73 ms·
Is my plane a 737 MAX?
- davidjjjh5544 3y agoDoes this ban work in Canada as well. right
- davidjjjh5544 3y agoSo which North American Airlines are forced to ground their 737 max planes?
- mariya12 3y agosome weeks ago, I was caught by my partner cheating , He took records of the whole incident and threatened to expose it on the internet. I was so scared and didn't want to be exposed so I researched for an hacker and i was referred to Remote Spy hacker as the best, I'm so happy he saved me the embarrasement my ex was planning to put me through by deleting all the pictures and videos he took on his phone. If your in need of a professional hacker contact [ Remote spy hacker @ gm ail . c om ].
- Igor_Wiwi 3y agoWhy 737 Max in particular?
- notac23 3y agoThey've been having major manufacturing and software quality issues. Have almost killed people several times at this point.
- Closi 3y agoBecause they fall out the sky and occasionally their windows fly off.
- jackdh 3y agoWell it's better a window than the front falling off.
- stephenr 3y agoIf a wave hits your plane the front falling off is the least of your concerns.
- danbruc 3y agoThat's not very typical! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM
- CafeRacer 3y agoLol, I still don't know if that interview is a comedy sketch or real.
- cqqxo4zV46cp 3y agoOn the off chance that this is genuine, it’s a sketch. A very famous comedy duo. Unfortunately one passed away a while ago.
- stephenr 3y agoIt's a satirical interview about a real event: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirki_(tanker) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirki_(tanker) They (the comedians) posted similar comedic takes on politics for many years; eg this one about Australia's energy market https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ELaBzj7cn14 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ELaBzj7cn14
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- dtagames 3y agoIts appalling safety record [0] thus far makes it one of the least safe airplanes in modern history. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX#Accidents_and_incidents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX#Accidents_and_i...
- I-Robot 3y agoThat is really bad misinformation statistically speaking. The "Max" aircraft (all variants) have literally many millions of miles of safe flight. If anything, it is the most scrutinized commercial aircraft in all of history.
- stephenr 3y agoI'm not going to comment on how it compares to other planes but it's certainly significantly less safe than the previous generations of 737: > a fatal accident rate of four accidents per million flights, whereas the previous Boeing 737 generations averaged 0.2 fatal accidents per million flights
- firebaze 3y agoBut even with this scrutiny glaring issues like the current ones have been missed. https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeings-ongoing-737-max-crisis-2024-01-06/ https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeings-o... (The most recent problem is missing yet)
- dtagames 3y agoI'll take the 777, thanks. https://simpleflying.com/safest-airliners-all-time/ https://simpleflying.com/safest-airliners-all-time/
- StreetChief 3y agoAre you equating and summing miles flown from different variants?! Rules and regulations apply separately for each variant.
- mikepurvis 3y agoReasonable place to start: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX_groundings https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX_groundings
- ThisIsMyAltAcct 3y agoThe 737 Max is the DC-10 of the 21st century
- JamesLeonis 3y agoThere was a recent blowout of a door, and now several problems were found in subsequent MAX planes. This is part of a larger saga with faults found in MAX planes that have caused some crashes, and the longstanding quality issues with Boeing. Some previous discussions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38917820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38917820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38893909 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38893909 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38889774 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38889774
- kube-system 3y agoYes, but those parts in question exist only on the MAX 9, which is no longer flying. Right now the answer to: "Is my plane a 737 MAX 9?" is "no, it isn't"
- Eji1700 3y agoWhen a plane crashes, twice, totaling 300+ dead, people are right to get skeptical. When the investigation into those crashes reveals a shitload of corner cutting on safety regs, people are right to get skeptical. When another version of the same plane made by the same company has an in flight blowout and the fleet is grounded AGAIN (yes i know just the 9s but remind me how many other companies have had entire lines of their plane grounded in the last 20 years), then yes I think it's reasonable to want to avoid any of their newer plane models as clearly the level of safety and quality appears to be declining. Flying is still safer than just about any other form of travel, but that's basically because we mandated a shit ton of regulations and safety to make sure that even penny pinching corner cutting corps wouldn't have people dying in droves. Boeing has clearly decided to push that envelope and they deserve all the bad press they get for it and I fully understand people who already have a quasi irrational fear of flying freaking the hell out over this. I would certainly not buy a car from a company that's clearly disregarded safety so badly, and would prefer avoiding being in one for any other reason (friends/rideshare/whatever).
- kube-system 3y ago> I would certainly not buy a car from a company that's clearly disregarded safety so badly, and would prefer avoiding being in one for any other reason (friends/rideshare/whatever). That's a lot of cars. The standard in the auto industry is to design specifically for regulatory tests, and/or popular industry tests, in a specific region. All major automakers sell cars that intentionally lack safety features in regions that don't explicitly require them, if it will give their vehicle a price advantage in that market. e.g. you can still buy vehicles without airbags made by major auto manufacturers.
- darknavi 3y agoNeed to integrate this into a browser extension for when you purchase flights!
- Etheryte 3y agoThis isn't foolproof, airlines swap out planes to meet schedules and/or capacity fairly often.
- BasilPH 3y agoThe fact that this is an actual concern is wild and shows the depth of Boeing's problems.
- miketery 3y agoI spoke to someone who works there about a year ago. I was trying to gauge how an insider viewed the Max problem related to the auto trim issue which caused two airplanes [1][2] to crash, killing 346 people. This was shortly after watching the documentary Downfall: The Case Against Boeing [3]. The ignorance and non acceptance of fault made me cringe. I won't go into the details, but this wasn't a freak accident this was due to human decisions. They cut corners on how to modify an aircraft to compete with Airbus, and then doubled down to not pass down training to pilots on their hack of a fix, since it would be an increase in costs on their customers (i.e. the plane becomes more expensive to operate due to extra training for pilots). I am doing my outmost to avoid any new planes from Boeing (higher risk with new airplanes). I've also simply started flying less. The Boeing fiasco is what 2nd world / 3rd world corruption looks like in the west. profit interests above safety, and regulatory capture of the FAA. Also anti competitive or anti free trade practices by the US Department of Commerce [4]. 1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_Air_Flight_610 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_Air_Flight_610 2 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_302 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_302 3 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downfall:_The_Case_Against_Boeing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downfall:_The_Case_Against_Boe... 4 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSeries_dumping_petition_by_Boeing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSeries_dumping_petition_by_Bo...
- spacemark 3y agoAll valid points, but I wonder if you've overshot your response to this (very slight) increase of risk to your personal safety. The statistical safety of aviation is the best it has ever been - 2023 set yet another record low for commercial aviation deaths and injuries. Your automobile trip to the grocery store is far riskier.
- r00fus 3y ago
- theflyingelvis 3y agoCan’t you just look at the equipment when making the reservation or the equipment on the “ticket”?
- bmitc 3y agoThe unfortunate thing is that they can change it at anytime. So you basically have to avoid airlines that have the MAX in their fleet, such as Southwest.
- deadbabe 3y agoWould be cool if you can get a refundable flight and cancel last minute if it switches to a MAX.
- bmitc 3y agoIt almost seems it should be regulated. But it also seems the regulations should have prevent a shitshow of an airplane being deployed.
- csharpminor 3y agoThe only major U.S. airline to not currently operate the MAX is Delta. Frontier, Hawaiian, JetBlue, Spirit, and SunCountry also do not operate it.
- ibejoeb 3y agoAnd Delta has an outstanding order for 100 of them, with delivery scheduled throughout 2025. We'll see if these continued incidents alter that, but I think the inertia is that this is what boeing selling these days. Everyone will have them.
- stevehawk 3y agoOn the other hand, Hawaiian, JetBlue, Spirit, Allegiant and others are all strapped with Airbus A320neos that are going to be grounded shortly due to engine issues related to P&W's GTF engine.
- ChicagoBoy11 3y agoSurely the author should now buy ismyplanea737max9.com, no?
- sp332 3y agoThe FAA has grounded all of them, but there is an inspection plan in place so they might be flying again soon. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/updates-grounding-boeing-737-max-9-aircraft https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/updates-grounding-boeing-737-ma...
- yreg 3y agoThe inspection takes 4-8 hours according to BBC, so they might be already up in the air.
- joekrill 3y agoThis doesn't seem correct. I checked a few flights I have coming up and it identified a United flight as not being a MAX, when United itself tells me it is. And it identifies a Southwest flight as being a MAX when it isn't.
