737 MAX 8 in January

[epixx]

We have a minor schedule and equipment change for a flight in early January on AA.  The plane is now scheduled to be the 737 MAX 8 (rather than 737 as originally planned).  Is it likely that this plane will be flying in early January?  Is there any reason to request a different flight?  These flights are cruise line flights, so we have not paid for them yet and can change them without incurring a fee. However, the times and prices are good, so unless there is a significant reason to change we would prefer to keep them.

[Keith1010]

You would think that if AA has chosen to change out the equipment to the 737 Max 8 that they are relatively confident that the use of the plane will be approved by then.

 

This is the latest I've seen from the FAA which doesn't say a lot.

 

https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=93206

 

This is an article from Bloomberg that was in the Washington Post.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/when-will-boeing-737-max-fly-again-and-more-questions/2019/08/13/b978bdd6-bdfe-11e9-a8b0-7ed8a0d5dc5d_story.html

 

I am not sure where you are flying from.  My only concern might be that the flight is canceled (hopefully not).  Are you flying in the day of the cruise which I would not advise under any circumstances regardless of aircraft, time of year, etc. or do you arriving one or more days ahead of schedule.

 

It's anyones guess if the aircraft is approved and what happens if they have to change out the aircraft but hopefully if its a changeout it would be done far in advance that another aircraft can be put in its place.

 

Keith

[CruiserBruce]

The airlines have canceled their 737 Max flights out to about Dec 1. That is as far as they can see right now. So, for now, you show as flying on a 737 Max.

 

If they don't get get the 737 Max flight by your flight, that doesn't mean your flight is automatically canceled and you don't get to your cruise. They could substitute another plane. They could put you on another flight. They could make other arrangements. 

 

You could also book your own flights separately from the cruise line, on a non- Max airplane,  and cancel your cruise line airfares,  for piece of mind.

[em-sk]

13 hours ago, epixx said:

We have a minor schedule and equipment change for a flight in early January on AA.  The plane is now scheduled to be the 737 MAX 8 (rather than 737 as originally planned).  Is it likely that this plane will be flying in early January?  Is there any reason to request a different flight?  These flights are cruise line flights, so we have not paid for them yet and can change them without incurring a fee. However, the times and prices are good, so unless there is a significant reason to change we would prefer to keep them.

 

It is very hard to tell.  I don't think the airlines knows when the aircraft will return to service and what conditions will be put in place.  You flight may very well be substituted by a different aircraft type or cancelled.  If they do cancel the flight, then free of charge they will move you to another flight.  If you don't like the routing the chose just tell them what your preferences are and they will move to something more appropriate at no cost.  

 

Some of the questions marks on the return to service is will the FAA, Transport Canada and the European Authorities act together or will each certify the aircraft on its own timeline.  You may very well see the case where American can begin flying the aircraft but has to keep it off routes that go into Canadian airspace.  It is also unclear what training requirements will be required.  It may take time to retrain pilots etc.  There are lots of things that no one knows just now.

 

What we do know is the airlines have been flexible and good at accommodating passangers onto other flights.   

[jollyjones]

I have the opposite experience - one of my AA flights in early Jan (MIA-BGI) has just been changed from a MAX 8 to a 320 - I took that to be a sign that AA aren't confident that they'll have the MAX 8s back in service by then.

 

I don't think I'd worry too much about flying a MAX 8 anyway - by the time they're back in service they'll be the most checked plane around, could possibly be safer than an old 737!

[CruiserBruce]

4 hours ago, jollyjones said:

I have the opposite experience - one of my AA flights in early Jan (MIA-BGI) has just been changed from a MAX 8 to a 320 - I took that to be a sign that AA aren't confident that they'll have the MAX 8s back in service by then.

 

 

Maybe,  maybe not. Planes get changed fairly often. My recent flight from SFO--IAD got changed from a 737-9 (not a Max) to a 777, international version, with lie flat seats in the front. Very nice.

[jollyjones]

I would have thought changes between wide body and narrow body are related to aircraft deployment needs and load factor - I've had 772s changed to 738s not infrequently and the planes still weren't full.

The daily AA BDA-MIA flight which was supposed to change to MAX 8s a couple of months ago is now served with either 738s or 319s - I'm guessing varying with load levels.

But there's not so much difference between a MAX 8 and a 320 so who knows?

[chipmaster]

It will be interesting to see what happens with the Max, it is the ultimate FUBAR for Boeing beyond anything they imagined and spun totally out of their control. 

 

FAA will own certification in the US, but internationally the FAA has lost all credibility with this and all the international bodies will be looking to exercise their leadership.

 

As AA is an American airline they can and likely could fly based on FAA ruling but if the international put in place must more restrictions like extensive simulator training it will put AA in a pickle.      So if the MAX continues to be grounded, a likelhood AA would have to either swap in or cancel flights as airplanes don't just appear.  

[em-sk]

5 hours ago, chipmaster said:

It will be interesting to see what happens with the Max, it is the ultimate FUBAR for Boeing beyond anything they imagined and spun totally out of their control. 

 

FAA will own certification in the US, but internationally the FAA has lost all credibility with this and all the international bodies will be looking to exercise their leadership.

 

As AA is an American airline they can and likely could fly based on FAA ruling but if the international put in place must more restrictions like extensive simulator training it will put AA in a pickle.      So if the MAX continues to be grounded, a likelhood AA would have to either swap in or cancel flights as airplanes don't just appear.  

 

The Canadians and Europeans acted independently in grounding the aircraft.  In the Canadian case it was once they they had access to the satellite tracking data on the Ethiopia flight and it showed  the same pattern as the earlier crash they concluded there was a systematic problem.   The FAA only made their decision once the aircraft was grounded in the rest of the world.

 

The Canadian authorities have suggested they are looking at requiring training in a MAX simulator for MAX pilots.  The AA pilots union has also come out saying training on a MAX simulator should be required.   In contrast the FAA is saying that is not needed.  

 

If the FAA stands alone in lifting its ban it will have zero credibility.  

 

[TruckerDave]

On 9/7/2019 at 12:02 PM, CruiserBruce said:

Maybe,  maybe not. Planes get changed fairly often. My recent flight from SFO--IAD got changed from a 737-9 (not a Max) to a 777, international version, with lie flat seats in the front. Very nice.

That's a major win.  They must have needed that bird on the east coast for some reason and looks like you hit the lottery. 😬

[TruckerDave]

On 9/8/2019 at 7:22 AM, jollyjones said:

- I've had 772s changed to 738s not infrequently and the planes still weren't full.

 

That had to have been painful. Especially for the folks who might have lost their seats up front. 😳

[CruiserBruce]

3 minutes ago, TruckerDave said:

That's a major win.  They must have needed that bird on the east coast for some reason and looks like you hit the lottery. 😬

Looking into it...they run the 772 on that route pretty regularly now. Not when I originally booked the flight. But it was UA's new Polaris hard product. Liked it a lot.

[TruckerDave]

2 minutes ago, CruiserBruce said:

Looking into it...they run the 772 on that route pretty regularly now. Not when I originally booked the flight. But it was UA's new Polaris hard product. Liked it a lot.

Nice.  I wonder if they have reduced the daily trips from between SFO-IAD and consolidated to larger aircraft to try and lessen the effects of the runway work at SFO. 

[CruiserBruce]

1 hour ago, TruckerDave said:

Nice.  I wonder if they have reduced the daily trips from between SFO-IAD and consolidated to larger aircraft to try and lessen the effects of the runway work at SFO. 

Our flight was before the work at SFO. No impact there.

 

Returned yesterday BOS-SFO. Our flight was 15 minutes early.

[TruckerDave]

10 minutes ago, CruiserBruce said:

Our flight was before the work at SFO. No impact there.

 

Returned yesterday BOS-SFO. Our flight was 15 minutes early.

Good deal.  I torture myself sometimes reading the SFGate online and the articles (and especially the reader comments) make it sound like the end of the world at SFO right now. 🙄

[Slidell_Cruiser]

On 9/6/2019 at 10:58 AM, epixx said:

We have a minor schedule and equipment change for a flight in early January on AA.  The plane is now scheduled to be the 737 MAX 8 (rather than 737 as originally planned).  Is it likely that this plane will be flying in early January?  Is there any reason to request a different flight?  These flights are cruise line flights, so we have not paid for them yet and can change them without incurring a fee. However, the times and prices are good, so unless there is a significant reason to change we would prefer to keep them.

The 737 MAX may be the safest place in the sky after re certification.

The pilots will all have simulator training, the MCAS system was an issue, but lack of pilot familiarity was just as critical in the crashes(pray for families effected). 

The old MCAS could be turned off with the autopilot switch on the yoke, but would re engage in 5 seconds automatically, most pilots did not know this, shame on you Boeing. To cut off the MCAS should must also toggle the 2 switches on the center console then trim the plane manually.

All of these issues are being addressed, they should have been addressed in the new plane roll out, but they were not.

I would fly on the 737- AMX, I have over 15,000 flight hours

[chipmaster]

On 9/21/2019 at 5:18 PM, Slidell_Cruiser said:

The 737 MAX may be the safest place in the sky after re certification.

The pilots will all have simulator training, the MCAS system was an issue, but lack of pilot familiarity was just as critical in the crashes(pray for families effected). 

The old MCAS could be turned off with the autopilot switch on the yoke, but would re engage in 5 seconds automatically, most pilots did not know this, shame on you Boeing. To cut off the MCAS should must also toggle the 2 switches on the center console then trim the plane manually.

All of these issues are being addressed, they should have been addressed in the new plane roll out, but they were not.

I would fly on the 737- AMX, I have over 15,000 flight hours

 

The question isn't how many hours you have, but your pilot has and what he does, LOL

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html

[rkacruiser]

4 hours ago, chipmaster said:

 

The question isn't how many hours you have, but your pilot has and what he does, LOL

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html

 

And, how well trained your pilot is.  And, if the FAA employees who are to certify the plane truly know what they are doing and are properly trained for the task.

[chipmaster]

7 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

And, how well trained your pilot is.  And, if the FAA employees who are to certify the plane truly know what they are doing and are properly trained for the task.

 

Indeed the whole thing is a FUBAR for many and a tragedy for those on those two flights, but even with all of BA / FAA failings and also the many pressures and business driven direction from all, in the end the pilots were ill prepared and poorly trained and then made some most untimely decisions that in the end can't blame them either for their errors.    

 

If the report is accurate all they did need to do is identify and flip to center switches in the first 30" or so.  I know sounds so easy reading from the comfort of my couch, but again that is why they spent thousand of hours in the cockpit and simulators and in principle trained by their companies who had their customers/lives as a value.   

[waterbug123]

I read an interesting article recently (sorry, don't have the link) discussing budget airlines and pilot training with regard to the max aircraft.  No one can ever say for sure, but the gist of it was that the majority of pilots here on mainline aircraft here in the US especially, come to the airlines after serving as military pilots, and that the training and experience received as the result of that military training probably better prepares them for the type of situation experienced in the Max incidents than learning to fly at a for-profit flight school and then jumping right into the cockpit of a plane that largely flies on autopilot, especially if for a budget airline where additional training and simulator time may be far more limited.

[chipmaster]

8 hours ago, waterbug123 said:

I read an interesting article recently (sorry, don't have the link) discussing budget airlines and pilot training with regard to the max aircraft.  No one can ever say for sure, but the gist of it was that the majority of pilots here on mainline aircraft here in the US especially, come to the airlines after serving as military pilots, and that the training and experience received as the result of that military training probably better prepares them for the type of situation experienced in the Max incidents than learning to fly at a for-profit flight school and then jumping right into the cockpit of a plane that largely flies on autopilot, especially if for a budget airline where additional training and simulator time may be far more limited.

 

The expanded NYT article weaves the history of the budget overseas.   I can tell you that China still sends kids barely out of high school to a local flight school near me.  They are dropped into cockpits and driven to fly some crazy hours/schedules by US based flight schools who exploit hem to the max.   

 

In the NYT article BA was well aware of these short cuts and at least in China invested considerable effort of their own to up the quality level there.  Much is lost about the good / effort that FAA / BA does try and do.

 

The net is in the end BA philosophy of final fail safe safety falls back to the pilot skills, and in the end if you fly a lot you see a wide variety of shapes/ages of pilots in the left and right seat, I highly doubt they have the same skill, strength, response time, critical thinking and most important the soft adjective "airmanship"

 

"The board wants Boeing and the FAA to reassess—and potentially jettison—what senior investigators portrayed as overly optimistic assumptions about the speed and effectiveness of cockpit-crew reactions to complex automation failures."

 

"Boeing failed to initially test—and the FAA never asked to see demonstrated—the full range of alerts, warnings and related system failures that could result from an MCAS misfire. Pilots of the ill-fated jets were overwhelmed by multiple alerts caused by a single malfunctioning sensor, leading to what safety experts call task saturation."

Edited September 26, 2019 by chipmaster

[FlyerTalker]

Chipmaster - Just to be clear, you are referring to Boeing by the symbol "BA" (which is their stock ticket symbol).  You are not referring to British Airways, which has the similar IATA symbol of "BA".

[rkacruiser]

1 hour ago, FlyerTalker said:

Chipmaster - Just to be clear, you are referring to Boeing by the symbol "BA" (which is their stock ticket symbol).  You are not referring to British Airways, which has the similar IATA symbol of "BA".

 

Thanks for that clarification because I was wondering what British Airways had to do with this issue.  I had not considered that possibility that "BA" being used was Boeing.  

[FlyerTalker]

1 hour ago, rkacruiser said:

 

Thanks for that clarification because I was wondering what British Airways had to do with this issue.  I had not considered that possibility that "BA" being used was Boeing.  

 

I am making that supposition, as I cannot speak for Chipmaster.  But it fits.

[chipmaster]

On 9/26/2019 at 2:17 PM, rkacruiser said:

 

Thanks for that clarification because I was wondering what British Airways had to do with this issue.  I had not considered that possibility that "BA" being used was Boeing.  

 

Yea, I'm stuck on stock world BA=Boeing, in flytalker land BA=British Airways, better I speak in full-length words, LOL