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 24, 2019, 9:44 pm
#1246
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
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?
Apr 24, 2019, 9:55 pm
#1247
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: Free checked in bag on UA & DL. Free icecream at Marriott checkin.
Posts: 2,862
Apr 25, 2019, 6:19 am
#1248
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Facts matter.
Apr 25, 2019, 8:11 am
#1249
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,417
Apr 25, 2019, 8:23 am
#1250
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
Apr 25, 2019, 8:47 am
#1251
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SFO/SJC
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 14,891
Given 350 people have died in 2 crashes that seem to have several similarities, I think the right thing is to ground the aircraft until the proper solutions can be implemented and tested - however little or much is needed. If updated software can fix it, fine. If more pilot training is required, fine. If it means the certification process needs to be more through to make sure everything is accounted for, fine. If it’s some combination of this and other things, fine. If it is found that the aircraft just isn’t safe enough as designed to meet the high standards that we have (and rightfully so), then we need to do the right thing and ground it permanently. Not rushing to judgement here and not suggesting the latter is the answer, but given the severity and similarities of these cases, something clearly needs to be done. Specifics need to be verified and the proper fixes need to be made.
Apr 25, 2019, 9:14 am
#1252
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,417
Apr 25, 2019, 10:58 am
#1253
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 816
Frankly all sides of this argument seem to have rushed to judgement before all the facts are known and anyone who isn’t convinced so far will not be by continuing the debate .
I can see no better reason to have an investigation so we can truly find out what happened.
Apr 25, 2019, 11:29 am
#1254
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
I presume you haven’t left the discussion because of the ‘presence of an investigation’ but rather because of the ‘rush to judgement before the facts are known’
Frankly all sides of this argument seem to have rushed to judgement before all the facts are known and anyone who isn’t convinced so far will not be by continuing the debate .
I can see no better reason to have an investigation so we can truly find out what happened.
As I've said before, I generally disagree with the notion of criminal involvement in aircraft accident investigation, but still, such an investigation is not tantamount to evidence of criminal activity.
Apr 25, 2019, 11:36 am
#1255
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
Relaxed Static Stability (RSS)
In the FAA review process the issue that should be addressed - Is the Static Stability too relaxed on the 737 MAX because the much larger engines were placed too much forward & too high? With MCAS was Boeing using computers to adjust the stabilizer to “give the appearance of more longitudinal stability than the airplane actually has. “ ? The Boeing link claims:
“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. …. 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. ”
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. …. 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. ”
https://www.boeing.com/commercial/ae...y/fo01txt.html
Apr 25, 2019, 11:50 am
#1256
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,694
Is the resulting static stability any lower than any other recently certified aircraft?
Apr 25, 2019, 12:13 pm
#1258
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,185
In the FAA review process the issue that should be addressed - Is the Static Stability too relaxed on the 737 MAX because the much larger engines were placed too much forward & too high? With MCAS was Boeing using computers to adjust the stabilizer to “give the appearance of more longitudinal stability than the airplane actually has. “ ? The Boeing link claims:
A new, clean-sheet design to replace the 737 likely would incorporate some form(s) of relaxed stability in order to improve efficiency.
Apr 25, 2019, 1:09 pm
#1259
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: MFR
Programs: UA 1K 1.9MM, Hilton Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 2,885
Just look at the front page of Flyertalk. Some of the reporting there is downright criminal it's so nonfactual. That Jackie Reddy is the worst -- every time I read something by her I cringe.
Apr 25, 2019, 1:46 pm
#1260
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,174
Since the MAX are new they will remain in yellow globe livery for a long time. Making it easier for customers to identify. At least these first 14.