3 ms·
The design problems that led to the first grounding of the 737 Max weren't particularly cost saving. The overall approach, where they wanted pilot certificatio
by maxerickson 3y ago
The design problems that led to the first grounding of the 737 Max weren't particularly cost saving.
The overall approach, where they wanted pilot certification to carry over is certainly a business decision, but I'd bet that pilots and airlines and so on liked it.
Similar thing with this door issue. It's likely enough to be sloppy process, and is going to cost them a mint, not save them money. Sure, you can say that compromising quality is motivated by profit, but that cedes an awful lot of the discussion of the consequences of the poor quality to the people that are pushing to save a bit up front.
- dboreham 3y ago> weren't particularly cost saving Not "cost saving" per se, but definitely about money. MBAs are taught that airlines should use one kind of plane. FAA makes it expensive to certify a new kind of plane. So you get this "737 of Theseus" concept where they virtualized the 737 as a "guest", implemented on a different plane "host", leading to the crashes.
- closewith 3y agoThere was and is immense pressure to retain type ratings. For example, both Ryanair and Southwest fly exclusively 737s and have enormous fleets. If type rating compatibility is lost, it's very plausible they could jump to Airbus.
- maxerickson 3y agoI don't understand why you would quote that sentence and ignore my next paragraph. They are currently flying them with the adjusted system and a few hours of additional training, pointing to the implementation rather than the approach.