Would you fly on a 737 Max?
Discussion
Lots of stupid f
king comments on that link blaming the accountants ("bean counters") for this.
No - a bunch of greedy sociopathic Execs caused this. They were put there / got there because of the way the Stock Market (esp. the US stock market) works - rewarding short-term results over long-term growth, rewarding profits and image over people and integrity...and the behaviours that encourages within firms.
...and in this instance, the egotistical CEO thought his company "too big to fail"...and it looks like he may be right.
Capitalistic democracy is broken - it's heading towards pure capitalism (led by the US and China), which will not end well for the 99% of people not at the top of the tree...
/rant
king comments on that link blaming the accountants ("bean counters") for this.No - a bunch of greedy sociopathic Execs caused this. They were put there / got there because of the way the Stock Market (esp. the US stock market) works - rewarding short-term results over long-term growth, rewarding profits and image over people and integrity...and the behaviours that encourages within firms.
...and in this instance, the egotistical CEO thought his company "too big to fail"...and it looks like he may be right.
Capitalistic democracy is broken - it's heading towards pure capitalism (led by the US and China), which will not end well for the 99% of people not at the top of the tree...
/rant
The fact that Boeing were also carrying out some of the testing for the FAA is laughable..
They are however back in the sky... and RyanAir for one will have loads of them...
The only saving grace is that fleets of these won't be operating at anywhere near maximum levels during the pandemic..
Just hope any issues can be solved without further loss of life.......
They are however back in the sky... and RyanAir for one will have loads of them...
The only saving grace is that fleets of these won't be operating at anywhere near maximum levels during the pandemic..
Just hope any issues can be solved without further loss of life.......
CeramicMX5ND2 said:
The fact that Boeing were also carrying out some of the testing for the FAA is laughable..
They are however back in the sky... and RyanAir for one will have loads of them...
The only saving grace is that fleets of these won't be operating at anywhere near maximum levels during the pandemic..
Just hope any issues can be solved without further loss of life.......
It leaves a nasty taste in my mouth too, but who else is suitably equipped to do such testing, these days? The FAA isn't resourced to do it, so it becomes a trust issue between regulatory & manufacturer, which iit's all too easy to abuse.They are however back in the sky... and RyanAir for one will have loads of them...
The only saving grace is that fleets of these won't be operating at anywhere near maximum levels during the pandemic..
Just hope any issues can be solved without further loss of life.......
havoc said:
Lots of stupid fking comments on that link blaming the accountants ("bean counters") for this.
No - a bunch of greedy sociopathic Execs caused this. They were put there / got there because of the way the Stock Market (esp. the US stock market) works - rewarding short-term results over long-term growth, rewarding profits and image over people and integrity...and the behaviours that encourages within firms.
...and in this instance, the egotistical CEO thought his company "too big to fail"...and it looks like he may be right.
Capitalistic democracy is broken - it's heading towards pure capitalism (led by the US and China), which will not end well for the 99% of people not at the top of the tree...
/rant
Comrades rise up against the State!king comments on that link blaming the accountants ("bean counters") for this.No - a bunch of greedy sociopathic Execs caused this. They were put there / got there because of the way the Stock Market (esp. the US stock market) works - rewarding short-term results over long-term growth, rewarding profits and image over people and integrity...and the behaviours that encourages within firms.
...and in this instance, the egotistical CEO thought his company "too big to fail"...and it looks like he may be right.
Capitalistic democracy is broken - it's heading towards pure capitalism (led by the US and China), which will not end well for the 99% of people not at the top of the tree...
/rant
On a serious note, the MAX’s physical flaws being addressed through software are alarming.
Not the same. In a true fly by wire design, the flying characteristics are designed from the outset to be controlled using computer software. The software is not "fix" to solve a basic design flaw.
The issues with the Max were as much to do with unwillingness of Boeing to be honest to the users of the nature of the inherent issues and to allow the crews to be trained properly to deal with them. That's not a software fix, that's a corporate culture and management fix.
The issues with the Max were as much to do with unwillingness of Boeing to be honest to the users of the nature of the inherent issues and to allow the crews to be trained properly to deal with them. That's not a software fix, that's a corporate culture and management fix.
Edited by Eric Mc on Sunday 31st January 11:09
havoc said:
Lots of stupid fking comments on that link blaming the accountants ("bean counters") for this.
No - a bunch of greedy sociopathic Execs caused this. They were put there / got there because of the way the Stock Market (esp. the US stock market) works - rewarding short-term results over long-term growth, rewarding profits and image over people and integrity...and the behaviours that encourages within firms.
...and in this instance, the egotistical CEO thought his company "too big to fail"...and it looks like he may be right.
