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
Oct 21, 2019, 7:00 am
#2356
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Colorado
Programs: UA Gold (.85 MM), HH Diamond, SPG Platinum (LT Gold), Hertz PC, National EE
Posts: 5,676
It has been incredible to me that $BA hasn't taken the hit I would have expected based on this. Even with the recent headlines which are hard to read as anything other than material extension risk at the very least have not caused the stock to even fall below Jan 2018 levels. I was with an uncle of mine in LA last week who is the CEO of a business that makes parts of Boeing as well as the MAX engines from GE (I believe). They've continued to see that order flow on plan/track. Meanwhile, they've been scrambling for the last 7 months to find other non-Boeing clients to prepare for a worst case scenario. My uncle started his career at Boeing back in the early 1980s and he's been in aerospace manufacturing ever since. He really just couldn't believe how this is playing out.
As noted up thread. The ramifications of the MAX not getting back in the air would actually have a measurable impact on the U.S. economy in my view (and that is more squarely in the realm of my day job unlike the fascinating pilot/engineering discussion in this thread). This will be a hell of a HBS case study one day.
As noted up thread. The ramifications of the MAX not getting back in the air would actually have a measurable impact on the U.S. economy in my view (and that is more squarely in the realm of my day job unlike the fascinating pilot/engineering discussion in this thread). This will be a hell of a HBS case study one day.
Oct 21, 2019, 7:31 am
#2357
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
This article from Reuters provides additional details on claims raised earlier in this thread: https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-et...-idUKKBN1WZ0MA
Boeing’s earnings release is Wednesday and will shed more light on the financial impact. I tend to agree that full recertification or termination of the program are unlikely as the implications would be catastrophic.
Boeing’s earnings release is Wednesday and will shed more light on the financial impact. I tend to agree that full recertification or termination of the program are unlikely as the implications would be catastrophic.
Oct 21, 2019, 10:49 am
#2358
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 233
This article from Reuters provides additional details on claims raised earlier in this thread: https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-et...-idUKKBN1WZ0MA
Boeing’s earnings release is Wednesday and will shed more light on the financial impact. I tend to agree that full recertification or termination of the program are unlikely as the implications would be catastrophic.
Boeing’s earnings release is Wednesday and will shed more light on the financial impact. I tend to agree that full recertification or termination of the program are unlikely as the implications would be catastrophic.
Oct 21, 2019, 10:54 am
#2359
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
Termination may be very unlikely unfortunately, however full recertification would be more manageable. Airlines hang on to their existing narrow body aircraft a few more years, Boeing is forced to actually certify the aircraft as airworthy. The reality is that the fleet is still less than 400 aircraft that were actually in service at the time of the grounding. That's a pretty small fleet of planes relatively.
Oct 21, 2019, 12:33 pm
#2360
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 11,468
Termination may be very unlikely unfortunately, however full recertification would be more manageable. Airlines hang on to their existing narrow body aircraft a few more years, Boeing is forced to actually certify the aircraft as airworthy. The reality is that the fleet is still less than 400 aircraft that were actually in service at the time of the grounding. That's a pretty small fleet of planes relatively.
Oct 21, 2019, 12:42 pm
#2361
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,131
Adding to that point, there must be quite a large number of essentially finished aircraft waiting on final "programming" and certification before delivery.
Oct 21, 2019, 12:54 pm
#2363
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: ORD | LGA | 2E
Programs: UA GS 1.6MM UC | AA CK 0.7MM AC | Bonvoy Ambassador | Hyatt Globalist | Hertz PC
Posts: 1,054
They announced in March that they were cutting monthly production from ~50 to ~40 if I remember correctly. They may have cut that again, but I don't see anything indicating that from the last earnings call. So even just since then that would be another 250+ planes just since that capacity cut.
Oct 21, 2019, 1:02 pm
#2364
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Another scoop from Reuters: EASA prepared to return MAX to service in January at earliest and any gap with FAA would be weeks, rather than months. This seems to put talk of full recertification to rest.
https://apple.news/AAnmlCHNUQBS5QbLURnwWfw
https://apple.news/AAnmlCHNUQBS5QbLURnwWfw
Oct 21, 2019, 1:56 pm
#2365
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,695
Another scoop from Reuters: EASA prepared to return MAX to service in January at earliest and any gap with FAA would be weeks, rather than months. This seems to put talk of full recertification to rest.
https://apple.news/AAnmlCHNUQBS5QbLURnwWfw
https://apple.news/AAnmlCHNUQBS5QbLURnwWfw
Oct 21, 2019, 7:30 pm
#2366
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,184
Oct 21, 2019, 11:45 pm
#2367
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Per the NYT:
We see increasing risk that the F.A.A. won’t follow through with a certification flight in November and lift the emergency grounding order in December,” UBS said in a note downgrading the stock. “We think a push out of the return to service could increase the likelihood of a pause on the 737 Max production system.”
Seth M. Seifman, an analyst at JPMorgan Chase, said the revelation of the messages “makes it more challenging for regulators to endorse the 737 Max near term.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/21/b...gtype=Homepage
Boeing is in a world o'hurt. My guess is the CEO is toast, they will announce a few more billion in costs (pusting it to over $10B in costs) making the decission to go with the MAX one of the worst in history, it will cost them more than a clean sheet design would have, and they end up with a tainted dud of a plane...
The big (as in billions and billions more) question is if they get regulatory approval before they are forced to shut down the MAX line for a period of time....
Oct 22, 2019, 3:21 am
#2368
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 233
While I agree that the chances the planes are scrapped is zero, lots of folks saw this entire thing as a bunch about nothing, all the fault of 3rd world pilots. Ain't turned out to be reflective of reality.
Per the NYT:
We see increasing risk that the F.A.A. won’t follow through with a certification flight in November and lift the emergency grounding order in December,” UBS said in a note downgrading the stock. “We think a push out of the return to service could increase the likelihood of a pause on the 737 Max production system.”
Seth M. Seifman, an analyst at JPMorgan Chase, said the revelation of the messages “makes it more challenging for regulators to endorse the 737 Max near term.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/21/b...gtype=Homepage
Boeing is in a world o'hurt. My guess is the CEO is toast, they will announce a few more billion in costs (pusting it to over $10B in costs) making the decission to go with the MAX one of the worst in history, it will cost them more than a clean sheet design would have, and they end up with a tainted dud of a plane...
The big (as in billions and billions more) question is if they get regulatory approval before they are forced to shut down the MAX line for a period of time....
Per the NYT:
We see increasing risk that the F.A.A. won’t follow through with a certification flight in November and lift the emergency grounding order in December,” UBS said in a note downgrading the stock. “We think a push out of the return to service could increase the likelihood of a pause on the 737 Max production system.”
Seth M. Seifman, an analyst at JPMorgan Chase, said the revelation of the messages “makes it more challenging for regulators to endorse the 737 Max near term.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/21/b...gtype=Homepage
Boeing is in a world o'hurt. My guess is the CEO is toast, they will announce a few more billion in costs (pusting it to over $10B in costs) making the decission to go with the MAX one of the worst in history, it will cost them more than a clean sheet design would have, and they end up with a tainted dud of a plane...
The big (as in billions and billions more) question is if they get regulatory approval before they are forced to shut down the MAX line for a period of time....
Boeing was never going to go with a clean sheet design to replace the smaller passenger count 737s. The 797 will only complement the 737.
Everyone recognizes that they have screwed up the software of the plane, but once that is fixed the aircraft will have a long life.
Unless you are a Boeing shareholder, I’m not sure why anyone cares that much about costs. Clearly, some still love the 380 and it’s lost billions of dollars and will never break even.
Oct 22, 2019, 3:45 am
#2369
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SAN
Programs: Nothing, nowhere!
Posts: 23,317
Oct 22, 2019, 11:48 am
#2370
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,252
you should visit our discussion at the OmniPR stock market thread. One should never knowingly invest in airlines or heavy equipment manufacturers long term. Catching a short term trend up or down is OK, but in a retirement targeted portfolio long term? No way.