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
May 22, 2019, 11:46 am
#1531
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 do not care about a small Y lavatory on a narrowbody plane.
The difference in seat width between the A320 series and the B737 is one inch per seat, and it doesn't matter to me. Neither is wide enough for me to find it comfortable in Y.
The fact of the matter is, neither of these planes is going to be particularly comfortable in Y, so that part is a draw. I already explained my preference for the MAX, which has nothing to do with the width.
The difference in seat width between the A320 series and the B737 is one inch per seat, and it doesn't matter to me. Neither is wide enough for me to find it comfortable in Y.
The fact of the matter is, neither of these planes is going to be particularly comfortable in Y, so that part is a draw. I already explained my preference for the MAX, which has nothing to do with the width.
And I somewhat disagree. I can sit in the exit door row on an A321 and actually be pretty comfortable in Y whereas on a 737 no such option exists. It may only be an inch, but it's definitely noticeable. Just take a ride on an E-Jet or A220 and then Airbus and Boeing narrow bodies look like slave ships in comparison.
May 22, 2019, 12:46 pm
#1532
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 233
Well, I hate to break it to you but the F lav is equally tiny.
And I somewhat disagree. I can sit in the exit door row on an A321 and actually be pretty comfortable in Y whereas on a 737 no such option exists. It may only be an inch, but it's definitely noticeable. Just take a ride on an E-Jet or A220 and then Airbus and Boeing narrow bodies look like slave ships in comparison.
And I somewhat disagree. I can sit in the exit door row on an A321 and actually be pretty comfortable in Y whereas on a 737 no such option exists. It may only be an inch, but it's definitely noticeable. Just take a ride on an E-Jet or A220 and then Airbus and Boeing narrow bodies look like slave ships in comparison.
I guess in your analogy, a 737 is a slave ship and a A320 is a migrant boat. In both cases, no one really wants to be there.
May 22, 2019, 10:51 pm
#1533
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Well, I hate to break it to you but the F lav is equally tiny.
And I somewhat disagree. I can sit in the exit door row on an A321 and actually be pretty comfortable in Y whereas on a 737 no such option exists. It may only be an inch, but it's definitely noticeable. Just take a ride on an E-Jet or A220 and then Airbus and Boeing narrow bodies look like slave ships in comparison.
And I somewhat disagree. I can sit in the exit door row on an A321 and actually be pretty comfortable in Y whereas on a 737 no such option exists. It may only be an inch, but it's definitely noticeable. Just take a ride on an E-Jet or A220 and then Airbus and Boeing narrow bodies look like slave ships in comparison.
United really thinks it can use this plane to complete on TCON flights in Business. Get real.
And in some news, looks like the FAA has zero credibility at this point, and each agency will have to approve and themselves test the modifications to the 7-narrow-7 CFIT. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.a1864276d178
May 23, 2019, 2:08 am
#1534
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
That is what is so ridiculously chintzy. This plane is flown on 5-6 hour flight, red-eyes, etc, and you can't wash your face or brush your teeth in the first class head as the sink is 2" deep. The entire aircraft from nose to tail just screams wal mart. Nothing about the plane is vaguely up to date. The lighting is awful, the windows/shades are cheap, the finishes are cheap, the overhead bins protrude into the cabin at loading/unleading so you can't get down the aisle, and then are just black gaping holes inside. Cheap, Cheap, Cheap.
United really thinks it can use this plane to complete on TCON flights in Business. Get real.
And in some news, looks like the FAA has zero credibility at this point, and each agency will have to approve and themselves test the modifications to the 7-narrow-7 CFIT. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.a1864276d178
United really thinks it can use this plane to complete on TCON flights in Business. Get real.
And in some news, looks like the FAA has zero credibility at this point, and each agency will have to approve and themselves test the modifications to the 7-narrow-7 CFIT. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.a1864276d178
The sink - the sink is so bad you can't even wash your hands without hitting the sink walls. Viral / bacterial microbe transmission. The sinks should be rated as a health hazard. Real third world. The 1950s - 60s Boeings had those small Suzy Homemaker Sinks, the sinks reached a point where you could actually wash your hands, and now back to Suzy Homemake. The 737 MAX crashes only pile on a badly perceived plane.
I really liked the 737 in the early 1970s when I was a teenager, but now nearly 50 years later, being squished and squashed my aging body really feels the discomfort. 737 MAX crash just another 737 coffin nail.
PS - And if you recall back in the 1960s and 1970s load factors were a lot lot lower, so you did not feel the crowding. Sometimes 2, 3, or 4 people on the jet.
Last edited by BF263533; May 23, 2019 at 10:09 am Reason: Add PS
May 23, 2019, 12:03 pm
#1535
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.997MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,859
Topic Reminder
Let's get back to the thread's topic, the reasons for the grounding of the MAX and the path, if any, to recertification.
Other concerns about the 737 interiors are best for one of the many threads on those issues.
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
Let's get back to the thread's topic, the reasons for the grounding of the MAX and the path, if any, to recertification.
Other concerns about the 737 interiors are best for one of the many threads on those issues.
