I certainly know nothing about planes yet from the reading I've done on the 737 Max I'm a bit uneasy that these planes are still flying.
I usually subscribe to the mentality that something that had a significant issue that was fixed is overly scrutinized and thus becomes safe but in this case it seems like the decision-making involved in the making of this plane from the start was flawed, such that I'm not sure patches on patches are enough.
Someone who knows more about planes might say all the issues are unrelated but fundamentally in a system like this I think one thing is bound to affect another, and if not that, then the mentality that led to one issue is likely to have been present in the developing of other components of the system.
The FAA will never ban it because politically its untenable in the US, the only thing that could kill the Max off would be if another big regulator such as EASA refused to let the Max into their airspace.
How do you think we would judge someone using common sense to work out a problem in computing? Because saying the FAA is existentially deferential to Boeing is a "series of tubes" analog.
Another poster above described it but Boeing managed to lobby congress into passing a law that basically says they don’t have to add a sensor that the FAA required them to.
I usually subscribe to the mentality that something that had a significant issue that was fixed is overly scrutinized and thus becomes safe but in this case it seems like the decision-making involved in the making of this plane from the start was flawed, such that I'm not sure patches on patches are enough.
Someone who knows more about planes might say all the issues are unrelated but fundamentally in a system like this I think one thing is bound to affect another, and if not that, then the mentality that led to one issue is likely to have been present in the developing of other components of the system.