Boeing 737 Max: The Flying Coffin

[Aloha Hoosier]

Must have been sold at below cost. They have quite a few of them sitting around in the tarmacs of Seattle.

Boeing can't deliver the 737 Max to customers, and now the planes are clogging up its storage lots

• The global Boeing 737 Max fleet has been grounded since March 13 in response to the crashes of Ethiopian Airlines Flight ET302 and Lion Air Flight JT610.
• Boeing has suspended customer deliveries of the 737 Max, but the production of the plane has continued at a pace of 42 aircraft a month.
• As a result, Boeing's storage lots are packed with undelivered 737 Max aircraft.

It isn’t below cost, but there will be a discount, and the fix will be made.

 

[sglowrider]

It isn’t below cost, but there will be a discount, and the fix will be made.

Highly, highly discounted for sure. Or even financed to IAG at some ridiculous rate.

They need something to boost the company morale too and consumer confidence. Plus they need to manage their cash flow considering that they have so many planes in AOG status.

 

[DrHoops]

God, I admire you!

Nope..., but I'm looking to buy this time next year

 

[DrHoops]

Boeing is not going to sell the Max for "below cost". Deliveries aren't going to start until 2023-27. There will be plenty of time for the fix and word is they may eventually roll some of these orders into the new, still to be determined 797 Middle of Market airplane, or MOM.

It isn’t below cost, but there will be a discount, and the fix will be made.

 

[DrHoops]

The discount will be 40-50%, which is not unusual for a 200 frame order anyway. IAG knows that this will blow over long before they start to receiver their first deliveries in 2023. This will be fixed and it will be a blip on the radar. IAG was smart to use this as a buying opportunity.

The funny thing is with only one passenger airplane for sale that anyone can actually fly right now, the 787, they blew Airbus out of the water with their orders today. 777-9 is delayed till year end and lord knows how long this Max issue will go.

It isn’t below cost, but there will be a discount, and the fix will be made.

 

[iubud]

I am curious what the fix will be. A software fix or an easier way to turn of the system wouldn't give me a lot of security. At low altitude and low speed, a pilot doesn't have much time to evaluate the issue and react.

A family member is a Captain of a 777 for DHL. He said pilots quickly noticed the engine placement difference when they saw a 737 Max and it was the feature that made it stand out and recognizable. He said he doesn't build them, but he wondered how the engine being above the wing affected the air flow over the wing. Forcing the nose down may be more about maintaining forward speed because of reduced lift than the plane pitching up.

My dad was the only person to successfully roll an F-100 on take-off at 50 feet on a simulator without crashing. Even with his low altitude skills, he didn't want to fly a heavy because the way big planes feel after take off. My uncle became a career AF pilot because he wanted to keep flying but had a similar feeling as Dad and didn't want to fly for an airline. Dad compared flying a heavy to a friend's 60 hp ski boat that would drag us through the water for a long time vs our 200 hp outboard that could pull you out of your skis.

A software fix will make the plane salable for now but a replacement better quickly follow.

 

[DrHoops]

I think this is an excellent post. I think the answer is that this was all about squeezing one last generation out of the 737, which an airplane that is over 50 years old, essentially. Even the A320 is now over 30 years old. I think Boeing wanted to build a clean sheet narrowbody aircraft but then Airbus announced the A-320 NEO and that forced Boeings hand. Boeing had to launch the MAX. The problem is, the 737 was desigend to have short landing gear so it would be easier for baggage handlers to load up and turn the plane around at each airport. Unfortunately, today's efficient engines have much larger fan blades and that's become more and more difficult for Boeing to fit on to 55 year old technology. The A-320 doesn't have those problems.

That's why Boeing had to design the engine to be, not only slightly above the wing, but significantly further forward than older versions of the 737. That's where the software came in. This will no doubt be the end of the line for the 737 and a new narrowbody will be developed with longer landing gear. (The MAX actually extended the front gear). It's been an amazing airplane, but it has to go soon.

I am curious what the fix will be. A software fix or an easier way to turn of the system wouldn't give me a lot of security. At low altitude and low speed, a pilot doesn't have much time to evaluate the issue and react.

