737 max... what now?

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by fdcg27
The MAX was always intended as a stop-gap to give Boeing something fully competitive with the NEO.
Boeing originally planned a brand new plane in this space but time constraints made the MAX a necessity were Boeing to have something to compete with the NEO in operating economics.
Airbus folks predicted correctly that Boeing would have to build a re-engined NG in the near term simply because Airbus could so easily re-engine the A320.
The new single aisle Boeing is under development and I suspect that its unveiling in the next couple of years will be a surprise to all players.
Meanwhile, the MAX will be returned to service and will be delivered in a few thousand examples with the current travails and the two awful fatal crashes relegated to disappearing sights in the rearview.
I don't mean to sound callous, but that's how things work.
After all, it virtually rained airliners up through the early eighties and people still booked flights every day.
An accident involving a MAX with an American or EU carrier might have been another matter, but that didn't happen for various reasons none of which involve dumb luck.

The new plane is Middle of the market, a replacement for 757, not 737.


Boeing is talking more about one ATM but is at work on both programs.
Market realities alone make this obvious, since MOM deliveries will be but a fraction of those of a 737 replacement.
Boeing can get along quite nicely without the MOM program but cannot continue without a more modern 737 class aircraft sometime in the fairly near future.
My hope is that Boeing learned the lessons of the tortured and convoluted development program that finally brought the 787 to market.

 

[AdmdeVilleneuve]

A report published this evening indicates the EASA has a different idea than the FAA of what needs to be demonstrated in flight testing before the MAX returns to service.
https://www.seattletimes.com/busine...ct-demands-for-737-max-return-to-flight/

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by AdmdeVilleneuve
A report published this evening indicates the EASA has a different idea than the FAA of what needs to be demonstrated in flight testing before the MAX returns to service.
https://www.seattletimes.com/busine...ct-demands-for-737-max-return-to-flight/

That is what I said few pages before. This is far more damaging than just MAX.

 

[john_pifer]

Originally Posted by AdmdeVilleneuve
A report published this evening indicates the EASA has a different idea than the FAA of what needs to be demonstrated in flight testing before the MAX returns to service.
https://www.seattletimes.com/busine...ct-demands-for-737-max-return-to-flight/


You're surprised? Of course they do. The Europeans will attempt to oppose and one-up the USA every chance they get. Pure politics.

 

[4WD]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by 4WD
The 190's I have taken are nice little jets … 1-2 upfront … 2-2 in the back with screens ...

190's are pretty nice, but that new Canadair or now A220 is really good. I flew it once from Paris to Zurich and once Zurich to Sarajevo, and it is neat little jet.

 

[PimTac]

I wonder what the overhead bin storage is like?

Flying international I occasionally run into a problem when going from a widebody to a smaller narrow body and find out my carry on either won't fit or there is not enough room. Usually it's the latter.

 

[4WD]

Originally Posted by PimTac
I wonder what the overhead bin storage is like?

Flying international I occasionally run into a problem when going from a widebody to a smaller narrow body and find out my carry on either won't fit or there is not enough room. Usually it's the latter.



There are so many people overseas dragging so many things on aircraft … even on a jam packed A319 … so I finally just starting checking a bag and bringing only a backpack onboard with computer etc …

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by 4WD
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by 4WD
The 190's I have taken are nice little jets … 1-2 upfront … 2-2 in the back with screens ...

190's are pretty nice, but that new Canadair or now A220 is really good. I flew it once from Paris to Zurich and once Zurich to Sarajevo, and it is neat little jet.



Well, I flew numerous times on 190. Photo looks nice, but reality in not that good. I did not find any more or less space on A220. Both are of course much better than anything CRJ space wise, though for whatever reason I always liked CRJ200/700/900/1000

 

[4WD]

Yeah … me too … having worked overseas nonstop since 1991 … flown them all …
But seems one has a 3 row side … biggest loser there
I also prefer the single row in front of 190

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by 4WD
Originally Posted by PimTac
I wonder what the overhead bin storage is like?

Flying international I occasionally run into a problem when going from a widebody to a smaller narrow body and find out my carry on either won't fit or there is not enough room. Usually it's the latter.



There are so many people overseas dragging so many things on aircraft … even on a jam packed A319 … so I finally just starting checking a bag and bringing only a backpack onboard with computer etc …




I am one of those people. .... I usually stay for around a month so the baggage is necessary. But I hear you. I've flown on flights to Manila out of LAX or SFO where each passenger has their two check in bags as boxes. Each box is right up to the max weight. Those have to be heavy flights. On the occasions when the aircraft was a A343, you knew that plane was struggling to get off the runway.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted by AdmdeVilleneuve
A report published this evening indicates the EASA has a different idea than the FAA of what needs to be demonstrated in flight testing before the MAX returns to service.
https://www.seattletimes.com/busine...ct-demands-for-737-max-return-to-flight/


EASA will ultimately go along with whatever the FAA deems to be sufficient.
They really have no choice unless they want the FAA to begin requiring full US certification of everything with an Airbus label.
Neither authority wants to put the other in a position where their competence to certify a type is not accepted.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by fdcg27
Originally Posted by AdmdeVilleneuve
A report published this evening indicates the EASA has a different idea than the FAA of what needs to be demonstrated in flight testing before the MAX returns to service.
https://www.seattletimes.com/busine...ct-demands-for-737-max-return-to-flight/


EASA will ultimately go along with whatever the FAA deems to be sufficient.
They really have no choice unless they want the FAA to begin requiring full US certification of everything with an Airbus label.
Neither authority wants to put the other in a position where their competence to certify a type is not accepted.

I would not bet on that. FAA was leading authority on Airbus too. It was leading authority on pretty much anything that flies. In addition, what about Chinese? Chinese might do something just because, to poke an eye.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by PimTac
Originally Posted by 4WD
Originally Posted by PimTac
I wonder what the overhead bin storage is like?

Flying international I occasionally run into a problem when going from a widebody to a smaller narrow body and find out my carry on either won't fit or there is not enough room. Usually it's the latter.



There are so many people overseas dragging so many things on aircraft … even on a jam packed A319 … so I finally just starting checking a bag and bringing only a backpack onboard with computer etc …




I am one of those people. .... I usually stay for around a month so the baggage is necessary. But I hear you. I've flown on flights to Manila out of LAX or SFO where each passenger has their two check in bags as boxes. Each box is right up to the max weight. Those have to be heavy flights. On the occasions when the aircraft was a A343, you knew that plane was struggling to get off the runway.

That ride must have been loud

 

[PimTac]

That's what noise canceling earbuds are for.

 

[mk378]

If the FAA wants to make another decision based on factors other than flight safety, that's on them.

They were once one of the most reputable government agencies in the world because they strictly stuck to their mission and that mission was in the public interest.

 

[4WD]

Originally Posted by PimTac
That's what noise canceling earbuds are for.


Yes … have some audio technia that fit me better than Bose … and can't trust dB ratings on normal ear plugs … have tried everything from expensive custom moulded to cheap foam … and Mack's (Walmart) work best for me … !

 

[PimTac]

I have tried over the ear headphones but for me personally the earbud style works best. I have Sony.

Those old 343's have a drone that will implant itself in your brain after sitting for many hours. On this route 14-16 hours. I always breathed a sigh of relief when I saw the 744 or the 773.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by PimTac
I have tried over the ear headphones but for me personally the earbud style works best. I have Sony.

Those old 343's have a drone that will implant itself in your brain after sitting for many hours. On this route 14-16 hours. I always breathed a sigh of relief when I saw the 744 or the 773.

Yeah, I am not referring to engines

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by PimTac
I have tried over the ear headphones but for me personally the earbud style works best. I have Sony.

Those old 343's have a drone that will implant itself in your brain after sitting for many hours. On this route 14-16 hours. I always breathed a sigh of relief when I saw the 744 or the 773.

Yeah, I am not referring to engines

You never know when a flight will have the incessantly crying baby. That could happen anytime.

I spent a number of flights across the Pacific on a ancient Northwest Orient 747 on which the overhead bins in the center would shake and rattle from takeoff to landing. After enduring that for about twelve hours that sound stayed in my head for hours. Sleep was not easy to come by. Cotton balls helped then. NC headphones were not cheap at that time.

You would have thought NWO could have tightened the bins up or something. They shook like they were going to fall off any moment.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by fdcg27
Originally Posted by AdmdeVilleneuve
A report published this evening indicates the EASA has a different idea than the FAA of what needs to be demonstrated in flight testing before the MAX returns to service.
https://www.seattletimes.com/busine...ct-demands-for-737-max-return-to-flight/


EASA will ultimately go along with whatever the FAA deems to be sufficient.
They really have no choice unless they want the FAA to begin requiring full US certification of everything with an Airbus label.
Neither authority wants to put the other in a position where their competence to certify a type is not accepted.

I would not bet on that. FAA was leading authority on Airbus too. It was leading authority on pretty much anything that flies. In addition, what about Chinese? Chinese might do something just because, to poke an eye.
f

Considering that this entire episode didn't exactly cover Boeing or the FAA in glory, I don't think there's much doubt that the aircraft will be perfectly fine once the FAA pulls the trigger and releases it for RTS. Boeing is also well aware that another accident involving this development of the type would be fatal not only to the crew and passengers but to Boeing's current narrow body program as well with a lasting legacy for Boeing for years to come.
You make a good point WRT China, but the back-channel whispering will be that there's nothing wrong with the aircraft that a reduction in tariffs wouldn't fix.