What Are Sharklets On American Airlines?

I originally published this review in January of 2019. With the exception of the current restrictions on service due to the Coronavirus most of what I wrote then holds true today (May 2021). Now it is Aug 2020 and I have included an update on the bottom of the page with changes from the original review. This review has been a long time in the making and honestly, will be similar to my review of American’s A319 First Class https://www.patstravelreviews.com/post/american-airlines-a319-first-class-review American has four versions of their A321’s. For this review I will concentrate on the typical First Class products in the US.

American also uses the A321 on their JFK to SFO & LAX routes.
These aircraft have three classes of service (4 with MCE) with International Business and First Class seats.

This aircraft is noted as “32B-Airbus A321 (Sharklets)”.
The three versions in this review are used on all other domestic routes as well as to/from Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean.

There is a big difference between the interiors and seats. American placed a large order with Airbus before their merger with US Airways. These aircraft, like the 3-class variant used to noted as “32B-Airbus A321 (Sharklets)” while the A321’s American inherited from US Airways are noted as “321-Airbus A321”.

However, AA has changed this and now the A321neo’s are designated as 32Q while the other two A321’s are just 321 (but for this review I will still refer to it as 32B to distinguish the two aircraft).
The only way to know which aircraft you will most likely get is by looking at the seat map.
This is important because the older USAir A321’s do not have Main Cabin Extra (MCE).

Only the bulkhead and exit rows in Economy are designated as MCE. Whereas the “newer” A321’s and the neo have MCE in rows 8 through 10 (as well as a few other rows). This also holds true with their A319’s. There are two versions, one American ordered and the others they also inherited from USAir.

Only this time, they are all noted as “319-Airbus A319”. I have flown several routes on these aircraft and a good percentage will follow the two different airlines hubs. So you will find the USAir version (321) on flights to and from PHX, PHL, and CLT while the 32B on flights to and from DFW, ORD, and MIA.

They also fly the 32B (2-class) and Neo from LAX & PHX to their Hawaiian destinations (HNL, LIH, OGG, and KOA). The 32Q has five rows (20 seats) in First Class while the other two versions only have 16 seats in First in a 2×2 layout (A319 has 8 seats) which means it is much harder getting upgraded on the A321’s (and A319’s) than the B737’s.

As an update (June 2021) I was booking a couple of tickets for later this summer and noticed that all AA’s A321’s have 5 rows in First Class.

Evidently, they are adding a 5th row to keep in line with the A321neo.
I looked at the seat map for every single A321 flight on the routes I was searching (Nashville BNA & PHL in September) and every plane had 5 rows.

I have flown on several A321’s this year and all but the Neo’s have had 4 rows. Maybe it is a quick process to add a 5th row, but I have never seen this on their seat map before today. I am not sure if they will keep the current seats with in-seat screens that have them or will replace the entire A321 fleet (hopefully not) with same new First Class seats like the Neo has pictured below (on right).

I will find out by September and update at that time (July 2021 – Looking at a trip in Aug. several A321’s had 4 rows in First – not sure why some 4 rows and others 5 – unless they are just reconfiguring their older USAir A321’s). Now it is December 2021 and I have noticed their entire B737 fleet has been updated with new seats (old nice seats with seatback IFE have been removed).

My guess is they are doing the same with the A321’s and the ones with 4 rows will have the screens, while the 5-seat configuration will be the new seats. Most, if not all of the USAir 321’s have now been renovated with American’s interiors and seats. So aesthetically they look the same, but unfortunately, they kept the same seats USAir had.

Meaning the recline, tray table, pitch, seatback pocket, and center armrest are all the same as they were with USAir. Just the color scheme and leather has changed. So some of the 321’s are a little older and starting to show their age despite being reupholstered. The 32B’s are a few years old at the most.

In addition, the seats on the 32B’s are all the same, while the seats on the A321’s can vary from aircraft to aircraft. Some have a lot of room in the bulkhead while others not as much. Some have adjustable headrests, others don’t. Some tray tables are one piece while others fold in two.

But the biggest difference between the two is the 32B’s have seat back entertainment and in-seat power ports (both plug & USB) while the 321’s only have Personal Device Entertainment and as far as I have seen, no power plug. American elected not to put seat back TV’s on their new A321neo’s (same with B737 max).

These planes only have own-device entertainment. The 32Q does have a power plug in a storage area under the middle armrest and USB port on back of seat in front of you (I am not sure where or if bulkhead seats have USB port). Some other differences: like American’s B737’s, the 32B’s seats have small drink trays that come up from the center armrests and in rows 2 through 4 another small tray that comes down from the seat in front of you.

Also, the outer armrest raises for an additional storage area. The recline on the 32B’s comes a little forward on the bottom, thus not infringing as much on the passenger behind you. The 321’s and 32Q’s have a more traditional recline that can greatly decrease the space for the person behind. To me the leg room is almost the same on all aircraft, but that could be because the 32B has less leg room than AA’s B737’s (except for new B737 Max).

In truth, the 32B’s do have a bit more leg room, but only by an inch or two. The bulkhead on the 32B has enough room to almost fully stretch your legs (someone of average height) and allows the window seat passengers (1A&F) to get by the aisle passenger without them having to get up. Seats 1 D&F have a small, angled footrest against the wall. Interestingly, according to AA, the 32B’s have 39 inches of pitch while the 321’s have 36″ and neo’s 37″, but SeatGuru has the 32B’s at 38″ (the B737’s were 40-42″).

Some of the 321’s have more room in the bulkhead than the 32B’s and again, some don’t. I feel SeatGuru is more accurate. American’s B737’s have the most leg room of the Big Three’s First Class (AA is reducing the seat pitch on the B737’s with updated cabins), while the 32B may have an inch or two more.

At 36″ the 321 would be considered the lower end of pitch for US Carriers. The only plus any of the USAir seats I flew on was a few had a storage area under the center armrest (I did fly on an A319 last week that had a power plug in this storage area).

The overhead bin, lights, and vents are basically the same on all aircraft.

Like most newer jets, the bins have enough room to easily place a standard roller-board suitcase.
The Neo’s overheads are even bigger.
As an update (July 2022) Every A321 flight I have flown on since I wrote this all have the same new seats.

I think they have replaced all the old USAir seats and their seats with seatback IFE. All A321’s I have flown on in this year have 5 rows and seats with new tray table (with device holder) and storage area under center armrest. As much as there is a difference in the travel experience in First between the 32B & the 321’s there is even more traveling in Economy Class.

Outside the bulkhead and exit row, the 321’s do not have American’s Main Cabin Extra, whereas, the 32B’s and neo’s do have MCE. I don’t really consider the exit row or bulkhead on the old USAir planes as MCE because the armrest does not raise and the seats are more narrow then a regular Economy seat and therefore, not as comfortable as the MCE seats.

The 321’s seats and interiors have also been updated so I am not sure why American decided not to make these aircrafts and their products equal. Whether on a B737, A320, A319, or A321, the service is the same on all American mainline domestic flights (outside LAX & SFO to JFK and their B777 flights between LAX & MIA https://www.patstravelreviews.com/post/american-airlines-b777-domestic-flagship-business-class-review ).

