Jan 4, 2021, 1:37 am
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
This is an archive thread, the archive thread is https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-airlines-mileageplus/1960195-b737max-cleared-faa-resume-passenger-flights-when-will-ua-max-flights-resume.html
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.
United does not fly the 737 MAX 8 that has been involved in two recent crashes, but it does operate the 737 MAX 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.
All 737 MAX aircraft worldwide (MAX 8, MAX 9, and MAX 10) are currently grounded.
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.
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
United does not fly the 737 MAX 8 that has been involved in two recent crashes, but it does operate the 737 MAX 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.
All 737 MAX aircraft worldwide (MAX 8, MAX 9, and MAX 10) are currently grounded.
B737MAX Recertification - Archive
Mar 11, 2019, 11:41 am
#136
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: dark side of the moon
Programs: papa card, UA 1K
Posts: 707
RE UA I think it's a no-brainer to ground their 737-max (even if they aren't the 8). Even it's just for the sake of PR. I am amazed the US airlines (and particularly UA as they have only a few) are dragging their feet on grounding the max. at least ground the 8. Going forward I will avoid all versions of the 737 max until the problem (s) are clearly fixed .... I didn't avoid Malaysia airlines after their two unlucky incidents ....
Mar 11, 2019, 11:47 am
#137
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SFO South Bay
Programs: UA 2MM
Posts: 3,052
Reuters is reporting several witnesses saying smoke and items coming out of plane before crash. Sounds very different than the control software issue cited in prior crash.
Regardless, I am happy to see UA being proactive and understanding about people who want to avoid the MAX variants.
Tamirat Abera, 25, was walking past the field at the time. He said the plane turned sharply, trailing white smoke and items like clothes and papers, then crashed about 300 meters away.
Mar 11, 2019, 11:52 am
#138
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
If there are signs of an engine fire or bomb we should know relatively quickly.
Mar 11, 2019, 11:54 am
#139
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,161
Reuters is reporting several witnesses saying smoke and items coming out of plane before crash. Sounds very different than the control software issue cited in prior crash.
Regardless, I am happy to see UA being proactive and understanding about people who want to avoid the MAX variants.
Regardless, I am happy to see UA being proactive and understanding about people who want to avoid the MAX variants.
Plus - we know that the pilots radioed a problem. If there was a fire/explosion don't you think they'd said that and/or we'd already know that (debris is more than one location)?
Mar 11, 2019, 11:59 am
#140
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,450
There is nothing to suggest that this problem is specific to the MAX8. The vast bulk of the flying hours so far on the variant are on the MAX8, since it was the first one released. If as is being suggested the issue relates to air-frame deficiencies and a poorly performing/executed fly-by wire system to try to make up for these deficiencies, then the problem will extend to the MAX9, which has the same basic systems. If anything, I would expect the flight performance of the MAX9 to be even more sub-optimal than the MAX8.
If passengers are uncomfortable flying on a given type because of their personal perception of safety, then by all means, they should change their travel plans. Problems arise when people start stringing disparate facts together in a public forum, reaching unsupported conclusions, and making proclamations that aren't relevant to the underlying matter.
Mar 11, 2019, 12:16 pm
#141
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Programs: UA GS, Amex Centurion, UA 1MM
Posts: 557
Eyewitness reports, especially from people generally unfamiliar w/aviation, are notoriously wrong. See TWA 800.
Plus - we know that the pilots radioed a problem. If there was a fire/explosion don't you think they'd said that and/or we'd already know that (debris is more than one location)?
Plus - we know that the pilots radioed a problem. If there was a fire/explosion don't you think they'd said that and/or we'd already know that (debris is more than one location)?
Smoke before crashing is VERY relevant. VERY revealing and VERY different than Lion Air. Causes? depressurization from fire, explosion, structural failure and on and on. It's nice to know what's up all being aviation enthusiasts, travel enthusiasts and professionals alike. HOWEVER, we need to sit tight...not make any judgments. But, I have a suspicion this one is going to be very different than the Lion Air.
And I dont agree with you that the pilot could recognize the issue. Remember ValuJet crashing in the Everglades? fire. pilots had no idea. one contained crash zone. many many possibilities and WAY too early to discount or give credit to anything. But multiple people seeing smoke makes me wonder....on a clear sunny day remember!
Last edited by saccoNY; Mar 11, 2019 at 12:22 pm
Mar 11, 2019, 12:24 pm
#142
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,172
Good PR by UA. It probably helps that the MAX isn’t a material % of their fleet miles flown. Winding them down semi quietly until the investigation is complete could be done without massive disruptions to schedule.
I booked away from MAX a few weeks ago due to poor reviews of seats and tiny lavs.
I booked away from MAX a few weeks ago due to poor reviews of seats and tiny lavs.
Mar 11, 2019, 12:30 pm
#143
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 16
I have an upcoming flight that seatguru tells me is a 737 on United. How to know what variant i'm flying?
Mar 11, 2019, 12:35 pm
#144
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,396
What does it say when you look at the trip details? (My Trip tab / Manage Reservation). It should say something like "Boeing 737-900." If the flight is scheduled to be operated with the MAX, it would say "Boeing 737 MAX 9."
Mar 11, 2019, 12:35 pm
#145
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
Yes, depending on what "modern times" are. In fact, it was not uncommon for new planes to experience teething problems, and there have numerous incidents that raised red flags...in some cases, ending the lifespan of the subject AC (eg, DeHavilland Comet.) In other cases--DC-10s, for example-- fatal mistakes were corrected and the AC served for decades.
DC 10 - AA engine flying off, corrected. Another the cargo door latch caused a crash. Identified & corrected.
In the 1960s there was a book about the 727 being the Libeled Aircraft after a series of crashes.
Back around 1970 there was a book published that described airline crashes over the prior 20 years and their causes. Flying is so much safer today. Just will have to wait and see the cause with the 737 Max.
The few times in your life where the plane is struck by lightning when the same model plane crashed two weeks before, or the landing gear has to be manually be cranked down & captain not sure if locked in place so you land with passengers in braced position in the event of crash (US Air), or it takes a half hour of to get the landing gear down on a Continental DC10 & crew starting to prepare for a crash landing.- this sort of makes you think twice before booking until issues resolved, if you are travelling with family members.
Mar 11, 2019, 12:38 pm
#146
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,450
Smoke before crashing is VERY relevant. VERY revealing and VERY different than Lion Air. Causes? depressurization from fire, explosion, structural failure and on and on. It's nice to know what's up all being aviation enthusiasts, travel enthusiasts and professionals alike. HOWEVER, we need to sit tight...not make any judgments. But, I have a suspicion this one is going to be very different than the Lion Air.
And I dont agree with you that the pilot could recognize the issue. Remember ValuJet crashing in the Everglades? fire. pilots had no idea. one contained crash zone. many many possibilities and WAY too early to discount or give credit to anything. But multiple people seeing smoke makes me wonder....on a clear sunny day remember!
And I dont agree with you that the pilot could recognize the issue. Remember ValuJet crashing in the Everglades? fire. pilots had no idea. one contained crash zone. many many possibilities and WAY too early to discount or give credit to anything. But multiple people seeing smoke makes me wonder....on a clear sunny day remember!
Reportedly, an ET302 pilot communicated a controllability issue and requested immediate return to ADD. There is no mention of any other sort of catastrophic occurrence (fire, explosion, decompression, engine failure), but we'll soon learn whether any other major systems, unrelated to flight controls, failed or were malfunctioning in this case.
Mar 11, 2019, 12:48 pm
#147
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 16
Ah thanks for the tip. It doesnt say anything about MAX, just Boeing 737-900 and Boeing 737-800
Mar 11, 2019, 12:52 pm
#148
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2017
Programs: AS 75K, DL Silver, UA Platinum, Hilton Gold, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Platinum + LT Gold
Posts: 10,501
Good PR by UA. It probably helps that the MAX isn’t a material % of their fleet miles flown. Winding them down semi quietly until the investigation is complete could be done without massive disruptions to schedule.
I booked away from MAX a few weeks ago due to poor reviews of seats and tiny lavs.
I booked away from MAX a few weeks ago due to poor reviews of seats and tiny lavs.
Mar 11, 2019, 12:53 pm
#149
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Programs: UA GS, Amex Centurion, UA 1MM
Posts: 557
The pilots of ValuJet 592 were well aware of a smoke condition and a likely fire. Whether they knew with certainty its source or precise location is unknown, but it is evident they were trying to get the airplane on the ground as soon as possible; sadly, they were either incapacitated or lost control of the airplane before they had the chance to carry out an emergency landing.
Reportedly, an ET302 pilot communicated a controllability issue and requested immediate return to ADD. There is no mention of any other sort of catastrophic occurrence (fire, explosion, decompression, engine failure), but we'll soon learn whether any other major systems, unrelated to flight controls, failed or were malfunctioning in this case.
Reportedly, an ET302 pilot communicated a controllability issue and requested immediate return to ADD. There is no mention of any other sort of catastrophic occurrence (fire, explosion, decompression, engine failure), but we'll soon learn whether any other major systems, unrelated to flight controls, failed or were malfunctioning in this case.
yes, all true. VJ592 was a smoked out cabin and pilots suspected (rightfully so) fire...but they had no idea as to the source or really what was going on...... Also we dont know the nature at all yet of the distress call. In fact, as far as I saw, only the ET CEO made that claim so far. (maybe updated) But a mechanical catastrophic event near, around some control hydraulic (as one example) could lead to control issues.....IDK, I am NOT a pilot or a mechanic....just an aviation enthusiast, frequent flier and follower of many past airline incidents...but if the witness who saw smoke coming out of the aircraft prior to impact is corroborated in in any way, it is a major early on detail that significantly differentiates Lion Air from ET.
Mar 11, 2019, 1:27 pm
#150
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC: UA 1K, DL Platinum, AAirpass, Avis PC
Posts: 4,599
Witness accounts I was wondering about
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-e...-idUSKBN1QS1LJ
Smoke and debris trailing, making a turn then diving
A possibility is bird strike damaging one or both engines, them stalling on that turn
More facts to come from the professionals
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-e...-idUSKBN1QS1LJ
Smoke and debris trailing, making a turn then diving
A possibility is bird strike damaging one or both engines, them stalling on that turn
More facts to come from the professionals