B-737 MAX 8 at MSP

        The public is stymied trying to get information on B-737 MAX's taking off at U.S. airports after the groundings.  Stranded B-737 MAX's began taking off at after it became clear that the technical issues and finger-pointing would not be quickly resolved. 
The original fix idea --a software update --could be installed anywhere. 
       Now, the public is, naturally, worried about an urban crash by a "grounded" aircraft. In Orlando, a "MAX-8" had to quickly turn back and make an emergency landing.The Orlando Sentinal matter-of-factly wrote that groundings applied to commercial passenger flights only. That missed the point: the public wasn't told --or warned --that not-yet-fixed Max's would be flying over populated areas. Storage space is limited around airports generally and B-737 MAXs were parked at airline expense. So the airlines began "ferrying" them to cheaper airfields where now it is expected thagt sensor, control panels, swirches or motors may be replaced or modified.
        That is the point: airport authorities do not consider overflight hazards their reponsibilty. 
        We uncovered more facts about the Orlando emergency landing:
1. Southwest had FAA (not airport authority) OK for ferrying B-737 MAXs to Victorville, CA, about 85 miles northeast of Los Angeles. SW and Boeing were collecting MAXs to be fixed and re-certified. Either the fix is more complcated than a software update or the grounded aircraft were in the way of airport operations.
2. The FAA is investigating the Olando incident, but Southwest said that "engine trouble" was the cause of the emergency.
3. Five B-737 MAX aircraft were grounded at Orlando International. 

Showing 3 reactions

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • Smaac Forum Panel
    commented 2019-06-01 10:40:10 -0500
    Air travel would be safer if safety really was the primary busiess goal of airlines (but profit is the obvious goal). Boeing catered to their customer airlines’ awarness of the costs associated with new aircraft: training and maintenance logistics. MSP is catering to riskier and more expensive peak-hours.

    In the Twin Cities, the finance and economic growth outlook is murky: forecasts might be off if demand falters, but also that large Delta and MSP fcilities investments made assuming a steady increase in air travel through the hub.
  • Smaac Forum Panel
    commented 2019-06-01 10:09:25 -0500
    The public, including frequent or propspective air travelers have by now too much information about the fatal crashes, trainng pilots and publishing flight manuals, and FAA, airline and Boeing shortcomings. Complex design and use issues are worrisome. Who believes that more powerful engines are less costly (more fuel efficient) now?

    Net-net, the “safest travel” assertions are, and shoud be in doubt. Business journals are saying that not wanting to fly on a MAX ever may be generalized to not flying if a reasonable option exists.
  • Smaac Forum Panel
    commented 2019-04-29 10:20:36 -0500
    Further investigations show that it is unlikely that any B-737 MAX 8 aircraft were at MSP when the grounding was ordered. The sighting therefore may be only a rumor. There is a small chance that a B-737 Max may have re-fueled or otherwise stopped at MSP while being ferried tothe west coast; that would explain why a radar tracking program Flight Number label was, as mentioned, missing. [Note: We have not been able to locate the oiginal posts on e-democacy or other local sites.]