5 ms·

Yeah, but who is going to want to fly in one again? Even working in aviation in the past and knowing that they've probably nailed the issue, I'd still be less t

Yeah, but who is going to want to fly in one again? Even working in aviation in the past and knowing that they've probably nailed the issue, I'd still be less than keen.

cma 7y ago
Many people just sort tickets by cheapest and choose that as their flight.
skellera 7y ago
Most people don’t even think about the plane they’re flying in. It will not be that big of an issue to continue using them unless some group actively tries to warn passengers about flying in those specific planes.
- bushido 7y ago
  It seems like this is becoming a concern now - per: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/07/barclays-downgrades-boeing-survey-shows-fliers-will-avoid-737-max.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/07/barclays-downgrades-boeing-s... The primary reason for the downgrade being: Barclays’ survey of airline passengers says many people will avoid the 737 Max “for an extended period” once the aircraft is flying again.
  - JudgeWapner 7y ago
    this is what marketing people are paid to solve. they'll rebrand it, have some feel-good TV commercials like BP did after they dumped millions of gallons into the gulf, and somehow get on with life.
  - Aeolun 7y ago
    Yeah, they say that, but when they get their non-refundable ticket and see it is in an 737 MAX. How many do you think will sue their airline claiming a refund?
    - chaboud 7y ago
      The airframe is listed at purchase. I won't be suing. I just won't be buying.
  - TomVDB 7y ago
    Here’s my thought experiment on that: if I booked a flight to my vacation destination and, at the last moment, I discovered that I’d be flying in a 737 MAX, would I cancel my trip or pay a considerable amount of moment to get all our tickets changed? I very likely would not. Would you? Would others? It’s one thing to answer a question of a pollster, it’s another to take concrete action.
    - chaboud 7y ago
      For a year after it is reinstated, my answer will be "yes, I'm changing my flight". Doubly so if my wife and child are on the plane. Why? Because I'd be so unbelievably pissed at myself if the plane nosed itself into the ground, at least for the time it took to impact. I also vote with my money. Simple answer? I won't be flying airlines that use the 737 Max. Stick to the NG or pick up some 320's. Between work and personal travel for our family, that's over $50k of gross revenue per year (we both travel a lot for work). Maybe nobody else cares? I'm betting there are more people like me and my wife.
    - michaelmrose 7y ago
      You typically can see the type of plane on travel sites. If this wasn't the case I would buy from one that did. In the case that I for some reason couldnt determine it ahead of time I would complain emphatically enough.
    - bushido 7y ago
      As others have stated, I will not be booking a ticket on a 737 max, period. Granted I might not be a typical discount shopper, I pick flights based on comfort, not price and have checked the aircraft/airframe I will be in for years. However, I have a tough time seeing anyone I know taking a risk with flying the 737 max for a 10% discount in fares. Typically, fuel costs to the airline can be estimated at 10-20% of the ticket price on domestic flights (5 gallons per seat per hour). 737 Max is advertised as providing up to 20% in fuel cost saving, which would bring the cost to 4 gallons per seat per hour. Which should not affect a ticket price by more than $4-6 per hour of flight. Are you suggesting that people aware of the issue will be wiling to risk their lives for a chance to save $8-20 to their destination? And to add to that very few 737 Max are in service right now, only 300 or so of 5000 orders have been fulfilled. These supposed savings are not yet factored into the price of most tickets, they are future reductions at best. And likely these will not even be reductions, just a way for carriers to earn more per seat.
  - michaelmrose 7y ago
    Wherein an extended period of time is effectively forever.
jhayward 7y ago
Have you ever flown in a 737? I'll bet you have. Are you aware that at one point in the deployment of the 737 they had a "runaway rudder" issue [1] that caused two crashes and one near crash, and hundreds died from it? The 737 has flow millions upon millions of flights, safely, since then. The problem will be addressed, and life will continue. It is tragic, and there will be major repercussions within the manufacturer and regulator but the design will be fine. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues
theclaw 7y ago
Boeing could simply rebrand the plane. Take ‘MAX’ out of the name, call it a 737-8. I think most people have absolutely no idea what model of plane they’re flying on anyway.
- salawat 7y ago
  That is a despicable, and dishonest thing to do, and there are people who are more than happy to act as repeaters to make sure people know Boeing's NewPlane (TM) is just a rebrand of the MAX, with a healthy dose of "this is how stupid Boeing thought you were." Such a move would be ill-advised.

Yeah, but who is going to want to fly in one again? Even working in aviation in the past and knowing that they've probably nailed the issue, I'd still be less than keen.

cma 7y ago

Many people just sort tickets by cheapest and choose that as their flight.

skellera 7y ago

Most people don’t even think about the plane they’re flying in. It will not be that big of an issue to continue using them unless some group actively tries to warn passengers about flying in those specific planes.

bushido 7y ago
It seems like this is becoming a concern now - per: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/07/barclays-downgrades-boeing-survey-shows-fliers-will-avoid-737-max.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/07/barclays-downgrades-boeing-s... The primary reason for the downgrade being: Barclays’ survey of airline passengers says many people will avoid the 737 Max “for an extended period” once the aircraft is flying again.
- JudgeWapner 7y ago
  this is what marketing people are paid to solve. they'll rebrand it, have some feel-good TV commercials like BP did after they dumped millions of gallons into the gulf, and somehow get on with life.
- Aeolun 7y ago
  Yeah, they say that, but when they get their non-refundable ticket and see it is in an 737 MAX. How many do you think will sue their airline claiming a refund?
  - chaboud 7y ago
    The airframe is listed at purchase. I won't be suing. I just won't be buying.
- TomVDB 7y ago
  Here’s my thought experiment on that: if I booked a flight to my vacation destination and, at the last moment, I discovered that I’d be flying in a 737 MAX, would I cancel my trip or pay a considerable amount of moment to get all our tickets changed? I very likely would not. Would you? Would others? It’s one thing to answer a question of a pollster, it’s another to take concrete action.
  - chaboud 7y ago
    For a year after it is reinstated, my answer will be "yes, I'm changing my flight". Doubly so if my wife and child are on the plane. Why? Because I'd be so unbelievably pissed at myself if the plane nosed itself into the ground, at least for the time it took to impact. I also vote with my money. Simple answer? I won't be flying airlines that use the 737 Max. Stick to the NG or pick up some 320's. Between work and personal travel for our family, that's over $50k of gross revenue per year (we both travel a lot for work). Maybe nobody else cares? I'm betting there are more people like me and my wife.
  - michaelmrose 7y ago
    You typically can see the type of plane on travel sites. If this wasn't the case I would buy from one that did. In the case that I for some reason couldnt determine it ahead of time I would complain emphatically enough.
  - bushido 7y ago
    As others have stated, I will not be booking a ticket on a 737 max, period. Granted I might not be a typical discount shopper, I pick flights based on comfort, not price and have checked the aircraft/airframe I will be in for years. However, I have a tough time seeing anyone I know taking a risk with flying the 737 max for a 10% discount in fares. Typically, fuel costs to the airline can be estimated at 10-20% of the ticket price on domestic flights (5 gallons per seat per hour). 737 Max is advertised as providing up to 20% in fuel cost saving, which would bring the cost to 4 gallons per seat per hour. Which should not affect a ticket price by more than $4-6 per hour of flight. Are you suggesting that people aware of the issue will be wiling to risk their lives for a chance to save $8-20 to their destination? And to add to that very few 737 Max are in service right now, only 300 or so of 5000 orders have been fulfilled. These supposed savings are not yet factored into the price of most tickets, they are future reductions at best. And likely these will not even be reductions, just a way for carriers to earn more per seat.
- michaelmrose 7y ago
  Wherein an extended period of time is effectively forever.

jhayward 7y ago

Have you ever flown in a 737? I'll bet you have. Are you aware that at one point in the deployment of the 737 they had a "runaway rudder" issue [1] that caused two crashes and one near crash, and hundreds died from it? The 737 has flow millions upon millions of flights, safely, since then. The problem will be addressed, and life will continue. It is tragic, and there will be major repercussions within the manufacturer and regulator but the design will be fine. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues

theclaw 7y ago

Boeing could simply rebrand the plane. Take ‘MAX’ out of the name, call it a 737-8. I think most people have absolutely no idea what model of plane they’re flying on anyway.

salawat 7y ago
That is a despicable, and dishonest thing to do, and there are people who are more than happy to act as repeaters to make sure people know Boeing's NewPlane (TM) is just a rebrand of the MAX, with a healthy dose of "this is how stupid Boeing thought you were." Such a move would be ill-advised.