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 13, 2019, 1:44 pm
#391
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 18
Finally, some action. The FAA we know is in bed with Boeing (former Boeing management now at the FAA) so of course there wasn't going to be any quick action to ground the fleet as it's bad for business.
At least now it forces Boeings hands to properly identify the issue and fix it ASAP.
At least now it forces Boeings hands to properly identify the issue and fix it ASAP.
Mar 13, 2019, 1:45 pm
#392
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 506
The FAA looks bad. Boeing captive. I'm not so sure about the carriers. They have the hands-on experience with these aircraft to know how they behave in flight. Certainly UA had no operational reason to undertake an unreasonable risk given the relatively small number of aircraft concerned. Although I suspect all three carriers were subject to intense lobbying by Boeing.
Mar 13, 2019, 1:45 pm
#393
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Programs: UA 1K MM, HHonors Diamond,PC, Marriott Rewards Gold
Posts: 1,118
I think Buzz Aldrin could get er done—but only if you need an astronaut with a lot of frequent space miles under his belt.
Mar 13, 2019, 1:48 pm
#394
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA 1K & 2MM, Bonvoy Titanium & LTP, HH Gold, Accor Silver, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 2,350
Well that order came in just in time for me to switch my 2pm SFO-LAX on the MAX-9 to the 1pm flight. Kind agent preserved my PZ seat despite me not requesting it or caring. I was her first call on this but she was bracing having already been dealing with the ongoing weather waiver and related issues.
Have to say that I wasn’t particularly concerned but am still happier to be on an ex CO 737-900 which is not a sentiment I ever expected to express.
booked on a LOT MAX-8 in a couple of months. Wonder if this will be sorted by then.
Have to say that I wasn’t particularly concerned but am still happier to be on an ex CO 737-900 which is not a sentiment I ever expected to express.
booked on a LOT MAX-8 in a couple of months. Wonder if this will be sorted by then.
Mar 13, 2019, 1:48 pm
#395
Join Date: May 2009
Location: ATL
Posts: 516
FAA is now saying they have more data linking the two crashes.
Mar 13, 2019, 1:52 pm
#397
Join Date: May 2009
Location: ATL
Posts: 516
CNN is citing a conference call with Daniel Elwell. Currently the 2nd post here:
https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/...ash/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/...ash/index.html
Mar 13, 2019, 1:53 pm
#399
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
Mar 13, 2019, 1:53 pm
#400
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,470
They look bad but if they did do their due diligence then it doesn't matter. It only matters under the public eye I suppose, but people are dumb. How many people clamoring for grounding have close to zero aviation knowledge? Most of their rationale was "well everyone else is doing it." Do you really want a regulatory agency using that as a reason for doing stuff? Or do you want data backed science?
I don't think there's much basis for disputing that the FAA is to a certain degree a captive agency. They still do good work, but they could do better if they had more independence from the companies they are charged with regulating.
Mar 13, 2019, 1:54 pm
#401
Join Date: May 2009
Location: ATL
Posts: 516
If it's the same data that Canada cited this morning it's satellite data of the ET flight and compared to known data from the Lion Air flight.
Mar 13, 2019, 1:54 pm
#402
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: TX
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 729
From the FAA order: https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/med...ency_Order.pdf
"On March 13, 2019, the investigation of the ET302 crash developed new information from the wreckage concerning the aircraft's configuration just after takeoff that, taken together with newly refined data from satellite-based tracking of the aircraft's flight path, indicates some similarities between the ET302 and JT610 accidents that warrant further investigation of the possibility of a shared cause for the two incidents that needs to be better understood and addressed."
"On March 13, 2019, the investigation of the ET302 crash developed new information from the wreckage concerning the aircraft's configuration just after takeoff that, taken together with newly refined data from satellite-based tracking of the aircraft's flight path, indicates some similarities between the ET302 and JT610 accidents that warrant further investigation of the possibility of a shared cause for the two incidents that needs to be better understood and addressed."
Mar 13, 2019, 2:01 pm
#403
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 say this without knowing what data has been shared with the various agencies, and I want to make crystal-clear I do not oppose grounding fleets, but only if there's specific information that independently supports the action. I am categorically against calling for groundings simply because something bad happened. It sets bad precedent and undermines confidence in aviation safety.
I maintain that if the grounding rests on data independent of the ET crash, then emergency action should have been taken on the MAX months ago, not in response to a public outcry. If there's information from the ET analysis that ties it to the Lion Air crash, then Boeing has a problem and the grounding is justifiable.
I maintain that if the grounding rests on data independent of the ET crash, then emergency action should have been taken on the MAX months ago, not in response to a public outcry. If there's information from the ET analysis that ties it to the Lion Air crash, then Boeing has a problem and the grounding is justifiable.
While there may not be any direct link between these two accidents at this time, there are plenty of similarities and variables that make this disturbing. Both accidents occurred in very similar phases of flight where weather was unlikely to be a factor. These were the same type of aircraft, operated by different airlines in different countries. Both airframes were only a few months old at the time of their respective accidents, limiting the possibility that either accident was caused by age related stresses/maintenance issues with the aircraft. The profiles of each crash show a similar catastrophic high-speed impact with terrain with little warning resulting in the aircraft being pulverized and next to no ability to survive the accident. There is no safety-related reason to keep these aircraft flying and to continue to expose people to the potential risk of a third accident. At some point down the road we may very well find out that these were completely unrelated accidents, however what safety benefits are there to continue operating the aircraft until that is discovered?
If this were a case of one aircraft crashing short of the runway in a major thunderstorm and the other being flown into the side of a mountain in blinding fog that would be one thing, however the similarities between the two crashes cannot be ignored.
Mar 13, 2019, 2:04 pm
#404
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: dark side of the moon
Programs: papa card, UA 1K
Posts: 707
UA missed a great PR opportunity to get in front of the US field and ground their MAX aircraft voluntarily. It was obvious that soon after the Ethiopian Airlines crash that there would be a world wide grounding of the max ... very poor foresight from the UA leadership...
Mar 13, 2019, 2:06 pm
#405
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
UA missed a great PR opportunity to get in front of the US field and ground their MAX aircraft voluntarily. It was obvious that soon after the Ethiopian Airlines crash that there would be a world wide grounding of the max ... very poor foresight from the UA leadership...