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 15, 2019, 6:32 pm
#2056
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: DCA
Programs: UA LT 1K, AA EXP, Bonvoy LT Titan, Avis PC, Hilton Gold
Posts: 9,658
Correct - Boeing dropped the 757 too soon. Airlines need the capacity of the 757 and even the 757-300. UA and DL both fly 757-300s out of DCA, because of slot limits. UA using it for their once a day flight to SFO and on one DEN flight.
Jul 15, 2019, 6:41 pm
#2057
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 233
It wasn't Boeing that dropped the 757, it was the airlines. Boeing would have happily built more, if airlines had purchased them. The airlines didn't so, Boeing didn't have any choice.
Jul 15, 2019, 7:06 pm
#2058
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,184
It's also a lot of fun to fly.
Jul 15, 2019, 7:30 pm
#2059
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
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.
For all the crap “beancounters” get, they do keep companies in business and paychecks flowing.
Jul 15, 2019, 7:40 pm
#2060
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 42,035
If a plane costs $12B to develop and you can charge $2M more than the prior model, does it really make sense to move forward if there is a potential market of 3,000 airplanes? Even if you can get $5M more, you’re not covering inflation or the cost of capital.
For all the crap “beancounters” get, they do keep companies in business and paychecks flowing.
For all the crap “beancounters” get, they do keep companies in business and paychecks flowing.
Jul 15, 2019, 7:44 pm
#2061
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
At the time, there was no need for airlines to order them because many had very large fleets which were not in need of replacement. Now things are very different.
Jul 15, 2019, 8:50 pm
#2062
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Austin, TX - AUS
Programs: AA Platinum, Hilton, Hyatt, IHG, Marriott
Posts: 1,625
Jul 15, 2019, 11:43 pm
#2063
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
But the reality is that 5 years from now Airbus will be selling 1000 single plane a year, earning $40M profit on each one, because they are better aircraft, and Boeing will be lucky to be selling 500 single aisle plane, at $20M profit each. Over a few years, you repay the development costs, and if you don't invest you dig yourself a deeper and deeper hole as you have to discount your inferior product to a smaller and smaller market.
Airbus has been slowly overtaking the 737 with the A320, and now with the A321neo being basically unmatched by Boeing. Airbus now has a clear lead in orders+deliveries: 6635 and raising for the neo, while Boeing only has 4934 and falling for the MAX.
Jul 16, 2019, 2:34 am
#2064
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: BOS
Programs: 1MM, UA 1k
Posts: 529
I think it’s downright laughable these “look how profitable Airbus is and will be” posts conveniently omit any mention of the 380 program. Neither major aircraft manufacturer is in terrific shape right now, and both are capable to royally screw up a major development program.
Jul 16, 2019, 6:18 am
#2065
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,126
You're probably right which is all the more reason Boeing, in hindsight, should have been looking at a clean-sheet narrowbody design. The strategy was to eliminate the 757 in favor of the even older 737, thinking it could functionally be its replacement. To some extent they were right but only in the short term. Take a poll of FT members and I think the overwhelming response will be the 737 is the inferior aircraft.
Jul 16, 2019, 6:24 am
#2066
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 233
You're probably right which is all the more reason Boeing, in hindsight, should have been looking at a clean-sheet narrowbody design. The strategy was to eliminate the 757 in favor of the even older 737, thinking it could functionally be its replacement. To some extent they were right but only in the short term. Take a poll of FT members and I think the overwhelming response will be the 737 is the inferior aircraft.
The 737 is here to stay for the foreseeable future. Even after the 797 is in service, the 737 will still be selling because it’s a very economical aircraft for the airlines, especially in shorter ranges.
Last edited by Newman55; Jul 16, 2019 at 6:32 am
Jul 16, 2019, 7:35 am
#2067
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,184
That decision isn't made in a vacuum. The manufacturer takes new design proposals to its customers and the decision to launch is based on what he customers want to buy. The customers overwhelming wanted an updated, more efficient, less expensive, 737 that could be delivered sooner instead of an all-new design that, while even more efficient, would have been more expensive and not available until a number of years later. Boeing could have ignored their customers and pressed ahead with the new design but most of the airlines would not have waited for them.
Jul 16, 2019, 7:48 am
#2068
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
I think it’s downright laughable these “look how profitable Airbus is and will be” posts conveniently omit any mention of the 380 program. Neither major aircraft manufacturer is in terrific shape right now, and both are capable to royally screw up a major development program.
You're probably right which is all the more reason Boeing, in hindsight, should have been looking at a clean-sheet narrowbody design. The strategy was to eliminate the 757 in favor of the even older 737, thinking it could functionally be its replacement. To some extent they were right but only in the short term. Take a poll of FT members and I think the overwhelming response will be the 737 is the inferior aircraft.
Jul 16, 2019, 8:00 am
#2069
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,597
Jul 16, 2019, 8:06 am
#2070
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