patches
Topic Author
Posts: 247
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2000 5:56 am

Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:56 pm

Just a question, Do you think Boeing took the 737 one step too far when they built the Max? They seem to be having problems with the Max design. Thought ?
Last edited by atcsundevil on Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Non descriptive title
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3639
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:59 pm

Nope.

The 737NG had 400 orders at first flight. The 737MAX has 4,000. Its the fastest selling airplane in the history of Boeing and is performing with very high reliability.

The view from Boeing

https://randy.newairplane.com/2018/05/2 ... the-globe/

RELIABILITY

With the 737 MAX, we added new functions and capabilities to make it the best single-aisle airplane in the market. When you put in all that new technology, you’re bound to have some teething in the beginning. But after working those out, the MAX is sitting at 99.4% schedule reliability. That’s the highest reliability of any new airplane entering service, and exactly where we expected to be 12 months into service.

Now, we’re driving toward even better numbers, targeting 99.7% reliability by the end of this year. All indicators show we’re right on track to get there as we work closely with our customers.



Looks pretty good

FUEL EFFICIENCY

One of the biggest promises we made about the MAX was the advantage it would give our customers over Next-Generation 737s. We designed the airplane to be 14 percent more fuel-efficient than today’s most efficient NGs. Our customers are proving that on a daily basis.

flydubai recently said it has seen 15% more efficiency with the MAX, along with less disruption and lower maintenance costs.

Hainan Airlines tells us they’ve seen fuel efficiency increase significantly with the MAXs compared to the NG, especially for flights longer than three hours.

And China Southern says its fuel consumption rate for the MAX has made it the most cost-saving type of any 737 model and the best fit for flights around seven hours.

Before putting the MAX into service, one customer told us they sometimes had to reduce the payload on its 737NG routes covering more than five hours. The MAX has made that a moot point.


People can argue anecdotally about technology and pushing a design too far, but reliability is where proven established designs shine

Range: 737 dominates the longer distance narrowbody routes
Image
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:10 pm

Newbiepilot, clearly the 800-lb gorilla in the room is JT610. IMHO, I don’t see that as “one step too far” as much as I see it as poor design.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
GEUltraFan9XGTF
Posts: 267
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 3:31 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:19 pm

patches wrote:
Just a question, Do you think Boeing took the 737 one step too far when they built the Max? They seem to be having problems with the Max design. Thought ?


What kind of problems? Please cite them. One accident / one case study is not sufficient evidence to form the basis of proof.

The "Max is inherently unstable" is Airbus fanboy propaganda along the lines of, "the 787 is cramped and uncomfortable."
© 2019. All statements are my own. The use of my statements, including by journalists, YouTube vloggers like "DJ's Aviation", etc. without my written consent is strictly prohibited.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 3969
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:22 pm

What problem? some Indonesians crashed there 50th brand new 737 into the ocean?
 
KICT
Posts: 815
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 11:54 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:36 pm

patches wrote:
They seem to be having problems with the Max design.

Yes I agree. Lion Air appears to be having problems with the Max design.
People are saying. Believe me.
 
fsabo
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:38 pm

GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
patches wrote:
Just a question, Do you think Boeing took the 737 one step too far when they built the Max? They seem to be having problems with the Max design. Thought ?


What kind of problems? Please cite them. One accident / one case study is not sufficient evidence to form the basis of proof.

The "Max is inherently unstable" is Airbus fanboy propaganda along the lines of, "the 787 is cramped and uncomfortable."


It is not the accident itself. It is the silent addition of MCAS because the MAX is _less_ stable than the NG.

From a commercial perspective boeing had to do the MAX. They had no other conceivable response to the NEO. They later found out that this adversely effected stability, so they threw in a kludge in the flight control and kept quiet about it. Is that a step too far? IMO, yes.
 
LDRA
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 4:02 pm

*Certification problem*
 
WIederling
Posts: 8495
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 4:04 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
https://randy.newairplane.com/2018/05/22/737-max-a-year-of-serving-the-globe/


Randy Boeing and his PR backoffice isn't really the source for any balanced or even god forbid neutral information.
Try again.

Then it is not sales but (no) crashes that counts.
Whoever caused the Lion Air crash the backstory that unfolds
has got a life on its own and it is not pretty.
Murphy is an optimist
 
SunsetLimited
Posts: 841
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:20 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 4:13 pm

Nope. It was a natural progression, imo, though this will be the final version of the venerable 737.

The MAX is a great aircraft - everyone I know at WN from pilots to F/As love the plane. It’s already proven to be a reliable, fuel efficient workhorse.
Spread hope like fire.
 
Strato2
Posts: 423
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 4:21 pm

GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
Airbus fanboy propaganda along the lines of, "the 787 is cramped and uncomfortable."


Are you disputing the publicised cabin and seat widths of 787? Fake news? :lol:
 
mm320cap
Posts: 299
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 12:35 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 4:27 pm

No. It’s not an “unstable” airplane. I fly it. And the NG. As a pilot, I like the A320 WAYYYY more because it’s more comfortable upfront. But the MAX is extremely efficient, reliable, and predictable. The MCAS issue is, in my opinion, an error of omission, not some inherent flaw in the airplane.

On a side note, I hope that this puts to bed the issue of pilotless aircraft for a good long time. That a faulty sensor can trigger a system that, without human intervention, pitch the aircraft into a crash tells me all I need to know.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1906
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 4:28 pm

patches wrote:
Just a question, Do you think Boeing took the 737 one step too far when they built the Max? They seem to be having problems with the Max design. Thought ?


What makes you say or ask that? The Lion Air crash? Based on the information I've seen, the invalid alpha input to the ADIRU should not have resulted in an accident. Indeed, the aircraft's last prior flight was completed despite issues. But we still need to let the investigation run it's course.

I do think that Boeing made a huge mistake in not disclosing the the MCAS. However, prior 737s already had a Speed Trim System (STS) that added pitch down trim when the aircraft was too slow; the MCAS was apparently a necessary addition to the STS as the Max's engines are larger and heavier, thus affecting the stability of the aircraft at slow speeds.

I expect the 737 Max family to be a big success as it's delivering the fuel burns that were promised.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
MaksFly
Posts: 327
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 5:50 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 4:59 pm

The fact that the mcas got Data from only one AoA sensor and had no redundancy IS an issue.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9378
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 5:09 pm

MaksFly wrote:
The fact that the mcas got Data from only one AoA sensor and had no redundancy IS an issue.

Nobody said there were zero issues. But it points to a certification issue, and a design issue in the sense that redundancy was not concerned, not an issue with taking an old frame and trying to modernize it (“one step too far”). Any modern plane with computer controls will gladly crash itself if there is no system in place to make sure the computer controls deactivate (giving direct control to pilots that is) when the computer detects potentionally faulty information. Boeing, for whatever reason (rushed?), omitted that.
 
User avatar
Jouhou
Posts: 1965
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 5:40 pm

It's still selling like hotcakes. There's strong demand for fuel efficient narrowbodies. It's not like it's a failure.

I think most of us agree though, this should be the last major update to the 737. It's replacement should be a clean sheet design. The inclusion of MCAS is an indication they've reached the limits of the 737s design.
 
Heinkel
Posts: 222
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:15 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 5:49 pm

mm320cap wrote:
On a side note, I hope that this puts to bed the issue of pilotless aircraft for a good long time. That a faulty sensor can trigger a system that, without human intervention, pitch the aircraft into a crash tells me all I need to know.


This event shows, that even with the intervention of two people on the flight deck, the result was fatal. The "human intervention" sometimes doesn't help.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5428
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 6:45 pm

Jouhou wrote:
It's still selling like hotcakes. There's strong demand for fuel efficient narrowbodies. It's not like it's a failure.

I think most of us agree though, this should be the last major update to the 737. It's replacement should be a clean sheet design. The inclusion of MCAS is an indication they've reached the limits of the 737s design.

