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
Apr 5, 2019, 8:47 am
#2357
Join Date: Nov 2010
Programs: Aeroplan AA
Posts: 249
Continuing with my "just wondering" theme, I wonder how may other airlines are thinking the same thing?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-citing-stigma
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-citing-stigma
Apr 5, 2019, 9:33 am
#2358
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 96
Looks like:
Even though the preliminary report gives us more questions than answers, the ridiculous narrative of 737 MAX = MCAS = Boeing = Bad which is being perpetuated by most of the internet and most of the people on this board looks to be a gross oversimplification. More evidence of the terrible design of MCAS, and although the proposed changes to MCAS might have saved the lives of the people on board they could not trim the aircraft even when it was disabled. Even after the MCAS changes are implemented the problems are deeper; at least we need to understand what is going on around sensor failure and around the control problems they had independent of MCAS. And as expected it looks like the crew made some errors too. Like most other aviation accidents this looks like a chain reaction of events where we've got issues with hardware, software and people lining up in a tragic manner.
But given that there are more questions than answers now I am not sure the MAX gets re-certified any time soon. I hope AC is making plans past the end of May for this.
- There were serious issues with he AoA and probably some of the other sensors. The incident aircraft had numerous items it its maintenance history that were never resolved (they just didn't recur). Investigators and Boeing need to understand why, as this was an issue with Lion Air and there was also an issue with a Sunwing 737 MAX8 (at cruising altitude) a few months ago as well, although they managed to handle it. This is not normal.
- The crew correctly used the stab trim cutout and tried to manually trim the aircraft. They were having issues though, because for whatever reasons they had lot of power applied and trimming the aircraft at those speeds challenging.
- For whatever reason they re-enabled the automatic trim, which is completely against the instructions provided by Boeing. Again for whatever reason when did they were not trying to use the electric trim, then MCAS re-engaged, pushed the nose down and then they were all dead at such low altitude.
Even though the preliminary report gives us more questions than answers, the ridiculous narrative of 737 MAX = MCAS = Boeing = Bad which is being perpetuated by most of the internet and most of the people on this board looks to be a gross oversimplification. More evidence of the terrible design of MCAS, and although the proposed changes to MCAS might have saved the lives of the people on board they could not trim the aircraft even when it was disabled. Even after the MCAS changes are implemented the problems are deeper; at least we need to understand what is going on around sensor failure and around the control problems they had independent of MCAS. And as expected it looks like the crew made some errors too. Like most other aviation accidents this looks like a chain reaction of events where we've got issues with hardware, software and people lining up in a tragic manner.
But given that there are more questions than answers now I am not sure the MAX gets re-certified any time soon. I hope AC is making plans past the end of May for this.
so having followed Boeing's own instructions but unable to trim the aircraft as the manual controls are not possible to trim the amount needed, they reactivated it to get electric assistance back ,but reactivation reengaged the MCAS. Boeing had to make the manual trim wheels a little bit smaller in the MAX, which means that more force is needed to get them going. The preliminary report indicates that at the speed of the Ethiopian plane, the first officer could not get the manual trim wheel moving after the crew had successfully disabled MCAS.
they never had a chance due to poor design, impossible instructions...all beyond the fault of pilots but squarely at Boeing
Apr 5, 2019, 9:42 am
#2359
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 96
Looks like:
Even though the preliminary report gives us more questions than answers, the ridiculous narrative of 737 MAX = MCAS = Boeing = Bad which is being perpetuated by most of the internet and most of the people on this board looks to be a gross oversimplification. More evidence of the terrible design of MCAS, and although the proposed changes to MCAS might have saved the lives of the people on board they could not trim the aircraft even when it was disabled. Even after the MCAS changes are implemented the problems are deeper; at least we need to understand what is going on around sensor failure and around the control problems they had independent of MCAS. And as expected it looks like the crew made some errors too. Like most other aviation accidents this looks like a chain reaction of events where we've got issues with hardware, software and people lining up in a tragic manner.
But given that there are more questions than answers now I am not sure the MAX gets re-certified any time soon. I hope AC is making plans past the end of May for this.
- There were serious issues with he AoA and probably some of the other sensors. The incident aircraft had numerous items it its maintenance history that were never resolved (they just didn't recur). Investigators and Boeing need to understand why, as this was an issue with Lion Air and there was also an issue with a Sunwing 737 MAX8 (at cruising altitude) a few months ago as well, although they managed to handle it. This is not normal.
- The crew correctly used the stab trim cutout and tried to manually trim the aircraft. They were having issues though, because for whatever reasons they had lot of power applied and trimming the aircraft at those speeds challenging.
- For whatever reason they re-enabled the automatic trim, which is completely against the instructions provided by Boeing. Again for whatever reason when did they were not trying to use the electric trim, then MCAS re-engaged, pushed the nose down and then they were all dead at such low altitude.
Even though the preliminary report gives us more questions than answers, the ridiculous narrative of 737 MAX = MCAS = Boeing = Bad which is being perpetuated by most of the internet and most of the people on this board looks to be a gross oversimplification. More evidence of the terrible design of MCAS, and although the proposed changes to MCAS might have saved the lives of the people on board they could not trim the aircraft even when it was disabled. Even after the MCAS changes are implemented the problems are deeper; at least we need to understand what is going on around sensor failure and around the control problems they had independent of MCAS. And as expected it looks like the crew made some errors too. Like most other aviation accidents this looks like a chain reaction of events where we've got issues with hardware, software and people lining up in a tragic manner.
But given that there are more questions than answers now I am not sure the MAX gets re-certified any time soon. I hope AC is making plans past the end of May for this.
Ethopian Airline= African = Bad Pilots = plane crash
Lion Air = Asian = Bad Pilots = Plane Crash
Boeing = American = Smart = Good = no crash
Apr 5, 2019, 10:59 am
#2360
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Mississauga Ontario
Posts: 4,096
most other aviation accidents this looks like a chain reaction of events where we've got issues with hardware, software and people lining up in a tragic manner.
But given that there are more questions than answers now I am not sure the MAX gets re-certified any time soon. I hope AC is making plans past the end of May for this.
But given that there are more questions than answers now I am not sure the MAX gets re-certified any time soon. I hope AC is making plans past the end of May for this.
I'm on record as saying October. I'm thinking now even that is optimistic.
Apr 5, 2019, 11:33 am
#2361
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Vancouver
Programs: Aeroplan, Mileage Plus, WestJet Gold, AMEX Plat
Posts: 2,026
Personally, I like flights that don't involve a series of chain reactions multiplying the acceleration of the reaction as a result of a software and architectural design flaw. But what do I know; I'm not a pilot, and not an Asian or African one at that, so what do I know? I'm just a PAX.
I'm on record as saying October. I'm thinking now even that is optimistic.
I'm on record as saying October. I'm thinking now even that is optimistic.
Apr 5, 2019, 11:39 am
#2362
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ideally YOW, but probably not
Programs: AC SE*MM
Posts: 1,822
so having followed Boeing's own instructions but unable to trim the aircraft as the manual controls are not possible to trim the amount needed, they reactivated it to get electric assistance back ,but reactivation reengaged the MCAS. Boeing had to make the manual trim wheels a little bit smaller in the MAX, which means that more force is needed to get them going. The preliminary report indicates that at the speed of the Ethiopian plane, the first officer could not get the manual trim wheel moving after the crew had successfully disabled MCAS.
Apr 5, 2019, 11:48 am
#2363
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada's worst airport....YYJ
Programs: AC: E75K, Marriott :Titanium, National: EXEC ELITE
Posts: 595
I don't think there's any chance the model gets scrapped, and as soon as they are recertified, AC and everyone else will start flying them again. There is just no feasible replacement on the horizon in the timeframe that airlines will need.
The real question will be how many people will avoid the MAX when it is re-introduced. Thinking like the FT member I am, I'm hoping for some smoking mileage runs deals on Max routes when the plane is reintroduced later this year to try and entice people back. $299RT YYC-OGG in Comfort? I'll take 3, please.
***None of this is intended to minimize the tragedies of the crash victims in any way.
The real question will be how many people will avoid the MAX when it is re-introduced. Thinking like the FT member I am, I'm hoping for some smoking mileage runs deals on Max routes when the plane is reintroduced later this year to try and entice people back. $299RT YYC-OGG in Comfort? I'll take 3, please.
***None of this is intended to minimize the tragedies of the crash victims in any way.
Apr 5, 2019, 12:12 pm
#2364
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: YXU
Programs: AC SE100K, National E/E, HH Diamond, IHG Diamond, MB, Avis PC
Posts: 965
Apr 5, 2019, 12:21 pm
#2365
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Mississauga Ontario
Posts: 4,096
Maybe we should recruit folks who do a lot of roller coaster rides at Canada's Wonderland. Might make up for the lack of real 737Max sim training.
Just a personal favourite, I suppose. But what do I know. I'm just a Pax.
Apr 5, 2019, 12:45 pm
#2366
Join Date: Nov 2010
Programs: Aeroplan AA
Posts: 249
Apr 5, 2019, 1:28 pm
#2367
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
I'm also curious how RatherBeInYOW came to the conclusion that "they forgot" anything?
Apr 5, 2019, 1:36 pm
#2368
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,302
Apr 5, 2019, 3:33 pm
#2370
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC SEMM / HH Diamond
Posts: 3,153
