Sep 19, 2017, 10:25 am
Last edit by: 24left
Jan 18 2021 TC issues Airworthiness Directive for the 737 MAX
Link to post https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/32976892-post4096.html
Cabin photos
Post 976 https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/29534462-post976.html
Post 1300 https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/29780203-post1300.html
Cabin Layout
Interior Specs can be found here https://www.aircanada.com/ca/en/aco/home/fly/onboard/fleet.html
- Window seats may feel narrower to come as the armrests are placed "into" the "curvature" of the cabin.
- Seats with no windows feel even more narrower as there is no space created by the curvature of window.
- All bulkhead seats have very limited legroom.
- Seats 15A, 16A, 16F, 17A and 17F have limited windows.
- Exit rows 19 and 20 have more legroom than regular preferred seats.
Routes
The 737 MAX is designated to replace the A320-series. Based on announcements and schedule updates, the following specific routes will be operated by the 737 MAX in future:
YYZ-LAX (periodic flights)
YYZ-SNN (new route)
YUL-DUB (new route)
YYZ/YUL-KEF (replacing Rouge A319)
YYT-LHR (replacing Mainline A319)
YHZ-LHR (replacing Mainline B767)
Hawaii Routes YVR/YYC (replacing Rouge B767)
Many domestic trunk routes (YYZ, YVR, YUL, YYC) now operated by 7M8, replacing A320 family
Link to post https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/32976892-post4096.html
Cabin photos
Post 976 https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/29534462-post976.html
Post 1300 https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/29780203-post1300.html
Cabin Layout
Interior Specs can be found here https://www.aircanada.com/ca/en/aco/home/fly/onboard/fleet.html
- Window seats may feel narrower to come as the armrests are placed "into" the "curvature" of the cabin.
- Seats with no windows feel even more narrower as there is no space created by the curvature of window.
- All bulkhead seats have very limited legroom.
- Seats 15A, 16A, 16F, 17A and 17F have limited windows.
- Exit rows 19 and 20 have more legroom than regular preferred seats.
Routes
The 737 MAX is designated to replace the A320-series. Based on announcements and schedule updates, the following specific routes will be operated by the 737 MAX in future:
YYZ-LAX (periodic flights)
YYZ-SNN (new route)
YUL-DUB (new route)
YYZ/YUL-KEF (replacing Rouge A319)
YYT-LHR (replacing Mainline A319)
YHZ-LHR (replacing Mainline B767)
Hawaii Routes YVR/YYC (replacing Rouge B767)
Many domestic trunk routes (YYZ, YVR, YUL, YYC) now operated by 7M8, replacing A320 family
Air Canada Selects Boeing 737 MAX to Renew Mainline Narrowbody Fleet
Dec 12, 2013, 2:34 pm
#61
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: YXE
Posts: 3,050
That is, until they do exactly as Stranger suggests and run seven-across seating. Dang!
I don't know if there's a hatred of the 737. The hatred is really that of, in the 2020s, probably not having a choice since AC's competition only flies 737s as well. I don't really accept that the E90s couldn't have been re-marketed with relative ease -- various carriers are still ordering them by the boatload, so if there's demand for new frames, there must be demand for used ones out there. Besides, there's still enough life in the A320-series fleet, and there's the 763 fleet that can provide enough domestic transcon capacity along with 787 deliveries to keep AC from really needing new aircraft until 2020 most likely.
Dec 12, 2013, 2:36 pm
#62
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ideally YOW, but probably not
Programs: AC SE*MM
Posts: 1,826
That's the point in the pro-bus love. AC can ratchet down the seat pitch till you're practically spooning with the passenger in front of you ... but they can't take away those precious extra inches of cabin width!
That is, until they do exactly as Stranger suggests and run seven-across seating. Dang!
That is, until they do exactly as Stranger suggests and run seven-across seating. Dang!
Some of us who have sat in different kinds of seats are also more concerned about seat comfort. And what the IFE will be like. And whether there will be power at every seat. And whether the USB charger will be 2.1 amp. And how much overhead space there is.
None of these things have anything to do with Airbus versus Boeing.
Dec 12, 2013, 2:37 pm
#63
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: YTZ
Programs: Hertz & Avis PC; National EE; SPG & Hilton Gold; AC 35K (yawn)
Posts: 5,921
So if I set up a series of 30 seats, starting at 45cm and making each 1.27 cm narrower than the previous one, would you be able to sit comfortably from several hours in all of them indistinctly? In that case, Ill take the 45 cm seat and would happily leave you with the 7.6 cm one.
Of course, if you don't like Air Canada, you can always fly their Canadian competition to get wider seats... wait.
Dec 12, 2013, 2:39 pm
#64
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: YTZ
Programs: Hertz & Avis PC; National EE; SPG & Hilton Gold; AC 35K (yawn)
Posts: 5,921
JAL Express operates their 738s in a 2-3 config in J-class. One of the best deals in domestic flying: 1000¥ over any fare gives you a bigger seat.
Dec 12, 2013, 2:42 pm
#65
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,237
Cabin width is fixed thing, AC can't change it so which aircraft is picked matters. Airbus is wider which is a good thing and makes it superior to latest retread of the 737
As far as pitch, seat type, power, IFE system, well that is all AC. Based on those 2 - 777 monsters they are flying and and how seats in Y look on 787 I am not very optimistic.
But who knows maybe AC will surprise us.
As far as pitch, seat type, power, IFE system, well that is all AC. Based on those 2 - 777 monsters they are flying and and how seats in Y look on 787 I am not very optimistic.
But who knows maybe AC will surprise us.
Dec 12, 2013, 2:56 pm
#66
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: DFW
Programs: AA (ExPlat).DL,UA Hertz (Pres Circle); Avis (First), Hilton (Diamond), Marriott (Gold)
Posts: 452
YYZ MIA is my most frequent route which I share between AC/AA and WS and my preference is always with AC 319,320s. I know it might be only a few inches but the cabins really do feel much much roomier and comfy. As much as I love WS staff, service, timeliness, etc... their 737s are not comfy at all. I just did a flight on them last month to confirm this fact. The only thing that scares me is that I am hearing really really negative reports on AA's new 319s.
Dec 12, 2013, 3:19 pm
#67
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ideally YOW, but probably not
Programs: AC SE*MM
Posts: 1,826
Dec 12, 2013, 4:40 pm
#68
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,237
Flew on one of those last year (LH airbus, plastic thin seats) I did not find them that bad for a 1-1/2 hour flight, been on worse such as UA YEG-IAH 737 not in PE seat. Hate that freaking plane, always buy better seat to at least get leg room, still a crappy seat for a 4 hour flight.
Dec 12, 2013, 5:22 pm
#69
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: YVR
Programs: AC*A
Posts: 482
While I was sad to see the 321 not picked due to its benefits of Door 2L boarding and more spacious cabin I see AC's point of view. Same manufacturer benefits and they probably got an amazing deal - as well as dumping nearly half of their E190s. I mean Boeing needed to start fighting for Airbus customers after Airbus stole a bunch of Boeing's. I expect AC to configure the cabin similarly to UA's 320s sadly. Streaming in Y and slimline seats. RIP the 320 cabin...
Another interesting point is the idea of grandfathering. While the 737NG had more current overwing exits, most other parts are older or not advanced as the A320. Having seen the estimated take off roll for the 737-9MAX it seems realllllllly long. Its hard to believe that the thing would fly with one engine *sarcasm-ish* As well, the lower ground clearance might also cause problems (no data for this, just wondering aloud).
All together a very interesting order!
Another interesting point is the idea of grandfathering. While the 737NG had more current overwing exits, most other parts are older or not advanced as the A320. Having seen the estimated take off roll for the 737-9MAX it seems realllllllly long. Its hard to believe that the thing would fly with one engine *sarcasm-ish* As well, the lower ground clearance might also cause problems (no data for this, just wondering aloud).
All together a very interesting order!
Dec 12, 2013, 6:15 pm
#71
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 11
Not every carrier puts 18" seats in their A320s. Even Air Canada uses 17.8" seats today. The obsession about a couple centimetre more seat width becomes moot when the person in front of you puts their seat back and it hits you in the nose at 30" pitch.
When Canadi>n was flying the 737-200 with the expandable business class section, which was comprised of all economy seats but the middle seat folded down into a tray with cup holders, the entire plane had 35" pitch. I'd take that economy class over the current AC Y on the Airbus any day of the week.
Dec 12, 2013, 7:44 pm
#72
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,987
But with the new AC 737s you will get the worst of both worlds. These aircraft are guaranteed to see a reduced seat pitch from the current narrowbodies - if AC management thinks 31" is OK on a 787 designed for 14 hour flights do you really think they will keep 32" on shorthaul planes?
Given that whatever aircraft was chosen would have seen reduced pitch - the extra width and space that the Airbus offered would have at least been one small positive.
But no, for the current management the focus is on low price and executive bonuses. Whether that is the right or wrong strategy is open to debate. What is not open to debate is that flying Y with AC will become more cramped and uncomfortable in the coming years.
Given that whatever aircraft was chosen would have seen reduced pitch - the extra width and space that the Airbus offered would have at least been one small positive.
But no, for the current management the focus is on low price and executive bonuses. Whether that is the right or wrong strategy is open to debate. What is not open to debate is that flying Y with AC will become more cramped and uncomfortable in the coming years.
Dec 12, 2013, 8:03 pm
#73
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: YXE
Posts: 3,050
Of course, the extra 'space' costs money to carry around, but even "the experts" are highly divided on the whole A320 vs. 737 efficiency issue with the existing planes, and the re-engined 737 is likely to tip the efficiency scale a little bit more in favour of the A320-series, especially with the restrictions on engines inherent to the 737 design.
Dec 12, 2013, 10:13 pm
#74
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: YVR
Programs: AC E50K, NEXUS
Posts: 645
Are you saying that people are more likely to get torticollis and thrombosis in a 73x than a 31x/32x? If so, please post a reference.
Dec 12, 2013, 10:18 pm
#75
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: YVR
Programs: AC E50K, NEXUS
Posts: 645
Flew on one of those last year (LH airbus, plastic thin seats) I did not find them that bad for a 1-1/2 hour flight, been on worse such as UA YEG-IAH 737 not in PE seat. Hate that freaking plane, always buy better seat to at least get leg room, still a crappy seat for a 4 hour flight.