Mar 11, 2019, 12:37 pm
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
Thread Topic
The reason for continuing this thread is to inform the UA traveler on the status of the MAX recertification and if / when UA might deploy the MAX aircraft. And UA flyer's thoughts about UA deploying the MAX if that was to happen.
Now that UA MAX flights have resumed, see UA statement at All about the Boeing 737 MAX: Safety, status and more
================================================== ========
The first B737 MAX, an enhanced version of the B737 family, started service in May 2016, a MAX 8. MAX 9 entered service March 2018. (UA service start date??)
The MAX series was ground in March 2019 after two incidents involve the MCAS; Lion Air Flight 610 - Wikipedia and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 - Wikipedia
United did not fly the 737 MAX 8 that has been involved in two recent crashes, but it had operated the 737 MAX 9.
All 737 MAX aircraft worldwide (MAX 8, MAX 9, and MAX 10) were grounded. Boeing in conjunction with FAA, EASA, Transport Canada and other national air safety organizations entered into a cause investigation, into the MCAS operation, into if sufficient training had been provided and into if the original certification process had been sufficient rigid.
Preliminary Summary of the FAA’s Review of the Boeing 737 MAX (PDF).
The FAA (18 Nov 2020), EASA (24 Nov 2020) and Transport Canada (17 Dec 2020) have re-certified the MAX 8 & MAX 9 for commercial flight
Boeing 737 MAX certification - Wikipedia
AA resumed use of MAX8 on 29 Dec 2020
UA plans to resumes service of the MAX9 in Feb 2020 (from IAH and DEN)
Airlines have resumed taking deliveries of the MAX 8 & 9
================
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 for the 737 MAX 9.
B737MAX Recertification - Archive
The reason for continuing this thread is to inform the UA traveler on the status of the MAX recertification and if / when UA might deploy the MAX aircraft. And UA flyer's thoughts about UA deploying the MAX if that was to happen.
Now that UA MAX flights have resumed, see UA statement at All about the Boeing 737 MAX: Safety, status and more
If you do not wish to fly on a MAX aircraft, we will rebook you at no charge or refund your ticket. This includes domestic ticket changes, Basic Economy tickets and international tickets if you move from one of our MAX flights to one of our non-MAX United or United Express flights. If your original itinerary involved another carrier, we will attempt to rebook you on your original airline on a non-MAX flight as well.
When we begin to fly the MAX once again, you should feel completely confident that we have taken all the necessary steps to confirm that our 737 MAX aircraft are as safe as any of our aircraft flying today. Safety has been and always will be our top priority, and it’s something we will never compromise for any reason.
When we begin to fly the MAX once again, you should feel completely confident that we have taken all the necessary steps to confirm that our 737 MAX aircraft are as safe as any of our aircraft flying today. Safety has been and always will be our top priority, and it’s something we will never compromise for any reason.
We will waive any applicable change fees or difference in fare if your rebooked flight:
If you don’t meet these conditions but still want to rebook, you may use the value of your ticket to rebook on another flight without a change fee, but a fare difference may apply based on the fare rules of the ticket.
- Has the same origin and destination as your original flight
- Is in your originally ticketed cabin (any booking code)
- Is rescheduled for the same day or one day earlier or later than your original travel date
- Is a United or United Express flight only
If you don’t meet these conditions but still want to rebook, you may use the value of your ticket to rebook on another flight without a change fee, but a fare difference may apply based on the fare rules of the ticket.
READ BEFORE POSTING
Once again many posters in this thread have forgotten the FT rules and resorted to "Personal attacks, insults, baiting and flaming " and other non-collegial, non-civil discourse. This is not allowed.
Posters appear to be talking at others, talking about others, not discussing the core issues. Repeating the same statements, saying the same thing LOUDER is not civil discourse. These problems are not with one poster, they are not just one point of view, ...
As useful as some discussion here has been, continuing rules violations will lead to suspensions and thread closure. Please think about that before posting.
The purpose of FT is to be an informative forum that, in this case, enables the UA flyer to enhance their travel experience. There are other forums for different types of discussions. This thread was had wide latitude but that latitude is being abused.
Bottom line, if you can not stay within the FT rules and the forum's topic areas, please do not post.
And before posting, ask if you are bringing new contributing information to the discussion -- not just repeating previous points, then please do not post.
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
Once again many posters in this thread have forgotten the FT rules and resorted to "Personal attacks, insults, baiting and flaming " and other non-collegial, non-civil discourse. This is not allowed.
Posters appear to be talking at others, talking about others, not discussing the core issues. Repeating the same statements, saying the same thing LOUDER is not civil discourse. These problems are not with one poster, they are not just one point of view, ...
