3 ms·

The strategy of continuing with the 737 into the 2020s has causes numerous avoidable fatalities. The original point stands, it was a strategical failure. As OP

The strategy of continuing with the 737 into the 2020s has causes numerous avoidable fatalities. The original point stands, it was a strategical failure. As OP comment said, they should have scrapped that platform. Rivals with more modern jets have superior products. You try to make a point it is the right strategy but execution was lacking. I respectfully disagree. The strategy of milking the obsolete platform was a bad choice.

panick21_ 3y ago
> strategy of continuing with the 737 into the 2020s has causes numerous avoidable fatalities No that's not the fundamental reason. The strategy of continuing with the 737 could have been done in a save way. There is nothing inherent in the 737 that makes it fundamentally unsafe. > You try to make a point it is the right strategy but execution was lacking. I respectfully disagree. You haven't actually made the point at all. With 787 the execution was flawed. With 737 MAX the execution was even more flawed. You have only provided other examples of flawed execution. That doesn't prove the strategy was wrong. Doing the 787 also doesn't inherently mean you can't replace the 737. Boeing had enough money to do both as they have done before. Saying Boeing should have done some other strategy would likely also have resulted in flawed execution of some kind. Without the 787, they might have had to do a 767 MAX. And that 767 MAX could have also crashed if the execution was flawed. All you are doing is imagining a different strategy and then asserting that everything would have been amazing if that strategy had been followed.
- namaria 3y ago
  All I'm doing is saying the strategy of milking an obsolete platform was a poor strategy. Disagree all you want but don't make a strawman to debate against and pretend that it is me.

3 ms·

The strategy of continuing with the 737 into the 2020s has causes numerous avoidable fatalities. The original point stands, it was a strategical failure. As OP

by namaria 3y ago

panick21_ 3y ago
> strategy of continuing with the 737 into the 2020s has causes numerous avoidable fatalities No that's not the fundamental reason. The strategy of continuing with the 737 could have been done in a save way. There is nothing inherent in the 737 that makes it fundamentally unsafe. > You try to make a point it is the right strategy but execution was lacking. I respectfully disagree. You haven't actually made the point at all. With 787 the execution was flawed. With 737 MAX the execution was even more flawed. You have only provided other examples of flawed execution. That doesn't prove the strategy was wrong. Doing the 787 also doesn't inherently mean you can't replace the 737. Boeing had enough money to do both as they have done before. Saying Boeing should have done some other strategy would likely also have resulted in flawed execution of some kind. Without the 787, they might have had to do a 767 MAX. And that 767 MAX could have also crashed if the execution was flawed. All you are doing is imagining a different strategy and then asserting that everything would have been amazing if that strategy had been followed.
- namaria 3y ago
  All I'm doing is saying the strategy of milking an obsolete platform was a poor strategy. Disagree all you want but don't make a strawman to debate against and pretend that it is me.