3 ms·
> there is always risk in any hardware rework I get your point, but isn't it ultimately about money anyway? If they can wire a plane correctly when they're bui
by ggambetta 7y ago
> there is always risk in any hardware rework
I get your point, but isn't it ultimately about money anyway? If they can wire a plane correctly when they're building it, they surely can rewire a plane later - they might have to remove more stuff, worst case scenario reverting the plane to the same state it would be for an original rewire, and I suppose the reason they don't want to do that is money.
I can't understand the decision to "ship" with a potentially catastrophic failure that would cost many lives otherwise. I don't think this should be a dilemma. IMHO the two sensible options from a regulator point of view seem to be "make the plane safe to fly, and if that's expensive, tough luck" and "don't fly the plane".
- catalogia 7y agoIt seems to me they could disassemble every Max, re-certify every part as stringently as they would certify a brand new part, throw away any part that was out of spec, then build "new" Maxes from those re-certified parts. (Except doing this would cost huge amounts of money.)
- pdonis 7y agoIt's not enough to disassemble every Max. This wiring is the same on every single 737, of any model, that is in service. That's a much, much, much bigger effort, plus you'd be tearing apart airplanes that have been in service for decades with no incidents.
- dsfyu404ed 7y agoThey did wire it correctly just the definition of correctly has changed over the last half century since the wiring harness was designed. It wasn't broke so they weren't gonna fix it because fixing things that aren't broke comes with cost and risk that you will break them when trying to fix them.