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 7, 2019, 11:46 am
#1096
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellingham/Gainesville
Programs: UA-G MM, Priority Club Platinum, Avis First, Hertz 5*, Red Lion
Posts: 2,808
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.
It appears they did re-engage the electric trim (which it appears did reengage MCAS inputs) What is not clear is whether manual trim inputs were effective and that is why the electric trim was re-engaged or if the plane was flying too fast and manual trim was difficult? IDK
Apr 7, 2019, 11:48 am
#1097
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,740
No, it is not! It is rather an aircraft design that forces pilots to jump through a number of (previously unknown) hoops to keep the MAX from crashing due to a flawed system that will happily fly the plane nose first into the ground.
Talked to some ("first world") pilots today and most of them agree that the single sensor AOA sensor design should have never made it into a commercial airliner and that the AD is very badly written. The one thing that is stressed there is to set the switch to "CUTOUT" and keep them on "CUTOUT". By the time they would find out that manual trimming does not work, it is already too late to reactivate electric trimming, which will also reactivate MCAS.
Talked to some ("first world") pilots today and most of them agree that the single sensor AOA sensor design should have never made it into a commercial airliner and that the AD is very badly written. The one thing that is stressed there is to set the switch to "CUTOUT" and keep them on "CUTOUT". By the time they would find out that manual trimming does not work, it is already too late to reactivate electric trimming, which will also reactivate MCAS.
Apr 7, 2019, 1:52 pm
#1098
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,694
Apr 7, 2019, 2:18 pm
#1099
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,740
I don’t think it’s that clear-cut. As I said, pilots explained to me convincingly that pilot error is not the main factor here, but that the pilots should have never been placed in that situation by the manufacturer.
Apr 7, 2019, 3:52 pm
#1100
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellingham/Gainesville
Programs: UA-G MM, Priority Club Platinum, Avis First, Hertz 5*, Red Lion
Posts: 2,808
No, it is not! It is rather an aircraft design that forces pilots to jump through a number of (previously unknown) hoops to keep the MAX from crashing due to a flawed system that will happily fly the plane nose first into the ground.
Talked to some ("first world") pilots today and most of them agree that the single sensor AOA sensor design should have never made it into a commercial airliner and that the AD is very badly written. The one thing that is stressed there is to set the switch to "CUTOUT" and keep them on "CUTOUT". By the time they would find out that manual trimming does not work, it is already too late to reactivate electric trimming, which will also reactivate MCAS.
Talked to some ("first world") pilots today and most of them agree that the single sensor AOA sensor design should have never made it into a commercial airliner and that the AD is very badly written. The one thing that is stressed there is to set the switch to "CUTOUT" and keep them on "CUTOUT". By the time they would find out that manual trimming does not work, it is already too late to reactivate electric trimming, which will also reactivate MCAS.
Apr 7, 2019, 3:55 pm
#1101
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,694
Apr 7, 2019, 4:25 pm
#1103
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,417
Sure, but they had plenty of other automated control systems. The MCAS has gotten a lot of attention due to the specific nature of these failures, but "a computerized system to help steer the aircraft" is not a new idea, and the 737 MAX is far from alone in operating one.
At the end of the day, the 737 is not a fly-by-wire aircraft; it can be flown with all pilot assist systems turned off. Boeing needs to address the tendency of the MAX to put the pilot into a dangerous situation more frequently than other models do, and they appear to be doing so. However, at the end of the day, the control belongs to the pilot. I have no wish to speak ill of the dead, but given the preliminary details that have come out so far, I believe responsibility will ultimately be shared between the plane and the pilots.
I also think there is little to be gained by continuing to try to figure out exactly what percentage of blame belongs where when the investigations are still underway. I think it is far more productive to wait and to see what is done to address the problem and to certify the updated plane. At this point, until new information is available (and possibly not even then), I don't think anyone is going to change anyone else's minds.
At the end of the day, the 737 is not a fly-by-wire aircraft; it can be flown with all pilot assist systems turned off. Boeing needs to address the tendency of the MAX to put the pilot into a dangerous situation more frequently than other models do, and they appear to be doing so. However, at the end of the day, the control belongs to the pilot. I have no wish to speak ill of the dead, but given the preliminary details that have come out so far, I believe responsibility will ultimately be shared between the plane and the pilots.
I also think there is little to be gained by continuing to try to figure out exactly what percentage of blame belongs where when the investigations are still underway. I think it is far more productive to wait and to see what is done to address the problem and to certify the updated plane. At this point, until new information is available (and possibly not even then), I don't think anyone is going to change anyone else's minds.
Apr 7, 2019, 4:45 pm
#1104
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: DSM, BKK or anywhere with an airport
Programs: UA 2P, HH Gold
Posts: 1,018
Hey Everyone - I asked this back on post #1061 and didn't see an answer so if anyone could help me out here, that't be awesome. I just don't understand all the forces involved; here's my question:
"Pardon my ignorance with the next question as I am not an ATP or even multi-engine pilot. If you lockout the stab in full "nose-down" deflection, then hold the yoke as far back as possible, all other forces being equal, would you be able to fly the aircraft at least somewhat nose level ? Or, once that stab is fully deflected down, is your 737 "going down" as well ?"
"Pardon my ignorance with the next question as I am not an ATP or even multi-engine pilot. If you lockout the stab in full "nose-down" deflection, then hold the yoke as far back as possible, all other forces being equal, would you be able to fly the aircraft at least somewhat nose level ? Or, once that stab is fully deflected down, is your 737 "going down" as well ?"
Apr 7, 2019, 4:58 pm
#1105
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellingham/Gainesville
Programs: UA-G MM, Priority Club Platinum, Avis First, Hertz 5*, Red Lion
Posts: 2,808
Apr 7, 2019, 5:58 pm
#1106
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,971
Article in USA Today - probably not very informative [for us] but it is bringing up more doubts and questions to the general public: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...em/3378703002/
Apr 7, 2019, 11:47 pm
#1107
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,740
However, I believe that the plane contributed a lot to make the holes in the Swiss cheese align.
Nice try to direct attention away from the flawed MAX. ^
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 8, 2019 at 12:30 am
Apr 8, 2019, 12:11 am
#1108
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,616
It's a relevant comparison. The co-pilots flying that aircraft didn't know how to respond to a series of anomalies and put the aircraft in a stall from which it couldn't recover. We don't know the final outcome of the two MAX crashes at this time, but in addition to the Boeing design failures, I suspect there will be findings similar to AF 447, which cited a lack of experience of both co-pilots is hand flying the aircraft and poor training.
Apr 8, 2019, 12:15 am
#1109
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SEA/ORD/ADB
Programs: TK ELPL (*G), AS 100K (OWE), BA Gold (OWE), Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Plat, IHG Plat
Posts: 7,763
It's a relevant comparison. The co-pilots flying that aircraft didn't know how to respond to a series of anomalies and put the aircraft in a stall from which it couldn't recover. We don't know the final outcome of the two MAX crashes at this time, but in addition to the Boeing design failures, I suspect there will be findings similar to AF 447, which cited a lack of experience of both co-pilots is hand flying the aircraft and poor training.
Apr 8, 2019, 12:44 am
#1110
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,616
I don't know why you would suspect that there will be similar findings - the preliminary report seems to indicate that the pilots were well trained and followed all procedures until they were stuck in an unrecoverable situation. From the report, they seem competent - expecting anything more is both unreasonable and unrealistic.