Jon Ostrower reports today (Jun 16) that first flight for MAX-10 is rapidly approaching:

Boeing’s first 737 Max 10 will be out of its flight test stall this morning for taxi tests on the runway in Renton. That’s the last set of ground evaluations before the aircraft is ready to fly. First flight rapidly approaching.

Ref: https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/ ... 4234008578

Katie Bailey posted video of MAX-10 taxiing: https://twitter.com/KPAE_Spotter/status ... 6870226945

And then she posted video of a high-speed taxi test: https://twitter.com/KPAE_Spotter/status ... 2978020356

So it seems the preliminaries are being performed and first flight is imminent.

In viewtopic.php?p=22836639#p22833515 we have:

WoodysAeroimag wrote:

7644 66122 N27751 737-10 United Airlines - Ready for its B1 flight later this week. Multiple sources have confirmed to me that its scheduled for Friday with Media involved.

7644 66122 N27751 737-10 United Airlines by 737 MAX Production, on Flickr

What a wonderful photo!

Please post info about MAX-10s's first flight to this thread, and use other threads for other purposes.

Pretty cool! Excited to see it fly soon and how the gear works in action.

Thanks for Opening this thread

Certainly looking forward to the MAX10 first flight. I hope we can get a live stream. Want to see how the gear operates in action.

I am assuming it allow it better runway performance than the 9?

Nnaeto87 wrote:

Thanks for Opening this thread

Certainly looking forward to the MAX10 first flight. I hope we can get a live stream. Want to see how the gear operates in action.

I am assuming it allow it better runway performance than the 9?

You're welcome!

It will be interesting to see what level of coverage this gets.

The roll out of the first MAX-10 happened during the grounding and Boeing did not attempt to generate media coverage.

Maybe it will be different now, maybe it will not.

Regardless I bet the local media outlets will have helicopters buzzing around whenever the first flight is.

I'm not sure what its runway performance will be relative to MAX-9 but we will see a fairly conservative profile being flown for the first flight, I would think.

IIRC our 737 production thread said as many as three MAX10s have been built already so hopefully they have a successful flight test program going in the near future.

Nnaeto87 wrote:

I am assuming it allow it better runway performance than the 9?

If it does, which I'm also assuming to be the case, then the value proposal for the -9 becomes even more dubious than it is now.

Unless either (A) the airline is a dedicated 737 operator to the point of not even considering the A321N, or (B) Boeing demands some crazy premium for the -10 over the -9; it really seems questionable what a lower-capacity and comparatively sluggish -9 would bring to the table for a carrier over the alternative.

LAX772LR wrote:

Nnaeto87 wrote:

I am assuming it allow it better runway performance than the 9?

If it does, which I'm also assuming to be the case, then the value proposal for the -9 becomes even more dubious than it is now.

Unless either (A) the airline is a dedicated 737 operator to the point of not even considering the A321N, or (B) Boeing demands some crazy premium for the -10 over the -9; it really seems questionable what a lower-capacity and comparatively sluggish -9 would bring to the table for a carrier over the alternative.

Isn't the new gear mostly to facilitate the rotation angle for the longer fuselage? Is it designed to provide for a shorter takeoff length? I suppose technically it is if it gets the 10 to just as steep of an angle as the other MAXs. Also, would the new gear be able to be retrofitted to existing MAX models and installed on all new deliveries going forward?

Legitimately asking.

LAX772LR wrote:

Nnaeto87 wrote:

I am assuming it allow it better runway performance than the 9?

If it does, which I'm also assuming to be the case, then the value proposal for the -9 becomes even more dubious than it is now.

Unless either (A) the airline is a dedicated 737 operator to the point of not even considering the A321N, or (B) Boeing demands some crazy premium for the -10 over the -9; it really seems questionable what a lower-capacity and comparatively sluggish -9 would bring to the table for a carrier over the alternative.

I wonder if Boeing is going to offer the -10 main gear as an option for future -9 orders? This could probably be done with a STC and might be available for retrofit to existing -9 models. Watching UA and AS B739's gobble up most of the 8,000 ft. 10R/29L runway at FLL is a little too exciting. The EMAS at each end starts to get "hungry" when a B739 lines up on that runway...

LAX772LR wrote:

Nnaeto87 wrote:

I am assuming it allow it better runway performance than the 9?

If it does, which I'm also assuming to be the case, then the value proposal for the -9 becomes even more dubious than it is now.

Unless either (A) the airline is a dedicated 737 operator to the point of not even considering the A321N, or (B) Boeing demands some crazy premium for the -10 over the -9; it really seems questionable what a lower-capacity and comparatively sluggish -9 would bring to the table for a carrier over the alternative.

