Is the 737 MAX Dangerous AGAIN?

[@flymachine]

Anytime congress follows what the pilots are saying it’s a wise decision

[@jamesstreet228]

Agreed 100%.

[@unicorns778]

Earlier NTSB was so strong u don't need Congress to intervene

[@paperplane-db8qf]

Or all planes could just have EICAS instead of none.

[@Steve.._.]

​@@paperplane-db8qfnah seriously. The pilots whined "but but it's not like this on my daily flyer!!! Waaaaa" 😂😅

[@jantjarks7946]

Outdated design tech isn't safer, but older. The B737 has to be replaced after both, the MAX-7 and -10 are introduced. That's the only sensible way forward. However, if Boeing still gets it approved. Introduction of both have been delayed so far that the exception granted ran out of the given time limit.

[@D77tcPelican]

Either give all Maxes EICAS or give it to none of them.

[@evancline24]

Agreed!

[@vasilisbill]

Its not that simple, Boeing will have to recertify max 8 and 9 from the beginning which means more time delays and more money need to be spent in order to be airworthy. Also to retrain pilots for the type that they already have and mechanics included will be very costly as well

[@brandonmininni6601]

@@vasilisbill who cares about how much it costs if it will make it much safer.

[@vasilisbill]

@@brandonmininni6601 well...Manufacturer and airline companies do care...they are the ones that pumping hundrends millions of dollars not you.if they have to re certify max 8 and max 9 they have to wait and companies will lose a lot of money and revenue, also tickets prices will go up and number routes will be decreased. So no one wants that. As is, not certifying max 8,9 is acceptable as long as it doesn't impair the pilot ability to flight the plane safely. If EASA and FAA says its safe without re-certifying then is ok for me.

[@nick4506]

@@brandonmininni6601 its alredy safter by the numbers then the airbus a320 family even though they already have it.

[@OBENSquad_21]

Trust me as an airline pilot myself, it’s smart whenever the government go with what the pilot union is saying, because we are the ones flying the jets.

[@2adamast]

Don't trust airline pilots, I haven't seatbelts because my other older car hasn't them, so why create a difference.

[@bullseyebrave88]

@@2adamast the older planes do have a system. Its like saying that new cars should adopt teslas technology which changes how an airbag deploys based on the person. Its better but not a huge difference. And this will save cost and make flying the planes simpler.

[@jasontroy3911]

I was just about to post the same thing

[@pablopalma8019]

Nueve meses después, ¿qué opinas?

[@tamasrevesz1215]

​@bullseyebrave88 your tesla example/analogy is simply not correct. All new cars have seat belts because that's the rule/standard. The 737 OEM missed the original deadline, so these new aircraft to be certified should be equipped with eicas. Does this mean a significant major change to the current TC? Yes, so should be on a new TC/TCDS, consequently pilots should be trained. The FAA exemption is just to favour the OEM, and based on financial purposes... again

[@Mr.Scootini]

Standardized cockpit layout is absolutely the safest way to go about this.

[@LG141602]

Lol. That's for boomers and Gen X. New planes will be completely autonomous. And if it requires landing by human, it will have assistance. The future is now old men.

[@GamingTrivia1113]

​@@LG141602that is pretty much impossible for now. Also eicas does not help with autonomy

[@LadyZeldaia]

@@LG141602 or.. hear me out, we can work for the setting we have atm instead of guessing what might happen? giving all pilots the same cockpit layout would greatly increase the places they can be hired, decrease training time for multiple planes and so on We cant even make autonomous cars propperly right now..

[@StephenButlerOne]

Next thr pilots eill be flying remotly from home with a PS cintroller and zoom.

[@andersrefstad8235]

Standard cockpit layout = EuroQalety ? ... If it's Boeing i aint going

[@davidhoffman1278]

EICAS stands for Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System.

[@peter_shadow7559]

Thanks

[@jonslg240]

I couldn't believe he didn't spell this out in the video btw. It comes across as someone making videos on things they know little about, even if that isn't the case.

[@maryfrawley4388]

And it's pronounced eye cas, not eee cas.

[@britishairways744]

​@@maryfrawley4388both work

[@duanepierson4375]

As a helicopter guy working w/ glass cockpits since ‘96, our ships aways have EICAS. All that is a yellow caution that pops up on the Attitude screen telling the pilot to check the EICAS page. The EICAS page is usually up on a center MFD, and displays engine and aircraft status. I don’t know how Boeing displays their aircraft data to the flight crew. I’m not sure if this Arthur is referring to MCAS, that flight control software responsible for the accidents in 2018.

[@Emb0341]

Can’t believe that the politicians are actually making a decision to listen to people who actually know what they are talking about. Usually they think they know better but can’t explain a damn thing

[@JimMacintosh]

As a Max pilot, this news makes me happy. We fly it, we know best.

[@Nedchilvs]

I don't like flying, but I definitely wouldn't fly on a Boeing 737 Max

[@peterwallis4288]

​@Nedchilvs why not? The issues that have come to light are now known and have been rectified.

[@Nedchilvs]

@@peterwallis4288 because it's clear that Boeing put profit before safety.

[@randellt]

@@Nedchilvs then I would assume that you will no longer fly United..being the CEO put race and gender above qualifications in hiring pilots.

[@Nedchilvs]

@@randellt I'm European and don't fly much anyway. If I do it's usually KLM or BA and I always check and make sure it's an Airbus

[@Sithvulcan76]

If the pilots say they don't need it then no. Keep in mind when the Director of the FAA an experienced commercial pilot test flew the Max to see if Boeing took the corrective actions for MCAS to recertify the type, he flew a Max 7.

[@jonslg240]

One thing to keep in mind: not all people agree with what their union says. It's not like being in the union is optional.

[@sneakybutpirate]

@@jonslg240 yes but the union represents what the majority of their members want, which is why it’s also important for union members to speak their mind to their union leaders

[@jonslg240]

That's not always true.. Different unions work different ways.

[@sneakybutpirate]

@@jonslg240What do u mean, and have you been in a union?

[@rtbrtb_dutchy4183]

So what if he flew the Max 7.

[@davidbeattie4294]

If its Boeing, I ain't going.

[@josekirchner4040]

The pilots are the ultimate authority on this.

[@B737Matt]

Yup, and the 737 Max is safe.

[@Shrike200]

Coming from 15+ years on 737's, and busy with my conversion to a bigger Boeing with EICAS, I have to say that I *LOOOOVE* the 737's simplicity. So far, all EICAS has done for me is increase my study load. With the 737, you know exactly what you're getting. You always look in exactly the same place for the same things, it always warns you when something has triggered a fault (none of this 'oh, but *this* failure is inhibited to 400', but *this* one isn't' kind of stuff). The 737's checklist is always immediately in front of you for normal ops, and it's not like a paper QRH is hard to use for the non-normals, unless you're a vegetable. Electronic checklists have only added a layer of complexity that I frankly didn't think I needed, and I don't care that it's auto-completed any items it can sense conditions/switch positions of. I'm sure I'll get used to them, but so far all it adds is complication. The way this 'news' has been put is ridiculous. At no point has any 737 been endangered by it's warning systems. The system is simple, works, and the worst that can happen is multiple dead bulbs IMHO (I have 10K+ hours on all generations of 737 except the MAX: -200, 300, 400, 500, 800) Yeah, I miss the 737, how could you tell?

[@bluolds]

Boeing: thew we dont need eicas on new aircraft now EASA: dont fly to europe then

[@ChristopherBurtraw]

EASA isn't what was requiring it.

[@bluolds]

@@ChristopherBurtraw isint EASA the FAA version of europe?

[@ChristopherBurtraw]

@@bluolds yes

[@ChristopherBurtraw]

Point is, if the US regulators are happy, these planes are good to go.

[@aerohk]

EASA no longer follow FAA's lead after the MAX. It is big boy now who plays by its own rule.

[@paulgerard5413]

What’s EICAS going to do? Tell them there’s a problem on board? It stands for Engine Instrument Crew Alerting System. It literally tells pilots when a fault of any system has occurred, nothing more. It does not play any role in the aircraft’s flight abilities or controllability.

[@iridiumcaptain]

It's pronounced "eye-cass," and it doesn't activate/deactive; it's just a method of displaying relevant information, especially info related to system failures.

[@NathantheGreat428]

yeah, all modern aircraft have eicas systems, not just the Max. I'm not sure what he's on about

[@bararulive]

Correct comment right here. The video is garbage unfortunately.

[@flightdeckfishing999]

He’s not a pilot he doesn’t know..

[@machdaddy6451]

The MCAS is covering up for an engine upgrade to the airframe that is flawed.

[@Wheninflight]

What did you mean by EICAS activating, increasing the chances of a fatal incident? It was my understanding the FAA and EASA required it to be more like ECAM, popping up with a ‘recommended actions’ checklist.

[@WarHawkAU24]

I believe the point is, if you fly 2 max variants and one has it, but the other doesnt, it might not be second nature. Lets ise Southwest Airlines for example. They fly the max 8 without it. Now lets say they add the max 7 with it. Pilots have gone do long flying without it, if it pops up in a max 7, their reaction time could actually drop since no muscle memory has been developed. It could cause them to react to the problem slower possibly slowing reaction time. I think that's the fear, but just my thoughts.

[@airbus7373]

Probably something to do with where a fault is displayed, which would be different in aircraft equipped with EICAS vs without.

[@WarHawkAU24]

@@airbus7373 true. I'm not familiar with the max at all

[@38911bytefree]

TRIM RUNAWAY FAILURE: INSTRUCTIONS: GOOD LUCK TRYING TO LAND THIS THING. SEND TO THE SCRAPYARD ASAP.

[@SpencerHHO]

I trust the pilots and their union. Bad unions exist but they all generally have an interest in their membership not dying at work.

[@Dbodell8000]

A lot more bad governments than there are bad unions.

[@Daisy_lief]

It never stopped being dangerous 🫡

[@SharpCosmos]

It’s not dangerous, just bad quality control this time. It was loose bolts this time. Not an entire part of the aircraft known to be faulty.

[@Daisy_lief]

@@SharpCosmos Which makes it dangerous 🤦🏻‍♀️

[@SharpCosmos]

@@Daisy_lief As of now, yes, but instead of a massive replacement. It just making sure some bolts are tight. Which won’t take long.

[@jantjarks7946]

It's dangerous, because of Boeings unacceptable work culture. The very reason why even the 737-900 has to be checked. Which still belongs to the NG versions. In other words, it's a long term issue and embedded in many work processes already. Who knows what still could be found again by the NTSB in the lacking and worrying product documentation processes. Door plug removal required documentation. The door plug opening didn't, despite the very same work steps being required. And seemingly the very reason why the incident happened in the first place. No one had to sign off the door plug being put in again.

[@SharpCosmos]

@@jantjarks7946 I'm not saying you're wrong. Boeing is unstoppable and this issue won't hurt them much at all. Many parties are at fault from Alaska knowing about a problem and ignoring it, Boeing not caring, and the company who makes the fuselages poor quality control. Though it can be fixed unlike some other aircraft such as the DC-10.

[@michaelk5265]

Allowing the max to fly is unwise. Make Boeing redesign a new plane and force it to go through strict certification. I don’t care if this process costs hundreds of billions of dollars. They should’ve done this the first time when trying to compete with A330 neo. Their greed and incompetence caused this

[@marctamtonthat]

I'll do everything possible to avoid the 737 max. The design flaw, lack of training of pilots induced by Boeing and quality control issues are too scary.

[@stalinizzatore8292]

In che senso controllo di qualità falliti?

[@thersanothersidetome]

No cuz it basically would require all of those pilots to be retrained on a very similar aircraft to what they’ve been using. Imagine getting into a 2023 model car when you’ve been driving a same model car but 15 years older, and so now it requires you to relearn everything cuz it’s so different and you have to take a new drivers test and all. It would reduce the crew’s experience on the type suddenly- which is not safe for operation.

[@kevinp8108]

I think I just saw the windshield of a DC-9 or Boeing 717! Both have a center windshield panel whereas the B737 does not.

[@muhammadfawzi1145]

It was an MD-82/83

[@sabretooth1997]

That's poetic because what Boeing is now essentially McDonnell Douglas. In the acquisition, they basically inherited MD's toxic management culture but kept the Boeing name because it was better. Not unlike the Kmart acquisition of Sears. Which also explains why Boeing as a company has fallen far from what it was in the days of the 747 and 777. The B73M is basically just today's DC10.

[@adamd6648]

@@sabretooth1997 I was gonna say that, the 737 max is just the DC10 all over again.

[@eduardodaquiljr9637]

Very timing incident,when one airline companies are about to order planes!

[@Midnight.Rain.747.]

ONE OF MY FRIENDS SAID IT WAS BOEINGS VERSION OF THE DC-10 💀

[@urielbueno7179]

Same people from the DC-10 came to Boeing and focused strictly on profits and their shareholders.

[@mariposamoreno]

BOOM! 😂

[@Midnight.Rain.747.]

@@urielbueno7179 yeah

[@YazovSupporter1974]

At least dc10 redeemed itself later on. I'm not so sure about 737max, but who knows

[@Midnight.Rain.747.]

@@YazovSupporter1974 i love boeing sm but they should’ve retired the 737 a while ago (unpopular opinion idk 😭)

[@JASNSOUNDS]

I am avionics specialist on the max. Its fault reporting is already incredible. Pilots absolutely know when there is s malfunction with anything.

[@knightsnight5929]

To be fair, it never stopped being dangerous.

[@wings9925]

This all just shows how weak the FAA are when it comes to Boeing: They'll do anything to keep the MAX in service

[@timwilson7326]

You don't have any idea what you're talking about

[@megawave79]

well mate its a safe plane lol. what are you even talking about?

[@AverageDayInside]

​​@@megawave79 would have been safe if boeing didnt cut corners, blood is on boeings hands

[@AlexandarHullRichter]

it has nothing to do with deference to Boeing. it has to do with the fact that two Max types (8 and 9) are already certified without this new system, and you don't want new planes of a similar type to be equipped with this new system, because it makes all the planes less safe to have pilots switching between similar planes that have different control systems.

[@megawave79]

@@AverageDayInside not talking about the previous one which crashed twice

[@christianbolstad3032]

It’s pronounced “eye-cass”

[@takagi298]

All my homies HATE the 737 Max

[@karpabla]

It is not a problem, as long as you remember not to fly in a MAX.

[@yukonstriker1703]

What about MCAS? THE issue that caused two crashes?

[@12pentaborane]

That was solved a while ago.

[@manofflorida1138]

Let’s remember that the MAX 7 and MAX 10 are not new types. They are merely variants of the existing 737 MAX subtype, and therefore no new type certificate needs to be issued.

[@ROBLOXGamingDavid]

Which one's more fatal: MCAS or ECAS. Remember, they're both meant to help the pilots but if not engineered or programmed correctly (or if it's malfunctioning), it can kill.

[@12pentaborane]

I'm pretty surprised the 737NGs and newer don't have EICAS. The 757 onward has it, given it flew a year before the production of the "classic" models I would have figured it was a staple from then on.

[@deepakthadhani]

I won't fly on the 737 Max, just recently a new issue with bolts/fasteners on its rudder systems was discovered by an airline and all 737 max planes have to undergo checks/maintenance. Have all airlines complied, is a risk I dont want to take.

[@marcbrady7241]

That’s only for the 737 MAX 9. All other 737 MAX variants are unaffected.

[@nick4506]

deadline was delayed to the end of 2022 because they thought they would be certified already but they are just going to keep going till they are all sertified.

[@uhohmemebiggestboy212]

At first I was like "huh" but it actually sounds like a good argument I can't argue that it could just cause more panic in an plane your use to already

[@stratocat]

From what I understand, the problems start at the production floor as training and quality control has been lax compared to past production standards. This from former Boeing manager/ whistle-blower.

[@samir_216]

Bro just showed a 737 NG cockpit instead of 737 MAX cockpit

[@demosteneneacsiu6144]

EICAS is the top middle screen, it’s fitted to all 737’s from the NG version onwards. Not the same as mcas :)

[@rtbrtb_dutchy4183]

It’s not. 737 doesn’t have EICAS.

[@chris22capt]

It's simply called engine display. The CAS in EICAS stand for Crew Alerting System, will alert the crew if something went wrong on the display and it will be very specific which system went wrong. Far more superior than the current recall system on 737, but a bad idea to force only -7 and -10 to have it while the rest of the fleet don't.

[@jonny1013]

As a crew who flown both b737ng and now the 330... i can safely say you do not need EICAS at all. Most planes flying today are not equipped with EICAS / ECAM and its not a safety issue. On future or other models okay it will be nice to have... but not on the 737max which has already its design finalized ! it does not make sense if u install EICAS !

[@simonm1447]

There will be no Eicas (the congress accepted it) but they have to retrofit other stuff like an artificial 3rd AoA sensor on own cost to all Max aircraft

[@jonny1013]

@@simonm1447 yup i agree

[@Democracyyy]

pretty sure if another max crashes because of Boeing Boeing is screwed

[@alkishadjinicolaou5831]

It has always been dangerous, from the start.

[@GeflyLW]

I hate the 737 MAX family.

[@robertwalker2052]

Boeing builds planes in Washington and South Carolina. I understand some carriers do not take delivery of South Carolina planes due to concerns of build quality.

[@steltekx]

Please stop the fearmongering. EICAS is a good thing in general, but so is maintaining consistency. All 737 Max variants were originally expected to not have EICAS. The only reason this came up is that the Max 7 and 10 hadn’t finished certification by the end of 2022

[@busukevm8288]

I have to say this actually makes sense when it was explained

[@demti2]

When was it safe, implying that it is dangerous "again"?

[@davecrupel2817]

Unfortunately, incorporating an EICAS type system in one's airplane is not as simple as installing a new screen. You will need to _COMPLETELY_ re-wire your aircraft. All kinds of new computers, sensors & probes will need to be added on to your aircraft and your engines. This means nothing less than converting your entire plane from analog & electromechanical to almost completely electronic systems. Which is the big fundamental difference between Boeing & Airbus. (As well as other manufacturers.) It's something that Boeing will have to slowly do, over time, if they want to convert their narrowbodies or wide bodies. Only way they can do it all at once is with an entirely new airplane. Not another 737. This is why pilots are only half the story. You need to consult us maintenance technicians as well.

[@iEvoke]

Wouldn’t fly in one. That’s for sure ..

[@Dirk-van-den-Berg]

Why THE HELL does Congress have a say in this? The only voice that should matter is that of the pilotsassociation.

[@daal7767]

It never stopped being dangerous

[@faranger]

I just love the engines being over the wing killing lift 😮

[@davidh.6930]

It sounds more like boing has some people in the pilot association to further cost cut, maybe next will be that the fuselage can be single layer because it would safe fuel?

[@erauprcwa]

That's the thing. EICAS is great, but the airplanes haven't had it in their entire history and have worked out fine. EICAS, while more direct, doesn't change anything about the current system of how to identify potential irregularities in the 737 flight deck. I feel totally comfortable and safe flying a 737 Max airplane and much prefer them over the NG.

[@jamesstreet228]

Who would you be most likely to trust regarding the systems on the plane you're about to fly on, the pilot's who fly them or congress who wouldn't even be able to turn the lights on or off?

[@RifullOfTheWest]

Don't fly on the 737 period. It's a all around dangerous airplane to fly on

[@triple7marc]

Pilots know best.

[@CabanaD]

Why would congress except an airline for a safety standard?

[@spicecandy5248]

Mcas- May crash any second💀

[@NikoStojic]

I went on 737-900 from Atlanta to Sarasota and it was smooth as possible. I think its fine.

[@marcbrady7241]

The 737-900 is different. That’s not a MAX. The 900 is part of the 737NGs.

[@briancrawford69]

The 737 has flown millions of miles and hours with a pretty good record. Sl if it hasn't already had it then don't push it on them now. Better to come up with systems that are just safer and more reliable to start

[@TheGersh18]

The Max was designed before that system was required. The -8 and -9 were certified before that requirement went into effect, the -7 and -10 had some development delays and just missed the deadline. It would be more dangerous to have 2 variants of the same plane, with different avionics. It’s very confusing for pilots. This was the right decision by the FAA, it doesn’t make the Max more dangerous.

[@frankchan4272]

Well let’s see what European & other flight authorities in countries say as they have a say now as those authorities used just follow the USA but stopped after the 737 Max incidents.

[@TheAviationYoutuber]

This aged well

[@toranp.8942]

If the pilots asked for them to not require EICAS, then that’s the correct move. The pilots know what they do or don’t need the best.

[@patriot369]

raising the landing gear elevation solved the problem no need for mcas anymore

[@CrashTestPrivate]

Short answer, no

[@davidkleinthefamousp]

Cool! When did this happen?

[@JulesBrunoJjBaggy]

The union should test their hypothesis by having allied airlines randomly turn ecas on or off during some safety sims

[@jojje3000-1]

More of US job-protection defeats security.

[@juangomez713]

Crazy how he predicted the future

[@rogerbobrowski5741]

Nobody knows a job better than the person doing it. Glad to hear the government listened instead of caving to big business.

[@richiet3841]

When it is determined that cause of fatality was lack of the safety system, then Congress will be blamed. Its inevitable.

[@AlexandarHullRichter]

EICAS is a system that would be new to the 737 entirely, and its absence does not make the new 737s any less safe than the old ones that also did not have it. the bigger problem with installing it is difference training. You don't want pilots switching between planes that have the new system and planes that don't have the new system, because then they would fly the planes that don't have it expecting it to help them out, and that's way more dangerous than none of the 737s being equipped with it. the 737 has never had this system before, and without the system, it has still been the safest Airliner ever made. if there was to be a 737 variant equipped with this new system, pilots that fly those would have to be restricted from flying flying any 737s that don't have it until every 737 that doesn't have it is retired, and since some of them are recently manufactured (including 737 Max 8s and Max 9s yet to be made), that's going to be a very long time.

[@thecanadian1433]

So, did it became dangeroys again, and proceed to say it would be dangerous ro have eicas on 50% of the variant...

[@Quemedices684]

Until you have a bad day when something unexpected happens

[@crazycoasterboi8176]

The government and unions disagree. What a shock.

[@danielressel6138]

So ist like a check engine light/ dash massage for malfunction? How does it not already have that?

[@rollvideo]

Boeing’s CEO announced today: “I’ve lost faith in the 737. Production of all variants will cease today. Seeing the 737 for the first time made me very uncomfortable, I could see it was going to be a stupid idea reviving such an old design. Sometimes I lay awake at night as I thought about entering the factory, putting on womans underwear and strapping myself to the nose-cone of a 737 model under construction. I wanted to see the look on the workers faces in the morning. I felt I needed to protest as the board did not support my decision to axe the model” ( I wanted to do it with real axes )

[@DEonaraR]

"time will tell"... nooo, they wait until many lives are lost

[@zx4race31]

Boeing needs to make an all new plane.

[@ABAtrading]

It’s always a great day when you’ve just booked a flight on the exact plane that you’re hearing is now deemed dangerous 😂

[@sneezygibz6403]

Exactly why i don't fly southwest.

[@rashadreddsent.8453]

Nah that one makes sense. As long as the pilots are good with it.

[@ThatOneAviator777]

I’ve been in a MAX8 and it’s completely safe. I don’t feel safe riding in a MAX 9, but I know it’s been tested due to the recent blowout and I would love to fly on it. I would even fly the A321XLR because it had a window blowout but Idrk. I wanna try both.

[@kjherms369]

Wasn't is the eicas system that brought down a few 737s not to long ago?

[@marcbrady7241]

No. That was MCAS. That was 5 years ago.

[@unicorns778]

Ever since Boeing merged with MD except 747 they have strong history of cutting the corners

[@fra93ilgrande]

Oh shit, now there’s plenty of them flying over Italy too 🥶

[@JayJayAviation]

They’re safe

[@billpugh58]

Avoid flying in them. Boeings lobby group is stronger than their safety group!

[@Holden-Mx]

Not me watching this video in a 737

[@brucewang-ju1uo]

Not my profile being a Boeing 737 max :

[@rollvideo]

Boeing’s CEO announced today: “I’ve lost faith in the 737. Production of all variants will cease today. Seeing the 737 for the first time made me very uncomfortable, I could see it was always going to be a painful product. Sometimes I lay awake at night as I thought about putting on womans underwear and strapping myself to the nose-cone of a 737 under construction. I needed to protest because I wasn’t being supported by the board, but that’s probably because I was often drunk in the office”

[@apreaze]

EICAS is handy, but I don’t see any problem to fly 73s without it tho

[@pog2346]

That’s a lot of westjet in the background

[@Youroldmatejohnno]

Wait it wasn’t dangerous at one point

[@krusty1974]

The B737 Max was never dangerous in the first place. MCAS activation is transparent to pilots and it’s activation is and was never a problem.

[@JayJayAviation]

1) This video isn’t about MCAS 2) Right because that’s how 2 of them crashed in 5 months

[@krusty1974]

@@JayJayAviation 1) When it says "Did the 737 become dangerous again?" what's the subject there? Chicken wings? Aubergines? 2) airplanes crashed because we fit primates in flightdecks. MCAS did not ever kill anyone. It is not an issue. It never was.

[@jjohn713]

Another sensational take by a talking head.....

[@rod-bits-and-pieces]

I just know i don’t ever want to fly in any max in fact Boeing have shown whether safety or profit are their priority!

[@theodorehaskins3756]

What the hell does Congress have to do with regulating the airlines? If any thing, they should be deferring to the FAA for guidance.

[@sharoncassell5273]

Pax talk about comfort. Pilots are concerned with manueverability. Safety issues.

[@sauronthegreat5799]

anytime Congress listens to doctors, it's a good thing.