Ethiopian 737 Max 8 crash and Fallout

[Denali]

I’m debating whether to write off $2000 to change a Vancouver to Maui flight. Neither USA nor Canada has grounded so out of options except self-funding change for 4 of us. It stinks. But nose diving into ground is worse.

Couldnt one of your kids get a virus a day or so before departure and you have to cancel your Max booking?

 

[JB expat]

Couldnt one of your kids get a virus a day or so before departure and you have to cancel your Max booking?

Clever Cookie!!!

 

[NZflygirl]

I’m debating whether to write off $2000 to change a Vancouver to Maui flight. Neither USA nor Canada has grounded so out of options except self-funding change for 4 of us. It stinks. But nose diving into ground is worse.

Sunwings airline is Canadian based and grounding their MAX for evolving commercial reasons so it's possible the Canadian and US airlines will join the other countries in their ban. The FAA is experiencing pressure from external sources eg politicians also. Maybe the aircraft type will be subbed and you won't have to change any plans.

 

[RooFlyer]

Ethiopian Airlines crash: Live updates - CNN Third post from the top

As the story is being continuously updated, I'm not sure what post you are referring to. This is the third one, when I looked:



Seems fair enough to me, especially given that the black box data wouldn't have been available yet for the Ethiopian crash. Its all very well for various countries to ban/uncertify the aircraft 'for an abundance of caution', but the FAA I think, as the 'authority', must restrict itself to facts and not speculation.

 

[JB expat]

Sunwings airline is Canadian based and grounding their MAX for evolving commercial reasons so it's possible the Canadian and US airlines will join the other countries in their ban. The FAA is experiencing pressure from external sources eg politicians also. Maybe the aircraft type will be subbed and you won't have to change any plans.

To some extent that's my concern - if I rebook and write it off, and then they sub the aircraft - I've lost money for no reason (other than current peace of mind). If they don't sub out - I still have hope of recovering - whether it be because of a later grounding or being very forceful vis-a-vis my travel insurer (long shot).

 

[JB expat]

As the story is being continuously updated, I'm not sure what post you are referring to. This is the third one, when I looked:

View attachment 156974

Seems fair enough to me, especially given that the black box data wouldn't have been available yet for the Ethiopian crash. Its all very well for various countries to ban/uncertify the aircraft 'for an abundance of caution', but the FAA I think, as the 'authority', must restrict itself to facts and not speculation.

What seems fair/moral is to ground the flights until it is certain that it isn't an equipment or software issue.

 

[CaptJCool]

As the story is being continuously updated, I'm not sure what post you are referring to. This is the third one, when I looked:

View attachment 156974

Seems fair enough to me, especially given that the black box data wouldn't have been available yet for the Ethiopian crash. Its all very well for various countries to ban/uncertify the aircraft 'for an abundance of caution', but the FAA I think, as the 'authority', must restrict itself to facts and not speculation.

350 MAX8s flying

Age of plane = Infant

2 apparently nose dive crashes just weeks apart.

Airbus and other Boeing planes count in their thousands and fly without threat of nose diving. Gosh some have flown for 30 years

I don’t believe in coincidences

Odds of crash currently 1/175......

So let’s fly another just in case and gamble we won’t kill another full plane of passengers and crew = American Roulette

IMHO tHe acting chief of FAA (apparently an ex Boeing exec is poorly advised or horribly conflicted

Safety is our greatest priority = bollocks

 

[Quickstatus]

Safety is our greatest priority = bollocks

...given that the black box data wouldn't have been available yet for the Ethiopian crash. Its all very well for various countries to ban/uncertify the aircraft 'for an abundance of caution', but the FAA I think, as the 'authority', must restrict itself to facts and not speculation.

I can see both points of view.

When has safety been the number one priority?
Everyday passengers fly in aircraft piloted by fatigued pilots. The risk of something bad is ever present though small. If safety is the greatest priority there would not be much air traffic.

It would be naive to say that all of the countries grounding the 737M8 have taken a purely safety position without any commercial/political considerations.

 

[NZflygirl]

Quite a few points from this interview: "It's impossible to call Boeing 737 MAX safe, says this aviation analyst" Mary Schiavo

 

[Berlin]

Safety is our greatest priority = bollocks

Couldn’t agree more. Decisions like this are made on a.) money and b.) politics. And the FAA making decisions is of course inherently political, especially under the current “America First” doctrine. Admittedly, same can be said about China for all making the first step in grounding them all. Believing anything else is just delusional.

 

[Daver6]

https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-...sues-with-boeing-737-max-20190313-p513t4.html

Odds of crash currently 1/175......

So you're saying 1 in every 175 Max flights has crashed? That doesn't seem right to me.

 

[CaptJCool]

No

https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-...sues-with-boeing-737-max-20190313-p513t4.html



So you're saying 1 in every 175 Max flights has crashed? That doesn't seem right to me.

,

No, just that 1/175 MAX8 planes has crashed.

 

[33kft]

No,

No, just that 1/175 MAX8 planes has crashed.

That would make it considerably better than Concorde's 1/14 then.

It's a metric, but it's probably not a great one.

 

[dajop]

No
,

No, just that 1/175 MAX8 planes has crashed.

I think in terms of sectors, rough back of the envelope calculations would suggest around 1 crash per 400,000 sectors flown (assuming 7 sectors a day per aircraft and linear introduction of new planes over last 22 months).

 

[defurax]

No
,

No, just that 1/175 MAX8 planes has crashed.

Slightly better than the DC-10...and passengers/airlines were not big fans in the end

 

[drron]

For people who want to read the US pilot's reports.
ASRS Reports for 737 max8

 

[Must...Fly!]

For people who want to read the US pilot's reports.
ASRS Reports for 737 max8

Makes you wonder about that common rating a little.

 

[Berlin]

For people who want to read the US pilot's reports.
ASRS Reports for 737 max8

Wow. Just wow.
Thanks a lot for sharing!

 

[RooFlyer]

What seems fair/moral is to ground the flights until it is certain that it isn't an equipment or software issue.

As an opinion, I'm with you 100%

I don’t believe in coincidences

Neither do I.

... but we aren't heading an organisation with the mandate or responsibility of the FAA.

Unless its thought that the FAA is proactively acting malevolently, as some apparently do think ...

Decisions like this are made on a.) money and b.) politics. And the FAA making decisions is of course inherently political, especially under the current “America First” doctrine.

.. then we might want to consider all sides of the argument before condemning them out of hand. (Note ... if you read me carefully, I am not agreeing with them ). You might also like to do some history and you'll find out that the FAA has been accused of being too soft and compliant with airlines in regards to possible (edit: and actual) aircraft defects for decades. So much for the reference to 'America First' doctrine

 

[NZflygirl]

For people who want to read the US pilot's reports.
ASRS Reports for 737 max8

I'm a bit confused by this. Under the Aircraft section it has the 737-800 and NG listed which I thought were different from the MAX.