Boeing did not want to do the MAX; they wanted to do the NSA. But they could not afford to lose the narrow body market completely to the A320NEO, which they would have had they not done the MAX because the customers were not willing to wait. I assume they are doing work on a new design now, but a lot will depend on what the next generation of engines is like, so they cannot go too far at this point. It all comes down to timing and what Airbus does. If eight years from now there is a new engine available that offers 15% or more fuel burn improvement and Airbus bolts it on to the A320, unless Boeing is far enough along to bring out the NSA in a timely manner they will be forced to find a way to slap it on to the 737. And they will. As to MCAS, as I understand it its purpose was to make the MAX handle like the NG. Boeing did make a big mistake by not explaining it to pilots, but to say that it is proof that the MAX was a step too far is a gross exaggeration. The fact that the airline with the worst safety record of any currently flying was unable to properly repair it and then one of their crews could not figure out how to disable it when three previous crews had again speaks to Boeing’s omission in explanation and the airline’s likely poor training, but not the design. The simple fact of the matter is that their are not massive gains in efficiency to be had in redesigning the airframe; the gains are to be had in the engines. And if the new engines will bolt on to the old airframe it becomes very hard to justify the billions required to design a new airframe. And this applies to Airbus as well as Boeing. So unless an advancement comes along that gives a compelling economic advantage to a new design airframe, or Boeing manages to get one designed in their spare time before the next engine generation is ready, it is likely we will see the A320NNEO and the 737ULTRAMAX.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6472
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:18 pm

JT 610 is a bit reminiscent of some of the issues with the MD-11, although much more had to go wrong for JT 610 to happen than occurred in some of the MD-11 accidents and incidents. But it reinforces one more time that incremental changes to a proven design have to be thought through very carefully, including how they will affect the aircraft in the edgiest of edge cases. I expect Boeing is going to adjust some internal procedures as a result of the crash. Certainly the documentation of future changes in a similar vein will look very different.

But that doesn't mean there's anything inherently wrong with incremental changes to a proven design. A brand-new design has its own risks, as we've seen on nearly every type to come into service from both Boeing and Airbus. The MAX is not the product Boeing really wanted to design, but it's proven to be a very good performer in service so far, and actually does address some key 737NG weaknesses to some extent. It's not "too far," it's clever engineering under enormous business pressure, and there's a reason it's sold in numbers.
 
LDRA
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:31 pm

LDRA wrote:
*Certification problem*

To expand on that, when you are forced to use longitude control augmentation to meet Part25.203a, with associated implications from Part25.672, but your legacy avionic architecture does not support that well, you don't even have enough direct redundancy in AoA sensing
 
StTim
Posts: 3407
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:38 pm

32andBelow wrote:
What problem? some Indonesians crashed there 50th brand new 737 into the ocean?


That is in poor taste sir.

The topic is pointless IMHO.
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 7:52 pm

A trolling thread imho based on one negative incident. The 737 Max is an excellent aircraft as is the A320 Neo.

But hey, if people want to bash I guess why not...right?
707 717 727 72S 737 733 737-700 747 757 753 767-300 764 A319 A320 DC-9-10 DC-9-30 DC-9-50, MD-82 MD-88 MD-90 DC-10-10 DC-10-40 F-100
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17710
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:04 pm

ElroyJetson wrote:
A trolling thread imho based on one negative incident. The 737 Max is an excellent aircraft as is the A320 Neo.

But hey, if people want to bash I guess why not...right?

My opinion too.

It is like saying FBW is bad because if the Paris airshow crash decades ago.

I'd fly a MAX any day. Just not into BUR. :duck:

Has anyone calculated how many MAX flights happened pre-crash? If it is more than a million, then it meets criteria.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
airzona11
Posts: 1497
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:08 pm

patches wrote:
Just a question, Do you think Boeing took the 737 one step too far when they built the Max? They seem to be having problems with the Max design. Thought ?


The operational metrics seem to be meeting or exceeding all targets.
 
