B737 MAX – Will You Fly on One ?Back to Forum
I am not sure of what is the case that you are making Swissdiver as I dont believe anyone here is disputing that the B787 is a decent aircraft.
Personally I prefer the A350 and believe that it is a superior product for reasons already mentioned.
Some of your figures above are incorrect and of course the B787 has been available for almost twice as long as the (first delivery September 2011) A350 thus one would expect Boeing to have delivered more of these much cheaper aircraft. A look at actual order data and your argument rather falls away Swissdiver.
Actual Boeing B787 deliveries since September 2011 = 817 to May 19 – not 1440 (source = 4 different Boeing operated web sites) On order 600.
Actual Airbus A350 deliveries 282 (first January 2015) on order = 617 as at May 2019 (source = https://sites.google.com/site/a350xwbproduction/production-list
2019 list price of B787-900 per Boeing official price list = US$292.5 million (top delivered model in range)
2019 list price of A350-1000 per Airbus official price list= US$366.5 million (top delivered model in range)
Given the above significant cost difference it seems inconceivable that the actual cost of the Airbus to customers is at all close to that of the B787
‘Airbus more aggressive in marketing than Boeing’ that also appears rather doubtful given Boeing’s present rather desperate circumstances.23 Jun 2019
These numbers are orders, cwoodward, not deliveries. Orders represent the market, deliveries depend on the manufacturers’ capacity and strategy. So the latter is not a good benchmark, contrarily to the former. And what we see therefore is a weaker demand for the A350 compared to the B787 during each of the past 5 years, when both where flying. This is a rather solid trend.
As for the price, Boeing is currently in despair. This is why WW got probably a very good price for the B737 Max IAG ordered a few days ago. And there is a chance something similar happened in 2012 (batteries issue). But overall, Boeing is a listed company that must be profitable. This is a rather new exercice for Airbus (2013, although the German, French and Spanish states still own 26+%). We also know that states play an active role in promoting both companies. But again, Airbus practices seem to be more problematic (there is a pending Serious Fraud Office investigation for corruption, followed by a French equivalent one). My point? There is little chance we will ever know the real price of an aircraft unless we buy not one, but 50 or more! But the general opinion is that Airbus is more agressive to try to enter markets controlled by Boeing (notably long haul).23 Jun 2019
The numbers that I have quoted are both deliveries and orders of both aircraft.
I have nothing further to contribute to this conversation that I find has become pointless and rather tedious.24 Jun 2019
Indeed – can we get back to the 737 MAX?
I see the latest news is that (rather depressingly) 400 pilots have joined a class action claiming damages from Boeing for monetary loss (wages due to the grounding of the fleet, which I have a little sympathy for) and mental distress (rather less so unless this has pushed any of said pilots into financial difficulty – which seems unlikely to me).
Oh, and that there may be another design flaw which Boeing aren’t going to fix properly:
“The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that the review process [over the MCAS system] was being delayed, at least in part, over the difficulty in operating the plane’s trim wheel system, which is a manual crank that turns a horizontal panel on the aircraft’s tail to change the angle of the plane’s nose.
A spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration said it has been a known issue the agency is examining, but it does not expect it to delay the plane’s return to service.
In emergency situations, like high speeds and steep angles, turning that crank can require a lot of physical force to operate. The Journal reported that regulators are concerned about whether female pilots — who typically tend to have less upper body strength than men — might struggle to turn the crank in emergencies.
The system is also used in an earlier version of jetliner, the 737 NG. The NG is widely used with about 6,300 planes being used by 150 airlines, mostly on short-and-medium range flights.
Neither Boeing nor regulators anticipate design or equipment changes as a result from the review [emphasis added], the Journal said, citing people familiar with the issue.”
Strangely, I mentioned before that strength might be an issue with the yoke override to MCAS. Perhaps all 737 pilots should have upper-body-strength requirements added to their pilot certification routines??
