# New 737 MAX 8 Transatlantic Opportunities



## NS VIA Fan (May 8, 2018)

The introduction of the 737 MAX 8 has opened up opportunities for new transatlantic routes using the smaller long range, narrow body aircraft in smaller markets.

Norwegian Air..has service from Europe to smaller US airports for example Stewart/Newburgh NY and Providence RI

Here in Atlantic Canada....Air Canada will be using the MAX 8 on routes between Halifax and London Heathrow and between St. Johns, Newfoundland and Heathrow.

WestJet has MAX 8s between Halifax and London Gatwick and from Halifax to Paris.

Icelandair is also flying the MAX 8 from Halifax to Reykjavik beginning this summer.

.....and since the Atlantic crossing is short from here..... WestJet can also use a 737-7 on routes between St. Johns and Dublin and from Halifax to Glasgow.

>>>>>>>>>

And for the first time ever.....although not on a MAX 8....the French Islands of St. Pierre et Miquelon (near the coast of Newfoundland) will have non-stop transatlantic flights to Paris on a ASL French Airlines 737.


----------



## jis (May 8, 2018)

The first time I flew across the Atlantic on a 737 was on a 737BBJ used by PrivatAir on a Luftahnsa coded all business class flight from Stuttgart to Newark, several years ago. it was a very nice and classy flight with excellent food and service.


----------



## Palmetto (May 8, 2018)

I think a 737 on these routes would be great--if seat pitch were 35" or better, and the configurations was 2-2.


----------



## jis (May 8, 2018)

Palmetto said:


> I think a 737 on these routes would be great--if seat pitch were 35" or better, and the configurations was 2-2.


A 737, or for that matter any narrow body plane with that layout would be better on any route


----------



## cpotisch (May 8, 2018)

Norwegian's transatlantic flights on the MAX are dirt cheap - one way fares start at $80 (for a short time they were as low as $65). Unfortunately, New Yorkers have to fly through Newburgh, and you have to pay extra to pick seats and get dinner, but at those prices, I'd say it's worth it.


----------



## Palmetto (May 8, 2018)

Newburg is tough to get to using public transit, as well. This, in spite of the fact that the Port Authority at one time wanted high speed rail between there and the city.


----------



## trainman74 (May 8, 2018)

So when does Southwest start Midway-Gatwick flights?


----------



## Trogdor (May 8, 2018)

trainman74 said:


> So when does Southwest start Midway-Gatwick flights?


Probably never, as Midway's runway is likely too short to accommodate a fully loaded 737 MAX 8 on takeoff.


----------



## JRR (May 8, 2018)

Pilots tell me that landing at Midway is a “controlled crash!”


----------



## Palmetto (May 8, 2018)

The "circle 22" at MDW is a real doozy of an approach: a steep left bank about a mile out from the end of the runway. BTW, the runway in Brownsville, TX is longer than any of Midway's.


----------



## cpotisch (May 8, 2018)

Trogdor said:


> trainman74 said:
> 
> 
> > So when does Southwest start Midway-Gatwick flights?
> ...


The MAX 8 is effectively the successor to the -700, and Boeing claims that the MAX has significantly better takeoff field performance than the NextGen. Since Southwest already flies dozens of 737-700s to Midway, I don't see why it couldn't handle the MAX 8.


----------



## jis (May 9, 2018)

Handling a MAX 8 and handling a max take off weight MAX 8 are two entirely different things. For a trans Atlantic flight it will have to be at close to MTOW.


----------



## PVD (May 9, 2018)

The Max 8 is the successor to the 800, Max 7 the 700. A Max 8 could fly in and out of Midway, but not at the highest maximum gross weights. Fully loaded and fueled for long stage lengths Midway would be considered too short for safe ops. The airport planning graphs are available from Boeing.


----------



## railiner (May 10, 2018)

IIRC, the B757 is probably the largest airliner that can use Midway...I don't believe any are currently still flying from there...


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 10, 2018)

cpotisch said:


> Norwegian's transatlantic flights on the MAX are dirt cheap - one way fares start at $80 (for a short time they were as low as $65). Unfortunately...you have to pay extra to pick seats and get dinner, but at those prices, I'd say it's worth it.


Even a free ticket wouldn't be worth it. Norwegian can take their 29-inch knee crushing seat pitch and shove it up their turbofan.



JRR said:


> Pilots tell me that landing at Midway is a “controlled crash!”


Sometimes it's an uncontrolled crash.








railiner said:


> IIRC, the B757 is probably the largest airliner that can use Midway...I don't believe any are currently still flying from there...


The 757 as a family has an unusually strong thrust to weight ratio. That being said, each series and model has distinct thrust ratings, min/max gross weights, and initial takeoff performance. These and other variables will factor into minimum required takeoff distance.


----------



## railiner (May 10, 2018)

Yep...that's why the 757-200 is so popular for flying into Colorado and Wyoming ski area airports. I've flown them into Eagle, Hayden, Montrose, Gunnison, and Jackson...


----------



## jis (May 10, 2018)

Back in the days, before the more capable second generation A320s and 737s came out, 757s were the aircraft that were most commonly used to travel to Lhasa Gonggar Airport. It was fun to takeoff from there using most of the looooong runway and then climbing and climbing and climbing and still have peaks on both sides higher than you were! The flight that I took from Lhasa to Kathmandu (China Southern Airline) flew almost directly over Mt. Everest. Of course first it had to climb all the way up to 35,000' or some such before trying to go across the main Himalayan Range. The main range there contains almost half of the world's five mile plus peaks.

One neat feature of Lhasa Airport that I remember is that after the door was closed upon completion of boarding, and the engines started, the plane got pressurized on the ground and you suddenly started feeling much better with way more oxygen. Lhasa Airport is at almost 12,000' above MSL.


----------



## Palmetto (May 10, 2018)

Going out of Missoula, MT requires a 360 turn and steep climb to go east.


----------



## PVD (May 10, 2018)

The 757 had a reputation as one of the best performing airliners for climb out on takeoff while losing an engine. This made it the perfect aircraft for some of those tricky performance locations.


----------



## railiner (May 10, 2018)

Best "hot-rod" since the 727?





Used to love to fly in those "three-holer's". It was amazing, watching their wings seemingly disassemble on approach...

I went on a Travel Agent "Fam" trip back in 1973...TWA took us on a 'dinner flight' from Denver - Stapleton to the Grand Canyon and back at sunset....

The Captain deployed those flaps for a nice flight right through the canyon, turned around and did it again the other way, and then took us home....spectacular at sunset!

I'll never forget it...


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 11, 2018)

railiner said:


> The Captain deployed those flaps for a nice flight right through the [Grand Canyon], turned around and did it again the other way, and then took us home...I'll never forget it...


I used to live along one of the flight paths to the Grand Canyon and the routine low flying air traffic was a common and inescapable nuisance. Each and every day, all day long. As a little boy I grew up in a forest that was almost as noisy as an airport. Which is kind of absurd and appalling when you think about it, although I doubt anybody on any of those aircraft ever did.


----------



## railiner (May 11, 2018)

Devil's Advocate said:


> railiner said:
> 
> 
> > The Captain deployed those flaps for a nice flight right through the [Grand Canyon], turned around and did it again the other way, and then took us home...I'll never forget it...
> ...


I imagine, if you didn't suffer from that effect, you might have enjoyed it too...





But I am sorry you were bothered by those flights...the early 7-2's were very noisy, as were all early jet airliner's.

I live under the "Expressway Visual Approach" to LGA's Runway 31, and am used to aircraft noise...especially when they take off from 13. In the early turbojet era, they used to rattle my windows, and set off car alarm's. Worse in the summer, until we finally got air-conditioning. The new high-bypass fanjets are much quieter.


----------



## cpotisch (May 11, 2018)

Devil's Advocate said:


> cpotisch said:
> 
> 
> > Norwegian's transatlantic flights on the MAX are dirt cheap - one way fares start at $80 (for a short time they were as low as $65). Unfortunately...you have to pay extra to pick seats and get dinner, but at those prices, I'd say it's worth it.
> ...


Several months ago, my 6'2" Physics teacher took a Norwegian 737 MAX to Ireland and said there was plenty of space. It obviously wasn't as open and airy as a wide body, but was perfectly comfortable for a 7 hour flight.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 11, 2018)

railiner said:


> I imagine, if you didn't suffer from that effect, you might have enjoyed it too...
> 
> 
> 
> But I am sorry you were bothered by those flights...the early 7-2's were very noisy, as were all early jet airliner's. I live under the "Expressway Visual Approach" to LGA's Runway 31, and am used to aircraft noise...especially when they take off from 13. In the early turbojet era, they used to rattle my windows, and set off car alarm's. Worse in the summer, until we finally got air-conditioning. The new high-bypass fanjets are much quieter.


Thank you for your understanding. I personally don't mind aircraft sounds when I'm in a major city near an actual airport, even when it's one of AA's notorious Mad Dog 80's, but when I'm out in the woods I just want some peace and quiet. A brief encounter with a low flying aircraft once in blue moon is fine, but all day long every single day is a bit much.



cpotisch said:


> Devil's Advocate said:
> 
> 
> > cpotisch said:
> ...


I'm over six feet myself and I've found 29-inch pitch to be completely impractical. It's also extremely uncomfortable and medically risky. My knees and legs suffer pain and eventually go numb when shoved into anything less than 32 or 33 inch pitch depending on the length of the trip and the design of the seat. With 34" pitch and above and I'm fine indefinitely. I suppose it's possible your teacher lucked into a row that had more pitch than the minimum and/or was aligned differently than the others, but for someone of my height risking a long ride with extremely tight legroom is simply not worth it at any cost.


----------



## cpotisch (May 11, 2018)

Devil's Advocate said:


> I'm over six feet myself and I've found 29-inch pitch to be completely impractical. It's also extremely uncomfortable and medically risky. My knees and legs suffer pain and eventually go numb when shoved into anything less than 32 or 33 inch pitch depending on the length of the trip and the design of the seat. With 34" pitch and above and I'm fine indefinitely. I suppose it's possible your teacher lucked into a row that had more pitch than the minimum and/or was aligned differently than the others, but for someone of my height risking a long ride with extremely tight legroom is simply not worth it at any cost.


Have you flown on the Norwegian MAX yet?


----------



## Ryan (May 11, 2018)

Comfort of a seat pitch for someone of a given height can very greatly depending on proportions. If you have stubby legs and a long torso, you're probably good to go. If you have long legs and not much torso, it's going to be hell for you.

Your teacher's anecdote is interesting, but irrelevant. If Chris says that the seats are unworkable for him, you should take him at is word, rather than relay anecdotes from school.


----------



## cpotisch (May 11, 2018)

Ryan said:


> Comfort of a seat pitch for someone of a given height can very greatly depending on proportions. If you have stubby legs and a long torso, you're probably good to go. If you have long legs and not much torso, it's going to be hell for you.
> 
> Your teacher's anecdote is interesting, but irrelevant. If Chris says that the seats are unworkable for him, you should take him at is word, rather than relay anecdotes from school.


I completely believe him. I was just wondering if he had sat in the 737 MAX, since the listed specs don't necessarily tell you everything, and the actual layout of those 29-inch seats could be different than that of other planes with the same listed dimensions.


----------



## PVD (May 11, 2018)

Pitch as a measurement is an apples to apples standard, the space between a point on one seat and the same point on the seat in front of it, where as comfort has many additional nuances. Seat width, fixed armrest vs movable, amount and method of recline, angle of satbagk to seat cushion, also length of the bottom cushion and seatback thickness factor in. That is above and beyond the physical differences between people.


----------



## railiner (May 11, 2018)

PVD said:


> Pitch as a measurement is an apples to apples standard, the space between a point on one seat and the same point on the seat in front of it, where as comfort has many additional nuances. Seat width, fixed armrest vs movable, amount and method of recline, angle of satbagk to seat cushion, also length of the bottom cushion and seatback thickness factor in. That is above and beyond the physical differences between people.


All that, and the design and height of the seat in front of you. Some seats are lower than other's on the bottom, so they can prevent your shins from extending under them....


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 11, 2018)

cpotisch said:


> Ryan said:
> 
> 
> > Comfort of a seat pitch for someone of a given height can very greatly depending on proportions. If you have stubby legs and a long torso, you're probably good to go. If you have lo ng legs and not much torso, it's going to be hell for you.Your teacher's anecdote is interesting, but irrelevant. If Chris says that the seats are unworkable for him, you should take him at is word, rather than relay anecdotes from school.
> ...


I agree that listed specs do not tell you everything, especially when it's a trait as limited in scope as generic seat pitch. That being said, I have forty different aircraft with nearly forty different airlines from which to extrapolate. Thus far the closest pitch I've been able to manage on a transoceanic flight is 32" when using recent slimline seats on newer aircraft such as the 788 and 789. Even that was merely tolerable rather than comfortable. If 30" and 31" pitch slimline seats are already too painful to manage across an ocean then what hope does 29" pitch realistically have?


----------



## PVD (May 11, 2018)

To add another wrinkle, the placement and type of boxes for entertainment equipment under the seats on some aircraft can render a seat with more than adequate distance uncomfortable for placing one's feet.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (May 11, 2018)

Back in the 1990's it was common for early AVOD systems (such as those found on B744's and B772's) to waste anywhere from 30%-60% of the usable coach footwell area for each affected seat. These days it's far less of an issue with modern AVOD systems (such as those found on B787's and A380's) but if you find yourself on an intercontinental B757/B767 or early model 777 then you'd be wise to research which seats are stuck with those huge immovable boxes of foot squeezing gadgetry.


----------



## cpotisch (May 23, 2018)

My 6'1" teacher is flying on another 737MAX today. We'll see if he can fit comfortably again (Norwegian).


----------

