Qantas has just revealed some additional details about its upcoming Airbus A321XLRs, which the airline will soon start taking delivery of. The airline isn’t using this jet in the way that you’d expect, and we’ve now learned exactly what the interiors will be like. This is part of the carrier’s overall fleet renewal strategy, as the oneworld airline also takes delivery of Airbus A220-300s and Airbus A350-1000s.
In this post:
Qantas has 28 Airbus A321XLRs on order
In 2019, Qantas Group placed an order for the Airbus A321XLR, which is the longest range and largest version of the Airbus A320 family. This aircraft is the same size as all other A321s, but with additional range, as this is an evolution of the A321ceo (and A321neo, and A321LR).
These A321XLRs have been ordered for both Qantas and Jetstar, and the allocation between the two subsidiaries has changed over time. Initially the plan was for at least 20 of those planes to go to Qantas, but that number has now been upped to at least 28 aircraft.
The catch is that since this is a brand new jet, it’s facing some delivery delays. While Qantas first expected to take delivery of the A321XLR in late 2024, that timeline has now been pushed back to April 2025.
Here’s how Qantas CEO Vanessa Hudson describes this order:
“Qantas will be one of the first airlines in the world to operate the A321XLR and ahead of the arrival of our first aircraft next year, we’ve started pilot training and finalised the details of the customer experience.”
“Nearly half of all the customers Qantas carries each year travel on our 737 fleet so the A321XLR aircraft that we’ve ordered to replace them will be incredibly important for our future.”
“The A321XLR is a fantastic aircraft to be part of our next generation fleet, and its range and versatility will give us to opportunity to explore more non-stop routes and operate them cost effectively.”
Qantas A321XLR cabin & seat details
The Airbus A321XLR has amazing range, and a vast majority of airlines taking delivery of the aircraft plan to use it for long haul flights, and are configuring it with flat beds… but not Qantas. Qantas A321XLRs will feature 197 seats, including 20 business class seats and 177 economy class seats.
Business class will consist of five rows of seats in a 2-2 configuration, and the experience will be comparable to what Qantas currently offers on domestic flights.
Economy class will consist of 30 rows of seats in a 3-3 configuration, once again similar to what you’ll find on Qantas’ other narrow body jets.
Throughout the plane there’s no seat back entertainment, and instead there’s streaming entertainment, plus personal device holders. Qantas also plans to offer fast and free Wi-Fi on its A321XLRs, which is something the airline is working toward on a larger scale. As far as charging goes, business class will have USB-A and USB-C outlets, while economy will only have USB-C outlets.
So this configuration will be much more similar to American’s A321neo layout than it is to JeBlue’s A321LR layout, for example.
Qantas Airbus A321XLRs will (oddly) replace Boeing 737-800s
Qantas’ primary motive with ordering Airbus A321XLRs is to use them to replace Boeing 737-800s, which are primarily used for domestic and short haul international flights. Admittedly these planes will only partially replace 737s, given that Qantas has 75 of those, while there are only 28 A321XLRs on order.
I’d largely consider that to be good news, in the sense that I think the A320 is more comfortable than the 737. Furthermore, Qantas 737s have 12 business class seats, so the significant increase to 20 business class seats will be good for upgrades and pricing.
Personally, I can’t really make sense of Qantas’ A321XLR order. I get why Qantas is ordering from the A321neo family, since it offers the capacity the airline needs. But the airline is going for the extra long range version of the plane, which is capable of operating flights deep into Asia that the 737 couldn’t.
With that in mind:
- The A321XLR is more expensive than other versions of the plane, so typically airlines only order these planes if they specifically have the intention of using them for long haul routes
- Qantas states that these planes will primarily be used between major Australian cities (including between Sydney and Melbourne, etc.), and also states that the additional range of the plane “opens up a wider range of direct domestic and short haul international routes (e.g. South East Asia, Pacific islands)”
- It seems like anything beyond the range of the A321neo would really be pushing the type of route on which a full service carrier could justify operating a jet like this
- Qantas is reportedly considering installing flat beds on some of the later A321XLR deliveries, but no final decision has been made; even then, you’d think the airline would’ve split the order between the A321neo and A321XLR
I’m not claiming this is a bad decision, but rather am just stating that it’s surprising. We’ve seen a lot of airlines order A321XLRs, but Qantas is one of the only airlines to specifically state that these planes will largely be used to operate hour-long flights between major markets.
I’m not sure what the point is of a full service airline having 197-seat extra long range planes in a regional, non-premium configuration?
Bottom line
Qantas plans to add 28 Airbus A321XLRs to its fleet, with the first plane expected to be delivery as of April 2025. While the A321XLR is a jet with incredible range, Qantas intends to use this aircraft primarily for short haul flights, and the plane will be configured accordingly.
Qantas will have 197 seats on its A321XLRs, including 20 business class seats and 177 economy seats. I’m not sure I fully understand Qantas’ A321XLR strategy, so I’m curious to see how this all plays out…
What do you make of Qantas’ Airbus A321XLR plans?
I think Qantas run the numbers well and they did their homework, same thing with JetStar, if they can use this plane and take advantage of the range and fuel tanks to carry more cargo, it's very intelligent, I don't think they needed this plane to open new long thin routes from secondary australian cities, they don't have a history of being adventurous from secondary markets, if they want to fly Asia they can easily...
I think Qantas run the numbers well and they did their homework, same thing with JetStar, if they can use this plane and take advantage of the range and fuel tanks to carry more cargo, it's very intelligent, I don't think they needed this plane to open new long thin routes from secondary australian cities, they don't have a history of being adventurous from secondary markets, if they want to fly Asia they can easily send an A330 or 787. Let's not also forget the geographical position of Australia, it's not the Americas or Europe, no need to deploy a premium heavy LR/XLR the same way other airlines do, I don't understand the pearl clutching from some people.
What a poor seat config to have on a A321XLR. Qantas will regret this mistake.
You mean passenger would regret booking Qantas but ended up in Jetstar?
That's why people fly Virgin.
More than enough for the missions they will be deployed on. Nobody was expecting these planes to have business class suites or a premium heavy configuration. Qantas doesn't need to fly narrowbodies on long thin routes, it's not like they are American or SAS. To think that Qantas would want to open new international markets from other australian cities using these birds was kind of naive.
Hey Ben
You don’t get the flexibility of the A321XLR .
You can do Aus Transcontinental and then step off to Regional International (ie from Perth).
Ie Jetstar planned 4 A321LR’s from the new Perth Base (everything old is new again ) but now basing 5 A321LR’s out of Perth .
The economic’s of the A321XLR’s from Australia is very good and flexible to fill those routes which can’t justify another...
Hey Ben
You don’t get the flexibility of the A321XLR .
You can do Aus Transcontinental and then step off to Regional International (ie from Perth).
Ie Jetstar planned 4 A321LR’s from the new Perth Base (everything old is new again ) but now basing 5 A321LR’s out of Perth .
The economic’s of the A321XLR’s from Australia is very good and flexible to fill those routes which can’t justify another wide body flight etc .
Airbus are running rings around Boeing (a once proud Engineering Aviation Company) which has suffered under KPI generated Managers who know nothing about producing aircraft in a Safety Environment and within a highly regulated Aviation Industry !
I wonder when the writer of this article ran an airline or ordered planes to be in a position to question what an airline orders with regards to plans they have in private. Everyone is an authority without knowing the inside story or plan.
Same reason people talk about politics.
Everyone seems to be the command in chief running every cabinet positions managing every international relations.
But that's the problem in society today, you hypocrites do it all the time but never realized it. You complain only when others do it.
Qantas has always been smart and engineering focused when ordering new planes. The LR version has more fuel tanks (less cargo) whilst the XLR has space for two additional LD 45 containers. Replacing a 737-800, it gives Qantas more pax and cargo capacity without load restrictions (wind components can also way in strongly during certain periods of the year in trans-continental flight in Australia.
A good article regarding this: https://www.analyticflying.com/p/why-qantas-ordered-the-a321-xlr-without
Qantas has always been smart and engineering focused when ordering new planes. The LR version has more fuel tanks (less cargo) whilst the XLR has space for two additional LD 45 containers. Replacing a 737-800, it gives Qantas more pax and cargo capacity without load restrictions (wind components can also way in strongly during certain periods of the year in trans-continental flight in Australia.
A good article regarding this: https://www.analyticflying.com/p/why-qantas-ordered-the-a321-xlr-without
You haven't read the comments?
Same link posted twice.
Which by the ways is also misleading.
It's comparing LR and XLR and not the 321.
While QF current 737-800 missions can be flown just fine with a normal 321neo.
This is absolute rubbish. ZEPHYR is running around multiple sites gaslighting and misrepresenting the article with made-up data and entirely missing the point. The most obvious absurdity in his flight planning estimates is that he keeps stating range in distance rather than time.
