Boeing Lounge MAX 10 FAA Certification

///AMG said:
It is also silly because the party line here for forever is "gaahhhhh damn Boeing can't deliver the MAX 10 and it won't get certified and there will be no movement because of that so damn Boeing and airbus is so great" and now that it is certified it is "ahhh the MAX 10 sucks". I've actually seen it in person and touched one, I bet nobody else has. Anyway, it'll be another 737. I'm fairly certain it will perform like a MAX 9. I literally can't tell the difference between a MAX 8, 9, 9ER, or an 800. The 700 also feels the same to me, other than the engine noise is louder on takeoff and everything inside looks different. Some of you guys are getting really lost in your esoteric airliner nerdery. I do like the MAX more than the others because it lands better and the displays are nicer. That's about the only difference I notice.
Click to expand...
Ehhhh… hopefully this isn’t infringing too far into “typical Alaska BS” territory but if you still believe the “Max 10s will be mad growth!!” line after the announcements about the -700s, the 717s, and given that we have how many -321s to replace, and given that jet fuel has doubled and no sign of the Iran war winding down, I’ve got some news for you. My observations about the Venn diagram of certain sociopolitical proclivities and people boosting that signal would certainly get moved so I won’t go there.

Now as your other comments, I think I trust the opinion of guys (including myself) who’ve actually flown other civilian jets 😛.
 
Roger Roger said:
Ehhhh… hopefully this isn’t infringing too far into “typical Alaska BS” territory but if you still believe the “Max 10s will be mad growth!!” line after the announcements about the -700s, the 717s, and given that we have how many -321s to replace, and given that jet fuel has doubled and no sign of the Iran war winding down, I’ve got some news for you. My observations about the Venn diagram of certain sociopolitical proclivities and people boosting that signal would certainly get moved so I won’t go there.

Now as your other comments, I think I trust the opinion of guys (including myself) who’ve actually flown other civilian jets 😛.
Click to expand...
I don't think they'll be mad growth, at least not while fuel is double the cost, but it's better than not taking deliveries. We've been pretty stagnant since the door blowout. I'd prefer to not have all our eggs in the Boeing basket but nobody asked me.
 
word302 said:
I don't think they'll be mad growth, at least not while fuel is double the cost, but it's better than not taking deliveries. We've been pretty stagnant since the door blowout. I'd prefer to not have all our eggs in the Boeing basket but nobody asked me.
Click to expand...
I mean I’d rather be taking deliveries of new airplanes than not whilst retiring the 700s, moving 800s to the islands to replace 717s, and divesting the 321s, but yeah, depending how fast they come and how fast we park those other aircraft, it’ll be a realistically a few years before those deliveries are net growth in frames.
 
Roger Roger said:
I mean I’d rather be taking deliveries of new airplanes than not whilst retiring the 700s, moving 800s to the islands to replace 717s, and divesting the 321s, but yeah, depending how fast they come and how fast we park those other aircraft, it’ll be a realistically a few years before those deliveries are net growth in frames.
Click to expand...
Well, they can't replace 321s or 717s with guppies until we have an SLI which is realistically 18 months away at a bare minimum. How many 700s are left? 5? (I really have no idea). I don't think anyone rational thinks there will ever be explosive growth at AS, but I also think reality is somewhere closer to what management says than beefy (not super close, but on that side of the line).
 
///AMG said:
It is also silly because the party line here for forever is "gaahhhhh damn Boeing can't deliver the MAX 10 and it won't get certified and there will be no movement because of that so damn Boeing and airbus is so great" and now that it is certified it is "ahhh the MAX 10 sucks". I've actually seen it in person and touched one, I bet nobody else has. Anyway, it'll be another 737. I'm fairly certain it will perform like a MAX 9. I literally can't tell the difference between a MAX 8, 9, 9ER, or an 800. The 700 also feels the same to me, other than the engine noise is louder on takeoff and everything inside looks different. Some of you guys are getting really lost in your esoteric airliner nerdery. I do like the MAX more than the others because it lands better and the displays are nicer. That's about the only difference I notice.
Click to expand...

If the range quote at 2500NM is remotely accurate the aircraft won’t be suitable for a transcon. I’m hoping it’s incorrect.

I’ve got a lot more experience than I’d like to admit flying jets that were range limited to the NE. If the above is true and the aircraft is range limited to 2500NM, that’s really, really bad.
 
Roger Roger said:
I mean I’d rather be taking deliveries of new airplanes than not whilst retiring the 700s, moving 800s to the islands to replace 717s, and divesting the 321s, but yeah, depending how fast they come and how fast we park those other aircraft, it’ll be a realistically a few years before those deliveries are net growth in frames.
Click to expand...
How dare you say something like that! Or listen to the investor call where they say the 4% growth is all from gauge. Not an increase in airframes.
 
Minuteman said:
I Googled "737-10" and it told me "727."

The -10 carries over almost 100 more passengers.
The -10 can hold 45,000 lbs of fuel. The 727 is 71,000(!!).
The -10 has a MZFW max range of ~2,500 NM, the 727 (-200Adv with -17R engines) could go ~2,200 NM.
The -10 doesn't have an EICAS, the 727 doesn't have an EICAS (but it does still have CWS).
Touchscreen CDU, blech!

The MTOW is only ~3,000 lbs more than the 737-9, so it'll be interesting to see the tire margin at the hot, high airpots.
Click to expand...

The JT8Ds on the 727 burned 9000pph per engine at takeoff and 3000pph at cruise. So there’s that.

Other than that, it was a superior aircraft to the 737 in every other respect.
 
Richman said:
Other than that, it was a superior aircraft to the 737 in every other respect.
Click to expand...
Optional wheel-well APU was kinda dodgy and reportedly loud as hell on the bag throwers.

1792710497361.png
1792710708998.png


I just wanted to callout Boeing's dogbarf branding on the MAX where a list of models sorts like

737-10
737-7
737-8
737-9

and the Google hive mind thought I was trying to subtract 10 before it guessed I was looking for that dumb name.
 
Roger Roger said:
Ehhhh… hopefully this isn’t infringing too far into “typical Alaska BS” territory but if you still believe the “Max 10s will be mad growth!!” line after the announcements about the -700s, the 717s, and given that we have how many -321s to replace, and given that jet fuel has doubled and no sign of the Iran war winding down, I’ve got some news for you. My observations about the Venn diagram of certain sociopolitical proclivities and people boosting that signal would certainly get moved so I won’t go there.

Now as your other comments, I think I trust the opinion of guys (including myself) who’ve actually flown other civilian jets 😛.
Click to expand...

I’m more s**** ing on the Boeing hate here than anything else. Trust me, I didn’t think the 10 was going to = growth. I’m kinda making fun of that perspective too. I hope you enjoyed your other civilian jets……I guess you’re stuck with the rest of us guppy people now :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top