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
Apr 4, 2019, 7:10 pm
#1036
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,692
I expected them to stall and say the planes were safe like they did after the first 189 people died. I kind of expected them to slapdash a software "fix" to get the planes rolling off the assembly line again, and only a third crash killing 150-200 would have actually, finally, sunk in.
I want my airplane manufacturers to lean forward and be proactive. <shrugs>
I want my airplane manufacturers to lean forward and be proactive. <shrugs>
Apr 4, 2019, 7:36 pm
#1037
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
I expected them to stall and say the planes were safe like they did after the first 189 people died. I kind of expected them to slapdash a software "fix" to get the planes rolling off the assembly line again, and only a third crash killing 150-200 would have actually, finally, sunk in.
I want my airplane manufacturers to lean forward and be proactive. <shrugs>
I want my airplane manufacturers to lean forward and be proactive. <shrugs>
Apr 4, 2019, 7:48 pm
#1038
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,161
Isn't Boeing going for just a software fix? Sure there will be training, but no statement that they will retest stability and any lift issues at high aoa's. If Boeing felt a very robust MCAS was needed & could not be individually disabled, there must have been some significant factors driving their initial decisions. By admitting liability, providing new software and providing for training, they are cutting off a lot of discovery and investigation into causation.
Apr 4, 2019, 10:24 pm
#1039
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,965
Boeing finally, finally, moves in front with this apology and admission of responsibility.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ng/3361880002/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ng/3361880002/
In addition to the human tolls, this shows how screwed up the company is - with design, with the arrogant attitude, with crisis handling, with integrity and ethics...did they think they could get away with this?
It will be interesting to see what happens at the annual shareholder's meeting later this month. It seems the company really needs a change of leadership.
Apr 4, 2019, 11:03 pm
#1040
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,353
My understanding from both statements here and watching some videos of runaway stabilizer trim is that from full nose-down: A long time to spin the manual wheel back, longer than you might have at only a couple thousand feet AGL, AND requiring a lot more force than even two pilots might be able to leverage, given they would have had to also apply significant then later overwhelming force to also hold back the yoke in the meantime. Which I suspect is what led the ET crew in desperation, out of other options, to try turning the electric trim back on, praying it worked the first way above.
Apr 4, 2019, 11:08 pm
#1041
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,721
„arrogant attitude“ is one of the main problems at Boeing. Witnessed this many times ...
Apr 4, 2019, 11:15 pm
#1042
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 11,468
Re the 777-X mentioned further up: Is that design also sold as "same like older 777 models - no significant pilot retraining required" ??
Apr 5, 2019, 12:57 am
#1044
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,965
...My understanding from both statements here and watching some videos of runaway stabilizer trim is that from full nose-down: A long time to spin the manual wheel back, longer than you might have at only a couple thousand feet AGL, AND requiring a lot more force than even two pilots might be able to leverage, given they would have had to also apply significant then later overwhelming force to also hold back the yoke in the meantime. Which I suspect is what led the ET crew in desperation, out of other options, to try turning the electric trim back on, praying it worked the first way above.
Even if the ET crew knew that, would it have been too late to recover after what MCAS did? This kind of reminds me of the NTSB hearing scene in "Sully" where multiple crews tried to get a better outcome than the Hudson and could not.
I still don't understand why Boeing designed it this way (never-ending retries and more severe each time - and seems like a design change last minute?) and it seems there is some bigger reason we don't know yet....
Then the lack of redundancy part.... The whole thing makes no sense and really makes you wonder.
I know some companies which try to get rid of more experienced engineers to save money run into experience gaps. Is Boeing suffering from that?
Maybe we should all feel safe now that the CEO risked his life to be on the test flight on Thursday?
Apr 5, 2019, 6:27 am
#1046
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,721
Last edited by worldclubber; Apr 5, 2019 at 7:29 am Reason: typo
Apr 5, 2019, 6:32 am
#1047
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,692
This is all cost shaving. Now they'll pay far, far more in settlements and judgments for 350 innocent people who paid for their misplaced frugality with their lives.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 5, 2019 at 10:56 am Reason: FTFY not allowed
Apr 5, 2019, 6:40 am
#1048
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,691
I expected them to stall and say the planes were safe like they did after the first 189 people died. I kind of expected them to slapdash a software "fix" to get the planes rolling off the assembly line again, and only a third crash killing 150-200 would have actually, finally, sunk in.
I want my airplane manufacturers to lean forward and be proactive. <shrugs>
I want my airplane manufacturers to lean forward and be proactive. <shrugs>
Looking ahead long-term, they know that most transport aircraft deliveries will be to non-US / "third-world" countries / China, and have realized that it might not be a good sales tactic to blame the lack of skill, experience and training of pilots in those countries or to imply that only US pilots are skilled enough to handle their finicky planes.
Ironically, I am sure Boeing is now very happy that Airbus' sales have been so robust lately - that has created a big backlog of orders for them.
Apr 5, 2019, 6:43 am
#1049
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,692
They are being proactive - about their future sales.
Looking ahead long-term, they know that most transport aircraft deliveries will be to non-US / "third-world" countries / China, and have realized that it might not be a good sales tactic to blame the lack of skill, experience and training of pilots in those countries or to imply that only US pilots are skilled enough to handle their finicky planes.
Ironically, I am sure Boeing is now very happy that Airbus' sales have been so robust lately - that has created a big backlog of orders for them.
Looking ahead long-term, they know that most transport aircraft deliveries will be to non-US / "third-world" countries / China, and have realized that it might not be a good sales tactic to blame the lack of skill, experience and training of pilots in those countries or to imply that only US pilots are skilled enough to handle their finicky planes.
Ironically, I am sure Boeing is now very happy that Airbus' sales have been so robust lately - that has created a big backlog of orders for them.
If they don't, then for years to come, you'll have people screaming in panic to get off a swapped last-minute MAX at UA/AA and especially WN.
The decision will likely be made by which major airline cancels their MAX orders first. After all, the NG is still in production; I'm thinking many airlines will just go with NGs.
Apr 5, 2019, 6:49 am
#1050
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: TPA for now. Hopefully LIS for retirement
Posts: 13,691
Big companies also have risk assessment, and at this point, you gotta start thinking that Boeing might consider canceling the MAX.
If they don't, then for years to come, you'll have people screaming in panic to get off a swapped last-minute MAX at UA/AA and especially WN.
The decision will likely be made by which major airline cancels their MAX orders first. After all, the NG is still in production; I'm thinking many airlines will just go with NGs.
If they don't, then for years to come, you'll have people screaming in panic to get off a swapped last-minute MAX at UA/AA and especially WN.
The decision will likely be made by which major airline cancels their MAX orders first. After all, the NG is still in production; I'm thinking many airlines will just go with NGs.
Last I heard (which was a week or so ago now so maybe this has changed) they were still rolling new MAXs off the production line and looking for places to store them because they can't deliver any. They might want to shut the line down for a bit, at least until the new planes can be produced with whatever fixes will finally be made.
It's too bad because they are nice planes (well, for a 737). I actually flew on one (on WN) during the couple of days between the ET crash and the US grounding.