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 16, 2019, 9:46 pm
#2101
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,664
This would mitigate 14 179-seaters, or the loss of 2,506 seats, with a gain of 19 126-seaters, or a gain of 2,394 seats. Not horrible. One plane short.
Jul 16, 2019, 10:39 pm
#2102
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,352
Two reasons. One, it's not 14 planes that UA would need to replace, it's 30 -- according to the fleet site, they were expecting 16 additional MAX deliveries in 2019. Two, it takes months of prep work for a used plane to be refurbished and put into service for UA. By the time these 73Gs are flying in UA livery, either the 737 MAX will be flying alongside them, or some other contingency plan will have been put into place, because this will have done little but stem the bleeding..
I suspect this is simply UA doing what UA does: buy used planes. They've got quite the collection -- 319s, 320s, and 73Gs.
Jul 16, 2019, 11:24 pm
#2103
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Looks like United is hedging that the MAX grounding may not end anytime soon. They announced they are buying 19 used 737-700's to be delivered in December with their earnings info today.
"United did not break out how the grounding, now in its fifth month, affected its bottom line but said it signed an agreement to buy 19 used Boeing 737-700 planes, older jets that it can use to meet growing demand. It expects those planes to be delivered in December."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/16/unit...estimates.html
If other airlines are looking into temporarily leasing or buying 737NG, the used values will certainly go up.
"United did not break out how the grounding, now in its fifth month, affected its bottom line but said it signed an agreement to buy 19 used Boeing 737-700 planes, older jets that it can use to meet growing demand. It expects those planes to be delivered in December."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/16/unit...estimates.html
If other airlines are looking into temporarily leasing or buying 737NG, the used values will certainly go up.
Not really.
Two reasons. One, it's not 14 planes that UA would need to replace, it's 30 -- according to the fleet site, they were expecting 16 additional MAX deliveries in 2019. Two, it takes months of prep work for a used plane to be refurbished and put into service for UA. By the time these 73Gs are flying in UA livery, either the 737 MAX will be flying alongside them, or some other contingency plan will have been put into place, because this will have done little but stem the bleeding..
I suspect this is simply UA doing what UA does: buy used planes. They've got quite the collection -- 319s, 320s, and 73Gs.
Two reasons. One, it's not 14 planes that UA would need to replace, it's 30 -- according to the fleet site, they were expecting 16 additional MAX deliveries in 2019. Two, it takes months of prep work for a used plane to be refurbished and put into service for UA. By the time these 73Gs are flying in UA livery, either the 737 MAX will be flying alongside them, or some other contingency plan will have been put into place, because this will have done little but stem the bleeding..
I suspect this is simply UA doing what UA does: buy used planes. They've got quite the collection -- 319s, 320s, and 73Gs.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Jul 16, 2019 at 11:52 pm Reason: OT content per Moderator note removed
Jul 17, 2019, 10:22 pm
#2104
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: EUG
Programs: UA Silver, AS
Posts: 115
New York Times:
"The Boeing 737 Max Crisis Is a Leadership Failure"
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/17/opinion/boeing-737-max.html
"The Boeing 737 Max Crisis Is a Leadership Failure"
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/17/opinion/boeing-737-max.html
Jul 17, 2019, 10:56 pm
#2105
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 41,988
New York Times:
"The Boeing 737 Max Crisis Is a Leadership Failure"
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/17/o...g-737-max.html
"The Boeing 737 Max Crisis Is a Leadership Failure"
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/17/o...g-737-max.html
But this disturbing culture of denial persists today at Boeing, as shown by the revelations following the crashes of two 737 Max 8 aircraft in Indonesia and Ethiopia, which killed 346 people. The company has an institutional reluctance to even examine potential design flaws in its product.
Jul 18, 2019, 11:59 am
#2106
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Virtuoso Travel Agent, Commercial Pilot
Posts: 2,117
Apparently the A321neo has issues with it's pitch control computer as well:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...ch-ano-459718/
That sounds awfully familiar.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...ch-ano-459718/
The European Union Aviation Safety Agency has disclosed that the revision follows analysis of the re-engined type's elevator and aileron computer.
It has not elaborated on the situation beyond stating that "excessive" pitch could occur under certain conditions and "during specific manoeuvres".
It has not elaborated on the situation beyond stating that "excessive" pitch could occur under certain conditions and "during specific manoeuvres".
Jul 18, 2019, 12:04 pm
#2107
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Apparently the A321neo has issues with it's pitch control computer as well:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...ch-ano-459718/
That sounds awfully familiar.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...ch-ano-459718/
That sounds awfully familiar.
Jul 18, 2019, 12:07 pm
#2108
Join Date: Mar 2012
Programs: Mileage Plus 1K; Marriott Platinum; Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,355
The part about issues with excessive pitch causing issues, sounds vaguely familiar (the issue is the limits of safe maneuvering, not a computer that w/o warning puts you into a dive), the Manufacturer modifying the manual to explain the limits and issue, sounds to me to be the opposite of what Boeing did....
For me (perhaps because of my professional bias as an educator) the training failures of the MAX program are as big a part of the problem/risk as the technology failings.
Jul 18, 2019, 12:21 pm
#2109
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
100% agree. The design of the A/C was bad, but the lack of training and information provided to the pilots, particularly after the first crash, was inexcusable.
Jul 18, 2019, 12:24 pm
#2110
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 233
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Jul 18, 2019 at 12:53 pm Reason: discuss the isssue, not the poster(s)
Jul 18, 2019, 12:42 pm
#2111
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 suppose the big difference in this case is that Airbus has been proactive and alerted customers to the potential for this condition to exist rather than trying to sweep it under the rug and letting two aircraft crash in the process.
Whilst this is an issue no doubt, it is not a catastrophic one as has been the case with the 737MAX. With that said, I'm sure time will tell as the A320neo series is arguably a more important aircraft for Airbus than the 737MAX is for Boeing.
Whilst this is an issue no doubt, it is not a catastrophic one as has been the case with the 737MAX. With that said, I'm sure time will tell as the A320neo series is arguably a more important aircraft for Airbus than the 737MAX is for Boeing.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Jul 18, 2019 at 12:54 pm Reason: quote updated to reflect Moderator edit
Jul 18, 2019, 12:49 pm
#2112
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
"the Manufacturer modifying the manual to explain the limits and issue" That is what Boeing did? Not until after the first (Lion Air) crash, when it sent out the following:
http://www.avioesemusicas.com/wp-con...Due-to-AOA.pdf
http://www.avioesemusicas.com/wp-con...Due-to-AOA.pdf
Jul 18, 2019, 12:57 pm
#2113
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Virtuoso Travel Agent, Commercial Pilot
Posts: 2,117
"the Manufacturer modifying the manual to explain the limits and issue" That is what Boeing did? Not until after the first (Lion Air) crash, when it sent out the following:
http://www.avioesemusicas.com/wp-con...Due-to-AOA.pdf
http://www.avioesemusicas.com/wp-con...Due-to-AOA.pdf
It's likely that the only reason that Airbus even identified the A321neo issue is because of increased scrutiny around pitch augmentation systems following the MAX crashes.
Jul 19, 2019, 2:45 am
#2114
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SAN
Programs: Nothing, nowhere!
Posts: 23,284
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49026285
Boeing is taking a $4.9bn hit to cover costs related to the worldwide grounding of its 737 Max aircraft.
The charge is set to wipe out profits when the world's biggest planemaker posts quarterly results next week.
I
Boeing is taking a $4.9bn hit to cover costs related to the worldwide grounding of its 737 Max aircraft.
The charge is set to wipe out profits when the world's biggest planemaker posts quarterly results next week.
I
Jul 19, 2019, 4:51 am
#2115
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,664
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49026285
Boeing is taking a $4.9bn hit to cover costs related to the worldwide grounding of its 737 Max aircraft.
The charge is set to wipe out profits when the world's biggest planemaker posts quarterly results next week.
I
Boeing is taking a $4.9bn hit to cover costs related to the worldwide grounding of its 737 Max aircraft.
The charge is set to wipe out profits when the world's biggest planemaker posts quarterly results next week.
I
Maybe.
