In the coming months, United Airlines will be putting its latest new narrow body aircraft into service. I wanted to go over the details, especially as the first routes have now been revealed.
In this post:
United has 70 Airbus A321neos on order
United Airlines has a total of 70 Airbus A321neo aircraft on order, which will start to be delivered as of late 2023. The A321neo is an updated version of the A321, featuring better fuel economy and range. You can expect that United will use this plane primarily on domestic and short haul international flights, which are otherwise served by Airbus A320 or Boeing 737 family aircraft.
The A321neos are only one part of United’s domestic fleet renewal strategy, as the airline also has a total of roughly 550 Boeing 737 MAX family aircraft on order, including the MAX 8, MAX 9, and MAX 10.
These A321neos on order are separate from the 50 A321XLRs that United has on order, as this is an even longer range aircraft that will be used primarily for long haul flights. You can expect A321XLRs to feature business class and premium economy.
Details of United’s Airbus A321neo layout & seats
United Airlines’ A321neos are expected to feature 200 seats, including:
- 20 first class seats
- 57 extra legroom economy seats
- 123 economy seats
The bad news is that United is going for a really dense layout with these planes, and is really cramming in the seats. As a point of comparison, American’s A321neos feature 196, while Delta’s A321neos feature 194 seats.
The good news is that A321neos will feature United’s newest cabin concepts, as the airline is in the process of modernizing its narrow body fleet. For example, A321neos will feature the carrier’s all-new first class seats, featuring wireless charging and privacy dividers. On top of that, you can expect personal televisions, power ports, bluetooth audio, and high speed Wi-Fi, for all passengers on the plane.
United’s first Airbus A321neo routes
As reported by @IshrionA, United Airlines has just put its first Airbus A321neo routes on sale. United will initially base its A321neos in Chicago, and currently the inaugural flight is planned for December 14, 2023, to Phoenix (PHX).
While I imagine that timeline remains subject to change, it’s clear that this is currently the intent, since the inaugural flight has had its flight number changed to UA321, a clear reflection of the special occasion.
After Phoenix, United will fly its A321neos to Fort Lauderdale (FLL), Orlando (MCO), Fort Myers (RSW), and Las Vegas (LAX).
When you go to book your ticket on united.com, you’ll see the new aircraft type reflected on eligible routes.
Bottom line
United Airlines has 70 Airbus A321neos on order, which are expected to join the carrier’s fleet as of late 2023. United has now scheduled the inaugural flight for December 14, with the special flight number UA321.
The A321neos will be in a dense layout, though will at least have modern cabins, with United’s newest first class seats, plus personal entertainment and high-speed Wi-Fi throughout the aircraft.
What do you make of United’s Airbus A321neos?
200 seats is not bad at all,I weigh 320
and i could fit on Frontier's 240 seat A321NEO
Route selection for this plane is going to be interesting in that UA is getting a whole new aircraft type with a plane that is just a liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitle bit bigger and has just a liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitle bit more range than the 737 MAX 10.
I assumed UA would use the A321ceo on the p.s. routes and use that extra capacity for better premium service.
There isn't anything remarkable about the initial routes. They probably have...
Route selection for this plane is going to be interesting in that UA is getting a whole new aircraft type with a plane that is just a liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitle bit bigger and has just a liiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitle bit more range than the 737 MAX 10.
I assumed UA would use the A321ceo on the p.s. routes and use that extra capacity for better premium service.
There isn't anything remarkable about the initial routes. They probably have more to do with getting the planes back to ORD every night for maintenance and familiarization by the mechanics.
Unfortunately, United's first class domestic catering is disappointing.
I hope United will consider bringing back the pre-merger Continental menus to domestic first class (and international business class).
Catering is their weakest game....They should now perfect on that
that's because they outsourced it when their inhouse catering tried to unionize.
Eh. It looks fine I guess. But United is way late to the A321 game, and late still on the NEO. Their competitors have been operating these jets for years already…
It’s giving “come try a jet you’ve probably already flown on, but with the subpar food and service you’ve come to expect from United!”
Hard to really be excited…
How in the world did they get 200 seats on a neo with that much "extra" legroom
I'm glad to read articles/news of UA purchasing new equipment and *trying* to offer a better product. The first class seat looks great. Nice, clean aircraft that the passengers and crew can be proud of and enjoy are essential.
I just wish they would invest some money in Domestic F & Polaris meals. I can get a better meal from a vending machine (Farmer's Fridge) than any of the rubbish UA serves currently...
just think how many A321s UA could have Scott Kirby wasn't convinced that getting the best price meant paying AA a "commission" for undercutting AA.
Of maybe it really is true which is why Delta was able to negotiate a lower price by negotiating an engine overhaul deal on its Pratt and Whitney Geared Turbofan engines so that DL now will have the lowest ownership and maintenance costs on its A321NEOs.
