
Taken by nt639
https://www.scramble.nl/civil-news/tita ... -a321neolrOn 26 October, Titan Airways took delivery of their first of two A321neoLRs. G-XATW, c/n 10150, was flown from Hamburg-Finkenwerder to London-Stansted on this date. It is painted all-black without titles.
Both new A321s are leased via lessor ALC and will replace the company's two B757-200s. One of the new Airbuses will be outfitted with a 16 Business Class and 168 Economy Class-seats, while the other will feature 52 Business Class-seats.
Titan Airways, which is named after their first aircraft, a Cessna 404 Titan, was founded in 1988 and is specialized in (ad-hoc) charter and ACMI-operations. It currently has a fleet of twelve aircraft consisting of one A318, two A320s, five A321s (including the new LR), two B737-400s and two B757-200s.
As they are contractor ownership and run.RichardIC wrote:Speculation now that these (two of them) will be contractor-operated, not RAF. The last image lacks an RAF roundel and still carries civilian registration.
That's just speculation on the original Pprune thread. But it would be an obvious issue which is one reason I'm unsure whether it's true.cyrilranch wrote:As they are contractor ownership and run.
Will they have defensive aids fixed to them as they are most likely carrying high value vips?
They could of course just be used to operate into countries where the use of such add ons is highly unlikely to be required.cyrilranch wrote:As they are contractor ownership and run.RichardIC wrote:Speculation now that these (two of them) will be contractor-operated, not RAF. The last image lacks an RAF roundel and still carries civilian registration.
Will they have defensive aids fixed to them as they are most likely carrying high value vips?
SW1 wrote:If you deem someone from the state important enough to be allowed to fly in such aircraft then no matter how unlikely it’s use i think it should have the defensive systems in place. We hear a lot about non state groups getting access to ever more sophisticated weapons.
Could you imagine the ramifications and reputations damage if one of these went dwn with someone important onboard.
If (as has been reported in Scramble and mentioned by Richard above) the fleet is to be wet-leased, either from Titan or another contractor, there's nothing to stop them having defensive aids installed, apart from money.cyrilranch wrote:As they are contractor ownership and run.RichardIC wrote:Speculation now that these (two of them) will be contractor-operated, not RAF. The last image lacks an RAF roundel and still carries civilian registration.
Will they have defensive aids fixed to them as they are most likely carrying high value vips?
andrew98 wrote:If it goes down with a load of politicians on if we may then get some MoD funding?
When you've got a bloody great union jack on the tail, roundels are hardly necessary. Nobody is going to be in any doubt.SKB wrote:I'm thinking that the VVIP Voyager in its "UK" livery only retained the RAF roundels because it still has the duties of an RAF tanker and transport plane. As the A321 is a leased private non-RAF plane, it doesnt have the roles of a Voyager, so the RAF roundels on a "UK" A321 are unneccessary.