7 ms·

Is there any way to know what kind of aircraft you'll be boarding when purchasing tickets? I've never paid attention until now, and the 737-Max is definitely a

Is there any way to know what kind of aircraft you'll be boarding when purchasing tickets? I've never paid attention until now, and the 737-Max is definitely a non-starter.

bradstewart 6y ago
Every airline will show you the scheduled aircraft when booking tickets, usually right next to the airports and travel times. Nothing guarantees they won't change it at some point before the flight though.
- tpmx 6y ago
  Be aware of the alternative aircraft code 737-8, which is a bit similar to the "good old" 737-800. AA seems to show "7M8-Boeing 737MAX 8" though. See https://onemileatatime.com/american-737-max-flights/ https://onemileatatime.com/american-737-max-flights/ and https://onemileatatime.com/boeing-737-8/ https://onemileatatime.com/boeing-737-8/
- jdxcode 6y ago
  certainly nothing guarantees, but American did at least say they wouldn't rebook non-MAX to MAX flights
ConceitedCode 6y ago
Just curious, what would it take for you to get on a 737-Max? European and American regulators have gone over it with a fine tooth comb at this point and allow it to fly. There is always gonna be people that will say the plane shouldn't fly. Arguably the amount of attention this plane has gotten will probably make it one of the safest in the industry going forward.
- omginternets 6y ago
  Honestly? Nothing. The issue is that I don't have enough time to evaluate whether the shoring-up job on the Max is sufficient.
- richardARPANET 6y ago
  Since the plane is aerodynamically flawed by design. I'll never step foot on one.
  - NikolaeVarius 6y ago
    But its not?
    - gruez 6y ago
      But it is? I think the parent was talking about: >Travis is unequivocal in his assessment of the Boeing 737 MAX. “It’s a faulty airframe. You’ve got to fix the airframe [and] you can’t fix the airframe without moving the engines” back and away from their current position. >The root problem with the engine-forward design is “once this thing pitches up, it wants to keep pitching up,” said Travis. “That’s a big no-no,” he continued, because pitch-up on an aircraft increases angle of attack. https://www.eetimes.com/software-wont-fix-boeings-faulty-airframe/ https://www.eetimes.com/software-wont-fix-boeings-faulty-air...
      - ConceitedCode 6y ago
        FYI - Background on the guy being quoted "Gregory Travis, a veteran software engineer and experienced, instrument-rated pilot who has flown aircraft simulators as large as the Boeing 757" I know a few veteran software engineers that are instrument-rated and frankly I'm not sure I would listen to any of them over the FAA or aeronautical engineers. Probably good for some perspective, but not exactly a great source for determining if an airplane is "aerodynamically flawed by design".
        raverbashing 6y ago
        I agree with you, aerodynamics and airframes are not something so trivial to understand. "who has flown aircraft simulators as large as the Boeing 757" Talk about a big aircraft simulator, those that I know are the size of a car, not of a 757 (jk)
      - 6y ago
- jdc 6y ago
  Is it not an intrinsically imbalanced aircraft?
  - cpgxiii 6y ago
    No it is not. No regulators has yet been prepared to certify a fixed-wing aircraft that is intrinsically unstable, even after decades of proven fly-by-wire development. The 737 Max has different yoke force during pitch-up than predecessor 737 models, such that at higher angles of attack it does not natively require increasing yoke force to continue to pitch up. That doesn't mean it would pitch up uncontrollably. MCAS was designed to provide pitch-down force in these high-AoA cases so that yoke forces would be equivalent to 737 NG models and minimal training would be necessary to fly both.
    - bruckie 6y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxed_stability#Unstable_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxed_stability#Unstable_air... indicates that the MD-11 (which regulators certified) is aerodynamically unstable. (That plane has a compensation system, similar to the 737-MAX.) Is "intrinsically unstable" different from "relaxed stability" in some subtle way? And while military planes are quite different from commercial planes, many (most at this point?) military jets are aerodynamically unstable.
      - cpgxiii 6y ago
        There are different kinds of "relaxed stability", largely depending on which axes of the aircraft are affected, and the magnitude of the instability. Longitudinal stability is something of a special case, in that essentially all swept-wing aircraft are vulnerable to "Dutch roll" instability and are generally fitted with yaw dampers. Since such stabilizers are, practically-speaking, omnipresent, regulators are OK with using them in what is now a well-understood domain. While it can be unpleasant, all of these aircraft can be flown with a failed yaw damper - notably the 707 family has a particular proclivity for yaw instability, and while almost all civilian users opted for the yaw damper, the largest fleet user, the USAF, did not fit their KC-135s with dampers until well into their service life. For good reason, pitch instability is a much more serious issue, and there has been very little interest in trying to bring to market a transport aircraft that required active pitch stabilization. Many, if not all, modern clean-sheet airliner designs are fly-by-wire due the the safety, performance, and efficiency improvements to be had, but they are all safely flyable in an "alternate law" (or equivalent) fallback mode. Combat aircraft, generally speaking, aren't certified aircraft (they have no need be), for good reason - if you're flying a modern fighter and the FBW computers die on you, it's over, you eject. Understandably, that's not an option in a transport aircraft.
- jellicle 6y ago
  I suppose it boils down to whether you have confidence in the FAA of 2020 to make a decision that would be strongly against the financial interests of Boeing and many US carriers. I think the Max will crash again. Excuse me, the 737-8 will crash again.
  - ConceitedCode 6y ago
    European regulators now allow the plane to fly after conducting their own investigation so it's more than just the FAA.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - imtringued 6y ago
    If pilots can disable the malfunctioning MCAS during emergencies then this type of accident won't happen again. The 737 max might suffer from more emergency landings than usual though.
- alkonaut 6y ago
  Nothing more than approval by relevant authorities. Once I use a different treshold than that, it becomes very difficult to fly at all. I mean all else being equal (Two planes to London leaving at almost exactly the same time and exactly the same cost) then perhaps I'd prefer the A32X. But the point is all else isn't equal. It becomes a matter of how many hundred you want to spend to fly the Airbus. Or how many hours you want to spend at the airport waiting for the non-Max flight. And I'll happily take the MAX if it saves me 30 minutes or $20. And I'll take my family along too without hesitation.
- addicted 6y ago
  At the very least new training for the pilots. The whole thing has been badly handled. The FAA/EU agencies should have declared at the very outset that airlines will need to bear the cost of retraining the pilots who will be flying this. It was the attraction of not having to retrain pilots that was the biggest incentive for Boeing to pull the shortcuts they did. At a bare minimum the aviation agencies should have pulled that benefit away.
ghaff 6y ago
The short answer is no. The longer answer is that you can see the planned type of aircraft when you book your ticket which doesn't typically change. But airlines can and do sometimes switch aircraft types at the last minute up to the point where you're already at the gate. ADDED: And I'm guessing things are more fluid than usual in the current situation.
- toast0 6y ago
  It really depends on the route (and the airline). Some routes I've flown are scheduled for different types throughout the day; it's not uncommon to fly on the other type. As a bonus, different types have different premium rows, if you reserve a non-premium seat and the type is changed, you may keep the seat number and get a premium seat.
intricatedetail 6y ago
If I saw 737MAX pulling at the terminal I would have cancelled the trip, but usually airline shows plane at itinerary and you can check flightradar what planes fly that route.

Is there any way to know what kind of aircraft you'll be boarding when purchasing tickets? I've never paid attention until now, and the 737-Max is definitely a non-starter.

bradstewart 6y ago

Every airline will show you the scheduled aircraft when booking tickets, usually right next to the airports and travel times. Nothing guarantees they won't change it at some point before the flight though.

tpmx 6y ago
Be aware of the alternative aircraft code 737-8, which is a bit similar to the "good old" 737-800. AA seems to show "7M8-Boeing 737MAX 8" though. See https://onemileatatime.com/american-737-max-flights/ https://onemileatatime.com/american-737-max-flights/ and https://onemileatatime.com/boeing-737-8/ https://onemileatatime.com/boeing-737-8/
jdxcode 6y ago
certainly nothing guarantees, but American did at least say they wouldn't rebook non-MAX to MAX flights

ConceitedCode 6y ago

Just curious, what would it take for you to get on a 737-Max? European and American regulators have gone over it with a fine tooth comb at this point and allow it to fly. There is always gonna be people that will say the plane shouldn't fly. Arguably the amount of attention this plane has gotten will probably make it one of the safest in the industry going forward.

omginternets 6y ago
Honestly? Nothing. The issue is that I don't have enough time to evaluate whether the shoring-up job on the Max is sufficient.
richardARPANET 6y ago
Since the plane is aerodynamically flawed by design. I'll never step foot on one.
- NikolaeVarius 6y ago
  But its not?
  - gruez 6y ago
    But it is? I think the parent was talking about: >Travis is unequivocal in his assessment of the Boeing 737 MAX. “It’s a faulty airframe. You’ve got to fix the airframe [and] you can’t fix the airframe without moving the engines” back and away from their current position. >The root problem with the engine-forward design is “once this thing pitches up, it wants to keep pitching up,” said Travis. “That’s a big no-no,” he continued, because pitch-up on an aircraft increases angle of attack. https://www.eetimes.com/software-wont-fix-boeings-faulty-airframe/ https://www.eetimes.com/software-wont-fix-boeings-faulty-air...
    - ConceitedCode 6y ago
      FYI - Background on the guy being quoted "Gregory Travis, a veteran software engineer and experienced, instrument-rated pilot who has flown aircraft simulators as large as the Boeing 757" I know a few veteran software engineers that are instrument-rated and frankly I'm not sure I would listen to any of them over the FAA or aeronautical engineers. Probably good for some perspective, but not exactly a great source for determining if an airplane is "aerodynamically flawed by design".
      - raverbashing 6y ago
        I agree with you, aerodynamics and airframes are not something so trivial to understand. "who has flown aircraft simulators as large as the Boeing 757" Talk about a big aircraft simulator, those that I know are the size of a car, not of a 757 (jk)
    - 6y ago
jdc 6y ago
Is it not an intrinsically imbalanced aircraft?
- cpgxiii 6y ago
  No it is not. No regulators has yet been prepared to certify a fixed-wing aircraft that is intrinsically unstable, even after decades of proven fly-by-wire development. The 737 Max has different yoke force during pitch-up than predecessor 737 models, such that at higher angles of attack it does not natively require increasing yoke force to continue to pitch up. That doesn't mean it would pitch up uncontrollably. MCAS was designed to provide pitch-down force in these high-AoA cases so that yoke forces would be equivalent to 737 NG models and minimal training would be necessary to fly both.
  - bruckie 6y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxed_stability#Unstable_aircraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxed_stability#Unstable_air... indicates that the MD-11 (which regulators certified) is aerodynamically unstable. (That plane has a compensation system, similar to the 737-MAX.) Is "intrinsically unstable" different from "relaxed stability" in some subtle way? And while military planes are quite different from commercial planes, many (most at this point?) military jets are aerodynamically unstable.
    - cpgxiii 6y ago
      There are different kinds of "relaxed stability", largely depending on which axes of the aircraft are affected, and the magnitude of the instability. Longitudinal stability is something of a special case, in that essentially all swept-wing aircraft are vulnerable to "Dutch roll" instability and are generally fitted with yaw dampers. Since such stabilizers are, practically-speaking, omnipresent, regulators are OK with using them in what is now a well-understood domain. While it can be unpleasant, all of these aircraft can be flown with a failed yaw damper - notably the 707 family has a particular proclivity for yaw instability, and while almost all civilian users opted for the yaw damper, the largest fleet user, the USAF, did not fit their KC-135s with dampers until well into their service life. For good reason, pitch instability is a much more serious issue, and there has been very little interest in trying to bring to market a transport aircraft that required active pitch stabilization. Many, if not all, modern clean-sheet airliner designs are fly-by-wire due the the safety, performance, and efficiency improvements to be had, but they are all safely flyable in an "alternate law" (or equivalent) fallback mode. Combat aircraft, generally speaking, aren't certified aircraft (they have no need be), for good reason - if you're flying a modern fighter and the FBW computers die on you, it's over, you eject. Understandably, that's not an option in a transport aircraft.
jellicle 6y ago
I suppose it boils down to whether you have confidence in the FAA of 2020 to make a decision that would be strongly against the financial interests of Boeing and many US carriers. I think the Max will crash again. Excuse me, the 737-8 will crash again.
- ConceitedCode 6y ago
  European regulators now allow the plane to fly after conducting their own investigation so it's more than just the FAA.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- imtringued 6y ago
  If pilots can disable the malfunctioning MCAS during emergencies then this type of accident won't happen again. The 737 max might suffer from more emergency landings than usual though.
alkonaut 6y ago
Nothing more than approval by relevant authorities. Once I use a different treshold than that, it becomes very difficult to fly at all. I mean all else being equal (Two planes to London leaving at almost exactly the same time and exactly the same cost) then perhaps I'd prefer the A32X. But the point is all else isn't equal. It becomes a matter of how many hundred you want to spend to fly the Airbus. Or how many hours you want to spend at the airport waiting for the non-Max flight. And I'll happily take the MAX if it saves me 30 minutes or $20. And I'll take my family along too without hesitation.
addicted 6y ago
At the very least new training for the pilots. The whole thing has been badly handled. The FAA/EU agencies should have declared at the very outset that airlines will need to bear the cost of retraining the pilots who will be flying this. It was the attraction of not having to retrain pilots that was the biggest incentive for Boeing to pull the shortcuts they did. At a bare minimum the aviation agencies should have pulled that benefit away.

ghaff 6y ago

The short answer is no. The longer answer is that you can see the planned type of aircraft when you book your ticket which doesn't typically change. But airlines can and do sometimes switch aircraft types at the last minute up to the point where you're already at the gate. ADDED: And I'm guessing things are more fluid than usual in the current situation.

toast0 6y ago
It really depends on the route (and the airline). Some routes I've flown are scheduled for different types throughout the day; it's not uncommon to fly on the other type. As a bonus, different types have different premium rows, if you reserve a non-premium seat and the type is changed, you may keep the seat number and get a premium seat.

intricatedetail 6y ago

If I saw 737MAX pulling at the terminal I would have cancelled the trip, but usually airline shows plane at itinerary and you can check flightradar what planes fly that route.