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 5, 2019, 6:55 am
#1051
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,664
Yes Boeing quite a big mess on its hands. It will be interesting to see how they deal with this over the next few years.
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.
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.
I keep thinking about how the passengers in both accidents ended their lives: In steep dives, with many seconds to realize that the plane was going to auger into the earth, and no way to control or change the outcome. The ultimate torture. Absolutely evil.
Apr 5, 2019, 7:19 am
#1052
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: ORD | LGA | 2E
Programs: UA GS 1.6MM UC | AA CK 0.7MM AC | Bonvoy Ambassador | Hyatt Globalist | Hertz PC
Posts: 1,052
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.
Apr 5, 2019, 7:26 am
#1053
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Very little in aviation is created from scratch. The 777 and 787 had new design processes, technology and systems and faces incredible teething pains. Aircraft with more incremental enhancements, the A350, Neo, and MAX tend to be more reliable as you’re dealing with systems and technologies that have known behavior. Occasionally there are problems, as we unfortunately see today. The aviation industry has historically learned from tragedy and instituted changes and reforms that impact future designs, production and operations.
Apr 5, 2019, 7:27 am
#1054
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,616
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.
Apr 5, 2019, 9:03 am
#1055
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,664
Apr 5, 2019, 9:36 am
#1056
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,178
Yes. Both because that is how it is supposed to work and that is how it did work (DFDR data) on the Lion Air accident flight as the Captain kept the airplane in-trim through 21 MCAS activations through the use of the primary electric trim.
Apr 5, 2019, 10:13 am
#1057
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: EUG
Programs: UA Silver, AS
Posts: 115
1) hold controls firmly
2) disengage autopilot
3) disengage autothrottle
4) if problem not yet solved, cut out the electric trim
At this point you're in big trouble, because the only option is to use manual trim, right?
Apr 5, 2019, 10:40 am
#1058
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,502
Even if they "fix" the plane, it'll be years now before I ever set foot on one. I'm not interested in being a guinea pig. No hysterics, no panic; I will simply book away from flights where the MAX is on the schedule, and if a swap occurs, I'll spend the $75 or whatever to swap myself back to a non-MAX.
Apr 5, 2019, 10:57 am
#1059
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: KEWR
Programs: Marriott Platinum
Posts: 794
But if for whatever reason you allowed it to get far out of trim and then do the memory items for stab runaway - I watched Mentourpilot's video again - according to that, the memory items are:
1) hold controls firmly
2) disengage autopilot
3) disengage autothrottle
4) if problem not yet solved, cut out the electric trim
At this point you're in big trouble, because the only option is to use manual trim, right?
1) hold controls firmly
2) disengage autopilot
3) disengage autothrottle
4) if problem not yet solved, cut out the electric trim
At this point you're in big trouble, because the only option is to use manual trim, right?
Do I feel Boeing is at fault for the engineering of MCAS and the lack of information distributed to its customers...absolutely! However, the recovery procedure is nothing new and I still do feel this was a recoverable situation based on my experience in the plane.
Every Boeing 737 type rated pilot has worked a runaway trim scenario in the simulator. If I recall it was sim session 2 or 3 during my type certification at Continental. I imagine the FAA will require this demonstration to be done at a lower, more critical altitude for future training curriculums because of this event.
Apr 5, 2019, 11:24 am
#1060
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
And, the 737-MAX and 777-X (Big MAX) appear to reflect more than "tweaking" or "modifying." With the 737 MAX they are placing much larger engines higher and more forward of the modified wing, on a plane designed for much smaller engines, generating a lot of aerodynamic issues being addressed with software. What was needed was a much higher landing gear. The United 737-200 is one of the first planes that I flew almost 50 years ago with much smaller engines balanced under the wings. Google a picture of the 737-200 and compare it to the 737 MAX. I saw a post or article stating it is like Ford putting putting a much larger engine in & stretching the Model T. To think that the 737 is one of the first airplanes that I flew on almost 50 years ago, and that it may be one of the last airplanes that I fly on before I move on to final rest in the Great Sky, makes me wonder, could Boeing have done better & its customer airlines insisted on better?
Apr 5, 2019, 11:25 am
#1061
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,591
Apr 5, 2019, 12:12 pm
#1062
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: DSM, BKK or anywhere with an airport
Programs: UA 2P, HH Gold
Posts: 1,018
Also, on an unrelated note: well done to everyone who has thoughtfully contributed to this thread. I've been a FT'er since Nov of '06 and this is one of the best conversations we've had around here in a long time. 1100+ replies, that's awesome. Thanks everyone. ^
Last edited by n198ua; Apr 5, 2019 at 12:20 pm
Apr 5, 2019, 12:31 pm
#1064
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,353
I wouldn’t necessarily say you’re in big trouble. Plane flies fine using only manual trim. Issue here is the MCAS forced the trim in an extreme nose down position if autotrim is kept engaged (or re-engaged as with ET). Both pilots need to work together to get the trim back into a normal range.
Do I feel Boeing is at fault for the engineering of MCAS and the lack of information distributed to its customers...absolutely! However, the recovery procedure is nothing new and I still do feel this was a recoverable situation based on my experience in the plane.
Every Boeing 737 type rated pilot has worked a runaway trim scenario in the simulator. If I recall it was sim session 2 or 3 during my type certification at Continental. I imagine the FAA will require this demonstration to be done at a lower, more critical altitude for future training curriculums because of this event.
I don't mean those at all to sound like loaded questions; I'm genuinely curious and appreciate all of the real pilots who are adding their insight in this thread.
Apr 5, 2019, 1:45 pm
#1065
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Non sequitur.
You can rigorously design and test and airplane only to discover flaws after it enters operation. It is not possible to be 100% safe. You learn from the problems, make changes so they don’t happen again, and move on. This doesn’t excuse the crashes or diminish the lives lost but it’s an extreme position where everything has to be safe or must not exist.
You can rigorously design and test and airplane only to discover flaws after it enters operation. It is not possible to be 100% safe. You learn from the problems, make changes so they don’t happen again, and move on. This doesn’t excuse the crashes or diminish the lives lost but it’s an extreme position where everything has to be safe or must not exist.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 5, 2019 at 2:22 pm Reason: Discuss the issues, not the poster(s)
