Norwegian Air Discussion

KCAccidental

rabjoshu wrote: »

Norwegian have said there'll be no wifi or power outlets or usb outlets on their tatl 787s! :eek:

thought this was a more interesting tidbit from the article

Finally, but importantly, the early flights will spend longer in-flight due to certification requirements. Norwegian indicated that its initial 737 MAX deliveries will enter service without ETOPS certification in place. That means it will need to take a longer flight path to stay within 60 minutes of a diversion airport as the plane crosses the Atlantic Ocean. Such routings are possible thanks to airports in Iceland and Greenland but they require less efficient flight paths and extra time in the air for passengers.

kub

Does this mean that they have no ETOPS rated 737Max planes currently? Who says they cannot reallocate some of their existing planes from other routes that are ETOPS rated?

BZ

kub wrote: »

Does this mean that they have no ETOPS rated 737Max planes currently? Who says they cannot reallocate some of their existing planes from other routes that are ETOPS rated?

The Max has not entered service yet. Once Norwegian receive their first aircraft they will have to perform a series of ETOPS proving runs to show they can operate the aircraft to the standard required.

Savman

Hopping the pond in a 737 that's not ETOPS certified, some folks like to live on the edge :pac:

Tenger

Savman wrote: »

Hopping the pond in a 737 that's not ETOPS certified, some folks like to live on the edge :pac:

Yeah, the edge of the North Atlantic.
Its not a big deal really, 30 mins extra each way.
As noted above, they will be providing the ETOPS testing during the first couple of months of operation. Somewhat similar to what Aer Lingus did with the A333 back in 1994 for Airbus.
We already have B737s going across the Atlantic, this is just a new model.

Gaoth Laidir

Here are the 53 aircraft they have on the Irish register (as of 28th Feb 2017).

flanzer

Tenger wrote: »

Yeah, the edge of the North Atlantic.
Its not a big deal really, 30 mins extra each way.
As noted above, they will be providing the ETOPS testing during the first couple of months of operation. Somewhat similar to what Aer Lingus did with the A333 back in 1994 for Airbus.
We already have B737s going across the Atlantic, this is just a new model.

It's something TA carriers ex DUB and SNN could use to their advertising advantage though. 30 mins extra per flight, 1 hour - 1 1/2 hours transfer to main cities. There are plenty of customers out there that wouldn't know what ETOPS certification is. Others carriers could throw it out there that Norwegian aren't fully certified to go TA, and they wouldn't be lying!

LiamaDelta

flanzer wrote: »

Others carriers could throw it out there that Norwegian aren't fully certified to go TA, and they wouldn't be lying!

But they would be lying...there's no such thing as 'not fully certified' you're either certified or not certified.
Either way, carriers rarely (if ever) criticise others when it comes to safety issues and/or certification, for obvious reasons. They certainly would be ill-advised to try using something like that as a selling point.

highlydebased

Confirmed by Shannon that they will be using preclearance there

http://www.clare.fm/news/shannon-airport-shortlisted-prestigious-international-award/ around the 4 min mark

JCX BXC

Could they be inaccurate? I understood that pre-clearance closes at 3pm.

highlydebased

JCX BXC wrote: »

Could they be inaccurate? I understood that pre-clearance closes at 3pm.

Would be quite an inaccuracy for a head of aviation marketing or whatever he is to say he wants to dispel rumours they won't be using it and for them to then not actually use it!

JCX BXC

highlydebased wrote: »

Would be quite an inaccuracy for a head of aviation marketing or whatever he is to say he wants to dispel rumours they won't be using it and for them to then not actually use it!

That's true,

I have personally seen staff trying to route people from the Kuwait flight through the locked and closed USPC, much to the confusion of the Kuwaitis, many of whom had poor English.

Although the Aviation development head has the job of developing aviation for Shannon, but may not have the best idea of operational procedures, especially if they have little involvement in them.

rabjoshu

Appears that Ryanair and Norwegian are close to a code-sharing deal.
Ryanair will fly people from Europe to Lgw, Bcn, Ork etc to embark Norwegian to the US.
http://www.express.co.uk/travel/articles/780182/ryanair-flights-new-york-norwegian

MoeJay

It would appear that the proof of the pudding is in the eating...is there any news or data out there about the performance of the aircraft, even in testing?

http://www.irishexaminer.com/business/norwegian-boss-casts-doubt-on-cork-new-york-447266.html

...the fact that Kjos received an award for "outstanding contribution" to Irish aviation tells you exactly what the IAA consider to be an "outstanding contribution."

Impetus

MoeJay wrote: »

It would appear that the proof of the pudding is in the eating...is there any news or data out there about the performance of the aircraft, even in testing?

http://www.irishexaminer.com/business/norwegian-boss-casts-doubt-on-cork-new-york-447266.html

...the fact that Kjos received an award for "outstanding contribution" to Irish aviation tells you exactly what the IAA consider to be an "outstanding contribution."

In the same article you mention, Norwegian's Kjos is reported as recently questioning the ability of the 737 MAX to land at Cork Airport, given the short runway length. The southerly runway is only 2'133m long.
Norwegian has been talking about creating a route from ORK to a NY area airport for several years.


If I was thinking of buying a new car in the morning, and had a small garage, the first thing I would look at is the dimensions of the car relative to the dimensions of my garage. Even more critical if one was spending $100 million on a new aircraft to serve a new route, dimensions and in particular runway length should be one of the first questions.


This make one wonder to oneself if Norwegian is an honest company. Also, when I was looking up the performance of the 737 MAX its maximum speed is only 840 km/h. Which is very slow for a mid-size commercial jet. It made me wonder if the engine manufacturers are putting a limiter on the speed, to generate a 'low fuel consumption' jet engine? I often find myself on short-haul European flights travelling at 900 km/h and above.

Finally, the constraining factor in expanding Cork airport seems to me the short runway length, Is it not about time they looked at adding 250 m to each end of the runway to make it more viable for a greater range of aircraft? When you see Ryanair's apparent willingness to act as a feeder airline to Norwegian and others the added traffic potential for an airport like Cork would be enormous.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/business/norwegian-boss-casts-doubt-on-cork-new-york-447266.html

Oasis1974

Was led to believe a runway extension was off the cards at Cork being close to a hill and a road on the adjacent end?

flanzer

Yeah, I broke my b0ll0x laughing last night on Twitter when they were awarded outstanding achievement. Internationally, maybe yes, but in terms of Irish aviation? Sure any of the newer airlines to the country could have won that! The IAA seem to be salivating over him on their Twitter feed too

NH2013

I think the runway length issue could have been seen from a mile off, but there was no using logic or reason to deter the crowds screaming for "Cheap Fares across the Atlantic!!". Now the flood gates have been opened to the illegitimate labour practices Norwegian employs, and little can be done to stop it, and the crowd that were screaming so loudly for these cheap fares won't see any of them.

MoeJay

I don't doubt their honesty for one minute. However it might the prelude to a softening of the argument on the economics of even the PVD route for the same reason...

No ORK-SWF means less crew based in Ireland too? Oh wait...

Jamie2k9

Anyone know if A321 NEO has better performance than 737 MAX.

They usually tend to do better of small runways.

Irish Steve

The length of the runway for landing is not the issue, it's the departure with fuel for the transatlantic trip that's the issue, the length of the runway means that they can't take the necessary fuel AND the load that makes the trip economic, which then means that there are "issues" about how many seats can be sold for the flight into Cork from the East Coast, being able to sell more seats one way than the other is going to make for problems with keeping people happy, they won't be happy if they can't get flights in both directions.

Locker10a

Seems to me this demonstrates very poor planning by Norwegian. But that doesn't surprise me.
Could we possibly see ORK-SNN-US east coast flights ? It's would eliminate the pay load restrictions and still me both airports get transatlantic service from Norwegian

billy few mates

billy few mates wrote: »

I think it's just a way of getting their foot in the door while they overcome all the regulatory hurdles, start off with a ORK-BOS service (or any other fanciful route pairing that no one else already does) so they can get the whole operation up and running with little or no objections. Once this one starts they can announce an expansion with a whole series of new routes out of DUB and SNN (which is the real prize) and then after a while just quietly drop the ORK-BOS route citing lack of customer demand.

Nearly...

Irish Steve

Given how close Cork and Shannon are to each other, it's unlikely, as there will be no traffic between the 2, so there will be no possible revenue benefit in accruing extra cycles on the airframe. This was the issue that made the 747 so uneconomic for Aer Lingus in comparison to the competition from Heathrow, the EI airframes ended up with twice the number of cycles compared with everyone else, and that has massive maintenance cost implications, both short term and long term

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

MoeJay

Sure look if they market Stewart as New York, and Providence as Boston, there's no problem in marketing Shannon as Cork (or indeed vice versa)...y'know, if they had to like.

Right?

(this is not a Shannon vs. Cork point that I'm trying to make nor trying to start any debate on!)

Irish Steve

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well aware of that, but the crunch issue is that a short internal sector with no real revenue advantage, regardless of the reason for it, hurts the bottom line for the operator, so the price on offer from Cork, via Shannon, has to reflect the additional cost of the landing and handling at Shannon, and if the flight out of Cork is full, then there's no additional revenue from the Shannon stop to offset the significant costs incurred in making the stop. The other complication is if they run it ORK-SNN- East Coast -ORK, then they have to factor in the people who want to get to Shannon from the East Coast, who will prevent a full uplift from Cork, or they have to stop at Shannon before they go to Cork, which makes the costs even more unattractive.

It will all come down to the actual performance capability of the 737Max, which is still not confirmed, once that is released, and certified from a regulatory aspect, only then can the operators work out their capability from the different airports and runways that they plan to serve, and there are clearly "issues" with Cork, which we've been talking about here for a very long time.

IsaacWunder

The Cork thing always struck me as a Trojan horse to use politically in order to get a license. Shannon and Dublin have preclearance. Norwegian will focus on them. Cork will be quietly forgotten about in time.

LiamaDelta

MoeJay wrote:

Sure look if they market Stewart as New York, and Providence as Boston, there's no problem in marketing Shannon as Cork (or indeed vice versa)...y'know, if they had to like.

Are yeh lookin ferra birra biznizzzz😂

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.