And since UA is...
just think how many A321s UA could have Scott Kirby wasn't convinced that getting the best price meant paying AA a "commission" for undercutting AA.
Of maybe it really is true which is why Delta was able to negotiate a lower price by negotiating an engine overhaul deal on its Pratt and Whitney Geared Turbofan engines so that DL now will have the lowest ownership and maintenance costs on its A321NEOs.
And since UA is buying GTFs for its A321NEOs in part as compensation from P&W for the costs of grounding its ancient 777As, UA (along w/ B6 and NK) will now be paying DL to overhaul its A321NEOs.
The circle of life is so fun to watch
You really need psychiatric help
because I accurately noted that Scott Kirby said for years after coming to United that UA could not order the A321 because AA had managed to negotiate the best price and if UA ordered it and undercut AA's price, UA would have to pay a fee to AA?
I have no idea if that is true but DL obviously managed to order hundreds of A321s and A321NEOs and got the engine maintenance contract from...
because I accurately noted that Scott Kirby said for years after coming to United that UA could not order the A321 because AA had managed to negotiate the best price and if UA ordered it and undercut AA's price, UA would have to pay a fee to AA?
I have no idea if that is true but DL obviously managed to order hundreds of A321s and A321NEOs and got the engine maintenance contract from Pratt and Whitney for the GTF.
UA chose the GTF in part because of compensation from Pratt for grounding the engines on the 777A.
So, either UA paid AA the fee, Scott Kirby was wrong, the agreement between AA and Airbus expired, but UA will end up paying DL directly or indirectly for engine overhauls on its A321NEO fleet?
No, I can simply connect dots that others cannot.
those that don't understand business or aviation business and trash someone that does understand things are the ones that need help
Tim,
once again you show you don't understand legal issues. You look down on people who call you out, but never accept when you are wrong.
The contract between AA and Airbus had a MFN (most-favored nation) clause. Airbus has to give AA the best price. If it doesn't (meaning it gives UA a better price) then Airbus owes AA the difference between what AA paid and what UA paid. But UA is not a...
Tim,
once again you show you don't understand legal issues. You look down on people who call you out, but never accept when you are wrong.
The contract between AA and Airbus had a MFN (most-favored nation) clause. Airbus has to give AA the best price. If it doesn't (meaning it gives UA a better price) then Airbus owes AA the difference between what AA paid and what UA paid. But UA is not a party to the contract and there is no legal basis under which UA would pay AA anything.
Kirby's claim is that Airbus would not offer UA "competitive" pricing because it did not want to have to pay AA the MFN penalty. MFN clauses generally have expiration dates - as you point out that "deal" probably expired. But the reality is that UA could have ordered the A321s at any point. DL did - so either Airbus paid a MFN penalty to AA, or more likely, DL paid the same as AA did.
Make sure the dots you are connecting are actually dots.
If you read what I wrote, I specifically noted multiple scenarios including that the MFN (although I didn't use that term) expired.
DL did buy A321s so they obviously didn't feel a need at the least to undercut AA's price but actually will because of its engine maintenance contracts that will actually mean that other airlines will subsidize DL.
So, once again, you argue trying to prove me wrong when I specifically noted...
If you read what I wrote, I specifically noted multiple scenarios including that the MFN (although I didn't use that term) expired.
DL did buy A321s so they obviously didn't feel a need at the least to undercut AA's price but actually will because of its engine maintenance contracts that will actually mean that other airlines will subsidize DL.
So, once again, you argue trying to prove me wrong when I specifically noted exactly what you said happened as one of the possibilities. Since neither UA or Airbus said the AA MFN expired, I cannot know why UA finally signed.
And again, DL didn't feel a need to undercut AA's pricing and will have hundreds of A321s in service by the time UA gets its first.
Tim, you do have a fascination with Delta that is a bit unhealthy. Why do you need to post about Delta on a post that was entirely about United and the A321?
I point out again that UA would never had to pay AA anything. Again, you fail to address issues on which you are wrong. You say you noted "exactly" what the possibilities were - but no way, ever, was UA going to pay AA a dime. You were wrong.
multiple other people have noted that UA is quite a bit late to the game.
As a student of airline history, I accurately noted that UA said that it could not sign an agreement w/ Airbus to undercut AA on A321 pricing so they did not order the A321.
I accurately noted that in the time UA made excuses about not ordering the A321, DL did, will have hundreds of A321s in service...
multiple other people have noted that UA is quite a bit late to the game.
As a student of airline history, I accurately noted that UA said that it could not sign an agreement w/ Airbus to undercut AA on A321 pricing so they did not order the A321.
I accurately noted that in the time UA made excuses about not ordering the A321, DL did, will have hundreds of A321s in service and more on order so obviously DL was able to overcome whatever obstacle UA found.
Add in that DL got the Pratt engine contract for the GTF and every airline that orders GTFs will essentially be partially subsidizing DL's A321NEO fleet - DL won't be the only GTF overhaul shop but they will operate enough capacity to do more than their own overhauls - and Pratt is guaranteeing DL a certain amount of volume above DL's own needs.
Other people accurately noted that UA is late to the game, I explained why, others made minor corrections to what I wrote, and then you and others get upset when I accurately point out that DL outstrategized UA in yet another area of business.
There is no unhealthy obsession w/ anything. There is a willingness to say things that you and others simply don't want to hear because it highlights that UA isn't really as far forward as you, other fans and their execs think and position themselves
I wouldn't be bragging about those P&W engines just yet.
nobody is bragging about them.
But the choice was for United to pass on any compensation credits from P&W for the 777A issues or to order their A321NEOs with the GTF.
The new engines don't have the problems anyway.
The issue is that P&W has to divert a certain amount of production to fixing older engines which could lead to delays.
And Delta will get a certain amount of revenue for...
nobody is bragging about them.
But the choice was for United to pass on any compensation credits from P&W for the 777A issues or to order their A321NEOs with the GTF.
The new engines don't have the problems anyway.
The issue is that P&W has to divert a certain amount of production to fixing older engines which could lead to delays.
And Delta will get a certain amount of revenue for fixing early GTF engines including from Spirit.
And, in case you missed it, the FAA is proposing that GE engines including the LEAP be urgently inspected.
Not one of the 3 engine makers is delivering flawless products. New engine technology is pushing metals and processes beyond what they have ever done before.
I am so excited for these to arrive! Honestly, I think United should have ordered 100 A321 Neo's rather than 70, and should have ordered 30 A321 XLR's (20 less than ordered)
Once United gets its hands on these, they are really going to start seeing the economic benefit of them. I think United should really focus these planes on Chicago and Newark.
Out of Newark, United is so heavily utilizing their 737-800's...
I am so excited for these to arrive! Honestly, I think United should have ordered 100 A321 Neo's rather than 70, and should have ordered 30 A321 XLR's (20 less than ordered)
Once United gets its hands on these, they are really going to start seeing the economic benefit of them. I think United should really focus these planes on Chicago and Newark.
Out of Newark, United is so heavily utilizing their 737-800's which only seat 166 on their most popular routes (Florida) while Delta almost exclusively uses the 321 out of LGA on these same routes. If the United can get the 321 neo on these routes, they will increase the gauge significantly without adding congestion to the runway and improve yield. We are talking about potentially 20-30 more seats per plane, this order has huge implications for United!
If United really wanted more space on those 800 flights they would just give them a 900
57 vs 42 extra legroom seats, 35% more than Delta vapor ware
UNITED rising
United has more premium seats on most of its planes than Delta and yet Delta generates more revenue including only passenger revenue than United. Passengers obviously consider Delta to be superior.
DL has fortress hubs that allows them to charge higher domestic fares. The substandard hubs don’t work as well for international flights, but domestically they charge more.
History has proven multiple times that people don’t pay a premium for a minor, if any, difference in product.
DL’s revenue premium also comes from the simple fact of having more passengers and more planes. The difference is shrinking as UA takes on hundreds of new...
DL has fortress hubs that allows them to charge higher domestic fares. The substandard hubs don’t work as well for international flights, but domestically they charge more.
History has proven multiple times that people don’t pay a premium for a minor, if any, difference in product.
DL’s revenue premium also comes from the simple fact of having more passengers and more planes. The difference is shrinking as UA takes on hundreds of new planes, and then will expand again, this time with UA in the lead.
except Delta gets more revenue so the hubs clearly aren't substandard.
And Delta is the largest airline in NYC and LAX, which hardly seem like substandard cities
The myth of United growing faster is just to throw opiates to the masses.
Delta has as many aircraft on order and option as United when adjusted for the far fewer regional jets which Delta has in addition to Delta's younger fleet.
UA could use...
except Delta gets more revenue so the hubs clearly aren't substandard.
And Delta is the largest airline in NYC and LAX, which hardly seem like substandard cities
The myth of United growing faster is just to throw opiates to the masses.
Delta has as many aircraft on order and option as United when adjusted for the far fewer regional jets which Delta has in addition to Delta's younger fleet.
UA could use the entirety of its remaining 787s on order to replace 777s and still have a less fuel efficient widebody fleet than Delta.
And in case you want to throw out the 767 argument, Delta's 767 fleet is only about 10 aircraft larger than UA's and Delta is reportedly using a chunk of its new A321NEOs and A330-900s due for delivery in the next year to start replacing its 767-300ER fleet - which will put DL and UA at almost identical numbers of 767s, or at least of the same vintage.
The US domestic airline industry was deregulated 45 years ago. Delta gained all of its hubs except for ATL either through mergers or organic internal growth in those 45 years.
United could have done the same which means, if you believe what you wrote, that Delta has outstrategized United.
And since DL and UA's own data provided to the DOT shows that Delta's international network has been more profitable, clearly UA's larger international size...
The US domestic airline industry was deregulated 45 years ago. Delta gained all of its hubs except for ATL either through mergers or organic internal growth in those 45 years.
United could have done the same which means, if you believe what you wrote, that Delta has outstrategized United.
And since DL and UA's own data provided to the DOT shows that Delta's international network has been more profitable, clearly UA's larger international size hasn't dropped to the bottom line.
Again
You need professional help
Your weird obsession with delta is a mental disorder
you do realize my reply is to the comment
"57 vs 42 extra legroom seats, 35% more than Delta vapor ware
UNITED rising"
what is with the instrument measuring contest from United execs themselves and with its fan club
I just happen to know the irrefutable facts and can counter them.
Start w/ telling United execs to lay off their incessant need to compare themselves to everyone else and just deliver the best results...
you do realize my reply is to the comment
"57 vs 42 extra legroom seats, 35% more than Delta vapor ware
UNITED rising"
what is with the instrument measuring contest from United execs themselves and with its fan club
I just happen to know the irrefutable facts and can counter them.
Start w/ telling United execs to lay off their incessant need to compare themselves to everyone else and just deliver the best results in every metric - not just how much carbon they spew around the globe.
I agree Jake. Also, UA has more capacity with aircraft and pilots. Delta shrinked too much during covid.
you don't get it.
DL is actually adding more capacity AND getting more revenue for it than UA or AA. You need only look at the last quarter's financial results to see it.
DL has more than replaced the capacity it retired and has more widebody aircraft due for delivery over the next 2 years than UA.
DL acquired a bunch of used 737s which are still being put in service and...
you don't get it.
DL is actually adding more capacity AND getting more revenue for it than UA or AA. You need only look at the last quarter's financial results to see it.
DL has more than replaced the capacity it retired and has more widebody aircraft due for delivery over the next 2 years than UA.
DL acquired a bunch of used 737s which are still being put in service and is reactivating 717s which is allowing DL to add more airplanes than United because of Boeing's delivery delays.
The point is that United has long made claims compared to other carriers that were relatively meaningless - such as first to fly to all 50 states (which lasted for months) and still doesn't achieve superiority in the real business metrics that matter such as revenue and profits.
I don't need help but you might ask UA execs and their finds why they feel a need to incessantly compare themselves to others and not achieve their goals
You all care way too much about corporations that do not care at all about you.
I don't "care" about companies - I do track their actions.
And I recognize that the decisions that happen in boardrooms and executive offices impact everything that people here "care" about including numbers and types of airplanes, routes, and products and services.
UA is the last of a number of US airlines to fly the A320NEO family in the US. Good on them for joining the crowd.
It will be more significant when...
I don't "care" about companies - I do track their actions.
And I recognize that the decisions that happen in boardrooms and executive offices impact everything that people here "care" about including numbers and types of airplanes, routes, and products and services.
UA is the last of a number of US airlines to fly the A320NEO family in the US. Good on them for joining the crowd.
It will be more significant when UA puts the 737MAX 10 into service and far less so when other airlines, including DL join the MAX10 bandwagon.
Row 23-26 D-E-F shows as economy plus but the seat map doesn’t look like here is any extra pitch.
All of these routes would have been (and perhaps some still are) operated by 757s in the past. While those would have had 24F, I believe the capacity and comfort overall may have been similar.
I flew an F9 A321 LAS-ORD a couple years ago - IIRC that plane was dense, with an all-Y 230 pax configuration. Still, even as a redeye that was fine and perfectly comfortable. No onboard amenities or service like UA has, though.
What does the A321NEO offer that the MAX family does not? I understand the mission profile for the XLR, but why a 70 airframe sub fleet against 550+ 737 fleet. Reminds me of the UA A319/A320 order back in the day.
could have to do with Pilot usage. Untied currently is retiring the aging 320 fleet. Would be very costly to retrain the Airbus captains.
It has commonality with the XLRs, and it’s not like there is MAX alternative to the XLRs. Also probably helped put a bit of piecing pressure on Boeing, by showing their willingness to buy NEOs rather than just XLRs, where Boeing can’t offer a alternative. Finally they offer a bit more capacity than the MAX-10s, good for replacing the 757s on domestic routes.
remember that uniteds 757 fleet is going to be retired by the end of the decade. they need a replacement for the longhaul narrowbody routes the 75 currently operates like ewr-edi and ewr-lim
They could also be looking for delivery slots that Boeing did not have for larger aircraft. And I would assume that the fleet acquisitions team at united was hedging their bets that the -10 could be delayed.
I'll believe it when I see it.