- duxup 3y agoIs it possible that the planes were changed for a different one in light of the cancellations recently and … one or the other is wrong?
- jacksoncheek 3y agoYeah, the data source is imperfect. The flight information pulls the "nearest" (live, scheduled or landed) flight that matches that flight number, to give you a sense of the aircraft on that route.
- JoshTko 3y agoSeems like a fatal flaw in the product where precision is the most important aspect.
- madeofpalk 3y agoIt’s next to impossible to actually answer this precisely at any time 3 hours before departure for airlines that fly both Airbus and Boeing. There will be specific planes scheduled for the flight in advanced, but it changes frequently up until departure due to regular airline logistics.
- aero142 3y agoAdding a date of travel and checking the scheduled tail number would be much more accurate.
- madeofpalk 3y agoKind of. The 'scheduled tail number' will change multiple times in the days before a flight.
- artylerzysta 3y ago[flagged]
- alpb 3y agoAre you less safe on a 737 MAX than driving to the airport in a car? Genuinely curious, I’m trying to understand if this whole saga is statistically significant.
- EasyMark 3y agoI often use the same theory of "is this safer than my commute to work every day" for actuarial decisions in my life.
- xahrepap 3y agoI've heard a lot of people say this in these comment threads, and I think this glosses over the actual issue: safety is getting worse, not better or even staying the same. So it's MORE statistically significant than it was. The trend is heading the wrong way. Air safety going down is a trend you want to stop ASAP. Not wait around until it's just as dangerous as something else like driving your car.
- DennisP 3y agoThat's true, but the question might be whether you personally should be worried if you find yourself on a 737 Max.
- alrs 3y agoThe first worry as an American is having a pillar of your country's economy managed by incompetents.
- gruez 3y agoSounds a lot like "yeah sure, fear over 737 Max is overblown, but the fact that I was thinking about it in the first place says something about the current state of affairs". https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/aaaah https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/aaaah
- 3y ago
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- United857 3y agoFor the most reliable info, you can look up your flight number in Flightaware or Flightradar 24 -- those use actual flight plan data, so will take into account any last minute aircraft changes.
- gruez 3y ago>those use actual flight plan data, so will take into account any last minute aircraft changes. But at that point it's too late. I doubt people are that afraid of 737 Max that they'll cancel a flight (and forfeit their ticket) over it.
- m_a_g 3y agoI would. I'm that afraid.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> doubt people are that afraid of 737 Max that they'll cancel a flight (and forfeit their ticket) over it Nobody rational will. But there are plenty of people with an understandable fear of flying who will create a customer-service kerfuffle over it. On the margin that might not do anything. But in aggregate it could affect how the airlines negotiate settlements from Boeing.
- eastbound 3y agoNo. It’s just that people want to vote with their feet, and inflict damage to Boeing for abhorrent behavior. I mean not even every army general in every country has killed as many as Boeing.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> people want to vote with their feet, and inflict damage to Boeing for abhorrent behavior People want to express outrage. That’s understandable. Most flight revenue is from frequent travellers, and they understand the business enough to know histrionics won’t change Boeing’s incumbency. A couple people who fly twice a year swapping airlines isn’t going to move the needle. And I doubt a material fraction of them are likely voters who would bother their electeds about this.
- I-Robot 3y agoIt really shouldn't matter. There are MANY Max variants, and the airlines have already taken the 'questionable' units out of service.
- stephenr 3y agoThe ones that are known to be questionable so far, you mean? They never seem to identify the questionable ones until after something goes to shit.
- danielmarkbruce 3y agoHave they though? Boeing is the least trustworthy company on planet earth these days. The airlines aren't far behind. The regulators don't seem competent. I say this as a capitalist - Boeing should be torn apart and sold for scrap metal.I'm sure there are some decent folks there, but that place has turned into a mess.
- JohnFen 3y agoThe Max line is clearly cursed, and I think it's reasonable to be suspicious of all of the variants in it. That they've taken the newly discovered problematic ones out of service doesn't imply that the ones left in service are good -- particularly since it seems that the problems stem from systemic quality control issues rather than something special about those particular variants.
- kreativ_py 3y ago[flagged]
- jacksoncheek 3y agoLol... blow through the quota if you like.
