Airbus to launch A321neoLR to replace 757

roundymac · 30-10-2014 9:52am

kub wrote: »

Doesn't direct from Cork to New York sound like a little tune.....a marketing companies dream.

I wish it would, could do with T/A down here.

Growler!!! · 30-10-2014 10:18am

kub wrote: »

Doesn't direct from Cork to New York sound like a little tune.....a marketing companies dream.

It is a tune. Christy Moore's "Lisdoonvarna"

How’s it goin’ there everybody,
From Cork, New York, Dundalk, Gortahork and Glenamaddy.
Here we are in the County Clare
It’s a long, long way from here to there.

L1011 · 30-10-2014 10:41am

Most of those are near enough to an airport that's had TATL, just don't go giving Dundalk ideas....

man98 · 30-10-2014 7:28pm

MYOB wrote: »

Most of those are near enough to an airport that's had TATL, just don't go giving Dundalk ideas....

165km isn't overly close... not that ORK is closer than DUB. I know there's no hope of anywhere closer having TATL, but I know Cork to be a great airport and I can stay overnight there with way less bother than DUB. Fingers crossed there'll be a service.

owenc · 30-10-2014 7:33pm

Well maybe Cork could get a seasonal route but I can't see anything else. After that no more airports need a transatlantic route, you would have Belfast, Cork, Dublin and Shannon which is plenty.

Jack1985 · 30-10-2014 8:04pm

owenc wrote: »

Well maybe Cork could get a seasonal route but I can't see anything else. After that no more airports need a transatlantic route, you would have Belfast, Cork, Dublin and Shannon which is plenty.

I think the correct assumption would be to see how a new ORK-NYC route would affect SNN, could well be the later would become seasonal when the supply from South Munster would be zapped up at Cork. That's always why EI hesitated in launching a ORK-NYC service during the boom, Willie Walsh indicated it would jeopardize SNN-NYC services and thus resisted the lobbying from US multinationals circa 2003 If I remember correctly. Also as I'm sure you are aware by now owenc, demand for more flights is in correlation with actual demand. Once actual demand grows nearly every major airport in the state could have a service to destination A.

roundymac · 30-10-2014 8:32pm

Just remember Jack that anything north of Mallow will most likly go to SNN, that's the biggest problem ORK faces.

Chris_5339762 · 30-10-2014 8:58pm

Just remember that a Cork transatlantic would not have preclearance as AFAIK there are no facilities of that sort constructed in the airport.

That alone will make most people drive to Shannon instead.

Jack1985 · 30-10-2014 9:05pm

roundymac wrote: »

Just remember Jack that anything north of Mallow will most likly go to SNN, that's the biggest problem ORK faces.

Yep true, but there is a very strong catchment alone for this route even excluding North Cork.

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Just remember that a Cork transatlantic would not have preclearance as AFAIK there are no facilities of that sort constructed in the airport.

That alone will make most people drive to Shannon instead.

That's not a majority consensus shared by a recent poll carried out by the Cork CoC, multinationals including Apple and Pfizer based in Cork indicated this would not be a factor in using a proposed NYC route. An airline would be targeting business and leisure pax - Leisure demand is a given, and there is overwhelming support for the business aspect to a service from the likes of Apple, Pfizer etc. That's why the right a/c for this route would be key, an A321neoLR would be an excellent match.

smurfjed · 30-10-2014 10:41pm

Immigration clearance in the USA is a breeze, i see the availability of the service as a nice to have, but not a prerequisite.

AFAIK, the BA A319 flight across the atlantic lands at Shannon for fuel but doesnt obtain pre-clearance.

peter1892 · 30-10-2014 10:52pm

Growler!!! wrote: »

I believe they do both.

BA001 has pre-clearance in Shannon:
http://www.britishairways.com/en-ie/information/travel-classes/business/club-world-london-city

A320 · 30-10-2014 10:56pm

Growler!!! wrote: »

I'd rather drive the road than stand in the CBP line in the US for hours along with the other multinational flights. Much easier through SNN.

Is it the road you've an issue with or the dumps of towns?:D

Both!!! Use to travel it a couple of times a week upto recently enough,ive never been in a queue for long over there ina few airports

Growler!!! · 30-10-2014 11:03pm

A320 wrote: »

Both!!! Use to travel it a couple of times a week upto recently enough,ive never been in a queue for long over there ina few airports

Ditto, there's a short cut around charleville. Buttervant, could be better. Slipping up the M8 then through mitchelstown is quicker.

man98 · 30-10-2014 11:04pm

I believe the Cork multinationals were looking for a 2 weekly 757? Not exactly jeapordising Shannon and Dublin TATL flights. And if my mind serves me SNN - JFK stops Jan - Apr... only United to EWR stands in the way.

owenc · 30-10-2014 11:14pm

Growler!!! wrote: »

I'd rather drive the road than stand in the CBP line in the US for hours along with the other multinational flights. Much easier through SNN.

Is it the road you've an issue with or the dumps of towns?:D

I haven't stood but for hours but I did stand for ages in Dublin.

ProfessorPlum · 31-10-2014 12:23am

Clearance in the States is luck of the draw. You can be lucky on a given day and clear immigration (and then the separate line for customs) in maybe 30 mins, but if you happen to land in behind a 380 or a couple of widebodies, you can easily have added several hours to your day. At the end of a long flight, that can be rather tiresome. Have to say, I'm a great fan of preclearance. It's great to arrive as a domestic passenger, and makes it especially nice if you are making a connection.

owenc · 31-10-2014 12:30am

Well Newark is not wide bodies.

man98 · 31-10-2014 12:42am

owenc wrote: »

Well Newark is not wide bodies.

BA fly 787s in there, United have plenty of widebodies as many airlines do I presume. So it's the same situation as anywhere else.

owenc · 31-10-2014 1:00am

Most of the flights are narrow bodies and that flight arrives at 11pm. Trust me. I have been there a couple of times now.

Crumbs868 · 31-10-2014 5:14am

owenc wrote: »

Most of the flights are narrow bodies and that flight arrives at 11pm. Trust me. I have been there a couple of times now.

There are plenty of international wide bodies(777, 767, a330s etc) landing at Newark every day.

You have to remember that when you look out the window and see all of the narrow bodies that most of these are domestic so don't go through customs and border

Preset No.3 · 31-10-2014 6:51am

owenc wrote: »

Most of the flights are narrow bodies and that flight arrives at 11pm. Trust me. I have been there a couple of times now.

You've been there a 'couple of times'. Trust me, when you are United platinum you see all types. Granted the bulk of the 757 flights from Ire/UK/Near Europe get in at around 11am, but you are mixed in with all the other services, and EWR is not exclusive to UA. Being in CBP at that time is NOT fun!

Preset No.3 · 31-10-2014 10:42am

I really think you enjoy trolling other members here with Walter Mitty type posts pretending that you know something. There isn't a single thread that you haven't managed to stay on topic.

Taking a couple of flights through EWR does not make you an expert in the field if CBP which in itself is taking away from the whole discussion of the new proposed airbus. Nobody cares if there is wide bodies, narrow bodies or no bodies going through EWR at certain times of the day. ITS GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS THREAD!!!!!

roundymac · 31-10-2014 10:48am

man98 wrote: »

I believe the Cork multinationals were looking for a 2 weekly 757? Not exactly jeapordising Shannon and Dublin TATL flights. And if my mind serves me SNN - JFK stops Jan - Apr... only United to EWR stands in the way.

It would really have to be at least twice weekly to operate correctly, other wise you would have a crew laying over either in JFK or ORK depending where it originates from.

owenc · 31-10-2014 10:51am

Preset No.3 wrote: »

I really think you enjoy trolling other members here with Walter Mitty type posts pretending that you know something. There isn't a single thread that you haven't managed to stay on topic.

Taking a couple of flights through EWR does not make you an expert in the field if CBP which in itself is taking away from the whole discussion of the new proposed airbus. Nobody cares if there is wide bodies, narrow bodies or no bodies going through EWR at certain times of the day. ITS GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS THREAD!!!!!

