The biggest Baby Boeing ever built took off from Renton Municipal Airport on Friday. The 230-seat 737 MAX 10 took off on a 2.5-hour first flight Friday morning with little fanfare. Boeing normally invites hundreds of media and aviation dignitaries to such occasions and issues elaborate press releases but there was little to mark this first flight. The twin crises of the certification issues on the MAX and the pandemic prompted the low-key affair.
The new MAX includes safety refinements beyond those demanded by the FAA in the earlier models, including a third angle of attack source requested by European regulators. Even though the plane is essentially a stretched version of the earlier aircraft the certification is expected to be long and complex because of the earlier issues. The new aircraft does have taller landing gear than earlier models to prevent tail scrapes on the longer fuselage. “We’re going to take our time on this certification,” CEO Stan Deal told the single pool reporter allowed to attend the flight.
The MAX 10 is Boeing’s answer to the A321neo, but critics say it has some shortcomings in that regard. The biggest single-aisle Airbus has 10 more seats and a range of 4,000 nautical miles, compared to the Boeing’s 3,300 NM. The range gives A321neo true trans-Atlantic and transcontinental flight capability that some operators are exploiting for medium-haul budget flights between Europe and North America, Africa and Asia without using widebodies.
Isn’t it time for Boeing to retire the 737 moniker and just come up with a new airplane?
Ya gads! Then Southwest wouldn’t have a common type rating for all their pilots.
Right on the money Mr Terps. Southwest is the main reason there is a 737-Max.
If Boeing had opted for the clean sheet replacement, and things had gone sideways in any manner, then we would all instead be saying “why didn’t Boeing just stretch the 737 instead, it’s a proven airframe”
Just re-do the 757. Was a better airplane anyway.
Indeed.
Far better nose, common type rating with 767, redundant systems, full digital avionics, …
The shorter 757-100 was offered but no takers. It may have been somewhat heavy for short-haul operations, but it and longer ones had legs, could do Seattle to London England area.
Redundant systems? 737 had those, of course.
Full digital avionics? 737 had the same options in the late 80’s.
Longer legs? Of course, a whole different airplane for a different market.
Wrong.
The 737 did not have the redundancy of the B757 and B767. That is well known, it has been explained by Boeing and independent experts.
You miss that Airbus is pushing range of the A321 family, it can now be scheduled from Portugal to the US and is being further developed.
The 757 was designed to fully support low minima landings, in the Cat III category.
The 737 was not, an additional autopilot channel was added during production of the original, upgrade of the ‘flight control computer’ system architecture after the MCAS fiasco added some additional monitoring, apparently a third source of AOA has now been added in some form.
I hope I never ride on a narrow body aircraft for 4000nm. Maybe the Airbus can go that far but I sure can’t.