Back to Squawk list
  • 35

A Leap Forward for the Troubled 737MAX

Submitted
Though there are many opinions out there on the Boeing 737MAX, this is good news for the airline industry and Boeing overall. (www.reuters.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


Lib4ever
Maxwell Johnson 8
I drive 737s for a living and would happily fly the Max with my whole family on board. In fact, my training having included management of runaway trim incidents, I would not object to piloting the pre-fix Max. Those tragic incidents, with their inexcusable loss of lives, should never have been more than annoying inconveniences. Obviously, the MCAS system needed to be fixed as did the sweetheart relationship between FAA and Boeing. I strongly suspect that the software issues have long since been resolved and FAA is now doing damage control and reputation repair. That's OK, there's no such thing as "too safe." It will be interesting to see if FAA and EASA hold Airbus to the same strict standards.
phurford
Paul Hurford 1
Maxwell: While not an ATP, I too would fly the MAX with my entire family as well. I remember well the tragic incidents with the L-188 Lockheed Electra in the late 50's. Different reasons for both failures, but the L-188 air frame is Super Safe today. I believe that the 737 MAX will have a similar history, and the FAA and Boeing will never forget this last year.
MichaelDendo
Michael Dendo 1
Thank you for your insight Mr. Johnson. My question is will Boeing ever be the great engineering company they were before McDonald Douglas stole the company.
ien397
Ike Newton 13
I suspect that when certification tests are completed and the Max returns to service, it will be the safest commercial aircraft flying. Keep at it Boeing.
ACFTTECH8
ACFTTECH8 10
Could not agree more. Very few aircraft in history have been through this much scrutiny and they are not done yet. The DC-10 had its day as well as the F-111. And maybe add the early V-22 issues but those were not to this level.
jbsimms
James Simms 2
Add in the 727 as it has several crashes early in it use.

https://news.yahoo.com/five-decades-ago-boeings-727-200941644.html
fredpc40
FRED PECORARO 1
MAXWELL J,
Well said,and i would have liked to be on board with you. it has been a long time, maybe u can answer this question for me: had the mcas failed as it did in both planes, would you have been able to bring me home.
thanks
RJBrown409
Randy Brown 3
Sounds like a bunch of anti American trolls posted here. This will be the safest plane ever. The only variable will be the foreign pilots and maintenance crews that crashed before. Here let’s put a Pakistani crew in so we know their the best pilots out there. Some of these foreign crews are so good they don’t even need a license.
selmer40
selmer40 3
Why use a MAX 7, not a MAX 8, for testing? The MAX 8 was the problem airplane.
30west
30west 11
Because the MCAS software, not a particular MAX airframe variant, was the focus of the problem attributable to Boeing.
mbrews
mbrews 2
- The other answer is Boeing saves time. Doing these tests on MAX 7 allows Boeing to a)continue certification of MAX 7 variant SIMULTANEOUS with b) testing of the heavily revised control software. Software changes go much much beyond the mcas. Making it ultra complex by Boeings software developers.
glbunker
Greg Bunker -1
I would agree. The Max-8 should be the airframe being tested since, I believe, engine placement among other changes were made to this iteration.
toz100
Maximilian Steinhauser -6
This plane and Boeing lost all trust. Remember the excessive penalties Volkswagen had to pay in the US which didn't hurt anybody's health to the zero penalty boeing had to pay for deliberatley killing hundreds of people. The Us justice has a double standard.
w2bsa
w2bsa -4
Allow me to point out that the incident with Volkswagen occurred during an administration who actually cared about the safety and pollution of autos and other vehicles. The administration now doesn’t care about any of these things and is over-protective of American industry. There’s your differences.
toz100
Maximilian Steinhauser -7
none of your administrations ever cared about environment and pollution. The US are by far the biggest polluters per capita worldwide. Your pickups are a few times as dirtxy aa the biggest Volkswagen but they are just labelled as trucks. With dirty tricks like this the Us protects its own industries and squeezes foreign ones. the same thing happened after the financila crisis when foreign banks had to pay huge penalties whereas the Us banks were pampered with equity.
Baywooff
James Bruton 6
A little sensitive about your VW's? You should be. They're junk and their motor design is ridiculous.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Quirkyfrog
I usually drive 2 hours to the nearest 'big' airport to avoid the little RJ's. Like when I did SYD, I drove. I hopped into a 777 with HUGE carry-on bins and giant seats. To start in a plane that has a bin big enough for a shoe box could sure make the next leg a pain... 14 hours? With what's in my carry-on? Sure... PASS...

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Dismiss
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss