B737MAX [Grounded as of 13 March 2019]

    Hide Wikipost
Old May 20, 19, 1:23 am   -   Wikipost
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been on FT for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: diburning
Wiki Link
United does not fly the 737MAX8 that has been involved in two recent crashes, but it does operate the 737MAX9.

How to tell if your flight is scheduled to be operated by the MAX 9:

View your reservation or flight status page, either on the web or on the app. United lists the entire aircraft type. Every flight that is scheduled to be on the 737 MAX will say "Boeing 737 MAX 9." If you see anything else -- for example, "Boeing 737-900," it is not scheduled to be a MAX at this time.

The same is true in search results and anywhere else on the United site.

For advanced users: UA uses the three letter IATA identifier 7M9.

All 737MAX aircraft are currently grounded, with exceptions for non-passenger-carrying positioning flights (e.g., to move them to a storage area until the grounding is lifted).
Print Wikipost

Reply

Old Mar 20, 19, 10:48 am
  #616  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: KEWR
Programs: Marriott Platinum
Posts: 509
Originally Posted by amtrakusa View Post
so the first A320 apparently crashed in an airshow during a demo. just saying' who killed whom is not clear at this point. is it the pilot? is it the airline? is it the mechanics. is it FAA? is it Boeing? or a combination of those. TO simply say it is boeing's fault is vast simplification of issues present, obviously this is good enough for most world's media and to most people who suddenly become interested in this and became armchair expert overnight.
Very well said!

I personally would not hesitate to get on any 737 Max aircraft today if allowed. Boeing makes great airplanes.

I would not however ride on any commercial jet flown by a 200 hour pilot or on an airline with known, documented maintenance issues.
MSPeconomist likes this.
clubord is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 10:55 am
  #617  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,749
Originally Posted by clubord View Post


Very well said!

I personally would not hesitate to get on any 737 Max aircraft today if allowed. Boeing makes great airplanes.

I would not however ride on any commercial jet flown by a 200 hour pilot or on an airline with known, documented maintenance issues.
One thing that is abundantly clear to me is that I have full confidence in United's pilots (and other team members). If they're willing to operate an aircraft, I will be ready to fly it.
fly18725 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 11:00 am
  #618  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: WAS/ BOM
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold
Posts: 1,439
Fresh Bloomberg report states that a deadheading pilot in the jumpseat saved the previous day's Lion air flight from crashing by disabling the MCAS system. The flying pilots didn't know what was happening and were working through their checklist. Report - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...d?srnd=premium

Also, apparently as per the voice recorder, the pilots of the Lion Air flight that did crash were following their checklist, but ran out of airspace to work with. This is BAD BAD for Boeing! Wonder if the US delivered planes were simply different or were US airlines given advanced warnings and provided additional material to train their pilots - but multiple US pilots have reported the system acting up and causing issues. Luckily no incidents in the US.
IADFlyer123 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 11:21 am
  #619  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 6,845
Originally Posted by IADFlyer123 View Post
Also, apparently as per the voice recorder, the pilots of the Lion Air flight that did crash were following their checklist, but ran out of airspace to work with. This is BAD BAD for Boeing!
The question is, what checklist/procedure were they following? For runaway stabilizer, I believe one of the first actions in the QRH checklist is stab trim switches to CUTOUT.

but multiple US pilots have reported the system acting up and causing issues
Where was that reported? If you are referring to the shallow analysis of the ASRS reports from last week, that's been thoroughly debunked as it relates to MCAS.
EWR764 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 11:41 am
  #620  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 6,483
Originally Posted by Halo117 View Post
Would the crew even suspect runaway trim before other issues based on failure rates?...could that be a cause for slow or non responsive actions by the crew? Does runaway trim need to move up further up the most likely failure list?
Runaway trim is not a failure; it is the symptom, or manifestation, of any one of several failures. On the 737 MAX, the trim can be moved by MCAS, Speed Trim System, Electric trim switches, the autopilot, or by manually turning the wheel. Only MCAS is unique to the MAX. A failure in any one of those systems could cause a trim runaway.

