Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Southwest Airlines | Rapid Rewards
Reload this Page >

Southwest uses the same new Boeing plane in Indonesia crash

Southwest uses the same new Boeing plane in Indonesia crash

Old May 11, 19, 9:39 pm
  #346  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by lougord99 View Post
It just keeps getting worse. I don't know how Boeing regains the consumers confidence.
With the exception of the FAA, which at this point has zero credibility, it seems unlikely that the MAX will be flying before the end of the year.
copperred is offline  
Old May 12, 19, 7:02 am
  #347  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by copperred View Post
With the exception of the FAA, which at this point has zero credibility, it seems unlikely that the MAX will be flying before the end of the year.
That's my gut reaction, too. But most people just aren't following this like we are. And to put it bluntly, the near-term alternative to the MAX flying (as in, the next 1-5 years) is skyrocketing prices and fewer flight options right at a time when the Asian market explodes. I don't think politics will play in too much. At this point, the only thing that matters is Boeing convincing authorities that this specific aircraft is safe. The rest of the fallout will have to wait.
argolfer is offline  
Old May 12, 19, 10:42 am
  #348  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by argolfer View Post
That's my gut reaction, too. But most people just aren't following this like we are. And to put it bluntly, the near-term alternative to the MAX flying (as in, the next 1-5 years) is skyrocketing prices and fewer flight options right at a time when the Asian market explodes. I don't think politics will play in too much. At this point, the only thing that matters is Boeing convincing authorities that this specific aircraft is safe. The rest of the fallout will have to wait.
We can look back on how the early DC-10 flaws affected the aircraft and McDonnell Douglas. While it bounced back later, it also existed in a time with less information available to fewer people. I don't think the MAX, with it's big typeface naming and ease of eliminating it from searches, has the same kind of buffer built in.

I expect Boeing to be a continuing business but without significant changes in the FAA's model of regulation (or actually doing any) the MAX may end up dragging down Boeing for a decade. They've been kicking the can down the road for so long and the issues with the 787 early on, as well as the hoped for but fizzled out 747-8 (so few passenger ac bought) the commercial aircraft side is going to need support from the rest of the business.

Southwest may need to look into buying some more 737-800/900s in the secondary market. Southwest has a great brand, much better than the legacies but I doubt they would accept the MAX impacting their plans.
copperred is offline  
Old May 12, 19, 11:47 am
  #349  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Programs: WN F9 HA UA AA IHG HH MR
Posts: 2,340
Originally Posted by copperred View Post
We can look back on how the early DC-10 flaws affected the aircraft and McDonnell Douglas. While it bounced back later, it also existed in a time with less information available to fewer people. I don't think the MAX, with it's big typeface naming and ease of eliminating it from searches, has the same kind of buffer built in.
Shortly after the AA DC10 crash at ORD, American's marketing department went into overdrive to make the term "DC10" disappear. The airplane was redubbed the "American Airlines Luxury Liner" including painting over the DC10 lettering on the fuselage. It worked in the pre-internet age. Then the airplane became an MD11.
Tanic is online now  
Old May 12, 19, 2:31 pm
  #350  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,653
Boeing has stated that no rebranding or name change is being considered, but I suspect they'll get past that at the point they truly admit their guilt in the situation and embrace greater transparency. All of which would be the correct course of action here, IMHO.

Alternately, they can play hardball, keep blaming the pilots, install some new software, get the FAA to approve the "737-8", and hope that people's long-term memory is crap.

Which do you think is more likely?
ursine1 is offline  
Old May 12, 19, 2:50 pm
  #351  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 4,582
Originally Posted by ursine1 View Post

Which do you think is more likely?
Not blaming the pilots is pretty unrealistic.

If Ford designed a hidden system that would randomly and aggressively steer your car into the oncoming traffic, it would certainly be a problem with Ford, not the driver.

But nothing in the Boeing checklist overrode the runaway system.

LegalTender is online now  
Old May 12, 19, 6:25 pm
  #352  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,653
In case it wasn't clear, what I think should be the correct course of action and what is the more likely eventuality are two different things.

Last edited by ursine1; May 13, 19 at 12:09 am Reason: typo
ursine1 is offline  
Old May 12, 19, 8:24 pm
  #353  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Programs: GE, Marriott Gold
Posts: 13,973
If Boeing came out and said that they were going to push for full recertification as a new aircraft type (instead of just certifying the MCAS fix), how quickly would they be able to get that done? And would that help with customer confidence at all?
tmiw is offline  
Old May 12, 19, 10:51 pm
  #354  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by ursine1 View Post
Boeing has stated that no rebranding or name change is being considered, but I suspect they'll get past that at the point they truly admit their guilt in the situation and embrace greater transparency. All of which would be the correct course of action here, IMHO.

Alternately, they can play hardball, keep blaming the pilots, install some new software, get the FAA to approve the "737-8", and hope that people's long-term memory is crap.

Which do you think is more likely?
Boeing can try to unmake reality with a time machine but they're looking at both civil and possibly criminal liability here, so they probably should plan not to speak of it anytime soon. Even their own press releases document obvious guilt.

The 737-8 already exists as the 737-800 NGs. Boeing may end up with an airliner they can't sell, and then will have to swallow their all too big pride.
copperred is offline  
Old May 13, 19, 12:22 am
  #355  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,653
Originally Posted by copperred View Post
Boeing can try to unmake reality with a time machine but they're looking at both civil and possibly criminal liability here, so they probably should plan not to speak of it anytime soon. Even their own press releases document obvious guilt.

