I just received an email that SunCountry Airlines is now flying to London Stanstead. They have an all 737-800NG fleet. The flight stops in Gander and then does the hop across the pond, 2061 nm. SunCountry states that their aircraft have a maximum range of 2600 nm. The 737NG now has a 180 ETOPS with rated operators. Still, this is the first transatlantic 737 service I've known about. Are other operators doing this?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
SunCountry Transatlantic 737 service?
Collapse
X
-
Plenty of passenger 737 non-scheduled and charter services have been flown across the Atlantic over the years, but I can't immediately think of any scheduled traffic, now or in the past. However, there have been and still are scheduled A319 and A318 services across the Atlantic. I am not sure what the big deal is. This is, however, a slightly adventurous move for Sun Country given the state of their finances in recent years.
Comment
-
Fly Globespan used to use 738's from Knock(Ireland)to Canada and Miami Air operate quiet a lot across the pond with their 737`s all be it with a stop in KEF.
Continental gave serious consideration a couple of years ago to using 738's EWR-SNN.
Just as a foot note Ryanair 738's fly non stop BFI-DUB on delivery(9+hours)
....all be it with just two Ryanair boys up the front
Comment
-
Firstly - the routes to STN are likely to utilisize wet-leased aircraft (that are of a greater range and therefore of a larger capacity). Unless there is a fuel stop (that we are unaware of), the other option for the airline is to use the 737 on the route (with a severly restricted load), which would be difficult to maintain a decent profit on.
While other airlines have toyed with the idea of using 737s trans-Atlantically, they have never seen successfull and long-terms usages as scheduled passenger services (with the exceptions being modified 737s in all-business class cabins a la Privatair, Miami Air, et al). Once again, in order to make these routes work logistically, you have to sacrifice loads. Much to the dismay of SunCountry - their passengers are unlikely to pay the fares necessary to make that route work.
Perhaps there are some 757s or 767s that they are in the process of wet-leasing, that we are not privy to information about.Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.
Comment
-
Originally posted by AA 1818 View PostFirstly - the routes to STN are likely to utilisize wet-leased aircraft (that are of a greater range and therefore of a larger capacity). Unless there is a fuel stop (that we are unaware of), the other option for the airline is to use the 737 on the route (with a severly restricted load), which would be difficult to maintain a decent profit on.
Comment
-
-
not hijacking here but it would appear to be appropriate given the general gist of this thread.
why do you suppose airlines are trying to shoehorn short-medium range aircraft into long routes? i assume that on trans-oceanic routes, cargo makes up a substantial portion of the revenue on pax flights. unless i'm wrong (and correct me if i am) ditching wide bodies for narrow and short appears to make no sense. hell, even main line carriers like AA have converted some 757's into trans-atlantic birds for JFK-CDG.
am i missing something here?
Comment
-
Originally posted by HalcyonDays View PostIf you were to read the first post in the thread, you will see that the service will stop in Gander. They will use their own 737-800s, and over the two sectors involved they should be able to take a regular load.Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TeeVee View Postnot hijacking here but it would appear to be appropriate given the general gist of this thread.
why do you suppose airlines are trying to shoehorn short-medium range aircraft into long routes? i assume that on trans-oceanic routes, cargo makes up a substantial portion of the revenue on pax flights. unless i'm wrong (and correct me if i am) ditching wide bodies for narrow and short appears to make no sense. hell, even main line carriers like AA have converted some 757's into trans-atlantic birds for JFK-CDG.
am i missing something here?
As for AA's use of the 757s on the JFK-CDG routes, perhaps, those are just to suppliment already existing demand on the route. In the event of heavy cargo, perhaps said cargo could be shifted to the 767s that usually do the route (alongside the 757), and the 757 allows a widebody that can be beter utilisized elsewhere, to be freed. The 757 has the range, and excess cargo could be shifted elsewhere.Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TeeVee View Postnot hijacking here but it would appear to be appropriate given the general gist of this thread.
why do you suppose airlines are trying to shoehorn short-medium range aircraft into long routes? i assume that on trans-oceanic routes, cargo makes up a substantial portion of the revenue on pax flights. unless i'm wrong (and correct me if i am) ditching wide bodies for narrow and short appears to make no sense. hell, even main line carriers like AA have converted some 757's into trans-atlantic birds for JFK-CDG.
am i missing something here?
I think there's less to all this than meets the eye. Maybe people get tweaked by the fact that it's across the Atlantic, but go the other way and you simply have a 3000 mile US coast-to-coast flight, where you'll find dozens of non-stop 737s and A320s every day.
Comment
-
Originally posted by canair67 View PostAloha was flying YVR-PHNL direct with thier 737 aircraft. 2700 miles.
There was also a time when Continental flew 737s across the Pacific (with several stops) as far as Cairns.
Comment
Comment