5 ms·

I’d be interested in a source for that. The 737 is an unqualified success. IIRC, at the turn of the century, one out of every three commercial flights was und

I’d be interested in a source for that. The 737 is an unqualified success. IIRC, at the turn of the century, one out of every three commercial flights was undertaken on a 737. (At around the same time, another third would have been DC-9 and derivatives) The 737 wasn’t particularly expensive to design or build. It shares a 41 section with the 707 and 727 for example.

rob74 4y ago
Let's not get too carried away, shall we? At least the 346 people that died in the two 737-MAX crashes would probably question your "unqualified success" statement. But yes, no one can deny that the 737 has been a cash cow for Boeing (for far too long, some would say).
- InTheArena 4y ago
  The 737 and 707 are the exemplar for airplanes. MCDs reverse takeover of Boeing has been a disaster / but safety wise even with the 737 Max debacle the 737 is the lane that took the jet age from only the elites to everyone.
- reisse 4y ago
  737 MAX MCAS issue pale in comparison to 737 classic rudder issues (two crashes confirmed because of the issue, three crashes suspected, and a few more cases where pilots were able to overcome the plane). Yet it happened in the era without social networks and Internet news, so few people remember about it.
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    >Yet it happened in the era without social networks and Internet news, so few people remember about it. And the public's opinion of the air travel industry was different so hand wringing over it wasn't so fashionable.
  - LastTrain 4y ago
    I’m old and I remember it being all over the news and Johnny Carson making jokes about Boeing “BOING” in his monologue. There was no social network but we were ALL watching the same damn 3 channels.
  - CaptainZapp 4y ago
    That's true. Then again the 737s with rudder issues were not brand spanking new planes. Without Boeing's negligence and corner cutting this never would have happened.
- ThePowerOfFuet 4y ago
  The 737 Max has almost nothing to do with the 737. Don't conflate the two.
  - rob74 4y ago
    Do pilots need a different type rating to fly the 737 Max? No? Then it's a bit strange to say that it has nothing to do with the 737...
    - SgtBastard 4y ago
      IANAP, but a lot of the root cause analysis around the 737 max crashes was that they were sufficiently different and so should have required re-certification of pilots before being allowed to fly them. Due to the costs involved, Boeing made the ultimately fatal mistake of minimising these changes to airlines so that pilots didnt know what they were flying (insofar as some of the subsystems).
      - adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
        IMO this is a bad take. MCAS was a fine system, the different aero charicteristics were fine. The only problem is that Boeing cheaped out and made MCAS depend on a single sensor for critical decision making. If they just had 3 sensors like any other saftey critical system none of these problems would have happened.
        tiahura 4y ago
        This. How many 10’s of thousands of flight hours were logged on the Max and no pilot even noticed MCAS.
        sofixa 4y ago
        They did, before the two crashes there were other incidents (e.g. a Lion Air flight just the days prior to the one that crashed where a third pilot was in the cabin by accident and his quick thinking saved the plane: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/20/lion-air-boeing-737-saved-by-off-duty-pilot-a-day-before-crash-report.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/20/lion-air-boeing-737-saved-by... )
- tinglymintyfrsh 4y ago
  To be fair, the 737 NG fiasco that preceded it isn't well known and it's unknowable how many excess deaths it caused or will cause because there are planes flying around with substandard structural components. https://christinenegroni.com/boeing-workers-warn-of-737-ng-structural-problems-then-4-planes-fracture/ https://christinenegroni.com/boeing-workers-warn-of-737-ng-s...
  - huuhee3 4y ago
    It's hard to take the article seriously, when it claims pictures of 737s breaking from same points as evidence of substandard components. There will be always weakest points in the fuselage, which give away first when you crash the plane. I think the Turkish airlines in particular stayed intact surprisingly well, considering how it was stalled and fell like a rock.
- 908B64B197 4y ago
  The original 737s by Boeing were all-American masterpieces that had pretty great safety records considering the sheer number of miles flown and delivered airframes. The 737-MAX, courtesy of Post McDonnel Douglas-Boeing merger [0], with code written by offshored 9$/h Indian coders was a complete disaster. [0] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/how-boeing-lost-its-bearings/602188/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/how-boeing...
  - mrguyorama 4y ago
    >all-American masterpieces What's more all american than "Post McDonnel Douglas-Boeing merger with code written by offshored 9$/h Indian coders"?
  - reisse 4y ago
    Oh dear. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues And speaking of safety records, A32* is better than B737* by any metric.
    - tallanvor 4y ago
      I'm not sure it's fair to compare the record of a plane family that's 20 years younger than the 737. The first 737 entered service in 1968 vs 1988 for the A320, and during those 20 years, airplane safety improved significantly. Airbus benefited a lot from Boeing's learnings over that time.
      - mrguyorama 4y ago
        As long as Boeing keeps flying the same vintage airframe, they are comparable. Boeing could have also built a more modern, safer plane, but they chose not to, which is a defensible position IMO, as the 737 is pretty safe.
  - anaganisk 4y ago
    $9 converted to Indian currency is Rs720 with a conversion rate of 80Rs per dollar which is around 3 lakhs a month, which is a lot in India, equates to a mid six figure salary here based on what you can afford. I'm not sure how you are trying to make a point here. Also it's unfortunate that you retort to blaming the coders and mild racism, instead of accepting Boeing messed up. FAA not once in it's reports nor any aviation experts blamed the code, Boeing went cheap and removed a redundant device the MCAS system needs during a malfunction. Even during the incident HN was quick to blame pilots for being unskilled, now it's the coders mistake? The American company went greedy and went cheap, ignored its engineers, bent FAA over it's back to make rules that suit them, ignored all the warnings. Tried to brush away opinions. And was fully aware of the issue. Instead it tried to hide it. I'm not sure where your so called $9 coder sits here.

rob74 4y ago

Let's not get too carried away, shall we? At least the 346 people that died in the two 737-MAX crashes would probably question your "unqualified success" statement. But yes, no one can deny that the 737 has been a cash cow for Boeing (for far too long, some would say).

InTheArena 4y ago
The 737 and 707 are the exemplar for airplanes. MCDs reverse takeover of Boeing has been a disaster / but safety wise even with the 737 Max debacle the 737 is the lane that took the jet age from only the elites to everyone.
reisse 4y ago
737 MAX MCAS issue pale in comparison to 737 classic rudder issues (two crashes confirmed because of the issue, three crashes suspected, and a few more cases where pilots were able to overcome the plane). Yet it happened in the era without social networks and Internet news, so few people remember about it.
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  >Yet it happened in the era without social networks and Internet news, so few people remember about it. And the public's opinion of the air travel industry was different so hand wringing over it wasn't so fashionable.
- LastTrain 4y ago
  I’m old and I remember it being all over the news and Johnny Carson making jokes about Boeing “BOING” in his monologue. There was no social network but we were ALL watching the same damn 3 channels.
- CaptainZapp 4y ago
  That's true. Then again the 737s with rudder issues were not brand spanking new planes. Without Boeing's negligence and corner cutting this never would have happened.
ThePowerOfFuet 4y ago
The 737 Max has almost nothing to do with the 737. Don't conflate the two.
- rob74 4y ago
  Do pilots need a different type rating to fly the 737 Max? No? Then it's a bit strange to say that it has nothing to do with the 737...
  - SgtBastard 4y ago
    IANAP, but a lot of the root cause analysis around the 737 max crashes was that they were sufficiently different and so should have required re-certification of pilots before being allowed to fly them. Due to the costs involved, Boeing made the ultimately fatal mistake of minimising these changes to airlines so that pilots didnt know what they were flying (insofar as some of the subsystems).
    - adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
      IMO this is a bad take. MCAS was a fine system, the different aero charicteristics were fine. The only problem is that Boeing cheaped out and made MCAS depend on a single sensor for critical decision making. If they just had 3 sensors like any other saftey critical system none of these problems would have happened.
      - tiahura 4y ago
        This. How many 10’s of thousands of flight hours were logged on the Max and no pilot even noticed MCAS.
        sofixa 4y ago
        They did, before the two crashes there were other incidents (e.g. a Lion Air flight just the days prior to the one that crashed where a third pilot was in the cabin by accident and his quick thinking saved the plane: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/20/lion-air-boeing-737-saved-by-off-duty-pilot-a-day-before-crash-report.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/20/lion-air-boeing-737-saved-by... )
tinglymintyfrsh 4y ago
To be fair, the 737 NG fiasco that preceded it isn't well known and it's unknowable how many excess deaths it caused or will cause because there are planes flying around with substandard structural components. https://christinenegroni.com/boeing-workers-warn-of-737-ng-structural-problems-then-4-planes-fracture/ https://christinenegroni.com/boeing-workers-warn-of-737-ng-s...
- huuhee3 4y ago
  It's hard to take the article seriously, when it claims pictures of 737s breaking from same points as evidence of substandard components. There will be always weakest points in the fuselage, which give away first when you crash the plane. I think the Turkish airlines in particular stayed intact surprisingly well, considering how it was stalled and fell like a rock.
908B64B197 4y ago
The original 737s by Boeing were all-American masterpieces that had pretty great safety records considering the sheer number of miles flown and delivered airframes. The 737-MAX, courtesy of Post McDonnel Douglas-Boeing merger [0], with code written by offshored 9$/h Indian coders was a complete disaster. [0] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/how-boeing-lost-its-bearings/602188/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/how-boeing...
- mrguyorama 4y ago
  >all-American masterpieces What's more all american than "Post McDonnel Douglas-Boeing merger with code written by offshored 9$/h Indian coders"?
- reisse 4y ago
  Oh dear. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues And speaking of safety records, A32* is better than B737* by any metric.
  - tallanvor 4y ago
    I'm not sure it's fair to compare the record of a plane family that's 20 years younger than the 737. The first 737 entered service in 1968 vs 1988 for the A320, and during those 20 years, airplane safety improved significantly. Airbus benefited a lot from Boeing's learnings over that time.
    - mrguyorama 4y ago
      As long as Boeing keeps flying the same vintage airframe, they are comparable. Boeing could have also built a more modern, safer plane, but they chose not to, which is a defensible position IMO, as the 737 is pretty safe.
- anaganisk 4y ago
  $9 converted to Indian currency is Rs720 with a conversion rate of 80Rs per dollar which is around 3 lakhs a month, which is a lot in India, equates to a mid six figure salary here based on what you can afford. I'm not sure how you are trying to make a point here. Also it's unfortunate that you retort to blaming the coders and mild racism, instead of accepting Boeing messed up. FAA not once in it's reports nor any aviation experts blamed the code, Boeing went cheap and removed a redundant device the MCAS system needs during a malfunction. Even during the incident HN was quick to blame pilots for being unskilled, now it's the coders mistake? The American company went greedy and went cheap, ignored its engineers, bent FAA over it's back to make rules that suit them, ignored all the warnings. Tried to brush away opinions. And was fully aware of the issue. Instead it tried to hide it. I'm not sure where your so called $9 coder sits here.