- malfist 3y agoReally bad UI. Clicking on the placeholder text in the textbox doesn't do anything. I thought it was broken until I just starting clicking randomly and found that clicking outside the placeholder text works.
- IE6 3y agoI agree that clicking on what appears to be a placeholder but instead acts as a label should at the very least focus the input box so you're prompted to type in it. However the UI overall is pretty simple and clean.
- grgbrn 3y agoUhh.. damning praise. I think that can be rephrased as: "It's pretty, but despite being almost the simplest thing you can imagine, it still has ridiculous, unnecessary usability problems"
- grgbrn 3y agoSame! At first I thought it might be a Firefox problem, but it's equally broken in Chrome. Predictably it's a React site, using some widget library (MUI) that is going out of it's way to provide a text input that is inferior to what's built in to any modern browser. Great!
- jmward01 3y agoAviation is safe. An issue happened and appropriate steps have immediately happened and in the end an already incredibly safe industry will be even safer. If a car has an issue we don't blink and we loose nearly 40k people a year in the US alone, but a plane has an issue and we panic. Yes, panic. This is not rational or helpful and is a huge reason why aviation is so antiquated. You want flying cars? Stop panicking at statistically minor issues. Panic and fear are why it was easier to heavily modify the already massively modified 737 design to create the 'max' instead of just designing a new plane. It is nearly impossible to bring innovation to market because of panic and fear. Over reporting and sites like this are increasing fear and panic when we should instead be celebrating a system working as it should.
- gorkish 3y ago/end of thread You can apply this same argument to literally fucking everything.
- malfist 3y agoWhen you or I wreck, how many people are injured? How much control did we have over those situations? When a plane crashes, how many people are injured? How much control did the passengers have?
- I-Robot 3y agoUmmm, mostly when 'you' wreck, it is definitely out of your control.
- jessriedel 3y agoFor the majority of drivers, the risk is primarily out of their control. This is because the majority of risk is due to a minority of drivers (the highly accident prone and the drunk, who are often 10x as risky or worse).
- m3kw9 3y ago737 is f-ed, stick with A350 haha
- flerchin 3y agoThe very definition of FUD. I really wonder if these sites are thrown together by folks who are somehow profiting off of this.
- danielmarkbruce 3y agoBoeing have killed hundreds of people by skirting safety regs. With the MAX. Get a clue.
- flerchin 3y agoThis site went up in response to zero people dying.
- PascLeRasc 3y agoZero people died because the site went up.
- nashashmi 3y agoAirbus will profit because the site went up.
- danielmarkbruce 3y agoA door came flying off at 16k feet. They found a bunch of planes with loose bolts. On a plane with a history of problems built by a company with a history of problems. No one died this time. But hundreds died last time. Nothing will stop Boeing except money. People not wanting to fly this plane will change airlines purchasing decisions. Boeing will feel the pain.
- rsynnott 3y ago> People not wanting to fly this plane will change airlines purchasing decisions. It actually may not, much, unfortunately; there's only one real competing line of products, and they're so massively backlogged that people will buy this anyway.
- yoyoinbog 3y agoThis is how it is in life "One door closes, another one opens" Boing
- legitster 3y agoGiven that every affected 737 MAX has been grounded for inspection already, this seems a bit hyperbolic. If you are still worried about some hitherto unknown new problem from Boeing, it could just as likely come from any of their airframes.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- PascLeRasc 3y agoAirlines famously never make mistakes that happen to also sell more tickets.
- 4death4 3y agoYou could have said the same thing after the first grounding of the 737 MAX.
- rsynnott 3y ago> If you are still worried about some hitherto unknown new problem from Boeing, it could just as likely come from any of their airframes. Eh... not sure about that. The 737 Max is quite new, and this is catastrophic/near-catastrophic problem 2 in a couple of years. One could be forgiven for being more suspicious of this family than their others. Like, maybe these were the only two problems, and everything else is a perfect as could be, but at this point it's not ridiculous to be concerned that it's just a shoddy product.
- kube-system 3y agoA lot of people don't realize that the fuselage of this plane isn't even made by Boeing, it's made by Spirit AeroSystems which also makes components for Airbus. We don't really know who to blame here until the investigation concludes.
- dralley 3y agoTrue, but as integrator, Boeing is still responsible for ensuring the quality of the final product.
