A320NEO Plus

The shift to focus on the systems may also be accompanied by further enhancements to the aircraft's aerodynamics.

Beochien a écrit:On l'a vu il y a longtemps, c'est exprimé en pouces je crois, dans les 21 pouces, O,53-54 M, ne pas confondre "Frames" avec Sections pré assemblées (Groupe de "Frames")

Frequent Traveller a écrit:Les anciens frames sont de 21" chacun, ça vaut por la série A320.
Les nouveaux frames sont de 25" chacun, ça vaut pour la série A350 ...

Plus on allonge les pièces Lego de base, moins lourd pèse la structure assemblée ... à condition toutefois de résister aux contraintes, mais les matériaux évoluent dans le bon sens, d'où l'accroissement rendu possible de 21" à 25" soit + 19 % d'espacement : moins de rivets, moins de travail, moins de poids ... tout va dans la bonne direction, à condition de tenir les contraintes ...

Plus vs NMA
Suspension or postponement of the A321Plus, which is intended to be a response to the Boeing NMA or 797, at first glance could be a seriously disadvantageous move. The entry into service target for the A321Plus was 2022, two or three years ahead of the NMA’s late 2024 or 2025.
Narrowing this advantage narrows the ability of Airbus to potentially capture orders in a preemptive move to challenge the smaller NMA, the NMA-6X (797-6) 220-passenger, 5,000nm design.
LNC’s economic analysis indicates the A321Plus and the 797-6 will have about the same economics. The A321Plus should have a capital cost advantage of $10m-$20m, however.
Program launch of the A321Plus with a two-three EIS advantage would make an already-challenging business case for the NMA more difficult.
With a narrower or concurrent EIS to the NMA, Boeing’s opportunity to sell the 797-6 along with the larger, 270-passenger 4,500nm range 797-7 will be easier to make inroads into Airbus customers.
However, EIS for the NMA is anything but certain. Although Boeing continues to vow EIS will be 2024-25, market intelligence insists Boeing salesmen and supply chain officials also have said 2027 could be the EIS. The driving factor is engine availability, and all the engine OEMs have difficulty with their products. Taking on another new engine program on the timeline required for the 2024-25 EIS simply may not work.
In this case, any Airbus delay in launching the A321Plus may prove neutral. Still, if Airbus could meet a 2022 EIS and the NMA slipped to 2027, the advantage to Airbus is obvious.

In an effort to pre-empt that move, Airbus had been looking at stretching the A320neo and A321neo to add seats from 2022, two years before the earliest date for Boeing’s proposed jet.
Suppliers say this A320neo-plus would also save fuel through better aerodynamics and that the cockpit could get a facelift.