User avatar
Slash787
Posts: 914
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 9:37 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:16 pm

[quote="Newbiepilot"Range: 737 dominates the longer distance narrowbody routes
Image[/quote]

Btw when is Qatar Airways planning to take the B737Max? have they committed to the order yet?
 
kalvado
Posts: 1820
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:28 pm

lightsaber wrote:
ElroyJetson wrote:
A trolling thread imho based on one negative incident. The 737 Max is an excellent aircraft as is the A320 Neo.

But hey, if people want to bash I guess why not...right?

My opinion too.

It is like saying FBW is bad because if the Paris airshow crash decades ago.

I'd fly a MAX any day. Just not into BUR. :duck:

Has anyone calculated how many MAX flights happened pre-crash? If it is more than a million, then it meets criteria.

Lightsaber

My estimate is between 100 and 200k flights so far.
 
musman9853
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:31 pm

fsabo wrote:
GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:
patches wrote:
Just a question, Do you think Boeing took the 737 one step too far when they built the Max? They seem to be having problems with the Max design. Thought ?


What kind of problems? Please cite them. One accident / one case study is not sufficient evidence to form the basis of proof.

The "Max is inherently unstable" is Airbus fanboy propaganda along the lines of, "the 787 is cramped and uncomfortable."


It is not the accident itself. It is the silent addition of MCAS because the MAX is _less_ stable than the NG.

From a commercial perspective boeing had to do the MAX. They had no other conceivable response to the NEO. They later found out that this adversely effected stability, so they threw in a kludge in the flight control and kept quiet about it. Is that a step too far? IMO, yes.



they didnt keep quiet about it. multiple airlines have said boeing told them about mcas
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1130
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:43 pm

musman9853 wrote:
fsabo wrote:
GEUltraFan9XGTF wrote:

What kind of problems? Please cite them. One accident / one case study is not sufficient evidence to form the basis of proof.

The "Max is inherently unstable" is Airbus fanboy propaganda along the lines of, "the 787 is cramped and uncomfortable."


It is not the accident itself. It is the silent addition of MCAS because the MAX is _less_ stable than the NG.

From a commercial perspective boeing had to do the MAX. They had no other conceivable response to the NEO. They later found out that this adversely effected stability, so they threw in a kludge in the flight control and kept quiet about it. Is that a step too far? IMO, yes.



they didnt keep quiet about it. multiple airlines have said boeing told them about mcas

From what was revealed by some airlines, it seems it was hit-or-miss; which is unacceptable.
If MCAS is that critical to flight, and its failure can bring down an airplane as is suspected, MCAS, how it works, how to react in case of failure, etc must be part of the training curriculum; no questions asked.
 
zakelwe
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2018 9:36 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:45 pm

mm320cap wrote:

On a side note, I hope that this puts to bed the issue of pilotless aircraft for a good long time. That a faulty sensor can trigger a system that, without human intervention, pitch the aircraft into a crash tells me all I need to know.


??

So it did not crash?
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2721
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:56 pm

patches wrote:
Just a question, Do you think Boeing took the 737 one step too far when they built the Max? They seem to be having problems with the Max design. Thought ?


by this theory, the A330NEO should also be viewed as going too far.
 
george77300
Posts: 1111
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 8:33 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:58 pm

Slash787 wrote:
[quote="Newbiepilot"Range: 737 dominates the longer distance narrowbody routes
Image


Btw when is Qatar Airways planning to take the B737Max? have they committed to the order yet?[/quote]

They have ordered 30 firm. Now going to be leased to Air Italy however but QR are the owner and purchaser.
 
lhrnue
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 9:02 pm

My biggest nightmare ... longhaul in a narrowbody aircraft
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3150
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 9:17 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
Nope.

The 737NG had 400 orders at first flight. The 737MAX has 4,000. Its the fastest selling airplane in the history of Boeing and is performing with very high reliability.

The view from Boeing

https://randy.newairplane.com/2018/05/2 ... the-globe/

RELIABILITY

With the 737 MAX, we added new functions and capabilities to make it the best single-aisle airplane in the market. When you put in all that new technology, you’re bound to have some teething in the beginning. But after working those out, the MAX is sitting at 99.4% schedule reliability. That’s the highest reliability of any new airplane entering service, and exactly where we expected to be 12 months into service.

