4 ms·
The original 737 had a terrible safety record at first because of a rudder hard-over flaw. It then went on to become the most used in history
by blackflame7000 7y ago
The original 737 had a terrible safety record at first because of a rudder hard-over flaw. It then went on to become the most used in history
- pvg 7y agoThat doesn't sound right. The 737 went into service in the late 60s. There were two confirmed fatal accidents involving rudder hardover in the 90s.
- blackflame7000 7y agoBy Original I meant the NG version
- pvg 7y agoBoth accidents attributed to rudder hardover took place before the 737 NG first flew in 1997.
- blackflame7000 7y agoThere were a lot more than just 2 rudder incidents. USAir Flight 427 United Airlines Flight 585 Eastwind Airlines Flight 517 Silkair Flight 185 Copa Airlines Flight 201 China Southern Airlines Flight 3943 MetroJet Flight 2710
- pvg 7y agoI mean. I am going by wikipedia here but most of the things you've said in this subthread seem to be inaccurate. It wasn't the original 737. It wasn't the NG. And most of the accidents you've listed were not caused by that particular rudder design problem (as far as I can tell, 3 were, maybe?). You keep adding new inaccurate things without the slightest acknowledgement you might have misremembered or misstated something before.
- blackflame7000 7y agoWell, Wikipedia is where I got those 7 accidents moron. It took me 5 minutes of research. ALL WERE ATTRIBUTED TO RUDDER PROBLEMS! Big deal NG vs Original, if we're being specific there are actually 10 versions of the 737. The point is still the same, they had a critical flaw and overcame it. Is that too complicated for you to understand or do you want to debate Airplane versions because you think that makes you smart?
- pvg 7y agoThe five minutes seem to have been inadequate because a bunch of these explicitly say they were not conclusively attributed to that specific problem. Copa Airlines Flight 201 "but after an exhaustive and extensive inquiry, they concluded that the crash was caused by faulty attitude indicator instrument readings." China Southern Airlines Flight 3943 "CAAC blame the pilots for improper response to an autothrottle malfunction. " Silkair Flight 185 "The NTSB's report found that there was sufficient evidence to rule out mechanical failure (based on examinations of the suspected PCU/dual-servo unit recovered from the SilkAir crash), and that the probable cause of the accident was "intentional pilot action" by a pilot" And so on.
- jussij 7y agoHence the reason I said time will tell. But there are also many examples of aircraft with terrible early safety records that never recovered from their bad start.
- jonknee 7y ago> But there are also many examples of aircraft with terrible early safety records that never recovered from their bad start. From Boeing? They have a history of sorting their shit out. Maybe this time is different, but I doubt it.
- SmellyGeekBoy 7y agoIt's a shame so many people have to die for them to "sort their shit out". Maybe they shouldn't make idiotic design decisions and lie to regulators in the first place?
- blackflame7000 7y agoFlying is not exactly easy and imperfect beings can't build perfect machines and even if they could they wouldn't be able to test it because they are imperfect. In 1000 years there will still be aircraft accidents.
- jussij 7y agoI would say times have changed at Boeing, because it seems for the MAX, rather than sorting their shit out they instead seem to prefer covering up their design faults. They also seem to have a bad habit of blaming the dead pilots for not being able to fly they broken planes.