The Boeing 737 MAX: Its Rise, Fall And Re-Emergence
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 май 2024
- With more airframes delivered to date than any other current model, the Boeing 737 is one of the most successful commercial aircraft in history. However, its latest generation, the 737 MAX, has somewhat tarnished the impressive history of the 737 family. When the model was grounded in 2019 over safety concerns, it caused difficulties and losses for airlines around the world - as well as for Boeing. It is now flying again, but…
How did the 737 evolve into what we see flying today? And what does the future hold for the 737 MAX?
With thanks to our video sources: bit.ly/3kCTy2P
Simple Flying:
Visit our website where we publish 150-200 news stories per week: simpleflying.com/
Listen to our weekly podcast: simpleflying.com/podcast/
Download our iOS & Android app: simpleflying.com/simple-flyin...
Daily email digest sign up: simpleflying.com/daily-digest/
Check out our main RUclips channel: / @simpleflyingnews
Follow us on social media:
Instagram: / simpleflyingnews
Twitter: / simple_flying
Facebook: / simpleflyingnews
Linkedin: / 33222643
#aviation #flight #avgeek #airlines #flying
#Aviation #Flight #Avgeek #Flying
“Never let accountants, design your parachute.”
They saved $200million on pilot re-training…
Yet they lost $20billion in value before fines, lawsuits, and compensation to airlines who bought their faulty plane.
Simple flying: M-C-A-S
Everyone else: Emcas
Fair enough since it looks close enough as acronym rather than random abbreviation
🙊…. He never learns….
Boeing - we don’t need no stinking physics. Profit over death
Airbus - respect physics. Stay alive.
MCAS: Might Crash Any Second.
so cringe
All the problems boeing has and is having is a direct result of allowing the bean counters to run the company and not the engineers
8:07 - If Boeing only had the foresight of knowing that constant bolt-ons to an obsolete architecture would cost them $20 billion and nearly two years time. They could have developed another aircraft.
The real issue is, if Boeing didn’t rush the production of the MAX, kept the two AOA censor readings, and put MCAS in the flight manual, they would have never had to pay $20 billion dollars in the aftermath. The design of the plane has little to do with it. It was just the time saving measures Boeing took for the development of said plane.
@@banksrail right on ! Should send this to ‘dj’s aviation channel for other aviation armchair quarterbacks to learn from.
Lion Air & Ethiopian Airways caused the death of over 300 people.
Two of over 430 flying 737 Max crashed due to:
1. faulty or damaged flight control sensors causing a runaway trim emergency in a 737 aircraft.
2. Poorly trained 737 pilots, who did not know how to properly use the manual trim wheels in every 737 aircraft, specifically to deal with runaway trim emergency.
The worst the MCAS could do( eg damaged or faulty sensor) is cause a runaway trim emergency.
All 737 pilots should know exactly what to do with a runaway trim emergency shortly after takeoff.
In fact, the crashed Lion Air Max, had the same emergency(due to faulty sensor) 24 hours earlier, and a 3rd pilot, who was properly trained, stepped in and safely landed the plane. Lion Air then approved this Max to fly when it still had a faulty sensor, ... and ... never checked that the pilots knew what to do as the 3rd pilot had.
Both dead flight crews, would have crashed a 737 200, Classic, & NG ... suffering a runaway trim emergency shortly after takeooff. Boeing put the the 737 200, how to properly use the manual trim wheels for runaway trim emergencies. And the 737 Max has the exact same manual trim wheels and cut off switches ... for Airlines to train their pilots how to correctly use.
The Max was a safe aircraft before the crashes. The software update, that Boeing recommended after the crash, simply made the MCAS system fool proof ... and this hides bad airlines and poorly trained pilots, which are the reason two of over 430 Max crashed.
Boeing didn't need to tell airlines or pilots about the MCAS ... because the worst it could do( faulty or damaged sensor) is cause a runaway trim emergency. And Boeing has put in every 737 for the last 50 years, the manual trim wheels & cut off switches for dealing with pitch control emergencies.
More BS from the fake new media, where the facts are clearly ignored for some emotional biased witch hunt.
The problem was not that they added a new system to an old aircraft, but that they botched its implementation. They could have made a completely new aircraft and botched that, too.
@@abelincoln6150 Had Boeing told them about MCAS then you might have a point.
