Turned out China was right on this one - ground first, ask questions later. That approach has historically been the FAA strategy. Maybe they should stick to wh

Turned out China was right on this one - ground first, ask questions later. That approach has historically been the FAA strategy. Maybe they should stick to what works? Especially given the airframe was so new and they also knew it had really stretched what should be allowable under the same type rating the caution was definitely warranted. The better question still remains as to how it got to keep the type rating despite the huge changes in the flight handling characteristics without a software system that didn't need to be sold in a redundant configuration and additionally without any additional training being mandated for pilots in the case of that system malfunctioning. Sure Boeing failed here but they are a company, companies especially of that size are absent of morals and driven only by profit. The FAA is meant to be the backstop, the voice of reason that prevents rampant capitalism from accidentally destroying itself. Airline travel only is what it is because of perceived safety, it's best all the stakeholders start remembering that.