Originally Posted by Dieuwer

Had this been JetBlue, it might had costed me days to get home simply because JetBlue does not have the capacity to handle mass cancellations due to IRROPS.

Originally Posted by sbm12

Depends on where you are and where you're headed. Absolutely agree for flights from smaller stations like DFW. If you were in AUS there's a decent chance a reroute via MCO, FLL or JFK could have worked. And if you're in BOS, the NYC area or south Florida the options are plentiful.

Originally Posted by Aewanabe

1). To the poster theorizing about engine thrust being a difference in older versus later aircraft, it's not a factor. All of our A320s, from the oldest to the last delivery with sharklets, have the same IAE V2527-A5 engines. A321s have V2533-A5 engines to account for their higher Maximum Takeoff Weights. (The basic IAE engine is the V2500. The suffixes after the 25xx account for the thrust ratings at TOGA thrust; so a V2527 engine produces 27000 pounds of thrust, while a V2533 produces 33000 pounds).

2). The provision for Additional Center Tanks in the A320s was an experiment that only involved about 15 of the aircraft. It was unsuccessful primarily due to center-of-gravity issues. Those 15-ish aircraft have correspondingly higher maximum take off weights, with the ACTs removed and deactivated, so there is no reduction in their respective ability to take off with full fuel loads.

3). The reason that A321 transcons are more reliable is that every Mint aircraft has been delivered with 2 ACTs, which provide roughly 2 hours and 15 minutes extra endurance. (The A321s don't experience the center of gravity issues with ACTs which the A320s did). Core A321s (not typically used for transcons, but I have seen them on JFK-LAS) have 1 additional center tank.

4). Regarding the eventual switch from 150 to 162 seats, keep in mind that the 162 seats will be the product currently installed in the A321s, which is between 1-3 generations newer than the current A320 seats. As a pilot group we raised the concern about increased Tech Stops with the company. We have been told that the new seats and new generation of Live TV are light enough compared to what's being replaced that even with the additional 1200 pounds of passenger weight the aircraft will be somewhat lighter.

My experience is that the A320 is perfectly adequate for transcons 97 percent of the time, which is of scant consolation when you are caught in the 3 percent of failures. With a full fuel load, the airplane's endurance is roughly 7 and a half to 8 hours, depending on whether or not sharklets are installed; this is typically perfectly adequate for a 6 to 6.5 hour flight. The overriding issue this week is not the headwinds as much as the horrendous weather in the NorCal area, which has caused the need for alternate airports much farther away from SFO and SJC than normal. (For example, for SFO our alternate is SJC or OAK more often than not, which only require an additional 10 minutes or so of fuel to reach after a missed approach. The farther away from your intended destination the alternate is, the more fuel which you cannot correspondingly plan to use enroute).

I hope this information helps clear up a bit of the confusion. I again need to stress that I'm speaking only from my own professional experience and knowledge base, and not as an official mouthpiece for JetBlue Airways. I mostly lurk with 3 small children at home, but will attempt to return to the thread fairly regularly if there are further questions about the aircraft.

Originally Posted by FBWFTW

Thanks for the details!
Couple of avgeek ?'s
-Any idea if the new seats are in the wild yet?
-Would an A320 with sharklets (a la VX) be able to make these transcons without fuel stops? Giving that the endurance at 8 hours?
-What are the alternates that force the fuel issue?? Is it like LAX for BOS-SFO and vice versa (adding on about an hour to the fuel req'd)

Originally Posted by Aewanabe

-New seats for the A320s have been delayed until the 3rd Quarter of 2017. No information has been provided to us about the reason for the delay, though I suspect it has to do with keeping aircraft in-service through the summer rush.

Originally Posted by tphuang

Hi Aewanabe, it seems like not many new routes have been announced recently. Is Jetblue just running out of aircraft (or maybe not able to hire enough new pilots) for its current expansion plan in BOS and FLL? Especially with all the A320s that will be out of rotation getting new seats added.

Originally Posted by RWPrincess

I also used to fly between JFK-PDX regularly and have never had a fuel stop on that route.

Originally Posted by gmax58

I believe BOS-LGB has had one in the last couple weeks (MSP), and I’m concerned for the chances of one tonight (especially given the long delays so far and the curfew rules at the airport). I’ll update this when I get in.