Originally Posted by
MrAndy1369
I really, really dislike the title (A321 transcontinental). It can come across as misleading, especially to pmUS customers, because pmUS transcons (such as PHL/CLT-west coast) use [pmUS] A321s for their transcons, but do not treat their transcons like JFK-LAX/SFO; MIA-LAX. Yes, it may be that JFK-LAX/SFO uses A321 (3-class), but how about LAX-MIA, which is also a premium transcon, but doesn't use A321's? Customers who know no better may see the heading, "A321 transcontinental", see that their CLT-SFO flight is an A321, and get all excited for the service, only to be left disappointed. AA should change the title to "Premium Transcons (city pairs)" and be done with it, instead of saying "A321 Transcontinental." Less misleading and a more clear designator.
I completely agree, though to be fair MIA-LAX for the purpose of meals should be the same as JFK-SFO/LAX. Yes though, outside of that, there are plenty of A321 transcon flights from CLT and PHL that do not see service much different from your typical midcon with the sundae as an exception. They should really term it as "premium transcon routes" or something of that nature, and list which ones they are below. Of course, there's also the obvious irony that the A321 is being treated as a flagship aircraft in general...