PDA

View Full Version : Ryanair “re-branding” their 737 MAX


Farrell
15th Jul 2019, 07:23
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/750x490/58509296_783e_4064_b748_656f05185baa_6495d15bdd2890615905541 79c6bc9a1aa32fed9.jpeg
From 737 MAX
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/750x489/7935f0a7_62e9_4ab3_bccd_2ace892fc8dd_30dad938e7f738751775f68 1754d34d872582989.jpeg
To 737-8200

Andrewgr2
15th Jul 2019, 07:26
At least there should be plenty of time for the paint to dry!

GordonR_Cape
15th Jul 2019, 07:30
I wondered where the -8200 name came from. That's the number of seats according to the press release: https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2014-09-08-Boeing-Launches-737-MAX-200-with-Ryanair

DaveReidUK
15th Jul 2019, 07:49
Yes, it's simply a marketing designation for the not-yet-certficated Max 8 option with the additional emergency exit that allows "200" (actually 197) passengers.

As well as Ryanair, Xiamen and VietJet have placed orders for it.

Uplinker
15th Jul 2019, 08:02
The pitot cover and AoA vane look like a question mark, as in

? 737-8200 (tel:737-8200)

DaveReidUK
15th Jul 2019, 08:02
First example for Ryanair, showing the additional E/E:

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/470x247/737_max_200_emergency_exit_dc845139d9a86caac6e2724be7c03310b df32d66.jpg

www.flickr.com/photos/737max-production/45032111285

GordonR_Cape
15th Jul 2019, 08:10
Yes, it's simply a marketing designation for the not-yet-certficated Max 8 option with the additional emergency exit that allows "200" (actually 197) passengers.

As well as Ryanair, Xiamen and VietJet have placed orders for it.

So what will they call their other ones? B737-8180? B737-9220? B737-10230?

DaveReidUK
15th Jul 2019, 08:26
So what will they call their other ones? B737-8180? B737-9220? B737-10230?

They can call them anything they like - that's the great thing about marketing designations. :O

Though I don't think RYR have any interest in the Max 9 or 10.

ATC Watcher
15th Jul 2019, 09:02
When you think you have to hide the real name of your product to make it " acceptable" to your customers , you are on the wrong side the battle.
And by doing this you take the risk that people that will care about not flying in the Max will be confused and reject the whole 737 whatever its type and avoid your company altogether.
Time will tell of course if next year this issue will still makes the headlines and if, like before , the price of the ticket rather than the aircraft type will be the deciding factor..

WingNut60
15th Jul 2019, 09:52
The pitot cover and AoA vane look like a question mark, as in

? 737-8200 (tel:737-8200)

The additional AOA sensor must be on the other side?

Fly Aiprt
15th Jul 2019, 10:58
And by doing this you take the risk that people that will care about not flying in the Max will be confused and reject the whole 737 whatever its type and avoid your company altogether.

ATC Watcher.
Was about to post along this exact same line.
Some of the flying public might feel they are tricked into climbing aboard a disguised MAX.

Hotel Tango
15th Jul 2019, 11:39
Might be best to call it the MAX8R (Revised)

DeeGee62
15th Jul 2019, 11:47
CC to nervous SLF: "No this one's much safer than the MAX Sir/Madam. You see we have an extra emergency exit!"

DaveReidUK
15th Jul 2019, 11:49
When you think you have to hide the real name of your product to make it "acceptable" to your customers, you are on the wrong side the battle.

The link in post #3 makes it clear that it's a designation dreamed up 5 years ago. The Max hadn't even flown by then.

Less Hair
15th Jul 2019, 11:49
Didn't the type certificate and sim always wear the name 737-8?

fdr
15th Jul 2019, 12:34
could have been worse, -911, or 737- 10-52, - 10-92...

DaveReidUK
15th Jul 2019, 12:35
Didn't the type certificate and sim always wear the name 737-8?

There have been photos posted of sims badged as "737 Max" (presumably configurable for both Max 7 and Max 8).

I guess if you pay for a sim you can paint whatever you want on it. :O

But you are correct in that anything relating to airworthiness, certification, etc will refer to 737-8, 737-9, etc.

Hotel Tango
15th Jul 2019, 14:52
American Airlines may only have a small alteration to make. Having just looked at a photograph I took of one of their 8 Max's last November, the only reference to it being a MAX was a small yellow inscription on the nose gear door which read: 73-8x.

DaveReidUK
15th Jul 2019, 15:27
American Airlines may only have a small alteration to make. Having just looked at a photograph I took of one of their 8 Max's last November, the only reference to it being a MAX was a small yellow inscription on the nose gear door which read: 73-8x.

