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
#676
Join Date: Feb 2012
Programs: Hertz PC
Posts: 657
Down the road once they do have a fix. Is public still going be scared to fly these birds? (I personally have no issues flying them now that pilots should know what to do.)
Probably wont effect United much but could hurt Southwest.
Probably wont effect United much but could hurt Southwest.
#677
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,178
With what we know about the Lion Air accident, this is what the pilot-flying would have experienced.
The Captain's stick shaker (noisy) activated at liftoff and continued throughout the flight. When flaps were retracted the MCAS system would have begun to activate.
MCAS trims nose-down (up to 10 seconds or until the pilot activates the electric trim). The pilot feels the nose getting "heavy" and applies nose-up trim to return the airplane to a trimmed state. Nothing changes for five seconds...
MCAS trims nose-down (up to 10 seconds or until the pilot activates the electric trim). The pilot feels the nose getting "heavy" and applies nose-up trim to return the airplane to a trimmed state. Nothing changes for five seconds...
MCAS trims nose-down (up to 10 seconds or until the pilot activates the electric trim). The pilot feels the nose getting "heavy" and applies nose-up trim to return the airplane to a trimmed state. Nothing changes for five seconds...
After three, maybe four, cycles the pilot should notice that everytime he trims the nose back up the airplane is trimming it back down. This is a stabilizer runaway. He can continue to counter the MCAS activations with his electric trim indefinitely or accomplish the stabilizer runaway procedure which will disable the system for the remainder of the flight.
The procedure is; 1. Grasp control wheel firmly. 2. Disconnect Autopilot (it's already off or MCAS wouldn't be operating) and autothrottle. 3. Stab Trim switches to Cutout.
AoA Disagree messages, or in-depth knowledge of MCAS , doesn't really help because you're busy controlling the airplane and don't have time for detailed thought on system interaction. That would come later when you're writing up the problem in the logbook for maintenance to fix. You fly the airplane. The key factor in identifying a stabilizer runaway is the repeated, or increasing, abnormal need to retrim.
Here's an article from the Aircraft Owner's and Pilot's associate which talks about this issue.
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/...pilot-training
I have been an airline pilot for 29 years. I have flown nine different airliner types. I have never flown an airplane with an AoA indicator. AoA indicators are common in military aircraft but relatively rare in civilian aircraft.
Last edited by LarryJ; Mar 22, 2019 at 8:41 am
#679
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
And the first hit....
Garuda Airlines (Indonesia) cancels Order for 49 MAX, saying they have "low confidence" in the airplane.... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.68d185aa3def
First of many I would expect to be coming....
And the MAX10 is the worst dog of them all, and its not even launched.
Garuda Airlines (Indonesia) cancels Order for 49 MAX, saying they have "low confidence" in the airplane.... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.68d185aa3def
First of many I would expect to be coming....
And the MAX10 is the worst dog of them all, and its not even launched.
#680
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
Does anyone know the extra cost?
#681
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,686
Did someone tell United that the MCAS system only pays attention to one of two sensors and doesn't notice if their outputs don't match so that an indicator to the pilots is necessary?
Seems like the optional safety equipment is only really not optional because Boeing's system design sucks. A critical airline system reliant on ONE sensor?
Seems like the optional safety equipment is only really not optional because Boeing's system design sucks. A critical airline system reliant on ONE sensor?
Critical is a layman's term that does not sufficiently differentiate between several important levels; it is not a recognized design assurance level. MCAS is DAL C, Major: Failure is significant, but has a lesser impact than a Hazardous failure ... or significantly increases crew workload (safety related)
STS, which can also command electric trim changes, is also DAL C and on a single input sensor at any given time.
They could gold plate everything to DAL A, never finish development of the aircraft, and nobody could afford to buy it...
The design changes widely being armchair quarterbacked are tremendously more complex than the well known trim runaway procedure.
#682
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,442
Just saw this on the late night news. From a public relations standpoint it makes United look cheap and risky. From a legal standpoint, in the unfortunate situation of an accident, it raises the issue that United was negligent. These safety features would probably have prevented the 737 mAX disasters. If you want to certify the plane with a common rating, I would think that you would want a backup warning system where there are materially different operational characteristics that must be compensated for with software.
Does anyone know the extra cost?
Does anyone know the extra cost?
#683
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London & Sonoma CA
Programs: UA 1K, MM *G for life, BAEC Gold
Posts: 10,220
And the first hit....
Garuda Airlines (Indonesia) cancels Order for 49 MAX, saying they have "low confidence" in the airplane.... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.68d185aa3def
First of many I would expect to be coming....
And the MAX10 is the worst dog of them all, and its not even launched.
Garuda Airlines (Indonesia) cancels Order for 49 MAX, saying they have "low confidence" in the airplane.... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.68d185aa3def
First of many I would expect to be coming....
And the MAX10 is the worst dog of them all, and its not even launched.
Strangely, Airbus just had a cancellation from Avianca, so they may well have some spare capacity in the next couple of years for an neo order - I just don't think it will be from Garuda.
#684
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: PIT
Programs: OZ Diamond, UA Gold
Posts: 9,904
Just saw this on the late night news. From a public relations standpoint it makes United look cheap and risky. From a legal standpoint, in the unfortunate situation of an accident, it raises the issue that United was negligent. These safety features would probably have prevented the 737 mAX disasters. If you want to certify the plane with a common rating, I would think that you would want a backup warning system where there are materially different operational characteristics that must be compensated for with software.
Does anyone know the extra cost?
Does anyone know the extra cost?
#685
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,104
And the first hit....
Garuda Airlines (Indonesia) cancels Order for 49 MAX, saying they have "low confidence" in the airplane.... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.68d185aa3def
First of many I would expect to be coming....
And the MAX10 is the worst dog of them all, and its not even launched.
Garuda Airlines (Indonesia) cancels Order for 49 MAX, saying they have "low confidence" in the airplane.... https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.68d185aa3def
First of many I would expect to be coming....
And the MAX10 is the worst dog of them all, and its not even launched.
#686
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,442
AOA indicators are installed for procedural reasons, primarily where airlines conduct, as a matter of policy, manual approaches in instrument conditions (e.g., HUD-assisted CAT III approaches). In visual flying, or autoland approaches, it's of minimal utility, unless UA decides to start doing carrier landings. United's 737s don't have HUD either; does that make them unsafe, too?
#687
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,681
Just saw this on the late night news. From a public relations standpoint it makes United look cheap and risky. From a legal standpoint, in the unfortunate situation of an accident, it raises the issue that United was negligent. These safety features would probably have prevented the 737 mAX disasters.
What industry standard did they violate - failure to predict the future about the failure of a system they likely did not have full information about?
Besides, you really cannot have negligence without damages. UA didn't cause any proximate damages to anyone by not ordering this option.
#688
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: WAS/ BOM
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold
Posts: 1,567
CNN reporting this morning that pilots training to transition from regular 737s to 737 Max were asked to take a self-guided learning lesson - https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/22/us/ma...ntl/index.html
These are US airline pilots. If this is even remotely true, and the training doesn't cover MCAS, then it should probably put to rest the claim that US pilots are trained better than international pilots and hence know how to operate the 73MAX.
Here are a few shocking quotes :
These are US airline pilots. If this is even remotely true, and the training doesn't cover MCAS, then it should probably put to rest the claim that US pilots are trained better than international pilots and hence know how to operate the 73MAX.
Here are a few shocking quotes :
Pilots of Southwest Airlines and American Airlines took courses -- lasting between 56 minutes and three hours -- that highlighted differences between the Max 8 and older 737s, but did not explain the new maneuvering characteristics augmentation system, know as MCAS, the spokesmen said.
"This is ridiculous," said Captain Dennis Tajer, a representative of the Allied Pilots Association, which represents 15,000 American Airlines pilots. "If you're going to have equipment on the airplane that we didn't know about, and we're going to be responsible for battling it if it fails, then we need to have hands-on experience."
The self-administered transition course for American Airlines pilots was a 56-minute online course, Tajer said, which he completed on his iPad. It was broken up into four broad sections, including a general description of changes to the aircraft, its engines, and its instrument panel. But an explanation or even an acknowledgment of the MCAS system was again missing, Tajer said.
#689
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: SLC
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 240
$80K for AoA disagree indicator. Happened to catch this on CBS Morning News as I was walking out the door.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/boeing-...r-malfunction/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/boeing-...r-malfunction/
#690
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 16,900
Did someone tell United that the MCAS system only pays attention to one of two sensors and doesn't notice if their outputs don't match so that an indicator to the pilots is necessary?
Seems like the optional safety equipment is only really not optional because Boeing's system design sucks. A critical airline system reliant on ONE sensor?
Thought we learned our lesson after that Air France Airbus 330 broke up over the Atlantic because of Pitot tubes...
Seems like the optional safety equipment is only really not optional because Boeing's system design sucks. A critical airline system reliant on ONE sensor?
Thought we learned our lesson after that Air France Airbus 330 broke up over the Atlantic because of Pitot tubes...