opus99

it won’t. This story says a lot of things everybody already knows. He just addresses things that the FAA,EASA and Boeing are working on now. Quite frankly this whistleblower has not said anything new to be very honest. He addresses human factor which is one of the main reasons the max has been grounded this long. The max being cancelled is such a futile solution, even Airbus won’t want that to happen. I don’t know how people can think the FAA will make the same mistake twice or even Boeing. Even if they were cash driven. The MAX resulted in them making their first loss as a result of cost cutting in the first place. The max recertification flight is happening in the next couple of weeks, so I’m sorry the max is not going anywhere

13901

I'm in two minds on the MAX. I think it's 95% probable that it will fly, at some point, in some form, with some levels of changes. There's, if I remember correctly, 6,000 of those planes on order and although some have cancelled their purchases, the big battalions are still there. And there's a hell of a lot more 737NGs out there, getting older by the day. Boeing will not allow them to fall to Airbus (and Airbus can't build 320s fast enough to replace them). Also, there's a risk of leaving a third potential intruder in the mix: Boeing and Airbus want to have a duopoly forever.

I said 95%, though. If, (and I put it as a very slim chance, so perhaps 5% it's even too large) a clean-sheet new narrowbody is launched, then the 737MAX can be binned for good. However, it would require binning the NMA (a thing whose real purpose isn't clear to me... I mean, who's screaming to have the 762 back?) and delivering a new plane right now.

TedToToe

I’m not doubting the ease or cost, but doesn’t it all boil down to the type rating? Perhaps in North America the FAA will accept a common type rating, thus allowing WN and others to have a single pilot pool. In Europe, I would expect EASA to follow a more cautious approach. Of course, for IAG, that won’t really matter.

BrianDromey

I think you are right, the aircraft will almost certainly fly again, at some point. The timing for the MAX is dreadful and will almost certainly result in many hundreds of cancellations. The same for the A320. Currently the NG's aren't really getting any older in terms of cycles or hours, being on the ground, in the main. Fuel prices are at historic lows, so that impacts the business case for new aircraft. Airlines are struggling to finance the fleets and debts they currently have, so adding new aircraft unless their current ones are totally clapped out will be expensive. Most NGs and early A320s are raging, but not beyond the point of being useful just yet, so airlines can afford to wait and see how the economy goes.

13901

I think you're running the risk of applying the current situation and extending it to an indefinite time. This is the bottom of the pit, but things are bound to get better fairly soon, and indeed we are seeing a re-start in aviation. 2019-levels won't be reached until 2023, nothing disputes that, but even if 2021 was 50% of 2019 (and that would be HUGE) there would be a need to get new planes in. Ryanair, and with them a lot of the low costs, lease planes for the cycle of a D-check. Give it 5 or 6 years and they normally give it back: if that cycle starts finishing they need new planes. And yes, fuel might be low right now, but even with oil at $60 the savings of flying a LEAP over a, say, CFM56 are significant. There will be some cancellations and a lot of deferrals (some of those Vietnamese or Indonesian orders for 200+ frames look ridiculous) but will we see mass culls? I don't think so. Which makes it problematic for Boeing: come 2021, 2022, they must have something to sell or the airlines that have bought their MAXs will get the pitchforks out.

Hydebear

I didn’t spot any mention of the LoI in the recent results/slides and hoped that it had all been quickly forgotten.

However while reporting the FAA’s progress there’s a strange couple of paprgraphs in the BBC story here - Boeing's 737 Max moves closer to flying again

There’s no source quoted so I’m wondering where the BBC got that expectation from - and does it imply the LoI is far from dead?

DYKWIA

I think it's on this thread somewhere, but there are a few B737MAX simulators at Gatwick. They are not BA owned, however.

So, the BBC report is correct.

13901

I think the two are incidental factors. Because there are a lot of sheep around Gatwick, and Gatwick has a BA base, it doesn't mean that BA has sheep in Hangar 6. Historically, BA had its own sims (previously in Cranebank, now in TBA). If they were to go ahead in this idea of having the MAXes, then I'd fully expect the sims to be at TBA. Especially as there's going to be lots of the darned things in IAG (unless the LoI gets kicked in the long grass given Covid and deferrals).

FlyerTalker39574

Do they ever have life?

BAeuro

I agree with 13901

I feel the BBC have put 2 + 2 together and got 5. Yes BA has a base at LGW and yes there will be MAX simulators there, but that doesn’t mean they’re for BA and doesn’t prove they’re committed to the LOI.

Waterhorse

I doubt IAG and BA care one jot about the 737MAX at the moment. Survival is on their minds just now, not committing to spend more on aircraft in the middle of a pandemic. As others have mentioned the simulators would be based at the GLA not LGW. In fact LGWs status as a BA base is in serious doubt at the moment. BBC aviation journalism at its finest, would be my guess.

DYKWIA

What in the BBC report is incorrect? The 2 paragraphs highlighted above are factual statements.

13901

Sure, but the implied message isn't.

A murderer lives in Harmondsworth.
BA's HQ is in Harmondsworth.

Both factual statements (assuming a murderer indeed lives in Harmondsworth)... but I'm sure you see the problem.

DYKWIA

No idea what you're on about, sorry

FlyerTalker39574

Are there TUI B737MAX based at Gatwick?