Aer Lingus looking to run 'short haul' A320neo/B737Max to North America

[gijoe]

Aer Lingus are in talks with Boeing and Airbus on revamping their short-haul fleet with either Airbus A320Neo's or Boeing 737Max's. In reality there isn't a prayer that they would go for the B737Max. As Michael O'Leary has pointed out the fuel efficiency gain with the B737Max is largely negated with the weight gain from the required re-engineering and lengthening of the fuselage to accommodate the engines. Whereas the A320neo is just a simple engine upgrade onto the existing fuselage and of course there will be massive crew savings in keeping an all Airbus A320, A330, A350 fleet where pilots can interchange aircraft with little training.

I have suggested previously on this forum (and ridiculed for it) that running a long-range A321 to North America would make a lot of sense for Aer Lingus. It would act very much like the Boeing 757-200 at present, although much more fuel efficient. An A321neo in a transatlantic 2 class configuration would carry 16 or 20 premium passengers plus 160 in economy to destinations on the Eastern seaboard like Montreal, Toronto, New York, Boston and Washington DC no problem. The long-range A321neo which will be upto 15% more fuel efficient than present models has 2 additional fuel tanks bringing its capacity to 24 tonnes of fuel with a cruising consumption rate of under 2.4 tonnes/hour it would have a range of circa 6500km i.e. the full 8 hour flying limit for 2 pilots without relief. An A321neo with 176/180 passengers and maybe 2 tonnes of cargo would have no problem serving any of the main East coast North American cities and it will give a new lease of life to Shannon Airport with daily flights to New York, Boston and probably Montreal viable with A321neo's.
Aer Lingus weighs 737-9 Max alongside A320neo

[Astral Peaks]

In reality there isn't a prayer that they would go for the B737Max.

It's Aer Lingus, so does that mean it will probably happen?
Or are they fully committed to Airbus craft now?

[Phil Maker]

when a lading slot is worth so much at JFK, why land with 190 when you can drop 290

automatic inefficiencies , unless your game plan is to drop them in La Guardia... now that I would buy.

[Keith-M]

We obviously have a plane spotter in our midst.

[Miss Fortune]

Roger that.

[Astral Peaks]

when a lading slot is worth so much at JFK, why land with 190 when you can drop 290

automatic inefficiencies , unless your game plan is to drop them in La Guardia... now that I would buy.

What about Newark?

[Long Gone]

What about Newark?

[Radix]

when a lading slot is worth so much at JFK, why land with 190 when you can drop 290

automatic inefficiencies , unless your game plan is to drop them in La Guardia... now that I would buy.

Or the Hudson.

Mick O' Leary is fitting floats to the landing gear as we speak...

[CookieMonster]

I like smaller planes... in every case fewer passengers = less pain, less delays, less pain in the ass flights etc.

[seabhcan]

With the new open skies agreement, an Irish airline can now fly to any US domestic airport. They don't need to use the expensive 'interenational' ones any more.