Air Canada 737 MAX Has Engine Issues & Diverts: Nonstory?

I wasn’t going to write a story about this, but I feel like perhaps some balance is needed compared to how I’ve otherwise seen this incident portrayed in the media. My mom even asked me about this story yesterday, because she saw it in the news — “did you hear about the Boeing 737 MAX that had the emergency?”

Air Canada 737 MAX diverts due to engine issues

Aviation regulators around the world are starting to unground the Boeing 737 MAX, meaning that airlines are taking these planes out of storage and preparing to put them back into service.

Since February 24, 2020, one of Air Canada’s 737 MAXs has been stored at Pinal Airpark in Marana, Arizona. The climate there makes it an ideal place to store planes long-term.

The plan was that the plane with the registration code C-FSNQ would fly from Marana to Montreal with the flight number AC2358 on December 22, 2020, so it could start preparations for returning to service.

Well, the plane departed as scheduled with a three person crew, but then a couple of issued occurred. As noted by The Aviation Herald:

  • The crew received a left engine hydraulic low pressure indication; the crew worked through checklists and consulted with dispatch and maintenance, and decided to continue the flight to Montreal with just one engine
  • Shortly thereafter the crew received an indication of a fuel imbalance from the left side, at which point the crew shut down the engine
  • The crew then declared a “PAN PAN” (which means the situation was urgent, but not an immediate danger), and diverted to Tucson, Arizona
  • The plane landed in Tucson 80 minutes after its initial departure, which was from an airport just 35 miles away
  • The plane is still on the ground in Tucson as of now

Flight path for the diverted Air Canada 737 MAX

Is this situation a big deal?

Looking at the Facebook comments of mainstream media articles about this, most people seem to suggest that the 737 MAX should be taken out of service and should never be flown again. After all, how could the plane have a serious issue so soon after returning to service?

That doesn’t really get at the nuance of this situation:

  • The 737 MAX wasn’t grounded due to engine issues, but rather due to issues with the maneuvering characteristics augmentation system (MCAS), which was intended to improve the pitch stability of the aircraft; in other words, this was an unrelated issue to why the 737 MAX was grounded in the first place
  • Commercial aircraft have engine issues that cause diversions every single day, and it’s almost never a news story because it’s so common, and no one is in danger

Now, the 737 MAX will face a lot more scrutiny than other aircraft in the coming months, and that’s for good reason. Public confidence in the 737 MAX is low, and will only return when the plane operates as designed without issues for many months/flights. But it’s also not surprising that every time something does happen, no matter the severity, the 737 MAX will be in the news.

While we don’t know the cause of this incident, it’s likely that this has more to do with the plane having been stored for so long, rather than anything about the 737 MAX as such.

While mechanics do a great job with getting planes back into service after extended storage, I still suspect we’ll see a few incidents over the next few years (hopefully nothing too serious) that involve planes that just got out of long-term storage.

For example, earlier this year there was an incident where a Wizz Air UK Airbus A321 had a high-speed aborted takeoff, because a pitot tube was blocked due to insect activity. This followed the plane having been in storage for several months due to the pandemic. I suspect that won’t be the last time that something like that happens.

Bottom line

An Air Canada 737 MAX being ferried to Montreal suffered some engine issues after takeoff in Arizona, causing a diversion. While it obviously looks bad for Boeing when a 737 MAX has any sort of an issue, personally I wouldn’t read too much into this.

This is different than the issue that got the 737 MAX grounded in the first place, and it’s more likely that this has to do with the plane not having flown for a long time, rather than anything related to the “MAX.”

But I’m also not surprised that the 737 MAX will likely be in the news every time there’s an incident, no matter how minor.

What do you make of this Air Canada 737 MAX incident?

Conversations (27)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

Alan Diamond

@fizzyboffs Are you then planning to fly all the A380, A330, A3XX that are currently in storage in the same facility? It was an engine problem. Do these Airbus airplanes only use rubber bands? If you won't fly an aircraft that had two fatal crashes in 2 years then I wonder why you might be flying Airbus? The A300 - A321 series have had 42 fatal crashes up to Dec 2017.

0
‼ 0
Charlie Guest

I'm guessing this incident will cause many airlines to do more on-site maintenance checks at the desert storage locations before flying these long-idled planes back to their regular maintenance sites. Watch for the FAA to tighten the standards for non-revenue ferry flights.

0
‼ 0
sagheer Guest

My guess unfortunately goes to Boing's employing too many unskilled employees with fake academic degrees from all over the world. These workers work only for their well paid salaries, but hardly with dedication for work of safety..., Like a nut missing here or there is not a matter of real concerns to them, finsh the work of shift quickly is the aim.

0
‼ 0
FizzyBoffs Guest

I personally would never step foot on any Max aircraft that has been sat in storage for over a year, And actually any max aircraft either brand spanking new or been in storage and had a software update. There's loads of other aircraft available for use without historic nose dives to the ground available for flight travel Better safe than sorry,, it's a no brainer,,

0
‼ 0
Stewart Guest

Ben great article. Going forward there going to be glitches it just said everyone is picking on the 737 Max these things were not designed to be stored for long periods of time and it doesn't matter how good the maintenance is is going to be food guilt glitches to get them back flying again. You should also track what happens with all the Airbus 380 s cuz I bet you they're going to go through the same issue. As for the crew deciding what to do the airplane while in flight they were there we all were not so they made their best decision was what they had to work with, which was the aircraft was put back down safely.

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published