The 737-8 already exists as the 737-800 NGs. Boeing may end up with an airliner they can't sell, and then will have to swallow their all too big pride.
Not speaking would of course be a major public relations misstep. How their message is viewed as being communicated​​​​​ is more important to the consumer than details at this point. And while it's probably too late for complete transparency, an effort at appearing like that was a priority would go far.

737-8 is another name for the 737-MAX 8. My point was that they wouldn't necessarily rebrand, but rather just drop the MAX designation. The 737-8 and the 737-800 are different aircraft.
ursine1 is offline  
Old May 13, 19, 7:06 am
  #356  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Programs: Southwest A-List+ due to work. Paid F or Biz for pleasure so not a mileage junkie
Posts: 9,724
Originally Posted by copperred View Post
With the exception of the FAA, which at this point has zero credibility, it seems unlikely that the MAX will be flying before the end of the year.
Yeah, it seems as if there were an easy fix to this, we would have heard about it by now and things would be a lot further along on the road to getting them flying again.
DenverBrian likes this.
Bear96 is offline  
Old May 13, 19, 8:19 am
  #357  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by ursine1 View Post
Not speaking would of course be a major public relations misstep. How their message is viewed as being communicated​​​​​ is more important to the consumer than details at this point. And while it's probably too late for complete transparency, an effort at appearing like that was a priority would go far.

737-8 is another name for the 737-MAX 8. My point was that they wouldn't necessarily rebrand, but rather just drop the MAX designation. The 737-8 and the 737-800 are different aircraft.
Have you read their press releases? They're pretty awful and silence would probably serve them far better. Some admit outright error and that they were aware of the issue.

The MAX and 737-800 are different designs of the aircraft yes, but losing a couple of zeroes attempts to conflate it with the 800 since many systems will do that to the consumer or to a booker. That sort of sleight of hand could taint the 737-800NG aircraft with the MAX.
copperred is offline  
Old May 13, 19, 12:45 pm
  #358  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,653
Originally Posted by copperred View Post
Have you read their press releases? They're pretty awful and silence would probably serve them far better. Some admit outright error and that they were aware of the issue.

The MAX and 737-800 are different designs of the aircraft yes, but losing a couple of zeroes attempts to conflate it with the 800 since many systems will do that to the consumer or to a booker. That sort of sleight of hand could taint the 737-800NG aircraft with the MAX.
Agreed that Boeing is handling things terribly. Admitting error and accepting responsibility would be the correct approach, but given the potential depth of their negligence (as it becomes more known), it's understandable they've shifted to legalese. But I still believe it's the wrong approach.

To be clear, 737-8 is already used as a designation for the 737-MAX 8.

Consumers are already confused, primarily due to the similar naming, but they more or less know now the issue is with the "MAX."

I think Boeing simply dropping "MAX" would be the most obvious approach, leaving both the 737-8 and the 737-800. This doesn't require rebranding per se, but has the same effect over time.
ursine1 is offline  
Old May 13, 19, 4:09 pm
  #359  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: USA
Programs: Frontier 100K, AC SE100K, BA Gold, WN A-/CP, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 3,809
This weekend a Southwest captain showed my son and I the cockpit (not the first time...). He started asking my son if he knew how to make the engines throttle up. My son instead wanted to see and try to turn the stabilizer manual trim wheel.

The captain obliged and to my shock said "if only the pilots in Ethiopia had done this, all those poor souls would have been saved." Wait. WHAT?

I fear plenty of other pilots without a full awareness of what actually happened or without MCAS hands on training/testing could be back in the air on a MAX soon.

I don't want to settle for someone who has taken an ipad course to say 'yeah, I got this'.

MAX simulators are in short supply... That is surely putting pressure on the airlines and the FAA. But how did pilots become certified back in the day before simulators existed?

And guess what ISN'T in short supply?
ACTUAL New 737 MAX aircraft. By the hundreds.

Boeing could fly a couple hundred test/certification flights per day. Every 737 pilot could be required to pass a MCAS recovery in-flight. Certainly a big-hammer approach but what a good way to restore public confidence.

Last edited by expert7700; May 13, 19 at 4:29 pm
expert7700 is offline  
Old May 13, 19, 11:15 pm
  #360  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 363
Originally Posted by expert7700 View Post
This weekend a Southwest captain showed my son and I the cockpit (not the first time...). He started asking my son if he knew how to make the engines throttle up. My son instead wanted to see and try to turn the stabilizer manual trim wheel.

The captain obliged and to my shock said "if only the pilots in Ethiopia had done this, all those poor souls would have been saved." Wait. WHAT?

I fear plenty of other pilots without a full awareness of what actually happened or without MCAS hands on training/testing could be back in the air on a MAX soon.

I don't want to settle for someone who has taken an ipad course to say 'yeah, I got this'.

MAX simulators are in short supply... That is surely putting pressure on the airlines and the FAA. But how did pilots become certified back in the day before simulators existed?

And guess what ISN'T in short supply?
ACTUAL New 737 MAX aircraft. By the hundreds.

Boeing could fly a couple hundred test/certification flights per day. Every 737 pilot could be required to pass a MCAS recovery in-flight. Certainly a big-hammer approach but what a good way to restore public confidence.
Someone that arrogant shouldn't be a pilot.
copperred is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: