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
May 2, 2019, 1:48 pm
#1321
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
.....
A quick Google search shows about 4.5 million worldwide deaths due to injury in 2017 (the last year with data on the chart I used). The number of fatalities in airline crashes is orders of magnitude smaller than that, regardless of the specific airframe.
.......
A quick Google search shows about 4.5 million worldwide deaths due to injury in 2017 (the last year with data on the chart I used). The number of fatalities in airline crashes is orders of magnitude smaller than that, regardless of the specific airframe.
.......
Cardiovascular diseases 31.8%
Cancers 17.08%
(snip)
Road incidents 2.22%
Kidney disease 2.2%
Tuberculosis 2.12%
HIV/AIDS 1.71%
Suicide 1.42%
Malaria 1.11%
Homicide 0.72%
Terrorism 0.06% (in 2016)
Natural disasters 0.02
It is amazing how concerned the nation is about terrorism and natural disasters, yet Road Events have a much higher mortality. Never mind Heart (Cardiovascular) disease.
But yes, it is a "massive" singe event death count that gets the news.
What is that Spock* said: you humans see a single death as tragedy and mass deaths as statistic.
*paraphrasing Spock from memory from original Star Trek
May 2, 2019, 3:19 pm
#1322
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,707
The tragedy/statistic quote is often attributed to Stalin.
See? Facts. I can do facts.
May 2, 2019, 4:29 pm
#1323
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
When the DC 10s were falling out of the sky back around 1979 the news coverage was a lot less with no 24 hour news cycle and no internet like today. The problems once identified were like poorly designed cargo door latches and short cut maintenance procedures. There were far more airplane accidents back then. Untied had to rely on 747s to pick up the traffic to Hawaii.
MCAS and the overall design of the MAX remain a point of debate.
Why have the MAX "feel" like the NG if it could cause the nose to pitch down and increase the risk of death?
Remove MCAS and certify MAX to fly as a MAX and train pilots to fly the MAX without all the "feel" ad ons.
MCAS and the overall design of the MAX remain a point of debate.
Why have the MAX "feel" like the NG if it could cause the nose to pitch down and increase the risk of death?
Remove MCAS and certify MAX to fly as a MAX and train pilots to fly the MAX without all the "feel" ad ons.
May 2, 2019, 6:47 pm
#1324
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 10,904
This is a great point. Regardless if how good MCAS is, it can be switched off. If the plane can't be certified as safe without it then it shouldn't be certified at all.
May 2, 2019, 11:40 pm
#1325
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: IAH
Posts: 488
Gotta disagree .....
IMHO you represent (not picking on you, just kind of follow up to the example) the educated public. Ignorant flying public will soon forget this, if they ever knew about it @:-)
When visiting my friend in Dallas, he said he didn't notice that there aren't any MAX aircraft directly over his house - he lives about two miles southeast of DAL's 31L and if the wind blows out of the north the left engine is directly over the house.
When I asked if he heard of the crashes, it was news to him. A lot of people don't read FT and don't watch the evening news, so if it's not in their newsfeed @:-)
IMHO you represent (not picking on you, just kind of follow up to the example) the educated public. Ignorant flying public will soon forget this, if they ever knew about it @:-)
When visiting my friend in Dallas, he said he didn't notice that there aren't any MAX aircraft directly over his house - he lives about two miles southeast of DAL's 31L and if the wind blows out of the north the left engine is directly over the house.
When I asked if he heard of the crashes, it was news to him. A lot of people don't read FT and don't watch the evening news, so if it's not in their newsfeed @:-)
What at I have found amazing about this whole sorry scenario is people who never knew what Boeing was, let alone an airplane model consistently now know this particular model and have decided it is a death trap (right
y or wrongly).
This comes back to people saying greed over safety. If you take MCAS out, the MAX is fine, but it is not the same plane requiring increased training and undermining the business case to purchase the MAX.
May 3, 2019, 10:32 am
#1326
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,694
You can turn off the transponder in flight, but you can't certify an airliner without one.
May 3, 2019, 11:01 am
#1327
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,707
I've never heard of a transponder being on or off resulting in a plan flying into the ground killing everyone on board.
Last edited by DenverBrian; May 3, 2019 at 5:18 pm
May 3, 2019, 11:10 am
#1328
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: BOS<>NYC<>BKK
Programs: UA 4.3MM LT-GS; AA1MM; Amtrak SE; MAR LT TITAN; PC Plat; HIL DIA; HYA GLOB
Posts: 4,393
Brief quote from a long article in Aviation Week and Space Technology:
The FAA is targeting May 23 for a meeting of global regulators to discuss its analysis of the MCAS changes, the agency confirmed first to Aviation Week (see page 24). While that gathering will be part of a concerted effort to build global consensus, it will have no bearing on when the FAA clears the MAX for U.S. operations. Progress on the updates suggests a late May or early June approval.
May 3, 2019, 1:20 pm
#1329
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,185
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol_Tr...os_Flight_1907
The transponder on the Embraer Legacy 600 business jet was accidentally turned off so TCAS didn't give either airplane a warning prior to the collision. The Legacy landed safely; the 737's 154 passengers and crew were lost.
May 3, 2019, 2:27 pm
#1330
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,694
I don't intend to be argumentative, but it has happened. Took down a B737-800.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol_Tr...os_Flight_1907
The transponder on the Embraer Legacy 600 business jet was accidentally turned off so TCAS didn't give either airplane a warning prior to the collision. The Legacy landed safely; the 737's 154 passengers and crew were lost.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol_Tr...os_Flight_1907
The transponder on the Embraer Legacy 600 business jet was accidentally turned off so TCAS didn't give either airplane a warning prior to the collision. The Legacy landed safely; the 737's 154 passengers and crew were lost.
May 3, 2019, 4:13 pm
#1331
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,707
I don't intend to be argumentative, but it has happened. Took down a B737-800.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol_Tr...os_Flight_1907
The transponder on the Embraer Legacy 600 business jet was accidentally turned off so TCAS didn't give either airplane a warning prior to the collision. The Legacy landed safely; the 737's 154 passengers and crew were lost.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gol_Tr...os_Flight_1907
The transponder on the Embraer Legacy 600 business jet was accidentally turned off so TCAS didn't give either airplane a warning prior to the collision. The Legacy landed safely; the 737's 154 passengers and crew were lost.
...the NTSB determined that both flight crews acted properly and were placed on a collision course by ATC, deeming the Legacy pilots' disabling of their TCAS system to be only a contributing factor rather than a direct cause.
May 3, 2019, 4:25 pm
#1332
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Houston/DC
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM
Posts: 564
May 3, 2019, 4:30 pm
#1333
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,707
May 3, 2019, 4:46 pm
#1334
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Houston/DC
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM
Posts: 564
So again, I will point out that you made a statement and 2 posters were obliged to educate you with 2 examples. I don't think there is any ulterior motive other than to enlighten.
May 3, 2019, 4:47 pm
#1335
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
That’s fine.
You’re entitled to your opinion.
However, there are other participants in this forum that are interested in factual discussion, perhaps because we plan to fly on the MAX in the future.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; May 3, 2019 at 4:48 pm Reason: discuss the issues, not the poster(s)