737 max... what now?

Status
Not open for further replies.
E365 said:
A 757 “MAX” would be really cool to see, but I’d think it would only make sense to do a 757-300 “MAX” (new engines, maybe a new wing design, etc.).

One problem is a 757-200 doesn’t hold many more passengers than a 737-900 (about 20 more passenger) but the 757 is massively more heavy - about 32,000 lbs extra. So it cost more to produce and will never be as efficient as a 737, even with new engines.

757-200 still has a big range advantage though.

The numbers on a 757-300 would maybe start to make more sense with another 30-40 passenger on board.
Click to expand...

Aren't they still thinking about a replacement between a 757 and 767 size?
 
Astro14 said:
What do you think Boeing, the FAA, NASA and others have been doing for the past 18 months? This is the longest grounding of a commercial aircraft type, ever.

Until the FAA approved the airplane for flight, and subsequently approved the airlines' training programs, airlines couldn't train on it. With yesterday's news, the training begins, and it begins with the instructors. Then the pilots.

The wiring and software modifications have been done on our airplanes, not certain about the rest of the airplanes. The modifications entail 1,000 man hours of work. This ain't cheap, either. The modified airplanes have to be inspected by the FAA, then test-flown, multiple times, to ensure proper systems performance, before being released to passenger service.

As far as reputation? With several thousand in service, the 737 is one of the safest airplanes ever built. I'm not a Max fan, but remember that the airplane experienced problems in the hands of inept crews. Crews that couldn't follow procedures or figure out what was wrong with it.

Word on the street is that SWA had a couple of MCAS events on their Max aircraft before it was grounded. They disconnected the autopilot and trim and flew the airplane. You never heard about it.

Finally, folks say that they're willing to pay the extra $5 for more pilot training. Booking history suggests that they're not, and will book a $5 cheaper ticket without regard to pilot training, pilot proficiency, airline maintenance history, or any other intangible. Folks assume all airlines are the same, when clearly, they are not.
Click to expand...

Hi Astro 14.
A question if i may regarding your last statement 'Folks assume all airlines are the same, when clearly they are not'.

As a layman i do indeed assume that any airline flying out of the UK has proficient crews and the aircraft are maintained to a high standard. Is this a very naive thing to assume?

I would be reluctant to fly internally in russia or africa. Again is this naive?

Thanks.
 
I saves a LOT of fuel, the major expense in airflight.

As long as the pilots are trained and they ALL have redundant sensors that are maintained, it will be a good plane.

Rod
 
Yes, but you're betting your life it has good pilots and sensors... I don't fly often so can afford to wait and see And if I fly it's the long haul well beyong the 737 max range...
 
edyvw said:
Airlines as a whole or accountants?
Click to expand...


It depends on the airline itself. For Alaska they said that the new aircraft will replace the Airbus aircraft they inherited from the Virgin America merger. That will bring them back to a all Boeing fleet which would mean cost savings.

I don’t know the details for United but it has to make financial sense.
 
PimTac said:
It depends on the airline itself. For Alaska they said that the new aircraft will replace the Airbus aircraft they inherited from the Virgin America merger. That will bring them back to a all Boeing fleet which would mean cost savings.

I don’t know the details for United but it has to make financial sense.
Click to expand...
Well yeah, it is all about $$$$. I am not sure thrill is there.
 
This is a long thread, so apologize if this has been posted previously.

Looks like they've got it solved--AND this explains a bit about the (originally) wonky system.

 
Dave Hess said:
Hopefully they can regain the trust that was lost and it be a ‘safer’ aircraft.
Click to expand...


I am betting it will be a very safe aircraft.

The vast majority of passengers don’t know or don’t care which airline brand or model they are boarding. The only exceptions would be the big heavies like the 747 and A380 and those are getting scarce.
 
Dave Hess said:
Hopefully they can regain the trust that was lost and it be a ‘safer’ aircraft.
Click to expand...
I am afraid this is just one issue. Boeing is not the first nor unfortunately last corporation that got lost in toxic corporate culture. These problems are not possible to overcome by fixing software and doing 4,000+ hrs of flying time. They require deeper reorganization.
 
edyvw said:
I am afraid this is just one issue. Boeing is not the first nor unfortunately last corporation that got lost in toxic corporate culture. These problems are not possible to overcome by fixing software and doing 4,000+ hrs of flying time. They require deeper reorganization.
Click to expand...
The 737 MAX was fixed with confidence IMO after nearly two years of serious engineering, rework and testing. It's probably the most scrutinized and now safe aircraft in the world. But yes, if this kind of situation is not to happen in the future, then corporate mindset and operations need to be changed. Boeing has always been about safety, but because of mis-management, bad engineering (or good engineering over-rode by stupid management) and short-cuts they got bite badly and learned a hard lesson which will probably not be repeated for a very long time, if ever.
 
What concernes me is they tried to put the blame on the pilots, and coached pilots in the simulator to prove it. So have they learned, or are they pretending?
 
Jetronic said:
What concernes me is they tried to put the blame on the pilots, and coached pilots in the simulator to prove it. So have they learned, or are they pretending?
Click to expand...
Well, from everything I've read it seems the pilot training wasn't stellar before this all hit the fan. But was that Boeing's fault or the airline that employed those pilots - or both. Many factors added up in the wrong direction in this whole scenario.

Hard learned mistakes are the ones that are rarely forgotten and ones that are handled to never happen again.
 
ZeeOSix said:
The 737 MAX was fixed with confidence IMO after nearly two years of serious engineering, rework and testing. It's probably the most scrutinized and now safe aircraft in the world. But yes, if this kind of situation is not to happen in the future, then corporate mindset and operations need to be changed. Boeing has always been about safety, but because of mis-management, bad engineering (or good engineering over-rode by stupid management) and short-cuts they got bite badly and learned a hard lesson which will probably not be repeated for a very long time, if ever.
Click to expand...
I supposed to be more clear. In light of MAX, KC46, 787 issues etc. obviously there is a problem there. Initial reaction to MAX issues, they way initial certification was done, point to deeper issues within the company.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

slo town
Our trip to the 108th running of the Indy 500
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Carmudgeon
S
My gen 1 3.5 Ecoboost; An inauspicious Start
2 3
Replies
50
Views
9K
CheezWhiz
C6 Modellsport
2014 Challenger long term review: Absolutely terrible.
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
14K
Enthusiast
supton
F9F vs MiG-15s
Replies
8
Views
3K
Hohn
Jackson_Slugger
A short history of US fighter aircraft — from biplanes to stealth jet
Replies
19
Views
3K
Kira
Back
Top Bottom