They might need to spend a few bob at the printer's as well:

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/345x463/aal_safety_cards_5b31edb626e6905856cdd721d64b0e222a18e698.jp g

Hotel Tango
15th Jul 2019, 15:54
They might need to spend a few bob at the printer's as well:

Already spent. Just have to chuck those with reference to the MAX ;)

On Track
15th Jul 2019, 23:40
Rebranding the aircraft is not going to make it airworthy.

Smythe
15th Jul 2019, 23:44
The pitot cover and AoA vane look like a question mark, as in

I guess one would question the AoA vane measurement while sitting there.... shouldnt it be pointing straight up?

Dave Therhino
16th Jul 2019, 02:50
Don't know anything about past or current painting decisions, but 737-8200 as far as I know is the planned formal type certificate model designation for the 200 passenger variant of a -8 fuselage length Max. It's not just a marketing designation. It had a separate certification program. I believe it's not on the TC data sheet because it's not approved yet. Those pictures appear to be at the factory.

Farrell
16th Jul 2019, 03:03
ATC Watcher.
Was about to post along this exact same line.
Some of the flying public might feel they are tricked into climbing aboard a disguised MAX.

Exactly. Which is my primary reason for the original post. Trickery is essentially what this is. Can’t stand behind the brand so stand the brand behind another name.

I’m fully aware of the designator / model number but airlines all over the place have daubed MAX on the sides of their aircraft, including Ryanair as evidenced by the photo. And now, the back pedal to an innocuous name.

Speed of Sound
16th Jul 2019, 10:35
Looks like RYR will have plenty of time to do their ‘rebranding’.

Ryanair to cut flights after 737 Max delays https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49000796

C152_driver
16th Jul 2019, 12:05
Rebrand as the 737-121.5 ?

The AvgasDinosaur
16th Jul 2019, 12:54
Looks like RYR will have plenty of time to do their ‘rebranding’.

Ryanair to cut flights after 737 Max delays https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49000796
is he really going to be short of airframes or trying to put a bit of pressure on Boeing and the airworthiness authorities ?
David

Maninthebar
16th Jul 2019, 13:00
is he really going to be short of airframes or trying to put a bit of pressure on Boeing and the airworthiness authorities ?
David

Yes

But even more he is playing a classic card that a restructure that would be necessary ANYWAY is actually someone else's fault

"We are starting a series of discussions with our airports to determine which of Ryanair's underperforming or loss making bases should suffer these short term cuts and/or closures from November 2019,"

= we need to cut out some facilities and people because they are losing us money

DaveReidUK
16th Jul 2019, 13:28
Don't know anything about past or current painting decisions, but 737-8200 as far as I know is the planned formal type certificate model designation for the 200 passenger variant of a -8 fuselage length Max. It's not just a marketing designation.

The 197-seat variant for Ryanair, etc, will share the same 737-8 designation on the TC, just as there's only a single entry for the -900ER with the passenger capacity varying depending on whether the mid-cabin E/E is deactivated or activated as a Type I/Type II exit.

The (MAX) 8200 designation will only feature in a marketing context.

FlightGlobal: 'New' name for Ryanair 737 Max is not actually new (https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/new-name-for-ryanair-737-max-is-not-actually-new-459666/)

a_q
16th Jul 2019, 16:14
Are they also going to change the Aircraft Data Plate to cover it up completely?

blue up
16th Jul 2019, 17:06
How about 737-7700?

DaveReidUK
16th Jul 2019, 17:08
Are they also going to change the Aircraft Data Plate to cover it up completely?

You haven't been paying attention. The certificated designation makes no mention of "Max".

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/466x234/737_max_8_data_plate_9194abc615481bd06b3f6c6e817507845a6f36b 0.jpg

Hotel Tango
16th Jul 2019, 17:17
but airlines all over the place have daubed MAX on the sides of their aircraft

Agreed that a number have but I happened to notice just now that, for instance, Southwest Airlines (USA) didn't.

Maninthebar
16th Jul 2019, 18:40
So
"We know that you are concerned that there have been two terrible accidents in which everyone died
But we have fixed the problems - you don't need to know the detail which will just confuse you
So we have obscured which aircraft might be affected"

The sweaty, smelly, cheap public will have no option but to use the aircraft because they WILL be on routes they want at prices they desire.

BUT, if ANYTHING happens,even unrelated to MCAS you betcha it will be reported as a MAX problem with (frankly justified) iimplications of a cover up

Union Jack
16th Jul 2019, 19:43
So
"We know that you are concerned that there have been two terrible accidents in which everyone died
But we have fixed the problems - you don't need to know the detail which will just confuse you
So we have obscured which aircraft might be affected"

The sweaty, smelly, cheap public will have no option but to use the aircraft because they WILL be on routes they want at prices they desire.

