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
Jul 14, 2019, 2:46 pm
#2041
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SAN
Programs: Nothing, nowhere!
Posts: 23,285
Rubbish. They could have produced a new air frame at a price airlines airlines are willing to pay. Especially if the total cost of ownership is equal to or marginally less than an Airbus.
Jul 14, 2019, 2:58 pm
#2042
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 233
The money they used used to develop the Max would have been spent no matter what. The current situation is certainly going to delay the 797 coming to market, though.
Also, the 787 is definitely going to make a ton of money.
Jul 14, 2019, 9:05 pm
#2043
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
You must know something no one else does. Boeing shopped the NSA concept - heavily - before the MAX. Airlines would not pay meaningfully more than current generation narrowbodies. It’s a commodity market until someone determines how to significantly change economics.
Jul 14, 2019, 9:26 pm
#2044
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: 42.1% in PDX , 49.9% in PVG & 8% in the air somewhere
Programs: Marriott Ambassador Elite, UA 1K, AS MVP GLD 75K, DL Pt
Posts: 1,086
Boeing 737 MAX Grounding Could Stretch Into 2020"
https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-...20-11563112801
Drama continues to expand, sadly fixes in place likely could be good enough, but the scrutiny for the Max is going well beyond, probably going to be the most scrutinized plan to be certified ever.
Sadly for airlines this is problematic to have capacity grounded and why would any airlines order any more planes with the unknown always there?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-...20-11563112801
Drama continues to expand, sadly fixes in place likely could be good enough, but the scrutiny for the Max is going well beyond, probably going to be the most scrutinized plan to be certified ever.
Sadly for airlines this is problematic to have capacity grounded and why would any airlines order any more planes with the unknown always there?
Jul 14, 2019, 10:23 pm
#2045
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 41,990
I understand the fact that airlines are unwilling to pay substantially more than an Airbus with similar specs whether or not Boeing is offering a new design. This means that Boeing would need to absorb a lot of development costs itself if it went the "new design" route. However, doing so would likely put it in a stronger position 20 years from now when there is little left to improve on the 737.
Jul 14, 2019, 11:06 pm
#2046
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SAN
Programs: Nothing, nowhere!
Posts: 23,285
anything that flies for 25 to 40 years is not a commodity. The price of the plane itself (which, of course is a factor) is dwarfed by the costs of pilots, fuel and maintenance. All these things add up to total cost of ownership which, with a new plane, will likely have been lower.
Jul 15, 2019, 5:02 am
#2047
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
I understand the fact that airlines are unwilling to pay substantially more than an Airbus with similar specs whether or not Boeing is offering a new design. This means that Boeing would need to absorb a lot of development costs itself if it went the "new design" route. However, doing so would likely put it in a stronger position 20 years from now when there is little left to improve on the 737.
anything that flies for 25 to 40 years is not a commodity. The price of the plane itself (which, of course is a factor) is dwarfed by the costs of pilots, fuel and maintenance. All these things add up to total cost of ownership which, with a new plane, will likely have been lower.
Regardless, all this product development talk is pointless: neither Boeing nor Airbus could justify an all new airplane when the re-engined models were launched and would still struggle today.
Jul 15, 2019, 9:39 am
#2048
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
A lot of reporting in the financial press saying that Boeing spent so much trying to fix the situation they got themselves into with off-shoring large parts of the 787 to try to stick it to their unionized employees that they will never make a dime on the 787. The Billions extra that they spent during the three year delay, then the battery issue, created sunk costs that they can't recovery when Airbus has basically capped what they can charge for a 787 with the A350. And to be clear, I am not suggesting that they are selling the 787 below production costs, rather the profit they make, after the cost of capital etc, will never repay the extra development/delay costs they had to spend when the 787 program went south.
The 737 and 777 programs have been cash cows, the 787 not so much...
The 737 and 777 programs have been cash cows, the 787 not so much...
Jul 15, 2019, 11:56 am
#2049
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SEA
Posts: 282
Any idea when the flights with the 737 max will be updated for existing itineraries? Have a flight in mid-Sept scheduled for the max 9. Been checking all weekend but it's still on there.
Jul 15, 2019, 12:04 pm
#2050
Join Date: Mar 2012
Programs: Mileage Plus 1K; Marriott Platinum; Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,355
A lot of reporting in the financial press saying that Boeing spent so much trying to fix the situation they got themselves into with off-shoring large parts of the 787 to try to stick it to their unionized employees that they will never make a dime on the 787....
The 737 and 777 programs have been cash cows, the 787 not so much...
The 737 and 777 programs have been cash cows, the 787 not so much...
That leaves the 777 as the last best hope for Boeing’s profitability in civil aviation.
But what about the re-engineering of the latest model 777, with the fold up wings? Did they follow the same short term values in that process? If so, could that be another problem area waiting to erupt?
Jul 15, 2019, 12:20 pm
#2051
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 233
A lot of reporting in the financial press saying that Boeing spent so much trying to fix the situation they got themselves into with off-shoring large parts of the 787 to try to stick it to their unionized employees that they will never make a dime on the 787. The Billions extra that they spent during the three year delay, then the battery issue, created sunk costs that they can't recovery when Airbus has basically capped what they can charge for a 787 with the A350. And to be clear, I am not suggesting that they are selling the 787 below production costs, rather the profit they make, after the cost of capital etc, will never repay the extra development/delay costs they had to spend when the 787 program went south.
The 737 and 777 programs have been cash cows, the 787 not so much...
The 737 and 777 programs have been cash cows, the 787 not so much...
Any financial press reporter that says that they won’t make a dime likely doesn’t understand program accounting. As we’ve seen with the MAX, the ability for the press to understand complex situations is not great.
Jul 15, 2019, 12:48 pm
#2052
Moderator: Budget Travel forum & Credit Card Programs, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYJ/YVR and back on Van Isle ....... for now
Programs: UA lifetime MM / *A Gold
Posts: 14,426
Believe I heard on the news that UA and AA are taking MAX off the schedule until November. Just a matter of time before this is swapped or taken off the schedule.
Jul 15, 2019, 12:54 pm
#2053
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SAN
Programs: Nothing, nowhere!
Posts: 23,285
FWIW, I hope you're right. It is essential to have at least two players in the aviation market that can compete on price and innovation. Without that competition, plane costs will rise and airline tickets prices will rise - and no one wants that.
Jul 15, 2019, 4:32 pm
#2054
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: ATL
Programs: Delta PlM, 1M
Posts: 6,363
When discussing costs to Boeing, it is important they have various insurance policies. I expect we will get a good idea of their cost estimate with second quarter earnings.
While almost certainly punitive, I do not expect the costs related to the MAX would be sufficient - in hindsight - to justify a new aircraft. The biggest impediment to a new single aisle is not Boeing’s (or Airbus) reluctance to invest but the fact the possible improvements would not justify the higher price. If you’re an airline, would you pay 20% more for an airplane that’s less than 10% better than an A230neo?
While almost certainly punitive, I do not expect the costs related to the MAX would be sufficient - in hindsight - to justify a new aircraft. The biggest impediment to a new single aisle is not Boeing’s (or Airbus) reluctance to invest but the fact the possible improvements would not justify the higher price. If you’re an airline, would you pay 20% more for an airplane that’s less than 10% better than an A230neo?
IMO, there is a huge failure in the current US corporate world that rewards near term profits only. The C suite will not benefit from a 40 year investment. If the company was owned by an individual though, it would.
Forgetting the entire safety side issue, the failure of Boeing to move on anything in this space (either a small or mid-size) has been a huge failure. The maybe yes / maybe no on the 797 and who knows when on a replacement for the smaller 737 is pathetic.
Jul 15, 2019, 6:01 pm
#2055
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2012
Location: MCO
Programs: AA, B6, DL, EK, EY, QR, SQ, UA, Amex Plat, Marriott Tit, HHonors Gold
Posts: 12,809
But the plane will be their bread and butter for 40 years. At some point any company has to pull the trigger on redesign costs such as this.
IMO, there is a huge failure in the current US corporate world that rewards near term profits only. The C suite will not benefit from a 40 year investment. If the company was owned by an individual though, it would.
Forgetting the entire safety side issue, the failure of Boeing to move on anything in this space (either a small or mid-size) has been a huge failure. The maybe yes / maybe no on the 797 and who knows when on a replacement for the smaller 737 is pathetic.
IMO, there is a huge failure in the current US corporate world that rewards near term profits only. The C suite will not benefit from a 40 year investment. If the company was owned by an individual though, it would.
Forgetting the entire safety side issue, the failure of Boeing to move on anything in this space (either a small or mid-size) has been a huge failure. The maybe yes / maybe no on the 797 and who knows when on a replacement for the smaller 737 is pathetic.