131–140 of 365 posts
When passengers starts wondering what model plane they are going to fly on then you know that you have lost the narrative. No wonder McDonald Douglas changed the DC-10 into the MD-11.
Does anyone know if there is a material difference between the MAX-8 and the MAX-9? All the banning seems to be specifically for the MAX-8, but should they consider banning all MAX series aircraft? I realize the crashes themselves were MAX-8, but the difference between them seems not significant?
I believe only the MAX-8s are in service. MAX-7s exist, but not sure if they're in use, or just on order. The 9 and 10 haven't been produced yet.
So this isn't just banning from airports , this is banning from their airspace ? That's then more or less a total grounding of them in Europe. As an example, Norwegian (who has 15 of them) said they weren't grounding them as late as this morning, but now they'll have no choice. They use them mainly for their medium flights between scandinavia and southern europe (Nice, Budapest, Tenerife etc). No way they can do that…
Banned in the entire EU now: https://www.easa.europa.eu/newsroom-and-events/news/easa-sus...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Two crashes in 6 months and there's only 350 planes in existence is a pretty bad safety record that is probably on par with Tupolev. The US can tacitly blame "third world" pilots all they want, but with 300 people dead already, I think it's important for the FAA and Boeing to say exactly what is going on, especially since the planes are in use in the USA. There is a debate over if the plane's hardware, software, or p…
From what I gathered so far, it looks like airplane design was made with many compromises that made it complicated to pilot planes properly.
and
"the plane is safe to fly with additional training, when given"
If the 737 MAX planes remain in the air in the USA, Boeing and US Govt are de facto saying "third world pilots clearly just don't understand how to fly our planes".
If they ground the planes, they de facto admit there is an actual safety issue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, that was the big selling point since airlines hate retraining pilots. Totally backfired in that regard though.
It sounds really stupid for Boeing if you put it that way. I can imagine it looks good on the marketing material, 'no pilot retraining required!', but as far as I understand from all the analysis so far, it's actually not that hard to disable the new MCAS system and prevent a crash. As a pilot you only need to know it is there, and what happens if it somehow fails. I would be surprised if they had sold even a single…
At the gym today, on all the TVs, the media talking heads were crucifying the FAA for being "unsafe" or playing fast and loose with passenger safety (for not grounding the planes). I've always held the FAA in high regard, and think they do a good job. Are they really being negligent here? Or is the media just looking for something to spark outrage? Can anyone with more specific knowledge of aircraft safety weigh in?
Two crashes in 6 months and there's only 350 planes in existence is a pretty bad safety record that is probably on par with Tupolev. The US can tacitly blame "third world" pilots all they want, but with 300 people dead already, I think it's important for the FAA and Boeing to say exactly what is going on, especially since the planes are in use in the USA. There is a debate over if the plane's hardware, software, or p…
The FAA and NTSB are very good at what they do, one of the very few examples of government services that work well together with industry, give them some time.
EASA has just banned 737 MAX jets throughout Europe. https://www.easa.europa.eu/newsroom-and-events/press-release...
In particular, ferry flights are allowed with certain limitations.
And what is this mandatory software update MCAS needs? If it's safe, why does it need an update?