United orders 50 Airbus A321XLR

Just another side effect of the self inflicted bullet wound in Boeings foot.

Sad to see but not the only American corporation victimized by the wisdom handed down from modern business schools.

 

The A321XLR is the only current solution for a 757. Boeing has continued to debate if they will or won't go forward with the NMA. The situation with the Max has not helped the NMA decision process but at the same time there continues to be questions if the NMA is the correct solution along with there being a sufficient market to justify the creation of a totally new aircraft.

We can lament Boeing decision to cancel the 757 but it was reasonable at that time - lack of orders and no airline on the verge of placing a block of orders. Boeing had been holding off the line shut down on the potential for an order from Northwest but they kept delaying and delaying. Ultimately after the shut down Northwest tried to get Boeing to restart the line but as they had already been warned, it was too late.

Notice 2 specific items in the article. (1) United gets 321XLRs starting in 2024 - the NMA would not be ready by then anyway. (2) United managed to shove out A350 orders for 5 years. I would speculate that part of the justification for the A321 order is that Airbus allowed #2 without penalties.

 

United has been flying Airbus A320 series for over 25 yrs.

 

Boeing should have designed a "757 MAX" update with the latest technology, even if there were initially no orders. Today they would be selling like hot cakes.

 

They committed to a -900NG, and after Condit's fiasco with the 757-300 I doubt they would have ever gambled on that.

 

Was the 757 tooling destroyed? If so, that would mean that any longing to resurrect the model is missing a key point.

 

What happened with the -300???

 

As I recall, never recovered development costs due to lack of orders (55 total). Condit championed the program despite reservations from many.

I flew in one once. Sat in very back. Took FOREVER to deplane.

 

The 757 is my LEAST FAVORITE plain to cross oceans with. Its way past its prime.

The Dreamliner may be my favorite though. I guess they are too expensive or slow to produce?

 

I once flew it from ATL to SEA but was lucky enough to get an upgrade to first class (which, amazingly, I had not asked for). I have flown them often on flights of 2 hours or less with no problem in coach, but the seat pitch can be snug. People seem to blame the airplane when the fault is with the airlines trying to cram as many passengers in. While I would prefer a twin-aisle airplane for a long flight, the 757 would be fine if seat pitch was not an issue.

 

I never saw them in ATL until the ex-Northwest planes were added to Delta's fleet. They remind me of the stretched DC-8s. I'd hate to be at the end of that bus...

 

I flew on a 757 from Atlanta to Buenos Aires and back in 2008 and it was very comfortable in 1st class. Not sure how it was in the back in steerage.

 

well, that and the 757 was loathed by many that flew on her. The regular domestic product, even on United with 24 first and a bunch of econ+ was just miserable in any class of service. I hated seeing that plane on my flights when shopping for routes. The Airbus first cabins are much better and there are a couple of econ+ seats that are really good (notably the first row of econ and the exit rows). The PS dedicated planes from NYC to LAX/SFO were okay in biz or first, but pricey to fly on (and upgrades hard to come by). For Intl, I much preferred all widebodies (well, except 777 wherein they shove 8 across in biz like united did and BA still does). The domestic Delta planes were torture, even worse than United. I'd opt for CRJ-700 over those (when your aircraft is suckier than a CRJ, you have a real problem).

Mayor has it right. Although,I'd generalize to eliminate the "across oceans" qualifier.

Let's hope.

 

United needs to invest in getting rid of their CRJ200 regional jets too. I flew one this weekend and it was pathetic. The Embraer 170-200 I flew back with them was the nicest regional jet I've been in so at least they aren't entirely incompetent.

 

Again, you're blaming the wrong party. It's the airlines, not the airplane, that was at fault!

 

I flew a CRJ700 from ATL to Ottawa when Delta first put them into service and the flights were very nice. Maybe the bigger CRJs are better than the 200s.

 

meh, its a long and narrow bodied plane. There are few, if any, configs that are passenger friendly for the 757. Its merely my experience and opinion that flying on the plane sucks. I enjoy flying on the same airlines' other planes (aside from the ones I mentioned). The equipment does in-large-part dictate the layout (based on economic parameters, useful load, dimensions, fuel usage, etc, etc). Its not like United wanted their 757 to be sub-par from the rest of their onboard experience. I'd bet that's why they have phased them out for the most part (I haven't been on one in years thankfully).

 

The 700 can be better (united has a version now that is actually pretty nice and filled with 1st and econ+ seats). I've not seen anything other than 2+2 narrow seats and 50 total seats on the CRJ-200. I actually like flying the Embraer's (175 and 190 iirc), especially in first. They re-invented the regional jet imho.

 

there have been rumors and maybe even announcements of the demise of the CRJ-200, but yet they are still there. I have to fly one when I journey from europe to reno to visit my mom. I pay for business class on a nice Polaris seat to SFO and then have to stuff my 6'3" 225lbs in to a crappy CRJ-200 with near zero legroom for the last hour. Lame. If they few an Embraer or CRJ-200 on that route, I'd be in first since my ticket is a biz class ticket. Instead I pay the same and end up on a Y fare in the tiny -200 econ seat.

 

Flew EMB-175's on United Express this past weekend PAE-DIA-DAY and return. Yes, EMB has slightly larger cross section than a CRJ200. But they are all too small for comfortable 2-2 seating.

 

^^^, and sitting on the single seat side

 

true, in econ. The 1-2 in first is nice and the fact that there is at least one side with proper overhead bins. Lordy CRJ's suck...sadly, I think one of United's regional partners just placed an order for a bunch more CRJ's rather than Embraer's.

Edit: found it, its "go jet" (outta chicago) and its some new CRJ-550 that is supposed to be better...we shall see...looks good on paper in a 10/20/20 first/econ+/econ config.
https://airwaysmag.com/manufacturer/bombardier-launches-crj550-united-orders-50-planes/

Edit #2: ugh, skywest still has 199 of the CRJ-200! So it looks like I'm stuck with CRJ-200 into Reno and Jackson Hole and Idaho Falls (my primary USA airports). Yuck.

 

The one I flew in yesterday was economy plus and I had tons of room. A guy across the aisle must have been 6'6"+ and his head completely cleared the headrest lol but didn't hit the overhead area. There was lots of room under the seat for larger carry-ons. Overhead bins were decent and not like a joke like the CRJ200. They should eliminate overhead bins on that to make the cabin larger. Only allow under seat storage.

 

They should just enforce the rules for carry-on, period.