0:30 simple flying: shows flight simulator footage
everyone else: wait that’s illegal
You forgot to mention the -600. I have many hours on the jump seat. SAS was the no.1 buyer. They had two types of the -600, one domestic and one for iner-scan and European routes. The last type had a fwd lav on the left hand side after the galley. That ment that half of comp 1 was a waste tank. I was on a fully booked plane, and I saw that two huge trollies of checked baggage was still on the tarmac. The pilot came on the PA explaning the delay. « Sorry about all this but this aircraft has a smaller trunk than a Ferrari!» The bags was left behind. The 737-700 killer today is the A-220. I am impressed about that aircraft. Mamma Mia!
You can only patch something up for so long. No matter how you look at it, it is an old design that will need to be be replaced sooner rather than later.
The crashes have little to do with the design and more to do with Boeing not putting MCAS in the flight manuals in fear that it would result in pilots not being certified to fly all generation of the 737.
It's a turd that re-emerged.
best thing about simply flying and long haul - they pronounce the numbers in Boeing model names separately i.e. 737 becomes 'seven three seven' instead of 'seven thirty-seven'.
so cringe
@jiyoun park yeah i do too. Seven thirty seven is too american
Who does that?
Please, more videos like this!
Love your videos! Keep it up
The MAX is going to be the last 737. Unless Boeing manages the impossible and shoves an EVEN BIGGER engine under those low wings with a better MCAS.
I would not hesitate to get on a 737 max now....probably the safest plane in the air today. Memories are short, people witll get on these planes and fly. 911 was a tragedy, but like I said memories are short and life goes on.
I'd be pretty hesisted tho: 10:46
But Boeing's poor safety culture , which some say arrived following the merger with Douglas - and certainly exacerbated by today's desperate competition with Airbus, remains.
The Boeing 737 is my favourite among the Boeing's narrowbodies. I flew on the 737 max with LOT Polish Airlines, Southwest, American, Icelandair and China Southern. The 737 max and the A320 NEO are perfect for each other.
Beoing also didnt do proper software testing for its starliner and lost contracts to spacex. But im sure someone got a bonus for cutting costs in the software QA dept.
Indeed. Boeing charged more money than SpaceX, and then because of their own mistakes still have not managed to reach orbit. Meanwhile SpaceX has been launching crew and cargo to orbit regularly... Boeing used to be the best aerospace company, but it has faltered terribly.
If I had a dollar every time they found a issue in the 737 max I would be able to buy a 737max
I think you mean, every time they found an issue in the Dreamliner….
😆😆😆
Don’t be fooled... Airbus is no different. The lens on them is yet to be focused, but even they have quality issues
I don't condone Boeing's bad decisions but in fairness, we've flown the plane multiple times after the grounding and depending on carrier, it's a nice comfortable bird even though American first class service is for crap.
@@oscargeorge1 calling it a bird is the most cringe thing I’ve ever heard in my life, it’s a plane not a bird
Not gonna lie the 737 max kinda tarnished Boeings overall history but I’m glad it’s making a comeback
After 2019, and covid in 2020, in 2021 -> 2023 the 737 max market is seriously booming I just love Caribbean Airlines's newest livery on their new plane and I love the design too, soo good!
Beautiful Piedmont shot
Great video
0:57 The Caravelle was a stunning aircraft!
Before the groundings I've flown on both the Max 7 and the Max 8 with SWA. The aircraft were far superior to the NG series being both more comfortable and quiet during flight. I agree with Mark W's opinion below, however, I remain optimistic that after the initial challenges the Max has faced are worked out it will continue the tradition of being the industry "workhorse" for passenger travel.
You could’ve only flown on their 737 MAX 8, SWA is still awaiting its first MAX 7
ruclips.net/video/rvkEpstd9os/видео.html
Max 7 hasn't been delivered yet, You probably travelled on the 8 or 9 (idk if southwey has them)
Nice overview but your slide on the NG variants included the -300 and -400 (both classic series) and omitted the -600 and -700 altogether.
Only the Alaska Air Cargo at the beginning was a 737-400(F), after that they only showed NGs until they continued with the MAX
ruclips.net/video/rvkEpstd9os/видео.html
I love your videos
Great video, Long Haul! But a mistake, found I have. 4:13 Malindo Air, a Malaysian Airlines, it was. It was the subsidiary of Lion Air Group (Indonesia) but the airline is registered in Malaysia.
As much as I want to join the hate bandwagon, I can't, because I flew on the MAX before the grounding, it was the quietest, most comfortable flight I ever had. The overhead bins were huge and I liked the soft mood lighting. I was very impressed, it's like a mini 787 inside. So I wish for the 737 MAX to find its feet again because fundamentally, it is a fantastic aircraft to travel on. Perfectly fine if its and Boeing's reputation is damaged beyond repair, by the way. The electrical issue is a setback in the MAX's re-entry into service, but all aircraft, even Airbus aircraft are routinely subjected to Airworthiness Directives. The A320 Family recently had a big one for the windshield and fuel pump defects. That said, I think Airbus aircraft overall, are better built than Boeing's best. I do think the MAX will be the final swansong for the 737 family and a clean sheet design will follow in the mid-2030s. Boeing needs to rethink its management to come out of the blunder more resilient, the board needs a reshuffle and a culture of product quality restored, it's a great shame to see a giant fall.
Everyone needs to watch this documentary to see just how bad Boeing is. They are scumbags. ruclips.net/video/PdYcJldzOdw/видео.html
Boeing KNEW of the fault. And they BURIED it and misled the FAA. Then when the 2 crashes happened, Boeing blamed the pilots! I don’t fly the Max on principle. I will not actively support Boeing’s toxic, deadly culture. They can burn in hell as far as I’m concerned.
It’s scary that they fixed an engineering failure to the structure via software that’s not even reliable. The 787 also suffers poor build quality with dangerous battery failures and un-specified structural flaws. It’s extremely disappointing. Meanwhile at Airbus they only have cosmetic defects and non-major problems. No wonder the PA is leaning towards an all Airbus fleet. Maybe because the airline cannot afford to have fatalities.
It's not the planes fault
Its Boeing fault
@@catdemon922 Its like you’re saying that it’s the tree’s fault for being struck by lightning.
4:13 Malindo is not Indonesian Airline, The Parent Airline, Lion Air is
Scary that I flew United 737 max in a November 2018
U.S. -trained pilots would have responded to MCAS activation like it was a trim runaway and you would have been fine.
@@StratMatt777 That's why they crashed it in the simulator when asked by the FAA to try to recover the plane in similar conditions as the 2 crashes?...LOL If it was safe, they wouldn't have grounded for 2 years, even in the US...quit your BS. I read the Congress reports, they're damning!
@@carocarochan said, "LOL If it was safe, they wouldn't have grounded for 2 years, even in the US...quit your BS. I read the Congress reports, they're damning!"
I _never_ said the MAX was "safe".
If you think I did, Quote me to prove it.
It sounds like you are telling me that you are not a pilot and have never flown an airplane...?
If you are a pilot, how much flight time do you have in which type(s) of aircraft?
Do you have jet time?
Do you have a 737 Type Rating?
Have you done any training in a 737 simulator (the kind owned by an airline)?
What are the immediate action memory items for dealing with a runaway stabilizer on the 737 (or on any type of aircraft)?
What is a Stabilizer Trim Cutout switch?
When do you use it?
(If you cannot answer the three questions above, your 737 simulator training was as poor as the training of the flight crews of the two MAXs that crashed).
What system does the MCAS system send commands to/activate?
Boeing should have installed a second Angle of attack sensor on ALL MAX aircraft since it is so critical that the inputs be accurate and verified against each other before the MCAS system reacts to the AOA it thinks the airplane is experiencing.
On one day, the local Seattle TV News showed a Boeing Whistleblower who designed the MAX cockpit... he told Boeing to add a second AOA for safety for the reason I just stated. They chose not to because they didn't want to spend the money because Boeing was taken over long long ago by greedy Wall Street bean-counter types who care about nothing other than profit.
Boeing's hiding of the MCAS system from pilots and the FAA is CRIMINAL. Someone from Boeing should be in jail.
Mullenburg, the "disgraced" CEO who testified to congress left Boeing with a $60 MILLION dollar severance package. Unbelievable!
So anyway, after you tell me how much flight time you have in jets, go re-read my original comment that you replied to and see what I actually said.
THERE IS A REASON THAT NO MAXs CRASHED IN The U.S./Canada/Europe/Japan/Australia.
Standard training for a type rating on ANY high performance complex aircraft includes how to deal with runaway stabilizer trim.
Heck, I taught it to my students in Cessna and Diamond General Aviation Aircraft that were equipped with autopilots (and therefore with electric trim).
[EDIT:] What mechanical error caused the MCAS on the crashed Lion Air 737 MAX to receive faulty AOA info?