Now, we’re driving toward even better numbers, targeting 99.7% reliability by the end of this year. All indicators show we’re right on track to get there as we work closely with our customers.



Looks pretty good

FUEL EFFICIENCY

One of the biggest promises we made about the MAX was the advantage it would give our customers over Next-Generation 737s. We designed the airplane to be 14 percent more fuel-efficient than today’s most efficient NGs. Our customers are proving that on a daily basis.

flydubai recently said it has seen 15% more efficiency with the MAX, along with less disruption and lower maintenance costs.

Hainan Airlines tells us they’ve seen fuel efficiency increase significantly with the MAXs compared to the NG, especially for flights longer than three hours.

And China Southern says its fuel consumption rate for the MAX has made it the most cost-saving type of any 737 model and the best fit for flights around seven hours.

Before putting the MAX into service, one customer told us they sometimes had to reduce the payload on its 737NG routes covering more than five hours. The MAX has made that a moot point.


People can argue anecdotally about technology and pushing a design too far, but reliability is where proven established designs shine

Range: 737 dominates the longer distance narrowbody routes
Image


Sound impressive on that map until you take out all the 757's in service. Talk about fudging numbers to make it look better.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9378
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 9:41 pm

rbavfan wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
Nope.

The 737NG had 400 orders at first flight. The 737MAX has 4,000. Its the fastest selling airplane in the history of Boeing and is performing with very high reliability.

The view from Boeing

https://randy.newairplane.com/2018/05/2 ... the-globe/

RELIABILITY

With the 737 MAX, we added new functions and capabilities to make it the best single-aisle airplane in the market. When you put in all that new technology, you’re bound to have some teething in the beginning. But after working those out, the MAX is sitting at 99.4% schedule reliability. That’s the highest reliability of any new airplane entering service, and exactly where we expected to be 12 months into service.

Now, we’re driving toward even better numbers, targeting 99.7% reliability by the end of this year. All indicators show we’re right on track to get there as we work closely with our customers.



Looks pretty good

FUEL EFFICIENCY

One of the biggest promises we made about the MAX was the advantage it would give our customers over Next-Generation 737s. We designed the airplane to be 14 percent more fuel-efficient than today’s most efficient NGs. Our customers are proving that on a daily basis.

flydubai recently said it has seen 15% more efficiency with the MAX, along with less disruption and lower maintenance costs.

Hainan Airlines tells us they’ve seen fuel efficiency increase significantly with the MAXs compared to the NG, especially for flights longer than three hours.

And China Southern says its fuel consumption rate for the MAX has made it the most cost-saving type of any 737 model and the best fit for flights around seven hours.

Before putting the MAX into service, one customer told us they sometimes had to reduce the payload on its 737NG routes covering more than five hours. The MAX has made that a moot point.


People can argue anecdotally about technology and pushing a design too far, but reliability is where proven established designs shine

Range: 737 dominates the longer distance narrowbody routes
Image


Sound impressive on that map until you take out all the 757's in service. Talk about fudging numbers to make it look better.

Nowhere on that map or in that blog post are 757s included or talked about. In fact only one airline included on the map even operates 757 (Tui).
Last edited by Polot on Mon Dec 10, 2018 9:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8495
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 9:41 pm

kalvado wrote:
My estimate is between 100 and 200k flights so far.


241 delivered over 18month.
deliveries increased over time.
so average availability is backloaded: ?4 month? or less?
4 month 241 frames, -> 30k "plane days"
average of 2 flights per day -> 60k movements.
( 3 flights per day -> 90k movements.)
more like two going by that "NG, MAX provide for the majority of longer routes" posted elsewhere.
Murphy is an optimist
 
IWMBH
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:01 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 9:48 pm

I don't think it is a step to far, but a new design from scratch definitely gave them the edge with the 787 over Airbus. Why not try the same trick with the 737?
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6472
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 9:53 pm

That map will change significantly as more neos are delivered. The 737's advantage on those routes pretty much disappeared when sharklets for the A320/A321 came out, but it will take operators and networks a bit of time to catch up.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9527
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 9:54 pm

Polot wrote:
rbavfan wrote:
Newbiepilot wrote:
Nope.

