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
Mar 12, 2019, 1:02 pm
#241
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC: UA 1K, DL Platinum, AAirpass, Avis PC
Posts: 4,599
OTOH, Airbus - with the A320 being designed in the 80s - does not have the same magnitude of problems that Boeing has. First, the Aircraft is higher off the ground, so adding newer/larger engines did not cause problems with ground clearance, second, the base model (the A320) was two stretches size larger than the base model of the 737 (the 737-100 which seated 85). So the A321neo is a single stretch of the A320, while the MAX9 is three stretches of the original 737 frame, and the new "base" MAX8 is two stretches.
Witness AF447 - the A330 where mode confusion played a role in response to the stall after the pitot tube which had been known to have a faulty design iced over - enough so that AF ordered them replaced just before the crash.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/busi...ight-447-crash
I remember a number of fliers worried about the Airbus after that incident.
Mar 12, 2019, 1:10 pm
#242
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
You don't need an engine placement issue to run into trouble with human response to automated flight systems.
Witness AF447 - the A330 where mode confusion played a role in response to the stall after the pitot tube which had been known to have a faulty design iced over - enough so that AF ordered them replaced just before the crash.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/busi...ight-447-crash
I remember a number of fliers worried about the Airbus after that incident.
Witness AF447 - the A330 where mode confusion played a role in response to the stall after the pitot tube which had been known to have a faulty design iced over - enough so that AF ordered them replaced just before the crash.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/busi...ight-447-crash
I remember a number of fliers worried about the Airbus after that incident.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birgenair_Flight_301
Mar 12, 2019, 1:25 pm
#243
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,162
Yes, and now many of us are worried about the Boeing as there seems to be no proactivity from Boeing or UA following 2 nearly identical total disasters (unlike the single AF disaster with A330 where airline and manufacturer were on the case.)
Mar 12, 2019, 1:41 pm
#244
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
I am not saying that a trade war did/did not impact their decision to ground the planes (which has now been seconded the EU, so not out in left field...) but I find no reasonable situation where the CAAC would lie about having reports from Chinese pilots of similar issues.
You don't need an engine placement issue to run into trouble with human response to automated flight systems.
Witness AF447 - the A330 where mode confusion played a role in response to the stall after the pitot tube which had been known to have a faulty design iced over - enough so that AF ordered them replaced just before the crash.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/busi...ight-447-crash
I remember a number of fliers worried about the Airbus after that incident.
Witness AF447 - the A330 where mode confusion played a role in response to the stall after the pitot tube which had been known to have a faulty design iced over - enough so that AF ordered them replaced just before the crash.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/busi...ight-447-crash
I remember a number of fliers worried about the Airbus after that incident.
+1
Mar 12, 2019, 1:49 pm
#245
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
Yes, and as AB Fan noted, Airbus swung into action, going so far as to spend Millions of $$$ to raise the plane off the south Atlantic sea floor. Boeing seems to have gone into a defensive crouch with the LionAir Crash - which I assumed from their statements was a one off, failure of Lion Air to train in a new system. Now that this turns out to be a suspect statement - with a new reflash of the system coming in a few weeks - Boeing has frankly substantially decreased my trust in them. I am getting a sneaking suspicion that having cut corners on the MAX (being beated out of the box by the neo, and lacking the will and engineering resources for a new aircraft) and with it being about 70% of sales, that Boeing is not exactly being forthcoming.+1
Mar 12, 2019, 2:00 pm
#246
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,752
Yes, and as AB Fan noted, Airbus swung into action, going so far as to spend Millions of $$$ to raise the plane off the south Atlantic sea floor. Boeing seems to have gone into a defensive crouch with the LionAir Crash - which I assumed from their statements was a one off, failure of Lion Air to train in a new system. Now that this turns out to be a suspect statement - with a new reflash of the system coming in a few weeks - Boeing has frankly substantially decreased my trust in them. I am getting a sneaking suspicion that having cut corners on the MAX (being beated out of the box by the neo, and lacking the will and engineering resources for a new aircraft) and with it being about 70% of sales, that Boeing is not exactly being forthcoming.
Even during the best of times, it's prudent & standard practice to assume every executive is lying or withholding crucial information--assume everything is a lie until one can independently verify it. Whether there is an issue or not or if they know it or not, at this point, their position will be the same--namely, the aircraft is safe.
Mar 12, 2019, 2:01 pm
#247
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,174
Your question should be posed to WN and AA
Mar 12, 2019, 2:05 pm
#248
Join Date: May 2000
Location: IAH
Programs: UA 1K 2.7MM, Marriott Titanium/LT Plat, IHG Spire
Posts: 3,317
Just a data point here, I'm scheduled to fly the MAX 9 tomorrow from OGG to LAX. I'm on the phone with UA right now and being told that the pilots are well trained and the MAX 8 is not the same as the 9, and so on. Resistance to changing me to a different flight (on a 772) even though there's tons of room and it's listed as K9 (I have a K class ticket). Anyone else have a different experience?
Update: After the rep consulted with a supervisor the change was made.
Update: After the rep consulted with a supervisor the change was made.
Last edited by JNelson113; Mar 12, 2019 at 2:11 pm
Mar 12, 2019, 2:11 pm
#249
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SFO South Bay
Programs: UA 2MM
Posts: 3,052
I took spin88's "cutting corners" to be a reference of Boeing not doing a total redesign of the 737 when they added the new engines. The MAX-8 engines were too large to fit the existing frame (too low), so they either had to do a full redesign (costly in time and money) or do a less significant change to raise the wings and create a software solution to resolve the resulting tendency to pull up in certain situations. Several aviation experts have used similar though perhaps less pejorative words (compromise, for example) in describing the decision Boeing made.
Mar 12, 2019, 2:14 pm
#250
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Houston/DC
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM
Posts: 564
Just a data point here, I'm scheduled to fly the MAX 9 tomorrow from OGG to LAX. I'm on the phone with UA right now and being told that the pilots are well trained and the MAX 8 is not the same as the 9, and so on. Resistance to changing me to a different flight (on a 772) even though there's tons of room and it's listed as K9 (I have a K class ticket). Anyone else have a different experience?.
Update: After the rep consulted with a supervisor the change was made.
Update: After the rep consulted with a supervisor the change was made.
Edit: Just saw your update. Looks like the word is slowly getting down to the agents.
Last edited by FlyngSvyr; Mar 12, 2019 at 2:19 pm Reason: Updated to reflect OP's update
Mar 12, 2019, 2:17 pm
#251
Join Date: May 2000
Location: IAH
Programs: UA 1K 2.7MM, Marriott Titanium/LT Plat, IHG Spire
Posts: 3,317
HUCA. That is not what UA put out yesterday. Maybe she was just trying to allay any fears you had, not necessarily denying you the change? UA was actually the first domestic airline to say they would "work with" anyone who had concerns flying on a MAX (even though they do not fly the MAX 8)
Last edited by JNelson113; Mar 12, 2019 at 2:34 pm
Mar 12, 2019, 2:20 pm
#252
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,162
Just a data point here, I'm scheduled to fly the MAX 9 tomorrow from OGG to LAX. I'm on the phone with UA right now and being told that the pilots are well trained and the MAX 8 is not the same as the 9, and so on. Resistance to changing me to a different flight (on a 772) even though there's tons of room and it's listed as K9 (I have a K class ticket). Anyone else have a different experience?
Update: After the rep consulted with a supervisor the change was made.
Update: After the rep consulted with a supervisor the change was made.
Mar 12, 2019, 2:25 pm
#253
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
The MCAS has been sufficiently demonized, but at the end of the day it's a safeguard to provide stall protection in a very narrow area of flying. The Lion Air crash did not involve a unique set of circumstances that had never been contemplated, nor did it give rise a situation pilots were not equipped to handle. The mechanism of the presentation of the failure was unique to the MAX, and I argue the system can theoretically be made safer with certain modifications. But that's not to say it would have changed the ET302 outcome, and it's not evidence that Boeing "cut corners" in the design process.
No manufacturer is immune to incidents and accidents which expose weaknesses in a design; we've seen it constantly throughout aviation history, in varying degrees of severity. The hallmark of safety in this industry has been the deliberate, careful process by which accidents are investigated, studied and analyzed, with recommendations made to prevent future occurrences. This also extends to litigation, which has identified flaws in investigations and initial investigative findings. The point is, drawing conclusions in the immediate wake of these events is simply foolish.
Mar 12, 2019, 2:36 pm
#254
Join Date: May 2000
Location: IAH
Programs: UA 1K 2.7MM, Marriott Titanium/LT Plat, IHG Spire
Posts: 3,317
Oh man, you all will just love this. The CSR comes back on and says that she made the change, but "my supervisor said that there is nothing wrong with the plane and if there were the FAA would have grounded them. That crash happened because the pilots made mistakes and in those countries the pilots aren't well trained. So everyone here is perfectly safe flying the MAX." This made me VERY angry and I said that it was outrageous and unfair for them to blame the pilots while the investigation is ongoing and that she and her supervisor should not be saying this to people. She then just said "okay okay" to get me off the phone.
Mar 12, 2019, 2:41 pm
#255
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,129
Every single airplane in commercial aviation uses software solutions to correct inherent aircraft tendencies, some of which are unpleasant or even deadly. FBW systems even correct human tendencies in control inputs.
The MCAS has been sufficiently demonized, but at the end of the day it's a safeguard to provide stall protection in a very narrow area of flying. The Lion Air crash did not involve a unique set of circumstances that had never been contemplated, nor did it give rise a situation pilots were not equipped to handle. The mechanism of the presentation of the failure was unique to the MAX, and I argue the system can theoretically be made safer with certain modifications. But that's not to say it would have changed the ET302 outcome, and it's not evidence that Boeing "cut corners" in the design process.
No manufacturer is immune to incidents and accidents which expose weaknesses in a design; we've seen it constantly throughout aviation history, in varying degrees of severity. The hallmark of safety in this industry has been the deliberate, careful process by which accidents are investigated, studied and analyzed, with recommendations made to prevent future occurrences. This also extends to litigation, which has identified flaws in investigations and initial investigative findings. The point is, drawing conclusions in the immediate wake of these events is simply foolish.
The MCAS has been sufficiently demonized, but at the end of the day it's a safeguard to provide stall protection in a very narrow area of flying. The Lion Air crash did not involve a unique set of circumstances that had never been contemplated, nor did it give rise a situation pilots were not equipped to handle. The mechanism of the presentation of the failure was unique to the MAX, and I argue the system can theoretically be made safer with certain modifications. But that's not to say it would have changed the ET302 outcome, and it's not evidence that Boeing "cut corners" in the design process.
No manufacturer is immune to incidents and accidents which expose weaknesses in a design; we've seen it constantly throughout aviation history, in varying degrees of severity. The hallmark of safety in this industry has been the deliberate, careful process by which accidents are investigated, studied and analyzed, with recommendations made to prevent future occurrences. This also extends to litigation, which has identified flaws in investigations and initial investigative findings. The point is, drawing conclusions in the immediate wake of these events is simply foolish.