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 8, 2019, 9:59 pm
#1126
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,185
I don't see the point in dividing the blame.
There is a failure of design which allowed the problem to occur. No doubt about that. It's quite clear that the MCAS logic should not have relied on a single data input without cross-checking for disagreement.
Once the failure occurs, us pilots have to deal with it and land the airplane safely.
These are two separate issues. They are both separately and independently at fault.
There is a failure of design which allowed the problem to occur. No doubt about that. It's quite clear that the MCAS logic should not have relied on a single data input without cross-checking for disagreement.
Once the failure occurs, us pilots have to deal with it and land the airplane safely.
These are two separate issues. They are both separately and independently at fault.
Apr 8, 2019, 11:13 pm
#1127
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
"Boeing’s 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals"
“We all rolled our eyes. The idea that, ‘Here we go. The 737 again, ' " said Mr. Ludtke, the former 737 Max cockpit designer who spent 19 years at Boeing.
"Nobody was quite perhaps willing to say it was unsafe, but we really felt like the limits were being bumped up against," he added.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/08/b...-737-max-.html
"Nobody was quite perhaps willing to say it was unsafe, but we really felt like the limits were being bumped up against," he added.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/08/b...-737-max-.html
Last edited by BF263533; Apr 9, 2019 at 1:24 am
Apr 8, 2019, 11:51 pm
#1128
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,748
I don't see the point in dividing the blame.
There is a failure of design which allowed the problem to occur. No doubt about that. It's quite clear that the MCAS logic should not have relied on a single data input without cross-checking for disagreement.
Once the failure occurs, us pilots have to deal with it and land the airplane safely.
These are two separate issues. They are both separately and independently at fault.
There is a failure of design which allowed the problem to occur. No doubt about that. It's quite clear that the MCAS logic should not have relied on a single data input without cross-checking for disagreement.
Once the failure occurs, us pilots have to deal with it and land the airplane safely.
These are two separate issues. They are both separately and independently at fault.
Apr 9, 2019, 7:34 am
#1129
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: USA
Programs: UA Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 1,195
When the investigation completes -- despite the interests of Ethiopia in protecting ET and its national pride, despite the US interests in not smearing Boeing, despite a LOT of other agendas -- the professionals will hopefully have data and provide information on both the primary causative factors and any secondary and tertiary contributing factors. In the meantime, the plane is grounded and Boeing is trying to remove unnecessary stress from the cockpit.
Apr 9, 2019, 7:45 am
#1130
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,708
(The attempts to analogize to cars are extremely weak tea.)
What aircraft makers should do is design and build passenger jets that fly as safely and easily as possible. We shouldn't be putting fighter jet-style computer systems on an unstable passenger jet just to make it flyable.
Last edited by DenverBrian; Apr 9, 2019 at 9:11 am
Apr 9, 2019, 8:24 am
#1131
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,748
PS: Congrats DenverBrian on your 20,000 posts.
Apr 9, 2019, 9:11 am
#1132
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,708
And if they decide to put in a system that has the capability to pitch the nose down and fly the plane into the ground, they should make it double/triple safe. There are EGPWS systems and the like to alert the pilots, but the system can cause a CFIT without any issues?
PS: Congrats DenverBrian on your 20,000 posts.
PS: Congrats DenverBrian on your 20,000 posts.
Apr 9, 2019, 9:37 am
#1133
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Good news. Both Airbus and Boeing are doing what you suggest.
Apr 9, 2019, 10:01 am
#1134
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,708
Apr 9, 2019, 11:02 am
#1135
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
Boeing says :" less...stability [for] fuel efficiency. "
https://www.boeing.com/commercial/ae...y/fo01txt.html
"2 Flight Control Computers and Stability Augmentation
The trend in the design of modern airplanes is to have less static longitudinal stability--frequently referred to as relaxed static stability (RSS)--to capture the benefit of improved fuel efficiency. Simply stated, some airplanes are now designed to be aerodynamically efficient, and stability is augmented electronically so that stick force gradients will meet certification requirements. Many methods exist for augmenting stability. For example, the Boeing 777 and MD-11 use flight control computers that adjust the elevator actuator positions to give the appearance of more longitudinal stability than the airplane actually has. In other words, computers absorb the extra workload caused by flying with RSS."
I saw an article that stated Airbus agrees with this concept.
MAX apparently maximizes the The trend in the design of modern airplanes is to have less static longitudinal stability.
Last edited by BF263533; Apr 9, 2019 at 11:11 am Reason: Add MAX apparently maximizes
Apr 9, 2019, 11:14 am
#1136
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: Free checked in bag on UA & DL. Free icecream at Marriott checkin.
Posts: 2,862
Wonder how long the current Boeing CEO is going to last? I feel he is probably going to be canned before end of Q2 2019 as the "quick fix" to the MAX does not seem to be "quick". Based on airlines planning their schedule, I think it could be Q4 2019 before they are back in the air again or maybe Q1 2020.
Where is the 777X in the approval process? Have they started?
This could delay the re-introduction of the MAX, probably delay future model launches as blogs and papers are going to make an issue of the approval process for public consumption (high potential for scare)
Where is the 777X in the approval process? Have they started?
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/
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Apr 9, 2019 at 1:56 pm Reason: merging consecutive posts by same member
Apr 9, 2019, 9:36 pm
#1137
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,130
Wonder how long the current Boeing CEO is going to last? I feel he is probably going to be canned before end of Q2 2019 as the "quick fix" to the MAX does not seem to be "quick". Based on airlines planning their schedule, I think it could be Q4 2019 before they are back in the air again or maybe Q1 2020.
Where is the 777X in the approval process? Have they started?
This could delay the re-introduction of the MAX, probably delay future model launches as blogs and papers are going to make an issue of the approval process for public consumption (high potential for scare)
Where is the 777X in the approval process? Have they started?
This could delay the re-introduction of the MAX, probably delay future model launches as blogs and papers are going to make an issue of the approval process for public consumption (high potential for scare)
Apr 9, 2019, 11:01 pm
#1138
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
The first MAX -10 fuselage, l/n 7644, arrived at Renton in early April 2019. http://www.b737.org.uk/737max10.htm
Regarding the 777x there are a few news stories out there that the 737 MAX design decision process raises questions about the 777x.
"Given the questions raised by Boeing's design decisions on its 737 Max aircraft, will the folding wing tips on its new 777-X line of planes be safe?"
https://interestingengineering.com/t...-are-they-safe
Top stories
Boeing shareholders file class-action lawsuit over 737 Max plane crashes
NBC News·4 hours ago
Airlines have completely stopped ordering the 737 Max
CNN.com·12 hours ago
Regarding the 777x there are a few news stories out there that the 737 MAX design decision process raises questions about the 777x.
"Given the questions raised by Boeing's design decisions on its 737 Max aircraft, will the folding wing tips on its new 777-X line of planes be safe?"
https://interestingengineering.com/t...-are-they-safe
Top stories
Boeing shareholders file class-action lawsuit over 737 Max plane crashes
NBC News·4 hours ago
Airlines have completely stopped ordering the 737 Max
CNN.com·12 hours ago
Last edited by BF263533; Apr 9, 2019 at 11:47 pm Reason: add Max 10 arrived Renton
Apr 11, 2019, 11:01 am
#1139
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: San Francisco
Programs: All-Around Kettle
Posts: 3,291
None of those changes to the anti-stall system, known as MCAS, were fully examined by the Federal Aviation Administration.
Although officials were aware of the changes, the modifications didn’t require a new safety review, according to three people with knowledge of the process. It wasn’t necessary under F.A.A. rules since the changes didn’t affect what the agency considers an especially critical or risky phase of flight.
Although officials were aware of the changes, the modifications didn’t require a new safety review, according to three people with knowledge of the process. It wasn’t necessary under F.A.A. rules since the changes didn’t affect what the agency considers an especially critical or risky phase of flight.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/11/b...-faa-mcas.html
Apr 11, 2019, 12:55 pm
#1140
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
I have the same doubts. The MAX10 pushes the airframe even further, more weight, longer, and a new telescoping landing gear. Lots that can go wrong. And given that Boeing is already pushing safety with the landing gear and landing speeds on the MAX9, can you imagine what will happen the first time a MAX10 goes off the runway or has a tire issue? And what if they have issues with the new landing grear?
Sorry, Boeing, the 737 is not, and will never be, a 757.
My guess is (a) airlines have to be thinking carefully about the MAX10, and (b) the FAA is unlikely to roll-over on certification like they did with the MAX8/9. This said, I think airlines would need to bail, until they do, it is full speed ahead for Boeing. Giving up on the MAX10 would be basically handing orders to Airbus for the A321neo.
Sorry, Boeing, the 737 is not, and will never be, a 757.
The first MAX -10 fuselage, l/n 7644, arrived at Renton in early April 2019. 737 MAX-10
Regarding the 777x there are a few news stories out there that the 737 MAX design decision process raises questions about the 777x.
"Given the questions raised by Boeing's design decisions on its 737 Max aircraft, will the folding wing tips on its new 777-X line of planes be safe?"
https://interestingengineering.com/t...-are-they-safe
Regarding the 777x there are a few news stories out there that the 737 MAX design decision process raises questions about the 777x.
"Given the questions raised by Boeing's design decisions on its 737 Max aircraft, will the folding wing tips on its new 777-X line of planes be safe?"
https://interestingengineering.com/t...-are-they-safe