nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Aer Lingus Fleet/Routes Discussion

JCX BXC

The seat map for the B767-200 being leased by EI next year are available on the Aer Lingus website, the seating is 2,3,2 in economy (As was suspected) and 2,2,2 in business

There are 189 economy seats and 12 Business seats making a total of the reported 201 seats.

Anyone know whether the B767 will be repainted, partially or entirely, in the EI colours for the 6 months that its leased for?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

sherology

Nibs05 wrote: »

So the LR is only good for JFK, BOS and BDL ?

If true, and not just a passenger number increase on IAD, I guess EI will have to add that extra ACT to LRA/B/C as well as D to ensure reach/range. Perhaps those extra rows of economy seats vs. TAP are beyond the capability. Needleman (Formerly JetBlue) did comment that the LR is not 'as' efficient/capable as expected. JetBlue are using the LR from NY\BOS to London, so would assume IAD-DUB should be capable... Perhaps fully tanked (ACT'd) though.

Would be good to get official data though... As one would assume calculations and predictions would have been done beforehand... And Airbus may be inline for some payback if they're poorly aligned.

x567

Nibs05 wrote: »

So the LR is only good for JFK, BOS and BDL ?

Montreal would be a similar distance, wasn't that going to be launched?

Nibs05

So the LR is only good for JFK, BOS and BDL ?

kevinandrew

During the booking process, once you get through to the seat maps you’ll see that all flights, even those listed as A321LR, show as an A330.

Lapmo_Dancer

It’s stated on an another forum that the 321 has been taken off IAD completely for the winter due performance issues. The schedule from the end of October was to have 330 x4 weekly and 321 x3 weekly to IAD. The website is still showing the original schedule. Can anyone confirm?

goingnowhere

Once the money is paid, you might get a tank of gas for free from Airbus but it's Aer Lingus pilots who fly

GM228

Side question, have always wondered who delivers new aircraft, for example was EI-LRB flown over by Aer Lingus or Airbus pilots or perhaps hire in pilots? I'm guessing Aer Lingus pilots and that Airbus pilots don't fly once the customer handover flight is finished?

tomister

Landed just before 10pm this evening

liiga

What time is EI-LRB due at ?

billy few mates

adam88 wrote: »

Still not a fan crossing the Atlantic in a narrow body. Some psychological that makes a single aisle plane so cramped

The last few Trans Atlantic flights I've done have been on 757s all on different carriers and I must admit I'm a fan of them now. I think the smaller size cabin means the service is more personal and in general I think the fewer the people sharing the same cramped space the more enjoyable the experience.
Boarding and de-planing are also a quicker and less crowded so I'm guessing the A320 LR experience will be similar.

Jack1985

liiga wrote: »

EI-LRB be stored for two weeks and fly on the first London Heathrow service on 1st October

It’s the 24/09 sooo a week the same as LRA.. LRA then will return to the hangar for a cabin addition (lighting).

Van.Bosch

liiga wrote: »

EI-LRB be stored for two weeks and fly on the first London Heathrow service on 1st October

And what TATL route will it serve do we know?

liiga

EI-LRB be stored for two weeks and fly on the first London Heathrow service on 1st October

Karl8415

Just wondering with the 2nd NEO due today how long before it enters revenue service and which route will it enter because judging by posts I think I’m right in saying that the 3rd isn’t far behind either so it’s exciting times with these arriving and not forgetting the 330 that’s due also

liiga

EI-LRB due TOMMORROW ?

kevinandrew

The second A321LR for Aer Lingus had its customer acceptance flight this afternoon. It spent 1hr 25min in the air.

roundymac

duskyjoe wrote: »

Was it not the 720??

Was for EI.

duskyjoe

Was it not the 720??

goingnowhere

Folks forget the first successful jet across the Atlantic was the 707 which has exactly the same fuselage dimensions as the 737 (and 727, 757), A32x is wider

JCX BXC

adam88 wrote: »

Still not a fan crossing the Atlantic in a narrow body. Some psychological that makes a single aisle plane so cramped

It's hardly a new idea, the 757 has been tankering back and forward over the Atlantic for quite a while now. Appears it doesn't seem to bother most people.

adam88

Still not a fan crossing the Atlantic in a narrow body. Some psychological that makes a single aisle plane so cramped

basill

XLR I think you mean. Agreed. Better/larger wing, higher cruise levels and speed and it will be in a class of its own.

Tenger

Got it spot on. The LR is very much a rush job. Airbus originally planned a redesigned wing but this would have delayed launch (and orders) and given the B737MAX/B787-8 more business.

Thus the addition of fuel bladders to the A321neo creates this niche variant. Remove these and you get a standard A321neo.
The A321XLR will be the real end goal of this design program.

Ninja edit as I missed that last, crucial 'X'

sherology

smurfjed wrote: »

How flexible is the Additional Center Tank in the A321, is it a line replaceable item that can be easily removed?

I'll let a more knowledge person answer your question, but they are supposed to be pretty easily added and removed... Although theory and practice no doubt differ.

It does go to show how the LR is really a stopgap aircraft, with the built in RCT of the XLR being the real trucker. I don't see any more LR sales happening, and those that exist, will likely be recommisoned to a321neos in later years (removal of heavy and inefficient ACTs).

smurfjed

How flexible is the Additional Center Tank in the A321, is it a line replaceable item that can be easily removed?

Jack1985

Karl8415 wrote: »

Thank you jack for your reply,I appreciate it,
But can I ask why does EI configure these aircraft differently when it comes to fuel tanks, would it not be easier to have every aircraft the same so they can be utilized on every route in the network because for example if one aircraft with 3 tanks is running late EI can’t dispatch another neo that only has 2 to MXP,I’m just wondering what’s the logic behind it

Well there is no need for a third tank on the DUB-BDL and SNN/BOS routes. These additional tanks further limit cargo hold capacity, so LRA to LRC will be able to carry additional cargo versus LRD and the other neos on the way. It makes sense. Many airlines have multiple variations of the same aircraft for this exact reason.

Karl8415

Jack1985 wrote: »

LRA, LRB and LRC have two additional tanks, LRD will have three. None of the current orders for the 321LR will hold the range for MSP. The XLR will, however by the time it arrives possibly during low season.

There's a few issues with performance currently regarding weather conditions and LRA being full heading to Bradley. With the issues with toilets in the aft, its possible removing a few rows and placing a toilet toward the forward of the economy cabin could both boost experience and alleviate some performance issues encountered so far. LRA, LRB and LRC will primarily service DUB-BDL and SNN-BOS/JFK due range with the two additional tanks.

Thank you jack for your reply,I appreciate it,
But can I ask why does EI configure these aircraft differently when it comes to fuel tanks, would it not be easier to have every aircraft the same so they can be utilized on every route in the network because for example if one aircraft with 3 tanks is running late EI can’t dispatch another neo that only has 2 to MXP,I’m just wondering what’s the logic behind it

Jack1985

Karl8415 wrote: »

Can I ask if there’s any update on the 321 LR been certified to fly distance to MSP, i appreciate that it’s down to be serviced by 332 next year,I think I read not so long ago that it wasn’t certified to travel the distance at that time,I’m just asking because thinking out load,I wonder when EI have enough NEO’S that they could send one to MSP on a route proving trip and report back to Airbus so they can collectively sign off on it to travel with passengers

LRA, LRB and LRC have two additional tanks, LRD will have three. None of the current orders for the 321LR will hold the range for MSP. The XLR will, however by the time it arrives possibly during low season.

There's a few issues with performance currently regarding weather conditions and LRA being full heading to Bradley. With the issues with toilets in the aft, its possible removing a few rows and placing a toilet toward the forward of the economy cabin could both boost experience and alleviate some performance issues encountered so far. LRA, LRB and LRC will primarily service DUB-BDL and SNN-BOS/JFK due range with the two additional tanks.

Karl8415

Can I ask if there’s any update on the 321 LR been certified to fly distance to MSP, i appreciate that it’s down to be serviced by 332 next year,I think I read not so long ago that it wasn’t certified to travel the distance at that time,I’m just asking because thinking out load,I wonder when EI have enough NEO’S that they could send one to MSP on a route proving trip and report back to Airbus so they can collectively sign off on it to travel with passengers

Jack1985 wrote: »

The intention is to use the 320 in SNN to do FAO/AGP in the morn with the later LHR’s in the afternoon freeing up room for capacity growth out of DUB and ORK.

Not confirmed. There may be news out of SNN in the coming weeks.