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
May 23, 2019, 12:38 pm
#1536
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Programs: MYOB
Posts: 1,292
United really thinks it can use this plane to complete on TCON flights in Business. Get real
One struggles to understand how this is related to the 737 MAX grounding.
And in some news, looks like the FAA has zero credibility at this point, and each agency will have to approve and themselves test the modifications to the 7-narrow-7 CFIT. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.a1864276d178
Each agency would need to approve it under any circumstance. How is that news?
Project management 101 - get buy in. That is what Elwell will now need to do.
May 25, 2019, 1:39 am
#1537
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
I was wondering about a month ago why this issue was not being addressed.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/maxs-re...=djemalertNEWS
"MAX’s Return to Flight Delayed by FAA’s Re-Evaluation of Safety Procedures for Older 737 Models"
Just another nail in the 737 coffin. You cannot help but think of the other nails when you see these latest coffin nails.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/maxs-re...=djemalertNEWS
"MAX’s Return to Flight Delayed by FAA’s Re-Evaluation of Safety Procedures for Older 737 Models"
Just another nail in the 737 coffin. You cannot help but think of the other nails when you see these latest coffin nails.
May 25, 2019, 7:17 am
#1538
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: KEWR
Programs: Marriott Platinum
Posts: 794
I was wondering about a month ago why this issue was not being addressed.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/maxs-re...=djemalertNEWS
"MAX’s Return to Flight Delayed by FAA’s Re-Evaluation of Safety Procedures for Older 737 Models"
Just another nail in the 737 coffin. You cannot help but think of the other nails when you see these latest coffin nails.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/maxs-re...=djemalertNEWS
"MAX’s Return to Flight Delayed by FAA’s Re-Evaluation of Safety Procedures for Older 737 Models"
Just another nail in the 737 coffin. You cannot help but think of the other nails when you see these latest coffin nails.
The runaway trim procedure itself or why both MAX crews didn’t comply with the procedure?
To correspond with your link, I would suspect the future memory item/checklist may include some form of the following:
1) Reduce speed (250 knots or less)
2) Manually re-trim for level flight
3) Do not re-engage electric trim
Last edited by clubord; May 25, 2019 at 7:46 am
May 25, 2019, 9:20 am
#1539
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,185
I was thinking a first step similar to what was on the checklist on the DC9.
1) Primary Trim --- Oppose runaway
That should be second nature, as the first thing you always do when the airplane is out of trim is to use the primary trim to correct it, and would keep the airplane close to in-trim until the electric trim is disabled in later steps.
May 28, 2019, 7:27 am
#1540
Join Date: Oct 2018
Programs: Mileage Plus, Marriott Rewards, Southwest Rapid Rewards
Posts: 686
I saw United announced they were canceling MAX flights through August 3rd. I'm booked on one from IAH to LAX on August 2nd. So far it hasn't been canceled; I'm assuming they're working their way through the calendar and they just haven't gotten that far yet? Would like to rebook sooner rather than later if they plan to cancel it.
May 28, 2019, 7:57 am
#1541
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,419
I saw United announced they were canceling MAX flights through August 3rd. I'm booked on one from IAH to LAX on August 2nd. So far it hasn't been canceled; I'm assuming they're working their way through the calendar and they just haven't gotten that far yet? Would like to rebook sooner rather than later if they plan to cancel it.
May 28, 2019, 8:23 am
#1542
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: 14,429
UA only has 14 frames out of a very large fleet, so they may well be able to allocate spares to minimize cancellations. They are far less affected than AA or WN which have had more MAX delivered.
May 28, 2019, 8:54 am
#1543
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 10,904
Perhaps I read a different article. The above spin on this is different than how I read it. I could not find anywhere that it is indicated that the other international agencies stated that they will have to perform their own testing. Daniel Elwell (FAA Administrator) acknowledged deviation from standard international collaboration, and is looking to resolve that, but no mention is made of different agencies performing their own flight testing.
Each agency would need to approve it under any circumstance. How is that news?
Project management 101 - get buy in. That is what Elwell will now need to do.
Each agency would need to approve it under any circumstance. How is that news?
Project management 101 - get buy in. That is what Elwell will now need to do.
The news here is that the FAA has no credibility. (Well, perhaps that's not exactly news any more, but it's the point of the article)
May 28, 2019, 9:02 am
#1544
Join Date: Oct 2018
Programs: Mileage Plus, Marriott Rewards, Southwest Rapid Rewards
Posts: 686
Sounds good. I've got family flying into LAX from elsewhere around the same time, and I'm the one with the rental car reservation so I'm just trying to be proactive with planning so they're not left at the airport waiting on me.
May 28, 2019, 10:01 am
#1545
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
What I think will happen is that loads will just go up over the summer to the extent that they can, with frequencies being dropped on some routes.
Delta is certainly looking pretty this summer, none of the crappy MAXs, and large numbers of brand new, and more comfortable A220s and A321s coming on line, no disruption issues. Plus they are getting the first of their A333neos, which will allow them finally to do what they need to do A/C wise ex-SEA.