A321T

[Piedmont1984]

Has anyone flown the A321T who can answer a few questions?

1- What kind of takeoff weights are you typically seeing on the transcontinental flights?
2- What cruising altitudes have you typically been seeing?
3- Are the max weights the same as the standard/enhanced 321s (205Klbs t.o., 171.5Klbs ldng)? How about the flap speeds ( 235 flap 1, etc)?

Just curious, our 321s seldom get above FL 300/320 initially and Fl 320/340 during last half of west bound transcontinental flights assuming takeoff weights between 190 and 200K. IOW, only see FL 380/390 when going to Disney World.

'84

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

Oops...
http://savvystews.com/2014/01/20/aa-a321t-slide-deployment-it-took-all-of-a-week-for-this-to-happen/

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

I also have a A321T question:  is there any chance that "newAA" will use the A321T on PHL-LAX in addition to JFK-LAX/SFO? 

 

[700UW]

Probably not, there isnt a market for it, the main driver is a business market and major contracts with Hollywood.

 

[kirkpatrick]

I also have a A321T question:  is there any chance that "newAA" will use the A321T on PHL-LAX in addition to JFK-LAX/SFO? 

My guess is no.  We're going to have 18-20 in that configuration and they're all pretty much committed to JFK-LAX/SFO.  I'm on my second trip now and we haven't had an empty seat in BC or first.
 
Great plane, BTW. I love Business Class - easy to work and laid out real nice.  FC galley is a bit tight is my only complaint.
 
MK

 

[FrugalFlyerv2.0]

Probably not, there isnt a market for it, the main driver is a business market and major contracts with Hollywood.

You're probably correct, but it would be great if new AA transcon product was standardized to all A321T.  I'd think PHL and now BOS, where AA+US will be strong could support A321 3-class fares too. 

 

[USFlyer]

I'd say that's doubtful.  Very few companies reimburse employees for domestic First or Business class anymore, unless you're C-suite level.  Even then, large companies who have contracts with an airline typically receive a certain amount of complimentary top-tier status to hand out to select employees, which are usually the C-suite executives which in turn allows them to upgrade for free.  NY-SF/LA are unique markets given the media/entertainment traffic.

 

[FWAAA]

LAX-MIA is another market where AA sells F and J, and currently flies two or three daily 3-class 777s (sold as 3-class).   
 
In the old days,  AA did have 3-class 767s and DC-10s on various transcon routes, like BOS-SFO/LAX  plus MIA-SFO.    I agree that the world may have changed too much to make those flights profitable again (they ended not long after Sept 11, 2001, and then B6 and now VX have driven down transcon fares).
 
I'd be happy if the non-A321T transcons featured F seats that reclined with footrests - that would be a vast improvement.    

 

[nycbusdriver]

I also have a A321T question:  is there any chance that "newAA" will use the A321T on PHL-LAX in addition to JFK-LAX/SFO? 

 
Parker basically answered that in the CLT Pilots Crew News meeting last week.   And his answer: "NO"
 
He said the 321T is more an experiment than not, and it will only work of all those premium seats get filled with customers who paid the premium fares to have those seats.  And really, the biggest reason someone will pay those fares is to have a fairly quiet, semi-private place to get horizontal and sleep for a reasonable period.  As Parker said, that translates to transcon non-stops only, and only in markets where premium flyers abound and can support those expensive seats.  That means New York and Los Angeles.  He didn't say there are absolutely no other markets that might work, but for now the only one he could think of was New York - Los Angeles (and he sounded confident, but not positive, that the "experiment" would be successful.)
 
I bet the maintenance shop could have those 321Ts in standard sardine configuration within an overnight shift.
 
I also bet that they will have accomplished exactly that on every 321T by this time next year.

 

[FWAAA]

Odd that Parker would label what AA has done successfully for 23 years "an experiment."   AA has captured high fares between JFK and both LAX and SFO ever since he left AA to go to NW.   
 
My cynical guess is that he's actually a bigger idiot than I ever imagined.     

 

[1AA]

LAX-MIA is another market where AA sells F and J, and currently flies two or three daily 3-class 777s (sold as 3-class).   
 
In the old days,  AA did have 3-class 767s and DC-10s on various transcon routes, like BOS-SFO/LAX  plus MIA-SFO.    I agree that the world may have changed too much to make those flights profitable again (they ended not long after Sept 11, 2001, and then B6 and now VX have driven down transcon fares).
 
I'd be happy if the non-A321T transcons featured F seats that reclined with footrests - that would be a vast improvement.

. The old days? 747's, 707's as well.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Odd that Parker would label what AA has done successfully for 23 years "an experiment."   AA has captured high fares between JFK and both LAX and SFO ever since he left AA to go to NW.   
 
My cynical guess is that he's actually a bigger idiot than I ever imagined.     

 
Parker is a numbers guy.  You, obviosuly, are not.

 

[eolesen]

No, I think FWAAA's comments are on the mark.

Despite attempts by DL, VA, and UA to make inroads into the LAX-JFK market, AA still winds up carrying the lions share of high revenue traffic, and winning the corporate contracts from both the film & broadcasting industry.

And those are numbers that Parker and Nocella are going to understand very quickly.

 

[nycbusdriver]

No, I think FWAAA's comments are on the mark.

Despite attempts by DL, VA, and UA to make inroads into the LAX-JFK market, AA still winds up carrying the lions share of high revenue traffic, and winning the corporate contracts from both the film & broadcasting industry.

And those are numbers that Parker and Nocella are going to understand very quickly.

 
The success of that service ALWAYS included over a hundred coach seats, big cargo holds and usable weight to make profits even if some of the premium seats went empty.  The 321 has none of those factors which can "subsidize" the empty premium seats.  Comparing 3 class service in a wide-body with that of the 321T configuration is comparing apples to oranges.  
 
321T is an experiment, plain and simple.  How many other "all premium class" narrow-body operations have been successful so far?  The only reason the 321T MIGHT work is that the fuel efficiency is so far ahead of those other operations that failed so dismally.  We shall see.
 
It has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the AA premium service.  In the 321T, that will likely be even better than its widebody predecessors.

 

[Art at ISP]

One thing to remember is that the SAG contract no longer requires first class for its members, it allows for business class. Had that not been the case, UA would never have converted PS to a two class configuration.

That said, there might be some merit to having lower capacity with greater frequency. There are 10 fewer premium seats on the 321T than there are on the 762, and I believe 72 Economy seats total, 36 each MCE and regular coach. I think before anything else they will cut the MCE cabin and add more coach seats, followed by eliminating F and making the front all business.
This would also enable subs such as the 763 or 772 if required.

I know offering premium services burns Parker up, but he will have to adapt to AA's service standards. If he tries the America Westification of AA he will certainly fail..

I am scheduled on the 321T tomorrow weather permitting. Happy with my MCE seat, but with the snow forecast here today I'll bet it will cancel.

My best to you all....