4 ms·

You're putting the safety record into chauvinist context, to be exact. An AoA failure is sufficiently rare for it to have only occured in a couple of occasions

You're putting the safety record into chauvinist context, to be exact. An AoA failure is sufficiently rare for it to have only occured in a couple of occasions in - shockingly - only a couple of countries.

skybrian 7y ago
Okay, I probably should have calculated the number of successful flights to avoid this. But, nowhere did I say any country is better than any other. That's your inference.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- cjbprime 7y ago
  I can help with that -- the MAX is suffering hull losses per flight completed at a rate about 100x that of comparable planes like the A320. Totally off the charts.
  - Aeolun 7y ago
    It’s such a weird statistic to use though. One crash takes a really long time to recover from in that score. So even if the 737 Max was magically fixed tomorrow, the score wouldn’t change.
    - michaelmrose 7y ago
      It's not remotely a strange choice when it represents the current most reasonable prediction of risk. If it were fixed tomorrow at that point we could discuss how it effects risk in the future.
    - bronson 7y ago
      > One crash takes a really long time to recover from in that score. As it should be. That's how important safety is. Boeing brought this on themselves by letting a second airplane crash before responding properly.
    - r3bl 7y ago
      Hundreds of people died. It should leave a long-term impact on Boeing's safety record. It should take them a long time to recover and regain trust.
- TomVDB 7y ago
  What was your original motivation to bring up the country aspect?
JudgeWapner 7y ago
actually you're being really ignorant to the fact that tons more flights originate in the US and UK so if they all have an equally-likely probability of failure, we should have seen one there first. Ethiopia and Indonesia had the first incidents. Boeing is mostly at fault here, but it may not be a coincidence that countries with lower standards of certification had the first incidents.

skybrian 7y ago

Okay, I probably should have calculated the number of successful flights to avoid this. But, nowhere did I say any country is better than any other. That's your inference.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
cjbprime 7y ago
I can help with that -- the MAX is suffering hull losses per flight completed at a rate about 100x that of comparable planes like the A320. Totally off the charts.
- Aeolun 7y ago
  It’s such a weird statistic to use though. One crash takes a really long time to recover from in that score. So even if the 737 Max was magically fixed tomorrow, the score wouldn’t change.
  - michaelmrose 7y ago
    It's not remotely a strange choice when it represents the current most reasonable prediction of risk. If it were fixed tomorrow at that point we could discuss how it effects risk in the future.
  - bronson 7y ago
    > One crash takes a really long time to recover from in that score. As it should be. That's how important safety is. Boeing brought this on themselves by letting a second airplane crash before responding properly.
  - r3bl 7y ago
    Hundreds of people died. It should leave a long-term impact on Boeing's safety record. It should take them a long time to recover and regain trust.
TomVDB 7y ago
What was your original motivation to bring up the country aspect?

JudgeWapner 7y ago

actually you're being really ignorant to the fact that tons more flights originate in the US and UK so if they all have an equally-likely probability of failure, we should have seen one there first. Ethiopia and Indonesia had the first incidents. Boeing is mostly at fault here, but it may not be a coincidence that countries with lower standards of certification had the first incidents.