4 ms·
>I am saying, in general, if you are going to get on a plane today, you are much more likely to be killed because of human error than any other reason. Sure, b
by na85 6y ago
>I am saying, in general, if you are going to get on a plane today, you are much more likely to be killed because of human error than any other reason.
Sure, but the issue with the 737 MAX in particular is that the aircraft is unsafe from a design perspective, so I find your arguments that US aircrews are less likely to make a mistake to be both nonsensical and irrelevant (from a 737 MAX perspective).
The 737 MAX is flawed in a way that was not only concealed from the operators, but in a way that causes a failure mode that is not easily avoided or averted because of Human Factors, even by an aircrew that "knows their shit".
Your faith in the MAX 8 flown by US operators is unfounded.
- kube-system 6y agoThe DC10 also had design flaws. Mitigations were implemented and it returned to service with a safety record similar to its peers. Both planes had an engineering problem, both can be solved by engineering a solution.
- na85 6y agoI don't understand. If the engineering problems around MCAS are solved, then why would it matter if the crews are American (and thus "know their shit")?
- kube-system 6y agoBecause you still need a good pilot to fly the plane, even if it was engineered perfectly. They don't need to be American, I merely listed it as an example of a place where people who fly planes can be reasonably expected to have a high level of competency. (In contrast to situations like PIA 8303) Most engineering problems also include elements of human interaction -- once again, the DC10 cargo door issue is a good example. One would expect that even if MCAS is re-engineered to work correctly, a pilot would still need to understand the operation of the system. Part of the problem is that Boeing tried to sell it as if it was of little to no importance to understand.
- na85 6y agoSorry, I don't follow your logic at all, nor do I really understand what point you're trying to make.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- blackflame7000 6y ago> but in a way that causes a failure mode that is not easily avoided or averted because of Human Factors, even by an aircrew that "knows their shit". This is negated by the fact that the pilots on the flight before the Indonesian crash were able to save their aircraft because they recognized the symptoms of runaway trim quickly. https://qz.com/1576597/off-duty-pilot-saved-lion-airs-737-max-the-day-before-its-fatal-flight/ https://qz.com/1576597/off-duty-pilot-saved-lion-airs-737-ma...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]