Airbus pioneered thin transatlantic routes with the A321 family, but 737s are muscling in with WestJet, Alaska, Southwest, and United. Is this real competition?
The idea of flying a single-aisle jet across the Atlantic used to sound like a punishment until the 757 opened the minds of both travelers and airline executives. But Airbus changed the conversation with the A321LR and, more recently, the A321XLR. These aircraft gave airlines the ability to profitably serve “thin” transatlantic routes, meaning city pairs that couldn’t fill a widebody but had just enough demand for a narrowbody.
JetBlue was among the first US carriers to prove the concept, launching A321LR service from New York and Boston to London. Aer Lingus had already been doing it for years from Dublin. Air Transat jumped in from Canada. And now American Airlines has taken delivery of the A321XLR, launching its first transatlantic route from JFK to Edinburgh in March 2026. Reports this week suggested that several more were on the way and some that operated seasonally will now see support all year. Air Canada is also adding the type to its fleet.
The narrowbody transatlantic revolution has been, for the most part, an Airbus story. The A321LR and XLR offer ranges of roughly 4,000 and 4,700 nautical miles respectively, making them tailor-made for hopping the pond without the economics of filling a 787 or A330; Delta and United both still operate a mix of 767-300/400s but both have planned to retire the type. By summer 2026, the LR and XLR are scheduled to operate 78 airport pairs between North America and Europe, up from 68 in summer 2025. It’s been an Airbus show, and Boeing has mostly been watching from the sidelines.
Until now.
Enter The Boeing 737 MAX
Here’s where things get interesting. The 737 MAX, particularly the MAX 8, doesn’t have the range of the A321XLR. At roughly 3,550 nautical miles versus Airbus’ 4,700, that’s a meaningful gap. But it turns out there are plenty of transatlantic city pairs that fall within the 737’s reach, especially from eastern Canada and the US East Coast to Iceland, Portugal, and parts of Western Europe.
Icelandair has been the pioneer here, and they deserve a lot of credit. The Icelandic carrier has been flying 737s across the Atlantic for years and is now scheduling more than 3,500 MAX-operated flights across the North Atlantic for summer 2026. Their longest MAX route will stretch from Seattle to Keflavik at 3,622 miles. Icelandair has committed so heavily to the narrowbody strategy that the airline is actually ending widebody operations entirely. Alaska will start the same route this summer.
WestJet has offered flights from far eastern Canada (Halifax) to London and other markets the last few years but was mostly alone in 737 transatlantic routes.
But what was once an Icelandair niche play is becoming something much bigger.
WestJet Goes All In
The most aggressive new entrant in the 737 transatlantic game is WestJet. The Canadian carrier is launching eight new nonstop 737 MAX 8 routes to Europe for summer 2026, representing a 44% year-over-year increase in transatlantic services. That’s more than dipping a toe in the water, it;’s a significant shift in strategy.
From Halifax, WestJet will serve Lisbon, Madrid, and Copenhagen. From Toronto, they’re adding Cardiff, Glasgow, and Ponta Delgada in the Azores. And from western Canada, they’re connecting Edmonton and Winnipeg to Reykjavik. The Toronto to Cardiff route will be WestJet’s longest narrowbody flight with a block time pushing nearly eight hours.
With 56 737-8s already in the fleet and more than 100 737-10s on order (eventually), WestJet is betting big on the idea that the 737 can serve thin transatlantic markets just as well as the A321. The airline is set to become the second-largest operator of 737s on transatlantic routes, right behind Icelandair, with 1,710 departures planned across the Atlantic.
Southwest Looks To Cross The Pond
We prior covered the reasons Southwest Airlines has to add transatlantic service on its own metal to comply with union requirements. Southwest is planning to launch flights from Baltimore to Keflavik, Iceland, potentially as early as spring 2026. For an airline that built its entire brand on short-haul, no-frills domestic flying, this is yet another monumental shift in a year filled with them.
The range math works. BWI to Reykjavik is roughly 2,700 miles, well within the 737 MAX 8’s range. Baltimore is one of Southwest’s biggest East Coast bases, and the airline already has an interline agreement with Icelandair that would allow passengers to connect through Keflavik to dozens of European destinations. This is part of a broader effort to make Rapid Rewards relevant for European travel and retain more of its current loyal customer base.
This won’t turn Southwest into a transatlantic powerhouse overnight, but it signals that even the most domestically focused carriers see opportunity in the narrowbody Atlantic market. I also expect Southwest to look for other routes to spread its 737 wings. From Baltimore (assuming Southwest’s largest east coast hub), the airline can reach Dublin, Shannon, the Azores, and Edinburgh with the 737-MAX 7 plus 20% fuel reserve without modifying payload density. With some cargo restrictions, London is also in range. Amsterdam, Brussels, and Frankfurt are a touch too far without some modifications. Or Southwest could look to a secondary airport from which it sets up its European base. Boston, for example, would open up Lisbon, London, and Paris without modifications but the carrier would face stong headwinds from an established domestic and international carrier base.
United Quietly Doubles Down
United Airlines has been in the 737 transatlantic business since 2022, when it launched Newark to Ponta Delgada in the Azores. The carrier added Funchal, Madeira in 2025 and is now doubling its 737 MAX 8 European routes for summer 2026 with new service to Glasgow and Santiago de Compostela from Newark.
These aren’t marquee routes. You won’t see Newark to London on a 737 anytime soon. But that’s exactly the point. United is using the MAX 8 to serve secondary European markets that can’t justify a widebody, and the strategy appears to be working. The 737 carries no lie-flat seats on these routes, just economy and premium economy, keeping costs down and making the routes viable even with lower overall demand. No other carrier flies to Santiago de Compostela at all, for example.
One more to consider is replacing a closed route from SAS. Scandinavian formerly flew a modified 737-700 from Stavenger to Houston, two oil and gas hubs, with just 44 seats in an all-business class configuration. While United is at it (and oil prices are up), this could happen too.
Can The 737 Really Compete With The A321?
The 737 MAX 8 is a capable airplane, but it’s not the A321XLR. The range difference alone limits the city pairs available to the 737. Longer transatlantic sectors remain firmly in Airbus territory but carriers like American, Delta, and United don’t have to wait for XLRs to add more routes to the map or more frequencies.
For the shorter crossings, and there are a lot of them, the 737 doesn’t need to match the A321XLR. Eastern Canada to western Europe, the US East Coast to Iceland, the Azores, and even destinations like Glasgow and Copenhagen are all within the 737’s reach. And with the potential certification of the 737 MAX 10 sometime in 2026, which offers more seats if not dramatically more range, the economics could improve further for airlines already operating the type. We could see cities with demand for US destinations like Liverpool (and my beloved Manchester) find new opportunities on smaller jets that are readily available.
WestJet has over 100 737-10s on order. If that airplane eventually gets certified and proves itself on these routes, it could make the unit economics of transatlantic narrowbody flying even more compelling for Boeing operators. Air Canada is also adding 737 MAX 8 transatlantic routes from Montreal to Nantes, Toronto to Ponta Delgada, and Halifax to Brussels for summer 2026, further expanding the Boeing footprint across the pond.
Conclusion
The transatlantic narrowbody revolution started with Airbus, and Airbus still owns the longer, more glamorous routes. The A321XLR is a game-changer, and American, JetBlue, Iberia, United, Aer Lingus, and others are proving it every day. But writing off the 737 in this space would be a mistake. WestJet is no longer experimenting, they are investing and Icelandair is not scheduling 3,500 transatlantic MAX flights on a whim. Southwest and Alaska’s moves are as bold if not bolder given what they represent for their respective comapnies. United quietly doubled its European 737 routes because the numbers work. What started as rare one-offs are becoming a strategy position. They represent a genuine and growing niche where the 737 MAX can compete, certainly not on every route across the Atlantic, but on enough of them to make Boeing a more significant player in a market that Airbus has dominated. The pond is getting more crowded, and for travelers looking for more options to Europe’s secondary cities at competitive fares, that’s nothing but good news.
What do you think?
So US citizens are so desperate to escape the world of War Criminal Trump that they will even board a Max to a backwater town in Europe to get away.
Interesting.
Your TDS is amazing. Get over yourself. Accept the fact Trump is our President and has done more already than Biden did in 4 years. Those suffering frankly deserve it. The US got WAY too woke with all the social justice warriors. Good to see us getting back to what made us great (and that includes nation building and taking steps to rid the world of problem areas)
War Criminal Trump may be your president, he’s certainly not mine but of course yes, over the time he’s been in office he’s started far more wars and conflict world wide than any president in history. I suppose you’ll have to remember him for something no matter how illegal it is.
Replying with “TDS” is such a lazy and tired take. Do better or move on.
Confederate Republican slavemongering goes 21st Century with orange makeup.
When United got the MAX 8, I’ll be honest with you I never expected we’d be seeing it flying as far as mainland Europe or Mongolia, they truly found a unique niche for the aircraft
While you mention the 757 at the beginning of your article, it seems like you gave it short shrift. We flew it from EWR-CGN in 08 or so. Moreover, according to another online poster, as early as 2006, Continental 757s were flying to BRS, LGW, BHM, MAN, GLA, EDI, SNN, DUB, BFS, BCN, MAD, LIS, CDG, ARN, CPH, OSL, HAM, CGN and maybe more. So, while the a321 may have supplanted the discontinued 757 for transatlantic narrow body routes, Boeing is now making a comeback in that market with the 737max.
just because you can fly a narrowbody on 8+ hour segments doesn’t mean airlines should.
There is no narrowbody that is as comfortable as even the smallest widebody, the 767.
every cabin on a narrowbody is inferior in comfort to a widebody; ironically, the 767 is the most comfortable in economy with 4 out 7 seats being aisles and 2 more being windows. Just one person is in a middle seat. on the 320 or 737 family aircraft only 1/3 of passengers have an aisle.
and that’s not even considering that everyone has to go through one aisle to board and get to the lav – or that the 737 and 321 fly slower and lower than widebodies on flights that long.
just because you can doesn’t mean you should
Naw, narrowbodies are just fine… if you install actual lie-flat up-front, which, for whatever reason, Delta can’t handle, even on its new XLRs. C’mon… if SQ can put a few lie-flat in their MAX-8, DL can get some in their 737s too…
the disconnect beween your incessant socialist posts and your statements about flying premium cabins all the time is breathtaking.
Narrowbodies just don’t have as much room in any cabin as widebodies do.
when you consider that carriers like UA are flying domestic configured 737s to Europe, your argument doesn’t even hold water
and precious delta flies domestic 757s to Europe with recliners
So get off your horse about united, Mr Dunce
On what transatlantic route does DL fly a 757? What I do know is that you can fly UA to EDI out of EWR on a 757 with a 2-2 J. You can fly a 321 on AA out of JFK with a 1-1 J. But, DL flies a 764. Every review makes me think the DL 764 experience, as weak as it is in J on that plane is better than the 321. Plus PE and Y are better ar 2-2-2 and 2-3-2 on the 764 versus 2-2 and 3-3 on AA 322xlrs.
thank you, mind.
the Delta One product on the 767-300ER is not the same as on the 767-400; the majority of DL 763 flights compete with UA 757s and other airline narrowbody=ies, not other widebodies. There are a few markets where DL uses 763s such as to BRU against other airline “nicer” widebodies but those are generally markets which are to other airline/alliance strength markets where DL has determined that product really doesn’t make that much difference.
the majority of 763s are used on domestic flights including transcons and to Hawaii. there they compete with other airline narrowbodies and UA’s high density widebodies.
The 763 is not the greatest product in business class, and is better than just about every other narrowbody product in other classes
And DL IS retiring the 767-300ERs. Let’s see what this oil spike does but there could be a whole lot of network restructuring and fleet changes in the next couple weeks for all airlines.
it is mind-numbing that there are people that argue that the majority of people buy tickets based on price and then trash a specific airplane type.
The reality is that there isn’t a single narrowbody that delivers comparable product and space as what a widebody can do -and that is before considering performance – speed, altitude, and range – as well as cargo.
and, most specifically, there are no US carrier XLRs in service now. The only narrowbody TATL service that is in service now is UA’s 757s – a far weaker product than any DL widebody – and UA’s 737s.
AA’s EDI flight will be nicer but it will be one flight this year for a carrier that has a poor track record of competing w/ DL and UA from NYC.
and no US carrier is planning to put premium cabins on MAX aircraft and operate them over the Atlantic or even to Hawaii so the comparisons of what Asian carriers have done w/ MAXs on far shorter routes is meaningless
KEF. Part of Europe and called TATL on Delta.com and listed as Europe per their JV with AF/KLM. DL flies the 752 with recliner seats as premium economy on the route.
If higher fuel cost and weakening demand are the factors, then narrowbodies with less operating cost and longer range, such as the XLR, are going to save airlines that want to still operate. Premium passengers clearly prefer lie-flat over recliners, especially on redeyes and longer routes. I still don’t understand why Delta failed at lie-flat on XLR; maybe, like, try again, because it’d be a huge improvement.
As for the ‘you’re a hypocrite if you fly premium cabins’ trope… is that effective? Like, do you need to sit in the last row to ‘care’ or a ‘middle seat’ or ‘no recline’? Or do you have to walk everywhere or take a bus? And, if you debate someone, is it true that you just need to shout ‘socialist!’ or ‘communist!’ or ‘fascist!’ and that’s it. You win; they lose. Wow, if so, that’s impressive. I gotta try that sometime…
I’ll take the seat width of the 321 economy seat over any of the recent Boeing widebody interiors hands down. The speed difference will be about 65 mph. What’s the time difference from flying direct versus convincing?
I take it you haven’t flown a 777 in economy recently. Also, the vast majority of the flying public purchase air travel based on ticket price, not equipment type or amenities. So I doubt you’d find a single airline manager who would agree with your statement.
Best of good luck to the versatile B737 MAX 8!
People forget that the Boeing 707, which pioneered TATL jet travel, was a narrow body aircraft.
I consider flying a narrowbody plane for more than about four hours to be an exercise in unpleasantness at the best of times. Unless the airlines are adding 2-3 inches of legroom plus considerably better padding I dread the idea of flying one. Meal service would be a disaster, as would getting to the loo. The 757 clearly illustrated the shortcomings of longer haul narrowbody planes. Perhaps if the seats had been 18″ wide rather than 16″-17″ it would have been less onerous but it sure bodes ill for what’s to come.
The difference between a 17 inch wide seat and an 18 inch wide seat on a 7 hour flight is significant for comfort and toleration. With only one narrow aisle, that bit of extra hip space means a lot. I’ve experienced jetBlue from JFK, AMS and CDG and from BOS to MAD. It’s not bad in the extra legroom seats. It wasn’t awful in the back either (before I became Mosaic for life). Having said that, I recently took a 737 to PVR from JFK and back on Alaska’s 737 and I felt it. I disagree slightly with the author, I think it’s nice to have these so called thin routes being serviced but jetBlue is not doing that. JFK and BOS to LHR, DUB, EDI, AMS, CDG, MAD and BCN (okay maybe EDI) are anything but thin routes. I’m grateful for Airbus and their forethought into making the passenger experience a priority.