Southwest 737 Max Makes Emergency Landing at MCO
Mar 27, 2019, 3:00 pm
#31
Join Date: May 2006
Location: TUS/PDX
Programs: WN CP/A-List, AS MVPG75K
Posts: 5,798
The aircraft that ingested debris (?) and returned to Orlando was a 737-8, aka 737-MAX8 or 7M8.
I think that 50+ number includes a mix of current NGs and MAX7/8/9 aircraft. Renton was nearly full when I was there a few months ago. I know engine production issues from CFM was delaying completion of the aircraft a few months ago and they had partially completed airplanes stashed everywhere at RNT.
In any event, the completed MAX airplanes will likely find their way to the Southwestern part of the US or to Moses Lake (MWH) in eastern Washington. I'm surprised AA or UA haven't moved their airplanes to one location either.
With Boeing producing 50+ 737s per month, and the grounding possibly lasting until July or August (depending upon which media reports to believe), I think VCV (and MHV) will very likely be seeing more of them. After 9/11, (or was it the 2007/2008 mess?) SWA kept taking deliveries, and they went straight to MHV for awhile. Up in the PacNW, BFI, RNT, PAE, and MWH can only hold so many parked aircraft, in addition to the non-737s, so I expect the desert to see most of the the Max8s and Max9s..
In any event, the completed MAX airplanes will likely find their way to the Southwestern part of the US or to Moses Lake (MWH) in eastern Washington. I'm surprised AA or UA haven't moved their airplanes to one location either.
Mar 27, 2019, 3:17 pm
#32
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 5,511
Is the EASA allowing the MAX to be re-positioned?
Mar 27, 2019, 3:50 pm
#33
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: ORD, MDW or MKE
Programs: American and Southwest. Hilton and Marriott hotels primarily.
Posts: 6,461
Mar 27, 2019, 4:24 pm
#34
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
737-800 = B738 or 738
737-MAX8 = B38M or 7M8
I don't think ICAO or IATA use "737-8" for 737-MAX 8 aircraft.
Boeing has confusing names for it's planes.
Mar 27, 2019, 4:35 pm
#35
Join Date: May 2002
Programs: WN F9 HA UA AA IHG HH MR
Posts: 3,305
Mar 27, 2019, 5:07 pm
#36
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
Sorry..what? You hold off until there's a respectable body count? MAX8 has safety concerns. One takes off from a major American city and lands on one engine 11 minutes later. This is reportable. It was neither notable nor reckless. There was no "crippled 737 MAX suffers near catastrophe" perjury.
Is the EASA allowing the MAX to be re-positioned?
Is the EASA allowing the MAX to be re-positioned?
Responsible journalism (places like the Washington Post, the New York Times, Reuters) reported on this incident correctly, noting that it appeared to be different from the previous issues but that it was newsworthy because it was the same type of aircraft that had just been grounded.
Everywhere else -- the places that, sadly, most people get their information these days (Facebook, random internet blogs) -- used salacious headlines that linked to articles scant of fact. Or with incorrect info. Even FlyerTalk (who really should know better) said it was a "test flight."
Incidents like this one happen all the time. Getting debris in the engine on takeoff is not aircraft-specific.
You should know by now my position on this topic. Boeing's mistakes killed people. They put money ahead of safety, and the regulators failed because the FAA is in the pocket of manufacturers and airlines. This incident has nothing to do with the MCAS system issues, and unless it can be shown that the plane failed engine inspections or some other connection to FAA oversight problems I see no reason to connect the two.
The EASA airworthiness directive does allow for limited non-commercial ferry flights, albeit with greater regulation than the FAA requires.
Mar 27, 2019, 11:41 pm
#38
Join Date: Jun 2015
Programs: VX Gold/WN Companion
Posts: 682
Yes...intentionally including or omitting key facts and phrased in such a way as to intentionally deceive, mislead, or otherwise insunate something that was not the whole story. It is not a lie, but it is also not entirely correct in its context for the purpose of evoking an emotion reaction vs conveying facts of a story. It is called spin.
...unless you just believe everything you read on the internet and in the media at face value.
...unless you just believe everything you read on the internet and in the media at face value.
Mar 28, 2019, 9:47 am
#39
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 48
Yes...intentionally including or omitting key facts and phrased in such a way as to intentionally deceive, mislead, or otherwise insunate something that was not the whole story. It is not a lie, but it is also not entirely correct in its context for the purpose of evoking an emotion reaction vs conveying facts of a story. It is called spin.
...unless you just believe everything you read on the internet and in the media at face value.
...unless you just believe everything you read on the internet and in the media at face value.
Mar 28, 2019, 1:41 pm
#40
Join Date: May 2006
Location: TUS/PDX
Programs: WN CP/A-List, AS MVPG75K
Posts: 5,798
Seriously though, the type certificate says 737-8. The 737-MAX 8 is a marketing name by Boeing, and
Last edited by tusphotog; Mar 28, 2019 at 3:50 pm Reason: Fixed a typo
Mar 28, 2019, 6:12 pm
#42
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
Apr 14, 2019, 2:14 pm
#43
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 5,511
https://www.wsj.com/articles/southwe...on-11555116989
"Southwest spokeswoman Brandy King said results of the reviews were handed over to the manufacturer, CFM, and did not say whether the engines were found to be safe or unsafe."
Apr 14, 2019, 3:58 pm
#44
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
The safety check on 12 other LEAP 1B engines was aircraft-specific. That it happens all the time isn't revealed. Issues with new technology may not show up until the engines have been used for several thousand hours in all kinds of climate conditions.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/southwe...on-11555116989
https://www.wsj.com/articles/southwe...on-11555116989
Apr 14, 2019, 5:14 pm
#45
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Blue Ridge, GA
Posts: 5,511
Or, as the article suggests, something else.
''The engine suffered internal damage after a component broke off in the high-pressure portion of the engine."