Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: More 737 troubles

Threaded View

  1. #11
    GRG55's Avatar
    GRG55 is offline iTulip High Commissioner, Select Premium Member, Canada and Persian Gulf
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,702

    Default Re: More 737 troubles

    Quote Originally Posted by santafe2 View Post
    The MAX is a hot rod. This is a 50 year old plane with a big modern engine that has no business on a 737. Like any other hot rod, the big, heavy, engine tends to break other components of the the 50 year-old elegant design. So how do you fix your mistake? Software, and a sensor that tells the ill designed aircraft not to climb too fast. Then, when your software and sensor fails and the badly designed hot rod 737 nose dives into the ground, call it a software problem, not a design problem. Never admit that your hot rod is just a back yard, grease monkey jalopy.

    In the future, if you and your family get on a 737 MAX just know that better software, more sensors and more aware pilots are the only thing keeping you from landing nose first. This is a horrible airplane but apparently until a plane-load of Americans bite the dirt, it's a software problem.
    The 737 was always a hot rod. In the 1970s the 100 & 200 series 737s were the fastest cruising airplanes in the Boeing fleet.

    I have no desire to get into an argument about this, but your case that technology "band aids" make the plane less safe isn't going to stop the already well advanced integration of technology into the airframes and the cockpits of every type of new model of aircraft from single GA piston to commercial airliners. Automated AOA limitation and other augmentation systems (call it MCAS or whatever else, that's what it is) are widespread throughout the commercial and high performance GA fleet now. The Airbus approach is to use the systems to protect the airplane from the pilots, fergawdsake. After AA 587 (which demonstrated conclusively you don't need to be flying a '37 Max for poorly trained pilots to kill all the passengers) maybe not such a bad idea?

    Boeing is anything but lily white on this one.

    But:
    With increased technology comes increased dependence on that technology.
    With increased dependence comes increased vulnerability when that technology fails.
    And fail it will.

    Anyone reading the full report of the Air France 447 Airbus accident into the Atlantic Ocean will understand your condemnation of Boeing over the use of, or dependence on technology is only partially valid.

    Once the 737 Max re-enters service it will arguably be the most scrutinized and safest airplane in the sky. I won't have any hesitation to board one. And I will continue to prefer it over Airbus. Any Airbus.

    As I have posted before, the best thing that could happen to Boeing Commercial Airplanes is to split it off from the defense businesses. They have different market drivers, different customers with different levels of available corruption, different economics and required corporate strategies. It's a lousy mix.
    Airbus also proves its a lousy mix with its repeating fiasco military efforts such as the POS A400M.
    Last edited by GRG55; 01-22-20 at 01:52 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Chrysler in Big, Big troubles.....
    By Mega in forum News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-16-15, 10:06 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-09-15, 05:45 PM
  3. Airbus in BIG troubles?
    By Mega in forum News
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-16-14, 01:50 PM
  4. california pension troubles
    By audrey_girl in forum News
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 04-07-10, 10:49 AM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Opinions expressed herein are those of the posters, not those of iTulip, Inc., its owners, or management. All material posted on this board becomes the intellectual property of the poster and iTulip, Inc., and may not be reposted in full on another website without the express written permission of iTulip, Inc. By exception, the original registered iTulip member who authored a post may repost his or her own material on other sites. Permission is hereby granted to repost brief excerpts of material from this forum on other websites provided that attribution and a link to the source is included with the reposted material.

Nothing on this website is intended or should be construed as investment advice. It is intended to be used for informational and entertainment purposes only. We reserve the right to make changes, including change in price, content, description, terms, etc. at any time without notice. By using this board you agree that you understand the risks of trading, and are solely responsible for your own investment and trading decisions. Read full legal disclaimer.

Journalists are not permitted to contact iTulip members through this forum's email and personal messaging services without written permission from iTulip, Inc. Requests for permission may be made via Contact Us.

Objectionable posts may be reported to the board administrators via Contact Us.

-->