As useful as some discussion here has been, continuing rules violations will lead to suspensions and thread closure. Please think about that before posting.
The purpose of FT is to be an informative forum that, in this case, enables the UA flyer to enhance their travel experience. There are other forums for different types of discussions. This thread was had wide latitude but that latitude is being abused.
Bottom line, if you can not stay within the FT rules and the forum's topic areas, please do not post.
And before posting, ask if you are bringing new contributing information to the discussion -- not just repeating previous points, then please do not post.
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
This thread has engendered some strongly felt opinions and a great tendency to wander into many peripherally related topics. By all normal FT moderation standards, this thread would have been permanently closed long ago ( and numerous members receiving disciplinary actions).
However, given the importance of the subject, the UA Moderators have tried to host this discussion but odd here as UA is not the top 1 or 2 or 3 for MAX among North America carriers. However, some have allowed their passion and non-UA related opinions to repeatedly disrupt this discussion.
The reason for continuing this thread is to inform the UA traveler on the status of the MAX recertification and if / when UA might deploy the MAX aircraft. And UA flyer's thoughts about UA deploying the MAX if that was to happen.
Discussion of Boeing's culture or the impact on Boeing's future is not in scope. Nor is comments on restructuring the regulatory process. Neither is the impacts on COVID on the general air industry -- those are not UA specific and are better discussed elsewhere. And for discussion of UA's future, there is a separate thread.
Additionally repeated postings of essentially the same content should not happen nor unnecessarily inflammatory posts. And of course, the rest of FT posting rules apply including discuss the issue and not the posters.
The Moderator team feels there is a reason / need for this thread but it has been exhausting to have to repeated re-focus the discussion -- don't be the reason this thread is permanently closed ( and get yourself in disciplinary problems).
Stick to the relevant topic which is (repeating myself)
The reason for continuing this thread is to inform the UA traveler on the status of the MAX recertification and if / when UA might deploy the MAX aircraft. And UA flyer's thoughts about UA deploying the MAX if that was to happen.
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
However, given the importance of the subject, the UA Moderators have tried to host this discussion but odd here as UA is not the top 1 or 2 or 3 for MAX among North America carriers. However, some have allowed their passion and non-UA related opinions to repeatedly disrupt this discussion.
The reason for continuing this thread is to inform the UA traveler on the status of the MAX recertification and if / when UA might deploy the MAX aircraft. And UA flyer's thoughts about UA deploying the MAX if that was to happen.
Discussion of Boeing's culture or the impact on Boeing's future is not in scope. Nor is comments on restructuring the regulatory process. Neither is the impacts on COVID on the general air industry -- those are not UA specific and are better discussed elsewhere. And for discussion of UA's future, there is a separate thread.
Additionally repeated postings of essentially the same content should not happen nor unnecessarily inflammatory posts. And of course, the rest of FT posting rules apply including discuss the issue and not the posters.
The Moderator team feels there is a reason / need for this thread but it has been exhausting to have to repeated re-focus the discussion -- don't be the reason this thread is permanently closed ( and get yourself in disciplinary problems).
Stick to the relevant topic which is (repeating myself)
The reason for continuing this thread is to inform the UA traveler on the status of the MAX recertification and if / when UA might deploy the MAX aircraft. And UA flyer's thoughts about UA deploying the MAX if that was to happen.
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
The first B737 MAX, an enhanced version of the B737 family, started service in May 2016, a MAX 8. MAX 9 entered service March 2018. (UA service start date??)
The MAX series was ground in March 2019 after two incidents involve the MCAS; Lion Air Flight 610 - Wikipedia and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 - Wikipedia
United did not fly the 737 MAX 8 that has been involved in two recent crashes, but it had operated the 737 MAX 9.
All 737 MAX aircraft worldwide (MAX 8, MAX 9, and MAX 10) were grounded. Boeing in conjunction with FAA, EASA, Transport Canada and other national air safety organizations entered into a cause investigation, into the MCAS operation, into if sufficient training had been provided and into if the original certification process had been sufficient rigid.
Preliminary Summary of the FAA’s Review of the Boeing 737 MAX (PDF).
The FAA (18 Nov 2020), EASA (24 Nov 2020) and Transport Canada (17 Dec 2020) have re-certified the MAX 8 & MAX 9 for commercial flight
Boeing 737 MAX certification - Wikipedia
AA resumed use of MAX8 on 29 Dec 2020
UA plans to resumes service of the MAX9 in Feb 2020 (from IAH and DEN)
Airlines have resumed taking deliveries of the MAX 8 & 9
================
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 for the 737 MAX 9.
