you feel that the cabin comfort becomes the limiting factor. Lavs, galleys, binspace, seat pitch in the back of the cabin (resulting in some very tail heavy a/c). This is not your DC-8 anymore. Hope airline cabin configurations will better match the aircrafts's technical capabilities. BTW: Some similar remark would be valid for the MAX.
Last edited by Kerosene Kraut; 6th Oct 2018 at 08:08.
AB are quoting 206 pax as a 2 class premium W and Y cabins (like Primera Air had) which will allow that range with Aux tanks.
I agree the 752 with 189-206 pax (rather than 223-235) is similar load but a bit less range offering.
The latest A321neo can now be ordered with a variety of different door and exit configurations, including larger single pair or a double pair of over wing exits (not seen before on the 321) which can offer a max load of 240 pax for IT charters or a LCC.
As for MMA role - not sure
The Airbus infographic in my previous post suggests 244 (which is also the figure in the TC).
That assumes the 5-door configuration: (from front to rear) Type C+ (no, I don't know what they are, either), two Type III overwing, Type C, Type C+.
With the standard A321 Type C door (ahead of the wing) instead of the Type III overwing exits, the limit is 230, or 200/220 (with 4/5 cabin crew, respectively) if all 4 doors are Type C.
That assumes the 5-door configuration: (from front to rear) Type C+ (no, I don't know what they are, either), two Type III overwing, Type C, Type C+.
With the standard A321 Type C door (ahead of the wing) instead of the Type III overwing exits, the limit is 230, or 200/220 (with 4/5 cabin crew, respectively) if all 4 doors are Type C.