The 737NG had 400 orders at first flight. The 737MAX has 4,000. Its the fastest selling airplane in the history of Boeing and is performing with very high reliability.

The view from Boeing

https://randy.newairplane.com/2018/05/2 ... the-globe/

RELIABILITY

With the 737 MAX, we added new functions and capabilities to make it the best single-aisle airplane in the market. When you put in all that new technology, you’re bound to have some teething in the beginning. But after working those out, the MAX is sitting at 99.4% schedule reliability. That’s the highest reliability of any new airplane entering service, and exactly where we expected to be 12 months into service.

Now, we’re driving toward even better numbers, targeting 99.7% reliability by the end of this year. All indicators show we’re right on track to get there as we work closely with our customers.



Looks pretty good

FUEL EFFICIENCY

One of the biggest promises we made about the MAX was the advantage it would give our customers over Next-Generation 737s. We designed the airplane to be 14 percent more fuel-efficient than today’s most efficient NGs. Our customers are proving that on a daily basis.

flydubai recently said it has seen 15% more efficiency with the MAX, along with less disruption and lower maintenance costs.

Hainan Airlines tells us they’ve seen fuel efficiency increase significantly with the MAXs compared to the NG, especially for flights longer than three hours.

And China Southern says its fuel consumption rate for the MAX has made it the most cost-saving type of any 737 model and the best fit for flights around seven hours.

Before putting the MAX into service, one customer told us they sometimes had to reduce the payload on its 737NG routes covering more than five hours. The MAX has made that a moot point.


People can argue anecdotally about technology and pushing a design too far, but reliability is where proven established designs shine

Range: 737 dominates the longer distance narrowbody routes
Image


Sound impressive on that map until you take out all the 757's in service. Talk about fudging numbers to make it look better.

Nowhere on that map or in that blog post are 757s included or talked about. In fact only one airline included on the map even operates 757 (Tui).


The fine print says "...excluding 757...", which is another way of saying "Other than XYZ....". I think his point in his post is that Boeing is trying to make the 737 look more dominant by excluding the existing 757 from the narrowbody totals.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1130
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 10:02 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
Polot wrote:
rbavfan wrote:

Sound impressive on that map until you take out all the 757's in service. Talk about fudging numbers to make it look better.

Nowhere on that map or in that blog post are 757s included or talked about. In fact only one airline included on the map even operates 757 (Tui).


The fine print says "...excluding 757...", which is another way of saying "Other than XYZ....". I think his point in his post is that Boeing is trying to make the 737 look more dominant by excluding the existing 757 from the narrowbody totals.

The fine print also says the BA LCY-SNN-JFK in A318 is included; one wonders why...
 
MD80Ttail
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:22 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 10:19 pm

Absolutely Boeing and Airbus have gone too far with their bathroom designs. Having just flown on a Max today and recently a new A321 both manufacturers have pushed the envelope on lavatory size. More accurately, the airlines have pushed the design too far to be fair. However, prices for flying have never been more affordable so it’s a fair trade off. Seat design and size has been pushed too far as well....but again you get what you pay for.

Safety wise we are talking about the bottom of the barrel airline in a bottom of the barrel regulatory environment that crashed a plane they should have never allowed to fly after four botched repair attempts. I don’t believe this accident would have happened with any major North American or European airlines.....or any reputable airline. (I have flown Lion Air btw and flying is Lion is MUCH safety by a factor of 100 taking a ferry or driving....assuming driving is even possible to where you are going in Indonesia.)
 
kalvado
Posts: 1820
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 10:28 pm

MD80Ttail wrote:
Absolutely Boeing and Airbus have gone too far with their bathroom designs. Having just flown on a Max today and recently a new A321 both manufacturers have pushed the envelope on lavatory size. More accurately, the airlines have pushed the design too far to be fair.

And we have a winner!
 