B737MAX Recertification - Archive
B737MAX-Cleared by FAA to resume passenger flights;UA MAX flights resumed 11 Feb 2020
Jul 22, 2020, 2:39 pm
#76
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
I wonder if with all of the enormous cost to Boeing as well as to the airlines if the decision had been made to do a fairly comprehensive rework of the 737, allowing for greater ground clearance, cargo, fuel capacity, MTOW if that would have been less expensive than the MAX boondoggle?
The 737 carries plenty of fuel and cargo and the other benefit greater ground clearance offers is the ability to have higher thrust engines that can support a further stretch of the airplane to compete with the A321.
Jul 22, 2020, 2:47 pm
#77
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,686
The 787 beat the A350 to market while Airbus was still trying to drum up sales for the commercial disaster that is the A380. The last clean-sheet 4 engine jet that came out of Boeing was the 747, Airbus has had two in that timeframe and the more successful of the two still wasn't as successful as the twin engine variants.
Jul 22, 2020, 3:47 pm
#78
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,178
Jul 22, 2020, 4:01 pm
#79
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,686
edit: I suppose it depends what you mean by "launched", since the A340 became for sale in '86, 2 years prior to ETOPS 180 being formally adopted in '88, but the writing was clearly on the wall during the A340 (nee T11) development with ETOPS 120 operations already in service in '85.
Jul 22, 2020, 4:12 pm
#80
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SIN (with a bit of ZRH sprinkled in)
Posts: 9,446
Don't forget the A340 was built with cold war mentality: Flying over Russia/USSR (and basically whole Eastern Europe, as well as several other countries) was to be avoided, which significantely increased flight paths to far-east destinations which favoured 4-engine aircrafts over 2-engines.
Jul 22, 2020, 4:15 pm
#81
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.99MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,742
We are back into "Airbus" drift, let's please stick to UA / 737 MAX discussions. And use other threads to discuss these other items (Airbus, Boeing's future, ...)
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
Jul 22, 2020, 6:36 pm
#82
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G, Marriott Bonvoy Gold; Avis PC
Posts: 8,990
UA is on the hook for so many MAX aircraft, but given they have the A321XLR coming in 4 years or so - maybe that could help them bridge the gap, get out of existing contracts (maybe by converting orders to 787 or 777X aircraft) and replenishing last-gen aircraft fleet by buying used A319/320s from China as they have been doing? Obviously Boeing is hurting for cash, so it may be hard to swing...
Jul 22, 2020, 6:43 pm
#83
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
UA is on the hook for so many MAX aircraft, but given they have the A321XLR coming in 4 years or so - maybe that could help them bridge the gap, get out of existing contracts (maybe by converting orders to 787 or 777X aircraft) and replenishing last-gen aircraft fleet by buying used A319/320s from China as they have been doing? Obviously Boeing is hurting for cash, so it may be hard to swing...
Jul 22, 2020, 6:58 pm
#84
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,178
The MAX is significantly more efficient than the NG and the original A320-family and slightly more efficient than the A320neo family. The airline accountants know this. That is why so many thousands of them have been ordered. When the airplane is cleared for service, there will be significant economic pressure to fly them instead of the NGs and original A320 family.
To put it into perspective, when I flew the 737-9 MAX, the fuel figures on the release looked insane. The fuel loads were what I would have expected in the significant smaller 737-700. Not an airplane the same size as the 737-900. It really stood out and made you spend some time looking at those calculations before you accepted the numbers.
Very round numbers... the 737-800/900 burn around 6,000 pph (pounds per hour), the 737-9 MAX burns about 5,000 pph. The difference is actually just a bit under 1,000 pph but those round numbers work very well for a sanity check on your flight plan numbers. You get a flight plan showing a fuel burn plus a reserve of 18,750 when you're expecting something around 22,500 in the 737-900. That's a significant difference and it only gets wider when you include the proportionally-smaller quantities for alternates, holding, expected delays, and extra fuel. (Divide by about 6.7 pounds-per-gallon, depending on temperature, to get gallons)
To put it into perspective, when I flew the 737-9 MAX, the fuel figures on the release looked insane. The fuel loads were what I would have expected in the significant smaller 737-700. Not an airplane the same size as the 737-900. It really stood out and made you spend some time looking at those calculations before you accepted the numbers.