One inconsistency is the pre-departure drink (currently suspended due to Covid-19 and one I fear the airlines may not bring back).

Usually just Orange Juice or Water is offered, sometimes a drink of your choice (including alcohol – usually former USAir crew) and occasionally there is no pre-departure drink at all.

This is more dependent on the crew than the plane. There is always a blanket on the seat and a hot towel after take-off on flights with a meal service (both of these have also been suspended due to the pandemic). I have flown from SAN to DFW dozens of times and breakfast consists of two choices. Usually American’s Steel-cut Oatmeal or an Omelet with Sausage and Potatoes (Covid breakfast is now choice of the old Economy buy on board Yogurt or Turkey Croissant Sandwich).

I have had the same choice to ORD and CLT as well. But, that being said, I was on a SAN to DFW flight and the options were a Continental Fruit Plate or a Breakfast Sandwich. All Breakfast flights come with a choice of breads; either a biscuit, bagel, cinnamon roll, or croissant. Flights designated as Lunch are almost the same as Dinner flights (the Covid-19 choices are always between a Turkey Sandwich or Fruit & Cheese snack https://www.patstravelreviews.com/post/what-is-it-like-flying-during-the-covid-19-pandemic photo to the right).

A small bowl of hot cashews & almonds is served with the beverage before the meal. Like breakfast, there are two entrées. Usually, a meat or pasta although the last flight I was on the choice was either Chow Mein or Tex-Mex Salad with Chicken (cold plate). I have had the same Chicken with Green Beans on a few flights from ORD to the West Coast and the same Short Ribs with twice Baked Potatoes from DFW to LAX & SAN.

Meals tend to change after three months or so. The meal comes with a salad and on longer flights, an appetizer or starter (always served with meal). A Bread Basket with a few choices of rolls is passed out shortly after your meal has been served. On shorter flights and lunch flights, dessert consists of a warm cookie (either Snickerdoodle or Chocolate Chip) while on longer flights Ice Cream in a glass (no toppings) or a Slice of Cake is served.

On longer flights outside the Dinner time-slot (usually after 8pm), red-eye’s, and flights between 2 – 2.5 hours a small snack is served. The two most popular being a Fruit & Cheese plate or a Hummus & Pita Plate. To American’s credit, they also serve the same warm nut dishes on these flights as well.

On flights that are under two hours a premium snack basket is passed around. Occasionally American changes the selection, but there is usually 5 or 6 items to choose from. Popcorn, Chips, Nuts, Pretzels, Cookies, Fig Bar, Granola Bar, Whole Fruit just to name a few. Typically they are from smaller companies and for the most part high quality products.

The Hawaii flights have different choices and slightly better catering. One of the best things about flying First Class on American is you can pre-order your meal 24 hours to 30 days before departure (also currently suspended). This is a more equitable system and eliminates someone who purchased a First Class seat not getting their meal choice while someone who was upgraded at the last minute does.

Also, it enables them to pick their preferred seat without them worrying where the flight attendants will take the orders from. American used to take orders from the front on even flight #’s and from the back on odd (febo). I don’t see much of this anymore and I think the ability to pre-order your meal made it obsolete.

For the most part AA’s First Class meals are more than edible. Some I like more than others, but what I like the most is they are always served hot (something United has a hard time with). Like most Airlines in the US, the flight attendants are inconsistent.

The majority are friendly, professional and accommodating, but more than a few are less than. One nice touch is prior to landing a flight attendant passes around a small tray of mints. All of American’s A321’s have access to Wi-Fi, but much like the seats, there is now some difference between the 321’s and 32B’s.

In the past the Wi-Fi was through Gogo Inflight, but now on the 32B’s and 32Q’s the Wi-Fi is through ViaSat. I am not sure if ViaSat will replace Gogo on the 321’s, but this still holds true since I wrote this review over a year ago. The Wi-Fi price varies from flight to flight, but is about the same with both providers.

Typically, the fee ranges from $12 to $14 for 1 hour, with a more reasonable price for the entire flight (typically $12 for shorter flights (2 hrs.) and $16 for longer flights (over 3hrs).
The ViaSat definitely has a faster connection, however, I prefer Gogo as it gives T-Mobile customer’s 1 hour free internet and unlimited free texting on your phone.

ViaSat is available from gate to gate, whereas Gogo still is limited to above 10,000 feet. All have American’s Personal Device entertainment. In the past, on aircraft that had seatback entertainment, Gogo only provided Wi-Fi, while on planes that did not have in-seat IFE then own device entertainment was available. Now, with ViaSat, entertainment is always available on your device.

I personally prefer watching programming on a seatback monitor over my tablet (dinner and a movie is much easier this way than finding a place for your tablet/laptop).
The own device entertainment is free as is the seat back in all classes.
The content is similar, but not 100% the same.

In most cases programs are unedited (uncensored).

The seatback IFE is touchscreen (there is also hand-set on armrest) and usually has more movie and TV choices plus has games, music, Apple Music plus a very nice moving map. I have not had any issues connecting to AA’s Personal Device Entertainment and my only complaint is that they are slow to change content. me some time to write this review and last week I flew on an A319 (USAir) from IAH to LAX that had 12 channels of Live TV in addition to the regular content on American’s Personal Device Entertainment. The same with the 32B’s, Live TV was available through your device.

But since I started flying again this past August (2020) every time I search for Live TV it always says “currently unavailable”. I am not sure if this also has something to do with the pandemic (don’t know how other than saving money). I thought I had read American was switching to ViaSat, but maybe they changed their mind.

Either way, just like with the seats, the experience is different from aircraft to aircraft. In a nutshell, I think American’s Domestic First Class is the best of the three legacy carriers and their new A321’s are a big reason I feel this way (although I like First on their B737’s more).

However, the fact they kept the same seats on the A321’s they inherited from USAir, makes it almost like flying on two separate airlines.
For the most part I try to avoid flying on the 321’s and not just because the First Class experience is better on the 32B’s or that the 32Q’s have more seats in First.

Mostly, because if I do not purchase a First Class ticket and don’t get upgraded, it is one of the only aircraft that does not have a Premium /Economy, Plus, Extra or Comfort seat with extra legroom (outside bulkhead and exit row). **Above is a photo of the latest meal served (Aug 2021) from DFW to SAN. A slight upgrade to what had been served in First. I recently read where American may never go back to traditional hot plated meals in First Class. I hope this will not happen and doubt it will with United returning to hot meals (FA told me sometime in Nov.2021 hot meals will return).

I would think AA would not want to be at a competitive disadvantage, but it is now Oct 2021 and AA is still serving similar meal (see below) with updated cutlery.
Also, as an update Live TV is back on own device entertainment with 12 Channels (ABC, CBS, CNBC, CNN, ESPN & ESPN 2, FOX, Fox News, NBC, NFL Network, USA and TNT).

I was able to watch some Monday Night Football on ESPN and College Football this past month. I’ve also added another photo of meal I had late Oct.2021. Almost back to regular catering. Breakfast SAN to DFW (again, hopefully hot meals return this month (Nov.

’21)). *** Further update As of Spring 2022 they are back to regular catering (for the most part) They are once again offering pre-departure drinks, hot towels after take-off and real glassware with meals.
Plus, you can pre-order your meals again.

On most shorter flights they pass around the Snack Basket, but on very short routes (SAN – PHX) it is just a Fig Bar in the morning or small packet of Premium Nuts the rest of the day.

Lunch & Dinner start with warm premium nuts and a beverage of your choice. However, hot meals are only served on flights over 3 hours (I thought was 1500 miles, but recently received a hot dinner from MSY to PHX and that route is slightly over 1300 miles) Flights from 900 to 1500 miles have a cold meal served (see photos 4 & 6 last row).

Lunch and Dinner still start with a ramekin of warm nuts but this means all their DFW flights to Southern California (DFW to SFO was hot meal) will now be served a cold meal (photo 4 below is DFW to LAX). The bread basket is replaced with a packet of Flatbread Crackers on the tray. So, they are close, but certainly on some flights not the same.

I have been on a few AA International Business Class flights and their LAX to JFK flight recently, and the service there is back to pre-pandemic levels. Not sure why they have not done the same thing domestically other than to save money. This was ok before, but now planes are full and fares are high.

I used to purchase First Class fares on some routes because I knew I would be getting a nice (ok, decent) meal. Now, I just hope for an upgrade. Additionally, blankets have not returned on domestic flights. But pre-ordering your meal has returned (within 30 days to 24 hours before departure) As I mentioned above all the A321 flights I have been on have the new seats and I do believe they have completed reconfiguring these planes.

They no longer differ from 32B and 321. The neo is still 32Q and now their 3 class transcontinental A321’s are 32B. So the rest are just designated as 321. They have 5 rows and no longer have seatback IFE. All have storage areas under the center armrest and have power ports in this storage area.

Rows 2 thru 5 have USB ports in seatback and have device holder on seatback and tray table (whereas bulkhead only has tray table holder). On photos 1, 4 & 6 below my tablet is inserted into this adjustable part of the tray table. It appears the nice monitors on photo 2 & 3 below are gone. One last update is all the 321’s Wi-Fi is through Viasat.

So the 1 hour free internet is gone on the 321’s (they still use gogo on their commuter planes, and I think A320’s). Rates are still high with a few exceptions (SAN to ORD was $6/hr when the rest are $12/hr and above) but they do have 20 minutes free Wi-Fi if you watch an ad.

What is Sharklets A321?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia “A321” redirects here. For the British road, see A321 road,

A321


An A321-200 of American Airlines, the largest operator.
Role	Narrow-body jet airliner
National origin	Multinational
Manufacturer	Airbus
First flight	11 March 1993
Introduction	1994 with Lufthansa
Status	In service
Primary users	American Airlines China Southern Airlines Delta Air Lines China Eastern Airlines
Produced	1992–2021 (A321ceo) 2016–present (A321neo)
Number built	2,715 as of 31 December 2022
Developed from	Airbus A320
Developed into	Airbus A321neo

The Airbus A321 is a member of the Airbus A320 family of short to medium range, narrow-body, commercial passenger twin engine jet airliners ; it carries 185 to 236 passengers. It has a stretched fuselage which was the first derivative of the baseline A320 and entered service in 1994, about six years after the original A320.

The aircraft shares a common type rating with all other Airbus A320-family variants, allowing previous A320-family pilots to fly the aircraft without the need for further training.

In December 2010, Airbus announced a new generation of the A320 family, the A320neo (new engine option).
The similarly lengthened fuselage A321neo variant offers new, more efficient engines, combined with airframe improvements and the addition of winglets (called Sharklets by Airbus).

The aircraft delivers fuel savings of up to 15%. The A321neo carries up to 244 passengers, with a maximum range of 4,000 nmi (7,400 km) for the long-range version when carrying no more than 206 passengers. Final assembly of the aircraft takes place in Hamburg, Germany, and in Mobile, Alabama, United States.

What American Airlines planes have seatback screens?

American Airlines

Aircraft	TV Screens?
Airbus A330-200	Yes
Boeing 737 Max 8	No
Boeing 737-800	Yes, depends on individual aircraft
Boeing 777-200	Yes

Does AA Airbus A321neo have lie-flat seats?

Every Flagship Suite ® seat on our A321T is fully lie-flat with aisle access so you arrive feeling refreshed.

What is the difference between winglet and sharklet?

What is the difference between the two? – There is no real difference between the two types of winglets apart from cosmetics. They are so close in design (that Airbus was proven to be infringing on a patent) that no version is better than another. However, winglets and Sharklets are both solutions to inefficient wing design from earlier aircraft.

A well-designed wing resolves the pressure difference as the wing ends and thus doesn’t need anything on the end of the wings. With up to 33% fuel savings to be had, such innovations will go a long way, especially in today’s sensitive climate. What do you think? What do you make of the two company’s offerings? Let us know what you think in the comment section.

Source: The Flying Engineer

Why do planes have Sharklets?

Winglets and Sharklets: An Inspiration by Nature After spending too much time optimising our website for old browsers, we decided to create a solution that not only saves time, but it is also efficient: please update your browser. Or download one of the latest browser versions: The main goal of Bionics (BIOlogy + TechNICS) is the solution of technical problems and includes the analysis of biological systems, the abstraction of the resulting findings and the application of these to technical solutions.

Numerous technical developments are based on inspiration from nature. Best known developments in aerodynamics are winglets or sharkles on aircraft wings. As a result of the oil crisis in the early 1970s, when the price of aviation fuel rose, airlines and aircraft manufacturers looked for ways to improve the operational efficiency of aircrafts.

Numerous approaches to solving this price problem delivered revolutionary aerodynamic concepts, including Winglets and Sharklets. Winglets or Sharklets are upward or downward curved extensions at the wing tips. Although they cause more weight and drag, winglets improve the environmental performance of an aircraft by reducing the induced drag caused by lift, thus minimizing fuel consumption.

For an airplane to take off, the lift – air hitting a wing with an approach speed – must be large enough to overcome gravity. The special shape of the profile of the wings ensures that the air flows faster at the top of the profile than at the bottom. This results in a higher pressure on the underside of the wing than on the upper side (Bernoulian equation).

The resulting force of this pressure distribution forms the lift. As an unavoidable consequence of lift, every aircraft generates rotating and long-lasting vortices behind its wings – so-called edge vortices or wake vortices. At the wing tips there is a largely unhindered flow around the wing tips because of the corresponding pressure difference.

This creates a vortex at each of the two wing tips. These counter-rotating edge vortices do not generate lift, but they do require energy, which acts as induced drag. As a result, the total drag of the aircraft increases. In addition to the problem of energy efficiency, edge vortices or wake vortices pose another problem.

Especially during take-off and landing smaller aircraft can get into the vortex field of larger ones. Since wake vortices do not disappear immediately and can remain above the ground for a long time, distances have been defined between aircraft that want to take off or land on a runway.

Why is American Airlines removing screens?

American Airlines just made a statement that may incense customers You are why we fly, to some extent. Screenshot by ZDNet How honest should you be with your customers? Should you tell them the real reason you do things? Or should you focus on making them as happy as possible? Especially if it’s as imperfect as air travel?

I only ask because of a fascinating interview with American Airlines CEO,In it, he discussed many issues, including the survival of his airline and its accelerated enthusiasm for packing as many people onto its planes as it can.Yet one element especially struck me.

He was asked about providing customers with seatback screens and streaming wi-fi. American has been at the forefront of ripping all of the seatback screens out of its narrow-body planes and replacing them with a little holder where you can put your phone, your iPad, or perhaps a picture of your loved ones and stream away.

Parker declared: “I think everyone – given the choice – would prefer to have a seatback screen and streaming wi-fi.” Then he explained why he wasn’t prepared to give customers the choice.
Apparently giving them both involve a level of effort which “doesn’t warrant it.” This may, to some, smack of something being “not worth it.” Which may, to some, smack of “there’s no profit in that, so give me a break.” But Parker insisted: “We absolutely believe that giving customers the ability to use their personal devices in flight – just like you can when you’re sitting in your living room – is what they prefer over having stored content in the screen in front of them.” It’s a perfectly fair business calculation.

But how fair is it to families who may have many children and not so many personal devices? They may be especially important as business travel continues to flounder, while personal travel – say, from Texas to Cancún – is seeing brisker activity. Moreover, how fair is it to business travelers who might prefer to work on their laptops while looking up occasionally at a screen they didn’t have to bring with them? (Phones, even bigger ones, don’t make for ideal movie-watching on planes.) Parker, though, believes this is the way it’s going to be on all airlines in the future.

Which may be news for Delta. Last month, the airline’s managing director of inflight entertainment and Wi-Fi Glenn Latta offered an alternative perspective., Latta said: “We now have the additional capability and next-gen technology to make sure you have a faster and more consistent connection to your favorite sites, including the ability to stream the entertainment of your choice on your flight.

It also lays the groundwork for future enhancements and personalization with the seatback screen that customers will love.” Some believe one of the more profound reasons for airlines like American to remove seatback screens is to save money on maintenance and make the plane a tiny bit lighter, hence saving a tiny bit on fuel costs.

Perhaps Parker is right. Perhaps we are so attached to our devices that we’ll be happy enough on a plane – as in the rest of our lives – by burying ourselves in those devices and demanding perfect wi-fi. Yet when you tell customers that it’s really not worth giving them what (you know) they’d really prefer and your current corporate tagline is “,” it might leave a tinge of discomfort ringing in at least a few customers’ ears.

: American Airlines just made a statement that may incense customers

Does American airline allow free carry on?

Customers flying Basic Economy are now allowed 1 free carry-on (in addition to a personal item) to all destinations.

Bags Checked bag policy Carry-on bags Delayed or damaged bags Track your bags

Does AA have free Wi-Fi?

International Wi-Fi – Now you can stay connected while on our 777-300 International flights. Once onboard the aircraft, you will be able to use any Wi-Fi enabled device to purchase a Wi-Fi session. As always, you will be able to enjoy complimentary internet access to AA.com. For information on how to login, please visit www.aa.com/wifi, *Schedules and equipment are subject to change.

Why are American Airlines seats so small?

Travelers have a lot to say about shrinking airplane seats Top-tier frequent flyer Rick Hubbard spends a lot of time squeezing into airplane seats and has noticed it’s a tighter fit. “Either that or I’m getting bigger and bigger, but I don’t think so,” Hubbard told CNN recently near a baggage claim.

I can’t imagine seats or aisles being smaller than they are today.” Shrinking personal space in the skies is not imaginary: Experts say over the years while Americans grew larger.
Airlines are balancing passenger demand for cheap airfare and more legroom.
Federal regulators, meanwhile, have focused narrowly on preventing a cabin so cramped that it prevents a rapid emergency evacuation.

“Their message to date has been how uncomfortable you are is between you and the air carrier,” said Peter Goelz, a CNN safety analyst and former managing director of the National Transportation Safety Board. Under pressure from Congress and passengers, the Federal Aviation Administration is now looking into whether seats are too tight to rapidly evacuate.

The agency this fall, and more than 26,000 comments poured in – many raising concerns beyond evacuation.
Commenter John Naughton called

“less fights if people could fit in more comfortably.”
Scott Parkinson, who is 6-foot-5, said jamming his knees into limited space leaves him
He requested that “seats be placed further apart so people have a decent amount of leg room and your knees don’t touch or crowd the seat in front of you” in the comment he submitted to federal officials.

The comments period closed on November 1. The FAA has not said whether it will act in response. In official comments submitted to the FAA, the groups representing major US airlines – Airlines for America and the International Air Transport Association – urged the agency to stay focused on safety, “And Not Comfort or Convenience.” Paul Hudson, president of passenger advocacy group FlyersRights, says legroom isn’t only an issue for the tallest passengers. He says shorter people can be uncomfortable, too, and cited data he submitted to the FAA associating health risks such as blood clotting with cramped conditions.

“They only narrowly define safety as if it has something to do with evacuation speed,” he told CNN. “But they ignore health risks, especially blood clots, which are known to increase dramatically when you’re in a confined space for more than two or three hours. They ignore completely the forced intrusion that you have now on your neighbor.” Hudson says that since the FAA developed evacuation standards in 1967, the average American has grown about 30 pounds heavier and an inch or two taller.

Airline seats, however, are smaller. Airline seats are “the only area that we know of where the public is invited to sit in seats that have actually gotten smaller. Everything else – stadium seats, theater seats, automobile seats – have all gotten larger,” Hudson explained.

In 2019, the FAA loaded people into an aircraft cabin to test evacuation speeds with differing legroom.

Stacey Zinke-McKee of the FAA’s Civil Aerospace Medical Institute told CNN at the time that the study was needed to “first decide if it’s a safety issue – if there’s any safety concerns.”
The study concluded that “currently flying seat pitches can accommodate and not impede egress for 99% of the American population.”

But US Rep. Steve Cohen, a Tennessee Democrat who wrote the legislation that spurred FAA action, called the testing “as faulty as they could be.”

“They had nobody under 18, nobody over 60, nobody with a disability, nobody with a walker, nobody with a seeing eye dog, nobody with any kind of dog at all, nobody with luggage,” he said.
“The public safety should be first and foremost, and it’s not,” Cohen said.
The FAA and Department of Transportation declined CNN’s request for an interview.

Airlines for America said its members consider safety the “top priority.”
“Airlines continue to invest in a wide range of innovative technologies to maximize personal space in the cabin while maintaining a level of comfort passengers expect,” the group said in a statement.
It told the FAA thinner and redesigned seats mean that “despite the reduction in the seat pitch, in the majority of cases passengers still have the same or near equivalent amount of space, and in some cases more space for their legs and knees.”

One airline recently announced that it is ordering planes with larger seats. Spirit Airlines said rows on its new Airbus aircraft feature “innovative curved seatback designs that unlock space at the knee level” – about two additional inches. The seats will also be wider. How much wider? A half inch. Top image: (Adobe Stock) : Travelers have a lot to say about shrinking airplane seats

What is the least popular seat on a plane?

Where Are the Worst Seats on a Plane? – The worst seats are generally “in the last row of the aircraft,” says David Duff, Content Specialist at SeatGuru, “The seats more than likely have limited recline, the proximity to the lavatory and galley are going to be bothersome since you are dealing with noises, smells, people queueing to use the lavatory, and the flight crew opening and closing storage compartments and chatting.” Sounds terrible, but wait—there’s more.

Many times, the windows are missing at these seats as well,” Duff continues, “and to top it all off, you are going to feel turbulence a bit toward the back of the plane.” Being in the back also means you’re one of the last ones off the plane—not ideal if you’re trying to make a tight connection,

OK, so the back row is the single worst place to sit on a plane and you should steer clear of it at all costs.

But which other seats should you avoid? All middle seats are unpopular for obvious reasons, and the seats in front of an exit row aren’t ideal either. “These seats usually have limited recline in case the plane has to be evacuated,” Duff explains. Even the desirable exit row seats, which typically have extra legroom, have a potential downside: “One of the major complaints we read about from community is how the seat nearest to an exit door tends to be colder than surrounding seats,” says Duff.

If you value the extra legroom the exit row typically offers, pack a pashmina or fleece to keep warm.

Finally, when considering a bulkhead seat, keep in mind that you won’t have storage under the seat in front of you, which can be inconvenient if you like easy access to personal items like travel kits or over-the-counter medications,

You should also be aware that bulkhead seats tend to be popular with babies and their parents, as they’re an ideal spot for bassinets.

What is the least safest seat on a plane?

Crunching the numbers – When writing about the safest seats on a plane, Time Magazine cited a 35-year study done by Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) into seating and fatalities. According to the FAA report looking at accidents and deaths between 1985 and 2020 the worst place to sit is in the middle of the plane. Photo: Getty Images When looking at what seats gave you the best chance of surviving, the middle seats in the plane’s rear came out the best with a 28% fatality rate. The worst seats were on either side of the aisle in the middle of the aircraft, with a 44% fatality rate.

Another study done by the University of Greenwich also determined that, following a crash, those passengers sitting closest to an emergency exit had the best chance of getting out alive. This is particularly key to survival in post-crash fires. As noted earlier, the chances of surviving a crash can sometimes depend on a given accident’s specific circumstances.

If the plane’s tail takes the brunt of the impact, passengers in the back will fare worse. Correspondingly, if the nose were to impact first, the people in the front of the aircraft would come off worse. Photo: Ryanair While plane crashes and the sheer number of fatalities can be shocking, air travel has only become safer over the years, especially when compared to other forms of transport. The odds of dying in a plane crash are said to be 1 in 8,000, compared to 1 in 112 for road traffic accidents.

What is the smoothest seat on a plane?

The best seat to minimize the effects of turbulence – A bumpy ride can range from uncomfortable to downright unsettling, and different parts of the plane feel turbulence more intensely than others. “The smoothest place to sit is over the wings,” says commercial pilot Patrick Smith, host of AskThePilot.com.

Can a plane fly without a winglet?

An Americans Airline flight had to be diverted on Tuesday, May 3, after a winglet detached from the plane during severe turbulence, according to the Federal Aviation Administration. The flight operated by regional carrier Envoy Air was flying from Charleston International Airport in South Carolina to Dallas-Fort Worth Airport.

The FAA said the flight encountered “severe turbulence,” causing the pilot to divert the plane to Birmingham-Shuttlesworth International Airport in Alabama.
When it landed at 7:15 p.m., crew observed “a piece of the right winglet was missing,” the FAA said in its preliminary report.

Winglets are placed at an angle on the ends of airplane wings.

Their purpose is to reduce drag and increase the fuel efficiency of planes, according to California Aeronautical University. Planes can still fly without winglets, however. “Without them, the plane will have to deal with more vortex drag and will not be able to fly as easily, but it will still be able to fly,” the Smithsonian said.

American Airlines did not respond to a request for comment by McClatchy News, but a spokesperson for the airline told WCSC the plane suffered “a possible mechanical issue.” “We thank our crew for their professionalism, ensuring the safety of their fellow team members and customers on board,” the spokesperson said.

One person on the flight said on Twitter that it was a “surprisingly smooth flight and landing after the fact.” One body found after plane carrying 8 passengers crashed off Outer Banks in NC Delta plane’s windshield shatters mid-air, forcing flight to get diverted on way to DC ©2022 The Charlotte Observer.

When did Airbus introduce sharklets?

Winglets and Sharklets Img 1 Airbus’s test A320 taking to the skies with its new “Sharklets”. On November 30, 2011, Airbus’s test A320 (MSN0001), which is also the world’s oldest, and first ever A320, fitted with “Sharklets” took to the skies on a five-hour flight from Toulouse initiating an elaborate test schedule to validate the performance of the new pair of winglets, study their aerodynamic behaviour and gather data for certification.

Sharklets, the Airbus lingo for its new wingtip design for the Airbus A320 family, was launched in the November of 2009 and the first aircraft fitted with these were slated for delivery to the launch customer Air New Zealand end 2012. However, Air Asia became the first operator of the sharklet equipped A320 in the January of 2013, with MSN 5428 registered as 9M-AQQ.

The 2.5-metre tall winglets will replace the aircraft’s current wingtip fence. Offered as an option on newly built aircraft, Sharklets have been specially designed for the Airbus A320 family to reduce fuel burn by up to an additional 3.5 percent on long routes of around 3000NM.

Winglets: An inspiration from nature.
The high pressure on the lower surface of the wing creates lateral airflow outwards or away from the fuselage towards the wingtip where, on account of relatively lower air pressure above the wing, tends to spill over and swirl around the wingtip to form a vortex creating additional drag described as “induced drag” thereby reducing aerodynamic efficiency of the wing.

NASA engineer Richard Whitcomb who developed the supercritical airfoil, a fuel-efficient wing design adopted by Airbus aircraft, is also credited with the development in the 1970s of aerodynamically efficient winglets that had a profound impact on the operating Difference in vortices with and without winglets economics of airliners.

In response to the 1973 oil crisis, NASA’s Aircraft Energy Efficiency (ACEE) program sought ways to conserve energy in aviation.
Whitcomb’s winglet design was predicted to reduce induced drag by approximately 20 percent and improve the overall aircraft lift-drag ratio by six to nine percent.

Winglets are small aerodynamic surfaces mounted almost vertically at the wingtips.

Inspiration for the design came from birds observed to curl their wingtip feathers upward when in need of high lift. A well designed winglet rises vertically and is swept back such that it significantly reduces the size of the wingtip vortex thus reducing induced drag.

Winglets: Their Evolution. Fig 1:The different popular winglets: A, the conventional winglet sporting an angular transition between the wing and the winglet. B, A Blended winglet with the transition being the arc of a circle whose centre is at “C1”. C, an Elliptical Winglet, which transition and winglet forms part of an ellipse centred at “C2”.

In 1988, the Boeing 747-400 became the first airliner to fly with winglets, the design of which is similar to that in Fig 1A. In 1993, Dr Louis Gratzer, Professor of Aeronautics in the University of Washington, erstwhile Chief of Aerodynamics for Boeing, filed a patent application for an aerodynamically effective winglet termed “blended winglet” which provides a smooth transition between the wing, and the winglet, as depicted in Fig 1B.

Highly blended winglets have demonstrated more than 60 per cent greater effectiveness over conventional winglets with an angular transition.
Blended winglet technology made its debut in 1993 as a Performance Enhancement Program for the Gulfstream II by Aviation Partners Inc, a company established in 1991 at Seattle by Joe Clark and Montana businessman Dennis Washington.

Boeing’s attention was drawn to the fuel efficiency and range enhancement on the Gulfstream II leading to a joint venture with Aviation Partners Inc to develop blended winglets for Boeing airplanes. Boeing helped Aviation Partners pioneer the technology that is available as options on 737NG airplanes and as retrofit options on the older 737, 757 and 767 models.

In 2000, Dr Fort. F Felker, a former NASA wind-tunnel researcher and expert in computational fluid dynamics, filed a patent for “elliptical winglets”, wherein the curvature of the winglets as they extend outward from the intersection with the wings approximates part of an ellipse, as shown in Fig 1C.

This apparently ensures an elliptical distribution of lift both horizontally and vertically, resulting in lower induced drag. The very next year, Winglet Technology LLC was founded by Robert Kiser and Dr Fort Felker at Wichita, Kansas. In 2002, a European Union (EU) funded, four-year technology programme entitled Aircraft Wing with Advanced Technology Operation (AWIATOR) was launched, with focus on reduction in drag, noise, aircraft wake and improved fuel consumption.

It brought together 23 European manufacturers, universities and research institutes with Airbus contributing 60 percent of the Euro 80 million budget. Very large wingtip devices which include winglets, were also looked into by the program and a resin film-infused composite winglet was test flown on board an Airbus A340 in 2003.

The host of tests were completed in early 2006. Airbus A320: A drive for improvement. Img 2 The closest competitor to the Airbus A320, the Boeing Img 3 737-800, test flew with winglets in 2000. For a flight of 1000NM, a landing weight of 65,000kgs, cruise at Mach 0.78 at FL370, the A320 and the Boeing 737-800 winglets consume almost the same trip fuel of 6,000kgs.

This is 300kgs lesser than a Boeing 737-800 without winglets. The winglets contribute to a 4.7% fuel saving on the 738 in this particular case. With this, it was seen as obvious that an A320 with winglets replacing its present wingtip fences, can save fuel as well. Boeing deployed the winglets at the right time: when crude oil prices were on the rise.

With spiralling fuel prices, the need for a more efficient A320 became apparent. Img 4 In the April of 2006, after the results of the AWIATOR winglet that flew on the A340-300, Airbus tested similar winglets on its prototype A320, MSN0001, and another newly produced A320 that was meant for JetBlue, MSN2755 ( Img 2 ).

Closely following these tests, in the July of 2006, Airbus began flight testing with “Elliptical Winglets” from Winglet Technology LLC ( Img 3 ). Airbus was working towards an “A320 Enhanced”, which was to include winglets, an aerodynamic tidy-up (to the engine pylons, surge tank ducts and upper belly fairing), engine improvements, weight savings and a new cabin, all aimed at reducing fuel burn by 4-5%, of which the winglets alone, as Airbus chief operating officer John Leahy had said, were expected to “get a couple of per cent”.

But in the October of 2006, Airbus wasn’t too sure about the winglets, stating, “latest information on the A320 winglet testing is that the results indicate that although improvements were found in terms of cruise drag, the increase in structural weight that would be necessary to support the winglets largely offsets the gain”.

In late 2008, Aviation Partners Inc and Airbus announced that blended winglets are being tested on an A320 ( Img 4 ). The winglets were specially made for the A320, with the upper tip of the winglet sweeping further back to prominent pointed end. No further news was heard about the results of the test, until in January 2010, when JetBlue provided an A320 for testing with the same Aviation Partners Inc winglets.

This time however, the test was between the airline and the winglet manufacturer, with co-operation from Airbus, with tests taking place in the United States. API claimed to have achieved a 5 percent fuel savings. The 19 outboard ribs on the 320 wing that need strengthening Airbus went ahead with its own design of a winglet with the sole supplier being Korean Air Aerospace Division, the aerospace manufacturing division of the Korean Air Group.

Technically, the challenges with installing a winglet are the higher bending and torque loads that the structure is subjected to. This requires structural strengthening. Of the 27 ribs that make up either wing of an A320, the 19 outboard ribs need strengthening. The centre wing box will also be strengthened with necessary changes to take care of both A320 equipped with Sharklets and the A320 NEO alike.

Since the structure must be provisioned to fit either the Sharklet or the conventional wingtip fence, Rib 27, the outer-most, has been fully redesigned to offer this dual wingtip-device compatibility. These reinforcements increase aircraft structural weight, compensated by an airframe-wide weight-reduction plan of around 200 kgs.

As a result of this weight neutralisation, an aircraft which is Sharklet ready end 2012 onward, but fitted with the conventional wingtip fences will not differ in fuel burn and performance from an A320 delivered in 2010.
Sharklets are standard on all A320 NEOs that will be produced 2015 onward.
To handle the new engines and the added maximum takeoff weight, additional inboard rib and spar reinforcements will be incorporated when the A320neo goes into production.

Legal Airbus launched a legal battle on 2 December 2011. Anticipating a patent infringement lawsuit by Aviation Partners, Airbus filed a lawsuit to have the court declare the sharklet design was not copied from the Aviation Partners blended winglet.

Aviation Partners has escalated the patent dispute with Airbus by asking a US court in Seattle to slap an injunction on all new sales of sharklet-equipped Airbus A320s.The injunction request by Aviation Partners on 31 July 2012 is the latest and potentially most damaging move in an eight-month dispute between Airbus and Aviation Partners over the intellectual origins of the A320 sharklet.Aviation Partners accuses Airbus of “copying” the sharklet design using Aviation Partners’ proprietary information and data supplied to the airframer under a non-disclosure agreement, the Seattle-based supplier says in court documents. Source of information for this section “Legal” is Flightglobal.

Making Operational and Economical Sense. MSN 5437 which will grace the Indian skies as VT-IFH As per Airbus, over existing A320, Sharklets deliver an additional fuel saving of 3.5 per cent over sectors greater than 3000NM and one per cent for sectors of around 500NM.

The greatest savings will be on long routes.
Indigo’s Mumbai-Singapore is 2180NM, with an average trip fuel of around 13100 kgs.
This will translate to a conservative estimated saving of around 400 kgs per flight and 292,000 kgs per aircraft per year.
Considering the cost of fuel at Mumbai (S$1520.5/T) and Singapore (S$993.36/T) as of end December 2011, this translates to a saving of around S$367,000 per aircraft per year, on just one sector.

But if we consider a somewhat realistic aircraft utilisation, the savings can touch US$400,000 per year, per aircraft. With such savings, in the Indian scenario, the winglets pay back for themselves in around two and a half years or sooner in the event fuel prices rise further.

Projected savings on a single A320.
Fuel Prices as of Dec 25th, 2011.
Assumption: 1% on short sectors and 3% on the longer sectors (conservative).
The price will for the winglet will be similar to the forward fit, of around US$950,000, although the retrofit kit could add to the cost.
John Leahy (Chief Operating Officer, Customers, Airbus) however feels that the cost differential may be minimal.

MSN 5463 which will be registered as VT-GOL Sharklets bring advantages more than one. Payload-range benefits include either a revenue payload increase of around 500 kg or an additional 100nm range at the original payload. The increased lift- to-drag ratio of the wing will result in higher available takeoff weights, notably from obstacle-limited runways.

Where runway performance is not limiting, operators could profit from a reduction in average takeoff thrust with consequent savings in engine maintenance costs by around two per cent.
Sharklets provide better takeoff performance and rate-of-climb, higher optimum altitude, higher residual aircraft value and greater safety margins in the event of an engine failure This innovation ensures that airlines can afford to compete with the lowest airfares in an increasingly competitive market.

Watch this wonderful, inspirational video on the first flight of the sharklet equipped A320! A320 Indigo and Go air photos are the copyright of their owners. Original, full size images on the original posting site may be viewed by clicking on the two photos.

Why does the Dreamliner not have winglets?

An effective alternative for the 787 – One of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner’s key selling points is the fuel efficiency that its variants offer compared to older aircraft. Therefore, you might expect that winglets, or at least something like the A350’s blended wingtips, which have a curved elliptical shape, would have played a key role in this.

However, Boeing opted instead to fit the 787 with raked wingtips. This term refers to the triangular shape of the end of the jet’s wings, as seen in the photo below. These tips have a greater sweep angle than the rest of the wing. They also have a similar effect on wingtip vortices as conventional winglets.

Furthermore, they offer weight savings compared to winglets, as they don’t require an extra component to be added. The 787’s raked wingtips, which enhance its efficiency, are evident from this angle. Photo: Getty Images The airline industry is always full of new developments! What aviation news will you check out next? In fact, research by Boeing and NASA found that this design offers greater drag reduction (5.5%) than traditional winglets (3.5-4.5%).

How much does a sharklet cost?

A winglet-equipped version of the Airbus A320 will enter service in late 2012, delivering fuel burn improvements of up to 3.5%. Launch customer is Air New Zealand. Airbus’s chief operating officer customers John Leahy says that the airframer had decided to adopt its own “sharklet” design after a series of winglet flight-test evaluations in recent years.

What is a ghost plane?

Ghost plane – Wikipedia A ghost plane (a term sometimes used interchangeably with ghost flight ) may refer to:

, an aircraft used by national governments to move prisoners internationally
An empty or near-empty flight carried out to preserve a
Regarding, a “ghost plane” or “ghost flight” occurs when the plane, already in the air, suffers some type of accident that has incapacitated the crew and passengers due to (lack of oxygen), but the aircraft continues to fly thanks to the autopilot until it runs out of fuel and ends up crashing, after getting out of its flight path. These types of accidents are usually caused by, which affects, There have been no survivors in this kind of accident and it is very possible that even landing the plane intact, the damage due to lack of oxygen would be irreparable for those on board. Examples include: Recreation of two Greek fighters inspecting in the air.
- A Cessna 441 which crashed in 1980 carrying
- , of golfer Payne Stewart’s Learjet
- , Queensland
- , 2005
- A which crashed into the Gulf of Mexico in 2012
- , a which crashed into the near in 2022
“Ghost Plane”, an episode of Canadian TV series Mayday about Helios Airways Flight 522; see

Topics referred to by the same term This page lists articles associated with the title Ghost plane, If an led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article. What was once supposedly a rare occurrence, ghost flights have become more frequent within the last few years.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, the term ‘ghost flight’ has begun to make an appearance within the aviation world. A ghost flight is a term used when airlines operate a regularly scheduled route with a plane containing less than 10% of the airline’s total capacity. These flights are creating a crisis environmentally due to increased carbon emissions.

In the beginning of 2019, over 5,000 planes have flown to and from United Kingdom airports with no passengers. In addition, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) confirmed that over 35,000 flights had less than 10% of passenger capacity. The reason for these low capacity/empty flights is unknown.

Airlines are not required to publish data explaining pollution practices. The United Kingdom’s biggest airport, Heathrow, accounted for 10,467 flights. As the COVID pandemic began to spread worldwide in March 2020, flights got cancelled and delayed due to the current restrictions and the unknown. During this time, airline travel was reduced by 45% in 2020.

Because of this, airlines had to increase the number of empty flights in order to maintain their airport slots during this time. Flight containing less than 10% of capacity during COVID-19 travel.

What is the death spiral plane?

Noun. death spiral (plural death spirals) (aviation) The downward, corkscrew-motion of a disabled aircraft which is unrecoverably headed for a crash.

What is an Airbus A320 Sharklets?

Winglets: An inspiration from nature.
The high pressure on the lower surface of the wing creates lateral airflow outwards or away from the fuselage towards the wingtip where, on account of relatively lower air pressure above the wing, tends to spill over and swirl around the wingtip to form a vortex creating additional drag described as “induced drag” thereby reducing aerodynamic efficiency of the wing.

In response to the 1973 oil crisis, NASA’s Aircraft Energy Efficiency (ACEE) program sought ways to conserve energy in aviation.
Whitcomb’s winglet design was predicted to reduce induced drag by approximately 20 percent and improve the overall aircraft lift-drag ratio by six to nine percent.
Winglets are small aerodynamic surfaces mounted almost vertically at the wingtips.

Winglets: Their Evolution.
Fig 1:The different popular winglets: A, the conventional winglet sporting an angular transition between the wing and the winglet.
B, A Blended winglet with the transition being the arc of a circle whose centre is at “C1”.
C, an Elliptical Winglet, which transition and winglet forms part of an ellipse centred at “C2”.

Highly blended winglets have demonstrated more than 60 per cent greater effectiveness over conventional winglets with an angular transition. Blended winglet technology made its debut in 1993 as a Performance Enhancement Program for the Gulfstream II by Aviation Partners Inc, a company established in 1991 at Seattle by Joe Clark and Montana businessman Dennis Washington.

In 2000, Dr Fort.
F Felker, a former NASA wind-tunnel researcher and expert in computational fluid dynamics, filed a patent for “elliptical winglets”, wherein the curvature of the winglets as they extend outward from the intersection with the wings approximates part of an ellipse, as shown in Fig 1C.

It brought together 23 European manufacturers, universities and research institutes with Airbus contributing 60 percent of the Euro 80 million budget.
Very large wingtip devices which include winglets, were also looked into by the program and a resin film-infused composite winglet was test flown on board an Airbus A340 in 2003.

This is 300kgs lesser than a Boeing 737-800 without winglets.
The winglets contribute to a 4.7% fuel saving on the 738 in this particular case.
With this, it was seen as obvious that an A320 with winglets replacing its present wingtip fences, can save fuel as well.
Boeing deployed the winglets at the right time: when crude oil prices were on the rise.

Closely following these tests, in the July of 2006, Airbus began flight testing with “Elliptical Winglets” from Winglet Technology LLC ( Img 3 ). Airbus was working towards an “A320 Enhanced”, which was to include winglets, an aerodynamic tidy-up (to the engine pylons, surge tank ducts and upper belly fairing), engine improvements, weight savings and a new cabin, all aimed at reducing fuel burn by 4-5%, of which the winglets alone, as Airbus chief operating officer John Leahy had said, were expected to “get a couple of per cent”.

Technically, the challenges with installing a winglet are the higher bending and torque loads that the structure is subjected to. This requires structural strengthening. Of the 27 ribs that make up either wing of an A320, the 19 outboard ribs need strengthening. The centre wing box will also be strengthened with necessary changes to take care of both A320 equipped with Sharklets and the A320 NEO alike.

As a result of this weight neutralisation, an aircraft which is Sharklet ready end 2012 onward, but fitted with the conventional wingtip fences will not differ in fuel burn and performance from an A320 delivered in 2010. Sharklets are standard on all A320 NEOs that will be produced 2015 onward. To handle the new engines and the added maximum takeoff weight, additional inboard rib and spar reinforcements will be incorporated when the A320neo goes into production.

The greatest savings will be on long routes. Indigo’s Mumbai-Singapore is 2180NM, with an average trip fuel of around 13100 kgs. This will translate to a conservative estimated saving of around 400 kgs per flight and 292,000 kgs per aircraft per year. Considering the cost of fuel at Mumbai (S$1520.5/T) and Singapore (S$993.36/T) as of end December 2011, this translates to a saving of around S$367,000 per aircraft per year, on just one sector.

Projected savings on a single A320.
Fuel Prices as of Dec 25th, 2011.
Assumption: 1% on short sectors and 3% on the longer sectors (conservative).
The price will for the winglet will be similar to the forward fit, of around US$950,000, although the retrofit kit could add to the cost.
John Leahy (Chief Operating Officer, Customers, Airbus) however feels that the cost differential may be minimal.

Where runway performance is not limiting, operators could profit from a reduction in average takeoff thrust with consequent savings in engine maintenance costs by around two per cent.
Sharklets provide better takeoff performance and rate-of-climb, higher optimum altitude, higher residual aircraft value and greater safety margins in the event of an engine failure This innovation ensures that airlines can afford to compete with the lowest airfares in an increasingly competitive market.

How many Airbus A321 have crashed?

Hull-losses:	9
Hull-loss accidents:	5	with a total of 152 fatalities
Criminal occurences (hull-losses, excl. hijackings):	2	with a total of 225 fatalities
Hijackings:	6	with a total of 0 fatalities
Survival rate:	0.0%	of all occupants survived fatal accidents

How many crashes has A321 had?

Airbus A320 safety record in spotlight after Russia plane crash The has focused attention on the safety record of the plane involved. The Airbus A321 had just taken off from the Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, on its way to St Petersburg,, a route it covered regularly.

The plane is one of the A320 fleet, which includes the A318 and A319.
A jet from the A320 family, of which there are about 6,200, takes off or lands every 2.5 seconds somewhere in the world The A321 is the largest member of the A320 family.
The company says the aircraft “offers airline customers the best seat-mile costs of any single-aisle aircraft and seating capacities comparable to that of a widebody jetliner”.

The plane first started flying in 1993 and went into commercial operation the following year. More than 900 have been made. The two-engine jet can carry up to 220 passengers and is capable of flying up to 3,000 nautical miles while carrying a maximum passenger payload.

“Like each member in Airbus’ A320 family of jetliners, the A321 offers the lowest fuel burn, emissions and noise footprint in its class,” says. The last high-profile incident involving an A320 jet was in March, when Germanwings flight 4U9525 crashed in the French Alps with the loss of 150 passengers and crew.

In this case the, Andreas Lubitz. The previous November a Lufthansa A321 plane had lost altitude over Spain. The Aviation Safety Network says there have been 16 serious incidents involving the A321 since 1996, only one of which was fatal. In 2010 an Airblue A321 with 152 passengers crashed in Islamabad.

AeroInside, which gathers data on aviation incidents and accidents,, most involving relatively minor technical issues. In September, a Thomas Cook Airbus A321-200 flying from Manchester to Izmir in Turkey reported a hydraulic problem and returned to Manchester where it landed safely. The same month two fires were detected in the toilet of a Monarch Airlines Airbus A321-200, flying from Birmingham to Sharm el-Sheikh.

In both cases the crew extinguished the fires and the flight continued. : Airbus A320 safety record in spotlight after Russia plane crash

Is A321 better than A320?

Capacity vs. range – The above specifications highlight the differences between the two models. We can see that while the A320 carries fewer passengers than the A321, it does have a more extended range (although it is beaten by the smaller A319). The A320neo, however, ends up far behind the bigger A321neo with its larger capacity and greater range.

The latter is, unsurprisingly, especially true for the A321LR, which will hold the crown for the longest A320 family flights until the entry into service of the A321XLR. Airbus’ latest and much-anticipated derivative of the A320 family was initially planned to begin flying this year. However, the process has hit a few snags as regulators worry about fire safety regarding the additional fuel tanks, and entry into service is now projected for 2024.

Perhaps it should come as no shock that, according to the numbers, the A321neo is the ‘best’ aircraft in the Airbus A320 family. Furthermore, the A321neo has demonstrated close to 30% improvement in fuel burn compared to its older sibling. This is beneficial to airlines and the end consumer but also a boon for the environment. What Are Sharklets On American Airlines The A321XLR will blow previous narrowbody ranges out of the water. Photo: Airbus Following the positive feedback of the series, Airbus launched the A321XLR in 2019 to complement its beloved A321neo series. The company stated that the aircraft was the next evolutionary step and based on the response to market needs for an even greater narrowbody range, offering more agility for point-to-point operations.

With its unprecedented range, this Airbus narrowbody could easily fly routes such as Montreal, Canada, to Split, Croatia. When introduced, the XLR will provide an unprecedented range of up to 4,700 NM. This figure is 15% greater than the A321LR and with the same fuel efficiency. Or, at least, this is the intention.

Concerns are that Airbus might not get the fuel tanks approved by regulators, forcing the manufacturer to reduce the jet’s range and robbing it of its greatest selling point. But things are far from that bad yet. As for the older CEO aircraft, if you want range, you’d go with the A319. What Are Sharklets On American Airlines The neo aircraft have significantly greater range than their predecessors. Photo: Vincenzo Pace | Simple Flying.