When I typed A320 I meant Airbus in general.

 

Is there any word on how many airplanes and people they’re adding for the new Boeing SFO base in October ?

 

Max 10 is not looking good right now.

 

Indeed. No one, not even politicians in states with Boeing production facilities, feels safe about leaning on the FAA to cut any sort of deal with Boeing on safety issues. That most of these orders will eventually be replaced by Max 9 orders with the same grandfathered systems notwithstanding.

 

The Max was never was a “good” airplane. The Max 10 even less. The Max anomalies guide that Maint. Cntrl. is developing is unreal. Boeing has no idea what they created when they tried to add a little smart to a dumb airplane…..By all Maint estimates, they should have the Max “sorted” over the next 3-5 years. Lets all hope that the Max 10 quietly dies. That will start the process, the long process of saying good bye to an airplane that should have ended with 737-800 . Imagine if Boeing had put the full force of their ability into a clean sheet 100-200 seat common type jet starting back in 2008. My guess is that Airbus would be in a full fight for the single aisle market instead of owning it lock stock and barrel. It would have required humility, ingenuity, determination, integrity, honesty and hard work. All things that the once proud Boeing name used to stand for but have long been removed from the Boeing core values statement. Very fitting for a Seattle company.

 

Well, it’s dumb to allow MAX 8 and 9s to fly with their current alert system methods, continue to produce for the next 25 year airplane life cycles, but kill the MAX 10 for not having EICAS. The 10’s alert system is literally going to be the same as the MAX 8 and MAX 9. And they are going to have a 25-30 year life at the airlines like any other airplane.

So anyone calling to cancel the MaX 10 sure isn’t doing it for “safety” related reasons. I, for one, hope the MAX 10 gets certified under the old rules. This is nothing more than the FAA flexing their muscles and posturing in a post MAX grounding environment to “take their time” on certifying this plane. They have all the documents they need for months now and they still said they won’t be able to meet the Jan 1 deadline.


Remember, this is the same FAA that refused to ground the MAX. And the same DOT Secretary that flew a SWA MAX8 from Dallas to DC AFTER the second MAX to show her confidence in the MAX planes. Now they care? Not buying it. Public optics, nothing more.

 

Of course. But they are politicians. What do you expect?

 

FTFY.

When Boeing moved their HQ to Chicago, that was clearly the end of Old Boeing... Neu-Boeing is just McDD and Jack Welch drones wearing the old Boeing like a skin-suit.

 

Doesn’t really matter for Alaska. First of all it’s going to be certified as is eventually, once the FAA is finished with their posturing and Boeing greases the appropriate skids. Second, even if Boeing decided not to go forward with it Alaska would either just change the order to Max 9s or take fewer planes, pretty simple.
A couple delusional folks over on the other Alaska forum thinking this might mean life for the Airbus at Alaska are just that, delusional.

 

Moderator Reminder*

Please stay on topic of Alaska Airlines Hiring, this thread is subject to removal if participants deviate from forum rules.