Do any maxes have enough cycles under their belts to expect comparable data would be available?

Probably at a major overhaul interval when they have to pull the plane apart. I worked for BA at the tech blocks in LHR on 747 majors at one point in my career, There were
a number of significant structural inspections carried out on those, using a range of techniques.

It’s been a tough month for Boeing, with the 777X static wing test failing too.

It would take almost 10 years at 10 flights a day to reach 35,000 cycles.

Key word is probably 10 landings a day, not 10 flights. Not sure why anyone cares about takeoff...though the wings could be full of fuel and their heaviest at that point. But it's during landing that they're supposed to get the biggest dynamic loading. Often the plan is to have fuel tanks not so full when landing occurs. In turbulent air, you'd think it could get quite bad. My memory is a bit blurry but I seem to remember these things designed to survive a 30 ft free fall onto their landing gear. The static equivalent g load, and on the pickle fork, is probably way up past 10 g's, with probably a good FS of 5+.
How many touch-and-go's are done in a day if somebody's practicing?
737-600, -700, -800 & -900 are all 737NG's. I'm not aware of UA having any -600's. In any case, there might be 7000 of these out there. They've been in service since late 1998. How many have had over 35000 cycles? Potentially quite a few.
35k. 90k cycles. I'm a bit surprised the fatigue life is that low. That's low cycle fatigue in my book. Are these polymer composite laminate structures? I don't know.

shhh... Almost every 737 in the sky is a 737NG right now.

I wonder what the acceptable crack size, where and in what orientation, is before the books associate them with an unacceptable crack opening energy.

In most cases, each successful flight ends with one landing.

What are you trying to say?

In Aerospace engineering, a flight cycle is defined by number of landings, not the number of anything else that happens during a flight.
And by blunt definition, a landing, is just a controlled crash. It's a very violent structural loading. The aircraft's structure gets its most severe loading, maybe the only significant loading, when it comes in dynamic contact with the ground. Try playing in a flight simulator some time. If anything is really tricky, it's the landing.

Okay. In that case, I refer you to post 21. To put it another way, flights without landings are beyond the scope of this discussion.

this is like 8 inflight shutdowns already.....

"If it's Boeing, we aren't going." seems to be the new version of the motto....

Uhhh... more like 2.5G and a FS of 1.5. The thing has to fly, not be gravitationally bound to the runway.

Actually, high pressure stress test and a cargo door blew. Nothing to do with the wing.

So would it be fair to say this was a high pressure month for Boeing & Co?

-James

I sure hope they�re sending out search parties and that they find it soon.