Very round numbers... the 737-800/900 burn around 6,000 pph (pounds per hour), the 737-9 MAX burns about 5,000 pph. The difference is actually just a bit under 1,000 pph but those round numbers work very well for a sanity check on your flight plan numbers. You get a flight plan showing a fuel burn plus a reserve of 18,750 when you're expecting something around 22,500 in the 737-900. That's a significant difference and it only gets wider when you include the proportionally-smaller quantities for alternates, holding, expected delays, and extra fuel. (Divide by about 6.7 pounds-per-gallon, depending on temperature, to get gallons)
Jul 22, 2020, 7:06 pm
#85
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
The MAX is significantly more efficient than the NG and the original A320-family and slightly more efficient than the A320neo family. The airline accountants know this. That is why so many thousands of them have been ordered. When the airplane is cleared for service, there will be significant economic pressure to fly them instead of the NGs and original A320 family.
To put it into perspective, when I flew the 737-9 MAX, the fuel figures on the release looked insane. The fuel loads were what I would have expected in the significant smaller 737-700. Not an airplane the same size as the 737-900. It really stood out and made you spend some time looking at those calculations before you accepted the numbers.
Very round numbers... the 737-800/900 burn around 6,000 pph (pounds per hour), the 737-9 MAX burns about 5,000 pph. The difference is actually just a bit under 1,000 pph but those round numbers work very well for a sanity check on your flight plan numbers. You get a flight plan showing a fuel burn plus a reserve of 18,750 when you're expecting something around 22,500 in the 737-900. That's a significant difference and it only gets wider when you include the proportionally-smaller quantities for alternates, holding, expected delays, and extra fuel. (Divide by about 6.7 pounds-per-gallon, depending on temperature, to get gallons)
To put it into perspective, when I flew the 737-9 MAX, the fuel figures on the release looked insane. The fuel loads were what I would have expected in the significant smaller 737-700. Not an airplane the same size as the 737-900. It really stood out and made you spend some time looking at those calculations before you accepted the numbers.
Very round numbers... the 737-800/900 burn around 6,000 pph (pounds per hour), the 737-9 MAX burns about 5,000 pph. The difference is actually just a bit under 1,000 pph but those round numbers work very well for a sanity check on your flight plan numbers. You get a flight plan showing a fuel burn plus a reserve of 18,750 when you're expecting something around 22,500 in the 737-900. That's a significant difference and it only gets wider when you include the proportionally-smaller quantities for alternates, holding, expected delays, and extra fuel. (Divide by about 6.7 pounds-per-gallon, depending on temperature, to get gallons)
Jul 22, 2020, 7:28 pm
#86
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.99MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,742
Hardly
Cheaper than recent history, yes -- spot price about 60% compared to last year, contract prices may be higher
Cheaper than recent history, yes -- spot price about 60% compared to last year, contract prices may be higher
Jul 22, 2020, 8:00 pm
#87
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,771
UA is on the hook for so many MAX aircraft, but given they have the A321XLR coming in 4 years or so - maybe that could help them bridge the gap, get out of existing contracts (maybe by converting orders to 787 or 777X aircraft) and replenishing last-gen aircraft fleet by buying used A319/320s from China as they have been doing? Obviously Boeing is hurting for cash, so it may be hard to swing...
Jul 22, 2020, 9:22 pm
#88
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Aug 3, 2020, 6:12 pm
#89
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,137
It's a rather long read with less than exciting language, but suffice to say, the MAX will need totally redone computer systems before being allowed to proceed with a return to commercial service.
https://www.faa.gov/news/media/attac...-R3-8-3-20.pdf
https://www.faa.gov/news/media/attac...-R3-8-3-20.pdf
Aug 3, 2020, 6:26 pm
#90
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.99MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,742
SUMMARY:The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2018-23-51, which applies to all The Boeing Company Model 737-8 and 737-9 (737 MAX) airplanes. Since AD 2018-23-51 was issued, the agency has determined that final corrective action is necessary to address the unsafe condition. This proposed AD would require installing new flight control computer (FCC) software, revising the existing Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)to incorporate new and revised flightcrew procedures, installing new MAX display system (MDS) software, changing the horizontal stabilizer trim wire routing installations, completing an angle of attack sensor system test, and performing an operational readiness flight. This proposed AD would also apply to a narrower set of airplanes than the superseded AD, and allow operation (dispatch) of an airplane with certain inoperative systems only if certain provisions are incorporated in the operator’s existing FAA-approved minimum equipment list(MEL). The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
- installing new flight control computer (FCC) software,
- revising the existing Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)to incorporate new and revised flightcrew procedures
- installing new MAX display system (MDS) software
- changing the horizontal stabilizer trim wire routing installations
- completing an angle of attack sensor system test
- and performing an operational readiness flight.
