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 12, 2019, 8:48 am
#196
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,452
At least with respect to the Lion Air crash, it was more of an issue where a faulty instrument fed bad data to a flight control augmentation system while the airplane was in manual flight, and the crew did not diagnose the problem in a timely manner. A pitch trim runaway is a failure that would present similarly and cause a similar result on any airplane so-equipped, not just the MAX. Accordingly, once it became clear that there was a problem with uncommanded control input along the pitch axis, the crew's attention likely would have been better applied to troubleshooting that issue rather than fighting with the airplane through 25+ cycles of MCAS activation. I hate to Monday morning quarterback aviation accidents, but some context is important to avoid the notion that the 737MAX (with almost entirely hydraulically-actuated control surfaces, rather than fly-by-wire) are autonomously commanding dives out of the sky, beyond the ability of flight crews to mitigate.
Mar 12, 2019, 8:51 am
#197
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Houston/DC
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM
Posts: 564
The term "mass hysteria" is defined as a psychological disorder where many people display the same symptoms with no obvious or discoverable link. Anyone saying this is mass hysteria is dismissing everyone's concerns about stepping on the plane as nothing more than a figment of their imagination and herd mentality.
I myself am undecided about whether I'd get on one. I have no MAX flights scheduled so I don't have to make the decision. My point is people have a valid reason to not want to fly on them for now and still let due course prevail. It's not one or the other.
I myself am undecided about whether I'd get on one. I have no MAX flights scheduled so I don't have to make the decision. My point is people have a valid reason to not want to fly on them for now and still let due course prevail. It's not one or the other.
In regards to the MAX 8 issue at hand, it really does not affect me yet. UA is my airline of choice and only operates the MAX 9's. If I ever find my self booked or switched to a MAX 9, I would not have a problem flying on one with UA pilots. That said, hypothetically, if I was on an international itinerary & had some sort of IRROPS that required me to be routed on OAL on a MAX-8 today I would have to think about it. My main concern would be if the OAL flight & ground crews would have the requisite experience & training to safely operate the plane in any & all situations. Absent an undiscovered design flaw in the MAX series, that seems to be a HUGE part of these 2 incidents.
Mar 12, 2019, 9:05 am
#198
Join Date: May 2009
Location: ATL
Posts: 516
Maybe mass hysteria is not the correct term, but there is a certain herd mentality to the near instant news outlets on the internet & their opinion pieces that drive people to social media. The problem is that there is such a need for content on these 24 hours news networks that they mostly fill the airspace with talking heads and their opinions, usually not many facts in the beginning. For better or worse, that does drive the herd in one direction or the other. Just look @ CNN's front page right now, the cycle is perpetuating itself. Now US Senators are calling for the grounding of the MAX 8 & I believe it is in large part to the news/social media cycle feeding on itself & needing to "follow the herd".
Mar 12, 2019, 9:09 am
#199
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,115
The interesting thing is that, if these accidents happened to involved 2 very experienced flight crews, we would tend to rule out any error on their part, while the investigators would definitely still put everything action of the crew under the magnifying glass. We as humans are biased to make judgments based on experience, but history has proven that very experienced flight crews can make poor decisions as well, meaning that (in)experience is almost never an isolated cause of an accident.
Finally, note that your OAL flight crew may very well be more experienced than your UA flight crew. In the end, it's not something I'd worry about since we as pax don't get to choose nor know the experience level of our flight crew. Probably for the better.
Mar 12, 2019, 9:28 am
#200
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Houston/DC
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM
Posts: 564
This is difficult to conclude based on only 2 incidents. Naturally, two incidents will have many things in common, and only a subset of those things will have actually contributed to that accident. If more incidents happen, the subset will become clearer. The official investigations will point out if (in)experience was actually a factor and if a more experienced crew could have prevented the accident or not.
The interesting thing is that, if these accidents happened to involved 2 very experienced flight crews, we would tend to rule out any error on their part, while the investigators would definitely still put everything action of the crew under the magnifying glass. We as humans are biased to make judgments based on experience, but history has proven that very experienced flight crews can make poor decisions as well, meaning that (in)experience is almost never an isolated cause of an accident.
Finally, note that your OAL flight crew may very well be more experienced than your UA flight crew. In the end, it's not something I'd worry about since we as pax don't get to choose nor know the experience level of our flight crew. Probably for the better.
The interesting thing is that, if these accidents happened to involved 2 very experienced flight crews, we would tend to rule out any error on their part, while the investigators would definitely still put everything action of the crew under the magnifying glass. We as humans are biased to make judgments based on experience, but history has proven that very experienced flight crews can make poor decisions as well, meaning that (in)experience is almost never an isolated cause of an accident.
Finally, note that your OAL flight crew may very well be more experienced than your UA flight crew. In the end, it's not something I'd worry about since we as pax don't get to choose nor know the experience level of our flight crew. Probably for the better.
In the Lion Air accident, preliminary findings definitely point to a faulty sensor that will most likely be cited as a major cause. Whether the pilots were seasoned pros or not , the inexperience/training dealing with the resulting situation and the inexperience/training of the ground crews for letting the plane fly were my concerns.
While there is hardly any information out on the Ethiopian flight, if EWR764 is correct that the FO only had 200 hours of flight time, that did introduce the question of experience of the flight crew in my mind. I realize that we all have to start somewhere & it is just bad timing that this FO ended up being in the seat & was not able to help in this emergency.
Probably not fair for me to infer these characteristics on foreign carriers that I know nothing about, but it is a bias that formed my opinion from the same internet I just complained about.
Mar 12, 2019, 9:29 am
#201
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 103
If any good comes from these tragedies please let it (or among "it") be a re-balancing of the aircraft system/software certification oversight scale. There is a massive industry lobby (GAMA et al) vying (and succeeding) to strip down oversight in a time where system/software complexity is skyrocketing. We need more (or at least as much) oversight right now, not less.
Airplanes are certified and enter service with so many problems (and even unknown/not well understood functions) that are force fed down regulators' throats by powerful OEMs (and their system suppliers) who then put way too much onus on flight crews to workaround those problems. I'm talking dozens, hundreds, or even thousands (yes, thousands) of problems PER system ranging from minor/trivial to more serious. OEMs defend those problems in isolation, but when you have that many problems how does anyone know what the cumulative effect or interrelationship of them all can be? It's impossible to analyze. Things should "just work" ... or at least work much, much better before certification/entry into service.
The FCOM for a new plane is often littered with restrictions/workarounds and I believe pilots can only memorize so much of this in addition to learning how to operate the aircraft. It's a recipe for problems.
Airplanes are certified and enter service with so many problems (and even unknown/not well understood functions) that are force fed down regulators' throats by powerful OEMs (and their system suppliers) who then put way too much onus on flight crews to workaround those problems. I'm talking dozens, hundreds, or even thousands (yes, thousands) of problems PER system ranging from minor/trivial to more serious. OEMs defend those problems in isolation, but when you have that many problems how does anyone know what the cumulative effect or interrelationship of them all can be? It's impossible to analyze. Things should "just work" ... or at least work much, much better before certification/entry into service.
The FCOM for a new plane is often littered with restrictions/workarounds and I believe pilots can only memorize so much of this in addition to learning how to operate the aircraft. It's a recipe for problems.
Mar 12, 2019, 9:33 am
#202
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,126
There have been many good posts urging all not to draw conclusions at this point. Along those lines, it also makes sense not to assume poor training or experience of the ET flight crew is a HUGE part of Sunday's accident. Just as the FO with 200 hours may have been flying the plane, the captain with 8000 hours may have been at the controls. We don't know.
Mar 12, 2019, 9:36 am
#203
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London & Sonoma CA
Programs: UA 1K, MM *G for life, BAEC Gold
Posts: 10,224
At least with respect to the Lion Air crash, it was more of an issue where a faulty instrument fed bad data to a flight control augmentation system while the airplane was in manual flight, and the crew did not diagnose the problem in a timely manner. A pitch trim runaway is a failure that would present similarly and cause a similar result on any airplane so-equipped, not just the MAX. Accordingly, once it became clear that there was a problem with uncommanded control input along the pitch axis, the crew's attention likely would have been better applied to troubleshooting that issue rather than fighting with the airplane through 25+ cycles of MCAS activation. I hate to Monday morning quarterback aviation accidents, but some context is important to avoid the notion that the 737MAX (with almost entirely hydraulically-actuated control surfaces, rather than fly-by-wire) are autonomously commanding dives out of the sky, beyond the ability of flight crews to mitigate.
Mar 12, 2019, 9:36 am
#204
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G, Marriott Bonvoy Gold; Avis PC
Posts: 9,005
Looks like the EU is going to ground the planes. Boeing should take the hit and do a thorough investigation at this point...doesn’t seem like either the DoT or the FAA are going to make them. Probably be best for UA in the long run as well, since they have a ton of them on order and the MAX 10 is going to play a big role in their premium TCON flying.
Mar 12, 2019, 9:38 am
#205
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London & Sonoma CA
Programs: UA 1K, MM *G for life, BAEC Gold
Posts: 10,224
There have been many good posts urging all not to draw conclusions at this point. Along those lines, it also makes sense not to assume poor training or experience of the ET flight crew is a HUGE part of Sunday's accident. Just as the FO with 200 hours may have been flying the plane, the captain with 8000 hours may have been at the controls. We don't know.
Mar 12, 2019, 9:38 am
#206
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Colorado
Programs: UA Gold (.85 MM), HH Diamond, SPG Platinum (LT Gold), Hertz PC, National EE
Posts: 5,656
I agree with others that this might be a training issue and I'm confident with UA Pilots, in fact all US based Pilots for any airline. The problem I can see is that when you decide to override the computer at 1000' AGL, and the trim has moved to a position due to a fault in info, you as a pilot have zero time to react and recover. I'm not old, but old enough and experienced enough to know that I want full control of the airplane at all times, with a quick disconnect of the Autopilot. When I engage the AP, I keep a close eye on the trim wheel, if it's moving more than I would do, I expect some serious control issues when I turn it off. That has happened to me many years ago, but thankfully in level flight in a boring 182.
Mar 12, 2019, 9:49 am
#207
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,452
The great majority of air accidents have a multitude of issues which cascade into a crash. Certainly with Lion Air there was a faulty sensor. That much is known. It is also believed that the built in MCAS system took the faulty sensor reading and pitched the aircraft down. Unfortunately Boeing had not publicised the existence of this system, nor provided any training on it so, assuming that this was indeed what happened, the pilots would not have understood why the plane was pitching down. And this is one of the key points of difference between Lion Air and Ethiopian: by the time of the Ethiopian crash, the pilots will have been aware of the issue with the MCAS system and should have been trained in how to deactivate it in certain circumstances.
See, e.g.,
While the above is not specifically a 737MAX, nor does it involve the MCAS, it is an illustration (though far from perfect, procedurally) of steps pilots would be expected to take to reestablish controlled flight in the event of a stabilizer trim malfunction... sort of like the MCAS, as currently conceived, will behave if being fed bad AOA data.
Mar 12, 2019, 10:04 am
#208
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,115
France, Germany and Iceland just joined.
Mar 12, 2019, 10:06 am
#209
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto
Programs: UA 1K, AC 35K, SPG GOLD
Posts: 264
SWA is allowing passenger to change their flight for free if they are worried flying the MAX. Sounds like a good PR move to me.