I believe the -9 will still have it beat on range. With the increase in narrow bodies operating longer flights, that will matter.

FLALEFTY wrote:

LAX772LR wrote:

Nnaeto87 wrote:

I am assuming it allow it better runway performance than the 9?

If it does, which I'm also assuming to be the case, then the value proposal for the -9 becomes even more dubious than it is now.

Unless either (A) the airline is a dedicated 737 operator to the point of not even considering the A321N, or (B) Boeing demands some crazy premium for the -10 over the -9; it really seems questionable what a lower-capacity and comparatively sluggish -9 would bring to the table for a carrier over the alternative.

I wonder if Boeing is going to offer the -10 main gear as an option for future -9 orders? This could probably be done with a STC and might be available for retrofit to existing -9 models. Watching UA and AS B739's gobble up most of the 8,000 ft. 10R/29L runway at FLL is a little too exciting. The EMAS at each end starts to get "hungry" when a B739 lines up on that runway...

I would imagine that they could offer it on the 738 as well as part of a short field performance package.

For some reason I'm really excited about the MAX 10.

But also oddly comical. The fuselage and engines look very sleek and proportional, but it's sitting so low to the ground it looks a little bit ridiculus. Or maybe unusual is a better term.

The taxi videos are very interesting, you can see the trailing link MLG is different to the other 737s.

TWA772LR wrote:

Also, would the new gear be able to be retrofitted to existing MAX models and installed on all new deliveries going forward?

I'm very curious as to whether they'll do that for the -9. As for the -7 and -8, I doubt it, unless the weight addition can be made to pay off in additional payload; which seems quite doubtful on the -7, but who knows for the -8.

Standardizing on a consistent production regardless of type would be a very Airbusy thing to do, with plenty of logic behind it; but not sure it's the direction Boeing is headed.

ikolkyo wrote:

I believe the -9 will still have it beat on range. With the increase in narrow bodies operating longer flights, that will matter.

Perhaps, though I'm sorta wondering what markets that would really help it in, as both can easily do just about any route in Europe, the lower 48 US states, Australia, etc.

jholio wrote:

I would imagine that they could offer it on the 738 as well as part of a short field performance package.

Maybe, though the 738/7M8 doesn't have nearly as much in the way of rotation restriction, so not sure how much good being able to rotate to a higher AOA than it already can will help them in short field.

JetBuddy wrote:

but it's sitting so low to the ground it looks a little bit ridiculus.

You just described every 737, save for the Jurassics.
IMO, they're the only ones that don't have that diminutive belly-dragging look.

LAX772LR wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

Also, would the new gear be able to be retrofitted to existing MAX models and installed on all new deliveries going forward?

I'm very curious as to whether they'll do that for the -9. As for the -7 and -8, I doubt it, unless the weight addition can be made to pay off in additional payload; which seems quite doubtful on the -7, but who knows for the -8.

Standardizing on a consistent production regardless of type would be a very Airbusy thing to do, with plenty of logic behind it; but not sure it's the direction Boeing is headed.

Both Boeing and Airbus long range narrowbodies have a problem - insufficient toilets and insufficient galleys. Toilets will be a problem for pax and the small galleys place additional pressure on cabin crews on long flights. Unfortunately, airlines prioritise economics over pax comfort and convenience. I guess they will need to justify it by offering really low fares!

flee wrote:

Both Boeing and Airbus long range narrowbodies have a problem - insufficient toilets and insufficient galleys.

that's not a Boeing/Airbus thing, that's an airlines greed + CAAs' tolerance thing.

Personally, I think a few good ADA suits in the states, or a few highly public piss-ins (et tu, Ryanair?) could solve that..... but we'll see.

That is a great photo and great looking plane. Looking forward to the first flight.

I was under the impression the landing gear allowed the aircraft to sit higher than the -8 to reduce tail strikes on the longer fuselage. The new gear mechanism allows this but then stows into the same wheel well space as previous generations. To achieve the same otherwise would mean a longer gear assembly which wouldn't fit when retracted.

Revelation wrote:

It will be interesting to see what level of coverage this gets.

The roll out of the first MAX-10 happened during the grounding and Boeing did not attempt to generate media coverage.

Maybe it will be different now, maybe it will not.

Regardless I bet the local media outlets will have helicopters buzzing around whenever the first flight is.

I'm not sure what its runway performance will be relative to MAX-9 but we will see a fairly conservative profile being flown for the first flight, I would think.
...

Boeing communication team (among others) has been decimated by the recent layoff rounds

There will be modest communication for each significant milestone like first flight, certification, first delivery for each airlines etc

The rest will be done by spotters, bloggers etc.

