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, 8:57 pm
#286
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 18
Bunch of quotes from here: https://www.dallasnews.com/business/...ed-safety-flaw
Mar 12, 2019, 9:01 pm
#287
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2017
Programs: AS 75K, DL Silver, UA Platinum, Hilton Gold, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Platinum + LT Gold
Posts: 10,471
There is no wrong in either "x" or "y". It's each person's prerogative.
Mar 12, 2019, 9:10 pm
#289
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington DC
Programs: Delta DM CO PE OZ GE AMTRAK
Posts: 524
I am not a pilot but can read enough to know there is a potential design flaw related to the engine placement on the MAX.
No offense but the US has some of the weakest consumer protection laws in the developed world.
It is a cost benefit analysis for Boeing and the airlines that continue to fly the plane. Cost of payouts for lives lost compared to lost revenue of not selling/flying the plane. It is all about the $$. (IMHO).
No offense but the US has some of the weakest consumer protection laws in the developed world.
It is a cost benefit analysis for Boeing and the airlines that continue to fly the plane. Cost of payouts for lives lost compared to lost revenue of not selling/flying the plane. It is all about the $$. (IMHO).
ironically you are talking about money, it is the US that will pay out the largest amount of money for this type of tragedy. i can assure you the victims won't get much compensation from Ethiopian or Lion air.
Mar 12, 2019, 10:06 pm
#290
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,679
Mar 12, 2019, 10:38 pm
#291
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,115
What is the best way forward? Should we halt increasing airliner complexity at the risk of not being able to develop new and useful but complex safety systems? Should we require pilots to have a college engineering degree before going to flight school? Should we redefine the roles of the pilot and the computers in the flight deck? This is going to be a very interesting discussion in the coming months and years, and I expect the outcome of the current investigations to provide valuable new insights in this regard.
Mar 12, 2019, 11:06 pm
#292
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
I took spin88's "cutting corners" to be a reference of Boeing not doing a total redesign of the 737 when they added the new engines. The MAX-8 engines were too large to fit the existing frame (too low), so they either had to do a full redesign (costly in time and money) or do a less significant change to raise the wings and create a software solution to resolve the resulting tendency to pull up in certain situations. Several aviation experts have used similar though perhaps less pejorative words (compromise, for example) in describing the decision Boeing made.
Result was an A/C that has some fundamental limits/issues.
The pilots in this document say quite different things. Several instances of this system forcing an unexpected nose-down event. Were I a passenger on those flights, it would be anything from anxious to scary, depending on how quickly the pilots could correct the situation. And they shouldn't have to. Planes simply shouldn't do this.
Most worrisome is this passage from the docs. This is a 737MAX pilot:
Most worrisome is this passage from the docs. This is a 737MAX pilot:
Mar 12, 2019, 11:09 pm
#293
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,965
I am in software and it is scary to think a software flaw (design, coding and not catching it in testing) could have caused disasters like this. I know/hope there is redundancy and rigorous review and testing very step along the way. However, I also believe "there is always one more bug"....
Also, how do they do all these things thoroughly when they are under pressure to fix something?
Some companies have lost a lot of experienced senior people in the age of cost reduction and outsourcing. I certainly hope Boeing still has a lot of experienced long term engineers who are really good at what they are doing.
Also, how do they do all these things thoroughly when they are under pressure to fix something?
Some companies have lost a lot of experienced senior people in the age of cost reduction and outsourcing. I certainly hope Boeing still has a lot of experienced long term engineers who are really good at what they are doing.
Mar 12, 2019, 11:20 pm
#294
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Danville, CA, USA;
Programs: UA 1MM, WN CP, Marriott LT Plat, Hilton Gold, IC Plat
Posts: 15,716
I don't think the FAA would let planes in the air if there is a risk of catastrophic failure. There is no percentage in rolling the dice on aviation safety just to appease Boeing or anyone else. But FAA will also not rush to judgment - for example we don't ground every 777 just because Malaysia 470 disappeared off the face of the earth. Or even after a second Malaysia crash involving a 777 (Ukraine). There has to be some evidence of a causal connection / design flaw that makes them unsafe to fly.
There was a recent article in Slate that made logical sense to me regarding the compromises that Boeing made to update the 737 design into the newer 737 MAX design. But not being an aviation engineer, I would reserve judgment until there is evidence to confirm this hypothesis.
I will say I am very skeptical of autopilot on vehicles, as evidences by numerous Tesla crashes. It does not appear ready for prime time. By contrast the technology is well developed for aviation, but we all know the most dangerous part of the journey is takeoff/ascent (where there is the risk of stall) and landing. If in fact the software can improperly "self-correct" based on a faulty sensor, it would appear that the software is not ready for prime time and the planes should be grounded until a fix is made.
The tough question is really "how much evidence is sufficient to make the call?"
There was a recent article in Slate that made logical sense to me regarding the compromises that Boeing made to update the 737 design into the newer 737 MAX design. But not being an aviation engineer, I would reserve judgment until there is evidence to confirm this hypothesis.
I will say I am very skeptical of autopilot on vehicles, as evidences by numerous Tesla crashes. It does not appear ready for prime time. By contrast the technology is well developed for aviation, but we all know the most dangerous part of the journey is takeoff/ascent (where there is the risk of stall) and landing. If in fact the software can improperly "self-correct" based on a faulty sensor, it would appear that the software is not ready for prime time and the planes should be grounded until a fix is made.
The tough question is really "how much evidence is sufficient to make the call?"
Mar 12, 2019, 11:25 pm
#295
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
Well, since you did not trust the reports that Chinese pilots had issues, do you trust these 5 by US pilots? https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...ng-737-1266090 A friend wants to know....
.......... milk the existing 737NG design, (3) Airbus, which had the jump on Boeing already, since its A/C was a 20 year new design, capable of taking newer engines due to its higher profile, got a yet further jump on Boeing by going with the neo, and (4) rather than biting the bullet, Boeing went with the MAX, trying to milk the 737 some more...
Result was an A/C that has some fundamental limits/issues.
...
.......... milk the existing 737NG design, (3) Airbus, which had the jump on Boeing already, since its A/C was a 20 year new design, capable of taking newer engines due to its higher profile, got a yet further jump on Boeing by going with the neo, and (4) rather than biting the bullet, Boeing went with the MAX, trying to milk the 737 some more...
Result was an A/C that has some fundamental limits/issues.
...
Mar 12, 2019, 11:53 pm
#296
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,370
I said I didn't trust the CAAC. I still don't. Unless they found out about these reports within the last 24 hours, they either refused to issue guidance about a serious safety flaw until it was politically expedient, or they have grounded the plane without merit, because there's simply not enough known about the ET incident to make a judgment based on it.
Mar 13, 2019, 12:06 am
#297
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
I said I didn't trust the CAAC. I still don't. Unless they found out about these reports within the last 24 hours, they either refused to issue guidance about a serious safety flaw until it was politically expedient, or they have grounded the plane without merit, because there's simply not enough known about the ET incident to make a judgment based on it.
one and two are possibilities, no way they just made up getting complaints, given that Boeing would want to/have a right to see them, and would need to analyze them as part of any root cause investigation. There are/were clearly issues with the MAX, we now know of 5 prior issues (non-crash) from the US, and two foreign crashes.
Look, I hope that the issue is fixable with a software reflash and/or it turns out not to be related. The other option will badly undermine both Boeing and the FAA, to the extent that anyone trusts them anymore at this point. https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/25/polit...ion/index.html
Mar 13, 2019, 12:26 am
#298
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K MM, Marriott Gold
Posts: 4,768
I am in software and it is scary to think a software flaw (design, coding and not catching it in testing) could have caused disasters like this. I know/hope there is redundancy and rigorous review and testing very step along the way. However, I also believe "there is always one more bug"....
Also, how do they do all these things thoroughly when they are under pressure to fix something?
Some companies have lost a lot of experienced senior people in the age of cost reduction and outsourcing. I certainly hope Boeing still has a lot of experienced long term engineers who are really good at what they are doing.
Also, how do they do all these things thoroughly when they are under pressure to fix something?
Some companies have lost a lot of experienced senior people in the age of cost reduction and outsourcing. I certainly hope Boeing still has a lot of experienced long term engineers who are really good at what they are doing.