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 16, 2019, 8:38 pm
#1471
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,185
Last edited by WineCountryUA; May 16, 2019 at 8:44 pm Reason: repaired link
May 16, 2019, 8:52 pm
#1472
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 10,904
So, since 2 planes crashed... should be DAL-A?
May 16, 2019, 10:42 pm
#1473
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,653
I'm not comparing my lack confidence in the Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority ability to fairly determine the causes of the ET crash with Boeing's honestly in ascertaining the causes of JT and ET accidents. I do trust the impartiality of the French BEA and the NTSB.
Last edited by TWA884; May 16, 2019 at 10:49 pm
May 16, 2019, 11:53 pm
#1474
Join Date: Feb 2013
Programs: LH M&M, BA EC, DL SM
Posts: 5,748
Since you quoted me: I said it is a fact that 300+ people are dead. However, it still has to be determined who has to take how much responsibility for that. Probably not solely Boeing and not solely the pilots.
May 17, 2019, 1:42 am
#1475
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,866
I am sure that in the various lawsuits simulator evidence will be produced to get to the bottom of the question of whether theEthiopian Airlines plane could have been saved. In the simulation even the reduced speed of 250 knots prevented the pilots from moving the manual wheel. Addis Ababa Bole International Airport is at 7625 ft. I think the ET plane was like 3000 ft. above the ground. So if they needed 8000 ft. for the roller coastering recovery technique they would have been several thousand feet below the ground before they recovered. Ouch! I had a bad experience in Kenya last August, but I am keeping an open mind. Standards in Africa need to be improved, but I am not convinced, YET, that the pilots could have done anything to save the plane being so close to the ground.
https://www.heraldnet.com/business/w...7-max-crashes/
“Reenactment in a flight simulator
Countering the notion that U.S. pilots could have overcome the emergencies that brought down the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines jets, the latest issue of trade magazine Aviation Week describes a simulator test flown as part of recurrent training by a U.S.-based 737 Max crew that re-created a critical part of the crashed Ethiopian flight. The simulation indicated that the pilots “faced a near-impossible task of getting their 737 Max 8 under control.”
Starting from the point where the Ethiopian pilots hit the cut-off switches and stopped MCAS from operating, the U.S. Max crew tried in the simulator to recover.
Even though the U.S. crew performed the simulator experiment at a normal speed of 250 knots instead of the more than 350 knots of the Ethiopian jet, the forces on the jet’s tail still prevented them from moving the manual wheel in the cockpit that would have corrected the nose-down attitude.
To get out of it, the pilots used an old aviator technique called the “roller coaster” — letting the yoke go to relieve the forces on the tail, then cranking the wheel, and repeating this many times. This technique has not been in U.S. pilot manuals for decades, and pilots today are not typically trained on it. Using it in the simulator, the U.S. Max crew managed to save the aircraft but lost 8,000 feet of altitude in the process. The Ethiopian Max never rose higher than 8,000 feet, indicating that from that point in the flight, the crew couldn’t have saved it.
A similar experiment, though without the use of the roller-coaster technique, was performed by a European airline pilot and 737 flight instructor who runs a popular You Tube channel called Mentour Pilot about aviator skills.
His simulator session ended as the pilot pulled with all his might on the yoke to try to keep the jet’s nose up, while the co-pilot beside him tried futilely to move the manual wheel.”
https://www.heraldnet.com/business/w...7-max-crashes/
“Reenactment in a flight simulator
Countering the notion that U.S. pilots could have overcome the emergencies that brought down the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines jets, the latest issue of trade magazine Aviation Week describes a simulator test flown as part of recurrent training by a U.S.-based 737 Max crew that re-created a critical part of the crashed Ethiopian flight. The simulation indicated that the pilots “faced a near-impossible task of getting their 737 Max 8 under control.”
Starting from the point where the Ethiopian pilots hit the cut-off switches and stopped MCAS from operating, the U.S. Max crew tried in the simulator to recover.
Even though the U.S. crew performed the simulator experiment at a normal speed of 250 knots instead of the more than 350 knots of the Ethiopian jet, the forces on the jet’s tail still prevented them from moving the manual wheel in the cockpit that would have corrected the nose-down attitude.