As for field performance is concerned, since an aircraft does not always takes off at MTOW and 737-10 will go to decent airport (due to high volume), the field performance would not be a big issue.

It is unclear if the cost of brake maintenance etc would be higher to possible faster wear

ba9216c wrote:

I was under the impression the landing gear allowed the aircraft to sit higher than the -8 to reduce tail strikes on the longer fuselage.

No. A longer gear would require slides on the over wing exits. It only comes into play during rotation.

https://youtu.be/F4IGl4OizM4

What is the difference between the -9 and -10? 2 rows of passenger seats or more?

ba9216c wrote:

I was under the impression the landing gear allowed the aircraft to sit higher than the -8 to reduce tail strikes on the longer fuselage. The new gear mechanism allows this but then stows into the same wheel well space as previous generations. To achieve the same otherwise would mean a longer gear assembly which wouldn't fit when retracted.

As the above video shows the new gear does not allow the aircraft to sit higher when it is parked, but it does allow more room for the aft body to pivot during the takeoff roll as the lift being generated by the wings reduces the weight on the wheels and allows the gear to extend. The higher angle of attack of the wing generates more lift so less runway is needed for takeoff.

I found that main landing gear mechanism nice but at the same time I'm wondering what happens if for whatever reason that gear fails to extend or retract during take-off or landing?

A388

A388 wrote:

I found that main landing gear mechanism nice but at the same time I'm wondering what happens if for whatever reason that gear fails to extend or retract during take-off or landing?

As I understand it from watching the Boeing videos, the extension is spring-loaded so it would be extended by gravity when off the ground and by the weight of the airframe on the ground (as aerodynamic lift raises the frame off the ground, the gear extends due to the weight of the strut). Once in the air, a "shrink link" pulls the extension inward as the gear retracts so it the strut is the same length as the it is on the other family members so it fits in the well and this link is a purely mechanical link that is evidently driven by the same type of actuator as used on all MAX model landing gear.

So the system can't interfere with extension (since it does not come into play until the main strut is in the down and locked position) and if the "shrink link" fails to operate on retraction, I imagine a sensor fires, the retraction is stopped and the gear is extended back to down and locked and the plane returns to base. We'll know for sure once the FCOM and/or ACAP are released as it would be covered in there (same way we found out about the irregular ops for the 777X's folding wingtips).

737-10 first flight takeoff is currently scheduled for 10am tomorrow, June 18. I haven’t yet heard who the pilots will be, but I’m assuming that Jenn will be in the left seat.

This is good news. I expect -10 sales to be announced soon. I assume the EU still wants angle of attack data? What was the final solution? (I lost track when alternatives were proposed).

LAX772LR wrote:

Nnaeto87 wrote:

I am assuming it allow it better runway performance than the 9?

If it does, which I'm also assuming to be the case, then the value proposal for the -9 becomes even more dubious than it is now.

Unless either (A) the airline is a dedicated 737 operator to the point of not even considering the A321N, or (B) Boeing demands some crazy premium for the -10 over the -9; it really seems questionable what a lower-capacity and comparatively sluggish -9 would bring to the table for a carrier over the alternative.

I assume the new gear and structural improvements make it to a -9ER. I agree the current -9 value proposition becomes marginal.

I expect this new gear to make it to the -8 for short field performance too.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

I assume the EU still wants angle of attack data? What was the final solution?

All MAX will be adding a synthetic air data system (SADS), starting with the MAX-10 (required for certification) and then retrofitted to the rest of the family afterwards.

Stitch wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

I assume the EU still wants angle of attack data? What was the final solution?

All MAX will be adding a synthetic air data system (SADS), starting with the MAX-10 (required for certification) and then retrofitted to the rest of the family afterwards.

Are you referring to the Enhanced AOA system? I’m not aware that the MAX is adding synthetic airspeed and altitude like the 787 and 777-9 have. Maybe we are saying the same thing?

LAX772LR wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

Also, would the new gear be able to be retrofitted to existing MAX models and installed on all new deliveries going forward?

I'm very curious as to whether they'll do that for the -9. As for the -7 and -8, I doubt it, unless the weight addition can be made to pay off in additional payload; which seems quite doubtful on the -7, but who knows for the -8.

Standardizing on a consistent production regardless of type would be a very Airbusy thing to do, with plenty of logic behind it; but not sure it's the direction Boeing is headed.

JetBuddy wrote:

but it's sitting so low to the ground it looks a little bit ridiculus.

You just described every 737, save for the Jurassics.
IMO, they're the only ones that don't have that diminutive belly-dragging look.

The 737 has a dad-bod?

Looking forward to seeing this machine.

BoeingGuy wrote:

Stitch wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

I assume the EU still wants angle of attack data? What was the final solution?

All MAX will be adding a synthetic air data system (SADS), starting with the MAX-10 (required for certification) and then retrofitted to the rest of the family afterwards.

Are you referring to the Enhanced AOA system? I’m not aware that the MAX is adding synthetic airspeed and altitude like the 787 and 777-9 have. Maybe we are saying the same thing?

Sorry but I think Stitch's information is out of date.

FG: Boeing 737-10 processes to undergo revision after EASA’s Max scrutiny says:

EASA says it asked Boeing to consider installation of a third angle-of-attack sensor, but the US airframer opted against it after evaluation the feasibility.

“Due to the legacy independent federated system architecture of the Boeing 737, the installation of an additional angle-of-attack sensor would require a significant engineering effort,” says EASA.

“At the same time, Boeing demonstrated the soundness and appropriateness of the proposed design for enhanced angle-of-attack integrity.”

This design included a combination of enhanced angle-of-attack monitors and addition of a manual switch to select the air data source.

EASA says it acknowledged there was “no formal requirement” for a third sensor in order to achieve an acceptable level of safety, and says the revised design is “more robust” despite having only two sensors – although it also acknowledges that a certain amount of functionality from the speed-trim system might be lost.

So we not getting "synthetic AoA" as a third AoA source, instead we are getting "enhanced angle-of-attack monitors and addition of a manual switch to select the air data source". This avoids the issue of dealing with the "legacy independent federated system architecture of the Boeing 737". To me the "enhanced angle-of-attack monitors" are presumably just enhanced data scrubbing of each of the two AoA sensors, and "a manual switch to select the air data source" is just that, a knob the crew will need to twist if/when they figure out one of the two AoA sources are wonky.

Revelation wrote:

Sorry but I think Stitch's information is out of date.

Could be - my info was from September 2020, but that was as recent as I could find in a Google search. I have an FG membership, but it is not a Premium one so I couldn't read their more recent stuff, including your linked article.

Stitch wrote:

So the system can't interfere with extension (since it does not come into play until the main strut is in the down and locked position)

So the MAX10 will be touching down with the fuselage farther away from the pavement than the 8 and 9? Any chance for pilots getting confused about flare when switching among the versions?

hivue wrote:

So the MAX10 will be touching down with the fuselage farther away from the pavement than the 8 and 9? Any chance for pilots getting confused about flare when switching among the versions?

Can't definitively answer that since I am not a commercial pilot, but as soon as the plane touches down, the gear strut compresses almost instantly (at least from my perspective as a passenger) so I would expect there would not be a noticeable difference between the two since we're only talking a matter of inches.

Stitch wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Sorry but I think Stitch's information is out of date.

Could be - my info was from September 2020, but that was as recent as I could find in a Google search. I have an FG membership, but it is not a Premium one so I couldn't read their more recent stuff, including your linked article.

Thanks for your kind response. I just tried the link and must say that it opened for me. I use a browser extension called 'cookie auto-delete' which I recommend. It cleans the cookies of each web site when the last tab holding their content is closed. The net effect is each web site thinks I'm a first time visitor so almost always loads content except for the sites with very strict paywalls. It also cleans out lots of tracking cookies so privacy is enhanced. Hopefully clearing cookies allows you and others to load that content, it has a lot of interesting info about MAX-10 in it.

]

hivue wrote:

Stitch wrote:

So the system can't interfere with extension (since it does not come into play until the main strut is in the down and locked position)

So the MAX10 will be touching down with the fuselage farther away from the pavement than the 8 and 9? Any chance for pilots getting confused about flare when switching among the versions?

I’m going to guess that the difference in gear length and extension will be almost imperceptible compared to the day to day variation pilots see with different headwinds, crosswinds, landing weights, runway lengths, etc.

BoeingGuy wrote:

737-10 first flight takeoff is currently scheduled for 10am tomorrow, June 18. I haven’t yet heard who the pilots will be, but I’m assuming that Jenn will be in the left seat.

Jenn on the left, Jim on the right

Stitch wrote:

As I understand it from watching the Boeing videos, the extension is spring-loaded so it would be extended by gravity when off the ground and by the weight of the airframe on the ground (as aerodynamic lift raises the frame off the ground, the gear extends due to the weight of the strut). Once in the air, a "shrink link" pulls the extension inward as the gear retracts so it the strut is the same length as the it is on the other family members so it fits in the well and this link is a purely mechanical link that is evidently driven by the same type of actuator as used on all MAX model landing gear.

So the system can't interfere with extension (since it does not come into play until the main strut is in the down and locked position) and if the "shrink link" fails to operate on retraction, I imagine a sensor fires, the retraction is stopped and the gear is extended back to down and locked and the plane returns to base. We'll know for sure once the FCOM and/or ACAP are released as it would be covered in there (same way we found out about the irregular ops for the 777X's folding wingtips).

Okay, thanks for the explanation

A388

LAX772LR wrote:

JetBuddy wrote:

but it's sitting so low to the ground it looks a little bit ridiculus.

You just described every 737, save for the Jurassics.
IMO, they're the only ones that don't have that diminutive belly-dragging look.

Yes, but it looks even lower due to the proportions, that was my point.

Spetsnaz55 wrote:

BoeingGuy wrote:

737-10 first flight takeoff is currently scheduled for 10am tomorrow, June 18. I haven’t yet heard who the pilots will be, but I’m assuming that Jenn will be in the left seat.

Jenn on the left, Jim on the right

That was my first guess. Second guess was Jenn on the left and Scott on the right.

Do we know the LEAP thrust rating for these MAX 10’s? I’ve read several figures and don’t know which one’s correct.

Stitch wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Sorry but I think Stitch's information is out of date.

Could be - my info was from September 2020, but that was as recent as I could find in a Google search. I have an FG membership, but it is not a Premium one so I couldn't read their more recent stuff, including your linked article.

I don’t want to identify myself and the area I work in, but let’s just say that I would probably know if a Synthetic Air Data system was being put on the 737 MAX. I’m not aware of it. However, the Enhanced AOA design will be implemented.

What got enhanced with the AoA sensors please? Is this different from other current MAXes? And how about MCAS? Is it needed at all or modified on the long -10?

BoeingGuy wrote:

737-10 first flight takeoff is currently scheduled for 10am tomorrow, June 18. I haven’t yet heard who the pilots will be, but I’m assuming that Jenn will be in the left seat.

Jenn in the left, Jim in the right.

Noshow wrote:

What got enhanced with the AoA sensors please? Is this different from other current MAXes? And how about MCAS? Is it needed at all or modified on the long -10?

Yes, I wonder what the difference in pitch up characteristics are between the 7 and the 10, since the 10 has a longer moment arm. The 7 one would assume is most in need of MCAS, and the 10 the least or perhaps not at all. One wonders how close the -600 came to needing MCAS, or perhaps it did.

DenverTed wrote:

Noshow wrote:

What got enhanced with the AoA sensors please? Is this different from other current MAXes? And how about MCAS? Is it needed at all or modified on the long -10?

Yes, I wonder what the difference in pitch up characteristics are between the 7 and the 10, since the 10 has a longer moment arm. The 7 one would assume is most in need of MCAS, and the 10 the least or perhaps not at all. One wonders how close the -600 came to needing MCAS, or perhaps it did.

MCAS is specific to MAX aircraft due to different handling characteristics with the engines mounted higher and further forward which was generating extra lift compared to the NGs

Avgeek21 wrote:

Do we know the LEAP thrust rating for these MAX 10’s? I’ve read several figures and don’t know which one’s correct.

I too am curious about this, Is there enough in the -1B to increase thrust for the -10 vs the -9? Or are they banking on the gear solving the takeoff distance issue alone. I also figure that the -10 has a higher MTOW but it might not be very significant.

Is there anything official from Boeing on this yet? Seems awfully late to have said nothing if it's going to happen tomorrow.

iflykpdx wrote:

Is there anything official from Boeing on this yet? Seems awfully late to have said nothing if it's going to happen tomorrow.

I doubt they’ll say anything till after the flight and then release a small press release. Even for the unveiling of the MAX10 they did not even release a press release

iflykpdx wrote:

Is there anything official from Boeing on this yet? Seems awfully late to have said nothing if it's going to happen tomorrow.

It’s on the Boeing employees news. 10am. Several of us have even posted who the pilots will be.

Nnaeto87 wrote:

iflykpdx wrote:

Is there anything official from Boeing on this yet? Seems awfully late to have said nothing if it's going to happen tomorrow.

I doubt they’ll say anything till after the flight and then release a small press release. Even for the unveiling of the MAX10 they did not even release a press release

What was different about when they unveiled the -10 vs now?

I can't wait. I was always a fan of the B737.

BoeingGuy wrote:

iflykpdx wrote:

Is there anything official from Boeing on this yet? Seems awfully late to have said nothing if it's going to happen tomorrow.

It’s on the Boeing employees news. 10am. Several of us have even posted who the pilots will be.

Thanks. Any word on an official live stream?