Jump to content

Photo

A321LR - Continuation


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1
puglife

puglife

    New Member

  • Member
  • 8 posts

User's Awards

     

I'm sure you're aware the AE community is wondering about the A321LR as it's called and I just wanted to know if there are any plans on adding it to the game.

Here's some specifications:

<a href="http://com.airbus-fe...ly/a321neo/</a>

 

https://leehamnews.c...-does-not-work/

 

 

 

And other references shown below:

 

bdqfcm.png

 

2hhp3b8.png

 

 

...Airbus stated the A321Lr would be 30% more efficient than the B757, with the data provided the fuel flow for the A321LR works out to 19,250 in comparison the A321NEO has a fuel flow of 19,400 therefore I think the A321LR should either have the same fuel flow (on average) or higher due to the extra 3 fuel tanks that will be added to the A321LR variant. 

 

 

 

 

 

Regards 

 

 

Daniel

 



#2
Stevphfeniey

Stevphfeniey

    Bad m*****f*****

  • Member
  • 4,193 posts
  • Website:http://stevphfeniey.tumblr.com/

In order to add aircraft the DCs need something called Thrust Specific Fuel Flow (basically it's how much fuel an aircraft consumes at certain points during the flight, typically during cruise). If you can find that data for the LEAPs and PW1000Gs on the 321LR, I'm sure they can add it.


please don't kill us we're just the aquabats

 

The Best Discord Server


#3
Shammy

Shammy

    AE Senior yet to be

  • Member
  • 71 posts

24,500 – 35,000 pounds thrust (at altitude)

 

The LEAP delivers a 15% improvement in fuel consumption, compared to today’s best CFM56 engines, and maintains the same level of dispatch reliability and life-cycle maintenance costs.

 

some extra info <https://www.cfmaeroe.../engines/leap/>


5_Member_Sig.png

 

2rxgvt2.png


#4
Stevphfeniey

Stevphfeniey

    Bad m*****f*****

  • Member
  • 4,193 posts
  • Website:http://stevphfeniey.tumblr.com/

24,500 – 35,000 pounds thrust (at altitude)

 

The LEAP delivers a 15% improvement in fuel consumption, compared to today’s best CFM56 engines, and maintains the same level of dispatch reliability and life-cycle maintenance costs.

 

some extra info <https://www.cfmaeroe.../engines/leap/>

 

Well 1. No, in fact fuel consumption savings on the LEAP-1Bs is possibly out of the range that any PIP can address. Something like 5% worse than what GE promised and only maybe being able to make up 3% of that. And related to that 2. Reliability on the LEAPs have been.... spotty at best since introduction. Not as bad as the PW1000s, but not good either.

 

Also I've seen the website that the DCs use to find TSFC figures for planes already in game, and it's literally just a spreadsheet some dude put together. Not a flashy website from the manufacturer.

 

Try again.


please don't kill us we're just the aquabats

 

The Best Discord Server


#5
dazwalsh

dazwalsh

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • 436 posts
Just throw it in with guestimated figures and correct it later with precise ones. We arent creating a simulator for nasa here its just some ageing game that has much bigger issues than some incorrect fuel burn figures

Isnt a 321LR just a few extra fuel tanks and slightly heavier 321NEO?

#6
polishdude

polishdude

    New Member

  • Member
  • 2 posts

Just throw it in with guestimated figures and correct it later with precise ones. We arent creating a simulator for nasa here its just some ageing game that has much bigger issues than some incorrect fuel burn figures

Isnt a 321LR just a few extra fuel tanks and slightly heavier 321NEO?

 

I support this brave and bold statement! :D






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users