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
Apr 5, 2019, 5:37 pm
#1081
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,598
Even including that model 737, it's extremely safe. Check out the wiikipedia page on aviation safety and try to actually understand the numbers on the two graphs of passenger fatalities vs. year. It's improved by actual (not figurative) orders of magnitude since my first flight 50 years ago. Add those two incidents to the chart and see how it looks.
There are so few annual fatalities that that's true nearly *every* year for some model. In some years, a single model is responsible for all of them. In 2018, the 737-700 was responsible for 100% of US commercial jet fatalities (one person killed in WN1380).
And they did before, which is why planes aren't falling out the sky right and left. As far as reports have indicated, Boeing started working on fixes after the Lion air crash. Design changes in aircraft and space systems take a *lot* of time because there's always a risk of unintended consequences.
It's still not entirely clear that there weren't multiple faults that led to what many are interpreting as just an MCAS fault. When I look at the altitude and measured AoA that the NYT showed today, that seems more likely, not less.
I never said Boeing couldn't have done anything.. There's almost always *something* that could have been done that was overlooked. Enormous numbers of labor hours go into fault analysis to prevent incidents and analyze them when they occur to get the causes and prevent them happening again. That's happening in this case, too. The difference now is the number of people who are used to getting information updates every few seconds and are jumping to conclusions and assumptions with incomplete information.
Meaning that this single model of aircraft is responsible for 30-50% of all air fatalities worldwide in the last 12 months.
Well, sure - they do now. How about after the Lion Air crash? Are you telling me there was absolutely nothing Boeing could do to prevent the Ethiopian air crash?
It's still not entirely clear that there weren't multiple faults that led to what many are interpreting as just an MCAS fault. When I look at the altitude and measured AoA that the NYT showed today, that seems more likely, not less.
I never said Boeing couldn't have done anything.. There's almost always *something* that could have been done that was overlooked. Enormous numbers of labor hours go into fault analysis to prevent incidents and analyze them when they occur to get the causes and prevent them happening again. That's happening in this case, too. The difference now is the number of people who are used to getting information updates every few seconds and are jumping to conclusions and assumptions with incomplete information.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 5, 2019 at 5:52 pm Reason: Quote updated to reflect Moderator edit; removed response to deleted content
Apr 5, 2019, 8:16 pm
#1082
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,185
It would be great if we had perfectly designed machines made of parts that never failed. That's for the engineers to work on. Us pilots know that the machines will never be perfect so we have to be prepared to handle the situations when components, procedures, or human factors fail. Some here may remember a day, over 45 years ago, when a burned out light bulb brought down an L1011 jumbo jet. We've learned a lot since then. By being prepared with knowledge, experience, and strategies for threat and error management we have been able to put together the safest form of transportation in the world. We're still working on perfect.
Apr 5, 2019, 8:34 pm
#1083
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: EUG
Programs: UA Silver, AS
Posts: 115
I guess my question would be why the procedure mandates to turn off electric trim right away and not has an additional step before that to bring the airplace back into proper trim using the electric trim. I assume the reason for that is that the procedure was originally written for the situation where there is a problem with the electric trim. But that is not necessarily the case here - the electric trim per se works fine, it's just being triggered incorrectly by the MCAS. Am I understand that correctly?
Apr 5, 2019, 9:06 pm
#1084
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
Interesting to read through the many thousands of comments on pprune, the pilots rumor board. One poster likened the 737 Max to a short legged dog that had been bred and bred and bred to the protest of true animal lovers. There is a lot of discussion that the Max has a whole host of problems other than MCAS, and not only are Max's leg short, they are very close together.
Max is a good name for a dog.
Max is a good name for a dog.
Last edited by BF263533; Apr 5, 2019 at 10:05 pm Reason: Shorten
Apr 5, 2019, 9:13 pm
#1085
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
Please let's stay are away from characterizing posters -- it is rarely complementary and does not add value to the discussion. And with each ever strident retort, the discussion degrades.
And it is against the FT rules
Such posts have been and will be deleted.
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
And it is against the FT rules
12.2 Avoid Getting Personal
If you have a difference of opinion with another member, challenge the idea — NOT the person. Getting personal with another member is not allowed. Personal attacks, insults, baiting and flaming will not be tolerated.
If you have a difference of opinion with another member, challenge the idea — NOT the person. Getting personal with another member is not allowed. Personal attacks, insults, baiting and flaming will not be tolerated.
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
Apr 5, 2019, 9:35 pm
#1086
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,707
I'm in total agreement that we will likely never be perfect in the air. But in this case, with this particular model of 737, we can obviously do better. 350 humans had to die to show this.
