The Most Damning/Must Read Articles On The Boeing 737 Max Situation
We haven’t really covered the 737 Max tragedies or overall story much, outside of Shawn’s rant about Southwest taking advantage of the situation. We did not feel comfortable covering it in detail because we are not experts in the area and with the tragedies that had occurred we felt it best not to meddle in something we didn’t fully understand.
But we have been following the coverage on it and I felt that it was important to group together some of the important articles from people who are way more in the know than us. These cover the events from all different angles so that you can get a better picture of the situation. And they also include info from both of the crashes, Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302.
If you have an article that you think should be added to the collection please share it in the comments section and I will add it in.
Articles On The Boeing 737 Max Situation
Flawed analysis, failed oversight: How Boeing, FAA certified the suspect 737 MAX flight control system – The Seattle Times
I shared this in a previous Around the Web but I felt it was important to share it again. I was shocked to read that Boeing was the fox guarding the hen house so to speak. That needs to be addressed ASAP.
Lion Air 737 MAX crew had seconds to react, Boeing simulation finds – ARS Technica
The pilots had a mere 40 seconds to correct the issue and avert the fatal dive. Unless you are well versed in the aircraft and it’s safety protocols that isn’t enough time to diagnose the issue and correct it. The pilots were heard on the cockpit voice recorders checking the manual. They just didn’t have enough time or training to react.
US pilots complained about Boeing 737 Max 8s in federal database – CNN
Pilots had complained about these planes in the past, at least 5 pilots in the US did just that. And many of them cited an unintended nose dive which is the same thing that lead to both fatal crashes. So there was a history and recorded complaints but nothing was done.
One day before last year’s fatal crash, Lion Air’s Boeing 737 Max 8 was reportedly saved by an off-duty pilot – CNBC
How this didn’t send shock waves through the company and at the bear minimum lead to a crash course in training on the situation is beyond me. That was their chance to get ahead of it but unfortunately the next day the same thing happened and that off duty pilot wasn’t on the plane.
Doomed Boeing Jets Lacked 2 Safety Features That Company Sold Only as Extras – The New York Times
This is insane! How are safety features an add on? And why wouldn’t airlines pay for them anyway to make it as safe as possible? Boeing will now include 1 of the 2 extras free in an effort to get the planes back in the air. Way to step up Boeing…
Lower Spend - Chase Ink Business Preferred® 100K!
Chase Ink Business Preferred® is a powerful card that earns 3X Ultimate Rewards points in a broad range of business categories on the first $150K in spend per year. Right now earn 100K Chase Ultimate Rewards points after Learn more about this card and its features!
Opinions, reviews, analyses & recommendations are the author’s alone, and have not been reviewed, endorsed or approved by any of these entities.
I think you mean meddle, not mettle in your opening paragraph. However, one can have the mettle to meddle…….
Fixed – thanks
[…] that have happened since are just as crazy. Mark from Miles to Memories has posted a nice collection of articles about the entire […]
Questionable? Sure it should be examined. But some of the equipment on an aircraft is custom order, it seems — and the airlines CHOSE what they wanted. Granted, basic safety stuff should NOT be optional. Should the AOA conflict lights be standard? Maybe so. The other side of the issue is Boeing and airlines have apparently studied how pilots can get overwhelmed by too much information (on top of cultural/language differences among international pilots). I’m no expert, btw.
So now, is Boeing giving the indicator lights free of charge because it’s a basic safety issue…or adding it to appease concerns? Not sure it matters. For me, bottom line, Boeing and MAX operators are under immense scrutiny…as they should be…and it’ll probably result in safer planes and operations.
I agree 100% – this should lead to a much safer operation going further. I also hope it leads to more pilot training when new aircraft are launched going further since they are only going to become more dependent on technology. I imagine it is tough to get them the time to do the training and expensive but it should be a priority going forward imo.
“…we are not experts in the area and with the tragedies that had occurred we felt it best not to mettle (sic) in something we didn’t fully understand…”
Well said. Yet now your observations and narrative are misguided and incomplete. For example — where is the article from the MANY pilots (the men/women actually doing the driving) who voice support for the aircraft? More notably, you ignore the controversy about (potentially inadequate) pilot training — which could be just as much a factor. And regarding FAA/Boeing — the “fox” has no incentive to kill “hens”…and flying has a VERY safe record. No doubt they’re tragic accidents and Boeing, the FAA and the airlines will all get some blame. Don’t add to the hysteria.
Thanks for commenting JH I did mention that the pilots did not seem to be adequately trained. And the Fox (Boeing) had incentive to rush the product to market which is why they lobbied the FAA to allow them to complete the inspections. The first article linked says they wanted to catch up to the recently launched Airbus.
If you want to share a few articles with the pilots in support of the plane I will gladly add them in as I said in the piece.
Boeing may well have rushed the approval process. It’s still a FAR LEAP to assume they knowingly cut corners on safety. Guess what, if too many Boeing jets crash, the company goes out of business — that’s the capitalist incentive to survive.
Here’s a video done by a reporter I respect who talked to 2 AA pilots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIwPivRgJxk
I will add it to the article – thanks.
I do find it strange that they made safety features an add on and now they are giving one of them free of charge to fix the issues. You don’t find that questionable?
“This plane is a piece of junk” Quite the statement. It is the exact same plane that has flown safely since 1967 with some updates that need to be corrected and clarified. It will fly for another 50 years likely safely once the corrections are made.
I was talking about this version of the plane which has had too many issues for such a new version of the plane.
You write this, “we felt it best not to mettle in something we didn’t fully understand” but then you have comments about what happened. Really. Why don’t we just wait until the reports on what happened come out from the FAA and EASA, the real experts.
These pieces were done by investigative journalists with reports. They already have a lot of proof on the situation and from the previous flight.
MCAS as deployed by Boeing, is a good example for the industries should not self-regulate.
“Regulations are written in blood.”
Yup – never a good thing when a company regulates themselves imo