To get out of it, the pilots used an old aviator technique called the “roller coaster” — letting the yoke go to relieve the forces on the tail, then cranking the wheel, and repeating this many times. This technique has not been in U.S. pilot manuals for decades, and pilots today are not typically trained on it. Using it in the simulator, the U.S. Max crew managed to save the aircraft but lost 8,000 feet of altitude in the process. The Ethiopian Max never rose higher than 8,000 feet, indicating that from that point in the flight, the crew couldn’t have saved it.
A similar experiment, though without the use of the roller-coaster technique, was performed by a European airline pilot and 737 flight instructor who runs a popular You Tube channel called Mentour Pilot about aviator skills.
His simulator session ended as the pilot pulled with all his might on the yoke to try to keep the jet’s nose up, while the co-pilot beside him tried futilely to move the manual wheel.”
May 17, 2019, 6:44 am
#1476
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,708
I am sure that in the various lawsuits simulator evidence will be produced to get to the bottom of the question of whether theEthiopian Airlines plane could have been saved. In the simulation even the reduced speed of 250 knots prevented the pilots from moving the manual wheel. Addis Ababa Bole International Airport is at 7625 ft. I think the ET plane was like 3000 ft. above the ground. So if they needed 8000 ft. for the roller coastering recovery technique they would have been several thousand feet below the ground before they recovered. Ouch! I had a bad experience in Kenya last August, but I am keeping an open mind. Standards in Africa need to be improved, but I am not convinced, YET, that the pilots could have done anything to save the plane being so close to the ground.
https://www.heraldnet.com/business/w...7-max-crashes/And of course, in simulator training both pilots know what's coming. It's not a surprise. In real life, the surprise likely costs several seconds.
“Reenactment in a flight simulator
Countering the notion that U.S. pilots could have overcome the emergencies that brought down the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines jets, the latest issue of trade magazine Aviation Week describes a simulator test flown as part of recurrent training by a U.S.-based 737 Max crew that re-created a critical part of the crashed Ethiopian flight. The simulation indicated that the pilots “faced a near-impossible task of getting their 737 Max 8 under control.”
Starting from the point where the Ethiopian pilots hit the cut-off switches and stopped MCAS from operating, the U.S. Max crew tried in the simulator to recover.
Even though the U.S. crew performed the simulator experiment at a normal speed of 250 knots instead of the more than 350 knots of the Ethiopian jet, the forces on the jet’s tail still prevented them from moving the manual wheel in the cockpit that would have corrected the nose-down attitude.
To get out of it, the pilots used an old aviator technique called the “roller coaster” — letting the yoke go to relieve the forces on the tail, then cranking the wheel, and repeating this many times. This technique has not been in U.S. pilot manuals for decades, and pilots today are not typically trained on it. Using it in the simulator, the U.S. Max crew managed to save the aircraft but lost 8,000 feet of altitude in the process. The Ethiopian Max never rose higher than 8,000 feet, indicating that from that point in the flight, the crew couldn’t have saved it.
A similar experiment, though without the use of the roller-coaster technique, was performed by a European airline pilot and 737 flight instructor who runs a popular You Tube channel called Mentour Pilot about aviator skills.
His simulator session ended as the pilot pulled with all his might on the yoke to try to keep the jet’s nose up, while the co-pilot beside him tried futilely to move the manual wheel.”
https://www.heraldnet.com/business/w...7-max-crashes/And of course, in simulator training both pilots know what's coming. It's not a surprise. In real life, the surprise likely costs several seconds.
“Reenactment in a flight simulator
Countering the notion that U.S. pilots could have overcome the emergencies that brought down the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines jets, the latest issue of trade magazine Aviation Week describes a simulator test flown as part of recurrent training by a U.S.-based 737 Max crew that re-created a critical part of the crashed Ethiopian flight. The simulation indicated that the pilots “faced a near-impossible task of getting their 737 Max 8 under control.”
Starting from the point where the Ethiopian pilots hit the cut-off switches and stopped MCAS from operating, the U.S. Max crew tried in the simulator to recover.
Even though the U.S. crew performed the simulator experiment at a normal speed of 250 knots instead of the more than 350 knots of the Ethiopian jet, the forces on the jet’s tail still prevented them from moving the manual wheel in the cockpit that would have corrected the nose-down attitude.
To get out of it, the pilots used an old aviator technique called the “roller coaster” — letting the yoke go to relieve the forces on the tail, then cranking the wheel, and repeating this many times. This technique has not been in U.S. pilot manuals for decades, and pilots today are not typically trained on it. Using it in the simulator, the U.S. Max crew managed to save the aircraft but lost 8,000 feet of altitude in the process. The Ethiopian Max never rose higher than 8,000 feet, indicating that from that point in the flight, the crew couldn’t have saved it.
A similar experiment, though without the use of the roller-coaster technique, was performed by a European airline pilot and 737 flight instructor who runs a popular You Tube channel called Mentour Pilot about aviator skills.
His simulator session ended as the pilot pulled with all his might on the yoke to try to keep the jet’s nose up, while the co-pilot beside him tried futilely to move the manual wheel.”
May 17, 2019, 8:41 am
#1477
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,185
The manual trim wheels each have a fold-out handle to provide good grip and leverage. The two wheels are installed so that the two handles (Captain's and First Officer's) are mounted 90° of rotation apart. This provides that at least one pilot has good leverage at any point in the wheel's rotation. In a situation where airloads make it difficult to rotate the wheel, this design allows both pilots to work together to turn the wheel with at least one always having good leverage.
Again, the key is not allowing the runaway, regardless of cause, to get you into that full nose-down stabilizer position. This is exactly what the crew of the Lion Air incident flight did and what the Captain of the Lion Air accident flight did through 21 unscheduled MCAS activations. In the simulator trials in the report, the crews started with the stabilizers in the full nose-down position. Those trials showed that, even then, the situation is recoverable. Recover from that situation is difficult and requires a high degree of crew coordinated.
May 17, 2019, 8:55 am
#1479
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Northern California
Programs: I want to be free! Free!
Posts: 3,455
Sorry to diverge from what is an interesting discussion of the core max issues, avionics, and CRM/response protocol, but perhaps to re-raise the more practical question for this forum: what is the latest thinking/info on the state of flights labeled as having a MAX aircraft in the summer timeframe (e.g. 4th of July)? Are folks asking to be moved off of these yet given the state of these re-entering service?
May 17, 2019, 9:58 am
#1480
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,694
May 17, 2019, 10:11 am
#1481
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,419
The MAX represents less than 5% of the narrowbody fleet.
May 17, 2019, 1:35 pm
#1482
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Northern California
Programs: I want to be free! Free!
Posts: 3,455
I principally just don't want to see a cancellation -- 5% isn't much but it is not as if UA has tons of slack capacity, to my knowledge. I'm headed to a holiday destination on a holiday weekend, but then again so is everyone else.
May 17, 2019, 2:20 pm
#1483
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
Additionally, there is probably zero chance the MAXs will be on commercial routes by August. So expect any present MAX flight before then to have a change in aircraft type.
May 17, 2019, 9:06 pm
#1484
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
NYT: right up front:
“Every day, there is new news about something not being disclosed or something was done in error or was not complete,” said Dennis Tajer, a spokesman for the American Airlines pilots union and a 737 pilot
Turns out that the simulators (which were not ready at launch) don't replicate the MCAS stall condition, so no way to train on it....
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/17/b...imulators.html
p.s. the bathrooms on Boeings are the worst, really third world. What a sad joke Boeing has become.
“Every day, there is new news about something not being disclosed or something was done in error or was not complete,” said Dennis Tajer, a spokesman for the American Airlines pilots union and a 737 pilot
Turns out that the simulators (which were not ready at launch) don't replicate the MCAS stall condition, so no way to train on it....
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/17/b...imulators.html
p.s. the bathrooms on Boeings are the worst, really third world. What a sad joke Boeing has become.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; May 17, 2019 at 11:03 pm Reason: OMNI content removed
May 17, 2019, 10:09 pm
#1485
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 am trying to get past my Boeing fanboy, and the MAX fiasco .... well, it's a fiasco
Guess I'm on my way, but really, restrooms
If AA et al didn't ask for them i'm sure Boeing would not have offered them. Thankfully I've only read about them.