[Speculation] Should AS Order the 737 MAX?

Old Jan 10, 20, 8:26 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Anchorage / So CAL
Programs: AKAir 75K, BestWestern PE
Posts: 36
[Speculation] Should AS Order the 737 MAX?

Any other FTers feel compelled to tell Alaska Airline to never buy any of the 737 max aircraft?

I just read the test pilot remarks about the plane and it makes me never want to fly on that plane. It seems that a plane that flies so far outside the norms (experienced test piots repeatedly crashed in the simulators) and requires software to make if feel as though it flies like a normal plane is a major red flag for me.

Alaska has a chance to save itself from this disaster waiting to happen and look at other options. I as a frequent flyer encourage them to do so because I will be looking to stay off that aircraft.
jjmadison likes this.
chillymac is offline  
Old Jan 10, 20, 8:35 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Between BLI & PAE.
Programs: AS MVP Gold, One Pass, SPG, Marriot Rewards,Sky Miles, AMEX Miles
Posts: 1,245
Originally Posted by chillymac View Post
Any other FTers feel compelled to tell Alaska Airline to never buy any of the 737 max aircraft?

I just read the test pilot remarks about the plane and it makes me never want to fly on that plane. It seems that a plane that flies so far outside the norms (experienced test piots repeatedly crashed in the simulators) and requires software to make if feel as though it flies like a normal plane is a major red flag for me.

Alaska has a chance to save itself from this disaster waiting to happen and look at other options. I as a frequent flyer encourage them to do so because I will be looking to stay off that aircraft.
I share your concern and intend to avoid flying the MAX until it has a couple of years of proven safety.
JPat is offline  
Old Jan 10, 20, 8:39 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 62
I certainly do. The 737 Max is just completely compromised from a reputational standpoint, as is Boeing itself at this standpoint. I think Boeing should just cancel the model, sell the inventory they’ve built already at a discount, and offer to fill orders with NG models until they can design a 737 replacement. I will be watching the schedule carefully and avoiding the Max entirely.
BayAreaTrvler is offline  
Old Jan 10, 20, 9:27 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SEA
Programs: AS MVP Gold
Posts: 1,274
I have some bad news for you. The strong rumor is AS plans to announce a large Max order soon as the grounding is lifted. On a practical note, they really have no other choice if they want to grow in the next few years.

Personally I have confidence in AS flight crews and if they feel safe flying it, I feel safe flying with them.
kennycrudup, ashill and jinglish like this.
jsguyrus is online now  
Old Jan 10, 20, 9:31 pm
  #5  
2020 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: PDX
Programs: AS MVP
Posts: 555
Originally Posted by chillymac View Post
Any other FTers feel compelled to tell Alaska Airline to never buy any of the 737 max aircraft?
No. I hope they use the situation as leverage to get a great price and order even more.
RAD_PDX is online now  
Old Jan 10, 20, 10:10 pm
  #6  
Moderator: Alaska Mileage Plan
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10,000
Let's remember that WN flew thousands of MAX cycles without a major incident prior to the grounding.
dayone is offline  
Old Jan 10, 20, 10:31 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 73
My thinking is that when it gets the okay to fly again it will be an extremely safe airplane.
NeilA is offline  
Old Jan 10, 20, 10:38 pm
  #8  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Portland, Oregon
Programs: Hilton Gold, Marriott Silver, Alaska MVP Gold
Posts: 2,232
This plane won't fly under its present name, Boeing has way too many problems with it and the latest NYT article of Boeing employee emails shows how bad this is.

It may come back, but not under this name

Alaska needs to follow thru on the Airbus order in process for now.
WebTraveler is offline  
Old Jan 10, 20, 10:50 pm
  #9  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 34,971
They already ordered them. Aren't they already built?

https://www.boeing.com/commercial/cu...tion-737s.page

I got schedule changed onto one a while back before the grounding got extended several times.
bmvaughn and jinglish like this.
channa is offline  
Old Jan 10, 20, 11:29 pm
  #10  
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Programs: AS MVPG
Posts: 5
The DC-10 went through this when it was new, and the USAF, UPS and FedEx have been flying them for decades with very few issues. The MAX will get its issued worked out, and in all likelihood continue the 737's run as the best mid-sized regional jet on the market.

Also, I might be the only one who thinks like this, but I absolutely loath the Airbus jets AS has. I know the plural of anecdote isn't data, but every time I'm on one, they're the noisiest, rattleiest, shakiest, bumpiest planes ever. I'd honestly rather fly on Q400s forever than another Airbus.
bmvaughn likes this.
Phrozen is offline  
Old Jan 10, 20, 11:30 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: SEA
Programs: DL FO, Hilton/Marriott Gold, Accor Silver
Posts: 2,028
Originally Posted by channa View Post
They already ordered them. Aren't they already built?

https://www.boeing.com/commercial/cu...tion-737s.page

I got schedule changed onto one a while back before the grounding got extended several times.
Yeah, about that....

Originally Posted by chillymac View Post
It seems that a plane that ... requires software to make if feel as though it flies like a normal plane is a major red flag for me.
While MCAS as originally implemented was absolutely a disaster, and Boeing really should've gone cleansheet anyway instead of trying to sling the LEAPs under the 737's wings, computer modification of flight controls isn't at all unheard of. Mostly it's seen on military aircraft, since aerodynamic instability goes hand-in-hand with increased maneuverability, but even the MD-11 has some computer handling tweaks to replicate the DC-10's handling characteristics despite a smaller tail assembly.
jinglish is offline  
Old Jan 11, 20, 12:46 am
  #12  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,727
Originally Posted by NeilA View Post
My thinking is that when it gets the okay to fly again it will be an extremely safe airplane.
"If", not "when".

And I'm unconvinced that even if it does get the ok to fly again it will ever be safe. In part, because I wonder whether the Boeing employee who made the "dogs watching TV" statement was correct. Are planes so complicated now that the FAA can't really do their jobs properly, or they just have to believe whatever the engineers who designed it tell them?

Simply put: Does the FAA have the technical expertise to determine whether this plane is safe? That's the real question that Congress should be asking in these investigations, because that is something that they have the power to fix. (Let the DOJ worry about whether Boeing lied to the FAA or whether any other crimes were committed -- that's their job). The question needs to be asked -- I think the days of blind trust in the FAA are over.

As an engineer, I believe that it's obvious that Boeing has serious culture issues which resulted in revenue being put before safety. I won't fly this plane for several years, and I would also have qualms about flying in any newly-designed Boeing aircraft for the next several years. Culture takes time to fix -- a new CEO is a good start, but it's just a start.

TL;DR: To answer the OP, yes -- I would request that AS not buy these things.
notquiteaff and jjmadison like this.
VegasGambler is offline  
Old Jan 11, 20, 2:27 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Traveling the World
Posts: 5,311
I think the A 340 or A350 would be great for transcons
jjmadison and bman1002 like this.
danielonn is online now  
Old Jan 11, 20, 2:56 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Programs: AS MVP Gold, Marriott Platinum, Hilton Gold, Hertz Five Star
Posts: 135
So the fact is that MAX is actually a safe plane to fly but because of the design change it requires re-certification for all pilots. To solve this problem Boeing implemented MCAS so pilots with 737 certifications don't need to re-certify for MAX. Without MCAS the plane flies just fine but 737 pilots can't fly it. The youtube channel of blancolirio has a lot of updates on this issue if you want to know more.
eddiehuang97 is offline  
Old Jan 11, 20, 5:58 am
  #15  
Formerly known as newbie elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: YUL
Programs: Free Agent
Posts: 2,130
Originally Posted by Phrozen View Post
The DC-10 went through this when it was new, and the USAF, UPS and FedEx have been flying them for decades with very few issues. The MAX will get its issued worked out, and in all likelihood continue the 737's run as the best mid-sized regional jet on the market.
They had to make extensive modifications to the DC-10 and introduce the MD-11 which has had (statistically) a high hull loss rate with many similar accidents resulting from tricky handling characteristics in the landing regime due to software called LSAS. LSAS compensated (sounds familiar again) for the fact that the vertical stabilizer on the 11 was 40% smaller than the 10 for fuel economy reasons. When you read the articles linked below (one of many found on the topic) many of the statements seem very familiar.

That Tragic MD-11 Safety Record

Before the pitchforks come out, I would get on a Boeing (or an MD11 for that matter, flew then a lot on KLM) without hesitation but there are serious process problems at Boeing (and its relationship with the FAA) which need to be addressed. MD-11 was commercial failure which I believe is what the MAX will be but what do I know.
notquiteaff and jjmadison like this.

Last edited by Admiral Ackbar; Jan 11, 20 at 6:04 am
Admiral Ackbar is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: