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 23, 2019, 9:22 pm
#1231
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
The ugly reality (talk to any Boeing old-timers) is that Boeing was taken over by MickyD. It is McDonald Douglas (dba Boeing). The management approach - buy off the government with lobbying and soft landings, don't invest, fight the unions - is straight out of the McDonald Douglas Play book. Everything that happened with the MAX - and the 15 years of delays on a new narrow body A/C before the current problems - are a direct result of the McDonald Douglas approach taking over Boeing.
Apr 23, 2019, 9:55 pm
#1232
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
The success of the pre Mad MAX 737 depends on how you measure success. If there was a safety trade-off then that reduces true success. If it is true the. 737 800/900s have a higher landing speed and more runway overruns that seems less safe detracting from true success.
Apr 23, 2019, 10:12 pm
#1233
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: Free checked in bag on UA & DL. Free icecream at Marriott checkin.
Posts: 2,862
I wonder if the unspoken selling point would turn out to be - "To fly a Boeing 737MAX you need to be a West Point graduate with XXX hrs flight experience with the US Armed forces; to fly an Airbus 32x's you dont need any of that." Majority of the 737MAX purchasers are from Asia and Africa so for Airbus it would be a stronger selling point than Boeing's selling point of a 737MAX is the same as 737NG and requires no additional training. 
I am curious to know how the FAA is going to package the approval process as being complete and the MCAS to be error proof as one goes through endless software patches and releases as all conditions were never considered in the first version of any software release. This is going to be the best written piece of code in history as Boeing cannot afford even one more incident with the MAX.
Apr 24, 2019, 6:36 am
#1234
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: TX
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 729
I am seeing the “Boeing 737 MAX 9” show back up post-announced grounding date on the app this morning. Yesterday the same flights were just shows as “Boeing 737”
Apr 24, 2019, 9:43 am
#1235
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: EWR
Programs: Marriott Platinum, HHonors Diamond, United Plat
Posts: 128
Some sections of the media are reporting that the 737MAX may be presented to the FAA for re-certification as early as May 2019, with the aircraft being un-grounded by July 2019. From what I read, in the past, most developed and developing countries would follow the FAA's lead in certifying an aircraft for their airspaces. But that may not be so straightforward now.
I am wondering how the dynamic in today's environment affect the certification/re-certification of the 737MAX, or indeed any other Boeing aircraft by the aviation authorities of Europe, China, Canada, Brazil or anyone else?
I hope we don't end up with a scenario like in the auto industry where cars are built for regulatory standards of a myriad of countries, thus increasing complexity and cost.
I am wondering how the dynamic in today's environment affect the certification/re-certification of the 737MAX, or indeed any other Boeing aircraft by the aviation authorities of Europe, China, Canada, Brazil or anyone else?
I hope we don't end up with a scenario like in the auto industry where cars are built for regulatory standards of a myriad of countries, thus increasing complexity and cost.
Apr 24, 2019, 10:01 am
#1236
Moderator: Budget Travel forum & Credit Card Programs, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYJ/YVR and back on Van Isle ....... for now
Programs: UA lifetime MM / *A Gold
Posts: 14,429
I'm guessing UA is counting on certification in May, and since they were flying them to Hawaii, that does not involve certification by any other country @:-)
Though they may think about flying that that long a distance over water, and just sub them in for 739 routes and have the 739s fly to Hawaii. Or consider that problems seems to be primarily during takeoff and not as so much during the flight.
Though they may think about flying that that long a distance over water, and just sub them in for 739 routes and have the 739s fly to Hawaii. Or consider that problems seems to be primarily during takeoff and not as so much during the flight.
Apr 24, 2019, 10:20 am
#1237
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,417
If UA isn't certain the frames can make it from Hawaii to California, they won't fly them at all (nor would the FAA re-certify them). It would be absolutely asinine to swap them onto other routes due to a fear that they're unsafe for travel over water.
Apr 24, 2019, 12:55 pm
#1238
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 14,891
Some sections of the media are reporting that the 737MAX may be presented to the FAA for re-certification as early as May 2019, with the aircraft being un-grounded by July 2019. From what I read, in the past, most developed and developing countries would follow the FAA's lead in certifying an aircraft for their airspaces. But that may not be so straightforward now.
When they get back in the air is another question, though different carriers have them off the schedule for different periods of time. I believe UA has them out through sometime in July, while others don’t have them back in as scheduled until August. That can always change, of course. I believe AA has said that when they are able to put them in the service, and possibly through the rest of the summer sched, they wouldn’t be scheduled per say and would be used as subs instead.
Apr 24, 2019, 1:31 pm
#1239
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
“ 'It’s important that when we return this aircraft to flight, that we do it in relative unison and lockstep around not just the U.S. but the world. So we’ll have to monitor and engage that,' Munoz said."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/24/unit...fly-again.html
Until all regulators are in general agreement, passengers may be reluctant to fly United.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/24/unit...fly-again.html
Until all regulators are in general agreement, passengers may be reluctant to fly United.
Last edited by BF263533; Apr 24, 2019 at 1:48 pm Reason: Add comment
Apr 24, 2019, 2:51 pm
#1240
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 748
“ 'It’s important that when we return this aircraft to flight, that we do it in relative unison and lockstep around not just the U.S. but the world. So we’ll have to monitor and engage that,' Munoz said."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/24/unit...fly-again.html
Until all regulators are in general agreement, passengers may be reluctant to fly United.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/24/unit...fly-again.html
Until all regulators are in general agreement, passengers may be reluctant to fly United.
Apr 24, 2019, 4:15 pm
#1241
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,130
Not completely. I believe the FO had 360 hours of flight experience. According to the analysis linked by LarryJ, the captain had significant experience but was busy trying to fly the plane. In the meantime, the FO committed several errors which compounded the situation. The facts remain that the 737 is one of the most successful airframes in aviation history, computer assist tends to be a an overall positive for many things including aviation but computer control can be quite problematic, and tragedies like this will continue to spur emotional reactions.
Apr 24, 2019, 4:25 pm
#1242
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: EWR
Programs: Marriott Platinum, HHonors Diamond, United Plat
Posts: 128
True. But we seem to be rapidly heading towards a world where the FAA has less of an influence in how other countries' aviation authorities make decisions. Which could mean higher costs and greater manufacturing complexity for Boeing. Or, I hope not, for Bell Textron, Cessna, Spirit etc.
Last edited by porky; Apr 24, 2019 at 4:25 pm Reason: Additional info
Apr 24, 2019, 4:52 pm
#1243
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: Free checked in bag on UA & DL. Free icecream at Marriott checkin.
Posts: 2,862
True. But we seem to be rapidly heading towards a world where the FAA has less of an influence in how other countries' aviation authorities make decisions. Which could mean higher costs and greater manufacturing complexity for Boeing. Or, I hope not, for Bell Textron, Cessna, Spirit etc.
Apr 24, 2019, 5:42 pm
#1244
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 14,891
Well, the FAA (and Boeing) did not help their case with their "expedited" approval of the 737MAX nor their reluctance to ground it after every other aviation authority in the world grounded it. FAA and Boeing brought it onto themselves this loss of credibility. Whether other aircraft manufacturers will also pay the price is to be seen. Maybe Embraer is now tainted with being associated with Boeing?
im curious on Embraer though...why are they associated with Boeing?
Apr 24, 2019, 5:48 pm
#1245
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
On July 5, 2018, Boeing and Embraer announced a joint venture for Embraer's airliners, after Airbus acquired a majority of the competing Bombardier CSeries on October 16, 2017.