ADent wrote:Does Boeing break down which airlines get them - I don’t see that data in the media and I don’t see a press release.
I can't answer your other questions, but I got my count from the deliveries report tool here, which seems to match what the media is reporting:
https://www.boeing.com/commercial/I think Boeing's counts are based on the dates the customer communicates acceptance of the aircraft, which might not quite align with the delivery flights. I assume the latter is how planespotters is counting.
Noshow wrote:What is the latest on the hoped for MAX 10 extension please? Is there anything going on in DC, any upcoming committee meeting or similar?
Anything concrete is going to come out in the committees first, but some of the better aviation journalists seem to keep tabs on the relevant committee actions, so I suspect we'll see relatively quick reporting if a bill is proposed.
My best guess is that the transportation committee members in each house are waiting for an FAA recommendation based in part on a study they commissioned that was completed this March and became public in June. The study was mandated by the same law that implemented the deadline on the crew alerting system waiver, and required the FAA to evaluate whether there would be a clear safety benefit to setting a time limit on how long after issuance a type certificate could be amended. The review included a look at waivers, of which the 737 MAX crew alerting system waiver was obviously highlighted. It appears the report was released unofficially, as I didn't find a copy on the FAA website, just the copy the Seattle Times shared:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... march-2022Although the study did not make a recommendation about the 737 MAX 10 waiver deadline specifically, it concluded that deadlines on amended type certificates were not a cost-effective way to ensure safety, and would likely not be adopted in turn by foreign regulators. It instead proposed improvements to the process of issuing amended type certificates including making the evaluation of the safety criticality of waivers more robust.
I think it particularly relevant to note an apparent shift in attitude: House Transportation Committee chair Peter DeFazio made a statement back in April explicitly opposing an extension to the waiver (
source). Maria Cantwell, his counterpart in the Senate, meanwhile, preferred a recommendation from the FAA (
source):
Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) wrote:The aircraft certification bill gave the FAA a two-year grace period to certify aircraft without the advanced flight crew alerting system, but that grace period should not be extended.
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) wrote:We're not going to hurry. We're not going to be rushed. I need the FAA to lead. I want to hear from them that that's what they think is the safest way to go.”
Two months later when the report became public, DeFazio's tone seemed to have changed. Perhaps he was starting to feel like the FAA now had the information it needed to more properly consider whether the waiver should be extended for the MAX 10 (
source)?
Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) wrote:I urge the FAA to consider the report’s recommendations carefully and issue a detailed response.
In short, it appears two of the members of Congress who have the most influence on the question are waiting for more input from the FAA before taking any actions regarding the MAX 10.
8297 42623 N7211U 737-7 Southwest Airlines by 737 MAX Production, on Flickr
