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
Mar 22, 2019, 6:52 pm
#2221
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: YVR
Programs: AC E50K, NEXUS
Posts: 645
Agreed, airliners aren't like Cessnas but there is more than one moving surface. On the 737, the stabilizers move and there are elevators and there are balance tabs.
Mar 22, 2019, 9:28 pm
#2222
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 6,222
Mar 23, 2019, 4:45 pm
#2223
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: MEX
Programs: AC E75K
Posts: 4,171
Pretty good write-up in the NYT today: Boeing Was ‘Go, Go, Go’ to Beat Airbus With the 737 Max.
Mar 23, 2019, 10:20 pm
#2224
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2014
Programs: AC SE100K-1MM, NH, DL, AA, BA, Global Entry/Nexus, APEC..
Posts: 18,877
Pretty good write-up in the NYT today: Boeing Was ‘Go, Go, Go’ to Beat Airbus With the 737 Max.
Thanks for posting this.
So, the MAX was born as a reincarnation of the 737 because Boeing was really concerned about losing the AA sale to Airbus.
As for the design issues mentioned in this article, I wonder if AC knew any of this before they decided to buy these cheap(er) and "easy to fly" MAXs.
QUOTEs:
"A technician who assembles wiring on the Max said that in the first months of development, rushed designers were delivering sloppy blueprints to him. He was told that the instructions for the wiring would be cleaned up later in the process, he said.
His internal assembly designs for the Max, he said, still include omissions today, such as not specifying which tools to use to install a certain wire, a situation that could lead to a faulty connection. Normally such blueprints include intricate instructions."
.......“Any designs we created could not drive any new training that required a simulator,” Ludtke said. “That was a first.”
When upgrading the cockpit with a digital display, he said, his team wanted to redesign the layout of information to give pilots more data that were easier to read. But that might have required new pilot training.
So instead, they simply re-created the decades-old gauges on the screen. “We just went from an analog presentation to a digital presentation,” Ludtke said. “There was so much opportunity to make big jumps, but the training differences held us back.”
Mar 23, 2019, 10:32 pm
#2225
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2014
Programs: AC SE100K-1MM, NH, DL, AA, BA, Global Entry/Nexus, APEC..
Posts: 18,877
Boeing Plans Fixes to Make 737 MAX Stall-Prevention Feature Easier ...
Wall Street Journal March 23 2019
I wonder how many from AC are going.
QUOTES:
"Even after the changes are fully implemented in the U.S., air-safety regulators in Canada and the EU are poised to conduct their own evaluation of the new software as well as how the FAA initially certified the plane to carry passengers. Those reviews could take months, according to safety experts."
The group engaging in this weekend’s preview of the changes includes pilots from U.S. MAX operators: Southwest Airlines Co. , American Airlines Group Inc. and United Continental Holdings Inc., a person familiar with the matter said. On Wednesday, this person added, a larger group of more than 100 pilots from a broad cross section of MAX operators are due at Boeing’s 737 factory in Renton, Wash., for a similar session.
....Under the new design, warning devices will alert crews if there is a problem with sensors before takeoff or in flight, people familiar with the redesign said."
Wall Street Journal March 23 2019
I wonder how many from AC are going.
QUOTES:
"Even after the changes are fully implemented in the U.S., air-safety regulators in Canada and the EU are poised to conduct their own evaluation of the new software as well as how the FAA initially certified the plane to carry passengers. Those reviews could take months, according to safety experts."
The group engaging in this weekend’s preview of the changes includes pilots from U.S. MAX operators: Southwest Airlines Co. , American Airlines Group Inc. and United Continental Holdings Inc., a person familiar with the matter said. On Wednesday, this person added, a larger group of more than 100 pilots from a broad cross section of MAX operators are due at Boeing’s 737 factory in Renton, Wash., for a similar session.
....Under the new design, warning devices will alert crews if there is a problem with sensors before takeoff or in flight, people familiar with the redesign said."
Mar 23, 2019, 11:31 pm
#2226
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: YVR
Programs: AC E50K, NEXUS
Posts: 645
@capedreamer
Thanks for posting this.
So, the MAX was born as a reincarnation of the 737 because Boeing was really concerned about losing the AA sale to Airbus.
As for the design issues mentioned in this article, I wonder if AC knew any of this before they decided to buy these cheap(er) and "easy to fly" MAXs.
QUOTEs:
"A technician who assembles wiring on the Max said that in the first months of development, rushed designers were delivering sloppy blueprints to him. He was told that the instructions for the wiring would be cleaned up later in the process, he said.
His internal assembly designs for the Max, he said, still include omissions today, such as not specifying which tools to use to install a certain wire, a situation that could lead to a faulty connection. Normally such blueprints include intricate instructions."
.......“Any designs we created could not drive any new training that required a simulator,” Ludtke said. “That was a first.”
When upgrading the cockpit with a digital display, he said, his team wanted to redesign the layout of information to give pilots more data that were easier to read. But that might have required new pilot training.
So instead, they simply re-created the decades-old gauges on the screen. “We just went from an analog presentation to a digital presentation,” Ludtke said. “There was so much opportunity to make big jumps, but the training differences held us back.”
Thanks for posting this.
So, the MAX was born as a reincarnation of the 737 because Boeing was really concerned about losing the AA sale to Airbus.
As for the design issues mentioned in this article, I wonder if AC knew any of this before they decided to buy these cheap(er) and "easy to fly" MAXs.
QUOTEs:
"A technician who assembles wiring on the Max said that in the first months of development, rushed designers were delivering sloppy blueprints to him. He was told that the instructions for the wiring would be cleaned up later in the process, he said.
His internal assembly designs for the Max, he said, still include omissions today, such as not specifying which tools to use to install a certain wire, a situation that could lead to a faulty connection. Normally such blueprints include intricate instructions."
.......“Any designs we created could not drive any new training that required a simulator,” Ludtke said. “That was a first.”
When upgrading the cockpit with a digital display, he said, his team wanted to redesign the layout of information to give pilots more data that were easier to read. But that might have required new pilot training.
So instead, they simply re-created the decades-old gauges on the screen. “We just went from an analog presentation to a digital presentation,” Ludtke said. “There was so much opportunity to make big jumps, but the training differences held us back.”
WRT constraining design changes to avoid changes in training, I don't think this is necessary such a bad thing. There are huge advantages for airlines in having a common type rating and common training across a family of aircraft. Considering Airbus does exactly this, there is no reason why Boeing should not also do it.
The line that Boeing crossed, IMO, is that the implementation of MCAS seems to be fundamentally flawed and it also seems to not be consistent with the philosophy of maintaining a single type rating. If MCAS was implemented properly and also consistently with the preservation of the same flight characteristics, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.
It's going to be really "interesting" to hear about the DOJ / FBI investigation into the certification process. If Boeing engineers assigned to the FAA did not carry out their roles responsibly (as appears to be the case), there will be hell to pay.
Mar 24, 2019, 1:05 am
#2227
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Vancouver
Programs: Aeroplan, Mileage Plus, WestJet Gold, AMEX Plat
Posts: 2,026
Back in the late 90s I remember attending a week long systems engineering course in Seattle that had people from a mix of industries. Boeing was well represented, including engineers where were Boeing employees but attached to the regulator on specific projects. This criticism of the process existed back then. These were engineers that were involved with the NG program employees by Boeing but attached to the FAA doing some of the oversight. I am not surprised the criticism still exists today it existed back then. The current administration in the US would probably be supportive of the current system is the alternative was increasing the US government head count.
Mar 24, 2019, 7:54 am
#2228
Formerly known as tireman77
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 5,523
From AP: The company [Boeing] is tweaking the system designed to prevent an aerodynamic stall if sensors detect that the plane’s nose is pointed too high. After the update, the system will rely on data from more than one sensor before it automatically pushes the plane’s nose lower. The system won’t repeatedly push the nose down, and it will reduce the magnitude of the change.
Boeing said it will pay to train airline pilots.
Sounds like a post from a guy a while back saying they would provide a "Software Update" and follow up with more training.
Personal editorial note (Edit): AC pilots received this training a few days after the Lion Air incident....
Looks like he was onto something. Just sayin'...
Boeing said it will pay to train airline pilots.
Sounds like a post from a guy a while back saying they would provide a "Software Update" and follow up with more training.
Personal editorial note (Edit): AC pilots received this training a few days after the Lion Air incident....
Looks like he was onto something. Just sayin'...
Last edited by PLeblond; Mar 24, 2019 at 8:01 am
Mar 24, 2019, 11:50 am
#2229
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: YVR
Programs: AC E50K, NEXUS
Posts: 645
Back in the late 90s I remember attending a week long systems engineering course in Seattle that had people from a mix of industries. Boeing was well represented, including engineers where were Boeing employees but attached to the regulator on specific projects. This criticism of the process existed back then. These were engineers that were involved with the NG program employees by Boeing but attached to the FAA doing some of the oversight. I am not surprised the criticism still exists today it existed back then. The current administration in the US would probably be supportive of the current system is the alternative was increasing the US government head count.
Mar 24, 2019, 12:03 pm
#2230
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SJC/YUL
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold
Posts: 3,878
As a P.Eng., the idea of being seconded from an aircraft manufacturer to the FAA makes my skin crawl. This would be an exceedingly difficult position to be put in and it seems to be a conflict of interest, unless the engineer is given a clear and absolute mandate by the employer to act solely in the interest of the FAA. Maybe in a perfect world this would work...
Mar 24, 2019, 1:39 pm
#2231
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ideally YOW, but probably not
Programs: AC SE*MM
Posts: 1,827
Aviation and aerospace, is an obsessively pedantic industry. (for the record, one that my brain is not tuned to be in).
Boeing here seems to have forgotten generations of industry norms. They should be held to that standard, not the reboot and see what happens standard.
Boeing here seems to have forgotten generations of industry norms. They should be held to that standard, not the reboot and see what happens standard.
Last edited by tcook052; Mar 25, 2019 at 5:10 am Reason: off topic
Mar 24, 2019, 1:41 pm
#2232
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: YVR
Programs: AC E50K, NEXUS
Posts: 645
I don't think it's all that difficult. An ethical engineer should be able to call it based on the data, regardless of which "side" they're on. If the product requirements are in conflict with regulatory requirements, than any engineer working for either the company or the regulator should be able to point out the conflict. I'm an engineer in a similarly regulated industry, and when someone points out such a conflict we stop and we address it. The only issue I see is if the company pressures employees to overlook things, in which case there is a very serious problem in the company culture.
Mar 25, 2019, 1:45 am
#2233
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Vancouver
Programs: Aeroplan, Mileage Plus, WestJet Gold, AMEX Plat
Posts: 2,026
As a P.Eng., the idea of being seconded from an aircraft manufacturer to the FAA makes my skin crawl. This would be an exceedingly difficult position to be put in and it seems to be a conflict of interest, unless the engineer is given a clear and absolute mandate by the employer to act solely in the interest of the FAA. Maybe in a perfect world this would work...
Mar 25, 2019, 1:52 pm
#2234
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC E50K MM * DL MM * HH Diamond * Marriott Lifetime Titanium * Queen's '92
Posts: 5,950
Mar 25, 2019, 3:04 pm
#2235
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Programs: BA Exec Club - Demoted to Bronze and re-promoted to Silver alongside AC Elite 50K (gold) in 2022
Posts: 393
back to CZAMflier - perhaps I'll wait for more than a year, but once the type is back in the air, I guess Boeing will be keen to deliver the backlog - I wonder where they will store them once paine is full!!
Last edited by tcook052; Mar 25, 2019 at 3:12 pm Reason: off topic