737 for trans Atlantic Flights

My last business trip before retiring was from San Luis Obispo to Los Angeles to Heathrow to Cape Town. From SBP to LAX was via a regional CRJ, then 747's on the next two legs (British Air going, South African Air returning). In the span of 27 hours I was airborne for 24 of them. Wide body or not, it wasn't fun.

When I got to my absolutely beautiful 5-star hotel (!!) and took my clothes off to shower off the breath of 700 others, I was MORTIFIED with the swelling in my lower legs, ankles, and feet. OMG! Twenty years ago wearing compression stockings wasn't a common thing.

Scott
 
Last edited:
SubieRubyRoo said:
Keflavik, Iceland to Seattle is the world’s longest 737 route. Just over 7 hours. 😖
Click to expand...
Yikes! That'd be barely tolerable for me, my biggest issue being going to the bathroom at 6'5". I literally have to bend at the knees to get into the bathroom and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be able to actually close the door if I needed to sit. I have for years not consumed liquids prior to flying and will take Imodium to decrease intestinal motility prior to flying, all to avoid needing to use the bathrooms on the smaller planes.
 
A321 XLR has the same problem our B777 have, they don’t have great high altitude cruise performance at normal weights.
 
Last edited:
MNgopher said:
While on a long flight a widebody would be preferred, the reality is there are tradeoffs.

Not every long route requires an airplane with the capacity a widebody provides... Using the narrowbody plane allows many routes to be non stop that would not otherwise be economically viable and would then require a connecting flight.

As a passenger, then I have to weigh whether the widebody with a connecting flight, the additional time that requires, and the potential for missconnections outweighs putting up with the single aisle plane for a long flight. My time is worth something...
Click to expand...
And there certain airports I would totally avoid if I was going to connect.

I would take any NB direct flight versus connect and even more so depending on the airport.

The B737 Max already flies long non European flights, I am sure passengers will be o.k for room unless they are in the cockpit.

I am fairly big ( 6 foot, 220 pounds ), I would have no problems flying direct on any NB.

Killing time waiting for traffic to die down having a coffee at McDonalds. 45 minutes early arrival from the Bahamas.
 
Last edited:
Astro14 said:
I’m told it’s a great airplane. At least, from a passenger perspective. That extra foot or so of fuselage width translates into a couple inches at each seat.

And that matters

Airbus is several years behind on their deliveries, and we intend to replace the entire 757 fleet with the airplane.

From a pilot perspective, they’re typically down at lower altitude, which tells me they’re a bit underpowered…
Click to expand...
Noticed that when taking 747s from Frankfurt to ORD/EWR. That little bit of extra width compared to the 767/787 is enough to make a difference to me. I’m tall but like a window seat to lean.
 
If an airline wants to start a new route overseas with a NB , they will use the aircraft that has the best range in their NB fleet.

In our fleet, the NB with the longest range is the B737 Max.

That’s why the B737 Max does that route.

If people feel it’s a miserable plane, don’t fly on it.

There are other planes to get to your destination but you will have to connect.
 
Last edited:
Just a civilian pilot said:
If an airline wants to start a new route overseas with a NB , they will use the aircraft that has the best range in their NB fleet.

In our fleet, the NB with the longest range is the B737 Max.

That’s why the B737 Max does that route.

If people feel it’s a miserable plane, don’t fly on it.

There are other planes to get to your destination but you will have to connect.
Click to expand...
You aren’t by chance flying Oakland to HNL on Friday?
 
Here’s a shot of an Aer Lingus 737 unloading at Corfu, Greece. They opened up the rear door to speed up the unloading.

2CC562D7-2D4F-4111-9616-CBC57C2771FE.webp
 
Last edited:
Having flown many 737 for six hours +/- flights, a wide body is a significant difference.

Looking back, 737 flights for 6+/- hours included:

Sea hnl
Sea iad
Sea JFK
PDX HNL
Sfo HNL
Lax HNL
Lax mia

NB not a desired aircraft for these flights. Add in today's reduced padding on seats, reduced pitch, and reduced lavatories in a 737, all I can say is not fun.
 
GON said:
Having flown many 737 for six hours +/- flights, a wide body is a significant difference.

Looking back, 737 flights for 6+/- hours included:

Sea hnl
Sea iad
Sea JFK
PDX HNL
Sfo HNL
Lax HNL
Lax mia

NB not a desired aircraft for these flights. Add in today's reduced padding on seats, reduced pitch, and reduced lavatories in a 737, all I can say is not fun.
Click to expand...
Yep. its not just overseas flying, they use them on long routes to other destinations.

All the flying that I currently do with the Airbus NB ( holiday destinations ) is going to be replaced by the B737 Max within 2 years and many are 5 hour flights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom