Revenge of the Dreamliner

Quote: Pacomartin

So London City is out of possibility for a full size narrow body.

That's what I thought.

Quote:

Stansted (30 miles | 10,000' runway) and Luton (29 miles | 7000' runway ) are smaller airports with train service to London. Neither of them has trans-atlantic service as of today.

Perfect! The initial flights would benefit from the publicity.

Quote: Nareed

Perfect! The initial flights would benefit from the publicity.

Luton Airport has it's own train station which opened November 1999. It is about a mile from the airport, so there are frequent shuttle buses.


Logo of the train from Stansted to London

Stansted is the largest hub for RyanAir, which is the largest operator of B737-800s in the world. Southwest Airline had more than twice as many B737s, but the bulk of their fleet is the B737-700s.

JetBlue does not participate in any major global airline alliances, but the airline has interline and codeshare agreements with several airlines. RyanAir is not currently one of those airlines.

Aer Lingus
Aeroflot
Air China
Air India
ANA
Asiana Airlines
Avianca Airlines
Azul Brazilian Airlines
British Airways
Brussels Airlines
Cape Air
Cathay Pacific
China Airlines
Condor
EgyptAir
El Al
Emirates
Etihad Airways
EVA Air
Hainan Airlines
Hawaiian Airlines
Iberia
Icelandair
Japan Airlines
Jet Airways
LAN Airlines
LIAT
LOT Polish Airlines
Lufthansa
Porter
Qatar Airways
Royal Air Maroc
SATA International
Seaborne Airlines
Silver Airways
Singapore Airlines
South African Airways
TAM Airlines
TAP Portugal
Turkish Airlines

Ryan air- cant really book them easily, not in my GDS (global distribution system)
Southwest - In the GDS but not fully
Jet Blu - In the GDS fully
All the rest on the list, just about all in my GDS so I book them

Who would want to fly Ryan Air and arrive all the time with the engines sucking fumes and all pilots who take on extra fuel publically punished by the company.

Aer Lingus (Dublin) has been a three time target of takeover by RyanAir, and has now sold 30% to corporation that owns British Airways and Iberia.

They fly transatlantic flights using a fleet of 8 widebody Airbus A330 (due to expand to 12 within the year) and 9 orders for the Airbus A350-900.

New York JFK
Newark (begins 1 September 2016)
Hartford (begins 28 September 2016)
Boston
Chicago
Los Angeles
Orlando
San Francisco
Washington D.C

Aer Lingus was investigating using the neo A321 to replace some of their widebody flights. Since JetBlue already has a partnership program with them, AerLingus may give up some of their flights from JFK to Dublin so they are free to pursue other US cities. They are moving into Newark Airport in a month anyway.

JFK — Dublin 3179 miles
JFK — London Heathrow 3451 miles

Birmingham UK airport (Birmingham — London Heathrow 87 miles) is another possibility. There are only two competing routes to USA
American Airlines New York–JFK
United Airlines Newark

French Aviation is dominated by Paris (as is the French economy) and JFK is the busiest international destination. But perhaps the secondary cities of Nice and Lyon would be a welcome destination for a narrowbody TATL flight.
63,813,756 Paris Charles de Gaulle
28,862,586 Paris Orly
11,660,208 Nice
8,467,093 Lyon

How does the A321 at Jet Blue's typical density compare to a 787-8 or an A330?

Interjet places 150 passengers with 34" pitch on the A320. I'm guessing the A321 on a similar configuration won't reach 200 pax. Jet Blue, as I understand, has similar generous room, plus the Mint premium seats. So they'd pack fewer passengers as well.

I can totally see RyanAir attempting transatlantic flights with the 737 MAX 200. That one pack 200 people in 28" pitch and no recline. Spending 6+ hours on such a plane qualifies, IMO, as self-inflicted torture.

Now, back to Jet Blue, would their complimentary WiFi work over the pond? How about the TV? They can be made to work, one way or another, but there can be a cost. These are important questions for an airline that sells a comfortable seat and a pleasant experience, rather than merely a low fare.

Lastly, I've a sneaking suspicion (or hope?) Jet Blue might possibly aim at an all-premium cabin at a reasonable price on transatlantic routes. I know their Mint offering is cheaper than business on the legacy carriers for transcontinental routes. That might appeal to business travelers (or their companies' CFOs) and with well-to-do leisure travelers.

Quote: Nareed

Interjet places 150 passengers with 34" pitch on the A320. I'm guessing the A321 on a similar configuration won't reach 200 pax. Jet Blue, as I understand, has similar generous room, plus the Mint premium seats. So they'd pack fewer passengers as well.

Max cabin width 12 ft 1 in
A320 Capacity Pax Comfortable seating 150 Max 180 Cabin length 90 ft 3 in
A321 Capacity Pax Comfortable seating 185 Max 236 Cabin length 113 ft 0 in

JetBlue puts 190 seats in a standard A321 seating
But in an Transcon (i.e. Mint they have 155 seats and 4 suites) in an A321
The assumption is Jet Blue will fly this Mint configuration on Transatlantic.

The all economy seating they will leave to Wow Airline (out of Iceland)

Quote: Nareed

How does the A321 at Jet Blue's typical density compare to a 787-8 or an A330?

Max cabin width 17 ft 4 in for A330
A330-200 Capacity Pax Comfortable seating 247 Max 406 Cabin length 147 ft 8 in
A330-300 Capacity Pax Comfortable seating 277 Max 440 Cabin length 165 ft 3 in
B787-8 Capacity Pax Comfortable seating 242 Max exit limit 381 Cabin width 18 ft 0 in

I would compare "comfortable seating"

A330-300 with WOW airline is 342 seats. Fly from Los Angeles and San Francisco to Iceland
B787-8 with Norwegian airline is 291 seats.

Quote: Pacomartin

B787-8 Capacity Pax Comfortable seating 242 Max exit limit 381 Cabin width 18 ft 0 in

So you could, perhaps, cram almost as many people in an A321 as in a 787. Interesting.

The question is whether the A321 could haul the mass of 235 people and their luggage from NYC to London. If it can, assuming some freight as well, then the A321 being cheaper, we might just see such things sometime soon.

And if that doesn't bother you, why the hell not?


Good thing Boeing doesn't have a 737 MAX that comes close. Though I hear one may be in the offing, in lieu of a clean sheet plane. I can just see RyanAir pack people in so tight, they'll need to sprinkle olive oil to keep the passengers from chafing too much (at a fee, naturally). Olive oil is the traditional filler in sardine cans (BTW, most such fish are not sardines, and the oil is usually worth more than the fish, ergo packing them so tight the amount of oil is minimized; frankly, I don't think olive oil is even used anymore).

But I digress....

I do wonder how, not whether, Jet Blue will pursue transatlantic flights. If focused on leisure travelers, they may pick nearby cities as alternatives. I don't know if that's been their MO.

Quote: Nareed

So you could, perhaps, cram almost as many people in an A321 as in a 787.

Japan Airline has a configuration of the Boeing 787-8 with 161 seats in the following classes:
38 open suites 74" by 25.5" (6 seats in a row)
35 premium 42" by 19.2 " (7 seats in a row)
88 economy 33" by 18.9" (8 seats in a row)
So even the economy seats are reasonably wide and they don't even use the normal 3-3-3 configuration)

Spirit Airlines puts 178 seats in an Airbus A320, only 2 less than the maximum of 180. They also put 218 seats in an A321.

Quote: Pacomartin

Japan Airline has a configuration of the Boeing 787-8 with 161 seats

And a heart of gold :)

Quote:

Spirit Airlines puts 178 seats in an Airbus A320, only 2 less than the maximum of 180. They also put 218 seats in an A321.

Wide bodies on "short" transatlantic flights typically are more densely packed than JAL's. And I doubt an A321 neo LR could make it across the Pacific. but the point is taken: ULCCs are evil :)