a reply to: Zaphod58
Zaphod, you know what, I've ridden on hundreds of airlines on thousands of flights around the globe. I can think of dozens, possibly hundreds of
times I' looked at the country I was in, the airplane and the flight crew and just knew that things probably weren't up to snuff training wise,
maintenance wise and crew wise. I wasn't flying on them for some kind of personal adventure, I was flying on them because I needed to get somewhere.
I didn't have the luxury of sitting in my chair and pontificating about "training" on the internet until I could fly on a United, or a Delta. I had
to take the Garuda's, the China Air's, the Thai Airways, the Air India's, etc. The 737 was probably singularly the most regularly used piece of
equipment next to possibly the 747-400 for the flying I was doing (with some Airbus A300's thrown in).
The 737 has a pretty remarkable safety record. The 737 in some variety has been flying for 54 years, and in that time there have been 184 crashes
with 4,862 fatalities. (Note - many of the early ones involved terrorism, but we won't get into the minutiae). That works out to an average of 26
souls lost per hull loss. The 737 original had a hull loss rate of 1.75/m departures (again, many due to terrorism), the Classic series brought that
number down to 0.54/m departures and the NG Series brought the number down even further to 0.27/m departures. With the 737 Max this number is now up
over 2.0. This alone should tell you there's a problem with the design! But let's keep going.
The 737 MAX alone accounts for fully 7% of all the fatalities for the entire generation of 737's, all 54 years of them...and it's only been flying for
less than 2 years! Doesn't this bother you? This includes the 100/200, the 300/400/500 and the NG 600/700 and 800 series. Tens of millions upon
millions of cycles, and in less than 1m cycles the MAX racks up 2 hull losses and 338 fatalities. This too is a pretty good indicator of a design
issue, but "no, it's all training", right?
I always felt a little bit safer when I saw I was going on a 737, I knew it would get me there...safely. It was a forgiving aircraft, and it was
reliable. Not so with the MAX, but it's a training issue. I worried less, even when I knew crew training or experience might be an issue. Why?
Because it didn't take a rocket scientist to fly a 737. And, because I didn't have any other choice.
So you can sit there and stick up for your beloved Boeing (which you know you do) and yammer on about it being a "training issue" while refusing to
acknowledge there's a serious software and sensor issue with the "design" of the MAX, but the facts are: Two 737 MAX's have crashed in less than the
span of one year, both of them exhibiting similar flight problems...and 338 people are dead. The Boeing 737 hull loss numbers are now heavily skewed
upwards by the MAX. AND, much of the free world actually "barred" the MAX from their airspace before Boeing or the FAA would lift a finger about it!
(Note - They didn't bar the airlines, the ones with "training issues"...no, they barred the airplane itself! But the rest of the world is ill
informed and ignorant of this "training issue", right?)
The 737 MAX isn't "all that" for an airliner anyway, it's a product of Boeing's bending to airline GREED! It's a horrible plane. Have you ever even
flown on one? I have...a week before they were grounded! Did you try to use the lav? Could you close the door? Could you fit in your seat? NO.
Oh, and we had mechanicals at the gate on pushback, and had something go wrong climbing out of DEN (which they said they were "straightening out").
The 737 Captain sitting next to me deadheading said "that's not real good", and I agreed.
How many more people have to die before you'll stop sticking up for Boeing and instead taking them to task for...wait for it...a serious "DESIGN
ETA - An aircraft manufacturer shouldn't have to offer up "training" as a solution for aircraft which suddenly "pitch down" with no control input from
the flight crew! That's absurd! Frankly, I'd say it would be laughable...if people weren't dying because of it.
edit on 3/24/2019 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)