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
#736
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
If WN wraps tires, ports and engines then there’s an indication the aircraft will not be flying soon.
#737
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Not ones that kill 350 people every five months. @:-)
Unacceptable in the 21st Century. That logic works in the days before today's computers and the complex simulations we can create to test, re-test, and hazard test BEFORE we put passengers on planes. "Tombstone mentality" indeed.
And I don't want Donald Rumsfeld anywhere near the testing and certification process either. @:-)
Unacceptable in the 21st Century. That logic works in the days before today's computers and the complex simulations we can create to test, re-test, and hazard test BEFORE we put passengers on planes. "Tombstone mentality" indeed.
And I don't want Donald Rumsfeld anywhere near the testing and certification process either. @:-)
It is impossible to test for every scenario, especially when incidents are created by a chain of events. It is prudent to make sure testing and certification was properly executed.
#738
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
Does the 737 MAX Have a Unique Tendency to Pitch Up?
If this is why a software fix with a MCAS system is required, why wasn’t the plane designed not to pitch up?
If there will always be a lifetime lingering issue, I would go with the A321neo. (plus A321neo superior comfort & public perception)
If there will always be a lifetime lingering issue, I would go with the A321neo. (plus A321neo superior comfort & public perception)
#739
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,184
If AF447 has been a B777, instead of an A330, the accident would likely not have happened because the control forces would not have allowed the F/O to hold full nose-up control input for the majority of the descent.
If OZ214 had been an A330, instead of a B777, the accident would likely not have happened because the auto-throttle logic, and alpha-floor protection, would not have allowed them to get so slow.
The 737-10 MAX doesn't yet exist. I have no idea what its approach speed will be. They are making changes to the main gear design which will increase tail clearance and, possibly?, reduce approach speeds.
#740
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: GVA (Greater Vancouver Area)
Programs: DREAD Gold; UA 1.035MM; Bonvoy Au-197; PCC Elite+; CCC Elite+; MSC C-12; CWC Au-197; WoH Dis
Posts: 52,140
#741
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
From what I’ve read, the system is designed to provide a similar handling feel to the NG, not to compensate for an aerodynamic flaw.
#742
Join Date: Jan 2019
Programs: DL, UA
Posts: 60
Maybe so but when it comes to public perception and satisfaction ''rational decisions" are not entirely based on facts of a matter, indeed some decisions are entirely not based on the facts -if they were the Max fleet would probably not be grounded at the current time. I am sure it is a major business decision being considered by any airline with big orders for this plane - and it doesn't matter what the facts turn out to be; the die has been cast and each airline has to decide today how to respond.
As we’ve seen time and again, however, the public has a short attention span. Boeing will do some fixes on this and the media will have moved on to the latest story to flog for hours on end...and people will forget about it.
#743
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
“... as the nacelle is ahead of the CofG this causes a pitch-up effect which could in ..”
“Specifically, the new 737 MAX showed a tendency to pitch up”
“MCAS was a band-aid to fix the pitch up problem caused by the relocated and heavier new engines”
It would seem to me that if the heavier engine's nacelle is ahead of the Center of Gravity that the plane should pitch down, not up?
#744
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,693
No, not with the information we have now. Despite the frequent complaints about the product, United is not a third world operator. It's not like the Ethiopian MAX crash was some incredible anomaly; it was the third 737 Ethiopian has crashed in the last decade, from a fleet of only 30 or so 737 aircraft.
United has good training and pilots who will fly the airplane.
Much confusion about this from media who doesn't understand the first thing about aircraft design, much less any details. The high-AoA behavior is aerodynamic from the lift off the nacelle (which is ahead of the CG). The location of the engine isn't moving in flight, so there's no associated CG shift in flight.
Both I and all the various certification authorities around the world disagree with your opinion here; a DAL C system doesn't need redundant sensor inputs on every sensor. The single input at a time AoA has been standard for years on a variety of systems, including the stick shaker. It's a pilot training issue that the pilots are not recognizing runaway pitch trim and following the runaway pitch trim procedure.
United has good training and pilots who will fly the airplane.
There were these statements on the internet:
“... as the nacelle is ahead of the CofG this causes a pitch-up effect which could in ..”
“Specifically, the new 737 MAX showed a tendency to pitch up”
“MCAS was a band-aid to fix the pitch up problem caused by the relocated and heavier new engines”
It would seem to me that if the heavier engine's nacelle is ahead of the Center of Gravity that the plane should pitch down, not up?
“... as the nacelle is ahead of the CofG this causes a pitch-up effect which could in ..”
“Specifically, the new 737 MAX showed a tendency to pitch up”
“MCAS was a band-aid to fix the pitch up problem caused by the relocated and heavier new engines”
It would seem to me that if the heavier engine's nacelle is ahead of the Center of Gravity that the plane should pitch down, not up?
Both I and all the various certification authorities around the world disagree with your opinion here; a DAL C system doesn't need redundant sensor inputs on every sensor. The single input at a time AoA has been standard for years on a variety of systems, including the stick shaker. It's a pilot training issue that the pilots are not recognizing runaway pitch trim and following the runaway pitch trim procedure.
Last edited by mduell; Mar 23, 2019 at 1:21 pm
#745
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,693
Ethiopian has crashed 10% of their 737 fleet in the last decade. I don't think there's any question the US airline pilots are better trained.
#746
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
If I read it right, Southwest flew 41,000 MAX flights - and 88,000 flight hours - not a trivial matter.
#747
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,693
Both crashes were at third world airlines with dismal crash records. Ethiopian has crashed 10% of their 737 fleet in the last decade. This isn't like Qantas is crashing the MAX.
#748
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,126
No, not with the information we have now. Despite the frequent complaints about the product, United is not a third world operator. It's not like the Ethiopian MAX crash was some incredible anomaly; it was the third 737 Ethiopian has crashed in the last decade, from a fleet of only 30 or so 737 aircraft.
United has good training and pilots who will fly the airplane.
.....
United has good training and pilots who will fly the airplane.
.....
#749
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,639
The procedure is not the "MCAS deactivation procedure". It is the "runaway stabilizer" procedure. A variety of systems, and failures, can result in a runaway stabilizer; MCAS is only one of them. Because an unchecked runaway stabilizer can quickly lead to a loss of control, you don't waste time trying to diagnose the reason for the runaway. If you have a runaway, you disable the electric stab trim which stops it. Let the mechanics figure out the cause of the runaway after you land. The runaway stabilizer procedure is the correct actions regardless of the underlying cause of the runaway.
#750
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,693