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 17, 2019, 1:36 pm
#2566
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: YVR
Programs: AC E50K, NEXUS
Posts: 645
@bimmerdriver, I've asked a couple of times about this ... and it's a real ask, I'm not trying to call you out or anything, I really do want to read more details.
Can you (or anyone) provide actual examples of 737 MAX flights where there is even a suspicion that the MCAS acted up, but the plane flew on ok. The only instances that I know about are the Lion Air flights prior to 610. I have read what the preliminary report says about those flight (a flight which was also reported to have been carrying an extra deadheading pilot, who was the one to suggest the stab trim cut-off) ... but I honestly want to read more about other examples, even if they are not confirmed MCAS problems.
I do recall that multiple people have referred to references of such incidents in the NASA database (https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/search/database.html), but I can't find anything myself.
Please help. I'd like to read more details about the flights you reference. Where did you find your information?
Can you (or anyone) provide actual examples of 737 MAX flights where there is even a suspicion that the MCAS acted up, but the plane flew on ok. The only instances that I know about are the Lion Air flights prior to 610. I have read what the preliminary report says about those flight (a flight which was also reported to have been carrying an extra deadheading pilot, who was the one to suggest the stab trim cut-off) ... but I honestly want to read more about other examples, even if they are not confirmed MCAS problems.
I do recall that multiple people have referred to references of such incidents in the NASA database (https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/search/database.html), but I can't find anything myself.
Please help. I'd like to read more details about the flights you reference. Where did you find your information?
Apr 17, 2019, 1:46 pm
#2568
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Programs: HH Silver
Posts: 56,449
No, this frames many unrelated events rather than causes, so meaningless relative to the aircraft's safety record.
We recently saw the tragic loss of an A320 in the EU Alps because of what we understand was homicide-by-pilot (and suicide with lethal intent).
So what has this tragedy have anything to do with the safety record of the A320 when a perfectly good aircraft is flow into a mountain?
We recently saw the tragic loss of an A320 in the EU Alps because of what we understand was homicide-by-pilot (and suicide with lethal intent).
So what has this tragedy have anything to do with the safety record of the A320 when a perfectly good aircraft is flow into a mountain?
Apr 17, 2019, 1:50 pm
#2569
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: 44,331
And we see the DC-9 on the graph, which AC tragically lost an aircraft because of the careless disposal of a cigarette in a lavatory when smoking on board was still allowed.
Again, this could have happened on any aircraft, as an in-cabin fire, started by an external source, is incredibly dangerous in the confines of an aircraft.
Again, this could have happened on any aircraft, as an in-cabin fire, started by an external source, is incredibly dangerous in the confines of an aircraft.
Is it possible to design an aircraft such that a disposal of a cigarette (in a "reasonable" location like the sink, toilet, trash, ashtray, etc.) would not start a fire? If the answer is yes, then it's fair to factor in incidents like this, since another aircraft could have been safe in the same situation.
Apr 17, 2019, 2:42 pm
#2570
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC SEMM / HH Diamond
Posts: 3,166
The only flights I'm aware of specifically are the lion air flights of the same aircraft that crashed. I've read a few anecdotal references elsewhere, but I haven't seen any official reports. This is what I said in a post above. If there are other official reports, they will no doubt surface as part of the investigation. If I find anything specific, I will post it here.
Can I suggest that until we get some actual reports with actual details, we all refrain from talking about any previous flights where MCAS (potentially) operated incorrectly, and the roles that any pilots (potentially) had in saving those planes?
Apr 17, 2019, 3:08 pm
#2572
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: YVR
Programs: UA Premier Platinum
Posts: 3,759
My guess is that Garneau wouldn't make this comment to the media unless he was planning to do something about it. It's not as if he was overheard in a bar talking about his personal opinion.
Apr 17, 2019, 4:05 pm
#2574
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: YVR
Programs: UA Premier Platinum
Posts: 3,759
Fair enough at the margins you suggest, but I can find only two incidents of fatalities related to discarded cigarettes, the other CAAC in 1982 on a Russian-built aircraft.
But in principal you are right, as while AC lost 23 passengers that day, the consequences fundamentally altered aircraft design, not just for DC-9s but every modern aircraft in terms of fire protection, evacuation, etc...my friend at TK who runs cabin crew training knows all about AC 797, and they use it to remind new crews why dealing with on-board smoking can be life and death.
But in principal you are right, as while AC lost 23 passengers that day, the consequences fundamentally altered aircraft design, not just for DC-9s but every modern aircraft in terms of fire protection, evacuation, etc...my friend at TK who runs cabin crew training knows all about AC 797, and they use it to remind new crews why dealing with on-board smoking can be life and death.
Apr 17, 2019, 4:47 pm
#2575
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC SE MM, Bonvoy Plat, Hilton G,Nexus, Amex MR Plat,IHG Plat
Posts: 4,426
Fair enough, and thanks.
Can I suggest that until we get some actual reports with actual details, we all refrain from talking about any previous flights where MCAS (potentially) operated incorrectly, and the roles that any pilots (potentially) had in saving those planes?
Can I suggest that until we get some actual reports with actual details, we all refrain from talking about any previous flights where MCAS (potentially) operated incorrectly, and the roles that any pilots (potentially) had in saving those planes?
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...ng-737-1266090
Apr 17, 2019, 5:00 pm
#2576
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: YVR - MILLS Waypoint (It's the third house on the left)
Programs: AC*SE100K, wood level status in various other programs
Posts: 6,231
Here is a link to a news article that there were 5 incidents in the US where pilots reported issues. Sorry if it was already rehashed elsewhere.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...ng-737-1266090
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...ng-737-1266090
Not all of the 'incidents' referenced explicitly involved MCAS (only three reports even mention MCAS) or were even necessarily initiated due to an in-flight issue . So treat it as it is - raw data gleaned from the NASA ASRS database.
Last edited by Bohemian1; Apr 17, 2019 at 5:27 pm
Apr 17, 2019, 5:21 pm
#2577
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: YVR
Programs: AC E50K, NEXUS
Posts: 645
FAA: Simulator Sessions Not Needed For Updated MAX Training
You have to register to read the entire article.
WASHINGTON—An FAA update of minimum training required for pilots to fly the Boeing 737 MAX will cover the aircraft’s maneuvering characteristics augmentation system (MCAS), but simulator sessions will not be needed, a draft of a new report reveals.