Qantas are seeking a single aircraft that can cover do several things at once:
1) It needs to replace the B738 but provide more capacity. Sydney and Melbourne's slot constraints mean...
This is absolute rubbish. ZEPHYR is running around multiple sites gaslighting and misrepresenting the article with made-up data and entirely missing the point. The most obvious absurdity in his flight planning estimates is that he keeps stating range in distance rather than time.
Qantas are seeking a single aircraft that can cover do several things at once:
1) It needs to replace the B738 but provide more capacity. Sydney and Melbourne's slot constraints mean they need something bigger. Enter the A321neo.
2) They need an aircraft that can do Brisbane/Melbourne/Sydney/Canberra/Gold Coast to Perth. On the westbound legs with unfavourable winds they A321neo standard model simply cannot carry the fuel. This is before typical constraints on the route including needing hold fuel, EDTO limitations when certain airports are not available in the evenings, etc. ZEPHYR is under the impression that just because it only needs 16t of block fuel that it'll be okay on Sydney to Perth. Once you add contingency, alternate, minimum arrival fuel, you're already over it's maximum capacity, nevermind hold fuel which is typically required. Brisbane is even longer! There is zero chance that a standard neo can make the trip. It's not unlikely, it's zero.
3) These aren't the only affected routes. Several routes to Pacific Islands, Bali, and occasionally some NZ routes won't be possible with the A321neo. They would be with the smaller B738 or A320, but not on the A321neo. In total, we're looking at anywhere from 20 to 30 sectors per day. Likely more in the future as they look to reduce use of A330s on domestic runs.
3) That means that they need the LR, however the LR gives up a lot of volumetric space to carry the fuel. Qantas know this since their subsidiary Jetstar has 20 of them already! Qantas have chosen the XLR because that volumetric cargo space is important to them. However, he's spent days misinterpreting the article to argue that it's incorrect since it suggests that it could carry 14t of cargo when in fact it explicitly states that it can't and that the volumetric space is the fixed constraint. In actual fact, we're looking at 4.5t which is less than he actually says it it. Doesn't matter if you can like 6t when the containers cannot carry more than 4.5t! That might seem insignificant, but they've got the business for this.
The nuance is that Qantas insist on having the same aircraft cover multiple roles. So instead of splitting standard neos and XLRs, they want just the XLR. The reason being is that their utilisation model needs to use the same aircraft on shorter runs as well as the the east-west coast flights. Many of these flights run as red-eyes on the eastbound sector, boosting utilisation. This is critical for them, hence the insistence on the single fleet.
The A321XLR can't carry more volumetric cargo compared to the A321NEO. It can definitely carry more Cargo than the A321LR but not the A321NEO.
The A321NEO is the basic form of the aircraft which has no ACT or just 1 ACT, so it has more cargo space than the A321XLR.
I went to the link you posted and read the total garbage written by the Author, this was my reply to him, reposting it here as I know you won't go back there to check and continue to spread fake information.
"You most definitely haven't heard about Maximum Zero Fuel Weight.
That there's still allowance in the MTOW doesn't mean it's all for cargo.
The highest certified MZFW for the A321NEO family is 75.6t.
...
I went to the link you posted and read the total garbage written by the Author, this was my reply to him, reposting it here as I know you won't go back there to check and continue to spread fake information.
"You most definitely haven't heard about Maximum Zero Fuel Weight.
That there's still allowance in the MTOW doesn't mean it's all for cargo.
The highest certified MZFW for the A321NEO family is 75.6t.
Using this and your hypothetical passenger weight and fuel weight,
The A321NEO true cargo will be 6.6t
The A321LR and A321XLR will be 5.6t each.
The MZFW is included in any plane certification for a reason, it's not negligible.
Any further available weight is there to take in more fuel.
Complying with the MZFW will also help you get down to or below the MLW upon reaching your destination. The highest certified MLW of the A321NEO family is 79.2t.
If you carry the full 14t cargo you specified for the A321XLR, you will have a landing weight of about 89t, 10t higher than limit. Your landing weight for the A321NEO will be 88t, 9t higher than limit.
Note that the A321LR, A321XLR will burn between 0.2-0.7t more fuel if flying the Sydney to Perth at MTOW.
Maybe you should delete this comment rather than intentionally misrepresenting the article. I've corrected your misrepresentations elsewhere yet you continue to post them.
Elsewhere you made up a flight plan that had a standard A321neo flying from Sydney to Bali because you have no idea about fuel planning. The trip fuel required would be 5-6t more than the aircraft can physically hold in its tanks under Qantas's SOP. Contrary to what you're trying to convince...
Maybe you should delete this comment rather than intentionally misrepresenting the article. I've corrected your misrepresentations elsewhere yet you continue to post them.
Elsewhere you made up a flight plan that had a standard A321neo flying from Sydney to Bali because you have no idea about fuel planning. The trip fuel required would be 5-6t more than the aircraft can physically hold in its tanks under Qantas's SOP. Contrary to what you're trying to convince people, the A321neo ain't making >5 hour trips under Qantas's SOPs. It's not making >5.5 hour trips anywhere. The LR will easily - but Qantas don't want the LR!
Either you're out of your depth or you're somehow trying to gaslight to cover that you're out of your depth!
Any airline that orders the the LR & XLR are stupid.
Please kindly explain why!
Consider the person who posted.
Anything except the A350-1000 is stupid.
Or specifically mocking the person who thinks any airline that's hub isn't in ATL is stupid, I mean profitable or premium.
I wouldn't say it's stupid, but it would take some convincing. But there are plenty of reasons to order both. For one, you could/can/will get a whole lot of LRs earlier than XLRs! And depending on the missions you wanted to use them for it could turn out to be quite a different use case!
For one, Jetstar will ultimately get both. They're have probably gone for all XLR, but their first LR will end...
I wouldn't say it's stupid, but it would take some convincing. But there are plenty of reasons to order both. For one, you could/can/will get a whole lot of LRs earlier than XLRs! And depending on the missions you wanted to use them for it could turn out to be quite a different use case!
For one, Jetstar will ultimately get both. They're have probably gone for all XLR, but their first LR will end up having preceded their first XLR by about 5 years.
And by then if they don't need/want the LR for range anymore they'll simply remove the ACTs, maybe derate the MTOW and bob's your uncle, you have a bog standard neo with a little extra unused plumbing!
Given Qantas desperate shortage of widebody long-haul aircraft, you would think the XLR would be ideal for freeing up A330/787s on some secondary Asian routes like Jakarta, Manila and Bangkok as well as potentially opening up other destinations at a low risk like Kuala Lumpur and Hanoi
The widebody shortage is a little over stated. They had a crunch which has subsided a little, but they're under less pressure due to US demand being very weak. But secondly, they have shifted a lot of lower yield Asian traffic onto Jetstar who have expanded massively as the A321LRs took over Bali allowing B787s to be redeployed. Group long haul capacity is up significantly.
Seems an odd choice to be hauling around an extra fuel tank unnecessarily for what, 85% of their flights? Unless we see a lot of intl flights ex Canberra, Adelaide, Perth where widebodies may be difficult to fill (if they had any extra widebody capacity) I cannot understand why they didn't just go with the -neo. Did they offset the fuel tank weight of the XLR by axing the IFE screens?
It's all about freight. See AnishReddi's comment below.
I'd also add that Perth widebody flights aren't difficult to fill. The amount of money in the Perth metro area is staggering. It's one of the only outstations to which Qatar airways operates the A380, for example.
Hey Ben, greta aritcle by Analytical Flying about why they chose the XLRs. It’s mostly due to payload and the fact that they can carry more cargo then either the 321neos or 321LRs.
https://www.analyticflying.com/p/why-qantas-ordered-the-a321-xlr-without
Excellent read. Thanks for posting!
The A321XLR can't carry more volumetric cargo compared to the A321NEO. It can definitely carry more Cargo than the A321LR but not the A321NEO.
The A321NEO is the basic form of the aircraft which has no ACT or just 1 ACT, so it has more cargo space than the A321XLR.
But you're missing the point for the 465612th time ...
It's a binary choice for Qantas between the standard A321neo and A321XLR, not the LR. The standard A321neo can't fulfil their mission scope. On the other hand, the A321XLR can fullfill their mission scope in terms of range while providing more cargo space than the LR. They're not comparing the XLR's cargo space to the standard A321neo since it's moot since it can't fullfill missions...
But you're missing the point for the 465612th time ...
It's a binary choice for Qantas between the standard A321neo and A321XLR, not the LR. The standard A321neo can't fulfil their mission scope. On the other hand, the A321XLR can fullfill their mission scope in terms of range while providing more cargo space than the LR. They're not comparing the XLR's cargo space to the standard A321neo since it's moot since it can't fullfill missions from the east to west coast Australia (plus Pacific Islands, Bali and some NZ).