A family member is a Captain of a 777 for DHL. He said pilots quickly noticed the engine placement difference when they saw a 737 Max and it was the feature that made it stand out and recognizable. He said he doesn't build them, but he wondered how the engine being above the wing affected the air flow over the wing. Forcing the nose down may be more about maintaining forward speed because of reduced lift than the plane pitching up.

My dad was the only person to successfully roll an F-100 on take-off at 50 feet on a simulator without crashing. Even with his low altitude skills, he didn't want to fly a heavy because the way big planes feel after take off. My uncle became a career AF pilot because he wanted to keep flying but had a similar feeling as Dad and didn't want to fly for an airline. Dad compared flying a heavy to a friend's 60 hp ski boat that would drag us through the water for a long time vs our 200 hp outboard that could pull you out of your skis.

A software fix will make the plane salable for now but a replacement better quickly follow.

 

[sglowrider]

I am curious what the fix will be. A software fix or an easier way to turn of the system wouldn't give me a lot of security. At low altitude and low speed, a pilot doesn't have much time to evaluate the issue and react.

A family member is a Captain of a 777 for DHL. He said pilots quickly noticed the engine placement difference when they saw a 737 Max and it was the feature that made it stand out and recognizable. He said he doesn't build them, but he wondered how the engine being above the wing affected the air flow over the wing. Forcing the nose down may be more about maintaining forward speed because of reduced lift than the plane pitching up.

My dad was the only person to successfully roll an F-100 on take-off at 50 feet on a simulator without crashing. Even with his low altitude skills, he didn't want to fly a heavy because the way big planes feel after take off. My uncle became a career AF pilot because he wanted to keep flying but had a similar feeling as Dad and didn't want to fly for an airline. Dad compared flying a heavy to a friend's 60 hp ski boat that would drag us through the water for a long time vs our 200 hp outboard that could pull you out of your skis.

A software fix will make the plane salable for now but a replacement better quickly follow.

Precisely what the video I had posted earlier said:

 

[sglowrider]

BOEING 737 MAX: 'NEW RISK IDENTIFIED' ON PLANE INVOLVED IN DEADLY CRASHES

Flaw could delay plane's return for months

A new flaw that could result in the plane's nose pitching downwards has been found on the Boeing 737 Max, the airline manufacturer said. It is almost certain to further delay the plane's return to the skies after two deadly crashes.

The software problem in the plane’s computer system was discovered by Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) test pilots updated Max software in a flight simulator, Boeing said.

The flaw could result in the plane's nose pitching down, two people familiar with the matter told the Associated Press news agency. Both spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss aspects of the review process that are not public.

 

[sglowrider]

Nope..., but I'm looking to buy this time next year

Airlines cancel more Boeing 737 Max scheduled flights as some crash victims refuse to settle

Southwest Airlines will not schedule Boeing 737 Max flights until at least Oct 1, the airline said on Thursday (June 27), just as the families of some Ethiopian Airline crash victims told a Chicago judge they are not ready to settle litigation.

Boeing's shares lost 2.4 per cent as the Chicago planemaker grapples with the fallout of two deadly crashes of its 737 Max jet within five months, which prompted a worldwide grounding in March and a string of litigation.

Meanwhile, Reuters reported on Wednesday that Boeing will not conduct a certification test flight, a necessary step before formally requesting FAA approval of new software until July 8, under a best-case scenario.

That means the eventual return of the jets for flight may drag into the fourth quarter of the year, analysts said.

Time to buy soon?

 

[sglowrider]

 

[iuwclurker]

I'll drive.

 

[sglowrider]

Massive kick in the goolies for the FAA...

Federal investigators say the FAA’s Boeing 737 Max inspectors were insufficiently trained

Some of the Federal Aviation Administration inspectors who worked on training requirements for the troubled Boeing 737 Max planes and other aircraft were underqualified and the air safety agency misled lawmakers about it, federal investigators said Tuesday.

The investigation is adding to scrutiny of the agency that certified the Boeing 737 Max to fly in 2017. The planes have been grounded worldwide since mid-March after two fatal crashes within five months of one another claimed the lives of all 346 people on board.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel sent letters to President Donald Trump and lawmakers outlining its findings, which stem from a whistleblower complaint about qualifications of FAA inspectors.

The FAA’s Office of Audit and Evaluation in February said it found that 16 of 22 safety inspectors did not complete formal training while 11 of the 16 lacked flight-instructor certificates.

 

[sglowrider]

Boeing Pilot Complained of ‘Egregious’ Issue With 737 Max in 2016

For months, Boeing has said it had no idea that a new automated system in the 737 Max jet, which played a role in two fatal crashes, was unsafe.

But on Friday, the company gave lawmakers a transcript revealing that a top pilot working on the plane had raised concerns about the system in messages to a colleague in 2016, more than two years before the Max was grounded because of the accidents, which left 346 people dead.

In the messages, the pilot, Mark Forkner, who played a central role in the development of the plane, complained that the system, known as MCAS, was acting unpredictably in a flight simulator: “It’s running rampant.”

The messages are from November 2016, months before the Max was certified by the Federal Aviation Administration. “Granted, I suck at flying, but even this was egregious,” he said sardonically to a colleague, according to a transcript of the exchange reviewed on Friday by The New York Times.

The Max crisis has consumed Boeing, and the revelation of the messages from Mr. Forkner comes at a particularly sensitive time. The company’s chief executive, Dennis A. Muilenburg, is scheduled to testify before two congressional committees, on Oct. 29 and Oct. 30, the first time a Boeing executive has appeared at a hearing related to the crashes. Boeing’s stock lost 7 percent of its value on Friday, adding to the financial fallout.

The existence of the messages strikes at Boeing’s defense that it had done nothing wrong regarding the Max because regulators had cleared the plane to fly, and potentially increases the company’s legal exposure as it faces civil and criminal investigations and multiple lawsuits related to both crashes. Facing competition from Airbus, Boeing worked to produce the Max as quickly as possible, striving to minimize costly training for pilots. Last week, a task force of 10 international regulators released a report that found that Boeing had not fully explained MCAS to the F.A.A.

[Read the messages between the Boeing pilot and his colleague about the MCAS issue.]

“This is more evidence that Boeing misled pilots, government regulators and other aviation experts about the safety of the 737 Max,” Jon Weaks, president of the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association, said in a statement on Friday.

Boeing has maintained that the Max was certified in accordance with all appropriate regulations, suggesting that there was no sign that MCAS was unsafe.

That contention was central to the company’s rationale in not grounding the Max after the crash of Lion Air Flight 610 last October, and in waiting days to recommend grounding the plane after the second crash, of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 in March.

It was only after data suggested that MCAS played a role in the second crash that Boeing and the F.A.A. decided to ground the Max.

Mr. Forkner was the chief technical pilot for the Max and was in charge of communicating with the F.A.A. group that determined how pilots would be trained before flying it. He helped Boeing convince international regulators that the Max was safe to fly.

In the messages, he said that during tests in 2016, the simulator showed the plane making unexpected movements through a process called trimming.

“The plane is trimming itself like craxy,” he wrote to Patrik Gustavsson, a fellow 737 technical pilot at Boeing. “I’m like WHAT?”

Mr. Forkner went on to say that he had lied to the F.A.A.

“I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly),” Mr. Forkner says in the messages, though it was not clear what he was specifically referring to.

Lawmakers, regulators and pilots responded with swift condemnation on Friday.

“This is the smoking gun,” Representative Peter DeFazio, Democrat of Oregon, said in an interview. “This is no longer just a regulatory failure and a culture failure. It’s starting to look like criminal misconduct.”

Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, said he expected answers from Boeing’s chief executive and board of directors.

“They must be held accountable if Boeing was deceptive or misleading in failing to report safety concerns,” Mr. Blumenthal said in an interview. “What these reports indicate is that Boeing’s own employees lied and concealed the truth.”


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/18/business/boeing-flight-simulator-text-message.html
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/business/boeing-737-crashes.html

 

[Thyrsis]

Boeing Pilot Complained of ‘Egregious’ Issue With 737 Max in 2016

For months, Boeing has said it had no idea that a new automated system in the 737 Max jet, which played a role in two fatal crashes, was unsafe.

But on Friday, the company gave lawmakers a transcript revealing that a top pilot working on the plane had raised concerns about the system in messages to a colleague in 2016, more than two years before the Max was grounded because of the accidents, which left 346 people dead.

In the messages, the pilot, Mark Forkner, who played a central role in the development of the plane, complained that the system, known as MCAS, was acting unpredictably in a flight simulator: “It’s running rampant.”

The messages are from November 2016, months before the Max was certified by the Federal Aviation Administration. “Granted, I suck at flying, but even this was egregious,” he said sardonically to a colleague, according to a transcript of the exchange reviewed on Friday by The New York Times.

The Max crisis has consumed Boeing, and the revelation of the messages from Mr. Forkner comes at a particularly sensitive time. The company’s chief executive, Dennis A. Muilenburg, is scheduled to testify before two congressional committees, on Oct. 29 and Oct. 30, the first time a Boeing executive has appeared at a hearing related to the crashes. Boeing’s stock lost 7 percent of its value on Friday, adding to the financial fallout.

The existence of the messages strikes at Boeing’s defense that it had done nothing wrong regarding the Max because regulators had cleared the plane to fly, and potentially increases the company’s legal exposure as it faces civil and criminal investigations and multiple lawsuits related to both crashes. Facing competition from Airbus, Boeing worked to produce the Max as quickly as possible, striving to minimize costly training for pilots. Last week, a task force of 10 international regulators released a report that found that Boeing had not fully explained MCAS to the F.A.A.

[Read the messages between the Boeing pilot and his colleague about the MCAS issue.]

“This is more evidence that Boeing misled pilots, government regulators and other aviation experts about the safety of the 737 Max,” Jon Weaks, president of the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association, said in a statement on Friday.

Boeing has maintained that the Max was certified in accordance with all appropriate regulations, suggesting that there was no sign that MCAS was unsafe.

That contention was central to the company’s rationale in not grounding the Max after the crash of Lion Air Flight 610 last October, and in waiting days to recommend grounding the plane after the second crash, of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 in March.

It was only after data suggested that MCAS played a role in the second crash that Boeing and the F.A.A. decided to ground the Max.

Mr. Forkner was the chief technical pilot for the Max and was in charge of communicating with the F.A.A. group that determined how pilots would be trained before flying it. He helped Boeing convince international regulators that the Max was safe to fly.

In the messages, he said that during tests in 2016, the simulator showed the plane making unexpected movements through a process called trimming.

“The plane is trimming itself like craxy,” he wrote to Patrik Gustavsson, a fellow 737 technical pilot at Boeing. “I’m like WHAT?”

Mr. Forkner went on to say that he had lied to the F.A.A.

“I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly),” Mr. Forkner says in the messages, though it was not clear what he was specifically referring to.

Lawmakers, regulators and pilots responded with swift condemnation on Friday.

“This is the smoking gun,” Representative Peter DeFazio, Democrat of Oregon, said in an interview. “This is no longer just a regulatory failure and a culture failure. It’s starting to look like criminal misconduct.”

Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, said he expected answers from Boeing’s chief executive and board of directors.

“They must be held accountable if Boeing was deceptive or misleading in failing to report safety concerns,” Mr. Blumenthal said in an interview. “What these reports indicate is that Boeing’s own employees lied and concealed the truth.”


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/18/business/boeing-flight-simulator-text-message.html

But basically that just says a pilot experiencing issues told a colleague? Not to give Boeing a pass here, but by itself I'm not sure I'd call that a smoking gun. Fair or not, for an organization to grapple with and process information, that information probably needs to be focused and shared with some intentionality.

 

[sglowrider]

But basically that just says a pilot experiencing issues told a colleague? Not to give Boeing a pass here, but by itself I'm not sure I'd call that a smoking gun. Fair or not, for an organization to grapple with and process information, that information probably needs to be focused and shared with some intentionality.

Few things:

1) Boeing has always implied that they were always unaware of such a problem.
2) If safety issues are not taken seriously by even their own pilots whilst others were 'too busy' thats an issue. The problem here is that tremendous pressure from the very top that forced them to bypass certain operational engineering processes/fixes (due to the competitive pressures) to get the Max delivered on time and on budget.
The internal conflagration within Boeing has to be the top management trying to shift blame or at least deflect blame. Knowing engineers, the Boeing engineers followed or at least wanted to follow procedures and processes to the letter ... only to be told to bypass certain processes or very expensive fixes/re-designs due to urgings from the top.

Lots of finger-pointing and I told you so going on for sure.

3) The issue with the regulators is another. When the trust in them is gone...

 

[DrHoops]

I was just reading about this today. I am blown away that Boeing would be so stupid.

This is exactly what happens when you continue to cut regulations/regulators and essentially let companies regulate themselves. Apparently hundreds of people’s lives are a satisfactory price to pay for malfeasance.

Boeing Pilot Complained of ‘Egregious’ Issue With 737 Max in 2016

For months, Boeing has said it had no idea that a new automated system in the 737 Max jet, which played a role in two fatal crashes, was unsafe.

But on Friday, the company gave lawmakers a transcript revealing that a top pilot working on the plane had raised concerns about the system in messages to a colleague in 2016, more than two years before the Max was grounded because of the accidents, which left 346 people dead.

In the messages, the pilot, Mark Forkner, who played a central role in the development of the plane, complained that the system, known as MCAS, was acting unpredictably in a flight simulator: “It’s running rampant.”

The messages are from November 2016, months before the Max was certified by the Federal Aviation Administration. “Granted, I suck at flying, but even this was egregious,” he said sardonically to a colleague, according to a transcript of the exchange reviewed on Friday by The New York Times.

The Max crisis has consumed Boeing, and the revelation of the messages from Mr. Forkner comes at a particularly sensitive time. The company’s chief executive, Dennis A. Muilenburg, is scheduled to testify before two congressional committees, on Oct. 29 and Oct. 30, the first time a Boeing executive has appeared at a hearing related to the crashes. Boeing’s stock lost 7 percent of its value on Friday, adding to the financial fallout.

The existence of the messages strikes at Boeing’s defense that it had done nothing wrong regarding the Max because regulators had cleared the plane to fly, and potentially increases the company’s legal exposure as it faces civil and criminal investigations and multiple lawsuits related to both crashes. Facing competition from Airbus, Boeing worked to produce the Max as quickly as possible, striving to minimize costly training for pilots. Last week, a task force of 10 international regulators released a report that found that Boeing had not fully explained MCAS to the F.A.A.

[Read the messages between the Boeing pilot and his colleague about the MCAS issue.]

“This is more evidence that Boeing misled pilots, government regulators and other aviation experts about the safety of the 737 Max,” Jon Weaks, president of the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association, said in a statement on Friday.

Boeing has maintained that the Max was certified in accordance with all appropriate regulations, suggesting that there was no sign that MCAS was unsafe.

That contention was central to the company’s rationale in not grounding the Max after the crash of Lion Air Flight 610 last October, and in waiting days to recommend grounding the plane after the second crash, of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 in March.

It was only after data suggested that MCAS played a role in the second crash that Boeing and the F.A.A. decided to ground the Max.

Mr. Forkner was the chief technical pilot for the Max and was in charge of communicating with the F.A.A. group that determined how pilots would be trained before flying it. He helped Boeing convince international regulators that the Max was safe to fly.

In the messages, he said that during tests in 2016, the simulator showed the plane making unexpected movements through a process called trimming.

“The plane is trimming itself like craxy,” he wrote to Patrik Gustavsson, a fellow 737 technical pilot at Boeing. “I’m like WHAT?”

Mr. Forkner went on to say that he had lied to the F.A.A.

“I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly),” Mr. Forkner says in the messages, though it was not clear what he was specifically referring to.

Lawmakers, regulators and pilots responded with swift condemnation on Friday.

“This is the smoking gun,” Representative Peter DeFazio, Democrat of Oregon, said in an interview. “This is no longer just a regulatory failure and a culture failure. It’s starting to look like criminal misconduct.”

Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, said he expected answers from Boeing’s chief executive and board of directors.

“They must be held accountable if Boeing was deceptive or misleading in failing to report safety concerns,” Mr. Blumenthal said in an interview. “What these reports indicate is that Boeing’s own employees lied and concealed the truth.”


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/18/business/boeing-flight-simulator-text-message.html

 

[sglowrider]

I was just reading about this today. I am blown away that Boeing would be so stupid.

This is exactly what happens when you continue to cut regulations/regulators and essentially let companies regulate themselves. Apparently hundreds of people’s lives are a satisfactory price to pay for malfeasance.

Competitive pressures (due to rapid globalisation or China's rapid growth?) and deregulation of public infrastructure items aren't a good combo.

But this is all symptomatic of decisions made a decades ago and the eventual erosion of trust between the public and the previously trusted authorities.

The old adage of 'pilot error' for causes of air crashes (whether true or not) in the past may no longer hold true. It was always a convenient excuse in the past but with this onion being unpeeled, it may not be so easy to pass off in the future.

I think we are heading into a crappy period of general distrust of once venerable products/companies or government organisations and Joe Public -- with Trump not helping with his constant 'discrediting' of the IC or even the Congress now seemingly bothered by the multitude of corrupt practices in this regime.
And now a once-venerable company like Boeing.

 

[DrHoops]

I totally agree, but don’t want to think about it too much, since I’m waiting for my flight in the Lufthansa Lounge on my way back from the Biennale in Venice.

I hope I make it back over the pond!

Competitive pressures (due to rapid globalisation or China's rapid growth?) and deregulation of public infrastructure items aren't a good combo.

But this is all symptomatic of decisions made a decades ago and the eventual erosion of trust between the public and the previously trusted authorities.

The old adage of 'pilot error' for causes of air crashes (whether true or not) in the past may no longer hold true. It was always a convenient excuse in the past but with this onion being unpeeled, it may not be so easy to pass off in the future.

I think we are heading into a crappy period of general distrust of once venerable products/companies or government organisations and Joe Public -- with Trump not helping with his constant 'discrediting' of the IC or even the Congress now seemingly bothered by the multitude of corrupt practices in this regime.
And now a once-venerable company like Boeing.

 

[sglowrider]

I totally agree, but don’t want to think about it too much, since I’m waiting for my flight in the Lufthansa Lounge on my way back from the Biennale in Venice.

I hope I make it back over the pond!

Any good? It was all the rage a decade ago. If I was being honest, I thought it was too left field for my limited INTP brain of mine. Thought being in Venice its probably better -- more concentrated a space to walk and see and not too spread out.

 

[DrHoops]

I go every year, sans last year when I was going through my divorce. This was the weakest year in the last five. I’d skip it this year for sure.

Venice is always fun for a few days once the day trippers and cruise shippers have left for the evening.

I may be back to SG in Dec. we should meet up if you’re gonna be there.

Any good? It was all the rage a decade ago. If I was being honest, I thought it was too left field for my limited INTP brain of mine. Thought being in Venice its probably better -- more concentrated a space to walk and see and not too spread out.

 

[sglowrider]

I go every year, sans last year when I was going through my divorce. This was the weakest year in the last five. I’d skip it this year for sure.

Venice is always fun for a few days once the day trippers and cruise shippers have left for the evening.

I may be back to SG in Dec. we should meet up if you’re gonna be there.

Let me know. My sisters are coming over plus I think my nephew is coming over too in Dec.

I only get the keys to the place in Penang in mid-Dec. So there are stuff to do before I can move in... if I can be bothered or remember at this point several months later -- may install a glass wall/patio (with the view of the sea) is the only thing I can think of and a fresh lick of paint.

So the chances are that I move up in late Jan or early Feb. Pain in the ass moving across countries even though this is basically up along the Straits of Malacca -- with a beautiful picturesque highway taking me from end to end! My cats need passports and jabs for Malaysia -- which is crazy since I can take my cats to the states with no hassle!

 

[sglowrider]

Whistleblowers everywhere...



Some major heads have to roll. It's getting ridiculous now. Systematic.

 

[Spartans9312]

CNN- "The FAA gives approval for the Boeing 737 Max to carry passengers again, ending the jet's 20-month grounding"
Nope. I'll drive

 

[Marvin the Martian]

CNN- "The FAA gives approval for the Boeing 737 Max to carry passengers again, ending the jet's 20-month grounding"
Nope. I'll drive

It will take a brave person to fly in 2020, with COVID happening, on a 737 Max.

Actually, I would fly a 737 Max except for the COVID.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

It will take a brave person to fly in 2020, with COVID happening, on a 737 Max.

Actually, I would fly a 737 Max except for the COVID.

Don’t live in fear of a tube that has fresher air than your grocery store.

How safe is air travel?

MIT Medical answers your questions about COVID-19. Today’s topic? How safe is air travel? What about that re-circulated air in the cabin? And should I look for an airline that’s still blocking middle seats?

medical.mit.edu

 

[outside shooter]

Don’t live in fear

actual concluding recommendation: MIT Medical continues to recommend that you postpone nonessential travel at this time, but if you must travel, do your best to travel thoughtfully, safely, and with deliberate attention to your own safety and the safety of others.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Don’t live in fear of a tube that has fresher air than your grocery store.

How safe is air travel?

MIT Medical answers your questions about COVID-19. Today’s topic? How safe is air travel? What about that re-circulated air in the cabin? And should I look for an airline that’s still blocking middle seats?

medical.mit.edu

The plane isn't my concern, it is the airport. The shuttles too and from, etc.

 

[Spartans9312]

It will take a brave person to fly in 2020, with COVID happening, on a 737 Max.

Actually, I would fly a 737 Max except for the COVID.

"Ryanair close to placing order for Boeing 737 Max jets"
Flying death coffin class tickets 50% off

 

[mcmurtry66]

"Ryanair close to placing order for Boeing 737 Max jets"
Flying death coffin class tickets 50% off

20/20 had a report on the 737 last week. i recorded it but haven't watched it yet. not to offend with an obvious statement but you know when you book flights you can look up the plane you're going to be on.

 

[sglowrider]

What a coincidence....

 

[UncleMark]

What a coincidence....

View embedded media

That's got to be criminal.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

That's got to be criminal.

It's a bad look, at least. I mean, not taking-time-off-to-care-for-your-newborns bad, but still bad.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

@UncleMark You might also be interested to know that the Rules of Professional Conduct have special conflict of interest rules for government lawyers. In short, they allow government lawyers to move to private firms that include clients they may have previously been adverse to, so long as they don't divulge any government confidential information, and the firm insulates them from any future representation.

(The lawyers on here might cringe and say it's more complicated than that, but I'm just giving the broad strokes.)

The general purpose behind the special rules is that we don't want to discourage qualified lawyers from public service, which is what would happen if the ethics implications of government work were too onerous.

 

[UncleMark]

The general purpose behind the special rules is that we don't want to discourage qualified lawyers from public service, which is what would happen if the ethics implications of government work were too onerous.

Yeah, it would be awful for ethics to be a burden.

Fvck me.

 

[sglowrider]

That's got to be criminal.

Imagine if the two 737Max crashes were in Ethiopia and Indonesia and it was in the States...

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Yeah, it would be awful for ethics to be a burden.

Fvck me.

I hear ya. F*cking lawyers, man.

But seriously, if the best lawyers all say, "I'm not going to work for the government, because it will make it very hard for me to pull down six figures in the future," then we end up with a whole bunch of shitty government lawyers. Which would be fine for me, because it would be easier to find a job (last prosecutor position I interviewed for had like fifty applicants), but maybe not so good for the people.

 

[UncleMark]

I hear ya. F*cking lawyers, man.

But seriously, if the best lawyers all say, "I'm not going to work for the government, because it will make it very hard for me to pull down six figures in the future," then we end up with a whole bunch of shitty government lawyers. Which would be fine for me, because it would be easier to find a job (last prosecutor position I interviewed for had like fifty applicants), but maybe not so good for the people.

So does this lawyer just have to pinkie swear she won't say anything about any of her past dealings with the firm's clients?

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

So does this lawyer just have to pinkie swear she won't say anything about any of her past dealings with the firm's clients?

The firm has to take measures to insulate her from the representation, or they have to drop the client. And, yes, she's barred from sharing confidential government information about the client with any of her colleagues.

I know it sounds a lot like the honor system, but keep in mind violators who are caught risk losing their opportunity to earn a living.

 

[UncleMark]

I know it sounds a lot like the honor system, but keep in mind violators who are caught risk losing their opportunity to earn a living.

Getting caught would require soemone on the inside, in the know to blow the whistle. Color me unconvinced.