Would this airplane have crashed if Lion Air's notoriously AWFUL maintenance crews hadn't messed up?
Why did this airplane not crash in the days preceding the crash, when other crews experienced the EXACT SAME MCAS malfunctions that the doomed flight experienced?
Why did different flight crews prevent the plane from crashing? What's the difference?
@@StratMatt777 you know how you deal with because you know about mcas now. The Ethiopian crew did cut out the stab trim... But they had waited too long and airspeed had built up and needed too much force to bring the nose up and then turned the trim back on and unfortunately mcas. When something happens it takes a while for the brain to register and act.. Especially when it's a system that you've not been told about. The true crime with mcas was they hid the feature.. Having it based of one aoa sensor was a bad idea.
@@Bren39 True.
The NG's also included the -600 and -700 variants. The 300 and 400 were from the legacy gen models.
future is bright
I'm not a fan of a 737 and definitely not the MAX variant. Boeing will keep stretching this plane. I prefer the 757 and wish it were still in production.
The 737 is MAXed out with the 10, without new landing gear and wing box no further stretch will be possible. You are right a 757X would be a killer.
so that should also apply to the a320ceo and 320neo
757 max or 757x would be amazing because they could make a small one to replace the 737 and a model that competes with the a321 xlr.
I think, if history has anything to say, the 737MAX will make a complete resurgence in the coming decade. Take the DC-10 as an example. A number of deadly crashes attributed to a flaw in the cargo door latching mechanism caused the type to be grounded in the US. After the flaw was fixed, the aircraft was returned to service and achieved an outstanding safety record and decades of operation. It never had another crash that was caused by a design flaw.
ruclips.net/video/rvkEpstd9os/видео.html
But it finished MD in commercial aviation
Smooth ryan air landing
I'm on vacation and I was flying here on a 737-Max/9
The 737 was for me the best airplane I traveled on it a 1000 time until the fucking MAX ….definitely I change it with the A320!
Honestly, after seeing what I have, I would be trepid to get on one. It’s the modern DC-9
737 Max: Squeezing blood out of a stone.
At 0:50 - and the Fokker F28.
Malindo is not an Indonesian airline, it is a Malaysian airline. It is owned by the PT Lion Group, an Indonesian conglomerate whose Indonesian airline is Lion Air.
2017: Rise
2019: Fall
2020: Re-emergence
2024: Re-fall
The 737 max is going to have great future despite having a rough start
Nice to see some optimism. I thoroughly enjoyed my one 737 MAX flight so far, but it'll be at least another 6 months before I feel comfortable stepping aboard a MAX, not that I can because air travel is nearly impossible where I live.
Yeah exactly!
While I do agree that the 737 MAX is a good plane despite the issues that it had, I hope this is a learning experience for Boeing. Sometime in the next ten years they are going to have to seriously consider developing a 737 replacement. There's only so much the 60 year old airframe of the 737 can do.
@@redshirt5126 Even though I agree with you, the airframe wasn’t the culprit to the two crashes. It was Boeing’s lack of planning and time saving measures. If Boeing would have used two AOA censors and actually put MCAS in the flight manuals, both of the crashes would have never happened.
@@banksrail - Besides the lack of 2nd AOA sensors, MCAS, there was no pilot simulator training.
How does engine placement effect Cabin width? The 727 is the same width
They mentioned placement in regard to the competition (like that TWA in the background @ 1:23 that had rear engines), not in regard to the Boeing's own airframes.
Cool
It listed the variants of the 737NG incorrectly and in the wrong order.
"Somewhat tarnished"... rofl
Great story but please cut the paper sounds wasnt sure if i had mice or the printer was grounded
Alot here that is missing.
1, 737 was not a 727 replacement.. 737 original purpose was to fill a gap between the 707 and 727 , mainly in Europe and other small countries were time was the issue. It did not have the range or capacity of the 727. Both airframes used the jt8d engine .. this changed when the cfm56 was fitted . The 757 was designed to replace and double the range at half the operating cost of a 727.
2 , the MCAS system did have a deactivate switch . The problem was that most third world airlines did not have pilots with enough flight hours to recognize when the system was activated and then lack of situational awareness to compensate or deactivate it . When MCAS was deactivated you flew the plane as normal. By the seat of your pants.
3 , NTSB and FAA all roll up under the Dept of Transportation.. the problem with the grounding is the the FAA had to give approval to the type certification with little knowledge on how MCAS actually worked . The NTSB only investigates accidents and then submits corrective actions.. both agencies have limited enforcement authority. It's the DOT responsibility to enforce what it see fit. ..
The entire 737 airframe is an excellent platform that will continue to be manufactured due to the amount of pilots that have been certified to fly it.. this is the only example were quantity and quality are on equal footing .. can't say the same for airbus.
The Boeing 737 may have a long pedigree, but as they say: "If it ain't broken, don't fix it." The MAX problem wasn't the design, just economic cost-cutting, which can happen with any aircraft. If old is so bad, why is there talk of upgrading the Boeing 757? If you've got a winner, stick with it. New for new sake is a fool's mission.
Because the price of fuel is a major contributor to operational costs. If you slice of 7% of fuel cost, you have a winner vs the competition. This translates into a much bigger slice of the pie and has worked for Boeing.
Boeing's core problem is its lazy management at the top. Absurd logistics meant to make the 787 more politically acceptable to EU carriers did nothing for sales but forced the fuselage to be built in Italy. Similarly the Tail was built in Japan.
Why the person suggesting this wasn't dumped out over the Atlantic with an anvil suggests the rest of upper management was similarly obtuse, not only about engineering and the need to eventually start again with a clean sheet of paper.... but also to understand the basics of logistics and supply chain costs.
This was over their head.
Instead they pressured workers to build faster.... and that backfired.
The only good move was to split their buisness East and West coast.
Unfortunately, their management remained in Chicago, more than 1,000 miles from the people who actually build things in a stellar example of how NOT to manage a business.
Until I see the leadership leave Chicago for Seattle or the Carolinas, I would stay far away from investing in this company. They don't know what they're doing. None of the actual people who do have a say in their strategic decisions.
@@avgjoe5969 Hi Avg Joe, thanks for your articulate reply. I fully agree with the second half of your argument, but not so much with the first half. Partnering with other democracies around the world is no longer just a clever sales strategy. It makes very good political sense, and yes, there is a political aspect in everything, just as there is a financial , environmental, fair labor, etc. one. The world economy has become so integrated that now that we have the written agreements (rules) we now need the enforcement mechanisms. As we've seen so many times in history, when dictatorships are not stopped from market abuses, ultimately the only way to end the abuse is war. This is not longer an option with today's level of weaponization.
Except the 737 HAS been 'fixed', repeatedly, for decades. The better analogy is a 1960s car repeatedly resto-modded till it's a hodgepodge of dated and new methodologies. At some point, you end up with more issues than anything else and require a clean sheet. There will be no further 737 development for this reason.
As for design not being the issue, cost cutting was definitely the catalyst, but your comment implies the resulting design was still acceptable. Are you not familiar with MCAS v1.0 at all? It was *abominable* design, hence the extensive RE-design of everything from how it is triggered to how it now operates IF activated.
It was SO bad people are now facing personal criminal indictment, starting with the chief test pilot.
Most people have no idea the max was even grounded and even at the gate, ng 737 also have two winglets so they can’t tell the difference
Anyone else see the “Adam & Eve” livery for Sky Airlines? Talk about your “full upright and locked position” ☺️
The cabin was derivative of the preceeding 707/720/727 and as such was not a design with competition with the short haul single aisle market in mind.
Disappointed to learn that Lion Air ordered more maxes. Was hoping they'd go with the A320 series, as they had promised to look into them. But boeing probably sold them at cost to Lion Air to make up for boeing's malfeasance and to ensure Lion would stay loyal to the type.
Still wanna fly with Lion..??
The master of delay flights & change the flight schedule as they want
I call them as "Metromini mabur" 😂😂
An airbus fanboys target
As of recent, I have flown in the Max 8 about 10 times this month and the aircraft performance is very well. It is unfortunate what this aircraft series went through in order to improve the safety issues and performance, here's hoping to better quality checks and safety standards.
So what does "performance" mean. Enlighten us.
@@nickv4073 If you did your research of how the technical aspect of the Max series work and what changes have been made to increase safety standards and performance issues then your question would have been answered already.
@@Vicstarz26 You said you flew in it 10 times. You were a friggin passenger, Dude. So what "performance" issues did YOU see as a passenger. Better meals? Good coffee? Nicer legs on the flight attendants? If you are basing this on "research" alone then why bother stating you flew in it 10 times? What does that have to do with anything?
Tons of 737 MAX flying from the west coast to
Hawaii. Even Phoenix to Hawaii.