- btown 3y agoAnd, importantly, it's entirely consistent to hold off on blaming any singular party until the investigation is complete, while simultaneously not wanting to personally fly on a 737 Max!
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jessriedel 3y agoYou can also argue that the airline is responsible for operating only quality products
- ghaff 3y agoAn airline is responsible more for safely operating the aircraft (including most maintenance). An airline really isn't in a position to verify every design detail of an aircraft any more than you're responsible for verifying there are no potential design flaws in your (much simpler) car that could potentially cause someone injury.
- jessriedel 3y agoI think airlines are a lot more responsible for verifying design flaws in their airplane than I am in my car. First, they are a giant business which has way more resources to do this. Second, they are selling a service. If I was running a US taxi service and bought a fleet of flawed Indian cars that caused crashes, I think I would be partially responsible.
- wt__ 3y agoMaybe this is the beginning of the end of the 'Max' naming convention...
- world2vec 3y agoI said this before in another thread about the MAX a few months ago and got downvoted but I'll stand on this: I won't actually fly on any 737 MAX and actively avoid Boing airplanes altogether. I understand statistics but already hate flying and this whole debacle doesn't help.
- m_a_g 3y agoPeople think I'm overreacting, but I don't care. I'm not stepping on a 737 Max in the next three years.
- codegeek 3y agoYou are not alone. I am literally going to ask the flight attendants before boarding if this is a 737 MAX. If they cant answer or the answer is yes, I will not step on that plane.
- supportengineer 3y agoLook for "equipment type" when booking flights, and on your boarding pass
- maddynator 3y agoCan someone tell what stack is used to build this website? I am new to FE and looking to understand how to create simple websites like this, where is the database, how are they connected/hosted, and how much it takes to run them monthly. Thanks in advance
- jacksoncheek 3y agoThis is a simple Next.js React app, deployed with Vercel. The component library is MUI.
- maddynator 3y agoThank you!!!
- jtokoph 3y agoWhat is your data source?
- 05bmckay 3y agohttps://airlabs.co/ https://airlabs.co/
- synergy20 3y ago[flagged]
- dubcanada 3y agoIt has a serious competitor? Airbus is equal if not higher in market share.
- BizarreByte 3y agoIt's interesting to see how the DC-10 would have been treated in modern times with social media and mass (moreso) communication. I've flown on Maxes and will continue to do so, even with the problems they've faced a flight on one is still far safer than many I things I do every day.
- mihaaly 3y ago... I can only hope that Turkish Airlines Flght 981 might not have happened then. Unsure though. https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/a-legal-and-moral-question-the-crash-of-turkish-airlines-flight-981-and-the-dc-10-cargo-door-saga-d22f0b9fa689 https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/a-legal-and-moral-questi...
- ho_schi 3y agoHow about checking that while booking? I’m flying usually with Lufthansa and they inform during booking about the used type of aircraft. I’ve a strong preference for the B747 ;) Other prefer the A380 or ensure that it is a least a twin-aisle or whatever your preference is.
- jollyllama 3y agoEven Spirit shows you your plane during booking.
- caycep 3y agoSo - question - how much initial capital/expertise would be needed to make a new ground-up competitor to McDD-oeing, but with the engineering/quality focus of the old Boeing? I'd imagine there must be enough disgruntled aerospace engineers to create a fresh company w/ a blank slate rethink of airliner design.
- MattGaiser 3y agoIt would be enormous. Getting airlines to buy from even medium-sized aerospace companies is a challenge. Bombardier couldn't sell its CSeries over fears that it would not be around for the multi-decade lifespan of the plane. Same plane under Airbus is a hot commodity.
- flashback2199 3y agoSo enormous that musk won't touch it. He's said a plane company is something he wants to do but can't. And that wouldn't even be large airliners.
- dubcanada 3y agoIt would probably take less capital/expertise to make a space rocket at this point then a airplane. There is so much red tape that unless you buy an existing airplane company you're probably never going to get sales. US gov has proven it will protect Boeing with massive tariffs if anyone besides Airbus threatens it, means you cannot sell to US companies. So you'd have to start with EU probably, and there is a fair number of established players already.
- PascLeRasc 3y agoI was hoping this website would tell me how to identify a 737 Max from the inside or from my gate. Trust but verify.
- InvOfSmallC 3y agoIt doesn't find my European flight.
- supportengineer 3y agoAm I the only one who cannot type into the text box? This is on Safari.
- uean 3y agoIt's not intuitive, but you need to click into the box to the right of the text.
- greatNespresso 3y agoThat's a great MVB
- ourmandave 3y agoIs there a site to check if 737 MAX's are flying over my house? I don't need a door air dropped into my yard.
- gruez 3y agohttps://globe.adsbexchange.com/ https://globe.adsbexchange.com/ filter by type code
- tky 3y agoFun and all but the data isn’t necessarily accurate, or it’s only checking for MAX-9, as I looked up a MAX-8 that just landed and it said it wasn’t (which is true, it wasn’t MY flight, so gotcha?:)) If this is an actual concern you have, look up the flight on your day of travel to see what equipment you will most likely have and react accordingly. As a fan of the TV documentary “Air Disasters” I’m more afraid of the software and the people than the hardware, and my confidence in air travel has only risen after watching dozens of episodes.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- apapapa 3y agoClass action suit coming soon?
- ShadowBanThis01 3y agoThe text-entry box doesn't work. You can click on it and it animates, but there's no cursor and typing does nothing. Desktop Safari, latest version.
- JumpCrisscross 3y agoIf you are outraged and want to be more than performative about it, check if your electeds are on the Senate Aviation Safety, Operations, and Innovation [1] and/or House Aviation Subcommittees [2]. If not, the broader Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation [3] and/or House Transportation & Infrastructure Committees [4]. Call their office (D.C., preferably) or submit a comment noting the issue and your concerns about it. Be dispassoinate. Unless you really know what the fuck you're talking about, avoid suggesting solutions. (You want to avoid the crackpot bin.) This is a really good week to do this, because budget negotiations are being finalised in both houses. [1] https://www.commerce.senate.gov/commerce-subcommittees https://www.commerce.senate.gov/commerce-subcommittees [2] https://transportation.house.gov/subcommittees/subcommittee/?ID=107417 https://transportation.house.gov/subcommittees/subcommittee/... [3] https://www.commerce.senate.gov/members https://www.commerce.senate.gov/members [4] https://transportation.house.gov/about/membership.htm https://transportation.house.gov/about/membership.htm
- idontpost 3y ago[dead]
- pirate787 3y agoAlso I'd contact your favorite airlines and demand that they retire their MAX planes. https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/airline-consumer-contacts https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/airline-consumer-...
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> I'd contact your favorite airlines and demand that they retire their MAX planes This isn't happening. Demand would swell well before price cuts made those planes uneconomical.
- cameldrv 3y agoThe 737MAX is not going away. There are about 1400 of them flying and another 6000 orders. Boeing obviously has some serious quality problems that need to get fixed, but since the grounding in 2019, the MAX has done something like 1.5 million flights with no fatalities. This is worth fixing, but it's not dangerous enough to change your travel plans. You're way more likely to die from COVID you caught on the plane than because the plane was unsafe.
- lolwutnaow29 3y agoHyper-rational man who read Freakonomics and LessWrong.com, 45, dies in plane crash. The man, only identified by his initials F.A., a regular user of the website Hacker News, was the single passenger on a flight on the infamous Boeing 737 Max airplane. As the plane rapidly lost altitude, he lectured the panicking crew on the safety statistics of the airline industry and how flying is technically safer than driving a car.
- ivanjermakov 3y agoThis is destructive to air transportation. I understand the appeal of avoiding 737 MAX but realistically it's one of the safest model to fly on because of how much effort is put into further accident mitigation. Without even talking about how safe aviation is in general.
- alistairSH 3y agoWhere is the data sourced for this checker? I just tested two upcoming flights (UA2021 and UA2022), both of which are currently (as in, today) flown on 737-900. UA2021 shows as "Not a Max" and UA2022 shows as "Is a Max". Yes, I fully realize Unided will swap these around as needed. Just curious where one would even find the "scheduled" airframe?
- chrisbolt 3y ago> Just curious where one would even find the "scheduled" airframe? The aircraft column: https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL2021 https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL2021 https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL2022 https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL2022 B39M is a 737 MAX 9, B38M is a 737 MAX 8, B739 is a 737-900, etc.
- alistairSH 3y agoThat’s my point… the “Is my plane…” site doesn’t match what I’m seeing on FlightAware.
- thegrim33 3y agoI'll preface this by saying I'm for sure not denying there's problems to be fixed with this plane. There for sure are. But man, people in threads like these seem so out of touch with reality. You know that you have an incomplete picture of reality right? You're on US-based websites and consume US-based media, both of which amplify every bad thing related to Boeing, but don't amplify the same types of issues for other manufacturers. When Airbus planes fall apart and crash and have problems those events almost never get upvoted to the top of Hacker News, and you don't see those events covered nearly as often in the media. All you are exposed to is Boeing bad news, and not bad news from other manufacturers and you have a pretty skewed perception of reality. It's still lottery ticket odds to be involved in a crash with one of these planes. You likely risk your life more every time you get in a car than getting in one of these planes.
- jacobgorm 3y agoI'm in Europe, but I can't recall any Airbus planes falling apart in recent history. Could you provide an example?
- jjav 3y ago> You likely risk your life more every time you get in a car than getting in one of these planes. This statistic always comes up, but there is a big picture missing in it. In a plane, you are a completely powerless passenger. There is absolutely nothing you can do to improve your odds, everything is in the hands of multiple third parties. If you go drive your own car, there is a huge amount of influence you can do to improve your odds. Maintain the car well, it's yours so you can. Make the decision to only drive if you are alert (not sleepy, not drunk, not under emotional stress), it's a decision you control. Become a better driver through training (car control, accident avoidance - these trainings exist even if they are unfortunately not required), another aspect which is under your control. Humans work best when they have a fighting chance. With driving there is a lot you can proactively do, in a plane there is exactly nothing you can do.
- fnimick 3y agoAnd absolutely none of that influence matters when someone else who isn't as careful kills you. Trust me, as a cyclist, you learn very quickly how one impatient or careless driver can end your life with one bad decision.
- bitcharmer 3y agoSadly this was a totally foreseeable outcome. How else could this go in a country where regulation is communism and shareholder value is God.
- avgDev 3y agoLate to the party but I'm flying a 737-900 next week. I was concerned, so I looked up if its the "plane", turns out, it is not. Boeing naming is so confusing. 737 naming: [1] The first generation "Original" series: the 737-100 and -200, also the military T-43 and CT-43, launched February 1965. [2] The second generation "Classic" series: 737-300, -400 and -500, launched in 1979. [3] The third generation "Next Generation" series: 737-600, -700, -800 and -900, also the military C-40 and P-8, launched late 1993. [4] The fourth generation 737 MAX series: 737-7, -8, -9 and -10, launched August 2011. I read a funny quote from a pilot today, "737, flying yesterday's plane tomorrow".
- leetrout 3y agoEven more confusing when flight crew phraseology is "this boeing three seven dash eight is equipped with ..." for a 737-800.
- stevehawk 3y agoAnd the 737NG has its own problems - https://simpleflying.com/boeing-737-ng-nacelle-redesign/ https://simpleflying.com/boeing-737-ng-nacelle-redesign/
- coxley 3y agoSubject aside, this is a very pleasant website design. Love the simplicity and subtle animations/transitions.
- Fischgericht 3y agoI find it puzzling that airlines are still ordering this plane. It's not just us, the customers, who should "vote with their feet", but the airlines, too. I would not buy from a vendor that is not able to have a QA process that makes sure all screws and bolts are in place, fastened and secured. Even if it would not be an airplane where this is critical for safety, even if it would just be a toaster, I would stop buying. I would find it insulting as a customer to buy something for 50 Million USD to find out that the vendor was not willing to invest a little bit in QA. I understand that the 737 MAX is very cheap, but the damage to an airlines reputation, even if 90% of the customers do not care, should be priced in, which in the end makes it an expensive airplane. Looking at the number of quality and design issue problems Boeing had during the last couple of years, combined with the press attention they are getting now, I think we can take it for granted that during the next couple of months more such issues will be found, including the "oops, that potentially could have crashed the airplane" category. Also, I find it really insane that after all these issues the FAA still has not been reformed, properly staffed and funded. It really really should be clear by now that the system of Boeing doing the "certification" the FAA is supposed to be in charge of themselves. And finally: It goes beyond my comprehension that someone would decide to build a version of the voice recorder specifically for the US that only stores 2 hours of voice, while the international version of the same plane stores 25. What kind of cost reduction per unit is that, $1 per airplane? Having two different models to "certify", produce and warehouse just to save a dollar or something per unit does not sound like any sane business decision. Some people say that Boeing is that terrible because they cut corners to save costs everywhere. But to me it sounds like they even are bad at executing cost cutting...
