You are at netAirspace : Forum : Air and Space Forums : Civil Aviation

They need to be more clever than this.

Oops, they did it again.

Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) worked together to manipulate 737 Max recertification tests following two fatal crashes in 2018 and 2019, according to a damning new Senate report. Boeing “inappropriately coached” some FAA test pilots to reach a desired outcome during the recertification tests, and some were even performed on simulators that weren’t equipped to re-create the same conditions as the crashes.

In doing this, the Senate report’s authors say the “FAA and Boeing were attempting to cover up important information that may have contributed to the 737 MAX tragedies.”

The FAA is also accused of retaliating against whistleblowers, possibly obstructing the Office of the Inspector General’s investigation into the crashes, failing to hold senior managers accountable, and allowing Southwest Airlines to operate dozens of improperly certified planes.

And the hits just keep onnn comin'.

I would say "Unbelievable!" but, with Boeing and the FAA, at this point I'd believe just about anything.

Except jail time. That ain't gonna happen.

Utterly disgraceful. In my opinion the 737 MAX`s should be scrapped.
The B737 design was really for a max flight time of around 4 hours, in an ideal world Boeing should re-engineer the B757 and give back passengers a bit of comfort and space.
I for one, would not fly on a 737 MAX no matter who was operating it.
Apart from anything else the very idea of doing a transatlantic flight for example in any version of B737 is something I just would not contemplate.
I know Westjet and others such as Norwegian were doing so, but I would not do it, no way.

AFAIA Concerned a B737 should be for 2-4 hour flights maximum, I know many of you will disagree and quote bits of my post in your reply, it`s just my opinion. I like to have a bit of comfort and space when I fly. I will not be forced to be crammed into some flying shed, having to touch butt cheeks with my fellow passengers for hours on end.

To be honest I actually hate flying now, well really it`s other people that get on my goat,flying is just too stressful, unless you have a private jet, and that`s not an option for me. Rant over

Ahh, yes. The old, "Well, they caught us doing it before, they won't suspect us of doing it again" maneuver.

ShanwickOceanic wrote:And the hits just keep onnn comin'.

I would say "Unbelievable!" but, with Boeing and the FAA, at this point I'd believe just about anything.

Except jail time. That ain't gonna happen.

I really think that this is so flagrant that it speaks more to a broader, societal change—and I would argue for my country, nascent decline—than anything else.

I have to be honest, I flew the MAX before it was safe, and the worst part about it was the AA Oasis layout. However, the cracks in the framework here give me pause when considering the new 777.

paul mcallister wrote:.

AFAIA Concerned a B737 should be for 2-4 hour flights maximum, I know many of you will disagree and quote bits of my post in your reply, it`s just my opinion. I like to have a bit of comfort and space when I fly. I will not be forced to be crammed into some flying shed, having to touch butt cheeks with my fellow passengers for hours on end.

I've flown LAX to HNL on a 737 in coach and been more comfortable than flying a 747 in coach from FRA to ORD. Had the center seat in coach on an Iceland Air 757 from KEF to BWI against a strong headwind and was ready to slit my wrists by the time we landed.

The interior of the aircraft has little to do with performance, other than maximum limits, as it can be totally dictated by the airline. Pitch and width are a function of economics so as long as passengers are willing to spend more time trying to find the cheapest seat than actually traveling, airlines will attempt to maximize profit. Can't blame them for that anymore than you can the passenger that's looking for first class amenities at public transport costs on a private carrier.

The problem is the incestuous nature of the industry. Aerospace draws from a relatively small pool of skilled individuals and inevitably the FAA is full of guys who've worked at Boeing (or MD) or who did their apprenticeships with people who are. It's no different in Europe where the French arm of Airbus in particular have heavy influence over regulatory authorities.

The answer isn't to take connected people out of positions of responsibility - their skills are vital to retain the knowledge base of such a specialist regulatory authority. The only answer is to bring in far more serious criminal charges for anyone caught colluding to cover up issues, cut corners etc. and have an international agreement that allows no escape for those involved . Whether that's achievable is another matter but the will to change in an industry that has taken such a battering is definitely there, and now is the time to act.

paul mcallister wrote:To be honest I actually hate flying now, well really it`s other people that get on my goat,flying is just too stressful, unless you have a private jet, and that`s not an option for me.

I'm largely the same, having chosen to sail a couple of times over the last two years. If I ever get my own private aircraft I'll message you and stop off across the Irish Sea if you want a lift

I will certainly take you up on that, and likewise if I ever win the lottery I get my self and nice Learjet and take you up for a whirl.

DXing wrote:
The interior of the aircraft has little to do with performance, other than maximum limits, as it can be totally dictated by the airline. Pitch and width are a function of economics so as long as passengers are willing to spend more time trying to find the cheapest seat than actually traveling, airlines will attempt to maximize profit. Can't blame them for that anymore than you can the passenger that's looking for first class amenities at public transport costs on a private carrier.

I am well aware that the configuration of the aircraft is down to the airline.
My point is that passenger comfort is way down their list of priorities and that should not be the case, and things will not change unless people complain about it.

I've flown both UA's 7M9 and 752 to Hawaii. The max is definitely more comfortable. It is also far more economical to operate.

UA 7M9 = 179 seats
UA 752 = 176 seats (typical configuration operated to HI)

UA's 7M9 is actually fairly comfortable as long as you don't need to use the lav. Those space-saver lavs are brutally small.

My brother is headed for training next month as Max 9s return to Hawaii service in the New Year. He just curses WN for the antiquated cockpit layout. (WN demanded cockpit commonality with older 738 and 739 models)

paul mcallister wrote:
I am well aware that the configuration of the aircraft is down to the airline.
My point is that passenger comfort is way down their list of priorities and that should not be the case, and things will not change unless people complain about it.

Good luck with that. All the complaining in the world won't drive a single change as long as passengers look for steerage pricing.

paul mcallister wrote:My point is that passenger comfort is way down their list of priorities and that should not be the case, and things will not change unless people complain about it.

Yeah, but that's DXing's point as well, though, isn't it? As long as passenger comfort is lower on your average passenger's list of priorities than getting a cheap ticket, we're not going to see airlines prioritising passenger comfort.

Lack of comfort is not entirely the Airlines fault, they will try to fill their planes with as many people as they are allowed to. The culprits here are the manufacturers or the authorities who certify aircraft to carry more people than they should really do.

Just because they can doesn't mean they have too. It's economics over ergonomics. People look for the cheapest deal and that starts the ball rolling. It's why I said passengers can complain all they wish but if they buy a fare that's obviously less than what is reasonable to pay for comfortable transport, they have no one to blame but themselves.

Just for the record I am not just talking about budget airlines, charters or cheap deals.
Most of us know just how bad they are either in US or Europe, and in that case you get what you pay for.
I am talking about so-called decent airlines that charge for example an economy plus seat which is less space/room than what you would have got in economy 10 years ago.
All the airlines are at it, trying to squeeze as many people on board, for my part until things change for the better, I simply won`t fly as I don`t think it`s reasonable that the majority of passengers are shoe-horned into tiny spaces and are expected to put up with it.

In my deluded world I expect a reasonable level of comfort when I travel, be it by car, bus, or train. Aviation should be no different. I understand completely they are trying to run a business, as far as I see it there should be lower limits on how many pax some types can carry and it`s not just a matter of comfort, there is the risk of medical problems as well.
Don`t forget the issue of DVT for example.

I do not wish to get into an argument with anyone on here, I am stating that as far as I am concerned commercial aviation has become uncomfortable, unpleasant and stressful. Until things change for the better, and especially the passenger experience I won`t be flying anywhere.

paul mcallister wrote:Just for the record I am not just talking about budget airlines, charters or cheap deals.
Most of us know just how bad they are either in US or Europe, and in that case you get what you pay for.
I am talking about so-called decent airlines that charge for example an economy plus seat which is less space/room than what you would have got in economy 10 years ago.
All the airlines are at it, trying to squeeze as many people on board, for my part until things change for the better, I simply won`t fly as I don`t think it`s reasonable that the majority of passengers are shoe-horned into tiny spaces and are expected to put up with it.

In my deluded world I expect a reasonable level of comfort when I travel, be it by car, bus, or train. Aviation should be no different. I understand completely they are trying to run a business, as far as I see it there should be lower limits on how many pax some types can carry and it`s not just a matter of comfort, there is the risk of medical problems as well.
Don`t forget the issue of DVT for example.

I do not wish to get into an argument with anyone on here, I am stating that as far as I am concerned commercial aviation has become uncomfortable, unpleasant and stressful. Until things change for the better, and especially the passenger experience I won`t be flying anywhere.

I'm with you on this, Paul, I still love flying and discover new places but I've always said that one day it won't be fun anymore