BUT, if ANYTHING happens,even unrelated to MCAS you betcha it will be reported as a MAX problem with (frankly justified) iimplications of a cover up

What a presumptuous, indeed borderline rude, statement - plenty of people who clearly cannot be so described fly with Ryanair.....

Jack

MemberBerry
16th Jul 2019, 20:28
Personally, as SLF, I don't feel offended. I don't think he meant it literally, but more in the sense of "the unwashed masses":

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/unwashed_masses

And probably it reflects more what the people deciding to hide the MAX branding would think, not him.

Union Jack
16th Jul 2019, 22:10
Personally, as SLF, I don't feel offended. I don't think he meant it literally, but more in the sense of "the unwashed masses":

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/unwashed_masses

And probably it reflects more what the people deciding to hide the MAX branding would think, not him.

Thank you for your very considerate interpretation but, if that's what Maninthebar genuinely meant, he really should have found a better way of expressing both thoughts..

Jack

Smythe
17th Jul 2019, 00:25
737-8 is the model number for cert...

There will likely be an designation to this, if nothing else, to tell the difference between the 737-8 variant allowed to fly, and the current variant. (hence the 737-8200 noticed.
The current cert does not have the 200 variable..

By the time the aircraft and the software configurations allow this ac to fly again...who knows what it will look like.

AerocatS2A
17th Jul 2019, 01:33
What B737-8 variant is allowed to fly?

Maninthebar
17th Jul 2019, 04:23
What a presumptuous, indeed borderline rude, statement - plenty of people who clearly cannot be so described fly with Ryanair.....

Jack

I was, of course, referring to myself

DaveReidUK
17th Jul 2019, 06:25
There will likely be an designation to this, if nothing else, to tell the difference between the 737-8 variant allowed to fly, and the current variant. (hence the 737-8200 noticed).

Could we have a translation into English, please ?

korrol
17th Jul 2019, 08:57
8,200 seats? That could explain why the Max is a bit of handful to fly. :)

Momoe
17th Jul 2019, 12:15
RYA wouldn't make this change without (significant) feedback from customers. Re-branding might fool some people but as the Max can't fly currently it seems pointless. It's up to Boeing to re-sell the Max (and regain customer confidence), however, the longer this drags on, the harder it becomes.
Full transparency required from Boeing, anything less won't go down well, IMO.

Ben_S
17th Jul 2019, 12:19
RYA wouldn't make this change without (significant) feedback from customers.

In the Ryanair world there is no such thing as bad publicity, if they were concerned about that, they would have held off until others had done it first and had the publicity about so it was no longer newsworthy. As it is, they have done it early and got a lot of press coverage out of it.

The AvgasDinosaur
17th Jul 2019, 12:47
RYA wouldn't make this change without (significant) feedback from customers.............
Since when has O’Leary taken any notice what so ever of customer feedback ???
Be lucky
David

OldLurker
17th Jul 2019, 14:14
The whole selling point is – the certification program, such as it was, was based on – the idea that it’s “just another 737”. In due course the 737-dontcallitMAX will be recertified with some software bodge (perhaps I’m being unkind here?) and will be listed in flight schedules for the unsuspecting public as “737” – which it is, isn’t it? Ordinary Joe SLF won’t be able to tell whether he’s going to be on a classic 737 or a disguised MAX, especially as the exact equipment type may vary from day to day or depending on availability.

DaveReidUK
17th Jul 2019, 15:45
RYA wouldn't make this change without (significant) feedback from customers.

I think Ryanair is perfectly capable of doing maths, and of figuring that 197 into 189 doesn't go. :ugh:

Chris2303
17th Jul 2019, 20:02
Since when has O’Leary taken any notice what so ever of customer feedback ???
Be lucky
David

I can just imagine him standing on the edge of the smoking hole saying "pilot error"

Buswinker
17th Jul 2019, 21:16
What B737-8 variant is allowed to fly?

is this a trick question?

AerocatS2A
18th Jul 2019, 01:24
is this a trick question?

It’s a question for Smythe. He alludes to the “B737-8 variant allowed to fly and the current variant”. I was just wondering what the B737-8 variant is that’s allowed to fly,

MemberBerry
18th Jul 2019, 01:32
The variant allowed to fly will be the one that the regulators agree it's airworthy, if any. The one with the required software and/or hardware changes.

The current variant, without any software and/or hardware updates, is not allowed to fly. At least not commercially.