- dawnerd 3y agoWhat choice do they have? If they switch to Airbus they’re going to be waiting until at least 2030. They could buy used but that’s goes against why airlines are ordering new planes to begin with. And that’s not factoring in the maintenance cost in switching manufacturers. Thats why you’ll see airlines be a Boeing or Airbus only fleet.
- datadeft 3y ago
- cooper_ganglia 3y agoThere's a 200,000x greater chance you die in a car crash. Personally, I couldn't be less worried about aircraft safety, even if this rate continues. If I could get a discount to take a 737 MAX exclusively, I'd do it.
- gmiller123456 3y ago"When one door closes, another door opens" -- Boeing
- datadeft 3y agoGod bless the author.
- apayan 3y agoIf you use Google Flights[1] to plan your flight, it lists the airplane that will be used for each leg of your trip so you can make sure to avoid flights on 737 MAXs. [1] https://www.google.com/travel/flights https://www.google.com/travel/flights
- banku_brougham 3y agoI think the market is beginning to explore the in-situ tolerance of consumers for fatal crashes, and weighing those marginal losses against realised cost savings.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> the market is beginning to explore the in-situ tolerance of consumers for fatal crashes, and weighing those marginal losses against realised cost savings Which market? Airlines aren't noticing this beyond a surge in customer-service and lost-booking costs. The financial markets are weighing penalties and settlements for the cost of grounded aircraft. The enforcement and incentive modifications around this will come almost entirely from the public sector and litigation, not consumers.
- epolanski 3y agoAre results correct for Ryanair planes? Because 737 8200 are Maxes too but the result is a no.
- hentrep 3y agoI booked a flight on United yesterday, well after this latest Boeing incident. After looking more carefully, they have me on a 737 MAX 9. I haven’t kept up with the latest, but I thought all of these planes were grounded. Am I missing something, or am I just setting myself up for a canceled flight next week?
- Sakos 3y agoOnly planes with the type of door that failed on the Alaskan airlines flight are grounded.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- scheme271 3y agoI think most of the 737 max 9s have the door plug since it's only replaced with an actual door when in a high density configuration used by low cost carriers.
- Sakos 3y agoSure, but not all of them do. There are some that weren't grounded and have continued to be in use. https://skift.com/2024/01/08/a-breakdown-of-carriers-that-operate-the-boing-737-max-9/ https://skift.com/2024/01/08/a-breakdown-of-carriers-that-op... This says there are 215 planes being used by airlines. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/updates-grounding-boeing-737-max-9-aircraft https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/updates-grounding-boeing-737-ma... This states that 171 planes are affected by the grounding.
- frumper 3y agoI've seen reports that the airlines are hopeful they'll be back in service by early next week. At the very least they need to go through enhanced inspections, and those inspections don't seem finalized on how to perform them yet. The best answer is, no one knows.
- epolanski 3y ago500 comments in 3 hours, and yet it's getting quickly downvoted out of the front page. Quite a suspicious thread.
- voisin 3y agoSo if it is, can you cancel and get a refund?
- j-b 3y agoMy family is set to fly with Alaska Airlines in a Boeing 737-9 MAX (ETOPS) this April. I'm just wondering about options and what others would do in this scenario. Maybe switch to a Delta flight on an Airbus A220-300, even though it means losing out on non-refundable discounts? Also, does anyone know if Alaska Airlines might let us change our non-refundable tickets (for an April flight) if we're worried about safety?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- DrNosferatu 3y agoRyanair is a big 737 MAX operator, but is there a complete list of all the airlines flying this aircraft?
- DrNosferatu 3y agoThere is: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boeing_737_MAX_orders_and_deliveries https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boeing_737_MAX_order...
- saintlunaire 3y agoIs anyone else contacting airlines to state their reluctance to fly the Max? I’ve just had a surprising chat with Ryanair where the agent boldly claimed that my enquiry about it is “the first one this year”.