Apr 5, 2019, 9:53 pm
#1087
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Murder Mitten
Posts: 298
A little bit late to the game but.... I was actually on a 737 Max 9 flight mid-flight between LAX and KOA when it was canceled. My GF was a bit nervous about flying on a Max. However the upgrade to first helped calm some of the fears :P When I landed I saw that the flight back to the Mainland was canceled.
Apr 6, 2019, 7:12 am
#1088
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,185
The longer NGs (-800/-900) have an issue with high landing speeds. This comes from the extended fuselage and the need to provide more tail clearance. Normal landing flaps settings are Flaps 30 and Flaps 40 but both models have an undesirable "wing wagging" at Flaps 40 so Flaps 30 is most commonly used unless Flaps 40 is required for the conditions. The Flaps 40 landing speed is roughly 8 knots slower than Flaps 30. The MAX has fixed this problem and so Flaps 40 is the normal landing flaps setting with its lower landing speeds. The width of the MAX's gear is identical to the NGs so no change there. The MAX's weather radar system is significantly improved as is the larger vertical situation display which improves situational awareness on your vertical profile.
Apr 6, 2019, 7:40 am
#1089
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
Apr 6, 2019, 12:33 pm
#1090
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,971
At work, we struggle with making something "doc/training" issues or making changes to the system and how many "doc/training" issues can be there when the system becomes too difficult to use? Can you really expect people to remember all these things in an emergency?
Apr 6, 2019, 12:43 pm
#1091
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,185
Isn't this part of the problem? I have been watching Mentour's videos and learned a lot about airplanes. It seems the pilots really need to know very well how planes work and behave. With Boeing not documenting these deficient and illogical designs and behaviors, how can the pilots know?
There's nothing in the information that has come out since the accidents that would be helpful in dealing with an unscheduled MCAS event. The Ethiopian crew was aware of the unschedule MCAS event on the Lion Air flight and how to deal with it but it didn't help.
Apr 6, 2019, 10:38 pm
#1092
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: San Francisco
Programs: All-Around Kettle
Posts: 3,291
If using electric trim inhibits MCAS until five seconds after electric trim is released, and the ET pilots used electric trim before the last MCAS activation before the crash, do we know why the pilots wouldn't have used the electric trim to bring the plane all the way back to in-trim? Or did they? I'm confused by that. Also why they wouldn't have hit the cutouts again right after releasing the electric trim.
Apr 7, 2019, 3:26 am
#1093
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,740
We are, and always have been, training in dealing with a runaway stabilizer. It's not even unique to the 737--all transport jets have a similar procedure.
There's nothing in the information that has come out since the accidents that would be helpful in dealing with an unscheduled MCAS event. The Ethiopian crew was aware of the unschedule MCAS event on the Lion Air flight and how to deal with it but it didn't help.
There's nothing in the information that has come out since the accidents that would be helpful in dealing with an unscheduled MCAS event. The Ethiopian crew was aware of the unschedule MCAS event on the Lion Air flight and how to deal with it but it didn't help.
I think part of the problem and possible answer to the "why didn't it help" question is the badly written airworthiness directive that resulted from the Lion Air crash (see p. 4):
Airworthiness Directive AD 2018-23-51
It first says in capital letters (line 3) to set the stabilizer trim switches to "CUTOUT" and half-way down the AD repeats that instruction and adds that the switches have to stay in "CUTOUT" position for the remainder of the flight.
At the very end of the AD you will find what should have been said at the beginning, as it conflicts with the stay in "CUTOUT" position for the remainder of the flight instruction given earlier: "Initially, higher control forces may be needed to overcome any stabilizer nose down trim already applied. Electric stabilizer trim can be used to neutralize control column pitch forces before moving the STAB TRIM CUTOUT switches to CUTOUT."
Badly written AD that may have contributed to many people losing their lives.
Apr 7, 2019, 11:31 am
#1094
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,694
If using electric trim inhibits MCAS until five seconds after electric trim is released, and the ET pilots used electric trim before the last MCAS activation before the crash, do we know why the pilots wouldn't have used the electric trim to bring the plane all the way back to in-trim? Or did they? I'm confused by that. Also why they wouldn't have hit the cutouts again right after releasing the electric trim.
Apr 7, 2019, 11:38 am
#1095
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellingham/Gainesville
Programs: UA-G MM, Priority Club Platinum, Avis First, Hertz 5*, Red Lion
Posts: 2,808
Some here may remember a day, over 45 years ago, when a burned out light bulb brought down an L1011 jumbo jet. We've learned a lot since then. By being prepared with knowledge, experience, and strategies for threat and error management we have been able to put together the safest form of transportation in the world. We're still working on perfect.