Going off topic is not trolling. And I go off topic on other forums even look on airliners.net. No one cares, this forum is terrible constant use of that word and it's the only forum that I go on that people actually care about staying on topic.

L1011 · 31-10-2014 10:54am

owenc wrote: »

Going off topic is not trolling. And I go off topic on other forums even look on airliners.net. No one cares, this forum is terrible constant use of that word and it's the only forum that I go on that people actually care about staying on topic.

Every forum has its own rules and standards.

owenc · 31-10-2014 11:05am

roundymac wrote: »

It would really have to be at least twice weekly to operate correctly, other wise you would have a crew laying over either in JFK or ORK depending where it originates from.

Just thinking if they can start a 5 weekly flight from Newcastle then definitely cork!

L1011 · 31-10-2014 11:12am

owenc wrote: »

Just thinking if they can start a 5 weekly flight from Newcastle then definitely cork!

Newcastle doesn't have to compete with an airport with preclearance 100 miles away.

Growler!!! · 31-10-2014 11:12am

owenc wrote: »

this forum is terrible

owenc wrote: »

Well it wasn't me who started it so stop flipping blaming me.

You'll find on a forum that there is debate and a bit of to-ing and fro-ing. At no stage should you react to anything in a personal way. If you find yourself reacting in such a way then perhaps go outside for a bit of air.

Tenger · 31-10-2014 1:54pm

This is the A321neo LR discussion. Lets keep it to subjcts at least realting to this proposed new version of the successful Airbus aircraft. Discussing the B757 and its future is realated, discussing the movements in EWR...not so much.
We try t keep on topic otherwise we end up with a meandering 20 page thread on general aviation.

I'm going to delete most of the recent comments.

smurfjed · 31-10-2014 3:08pm

I'm getting confused, what was this thread about?

man98 · 31-10-2014 3:24pm

owenc wrote: »

Please PLEASE just look at WHO asked ME where I live! NOT ME.
I didn't even prevent people from discussing the a321 they can discuss away.

You kind of did...
What are the runway specs for this going to be like? The 757 is relatively short, but doesn't the B739ER need quite a bit?

Tenger · 31-10-2014 3:31pm

Thread locked while everyone takes a deep breath and steps away from the keyboard for few hours.

Tenger · 04-11-2014 9:01am

Thread opened again.
Here's a n article that smurfjed posted elsewhere. Its an Airbus infomercial from 2004 which extols the benefits of the additional center fuel tanks. (ACTs) Shows how this is not a new concept for them.

http://www.airbus.com/support/publications/?eID=dam_frontend_push&docID=17453

Irish Steve · 04-11-2014 1:28pm

Interesting that it's not a permanent fitting, the additional tanks can be removed or refitted relatively quickly, which could make them even more useful depending on the time of year and the routes that are suitable for them in long range mode. Being able to remove the tanks to enable more freight or bags on shorter routes could be quite useful

L1011 · 04-11-2014 2:17pm

Irish Steve wrote: »

Interesting that it's not a permanent fitting, the additional tanks can be removed or refitted relatively quickly, which could make them even more useful depending on the time of year and the routes that are suitable for them in long range mode. Being able to remove the tanks to enable more freight or bags on shorter routes could be quite useful

Could prove very useful for the Canaries ex-DUB for one anyway - full capacity when there's more business in the summer, no tech stop in winter when they're less full anyway.

MoeJay · 04-11-2014 2:39pm

/off topic

A number of the EI 321s were delivered with ACTs fitted; they were removed (who knows why) - and never used. Interestingly, some of the ones handed back had to have them fitted before being returned to the lessor, so there were ACTs in Hangar 6 for a while fuelling(!) a few more rumours..!

/topic

The engine/wing combo will be interesting to see. The missions that this LR version will cover are pretty specific; the existing 321 does the high capacity 4 hour sectors relatively well already...all the UK charter operators are living proof! Similarly the Scandinavians happily operate them too to the Canaries.

Airbus to launch A321neoLR to replace 757

Comments