MD80Ttail
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:22 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 10:32 pm

lhrnue wrote:
My biggest nightmare ... longhaul in a narrowbody aircraft


I don’t understand this sentiment. Your “personal space” on the newest gen narrow body vs the newest gen wide body is the same. I prefer long haul on narrow bodies bc boarding and deplaning are much quicker..less people. Getting bags much faster....less bags. Better service...less people. Less chance for screaming kids or less screaming kids...less people. Customs is faster...less people. I will never again take an A380 flight if I can help it!!! When given a choice I choose a narrow body before a wide.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17710
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 10:53 pm

MD80Ttail wrote:
lhrnue wrote:
My biggest nightmare ... longhaul in a narrowbody aircraft


I don’t understand this sentiment. Your “personal space” on the newest gen narrow body vs the newest gen wide body is the same. I prefer long haul on narrow bodies bc boarding and deplaning are much quicker..less people. Getting bags much faster....less bags. Better service...less people. Less chance for screaming kids or less screaming kids...less people. Customs is faster...less people. I will never again take an A380 flight if I can help it!!! When given a choice I choose a narrow body before a wide.

I too choose a narrowbody over a widebody. However, it is on flight time (schedule) more often than not.

I like widebodies, but not the extra 20 minutes to load and 20+ more minutes for the bags. I want fragmentation! I pay a premium for direct flights. In particular, with kids hubbing to fill a widebody is a hassle.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
DL757NYC
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 6:07 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 11:04 pm

I think they had to in order to compensate for the lack of a A321 competitor.
 
musman9853
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 11:14 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
musman9853 wrote:
fsabo wrote:

It is not the accident itself. It is the silent addition of MCAS because the MAX is _less_ stable than the NG.

From a commercial perspective boeing had to do the MAX. They had no other conceivable response to the NEO. They later found out that this adversely effected stability, so they threw in a kludge in the flight control and kept quiet about it. Is that a step too far? IMO, yes.



they didnt keep quiet about it. multiple airlines have said boeing told them about mcas

From what was revealed by some airlines, it seems it was hit-or-miss; which is unacceptable.
If MCAS is that critical to flight, and its failure can bring down an airplane as is suspected, MCAS, how it works, how to react in case of failure, etc must be part of the training curriculum; no questions asked.



you're absolutely right. its just that at this point we don't know if its boeings fault for not pushing it harder in training or the airlines fault for not including it. i'm just saying we should hold off on accusations for the time being
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1561
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 11:19 pm

No, the 737MAX is not one step too far.
Whatever
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 11:45 pm

I'm sure Boeing is building the new MOM/797 with every intent of using as much of the design as possible on the NSA. They have to beat Airbus to market on a new narrowbody.
 
MD80Ttail
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 1:22 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Mon Dec 10, 2018 11:47 pm

What can be accomplished with a clean sheet design at at what cost without a leap in engine technology. Probably not much to justify the investment of a clean sheet design. How do I know this? The fact Boeing and Airbus have not produced a clean sheet narrowbody design. The benefits without a leap in engine tech doesn’t justify it at this time or the near future.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26316
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:08 am

WIederling wrote:
Randy Boeing and his PR backoffice isn't really the source for any balanced or even god forbid neutral information. Try again.


And yet no outrage for all the Airbus PR charts posted by a certain Belgian with a Diptera infestation. :scratchchin: :rotfl:
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 4704
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Did the 737 MAX go one step too far?

Tue Dec 11, 2018 1:43 am

Nope. They made the right decision by evolving the NG into the MAX.

Judging by sales alone, the customers think the MAX is a very good plane. Airlines have bought it by the droves, and in the real world, that's all the justification that matters.

From a customer standpoint, it's the same as the NG. In fact I doubt most customers can tell the difference between a 737 and a 777. They don't know and they don't care. The fuel savings that the airlines get from flying the MAX can go towards cheaper fares and/or longer, thinner routes that otherwise wouldn't be available to passengers.

It seems that Boeing dropped the ball with their documentation and redundancy of the MCAS systems, but there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with the basic design.

I have no doubt this will be the last iteration of the 737, but the MAX is the right plane at the right time for Boeing and its customers.
What the...?

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos