6 ms·

I don't care how certified these planes are down the track, I never want to set foot on a 737 Max and generally any new Boeing that doesn't have a solid air his

I don't care how certified these planes are down the track, I never want to set foot on a 737 Max and generally any new Boeing that doesn't have a solid air history. Trust with these guys is totally blown.

SimplyUnknown 7y ago
I'm totally with you, but how do you prevent it? Usually you only know what type of plane you fly with after buying tickets. A solution might be to only buy tickets from operators that don't have with 737 MAX planes but this group might be getting smaller over long time.
- tus88 7y ago
  Or larger.
  - SimplyUnknown 7y ago
    Sure, but you never know which way it will go but this is assuming the 737 MAX gets recertified by the FAA and operators are going to buy them because it is cost-effective or whatever. This means that the group that doesn't have a 737 MAX is going to be smaller and therefore harder/way more expensive to avoid.
    - sascha_sl 7y ago
      It's not much different than the NEO, the pitch was that you will not have to send your pilots back to training because "it's just a 737". Since it clearly is not just a 737 the NEO (which is also a variant, but one that didn't inherently change the aerodynamics of the plane) now has the advantage, not just because reputation.
- londons_explore 7y ago
  Nearly all routes are flown with a specific type of plane always. Just use FlightRadar24 to see for that specific flight what usually does that route. Thats only a 90% guarantee, since plane types are reshuffled during disruption sometimes.
- iso947 7y ago
  This is an example of where “vote with your dollar” and “invisible hand of the market” falls down, and why we need strong regulations.
  - emiliobumachar 7y ago
    Airliners are very much regulated already. If you want to set a personal standard above and beyond the regulation, there might not be a market for you. Supposing it could be worked out, do you plan to review the safety record of all your potential rides, or just go by headlines?
    - mfer 7y ago
      The issue many people will have on hn is that the design flaws (not just software issues) have been discussed at length along with mismanagement that has shown little to no regard for design flaws. This has eroded trust in Boeings ability to make a new plane. Time without incidents will be needed to earn many of our trusts back. You talk of the regulation but posts on HN have shown how the regulators have failed and even why it's happened.
      - bluGill 7y ago
        How do you know Airbus' software is better than Boeing? Maybe Boeing is overall better, but bad luck caught them? Maybe Boeing has learned a lesson and while their past software was bad they have spend the last year making significant changes and all future airplanes will be much better?
        jsight 7y ago
        You are getting downvoted, but your points are fair. It wasn't that long ago that people criticized Airbus for some surprisingly similar reasons.
        admax88q 7y ago
        Sure we can imagine a scenario where Boeing is still the best choice. But if we actually want to make the best decision possible with the information available at this point in time add probabilities to your cases. Who is more likely to have quality control issues? The company that has had more planes crash or the company that has had fewer planes crash?
- rsynnott 7y ago
  Assuming it's a major route, there are probably carriers with Boeing-less fleets on it.
- HorkHunter 7y ago
  Assuming Airlines are/will be racing to operate/purchase 737 MAX?
- tluyben2 7y ago
  I pick airlines that have (almost) no Boeings and that I can call before booking to see if it's an Airbus. I have done that for many years before the 737 Max issues. I simply find them annoying (very noisy) to fly with, but I definitely try to avoid. Some times I find myself in a Boeing on short flights when suddenly another airline provides the plane and it may be bad luck or damaged hearing or whatever; every flight I get into (and I fly a lot) with a Boeing, the noise is horrible.
  - avh02 7y ago
    my experience with A350 vs 787 (both Qatar) is that the A350's are some of quietest planes I've flown.
    - tluyben2 7y ago
      Must be me for sure; Qatar as well; did not sleep at all as there was a high pitch whining the stewardess said ‘you get used to’; nothing at all in the 350 or 380.
    - vrsfvwae5tbh 7y ago
      Got bumped from a A350 to a 777 for an upcoming long haul when Cathay Pacfic changed their schedules due to COVID-19. Blegh.
      - MaupitiBlue 7y ago
        The 777 is the safest of them all, isn’t it?
  - Reason077 7y ago
    Have you tried noise cancelling headphones? They make a huge difference to comfort on noisy flights.
    - tluyben2 7y ago
      I have yes and they work, however, when I fall asleep, I end up laying on them and they kind of break...
- rburhum 7y ago
  when you buy a ticket from the airline, it shows you what kind of plane it is.
- mnm1 7y ago
  Look it up on kayak or the airline's website if booking directly. The info is available before booking.
kitd 7y ago
I understand the sentiment but there may well be a reporting bias going on. Boeing are in the news anyway, which in turn makes other Boeing problems more likely to make the news, both in the number of blogs written, and the likelihood they get shared here. Or alternatively, it really needs a report that demonstrates that eg Airbus have no similar foreign object problems for one's understanding to be more informed. A Boeing-only story by itself is an incomplete picture.
- txcwpalpha 7y ago
  It’s not even just reporting bias, there are other biases involved as well. It’s entirely possible that other airplane types have high rates of FOD in the fuel tanks but they go unnoticed because those other planes aren’t under nearly as much scrutiny as the post-crash MAX. If there’s a systemic problem that involves issues manufacturing a plane, it’s highly unlikely that it only involves one single type of plane.
  - octodog 7y ago
    Even if this is a systemic problem is doesn't change the underlying logic involved. It's unknown whether other models have this (or similar) issues, so you are still better off avoiding the model you know has a risk/default.
    - txcwpalpha 7y ago
      You’re missing the other half of your logic though, which is that due to knowing that this plane has an issue, you also know that the issue will be resolved, so you actually know that this plane does not have the issue. For other planes, as you said, it is unknown if they have the issue or not. I’d rather fly on the plane that I know for sure has had the issue addressed.
      - lagadu 7y ago
        But we also know that this plane was poorly designed and the design process followed a path that completely disregarded safety. You're saying that the best way for a company to get your business is to make a deathtrap and after it kills a bunch of people they'll fix a few of the glaring problems versus just making a good plane in the first place.
tyfon 7y ago
I completely agree, I'm never setting my feet on a new Boing again. The certification they receive is mostly done by themselves anyway. I might have been lenient if it was one issue but it issue after issue and it's not just design of the plane, it seems the whole company is rotten to the core.
ars 7y ago
It's the other way around for me. These planes, and Boeing, are under so much scrutiny I doubt that there will be any other plane in the world that will match it for safety. I also noticed that the last several issues reported were all reported by Boeing and not by the FAA. I like that as well.
glofish 7y ago
If anything the exact opposite is true. These planes are vetted so closely and strictly that will probably make them the safest plane in existence. How many Airbus have messed up wiring or have debris in the fuel tank? None? Do you know why? Because nobody is looking at them with a magnifying glass.
- jojo2000 7y ago
  That's absolutely not true regarding the wiring constraints. There have been projects going on for years to sort that problem out.

SimplyUnknown 7y ago

I'm totally with you, but how do you prevent it? Usually you only know what type of plane you fly with after buying tickets. A solution might be to only buy tickets from operators that don't have with 737 MAX planes but this group might be getting smaller over long time.

tus88 7y ago
Or larger.
- SimplyUnknown 7y ago
  Sure, but you never know which way it will go but this is assuming the 737 MAX gets recertified by the FAA and operators are going to buy them because it is cost-effective or whatever. This means that the group that doesn't have a 737 MAX is going to be smaller and therefore harder/way more expensive to avoid.
  - sascha_sl 7y ago
    It's not much different than the NEO, the pitch was that you will not have to send your pilots back to training because "it's just a 737". Since it clearly is not just a 737 the NEO (which is also a variant, but one that didn't inherently change the aerodynamics of the plane) now has the advantage, not just because reputation.
londons_explore 7y ago
Nearly all routes are flown with a specific type of plane always. Just use FlightRadar24 to see for that specific flight what usually does that route. Thats only a 90% guarantee, since plane types are reshuffled during disruption sometimes.
iso947 7y ago
This is an example of where “vote with your dollar” and “invisible hand of the market” falls down, and why we need strong regulations.
- emiliobumachar 7y ago
  Airliners are very much regulated already. If you want to set a personal standard above and beyond the regulation, there might not be a market for you. Supposing it could be worked out, do you plan to review the safety record of all your potential rides, or just go by headlines?
  - mfer 7y ago
    The issue many people will have on hn is that the design flaws (not just software issues) have been discussed at length along with mismanagement that has shown little to no regard for design flaws. This has eroded trust in Boeings ability to make a new plane. Time without incidents will be needed to earn many of our trusts back. You talk of the regulation but posts on HN have shown how the regulators have failed and even why it's happened.
    - bluGill 7y ago
      How do you know Airbus' software is better than Boeing? Maybe Boeing is overall better, but bad luck caught them? Maybe Boeing has learned a lesson and while their past software was bad they have spend the last year making significant changes and all future airplanes will be much better?
      - jsight 7y ago
        You are getting downvoted, but your points are fair. It wasn't that long ago that people criticized Airbus for some surprisingly similar reasons.
      - admax88q 7y ago
        Sure we can imagine a scenario where Boeing is still the best choice. But if we actually want to make the best decision possible with the information available at this point in time add probabilities to your cases. Who is more likely to have quality control issues? The company that has had more planes crash or the company that has had fewer planes crash?
rsynnott 7y ago
Assuming it's a major route, there are probably carriers with Boeing-less fleets on it.
HorkHunter 7y ago
Assuming Airlines are/will be racing to operate/purchase 737 MAX?
tluyben2 7y ago
I pick airlines that have (almost) no Boeings and that I can call before booking to see if it's an Airbus. I have done that for many years before the 737 Max issues. I simply find them annoying (very noisy) to fly with, but I definitely try to avoid. Some times I find myself in a Boeing on short flights when suddenly another airline provides the plane and it may be bad luck or damaged hearing or whatever; every flight I get into (and I fly a lot) with a Boeing, the noise is horrible.
- avh02 7y ago
  my experience with A350 vs 787 (both Qatar) is that the A350's are some of quietest planes I've flown.
  - tluyben2 7y ago
    Must be me for sure; Qatar as well; did not sleep at all as there was a high pitch whining the stewardess said ‘you get used to’; nothing at all in the 350 or 380.
  - vrsfvwae5tbh 7y ago
    Got bumped from a A350 to a 777 for an upcoming long haul when Cathay Pacfic changed their schedules due to COVID-19. Blegh.
    - MaupitiBlue 7y ago
      The 777 is the safest of them all, isn’t it?
- Reason077 7y ago
  Have you tried noise cancelling headphones? They make a huge difference to comfort on noisy flights.
  - tluyben2 7y ago
    I have yes and they work, however, when I fall asleep, I end up laying on them and they kind of break...
rburhum 7y ago
when you buy a ticket from the airline, it shows you what kind of plane it is.
mnm1 7y ago
Look it up on kayak or the airline's website if booking directly. The info is available before booking.

kitd 7y ago

I understand the sentiment but there may well be a reporting bias going on. Boeing are in the news anyway, which in turn makes other Boeing problems more likely to make the news, both in the number of blogs written, and the likelihood they get shared here. Or alternatively, it really needs a report that demonstrates that eg Airbus have no similar foreign object problems for one's understanding to be more informed. A Boeing-only story by itself is an incomplete picture.

txcwpalpha 7y ago
It’s not even just reporting bias, there are other biases involved as well. It’s entirely possible that other airplane types have high rates of FOD in the fuel tanks but they go unnoticed because those other planes aren’t under nearly as much scrutiny as the post-crash MAX. If there’s a systemic problem that involves issues manufacturing a plane, it’s highly unlikely that it only involves one single type of plane.
- octodog 7y ago
  Even if this is a systemic problem is doesn't change the underlying logic involved. It's unknown whether other models have this (or similar) issues, so you are still better off avoiding the model you know has a risk/default.
  - txcwpalpha 7y ago
    You’re missing the other half of your logic though, which is that due to knowing that this plane has an issue, you also know that the issue will be resolved, so you actually know that this plane does not have the issue. For other planes, as you said, it is unknown if they have the issue or not. I’d rather fly on the plane that I know for sure has had the issue addressed.
    - lagadu 7y ago
      But we also know that this plane was poorly designed and the design process followed a path that completely disregarded safety. You're saying that the best way for a company to get your business is to make a deathtrap and after it kills a bunch of people they'll fix a few of the glaring problems versus just making a good plane in the first place.

tyfon 7y ago

I completely agree, I'm never setting my feet on a new Boing again. The certification they receive is mostly done by themselves anyway. I might have been lenient if it was one issue but it issue after issue and it's not just design of the plane, it seems the whole company is rotten to the core.

ars 7y ago

It's the other way around for me. These planes, and Boeing, are under so much scrutiny I doubt that there will be any other plane in the world that will match it for safety. I also noticed that the last several issues reported were all reported by Boeing and not by the FAA. I like that as well.

glofish 7y ago

If anything the exact opposite is true. These planes are vetted so closely and strictly that will probably make them the safest plane in existence. How many Airbus have messed up wiring or have debris in the fuel tank? None? Do you know why? Because nobody is looking at them with a magnifying glass.

jojo2000 7y ago
That's absolutely not true regarding the wiring constraints. There have been projects going on for years to sort that problem out.