Capitalistic democracy is broken - it's heading towards pure capitalism (led by the US and China), which will not end well for the 99% of people not at the top of the tree...
/rant
Is there not an element of bean-countery in that Boeing were trying to avoid splashing out the dollars on a new design? I would agree that's not the accountants' fault, it's still down to the bods in charge.king comments on that link blaming the accountants ("bean counters") for this.No - a bunch of greedy sociopathic Execs caused this. They were put there / got there because of the way the Stock Market (esp. the US stock market) works - rewarding short-term results over long-term growth, rewarding profits and image over people and integrity...and the behaviours that encourages within firms.
...and in this instance, the egotistical CEO thought his company "too big to fail"...and it looks like he may be right.
Capitalistic democracy is broken - it's heading towards pure capitalism (led by the US and China), which will not end well for the 99% of people not at the top of the tree...
/rant
Halmyre said:
Is there not an element of bean-countery in that Boeing were trying to avoid splashing out the dollars on a new design? I would agree that's not the accountants' fault, it's still down to the bods in charge.
Of course...same with everything since Mercedes stopped making cars then working out how much they cost to build.(RR, I believe, still adopt this model to a degree...albeit with as much BMW parts-bin behind the scenes as won't be noticed)
Us accountants measure and report. After that people with bigger egos make the decisions...which usually involve making sure they hit their bonus targets regardless of who gets f
ked-over! 
Condi said:
Boeing have had net cancellations for at least the last 12 months, maybe 2 years. They are also having to pay large compensation to various airlines for the delays over the MAX.
This whole debacle will have cost them more than what it would have been to develop a brand new clean-sheet design. With the technology transfer and what they learned from the 787, they could probably have done a whole new narrowbody for <$15 billion vs the $20 billion the grounding has apparantly cost. uncinqsix said:
This whole debacle will have cost them more than what it would have been to develop a brand new clean-sheet design. With the technology transfer and what they learned from the 787, they could probably have done a whole new narrowbody for <$15 billion vs the $20 billion the grounding has apparantly cost.
I thought the point of this whole debacle was that a warmed over 737 meant airlines didn't have to retrain crews for a new aircraft. Boeing would probably have been quite happy with a clean sheet design.Teddy Lop said:
uncinqsix said:
This whole debacle will have cost them more than what it would have been to develop a brand new clean-sheet design. With the technology transfer and what they learned from the 787, they could probably have done a whole new narrowbody for <$15 billion vs the $20 billion the grounding has apparantly cost.
I thought the point of this whole debacle was that a warmed over 737 meant airlines didn't have to retrain crews for a new aircraft. aeropilot said:
Yep, or certain airlines, forced Boeing's hand and said we'll buy X number as long as we don't need to retrain crews......and that worked out well......not.
I'm sure the fact that the estimated development costs of the MAX were around 1/4 of a clean sheet didn't hurt either. But if the product was compelling enough, the airlines probably wouldn't have minded retraining their crews. In hindsight, they could have done the all new aircraft and paid airlines a few billion towards crew retraining, and still have been ahead of where they are now.
uncinqsix said:
aeropilot said:
Yep, or certain airlines, forced Boeing's hand and said we'll buy X number as long as we don't need to retrain crews......and that worked out well......not.
I'm sure the fact that the estimated development costs of the MAX were around 1/4 of a clean sheet didn't hurt either. But if the product was compelling enough, the airlines probably wouldn't have minded retraining their crews. In hindsight, they could have done the all new aircraft and paid airlines a few billion towards crew retraining, and still have been ahead of where they are now.
The problem with the Max initially was that Boeing didn’t tell anyone about MCAS and how it worked.
The Boeing course for 737 pilots to go onto the Max didn’t even mention it at first, then there was a small paragraph saying the aircraft had “a stall protection system” and nothing about what was involved.
After the first crash there was lots of information about it and what to do etc but by then it was too late.
El stovey said:
The airlines don’t mind doing any retraining especially for something like the Max which at most would be something called a differences course.
The problem with the Max initially was that Boeing didn’t tell anyone about MCAS and how it worked.
The Boeing course for 737 pilots to go onto the Max didn’t even mention it at first, then there was a small paragraph saying the aircraft had “a stall protection system” and nothing about what was involved.
After the first crash there was lots of information about it and what to do etc but by then it was too late.
Quite why man slaughter charges haven’t been brought is a travesty. Heads should roll for such a fThe problem with the Max initially was that Boeing didn’t tell anyone about MCAS and how it worked.
The Boeing course for 737 pilots to go onto the Max didn’t even mention it at first, then there was a small paragraph saying the aircraft had “a stall protection system” and nothing about what was involved.
After the first crash there was lots of information about it and what to do etc but by then it was too late.
k up.Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff