Boeing says it is, but I have my doubts.
This came out today. “This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys,” another employee said in 2017, apparently in reference to the FAA.
I smell a big gubbermint bailout on the way.
Most of the problems with the plane have to do with its installed software, which is a relatively easy fix compared to, say, the wings tending to fall off.
There's no way that a massive collective investment like the 737 fleet will ever be allowed to become worthless. They'll fix the problem somehow, albeit at massive expense, which we, the public, will be charged for in the form of higher fares.
I have a rather higher opinion of the airline industry, the aircraft industry, and the FAA. Given the thousands of flights every day, the rate of crashes is amazingly low. Fifty thousand miles in a car carries the same risk of dying as one hundred million miles in a plane. I'll take those odds.
Speaking only for myself, I will never fly on that deathtrap.
David, I agree with you on that. My understanding is the problem with the software is that they needed it in the first place. They were trying to compensate for an engine that is too large for the plane. I am not sure that is something software can fix. It doesn't seem like a smart business move trying to radically modify a 50-year old design rather than just starting with a clean sheet.
Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis
Most of the problems with the plane have to do with its installed software, which is a relatively easy fix compared to, say, the wings tending to fall off.
There's no way that a massive collective investment like the 737 fleet will ever be allowed to become worthless. They'll fix the problem somehow, albeit at massive expense, which we, the public, will be charged for in the form of higher fares.
I have a rather higher opinion of the airline industry, the aircraft industry, and the FAA. Given the thousands of flights every day, the rate of crashes is amazingly low. Fifty thousand miles in a car carries the same risk of dying as one hundred million miles in a plane. I'll take those odds.
Look at that! Kevin and I are lock step in our thinking regarding this subject.
There’s definitely a lot of eyes on it now so if they give it the green light you can be sure they fixed whatever was wrong. There was supposed to be a lot of eyes on it to begin with but here we see another cozy relationship between companies and regulators that resulted in no oversight
I believe Boeing is currently compensating airlines for their lost revenue....and the There’s the matter of compensating the crash victim families. And they’ve scheduled 2800 layoffs from the line.
Originally posted by: Mark
David, I agree with you on that. My understanding is the problem with the software is that they needed it in the first place. They were trying to compensate for an engine that is too large for the plane. I am not sure that is something software can fix. It doesn't seem like a smart business move trying to radically modify a 50-year old design rather than just starting with a clean sheet.
The 737 is the most successful airliner in history. I'm fairly sure that more 737s have been made than any other commercial aircraft. They are extremely useful for US domestic flights, given their range and load capacity.
I think that's one reason they tried to modify it rather than introducing a new design. The other reason is that getting a completely new design certified would take years, and all that would have to happen before they built a single one. In contrast, modifying an existing design takes a LOT less time and paperwork.
There's nothing inherently wrong with an older aircraft design. The military's SR-70s and B-52s are still flying. Heck, the DC-3/C-47 is still in use all around the world. It comes down to maintenance and the inherent strength and utility of the aircraft. I can't really blame Boeing for going with a modified design, given that the platform on which that modification was based has been so successful.
There definitely is a design flaw in the automated control system of the 737 MAX, in that it relies on the output of a single sensor. If that sensor malfunctions, the control system might make erroreous decisions. Boeing tried to allow for that by providing an INPUT ERRONEOUS warning light and stating a training procedure for pilots to compensate for that should it happen. The pilots in the two crashes apparently did try that procedure, but were unsuccessful.
Kevin Lewis writes: "There's nothing inherently wrong with an older aircraft design. The military's SR-70s and B-52s are still flying. Heck, the DC-3/C-47 is still in use all around the world. It comes down to maintenance and the inherent strength and utility of the aircraft."
DonDiego concurs DC-3s and C-47s are still in use all around the world.
And B-52s are still flying too. The last B-52 was delivered in 1962 - a total of 742 aircraft and 2 prototypes had been delivered.
But the SR-70s, . . . not so much. A total of 32 SR-71As were built; 12 were lost to accidents. The rest have been retired to reside on/in numerous air force bases, museums, and displays.
Ref: wikipedia
Lockeed Martin is presently developing the successor, to be designated the SR-72. Poor old DonDiego does not know the current timeline for production/deployment, . . . and he couldn't print it if he did.
My previous job was as a software engineer for a small airline ...ATA. Our biggest source of revenue came from chartering the military to and from airbases across the globe. Our primary aircraft for this purpose was the Lockheed L10-11 which was manufactured in the early 1970’s. It wasn’t viable for consumer use because it guzzled fuel but since th military paid for their own fuel it worked out nice. Those things could fly 400 people 4000 miles without stopping and they were super fast - boasting a third engine on the tail.
they were in service all the way until the airline bankruptcy in 2008.
At ATA you’re on vacation!
The first flight I took to vegas was on ATA departing Indianapolis. The second one was too. I had to downgrade to Southwest after ATA went under.
