Qantas' New A321XLR

[Chrizztofa]

Let's take a more pragmatic view of this. The only thing absolutely worth conceding here is that the toilet ratio is worse for Economy passengers. That's it.

Is it actually worse for Y passengers? What are the effects - people wait longer, toilets are on average smellier, increase of risk of urinary diseases across people who regularly fly QF?

No one is honestly tracking all of this, e.g. the average wait time of a passenger in any type of aircraft. Maybe QF don't really want to do it either. But none of the accusers have honestly and practically laid out that this will lead to a drastically more uncomfortable toilet experience for all Y passengers (maybe all J passengers if you want to be strict, since they go from 12 pax to 1 toilet to 20 pax to 1 toilet). QF have certainly increased the risk of dissatisfaction - especially if and when these aircraft fly routes longer than about 2 hours - but I don't think anything but experience is going to tell whether it practically translates to a material discomfort or dissatisfaction. (Of course, those who realise this may decide to change their toilet habits to avoid using the aircraft toilet, which masks whether QF actually were OK or not in making this design decision).

Michael O'Leary at Ryanair once made a similar point when rumours were circulating that FR wanted to charge passengers for using toilets. His argument was that by charging, for use FR would change passenger behaviour so they would need one fewer toilet per flight and could put in more seats instead.

While the social media disquiet may dissipate once the aircraft is in regular service, the toilet queues on PER-SYD was mentioned in at least one published flight review, so it does seem to be out of the ordinary (by current standards) for regular flyers...and just adds to the perception of QF being 'cheap' while charging sky-high prices (at least with FR and JQ you expect a vaguely bad experience!)

 

[MEL_Traveller]

The other thing is, most people on social media won’t even know what type of plane they’re flying on! Ask them if they just got off a 737, a320 or a321 and i bet most would shrug and say ‘who cares’?

 

[elanshin]

The other thing is, most people on social media won’t even know what type of plane they’re flying on! Ask them if they just got off a 737, a320 or a321 and i bet most would shrug and say ‘who cares’?

Well they won't know by being on it and spotting the difference, but i suspect there's more than a few nervous people when the word Boeing MAX is brought up. It's probably also why theres very little mention of it from VA.

 

[moa999]

one of the configs mentioned up thread have the 3rd whY loo behind the J cabin

Makes sense for passenger circulation, particularly during meals.

But equally a negative for visibility of pax and exits in a safety scenario..
Plus whatever impact extra plumbing/ tanking has.

Overall it seems less favoured among the airlines ordering 321s versus an extra toilet at the back.

, as the airline has realised the error of the first iteration and is now going for the three at the back,

As above, the error being that these initial XLRs were destined for JQ and meant to be delivered in 2024, before

 

[RooFlyer]

But none of the accusers have honestly and practically laid out that this will lead to a drastically more uncomfortable toilet experience for all Y passengers

Who has been arguing about drastically more uncomfortable for ALL Y passengers? It will be drastically uncomfortable for pax who cant get into a loo in time, or for kids, and as a consequence, probably for those around them.

As above, the error being that these initial XLRs were destined for JQ and meant to be delivered in 2024, before

And as before - it doesn't matter. A person is a person even if flying a LCC.
__________

When some people posting here get to the stage of life when going to the toilet suddenly and urgently isn't a lifestyle choice, they may be more sympathetic to the 'more toilets were/are needed on these aircraft' arguments.

 

[moa999]

And as before - it doesn't matter. A person is a person even if flying a LCC.

But it does.. because JQ doesn't restrict who can use what toilet., so it's 232 Y config on the 321LRs works fine with 1 front and 2 back toilets. (77:1)

The higher ratio only occurs on airlines with premium cabins because they restrict (or at least try to restrict) the front toilet, in QFs case to 20J pax, which means the rear toilets are shared by a higher number of Y pax. 180Y.

 

[BM7500]

I was on the first flight of XLR last Thursday, not the PR flight to MEL, but the actual first commercial service to PER. Some observations;

I got a seat in row 7 (second row of Y) that has noticeably more legroom. I didn't pay any more for this seat, but going forward, an additional fee will be the norm. The legroom in the other standard seats looked just as cramped as that on a 737.

The larger overhead bins are a plus and will help with the boarding process. This is likely to be offset by the higher pax numbers though.

The general look of the interior is fresh, but nothing we haven't already seen in the BSI equipped 737's. The rate of airflow through the overhead nozzles seemed weak; I'm not sure if this is an FA adjustable setting, though, and the bigger windows are barely noticeable.

The aircraft is around 5db quieter than a similar seat on a 737, but this will depend on where you're sitting. I'd suggest that it would be reasonably quiet in the first few rows of J.

In terms of the seat, I was not impressed. Like the 737s, the seat cushion is reasonably high, meaning the armrests are basically unusable for a person of average height. I found myself slouching to one side and had a sore back by the time we reached PER. That extra 1cm of seat width, undiscernible. Having no seatback IFE was not a good call for aircraft operating the transcon routes. I understand why the decision was made from a cost/maintenance and weight perspective, but in real terms, this means that most ppl on the aircraft will end up streaming to their device, and this was evident with unusable wifi for big patches of the flight. Sending simple text messages or watching a short reel became impossible, let alone streaming a YouTube vid or similar. I didn't try the Qantas Entertainment app, but would guess that traffic on the wifi may be prioritised?

Then there is the Y lav situation. Much has been said about it already, but on this flight, we were left with our 'meal in a box' for well over an hour, before the rubbish was collected. It was at this point that everyone had the idea of going to the loo and there was a lineup for some time, stretching back about 5 rows or so. Interestingly, none of the Toilet Status signs were within my sightline, so i made my way past my seat neighbors only to discover the state of the lav lineup. In hindsight, transcon services with the XLR should have been held off until VH-OGD arrives (with its extra lav).

Overall, this is far from the 'gamechanger' aircraft that QF have been touting, and as others have said, many will not notice much of a difference from the 737 - and in some respects this is a step backwards from the pax perspective. This is the future of Qantas' short haul and I was unimpressed.

 

[ednnf]

This thread pretty much sums up the state of our RPT industry. When a brand new aircraft type enters service, the main talking point ends up being the bladder issue rather than whether it measures up against what other flag carriers are offering.

It’s just sad.

 

[jakeseven7]

I have a flight booked tomorrow! Didn’t even notice it had been subbed in as it’s an ancient booking, will try for an extra leg room now!

This thread pretty much sums up the state of our RPT industry.

Or the old loud AFF retirees

 

[anat0l]

From what I can see from the seat map, the A321 needs five cabin crew?

I think, as already highlighted, one of the other main concerns will be service. Seems the team is not quite up to speed (pun intended) on working the cabin, especially in Economy, but put that aside it's still a big ask, particularly on shorter flights, e.g. in the golden triangle.

I can see that service might just take up almost all of the time that the aircraft is in the air on shorter routes, so good luck to anyone trying to access the toilets - it's not going to be the lack of them that is the issue.

 

[levelnine]

the main talking point ends up being the bladder issue rather than whether it measures up against what other flag carriers are offering.

Isn't the bladder issue precisely a question of whether the aircraft measures up against what other carriers are offering?

 

[anat0l]

Isn't the bladder issue precisely a question of whether the aircraft measures up against what other carriers are offering?

If you believe that's the be all and end all of the comparison.

 

[levelnine]

If you believe that's the be all and end all of the comparison.

Well the broken wifi, lack of IFE and uncomfortable seats have also been discussed in this thread.

 

[K9DOG]

This thread pretty much sums up the state of our RPT industry. When a brand new aircraft type enters service, the main talking point ends up being the bladder issue rather than whether it measures up against what other flag carriers are offering.

It’s just sad.

True, but here’s something we need to ask ourselves have we as passengers, given Qantas too much tolerance? The lack of IFE, some argue it’s fine since everyone is streaming on their phones these days. But that doesn’t change the fact that other airlines continue to provide proper seatback entertainment as standard.

Then there’s the missing cabin divider which leaves premium passengers feeling like they’re on a bus ride rather than in a separate class. The inflight meals? Barely consumable. And the lavatories? Sorry missing one.

Some also say “Oh, but it’s for domestic use” The reality is, it doesn’t matter if the flight is 1.5 hours or 5. The measure should be whether the product stands up against what others are offering. Just look at Thai’s A321neo. And look at ours, then imagine on 9 news saying we now have groundbreaking new aircraft…

 

[Aeryn]

But that doesn’t change the fact that other airlines continue to provide proper seatback entertainment as standard.

Curious as Ive not seen seatback entertainment on domestic flights recently (as in last decade) within the USA or UK or South Korea by full service carriers either - which airlines routinely provide this on domestic flights?

Would I want to be on a single aisle plane long-haul, nope; but for anything domestic (or trans tasman or short flight like to NOU or NAN) i dont see this as a step down from the 737s, the bigger bins are better.