1 user thanked author for this post.25 Jun 2019
This is the best piece that I have read on the 737 Max and Boeing’s culpability in these tragedies.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/times-watchdog/the-inside-story-of-mcas-how-boeings-737-max-system-gained-power-and-lost-safeguards/26 Jun 2019
The FAA says it has identified a new potential risk on Boeing 737 MAX aircraft.
It just goes from bad to worse, more delay in development time and further customer dissatisfaction.26 Jun 2019
I saw on this morning’s business news that likely return to service will be October 2019.
I wonder if the loss to airlines, which presumably will be kicked back to Boeing, will ever be known.28 Jun 2019
Cynic in me says that won’t hide what it actually is!
Can’t think what the normally efficient FR PR team are thinking about….
it’s now been reported in the wider media and if you consider that
1) Ryanair only fly 737’s and 2) a lay traveller wouldn’t be able to differentiate between an A320 & Boeing 737 then for me it’s a bit of a risk , I don’t get their long term logic, never mind the potentially negative press in the short term .
However Ryanair aren’t the only ones , at the Paris airshow, IAG referred to “200 B737 aircraft” that would to join its fleet, which it described as “a mix of 737-8 and 737-10 aircraft”.15 Jul 2019
This Wall Street Journal article I believe well articulates the views of many industry experts.
My own thought is that that the plane is very unlikely to ever be re-certified without structural changes.
QUOTE FROM WALL STREET JOURNAL
WSJ: By Andy Pasztor , Alison Sider and Andrew Tangel (Updated July 14, 2019 12:07 pm ET )
Fixing the Boeing Co. BA 1.76% 737 MAX’s flight-control software and completing other steps to start carrying passengers is likely to stretch into 2020, an increasing number of government and industry officials say, even as the company strives to get its jet back into service this year.The situation remains fluid, no firm timeline has been established and Boeing still has to satisfy U.S. regulators that it has answered all outstanding safety questions. But under the latest scenario, the global MAX fleet is now anticipated to return to the air in January 2020, a full 12 months after the plane maker proposed its initial replacement of software eventually implicated in a pair of fatal crashes, according to some Federal Aviation Administration officials and pilot-union leaders.
The process of developing and certifying revised software and pilot-training changes has been repeatedly delayed, with airlines scrambling to cope with slips month after month. Boeing executives, FAA engineers and international aviation regulators have steadily expanded their safety analyses to cover a growing list of issues spanning everything from emergency recovery procedures to potentially suspect electronic components. Some of those assessments are further complicated because they cover earlier 737 models.
Already, carriers have given up on flying their MAX planes until late this year. American Airlines Group Inc. said Sunday that it would keep the plane off its schedules through Nov. 2, two months beyond its previous target of an early September return. It’s the fifth time American has pushed off MAX flying since it first had to call off flights when regulators grounded the plane in March. United Airlines Holdings Inc. announced a similar move on Friday, but FAA officials and others tracking the issue said there’s no assurance the November date will hold.Airlines didn’t expect to be in this position at this point in the year, with no end to the grounding in sight. When American first decided to scrub MAX flights for much of the summer, executives said they were doing it to save customers from last minute cancellations but were still “highly confident” the plane would return sooner.
How Boeing’s 737 MAX Troubles Ripple Through the Industry
Instead, they have had to cope without their MAX jets through what has proven an exceptionally busy summer. The Transportation Security Administration has notched eight of the 10 busiest days in its history since May.Senior Boeing executives and some FAA leaders have told government and industry officials they still expect the agency to be ready to lift the grounding in the fall, which presumably would enable the jets to resume carrying passengers before the end of the year. But based on a history of previous delays and unexpected technical challenges, many of these officials said, at this point sentiment seems to be building that a conservative January timeline is more realistic.The FAA has said it is following a thorough process that has no timetable, with agency leaders vowing to resolve all safety issues before allowing the planes back in the air.
Boeing has said it intends to “provide the FAA and the global regulators whatever information they need,” noting that the company won’t offer the 737 MAX “for certification by the FAA until we have satisfied all requirements” for such approval and safe return to service.The specific software fix for MCAS, an automated system that misfired, overpowered pilot commands and strongly pushed down the noses of both of the MAX airliners that crashed, has been essentially completed and awaiting formal FAA approval for months. But in the intervening period, Boeing and safety regulators have been delving into various related issues that cropped up from earlier engineering studies, ground-simulator sessions and flight tests.
During early stages of work on the fix, Boeing and FAA officials disagreed behind the scenes about the extent of changes needed to reduce hazards posed by the MCAS system, according to people familiar with the details. Then in March, just as Boeing was slated to submit a long-awaited proposal with the goal of jump-starting the process, new questions arose about related software systems and emergency checklists, requiring weeks of additional intense evaluation.
The topics included concerns about whether the average pilot has enough physical strength to manually crank a flight-control wheel in extreme emergencies.In late June, Boeing and the FAA disclosed still another flight-control problem on the MAX, involving failure of a microprocessor that meant test pilots couldn’t counteract a potential misfire of MCAS as quickly as required.Since the 737 MAX and its earlier version, called the 737 NG, share the same flight-control computer, fixes related to the microprocessor also apply to NG models, thousands of which remain in service around the world. Boeing also faces the task of convincing the FAA that a software fix, instead of physically replacing the suspect electronic component on all MAX planes, will suffice.
Even assuming new MAX issues don’t crop up, Boeing will need FAA approval for its entire suite of fixes, not just those directly related to MCAS, along with a new round of flight tests, a green light for enhanced training procedures and approval of updated simulator software. In addition, airlines have said it could take them up to 45 days to complete necessary maintenance procedures and other mandatory checks by mechanics to bring MAX aircraft out of storage.From a purely technical standpoint, some senior FAA officials believe they could be in a position to approve Boeing’s proposed fix at some point in October, though working with international regulators on a coordinated return to service could cause a delay, according to one person briefed on the matter. Another wild card, this person added, relates to the potential impact of new FAA leadership if the U.S. Senate confirms Stephen Dickson in the fall as the next agency administrator.Each month the plane’s return is delayed means a new puzzle for airlines: how to build a new schedule that covers as much flying as possible with fewer jets. Some customers who had already planned flights have to be rebooked—sometimes at a less convenient time or with an added stop. Pilots and flight attendants also have to be reshuffled.Now, carriers are nervously eyeing the holiday season, when they will face a crush of travelers whose Thanksgiving and Christmas travel plans leave little wiggle room. United was supposed to have 30 MAXes in the coming months, up from 14. As a result it is cutting 2,900 flights in October—more than twice the number it has had to cull in July. American Airlines had 24 MAXes in its fleet at the time of the grounding—less than 3% of its total. But it was supposed to have 40 by the end of the year.At Southwest Airlines Co. , Alan Kasher, vice president of flight operations, said in a message to employees Friday that the airline is “overstaffed,” with more pilots than it needs to operate a shrunken schedule stemming from the grounding of its 34 MAX jets. Some Southwest pilots have complained of lost earnings from fewer flying opportunities.With the timing of the MAX’s return still murky, the airline is postponing training for some newly hired pilots who were set to start this fall and pushing back training for some current Southwest co-pilots on track to upgrade to captain.
Write to Andy Pasztor at [email protected], Alison Sider at [email protected] and Andrew Tangel at [email protected]
Lake1952 is online now16 Jul 2019
Even renaming this aircraft to a Boeing 737 – 8200 won’t do the trick. This aircraft is doomed. I believe many cancellations will follow if this saga continuous into 2020.
It’s hurting Boeing, shareholders, airlines and their personnel and the trust of customers of these airlines.
Would you board this type without thinking twice? I know I wouldn’t. At least not for a long while.16 Jul 2019