The WestJet 737 MAX 8 thread
Mar 20, 2019, 6:09 pm
#76
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Programs: DL, OZ, AC, AS, AA, BA, Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, IHG
Posts: 19,900
There's no preclearance in YYJ 
Even sticking with WS partners, DL/KL via SEA/AMS would be much better as you have a 10 hour flight to get a proper sleep on.
Next best option within the WestJet partner environment would be YYJ-YVR-AMS-GLA on WS/KL. Longer layovers but again a proper 9h30m flight to get some rest on.
The WestJet option is a 1.5 hour flight, 2h49m hour layover, 4h46m flight, 1h34m layover, 5h24m flight. That's what I meant by painful. No way someone can fly that itinerary and be able to feel rested upon arrival.
Even sticking with WS partners, DL/KL via SEA/AMS would be much better as you have a 10 hour flight to get a proper sleep on.
Next best option within the WestJet partner environment would be YYJ-YVR-AMS-GLA on WS/KL. Longer layovers but again a proper 9h30m flight to get some rest on.
The WestJet option is a 1.5 hour flight, 2h49m hour layover, 4h46m flight, 1h34m layover, 5h24m flight. That's what I meant by painful. No way someone can fly that itinerary and be able to feel rested upon arrival.
Mar 21, 2019, 10:57 am
#77
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ontario
Programs: Westjet Rewards
Posts: 155
A poster on another site said that he got notice this past Monday that his flight YYZ>LAS was cancelled on Saturday (5 days in advance). Re-routing him would be 23 hours of travel time so he cancelled. He said the reason for cancellation was that the plane for that route was a MAX 8. I did look at the Saturday flight and the poster was correct. WJ has only one daily departure to Vegas on Saturdays.
That same day or shortly after both WJ and AC said that they have reconfigured their fleets to accomodate the loss of the MAX 8's.
Am I missing something here?
That same day or shortly after both WJ and AC said that they have reconfigured their fleets to accomodate the loss of the MAX 8's.
Am I missing something here?
Mar 21, 2019, 2:15 pm
#79
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Programs: DL, OZ, AC, AS, AA, BA, Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, IHG
Posts: 19,900
Wow, so it's been reported on CBC that WS' Max planes don't have all of the extra safety features installed. Only AC opted to purchase all of the extra. I wonder how WS' public relations department is going to respond to that headline?
Mar 21, 2019, 2:37 pm
#80
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,444
“United Airlines, which ordered 137 of the planes and has received 14, did not select the indicators or the disagree light. A United spokesman said the airline does not include the features because its pilots use other data to fly the plane.”
https://www.thestar.com/business/201...as-extras.html
Mar 21, 2019, 2:40 pm
#81
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 669
WS really went cheap. Anything to save a buck! First buy cheap aircraft, than cut the options.
Mar 21, 2019, 2:49 pm
#82
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: YYC
Programs: Hilton Diamond, Fairmont Plat, IHG Spire, SPG Gold, WS Gold, Hertz PC, National E Elite,
Posts: 2,768
I'm on a YYC-BNA tomorrow that was a MAX8 route. We are changed to a 737-700 and the flight is sold out.
I really feel sorry for the scheduling folks at these airlines right now!
I really feel sorry for the scheduling folks at these airlines right now!
Mar 21, 2019, 2:59 pm
#83
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: YYJ
Posts: 4,137
They did install one of the two options being discussed, unlike UA, so this criticism is a little misplaced IMO.
Mar 21, 2019, 3:02 pm
#84
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Programs: DL, OZ, AC, AS, AA, BA, Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, IHG
Posts: 19,900
I think that's going to be the perception for anyone that reads the article. Unfortunately WS didn't give a response to CBC's article. This looks bad. It gives the impression that they rather save a few bucks than have the safest possible plane.
Mar 21, 2019, 3:05 pm
#85
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Programs: DL, OZ, AC, AS, AA, BA, Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, IHG
Posts: 19,900
I think all safety features should be standard and not be made optional. Yes, those extra features probably didn't helped in that scenario, but what about other scenarios? Shouldn't we all be flying on the safest plane possible? The public ain't going to remember the details. They're just going to remember that WS cheaped out to get a cheaper Max plane. AC is going to look like the winner here.
Mar 21, 2019, 3:39 pm
#86
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: YYJ
Posts: 4,137
I think all safety features should be standard and not be made optional. Yes, those extra features probably didn't helped in that scenario, but what about other scenarios? Shouldn't we all be flying on the safest plane possible? The public ain't going to remember the details. They're just going to remember that WS cheaped out to get a cheaper Max plane. AC is going to look like the winner here.
Mar 21, 2019, 4:00 pm
#87
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2010
Programs: DL, OZ, AC, AS, AA, BA, Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott, IHG
Posts: 19,900
People seem to respond differently to plane accidents than car accidents. You don't see the government grounding all Audi A4s when people die driving them.
Mar 21, 2019, 5:19 pm
#88
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 296
A poster on another site said that he got notice this past Monday that his flight YYZ>LAS was cancelled on Saturday (5 days in advance). Re-routing him would be 23 hours of travel time so he cancelled. He said the reason for cancellation was that the plane for that route was a MAX 8. I did look at the Saturday flight and the poster was correct. WJ has only one daily departure to Vegas on Saturdays.
That same day or shortly after both WJ and AC said that they have reconfigured their fleets to accomodate the loss of the MAX 8's.
Am I missing something here?
That same day or shortly after both WJ and AC said that they have reconfigured their fleets to accomodate the loss of the MAX 8's.
Am I missing something here?
The international/transborder tariff is below for schedule irregularities beyond the carrier's control, which is probably true for now. But they can't claim it's beyond their control forever(e.g. AC leased capacity to fill in the gap).
I've cleaned it up for readability and some emphasis:
The carrier will provide the following:
(a) the carrier will offer the passenger the choice to travel on another of its scheduled flights on the same route as the passenger was originally ticketed or to travel on a different routing operated by the carrier to the same ticketed destination.
(b) if these options are not available, the carrier will offer to transport the passenger on the same route as he/she was originally ticketed or on a different route operated by the services of another carrier with whom the original air carrier has a commercial agreement and provided space is available.
(c) Blah blah, they can't charge you more for any of this
(d) Blah blah, if they get a cheaper fare , they owe you the difference. I take this to mean fare class OR fare.
(e) should the alternate transportation proposed by the carrier not meet the passenger's satisfaction, the unused portion of the passenger's ticket(s) will be refunded. The refund will be made to the purchaser of the ticket(s). The form of refund will be the same form used as payment of the ticket(s). The refund will be based on the total value of ticket(s). For complete conditions on refunds see rule 105.
(f) when a refund is requested as a result of a schedule irregularity, the passenger must submit the unused portions of his/her ticket(s) to the carrier by no later than 30 days after the validity shown on the ticket(s).
(a) the carrier will offer the passenger the choice to travel on another of its scheduled flights on the same route as the passenger was originally ticketed or to travel on a different routing operated by the carrier to the same ticketed destination.
(b) if these options are not available, the carrier will offer to transport the passenger on the same route as he/she was originally ticketed or on a different route operated by the services of another carrier with whom the original air carrier has a commercial agreement and provided space is available.
(c) Blah blah, they can't charge you more for any of this
(d) Blah blah, if they get a cheaper fare , they owe you the difference. I take this to mean fare class OR fare.
(e) should the alternate transportation proposed by the carrier not meet the passenger's satisfaction, the unused portion of the passenger's ticket(s) will be refunded. The refund will be made to the purchaser of the ticket(s). The form of refund will be the same form used as payment of the ticket(s). The refund will be based on the total value of ticket(s). For complete conditions on refunds see rule 105.
(f) when a refund is requested as a result of a schedule irregularity, the passenger must submit the unused portions of his/her ticket(s) to the carrier by no later than 30 days after the validity shown on the ticket(s).
I should add that, legally, carriers' Tariffs must be reasonable. The Canadian Transportation can, and has, ruled against carriers' Tariffs, and also fined them when they didn't fix it:
https://otc-cta.gc.ca/eng/enforcemen...-airways-plc-0
My post from Page 1:
Westjet’s 73 page international tariff can be found here:
https://www.westjet.com/assets/wj-we...us)-tariff.pdf
How cancellations are handled when outside the carrier’s control can be found starting on page 50.
What constitutes an airline that WestJet has a Commercial Agreement with?
Just partners? Just Interlines? Both?
https://www.westjet.com/assets/wj-we...us)-tariff.pdf
How cancellations are handled when outside the carrier’s control can be found starting on page 50.
What constitutes an airline that WestJet has a Commercial Agreement with?
Just partners? Just Interlines? Both?
Last edited by tecate55; Mar 21, 2019 at 10:32 pm
Mar 21, 2019, 6:39 pm
#89
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: YYJ
Posts: 4,137
Mar 21, 2019, 7:05 pm
#90
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: YEG
Posts: 269
I cannot remember a vehicle ever being banned from the road. There are probably a few times where it should have happened (Ford and Firestone comes to mind) but didn't.