Who the hell is just on snacks for 5-6 hours on SWA
The 737 max is just a modern day DC-10 give it 5 years and no one will be as paranoid
Yet the DC 10 destroyed Douglas in commercial aviation.
@@mp4373 it did indeed but the plane itself flew non afraid for many years
@@shiroalter8975 Paris
@@mp4373 It also helped kill Concorde.
For all of you saying "757" the problem was that airlines stopped ordering enough 757's to the point that it wasn't economical for Boeing to continue the line. Meanwhile they kept ordering 737's. So why should Boeing continue a line that was essentially dead instead of one that was alive?
They can ofc, and the technology also isn't that aged.
But, the production line is scraped to the point that they better be make new ground up aircraft instead. If there's still production line (Like 767), the will definitely release 757X sooner than anything else
The Boeing 757 was pretty much killed after 9/11 and after orders have dried up after 2001. Most airlines preferred smaller aircraft like the 737ng and the Airbus a320-19 instead of the 757.
@@bocahdongo7769 how boeing keep the production line if there is no order for the type ? Even 767 still have orders for cargo and millitary use so boeing can keep the line.
@@Arkan_Fadhila that's the point. 757 model is, let's say, to ahead for it's time
Hopefully as a result of max FAA will eventually cap number of variants with old designs
I wouldn't expect or desire that. The only thing for the FAA to "cap" are secret systems that run software that trims the horizontal stabilizer down in order to make the airplane behave like the other derivatives so that the airlines don't have to train their pilots on a new type.
3:17 That's a -400 (Classic) I'm pretty sure...
Yes. The location of the probes alone is a dead giveaway that it's a Classic. NGs had them relocated just behind the radome.
Boeing needs a clean sheet design and Boeing needs to get started on it now for arrival in the early 2030s, given how long it takes for Boeing to go from initial concept to revenue service. The 737 fuselage can only support 17.3 inch wide seats at six-across. The Airbus is at 18, and economy seat width is one of the biggest determinants of passenger comfort. Sure, a wider fuselage is more expensive to operate, but with 60 years of advances since the original 737 was designed, surely there are ways to make a clean sheet design economically have wider-than-18-inch coach seats in a six-across config (egress rules with a single aisle will keep it at six-across). If Boeing can make a plane with six-across, 19-inch wide Y seats that is also more efficient than the MAX, they will have a winner. Bonus points if it's a variant of the 797 Middle-of-Market platform, allowing Boeing to truly take on Airbus by having ONE type rating, parts supply and product family equip both short and medium market missions (the A321XLR is the same family as the regular A320neo). Maybe a 797 that comes in MAX 8 replacement, MAX 9/757-200 replacement, and 757-300 replacement sizes?
~FAA; mandates 737 MAX inspections for key automated flight system
~AvGeek; concerned about MCAS
~Passengers; give us cheapest fare....
🛫🤣🛫😎🛫🤣🛫😎🛫🤣🛫😎🛫🤣🛫😎
Even the Passangers may not know if they fly with 737 Max unless someone tell him 😂
@@Arkan_Fadhila actually we can check out what type/variant of aircraft we're going to fly by looking at bottom-right on Flight Details page through online booking🛫🤓 #SaveFlight
@@stradivarioushardhiantz5179 really ? I never check that before. I guess i'll try to find that if i have a chance to fly again. I never found the type that i'll fly before
@@stradivarioushardhiantz5179 yeah most people won't do it though
@@Arkan_Fadhila And that's how these greedy capitalist pigs get away, the media always keep people busy with things that don't affect their life. No criminal charge against massacre of people against boeing lmfao. All we know is one massacre = 1 ceo's job, great justice system in the US!
I make it a point to not fly on the max if I see it on a booking.. maybe it's safer or not but I know they haven't made actual changes and it's based all on training and human error is too risky in my mind
Is it true, that current 737-Max pilots pull the circuit breaker of MCAS before takeoff? I don't think thats true!
No. The EASA/Canada airworthiness directive allows the *stickshaker* CB to be pulled in case of a spurious activation, but there isn't a speed trim CB for the MCAS as such, AFAIK.
You were extra friendly to the 737's history with the omission of the rudder design flaw, which just like the MAX led to two crashes with no survivors.
While your right, it’s important to say that this part of the video was rather a 737 history recap with all variants briefly mentioned! The focus of the video was on the MAX
It all seems like the military mind's inherently unstable air frame, but what the hell the computer/ejector seat will fix it, mentality slowly creeping across in to civil aviation. The accountants are not going to see anything but merit in that idea. I am waiting for the first airliner with anhedral wings if it somehow suits operating efficiency. At least in that case the pilots will know something is going on.
How much longer will airlines allow passengers a no-fault/no-cost re-booking to a non 737MAX flight? It's fairly easy to see which aircraft is on a route when booking, yet equipment changes are regular occurrences.
💚
Malindo Air is Malaysia not Indonesia and Lion Air is Indonesia. Wow! I didin't know Lion Air order that much of 737 MAX before.
I think removing the MCAS might simply fix the problem.
They would have to retrain pilots, which is very expensive and time-consuming.
@@simondahl5437 So is picking up after a crash.
@@rogerrussell9544, Sure but removing MCAS is not an alternative...
@@simondahl5437 There is no alternative for designing and building current state of the art planes to compete for market share. The bean counters at Boeing knew the 737 was getting old. They knew the 757, and 767 are getting old. They invested a lot in new tech on the787 and then didn't leverage that onto new models. The 777X failed the static stress test, notice they aren't getting a lot of orders for it?
There is no alternative to the board replacing the executives while they still have a little time to turn things around.
No my friend,software are not bad things in aviation. Do you know how an airbus fly? So fixing the mcas is the only one solution.
It really took me a second to realize that the “Em-cas” was meant with M-C-A-S 😂
The sad reality
ruclips.net/video/rvkEpstd9os/видео.html
Well now the fix the plane all people that dont know aviation dont even care about the MAX issue.... so this plane gonna still flying for a at least 20 year. But i recommend Boeing To Start Thinking in a good replacement in the future. For me the 797 can be one. He can replace the 737 and 757 in the same time like the A320 Neo family Regular, LR and XLR.
I wonder why didn't they go for the raked wingtips.
heres your popcorn for reading comments about boeing being stupid
Main reason I clicked on this video.
Ye some idoits never learn or they don t understand about planes
There is something wrong with the order overview -- United has almost 400 737MAX on order.
Also the 737 was not developed to be a 727 replacement at all, the 737 came shortly after the 727 and was meant to be the "Regional Jet" of Boeing.
This was probably scripted before they released their order
@@woodduck2178 probably, but the order is almost a month ago.
Exactly! The 757 was the 727 replacement.
Since the 757 was cancelled in 2005 we can say that Boeing designed the MAX10 to be a 757-200 replacement.
@@StratMatt777 the 737-900ER was the replacement for the 757-200 -- of course lacking range, takeoff performance and a little bit of capacity, but still able to operate a good 80%+ of 757 routes with almost same seat capacity.
The MAX10 of course is also aimed as a replacement of the last 757s in service, but also to compete with the A321neo.
@@widget787 Yeah that's true... I wasn't thinking about the MAX's brand new 9:1 bypass engine technology- I was only thinking about fuselage (cabin) length (the "lacking a little bit of capacity part" you mentioned) and how the 737-900 was a little shy of the 757.
the 737 max in the Us Latin America and Europe never reported any problems with the max
Not in service, but the grounding can definitely be seen as a problem
Boeing should back to drawing back, to design all new replacement plane for B737 . Maybe it take years, but it good for Boeing and competition. And this B737 airframe should be retired, since it too low on the ground, look at their engine .
They can't afford to
The engines are too big for the outdated 737. New aeroplane makes wall street unhappy
I’m so glad none of the regional airlines that operate down this end of the world other than virgin Australia have invested even a dollar into this plane. I have like zero faith in Boeing’s ability to safely continue with this rollout. It seems to me that they’re building planes accepting that there will be fatal flaws causing incidents but are weighing that up with the damage to their reputation and at the expense of lives. For them the deaths don’t outweigh the benefits.
Are these all Boeing employees taking about how “safe and quiet” the max is? Say that to the families of those who lost their lives.
@6:23 "A lack of training for the pilots??" How 'bout a lack of KNOWLEDGE that MCAS even existed?? 🤔🧐 Boeing REALLY screwed the pooch on that one.
And nobody from Boeing goes to jail?
We don’t know that yet
The airline I use most often has some on order. I have no qualms about flying on it.
This could be the last 737 ever in the world they might make an you were designed replace to 737 not sure yet
Airbus is going to have its turn in the aviation barrel. Every dog has its day and Airbus is next.
And fall again!
Delta wasn't on the list. I will be flying Delta.
...and re-fall.
I haven’t seen the comment addressing the simulator footage so I’m gonna be the one to do it…Why?? Lol I’m pretty sure there are millions of plane spotting vids that include all 737 variants with the exception of the 100/200
Was that first shot of a 737 landing from XPlane? 😂😂
It was!
It looks so realistic, didn't even notice it
@@nimitberry5257 I know right! The only thing that gave it away was the jolting yoke movements, other wise I may not have noticed.
It would take Boeing 3 years and $100Mil to design an outhouse.
I think the 737max is going to be successful despite the flaws the max had before the groundings. I hope this teaches Boeing not rely one aircraft type to cover a wide range of single aisle market. Boeing should had a replacement like a next generation 757 and a stretch or upgraded 717, to cover markets where the 737 couldn’t operate or no longer operates in. If Boeing did one of these aircraft, we wouldn’t be hearing anything about the max crisis because the max wouldn’t exist.
I will NEVER trust Boing again, let alone the MAX.
The Max scandal brought to light many facts showing how many corners Boeing cut and how complacent the FAA was in the quest to put Shareholder Value over safety. And make no mistake, that is exactly what they did. The craft NEVER should have been certified to fly in the first place.
That’s bad enough, but their public actions are just down right appalling; when the Max’s crashed, Boeing started blaming the pilots and implying it was their fault. Then it was found during the congressional investigation that Boeing not only KNEW about the dangerous system, but intentionally omitted it from the training manual AND misled the FAA about the issue. Boeing’s own people said things like “God will never forgive us for this” and that they wouldn’t allow their loved ones to fly on the plane.
Boeing executives SHOULD have had gone to JAIL for this.
Instead they paid off the fed with a $1.7B “fine” (bribe) and set up a $500M “victims fund” in exchange for no criminal charges being filed.
Boeing is systematically rotten to the core and bought their way out of accountability. The closest thing to being held accountable was dismissing the former CEO and sending him packing with SIXTY MILLION DOLLARS!
The FAA is complicit and faced no repercussions. In fact, the FAA performed an employee survey after this and the reoccurring theme was to “not rock the boat with Boeing” and that senior FAA leadership was dismissive of safety concerns.
The numerous groundings after re-certifying the MAX show that they NEVER did their due diligence and should have approved it before this point.
And if you think this toxic culture is exclusive to just the MAX, you are simply naïve. We shouldn’t trust ANY new Boeing craft, let alone the MAX. Or the FAA.
I fly 4-6 times a month, and only buy tickets on Airbus or older Boeing planes. I cannot, in good conscious, support this new generation of Boeing. They are immoral and have demonstratively proven safety takes a back seat at their company. No amount of PR campaigning will change this. That’s the issue. That’s why I won’t fly a MAX.
Bruh chill now the b737 max is probably the safest plane
More like McDonnell Douglas 737 Max (death)
The plane is a design cock up. But they cdnt change it or that wd be an admittance. So basically the plane continues as is, with revised software to stop it crashing.
All planes fly with software. The MAX is certainly not the only one. But what makes it easier for planes to crash is when no one is aware of the software added.
@@banksrail the difference is this plane crashed with software
@@willmac5642 the plane crashed because of a mix of human error, poor maintenance, and software. MCAS could have been turned off but the pilots didn’t know how to because it wasn’t in the manual.
I’m not flying that. That’s my comment.
its safe
Boeing Wins !!
What does it feel like Simple Flying stole their title from Company Man.
I'd have no qualms flying the recertified Max, but for the sake of non-avgeeks, I hope that airliners and flight crews just refer to it as a "737". Lots of people will never trust a 737 "Max".
Boeing DC-10ED the hell out of that word... And killed several hundred people in the process.
Nice programming, guys! 🙄
I think GE did the programming for MCAS if I’m not mistaken
@@JayJayAviation IIRC it's Honeywell following Boeing specifications. They contract developer in this case.
As an avgeek I need to know the exact aircraft being operated
It was far more corrupt, and sinister than your video makes it appear.. and no one jailed. Unbelievable.
Both aircraft losses were with inexperienced pilots, the complexity should require sim training. But wax nostalgic. The 727 was a sweet aircraft to fly in. With engines at the very rear of the aircraft, it was really quiet at cruise. The FAA will slow new aircraft designs though, and we are stuck with flying beer can style for a while.
it wasn't grounded over safety concerns, it was grounded because it killed its passengers
offiial 7/8/9
i know its prob not