Every airplane that has a powered pitch-trim system has a runaway trim (or stabilizer) procedure. That includes every airliner build since the beginning of the jet age. I have learned and practiced the runaway trim/stabilizer procedure in every transport jet, and a few general aviation airplanes, that I've flown including the CRJ, DC8, DC9, B757, B767, and B737. This isn't something obscure that is hidden in the fine print of a thousand-page manual.
LarryJ is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 11:45 am
  #621  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Earth
Programs: UA 2P, HH Gold, AA Gold
Posts: 815
Originally Posted by IADFlyer123 View Post
Fresh Bloomberg report states that a deadheading pilot in the jumpseat saved the previous day's Lion air flight from crashing by disabling the MCAS system. The flying pilots didn't know what was happening and were working through their checklist. Report - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...d?srnd=premium

Also, apparently as per the voice recorder, the pilots of the Lion Air flight that did crash were following their checklist, but ran out of airspace to work with. This is BAD BAD for Boeing! Wonder if the US delivered planes were simply different or were US airlines given advanced warnings and provided additional material to train their pilots - but multiple US pilots have reported the system acting up and causing issues. Luckily no incidents in the US.
CNN has picked it up. Here's a snippet from that story:

(CNN)An off-duty pilot in the cockpit of a Boeing 737 Max 8 jet jumped in to help crew disable a malfunctioning flight-control system as it experienced difficulties in October, according to Bloomberg.

The next day, with a different crew, the same plane crashed into the sea off Jakarta, killing all 189 people on board.
On doomed Lion Air Flight 610, pilots searched in a handbook for a way to stop the plane from nosediving, according to an exclusive Reuters report.


Apparently the pilots on the doomed Lion Air flight were desperately searching for a solution in their checklists right up until the plane impacted the water.
n198ua is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 11:50 am
  #622  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: USA
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Platinum, IHG Gold Elite
Posts: 591
I agree this incident is bad for Boeing but IMO for much of the same reason Alar was bad for Washington apple growers right after that great agricultural expert, Meryl Streep, testified before Congress about the dangers to our children.

Yes, there have been a number accidents with the 737 worldwide ... over the course of 50+ years and tens of thousands of flights. As I said much earlier, one would have to be an idiot to not take pause over 2 similar sounding accidents happening on a brand-new aircraft in a short time. On the other hand, I still haven't seen much in the way of evidence except that Lion Air's crews apparently did not have anywhere near the level of training of US mainline pilots and that Lion Air had a horrible maintenance record (which still gives me pause on a new aircraft). Ethiopian has a much different history and I still trust the FAA professionals that I've seen so I'll trust their judgment and wait for more evidence to come out before screaming about corporate malfeasance, criminal or civil charges against Boeing or FAA employees, etc.

BTW, multiple reports from one or two pilots are not the same thing as reports from multiple pilots. The mainstream media coverage I've seen seems to overlook that.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Mar 20, 19 at 11:58 am Reason: Discuss the issues, not the poster(s)
ExplorerWannabe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 11:55 am
  #623  
Moderator: United Airlines; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Gold 1.8MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Gold
Posts: 45,863
Originally Posted by Halo117 View Post
....
Lastly the announcement by AC and UA a few days ago about summer impacts is just bad timing...no need to even mention revenue projections with a prolonged grounding...do people even think how that may be viewed less than week since the grounding... furthers the perception of $ over safety ....
For UA, as a publicly owned corporation this required by SEC. Must publicly release material financial impacts once known. To have not released the formal statement would have been an SEC violation.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Mar 20, 19 at 12:02 pm
WineCountryUA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 12:03 pm
  #624  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: WAS/ BOM
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold
Posts: 1,439
Where was that reported? If you are referring to the shallow analysis of the ASRS reports from last week, that's been thoroughly debunked as it relates to MCAS.
I was referring to this - https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/13/us/pi...max/index.html
IADFlyer123 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 12:18 pm
  #625  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Houston,TX
Programs: UA Premier 1K, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium Elite, National Exec. Elite, Hertz Prez Circle
Posts: 127
Originally Posted by WineCountryUA View Post
Moderator Note

Let's keep the political commentary for OMNI. While concerns if the FAA did a proper oversight role is an appropriate discussion area, getting into political discussions / inferences / opinions are best in OMNI.

WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
Pardon me...what is OMNI?
surram is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 12:21 pm
  #626  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pasadena, California
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM
Posts: 9,974
Originally Posted by surram View Post
Pardon me...what is OMNI?
OMNI is the catch-all forum where people on FT can discuss non-travel related topics. You need to have a certain number of posts and time on FT (I forget the thresholds). It's all over the place. This topic would not be found in OMNI.

I used to be an OMNI junkie. But I'm all better now.
ExplorerWannabe likes this.

Last edited by iapetus; Mar 20, 19 at 12:27 pm
iapetus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 12:32 pm
  #627  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Houston,TX
Programs: UA Premier 1K, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium Elite, National Exec. Elite, Hertz Prez Circle
Posts: 127
Angry

Originally Posted by bocastephen View Post
Analogous to GM asking me if I want an airbag in my car - and if I do, which common sense dictates I should, I need to pay an additional line item charge. (Let's disregard that airbags are mandatory, it's just an example).

Who in their right mind would forgo an airbag when it appears to be such a critical safety requirement?
Unfortunately, airbags, albeit side airbags were indeed optional for a very long time...until a few years ago; only now I see side airbags standard.
surram is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 12:39 pm
  #628  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Houston,TX
Programs: UA Premier 1K, Marriott Bonvoy Lifetime Titanium Elite, National Exec. Elite, Hertz Prez Circle
Posts: 127
Wink

Originally Posted by EWR764 View Post
Quite simply, the fight would not have been in vain if the pilots executed a procedure for which they had been trained.

The question, of course, is why were the pilots even in the position where their (correct) affirmative response was the only thing standing between survival and disaster? As we have maintained throughout this excellent thread, is that the two crashes appear to be the combination of a poorly-designed system that inexplicably did not incorporate the redundancy and fail-safe features of other, similar flight control augmentation systems, plus the final link in the causal chain... improper crew management of an emergency situation. Unfortunately, human factors always play a role.

Boeing has a major problem in that it appears to have designed a system that creates a dynamic situation where a crew's options dwindle much too quickly in the event of a single point of failure. That's not acceptable.
Who are you, man? You are amazing! What are you doing here...you should be in France (or in Ethiopia) with NTSB investigating and producing such a quality report; may be you are there, already!
Or at the very least be on television explaining these nuances and summarizing them as lucid as you are doing here...love your analysis.
EWR764, notquiteaff and denver19 like this.
surram is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 12:40 pm
  #629  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 6,845
Originally Posted by IADFlyer123 View Post
Exactly... review of the source material (rather than the analysis of a non-aviation journalist) shows exactly zero (0) reports of MCAS-related issues in actual service.

That does nothing to dismiss any of the real issues that have been identified about the MAX... but to say that the ASRS database shows that pilots in the USA reported MCAS problems, rather than complaints in the abstract, is factually inaccurate.

Originally Posted by surram View Post
Who are you, man? You are amazing! What are you doing here...you should be in France (or in Ethiopia) with NTSB investigating and producing such a quality report; may be you are there, already!
Or at the very least be on television explaining these nuances and summarizing them as lucid as you are doing here...love your analysis.
I appreciate that... but in the absence of really any facts about the ET disaster, I still consider my analysis to be highly, highly speculative.
EWR764 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 19, 12:55 pm
  #630  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Tx
Programs: AA, UA, WN
Posts: 748
Originally Posted by WineCountryUA View Post
For UA, as a publicly owned corporation this required by SEC. Must publicly release material financial impacts once known. To have not released the formal statement would have been an SEC violation.
Why haven't AA or WN made similar filings as their exposure is greater than UAs?
Halo117 is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread