SLF avoid travel on 737 max
Personally, I'd rather wait a couple of years to see how the Max goes. I'd happily fly any other Boeing plane, but I can wait a few years before I entrust my life to it.
All the reasons given to fly it when it enters service are logical just as they were before each of those two planes crashed. I'm happy to wait for a bit of real world evidence.
All the reasons given to fly it when it enters service are logical just as they were before each of those two planes crashed. I'm happy to wait for a bit of real world evidence.
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tana
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A man moves into an apartment next to you. You see him load a dead body into his trunk. He asks you to help him move a large box in the basement. And it's 3am. Makes you wonder what Mrs.Morrison from the third floor could do with her knitting kit. Merry Christmas to you, too!
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Siargao Island
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Getting back to the OP's original questions, or some of them, Wikipedia is a pretty good source of identifying, not just the current and forthcoming types they operate but also, their codeshare partners, then a further Wikipedia search identifies the types that codeshare partner operates etc.
Paxing All Over The World
EASA are going to hold Boeing 'to the fire' in this but the company will survive.
How the Max makes it through is still a case of wait and see. But, I think, it will survive.
How the Max makes it through is still a case of wait and see. But, I think, it will survive.
Son of Slot
Super Senior Moderator
Super Senior Moderator
This may be one of the most important topics in aviation history - so please reply thoughtfully. From Day 1, PPRuNe has had the rule, 'Play the Ball - not the Player'.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
avoid default 737 max travel
All genuine responses have been “on message”, particularly those from James 1077, Jetman346, wheels down, Luke SkyToddler, Stickshift3000, Gliderman2 and Preemo.
My post was never intended to develop into accusations of anti Boeing propaganda, but to explore the alternatives to default 737 max travel. It is more than the company deserves, but any current anti 737 max sentiment is suppressed in this thread, and for the moment, I travel on 787, 777 and other 737 models without special concern.
I also continue to carefully drive my diligently maintained car in accordance with the law (allowing adequate time for traffic etc), trust my chosen family doctor (to a degree) and keep a good eye on those airlines with multiple serious incidents and accidents. In a life before retirement from airlines, free worldwide travel was offered by a flag carrier. I did not take up the offer due their poor safety history. Airlines that unsafely fly over warlike missile equipped areas, due to laziness, lack of research or for fuel savings are permanently on my no-fly list. So are those with ultra cheap fares that, IMHO, cannot support quality staff and robust safety.
I have considered the issue of renaming MCAS equipped 737 to avoid ready recognition by pax. While I am confident that I can personally see through such smokescreens, most SLF will not be able to do so. Without publicity, of those who last minute realise their mistake, there will only be the occasional failure to board.
Geoge Glass, rude stuff, 27/09 and Dark Knight 19 will have a lot of humble pie to consume if there is another 737 max flight control system related accident. Any surviving passengers and the relatives of the deceased will be possibly a little more upset?
On the other hand, those who inconveniently make the hard decision to avoid 737 max will sit down to Christmas dinner with their loved ones, year after year. Their only regret will be that a handful of 737 pilots had to retire early and perhaps drive a taxi at 2 am in pouring rain with drunk and vomiting passengers. I suggest that some those 737 max advocates face humiliation and financial loss. Otherwise why would they jump into propaganda mode on a thread that just seeks reasonable personal solutions. They are not simple solution seekers.
My post was never intended to develop into accusations of anti Boeing propaganda, but to explore the alternatives to default 737 max travel. It is more than the company deserves, but any current anti 737 max sentiment is suppressed in this thread, and for the moment, I travel on 787, 777 and other 737 models without special concern.
I also continue to carefully drive my diligently maintained car in accordance with the law (allowing adequate time for traffic etc), trust my chosen family doctor (to a degree) and keep a good eye on those airlines with multiple serious incidents and accidents. In a life before retirement from airlines, free worldwide travel was offered by a flag carrier. I did not take up the offer due their poor safety history. Airlines that unsafely fly over warlike missile equipped areas, due to laziness, lack of research or for fuel savings are permanently on my no-fly list. So are those with ultra cheap fares that, IMHO, cannot support quality staff and robust safety.
I have considered the issue of renaming MCAS equipped 737 to avoid ready recognition by pax. While I am confident that I can personally see through such smokescreens, most SLF will not be able to do so. Without publicity, of those who last minute realise their mistake, there will only be the occasional failure to board.
Geoge Glass, rude stuff, 27/09 and Dark Knight 19 will have a lot of humble pie to consume if there is another 737 max flight control system related accident. Any surviving passengers and the relatives of the deceased will be possibly a little more upset?
On the other hand, those who inconveniently make the hard decision to avoid 737 max will sit down to Christmas dinner with their loved ones, year after year. Their only regret will be that a handful of 737 pilots had to retire early and perhaps drive a taxi at 2 am in pouring rain with drunk and vomiting passengers. I suggest that some those 737 max advocates face humiliation and financial loss. Otherwise why would they jump into propaganda mode on a thread that just seeks reasonable personal solutions. They are not simple solution seekers.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
auto flight , what is driving your anxiety ? Do you fully understand what happened in those accidents ? My informed position is based on almost 40 years in aviation and than 15,000 hours flying Boeing aircraft.
Son of Slot
Super Senior Moderator
Super Senior Moderator
autoflight
No.
Both this thread and a previous one in the forum, have allowed plangent criticism and that will continue to be allowed. What is not allowed, is wild speculation, unfounded criticism and personal attacks on others posting.
any current anti 737 max sentiment is suppressed in this thread
Both this thread and a previous one in the forum, have allowed plangent criticism and that will continue to be allowed. What is not allowed, is wild speculation, unfounded criticism and personal attacks on others posting.
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tana
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Second, max sentiment is NOT suppressed here, I assure you. I've only been here for a few a months and I honestly don't know what kind of people local admins are. But I've just come from a.nother forum where I got a 3-month ban for saying that Airbus sells more planes than Boeing. Admins there REALLY suppress anything that even hints that their beloved Boeing isn't the "greatest planemaker in the world". THAT's bad. And I don't really see this here. Yet?
Third, and maybe foremost, OF COURSE there are people here who love Boeing. And OF COURSE you got some knee-jerk reaction. Some of the people here flew or fly Boeing. Some of them LOVE the company. For some what's happening to it is a personal tragedy. Of course they are angry at you for saying you won't fly "the Max". Just calm down and fly Airbus.
PS How, in the name of everything that's holy, did you manage to only write 300 posts in TWENTY years!?
autoflight
I think you miss the point I made.
While no one can say any aircraft will not crash for any particular reason, however with the changes to the 737 Max system and the training that will most definitely be mandated there are other factors that are significantly more likley to cause an accident on Air Transport jet aircaft in the future than a control problem on a 737 Max.
I think you miss the point I made.
While no one can say any aircraft will not crash for any particular reason, however with the changes to the 737 Max system and the training that will most definitely be mandated there are other factors that are significantly more likley to cause an accident on Air Transport jet aircaft in the future than a control problem on a 737 Max.
Last edited by 27/09; 21st Dec 2019 at 08:02.
The MAX name is tainted, and I doubt any UK/Euro airline will ever use that tag again, if and when at the RTS of the aircraft.
The OP states he does not wish to fly in a MAX and lives in OZ - A fair few OZ, Pacific and Asian airlines have or (edit) will have the aircraft so he if wants to avoid booking on one then he needs to research his booking and airline options.
TUI UK have removed any reference in their online holiday and flight brochures (and also the Our Fleet section) that they have the MAX...
TUI's CEO has already said to the Press they are mooting a name change.
TUI's social media erupted in March after the 2nd crash with 1000's of it's UK customers demanding to cancel/amend their Hols, and vociferous demands that TUI voluntarily grounded the plane.
Customers are now ''informed'' so don't be fooled that airlines will not have an issue when they do reintroduce their fleets.
This is not 1979, we had no social media at the time of the DC-10 groundings 40 years ago, and the fleet then re-entered venerable service.
The MAX debacle coverage in the Press and SM now means the public are hearing in real-time the trials and tribulations within Boeing, the aviation and regulatory authorities, and also what is playing out in the Senate and in the Courts.
Ryanair CEO MOL has already crassly stated 'no refunds' if you are booked on a MAX with them.
FR have now painted out the word ''MAX'' off the noses of their new aircraft sitting at Boeing awaiting delivery.
FR have ordered a unique version known as the 737 MAX 8 -200.
Their planes now have just Boeing 737 8-200 on their noses - Pax will only know from the differing seat map when booking, but not all pax pay to reserve a seat.
I personally (in the UK) would not go on a MAX in a hurry, I am only likely ever to see one if I booked a TUI package holiday (or take a Ryanair flight and that is not likely lol)
I am not in the market to book West jet, AC or Norwegian for my travel plans (all of whom have the type)
BA Comair I do use, and they have a sole example for now.
Maybe not since 1952 with de Havilland DH 106 Comet 1 have we seen such a major aviation story with design flaws.
The Comet 1 was in airline service for just under two years before grounding, the same as the MAX.
In that time it killed 110 souls, compared with the MAX's 346.
Much smaller aircraft but the seriousness of design flaws does not outweigh that.
The Comet 1 was redesigned, reappearing 4 years later as the Comet 4.
MCAS seems so deeply rooted in the 737 MAX's flight control systems is that why Boeing still cannot fathom out a safe fix to ensure the aircraft's stability in all flight envelopes.
Also seem that no MCAS = no type approval using the 1967 737-100/200 type approval Grandfather rights.
To now re-design the air frame to remove the need for MCAS will surely mean a new type approval needed.
The MAX production is now to be halted after almost a year's grounding so we remain to see how the MAX's future will play out.
The OP states he does not wish to fly in a MAX and lives in OZ - A fair few OZ, Pacific and Asian airlines have or (edit) will have the aircraft so he if wants to avoid booking on one then he needs to research his booking and airline options.
TUI UK have removed any reference in their online holiday and flight brochures (and also the Our Fleet section) that they have the MAX...
TUI's CEO has already said to the Press they are mooting a name change.
TUI's social media erupted in March after the 2nd crash with 1000's of it's UK customers demanding to cancel/amend their Hols, and vociferous demands that TUI voluntarily grounded the plane.
Customers are now ''informed'' so don't be fooled that airlines will not have an issue when they do reintroduce their fleets.
This is not 1979, we had no social media at the time of the DC-10 groundings 40 years ago, and the fleet then re-entered venerable service.
The MAX debacle coverage in the Press and SM now means the public are hearing in real-time the trials and tribulations within Boeing, the aviation and regulatory authorities, and also what is playing out in the Senate and in the Courts.
Ryanair CEO MOL has already crassly stated 'no refunds' if you are booked on a MAX with them.
FR have now painted out the word ''MAX'' off the noses of their new aircraft sitting at Boeing awaiting delivery.
FR have ordered a unique version known as the 737 MAX 8 -200.
Their planes now have just Boeing 737 8-200 on their noses - Pax will only know from the differing seat map when booking, but not all pax pay to reserve a seat.
I personally (in the UK) would not go on a MAX in a hurry, I am only likely ever to see one if I booked a TUI package holiday (or take a Ryanair flight and that is not likely lol)
I am not in the market to book West jet, AC or Norwegian for my travel plans (all of whom have the type)
BA Comair I do use, and they have a sole example for now.
Maybe not since 1952 with de Havilland DH 106 Comet 1 have we seen such a major aviation story with design flaws.
The Comet 1 was in airline service for just under two years before grounding, the same as the MAX.
In that time it killed 110 souls, compared with the MAX's 346.
Much smaller aircraft but the seriousness of design flaws does not outweigh that.
The Comet 1 was redesigned, reappearing 4 years later as the Comet 4.
MCAS seems so deeply rooted in the 737 MAX's flight control systems is that why Boeing still cannot fathom out a safe fix to ensure the aircraft's stability in all flight envelopes.
Also seem that no MCAS = no type approval using the 1967 737-100/200 type approval Grandfather rights.
To now re-design the air frame to remove the need for MCAS will surely mean a new type approval needed.
The MAX production is now to be halted after almost a year's grounding so we remain to see how the MAX's future will play out.
Last edited by rog747; 21st Dec 2019 at 09:40.
Um, which Oz airlines have the max?!
Did Virgin cancel their orders or just defer them?
Both Virgin and Qantas need to order for narrow body fleet renewal soon. The whole industry is stuck with the same conundrum: Max with its reputation and legacy issues or A320 Neo with order delays and very expensive training.
Both Virgin and Qantas need to order for narrow body fleet renewal soon. The whole industry is stuck with the same conundrum: Max with its reputation and legacy issues or A320 Neo with order delays and very expensive training.
Australian regulators will want their own approval if and when the MAX is said to be safe to RTS.
What's your source for the statement that the Max 10 won't ?