- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Boeing 737 Max
Posted on 10/30/19 at 2:57 pm to CharlesLSU
Posted on 10/30/19 at 2:57 pm to CharlesLSU
quote:
At the end of the day, will you be comfortable flying in it after all of the MACS are supposedly fixed?
I've flown in the Southwest Max's a few times. Never noticed a difference in the flights other than a bigger nicer airplane. I didn't die. That's good I suppose.
0
Posted on 10/30/19 at 2:59 pm to Cold Drink
By the way, the FAA’s statement yesterday should be very worrying for Boeing. For the first time they hinted at the possibility of the plane never flying again.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 3:17 pm to CharlesLSU
Better question is would any of the resident pilots here feel comfortable flying the plane right now.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 3:20 pm to CharlesLSU
Absolutely. It will be the safest plane on Earth. If another one goes down it will bankrupt Boeing.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 3:25 pm to LSUERDOC
quote:
Better question is would any of the resident pilots here feel comfortable flying the plane right now.
I would 100% fly it. Boeing products are by and far superior to anything else in the industry.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 3:29 pm to Salmon
quote:
I've honestly never paid attention to the plane while flying, so...
If you ever end up on a shitty airbus you’ll notice
Posted on 10/30/19 at 3:32 pm to Cold Drink
quote:
they hinted at the possibility of the plane never flying again.
That would be ridiculous. The plane does have issues with MCAS (as it was configured) but even then the plane is safe in the hands of a skilled pilot. After the software updates, the MCAS won't be an issue and it will be as safe as any other 737. I'd fly in it today with no concerns (assuming a properly trained American pilot
). Posted on 10/30/19 at 5:11 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
quote:
Boeing products are by far superior to anything else in the industry.
I don't think this can be said about the Max specifically. And Boeing's response to the two crashes has been a train wreck.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 5:12 pm to RedFoxx
quote:
Probably a shitty CRJ.
May be shitty, but how many have you heard about crashing in the last 20 years?
Posted on 10/30/19 at 5:17 pm to TigerStripes06
The problem is hardware, not software. I expect them to become cargo carriers and never passenger planes.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 5:30 pm to TigerStripes06
quote:
May be shitty, but how many have you heard about crashing in the last 20 years?
Oh, they’re perfectly safe. But so shitty.
Broken APU
No CAT II because of some MEL
Slats that wont retract
Hydraulic fluid leak
Just some of the fun “quirks”
Posted on 10/30/19 at 5:47 pm to RedFoxx
I know a few pilots who fly for big US airlines. While the Max has some issues, they all say that a US carrier pilot would handle it without any issues.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 6:15 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
quote:
I would 100% fly it. Boeing products are by and far superior to anything else in the industry.
And I'd have no problem boarding your plane.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 6:16 pm to N2cars
Why does Boeing suck?
Posted on 10/30/19 at 7:04 pm to yellowfin
quote:
If you ever end up on a shitty airbus you’ll notice
That's what's so sad about this whole thing. It just means more of those Airbus abominations.
I don't buy "muh safest plane" or "muh 'Merican pilots" but I do frickin' HATE Airbuses.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 7:21 pm to MikeBRLA
quote:
That would mean starting over from scratch from my understanding. Bottom line is they “stretched” an airframe and put engines too large for said airframe thus causing it to be unstable. MCAS was created to “fix” the unstableness.
Unstable? Every fighter jet in the world is unstable. F117A would probably never get off the ground with out a shite ton of software to make the brick fly.
We can strap a tank called the space shuttle to a bunch of rockets and send it to outer space and then watch it glide down and land powerless any where in the world.
If we wanted to, we could mount those huge new Max engines backwards and make the damn plane fly.
Bigger engines is not a problem. The old airframe is not the problem. Mcas is not a problem.
Mcas that relies on only one angle of attack sensor and not training pilots is the problem.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 7:46 pm to BHM
quote:
Mcas that relies on only one angle of attack sensor and not training pilots is the problem.
Then why did Boeing ever proceed to production?
Posted on 10/30/19 at 7:56 pm to USMEagles
quote:
That's what's so sad about this whole thing. It just means more of those Airbus abominations.
I don't buy "muh safest plane" or "muh 'Merican pilots" but I do frickin' HATE Airbuses.
Exactly. I fricking hate Airbus. I’m a Boeing homer but they ROYALLY frickED UP with this plane (they panicked in response to Airbus spamming their NEO’s), and the whole situation just sucks.
But what’s not helpful at all is putting blinders on in response to this disaster by perpetuating this myth of the magic American Pilot. I’m not saying that American pilots (And airlines) aren’t - on average - more competent than those of poorer countries, but “shitty foreign pilots“ somehow can manage to keep every other new plane in the air except for the 737 Max.
This post was edited on 10/30/19 at 7:59 pm
Posted on 10/30/19 at 8:10 pm to AlwysATgr
quote:
Then why did Boeing ever proceed to production?
Multiple AoA sensors was an option that every US carrier that had the Max went with. Guess what the other two foreign carriers went with?
Now I do have issues with them offer multiple sensors as an option. Probably would have been ok only if full pilot training was required. Guess it being optional is similar to modern car with safety options. Should every safety feature be mandatory? Probably but it isn't.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 8:12 pm to BHM
quote:
Multiple AoA sensors was an option that every US carrier that had the Max went with. Guess what the other two foreign carriers went with?
How much did they save?
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News