DYKWIA

I wish I had your confidence in Boeing... They are still constantly blaming others, and saying that a software upgrade (not fix) is all that is required.

Of course, the regulators (outside NA, and hopefully including NA) see it differently. I'd hope Boeing would be forced to go through a full re-certification process on the Max - but that would mean it never flew again as it wouldn't pass any modern day certification.

edi-traveller

FlyerTalker39574

TedToToe

Irreverent Medusa

You quite clearly don't know me

Sailbot3310

Personally, very poor choice. As a passenger, I much prefer Airbus for both long and short haul. I find them much more comfortable on almost every airline I've flown.

wb1969

I’m not an expert on purchasing planes, but if it’s only a letter of intent, it leaves the door open for Airbus to counter offer. The A320 is superior to the 737 in every respect from a passenger point of view, which is why I always choose BA or Easyjet over Ryanair.

corporate-wage-slave

I'm in this group too, moreover this aircraft won't take to the skies again without the various regulatory bodies going through due process. There was some criticism of the FAA's approach to the MAX originally - both the original sign off and the grounding - so I can't see any short-cuts being offered from here, given the assorted legal writs sent their way. You also have to take account of the straightforward fact that people love to fly on low fares, and IAG has simply taken advantage of a buyers' market. I doubt many passengers (leaving out FTers here) would be able to tell the difference between a MAX and NEOs, for a short hop trip lasting an hour or two it's reasonably comfortable experience unless you are particularly tall / bulky.

our_kid

For me this aircraft has really tarnished the image of Boeing and what with the reported issues at the Charleston plant and Qatar refusing non Seattle 787s Boeing has some way to go before I’ll fly their 737-MAX.

Airbus totally surpassed Boeing IMHO - the A320/1 NEOs are lovely and as for the A350 well it is in a different class.

lhrsfo

It seems a very strange choice as, capital cost aside, the main selling point of the MAX was commonality with other 737s - hence MCAS and all the troubles. Without a fleet of 737s already, the only possible reason is a very low capital cost.

Prospero

I have mixed feelings about this. Personally, in terms of passenger comfort, I consider the 737 an inferior aircraft to the A320 however...

Strategically, this could play to IAG's favour, having a firm standing in both camps when it comes to future aircraft orders;

Not knowing the terms contained in the LOI, it is possible it allows IAG to walk away In the event of prolonged regulatory issues with the MAX;

LGW needs fuel efficient frames if it is to have a sustainable future.

crazyanglaisy

My views have been heavily shaped by all that I've read online, which may well of course be proved to be incorrect or overblown. But, simply in light of the insights published so far, I won't be travelling on this plane as no proposed software fix is going to satisfy the concerns that have been expressed with the aircraft's fundamental design limitations.

Given the issues that have also been aired about the approvals granted by the appropriate regulatory bodies, the simple fact that it receives subsequent approval to take to the skies again won't provide me with sufficient reassurance.

Fortunately, I hardly ever fly from Gatwick so this won't cause me too much personal disruption.

Akoz

There is no statement on the split between the IAG airlines, so it could be that the BA name was added to the statement as a show of confidence at this stage and that non actually end up with BA. A push to turn Vueling/Level into the next Easyjet or Ryanair for not much money? That could also free up some A32x frames from Vueling to be placed else where. That said LGW is the obvious base with the new Boeing maintenance hanger currently under construction there.

FlyerTalker39574

AlanA