advertisement


Would you fly on this plane?

Some were saying the Max would be the safest aeroplane in the air after all the remedial work. The argument was naturally feasible, but not everyone would necessarily give it credit even so.

Now it might appear that those less easily persuaded people may well have had it right.

If there was a need to specially coach test pilots, then clearly Boeing do not consider the Max can stand on its own merits as safe.

The type will fly again - it already is - and the driver will be capitalist economics. Same for any consumer product. Cheap training shoes or textiles made in Asian sweat shops are cheaper than items made in more civilised places of work, but many people buy on price first and foremost. No doubt that there will be airlines who fly the Max at discount prices, and these will be fully booked because of the price competition.

But the FAA and Boeing will also know that if the Max has a fatal accident again due to its design, then both organisations will be far more trouble than they already are. I can easily say that I shall never fly on the type, but that is because I'll never fly on any aircraft again. Last time was in 2015. At the time I knew it would be the last time. A sort of promise to myself when I got on the outgoing flight to Norway. I don't think I was ever more nervous on a pair flights than these.

If I ever go abroad again, it will be via ferries!

Best wishes from George
 
Clearly the FAA is failing as a regulator. Sully was hung out to dry based on the coached simulator flights of the Hudson incident, and it was only at the hearings that the real human factors were added to the mix, thus vindicating his decisions. And we now have something similar, yet I suspect it wasn't necessary to show the Max was safe, so why do it ? One might assume that Boeing knows something that the FAA doesn't.

CHE
 
From the recent Senate report :-

VIII.Conclusion
The FAA is responsible for the regulation and oversight of the U.S. aviation industry with
safety as the primary goal. The Committee’s twenty month investigation incorporated
information from fifty-seven whistleblowers, thousands of pages of documents, and numerous
interviews. Committee investigators discovered numerous systemic deficiencies in FAA
oversight. These deficiencies included ineffective or complete lack of oversight, resulting in
unnecessary risk to the flying public. In many cases FAA management appears to be aware, and
in some cases complicit in thwarting the very oversight they are charged with directing and
supervising. In the most alarming cases, whistleblowers have warned of tragedies before they
occur only to be retaliated against by managers. Unfortunately, much of what has been detailed
in this report has been well known and reported on for decades.

CHE
 
Imagine how many billions the USA would have fined Boeing if it wasn't American ? Instead the fine is peanuts.
 
I think the 'fine' will be the delay to the 777x and subsequent aircraft's certification. Grandfather rules will be be needed to get the 777x through and I suspect Boeing may have another certification debacle on their hands with an aircraft sorely needed to keep the cash flowing.

Also worth noting that the 787 has a load of problems with shims out of spec in an increasing number of critical joints that will require, as a minimum, rework and maybe even a life limitation on some in-service aircraft.

CHE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top