Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
strfyr51 wrote:The assumed temp is +50 deg F higher than the actual OAT. that's pretty impressive . It's going to make for a damn long runway takeoff roll though.
It saves on engine wear but I'd rather have runway behind me and sky below me in more of a hurry than that. I was never a fan of Max Gross takeoffs even when I worked as a flight engineer.
strfyr51 wrote:BENAir01 wrote:Yeah, Thai Lion Air has already been operating the 7M9.
I thought the header said North American inaugural service?
axiom wrote:flyingclrs727 wrote:Newbiepilot wrote:I am glad to see the airplane entering service. There was a lot of doubt, especially from one member, about whether or not The 737-9 would ever be built let alone operated by United. In a number of threads there was speculation that the 737-9 order would be canceled in favor of A321neos.
It is interesting that United is putting the airplane on IAH-ANC right away. Is the route being relaunched because of the range of the MAX? That would have been a struggle for a 737-900ER and the 757s are configured for premium routes.
I'm not shocked at all. Just as the 787 was used for long haul expansion rather than replacement of 767's, the 737-9 MAX is being put on the longest domestic routes first. This puts the most fuel efficient aircraft on the routes that benefit most from the improved fuel efficiency.
It makes sense, indeed. I feel for the good people of ANC, however. They've been MAX'd in mass. Does UA use the same terrible toilet configuration that AA uses?
Love to see this classic design get new life. Do not love the prospect of how tight the interiors have become.
tjh8402 wrote:axiom wrote:flyingclrs727 wrote:
I'm not shocked at all. Just as the 787 was used for long haul expansion rather than replacement of 767's, the 737-9 MAX is being put on the longest domestic routes first. This puts the most fuel efficient aircraft on the routes that benefit most from the improved fuel efficiency.
It makes sense, indeed. I feel for the good people of ANC, however. They've been MAX'd in mass. Does UA use the same terrible toilet configuration that AA uses?
Love to see this classic design get new life. Do not love the prospect of how tight the interiors have become.
I don’t believe the use the AA lav. I haven’t counted myself, but per my friend on the flight (a UA elite and avgeek so he studies these things), the Max 9 actually seats 3 fewer total pax than the -900, and has an extra row of Y+. I haven’t double checked him but he’s usually right about these things.
CRJ900 wrote:Trip reports about the UA MAX 9 are starting to appear on youtube. Looks like the F and Y seats are slimline versions without PTVs, which should save about 400kg in weight. Noticed a lovely slimline lav behind row 5AB too.
Do UA have the aft flat pressure bulhead on the 900ER and MAX 9 or did they drop it? It's heavier than the rounded pressure bulkhead.
cledaybuck wrote:77H wrote:I don't think anyone is anxious to add extra capacity to KOA right now.hoya wrote:
UA will operate the MAX9 out of OGG later this year, so runway performance must be sufficient if it can take off a 7000ft runway and make it to LAX.
I’ve seen that on the fleet utilization plan. Had to double take when I first saw it. Even more surprising is that OGG is scheduled to see the M9 before KOA which has a longer runway.
I watched a video of the 7M9 inaugural take off roll. It used most of the runway out of IAH. Hopefully UA sends the plane on proving runs before they commit it to OGG lest they find themselves blocking seats to leave the pavement.
OGG’s strong tradewinds should aid the plane in getting off the runway but what happens when winds are calm?
77H
FlyHossD wrote:77H wrote:FlyHossD wrote:I suspect that the -9Max's will be much the same - lots of carping by people who don't fly them.
There are several notable airports they can’t use the 739 to that could benefit from the added capacity the plane offers. OGG/LIH/SNA immediately come to mind.
77Hhoya wrote:UA will operate the MAX9 out of OGG later this year, so runway performance must be sufficient if it can take off a 7000ft runway and make it to LAX.
STT757 wrote:Anyone here know the breakdown of the delivery schedule, how Many per year? These 61 737Max 9s are the replacements for the 65 737-700s UA ordered to grow mainline flying. These 737Max 9s aren’t replacing older aircraft, they’re all growth.
iahcsr wrote:First diversion; UA1788 MCOIAH diverted to AEX due weather. Ship 7501 arrived IAH 2+ hours tardy. Interesting...
CRJ900 wrote:What kind of inflight service do Y passengers get on IAH-ANC - being 6hrs30mins, do they get a full meal with hot main dish like on long-haul flights?
flyguy84 wrote:iahcsr wrote:First diversion; UA1788 MCOIAH diverted to AEX due weather. Ship 7501 arrived IAH 2+ hours tardy. Interesting...
Not sure what’s “interesting...” about it. ATC was issuing tactical re-routes and the flight didn’t have sufficient fuel.
