Before Ethiopian Crash, Boeing Resisted Pilots’ Calls for Aggressive Steps on 737 Max

In a tense meeting with American Airlines pilots shortly after the first deadly crash of Boeing’s new jet, executives insisted that the plane was safe to fly.

Comments: 227

  1. Have the Boeing execs (with families) fly the 737 Max to a hearing in D.C. about this. Or maybe they'll decide to leave early and turn it into a family road trip?

  2. This will be a business school case study for years to come. It's sad to see another pillar of America's economy so consumed by "shareholder value" that it can no longer think clearly and do what is right for the passengers and operators whose very lives depend on its products. This is also a sad example of what happens when oligopolies dominate so many of our most critical economic sectors. I'm sure Boeing will be fine but I, for one, am happy that just 1 of 22 flight segments I have booked through next spring are on Boeing aircraft.

  3. Business schools where? In China?

  4. @Bjh Try the decision maker on this McNrney.......Harvard business school. He pushed against the aircraft guys who wanted a new plane. The idea of avoiding more training and going cheap was a good business idea but a terrible idea.

  5. @as Absolutely right. They made a decision to get something to market as quickly as possible to have something to compete for orders against what would become the A320 neo family, which was able to fit even bigger engines than the max has (safely). I would say now that Boeing will never get another 737 Max order, and they have nothing else in the capacity segment to compete against the A320 neo. To save Boeing, kill the max, and design a new plane for that seating segment, like they should have done 10 years ago. As an interim measure after the Max's type certificate is torn up, maybe the existing Max's could be refitted with the 737-800 series engines, at Boeing's expense, and with compensation by Boeing to carriers for the increased fuel consumption.

  6. Maybe it was a bad choice of words on the Boeing executive's part, but his saying that "no one has yet to conclude that the SOLE cause of this was the function on the airplane" almost makes it sound like he is acknowledging some culpability. It is frightening that a company would not willingly do everything they can to ensure the safety of their product, especially when the lives of others are at stake. Has short-term profit become so important, that it rules above all else?

  7. The more information that comes out about this, the worse it gets for Boeing. The lawsuits will be epic. Trump's assault on the regulation of industry should scare everyone. Without government regulation, safety takes a back seat to profiit.

  8. @apparatchick Indeed, Ethiopian Airlines and the families of the victims should sue Boeing.

  9. @apparatchick I've been amazed at the lack of discussion about the deep culpability of Boeing. I almost see this as being a Boeing-is-too-big-to-fail situation, so let's settle fast, move on, and forget it all happened. Let's do everything we can to avoid epic!

  10. @Andrew I fully agree with one reservation. The executives who made the decisions should be punished as well as the company.

  11. Boeing's stock has dropped a little, but I don't understand why it hasn't been plunging. Every revelation makes the story look worse for Boeing.

  12. @Lisa W I'd ask the same question of Facebook, honestly. Capitalism is working out great, ain't it.

  13. @Lisa W Only one competitor: AirBus. It has problems too. No matter what Boeing does, we can't wean ourselves from their planes.

  14. @Lisa W Good question. Unfortunately, lots of analysts and investors have probably concluded that Boeing won't pay a big legal or political price for this. As for whatever fines or lawsuits ensue, Boeing will just get away with writing them off as a cost of doing business.

  15. Boeing is an huge contributor to the Republican party. Is this the reason that the United States, specifically Elaine Chao, was the last Government to ground this plane?

  16. @Jobim Much as I dislike Trump, the FAA has been a captured agency for many years-- under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

  17. @Alexander Agreed but our Department of Transportation was the last, in the world, to ground this aircraft. There is much blame. Certainly enough to go around.

  18. Such a simple and freeing thing to promptly admit error and move to remediation - yet here we have another giant too big to fail, having failed us. Why not come clean ?

  19. Boeing isn't a natural person with a conscious, reflecting somberly on bad behavior and contemplating making amends. It is an artificial person with a balance sheet, calculating profit and loss. There is no emotional component in the equation.

  20. Years ago, I worked on the team at Boeing that helped customers adhere to repair manuals as well as FAA-issued airworthiness directives. Everyone I knew took great pride in this work, as well as being at the front lines of ensuring safety was top priority. I'm not sure what culture has sprouted up at Boeing since then, but "turn a deaf ear to pilots" is an unconscionable development. How utterly disappointing for a company that used to be a crown jewel of American quality and innovation.

  21. @Matt The Daily podcast (of the NY Times) did a fantastic episode on what culture has sprouted up at Boeing since then, I highly recommend a listen! It is the April 23 episode called: 'The Whistle-Blowers At Boeing: Problems at a plane factory in South Carolina led workers to question whether safety was always the company's first priority'

  22. @realist I agree. It appears as though the non-union intentionally located South Carolina plant could be the cause of the problems. I no longer have any faith in Boeing.

  23. @realist Al Jazeera did an exposure video of the Carolina factory 5 years ago. It is on YouTube. What was our media doing since then? Crickets.

  24. Well, well. The smoking gun. Boeing out-and-out refused to do what the best pilots were vociferously demanding. That arrogance will hopefully lead to criminal charges and the removal of those responsible for this debacle from ever being in a position to threaten the safety of the flying public again.

  25. @Hammerwielder Or, more likely I'm afraid, being promoted up the company food chain for "taking one for the team."

  26. I am not surprised. Corporate greed runs this country. My trip on SW was 3 days away when the 2nd plane crashed. I did not wait for Boeing or our Tramped up government leadership to ground the planes. I rebooked immediately on a MAX. At some point very soon corporations of every kind, all the businesses that feed our materialistic consumerism, and we the people who insist on having way too much will wake up and address the issue. And it will be hard, challenging work for all. Thanks to these pilots for speaking truth to power.

  27. @JDK "I did not wait for Boeing or our Tramped up government leadership to ground the planes. " I rebooked immediately on a MAX." pardon?

  28. The government should prosecute Mike Sinnet personally and individually. When you only hold the company responsible, the people making decisions feel like they have nothing to lose by taking shortcuts.

  29. Agreed. I see a heads I win, tails you lose situation at play. The CEO and senior execs get paid huge sums because of the value of their expertise and decision making, yet repercussions of poor decisions involving life and death don’t merit owning the responsibility.

  30. @Mark CAn you imagine if a surgeon performed surgery like these executives did their job? A tape like this would lead to a loss of license in a heartbeat, so to speak.

  31. So with all these preventable deaths, will someone finally go to jail? No? Not even the CEO is accountable? Well then, expect more deaths in the future. For why would Boeing fix there planes when they can get away with it?

  32. How will we ever trust Boeing again, when they had knowledge of the problem, but valued profits over human life.

  33. Why are these Boeing execs able to get away with these self-made disasters. From what I have read about these outrageous stories, I am convinced that Boeing was absolutely negligent. They should be taken to court and get their due, which means not settling for some inconsequential fines with no admittance of guilt. They all think they are above the law, just like that guy in the WH. The law is being flaunted by all these wealthy folks who can afford lawyers that know how to work the system. This is not the way it's suppose to work. If you want folks in this country to regain confidence in the system, in the values established by the Constitution, make it work the way it was suppose to for everyone.

  34. Cutting two regulations for everyone added, is the solution.

  35. It is a telling clue that both crashes of the Max were from lesser developed countries. Perhaps assuming the pilots really know how to take control of an aircraft's computer systems is a faulty assumption. A lot of US airlines have ex military people as pilots. I wonder how many pilots these days know the principles of flight versus video game computer flying.

  36. @bluegirlredstate you are most welcome to your views; but that is a little unfair; if you look at sales of these aircraft, it reflects worldwide growth. Boeing are pleased to sell their planes around the world: the pilots are experienced and trained. It seems that if the angle of attack indicator is damaged; or faulty; that single indicator empowers MCAS to be the strong force.

  37. @bluegirlredstate no basis for the comments. Purely assumptions littered in bias lacking facts. Recent simulator flight tests at Boeing by airline pilots airlines hailing from developed countries tended towards catastrophic. Yet they had the benefit of all the accumulated knowledge after the fact and doubted they would have survived in a real aircraft. Unless one has experienced the cockpit environment suspended in 4D, high speed, loss of horizon, high G’s, multiple alarms at low altitudes with automation working against ones skills it is not an informed discussion. Respectfully

  38. I thought the pilots always had the last word when it came to flying safety. That's how I learned to fly. Too bad money once again trumps lives.

  39. Wow. If there isn't a criminal investigation already underway, there bloody well better be now. And this tape should be Exhibit A.

  40. Hate to break it to American and Southwest, but I will never fly on the 737 MAX, hence I won't fly American or Southwest as long as they're in the rotation of planes. I am not the only person out there who feels this way. Boeing has proven it does not give a hoot about flyers safety when push comes to shove.

  41. @Shari If American and Southwest continue to fly these planes then it is obvious they do not care either. I will continue to fly carriers like Delta that do not fly these Rube Goldberg designed planes. Its it amazing that the E.U. grounded these planes first, and that was the only real reason the FAA, American & Southwest finally did the same. It will be interesting to see what Ryanair does in Europe as they use Boeing 737 planes exclusively.

  42. @annoyed The 737 Max isn't really an issue for Ryanair - as yet as they only have 3 on order. None of the 431 737s they currently fly are Max, only 800s and one 700.

  43. @Shari They’ve been out of the air since they were finally grounded in mid-March.

  44. There is no other way to call Boeing's executives decision to keep their planes flying without calling all 737's pilots to a new training or sending a mandatory re-training to the pilots around the world: it is called MURDER. The first plane that came down "could" be called an unfortunate accident, with some elasticity. The second plane, after the claim made by American pilots, is just simply a CRIME. They (the executives who took the fatal decision) and Boeing should pay with jail and money the lives lost in Ethiopia. One hundred and fifty seven families claim for that.

  45. The executives acted despicably. I hope the lawsuits to come drag them through court for years and years. But it still won't bring back those who died because of their negligence and greed.

  46. 1. Boeing will never have the reputation for quality again. They first indicated they didn't care by moving to a non-union manufacturing state. But when they ignored serious safety concerns, they made the world realize Airbus and Bombardier were more reliable. 2. Now that Boeing runs the Pentagon, expect more US Air Force jets to fall out of the sky. 3. Sell Boeing stock. 4. Most interesting scandal yet to be investigated: was there racism in how Boeing made essential safety features an extra charge for African and Asian airlines? Bottomline: America has egg on its face thanks to Boeing.

  47. Frankly, I don't view Boeing's response to be all that surprising and, in the context, probably is a reasonable one. The company wanted to take a methodical approach to understanding the issue and then implementing the right fix. I fly a lot for work so I don't say this cavalierly. My real issue is the obvious coziness of the FAA with the industry that they are charged with overseeing. I view this as being the direct result of all of the "regulatory rollback" that most Republicans seem to believe is the panacea for everything that ails this country. Even in the Obama administration, the constant GOP pressure to reduce the size and scope of governmental functions took its toll and created the environment where the fox guards the henhouse. Until we address the root cause of this problem - with a methodical and deliberate approach - we will just be playing whack-a-mole, whether it be with the FAA, the FDA, the EPA, the USDA, etc., etc., etc., all of which occupy an important role in ensuring the safety of the public. Demand that your elected officials come out strongly in support of public safety, that's the only way to salvage any semblance of victory from tragedies such as these.

  48. You are absolutely correct! Regulation redux has been toxic for far too long. If the American people really knew just how committed most government regulators were in all the agencies you listed, they would have a different perspective. The personnel that work in these agencies work long hours and take their work with the utmost seriousness. They are doing good things on behalf of the taxpayer, despite what Republicans may say about these civil servants. Their jobs are made much more difficult and demoralizing by the constant drumbeat of cutbacks and pressure to favor business interests much more than the safety and well-being of ordinary Americans.

  49. So it's not methodical to ground a plane until you know what's wrong with it?

  50. @nictsiz Excellent point, tho it runs smack up against the republican narrative, especially under Trump, which has sped up the economy by eliminating much regulation. For example; environmental regulation. Neutral scientific experts estimate that easing environmental regulation could cost 10 thousand lives over the next years, not to mention time & money spent on people who don't die but are incapacitated. I agree with you, but it's a tough road. One argument; People will be trained and paid in the new, clean economy. Unfortunately this view requires 'that vision thing' which sees payoff down the road, often not to those presently involved.

  51. I do NOT understand how Boeing was allowed to assist in the “certification” of the death trap plane known as the Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft? Perhaps, the Secretary of Transportation, Elaine Chao, who is the wife of Mitch McConnell can appear before Congressional committees to explain how this plane killed about 300 people before it was grounded!

  52. @Mark I love your suggestion. McConnell looks so smug when he is spouting pious statements about why the Republicans can or cannot do something when the actions he is referring to are purely political chicanery. It will be great to see him squirm when Chao is excoriated in public. But you know what, it will never happen. Democrats lack the killer instinct that is necessary in politics. That is why they have been singing the anthem of bipartisanship while the Republicans have got away with murder, well figuratively.

  53. This is unbelievable. The only decent thing for Boeing to do is to fire Mike Sinnet, Craig Bombey, and John Moloney the lobbyist who were there at the meeting. Why was a lobbyist at the meeting in the first place? it is bizarre that a lobbyist would be brought along for a meeting to discuss safety. It has become obvious that Boeing has lost its moral bearings.

  54. @John A: Ummm......can a corporation have moral bearings? I don't think so---but apparently the US Supreme Court thinks they're "people" ---so maybe we can't be too hard on poor Boeing because it's feelings might get hurt.

  55. @John A Firing them is not enough.

  56. @John A, they didn't lose their moral bearings;they sold them.

  57. And Mr. Sinnett sleeps well at night and feels fine about his actions? And will retire with a nice pension, etc.? This is criminal but since Boeing is a big corporation NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. To anyone. Just move on people, you didn't see anything here, just move on...

  58. I wonder if Mr. Sinnet would have flown on that plane after the first crash, and he definitely would not have flown after the second crash even though he wanted us to fly on it.

  59. I think that Boeing executives ought to take it FROM THE PILOTS whether or not the pilots had or now have sufficient information about this new system: “My question to you, as Boeing, is why wouldn’t you say this is the smartest thing to do?” Mr. Michaelis [a PILOT] said. “Say we’re going to do everything we can to protect that traveling public in accordance with what our pilots unions are telling us.” "Mr. Sinnett [a Boeing executive] didn’t budge, saying that it remained unclear that the new software, which automatically pushes the plane’s nose down, was responsible for the Lion Air crash. He added that he felt confident that pilots had adequate training to deal with a problem, especially now that pilots — who were not initially informed about the new system — were aware of it."

  60. So 189 people died in the first crash. That wasn't enough for Mr. Sinnett. But add another 157, and now it's serious? Now we know his personal threshhold to listen to pilots. “You’ve got to understand that our commitment to safety is as great as yours,” Mr. Sinnett said in the meeting. “The worst thing that can ever happen is a tragedy like this, and the even worse thing would be another one.” Be careful what you wish for, Mr. Sinnett. The Board of Directors should terminate Mr. Sinnett, now. And let an experienced pilot be at the side of Sinnett's replacement.

  61. @ClearThnker And don't forget; after the 2nd fatal crash, it still took the U.S. another few days to ground this aircraft. I'm not sure how many flights there were during that time, but the entire country, especially Boeing, was spared an even greater tragedy.

  62. For anybody who's going, To be flying on Boeing, Be aware they don't care, About you in the air, But only in profits growing.

  63. So, when will Mr. Sinnett be charged with negligent homicide?

  64. @SYJ Right on! To deliberately sanction -- indeed, encourage -- the continued operation of a demonstrably defective aircraft is criminal. Indeed, I'm not sure it should be only "negligent." His withholding the information, knowing it by the analysis of an actual fatal event, from those flying the craft was quite deliberate.

  65. @SYJ, sadly, never.

  66. It's time to tear up the 737 Max type certificate. The only reason MCAS exists is because Boeing was compensating for lousy airframe design (too large of a change in pitch on thrust), so they could get the certificate. Take MCAS away completely and see if the plane would meet the required handling characteristics on its own merits.

  67. @Alexander of course it meets the handling characteristics. The plane flies fine without MCAS, it crashes when MCAS takes over.

  68. @Andrew Lee The engines are too powerful for this plane, the plane tilts upward under too much thrust necessitating MCAS to bring it down. This plane was designed when less powerful engines were the rule, this design should have been scrapped but they were in a hurry. MCAS was the second problem of two. Third, no one was ever told abut this program hence of course were not told how to disable it and the instrument panel light to alert pilots that it was coming on were an extra cost option. Boeing will be very lucky to not cease to exist after this debacle.

  69. It seems to me that both the airline and the FAA view this disaster through a flawed lens. There is no mention in this article of any consideration by Boeing or the FAA of the people most involved in these crashes - the passengers and the pilots who lost their lives. And the fact that it is more than clear that these crashes, particularly the second one, could perhaps have been avoided if the pilots had been properly trained, advised or even MADE AWARE of the faulty software. There is a lot of discussion right now about "Capitalism". This is Capitalism run rampant. It might have cost Boeing some money to deal conscientiously with this problem. They chose not to do so, and in fact made no attempt advert these disasters, and even in this meeting continued to try to pass the blame off on the pilots who had no idea what they were dealing with. And as far as I can tell, the FAA was complicit. Where does this go from here? Boeing seems to want to continue to put the pilots in the position of continuing to fly planes with the flawed software. Even if the pilots are aware of the issues, the plane may fail to respond in a crisis because the software fails. Not to mention that the physical design of the jet is flawed. Boeing and the FAA should keep the planes on the ground under the airworthiness directive until the software is redesigned and thoroughly tested, and every penny of the cost should come out of Boeing's coffers.

  70. @MB Unfortunately we do have 'capitalism run rampant' as illustrated by the 99% / 1% breakdown. It is called oligarchy. Many Americans equate this with 'freedom' so any attempt to lessen the disparity becomes 'anti freedom' and socialism is equated with communism. This happens to a society which makes true education for all difficult and/or uninteresting, as we've done over the past few decades thru sort sighted tax policy .... The Romans had gladiator contests to quiet the masses, we have TV ... yikes !

  71. Boeing's image was seriously, and perhaps permanently, tarnished when they held off immediately grounding the planes after the 2nd crash. I couldn't believe they were letting them fly with the obvious crash similarities. It will cost them big. And the FAA looked equally bad. But, our nation is losing it's reputation on all fronts these days, so it's par for course.

  72. @Character Counts Boeing is not responsible. Individuals at Boeing who have made certain decisions are responsible and should be treated accordingly. If there are criminal acts, levying a fine against Boeing is absolutely meaningless, just a cost of doing business no different from the cost of the toilet paper in the C.E.O.'s bathroom. Unless those who make criminal decisions at corporations are personally held accountable with jail time, not only will nothing improve but, to the contrary, such will encourage others to do likewise, as it effectively says, "Don't worry about doing the crime 'cause you aint gonna do the time." I don't know all the facts regarding this particular case and whether there were criminal actions, but it seems clear that there is sufficient evidence to justify a criminal investigation to see if individual criminal prosecutions are warranted. Of course none of the tobacco C.E.O.s who lied to Congress nor any of the Wells Fargo people who signed off on setting up phony accounts in many of our names have done time, so why should Boeing's top management expect any different? The function of criminal penalties is not merely to punish wrongdoing but to deter it. Citizens United notwithstanding, corporations don't make decisions, people do.

  73. @Steve Fankuchen Thank god for the union!

  74. Corporate America seems to have risen so far above the people who use their products, etc. that they really don't think of 127 terrified, dead humans as anything but a statistic. They don't even get far into into the thought to care about the tragedy.

  75. Isn't it a shame that this once-iconic American company has been outed as indifferent to the safety of its planes? Of course, a 50-year-old design should probably be retired. But they didn't do that, either. Good grief.

  76. If Boeing were an individual responsible for the deaths of the passengers, that person would be tried as a criminal and then spend many years in prison. The equivalent for a corporation is that Boeing should be sued into insolvency, bankruptcy, and non-existence.

  77. Put the management who made the decision to keep the planes flying, like Sinnett, in jail and keep the company going. There are tens of thousands of regular people relying on those jobs at Boeing. Punish the execs- this story shows that it’s them, not the front line employees, who are responsible.

  78. Pilots know what is safe better than anyone else. The Max should be parked in a field and scrapped. I used to believe I was safest on a Boeing. And government oversight is so dismal in this arena I can’t tell the difference between the FAA and Boeing anymore

  79. Somewhere a worried Boeing exec is shouting into his phone: “Quick, hire more lobbyists and send them to DC! Tell em to kiss Trump’s sweet behind if that’s what it’ll take!” I have already adjusted travel plans three times to avoid these aircraft. No way would I put my family on one to save a few bucks.

  80. The Boeing executives and FDA officials who approved the 737 Max should be imprisoned for life. They killed hundreds of innocent people in Indonesia and Ethiopia.

  81. @Hopeless American How about in an Ethiopian or Indonesian prison?

  82. As if it couldn't get any worse with Boeing turning a blind eye to flaws in the design, now it comes out that even after a crash killing everyone on board they were still in denial. Unbelievable. Outrageous. Criminal. If a normal person caused that many deaths through criminal negligence they would be in prison. If corporations are people too, and if they have all the rights that people do, then those who knew and were responsible should be in prison too. But chances are, Boeing the corporation will get a slap on the wrist, a digestible fine, and go on cutting safety corners cause it's good for the bottom line.

  83. @Sherry An unmentioned irony is that the extensive TSA inspections passengers now endure to board airplanes is to protect these privately owned vehicles from repeated misuse by (originally Saudi) passengers. Do you see any such protection for passengers of publicly owned trains, subways, buses, ferries, etc.? I don't, and Boeing apparently doesn't prioritize protecting its pilots or passengers, either. This, imho, is why legislators must be accountable to the public, not their big campaign funders. Alternative legislation is at

  84. @Sherry I believe they still are in denial.

  85. Boeing management should be ashamed of their negligence. How could they not describe a critical system in the flight manual? Management and engineering malpractice at it's worst.

  86. No Mr. Sinnett--the question is not whether it was clear that the system was the cause of the Lion Air crash, the question is whether it was clear that it was NOT the cause. Unless that was clear, the plane should have never left the ground. This is looking more and more like criminal liability. That, I suspect, is why this has been quiet in the press for the last couple months. Expect "heavy" fine (probably a slap on the wrist) and, if there's any justice, jail time. Criminally negligent homicide is a serious crime. 150 counts is pretty heavy (once might be chalked up to negligence, after that, it's a lot closer to intent). They'd better hope they don't get turned over to Ethiopian authorities. What was their lobbyist doing at this meeting anyway? Did he have something to say about airworthyness?

  87. @Justin Not just negligence, in my opinion, but reckless disregard for the value of human life

  88. @Tim, you did not explain that reckless disregard for human life, or “depraved heart,” is second degree murder in most U.S. jurisdictions.

  89. @A Good Lawyer That is what I’m getting at

  90. If you want to save American aerospace in general, and keep Boeing as a top player instead of "one of the rest", to the AIrbus colossus, then the only solution is to get savage with Boeing and the FAA. That means the everyone who rubber stamped the flawed design leaving the company in handcuffs, and giving safety inspectors at Boeing the power to get their managers fired if their concerns are not addressed.

  91. "Michael Michaelis, an American pilot, argued that Boeing should push the F.A.A. to issue what is known as an emergency airworthiness directive." This seems backward to me. Shouldn't the F.A.A. (the regulator) be pushing Boeing (the regulatee), not the other way around?

  92. @tjsiii It's backward in the rest of the world, but not in this country where industry often captures the regulator. Remember, Boeing was allowed to "self-certify."

  93. Shame on Boeing and the FAA

  94. Willful negligence on the part of Boeing. This V.P. needs firing, really fast.

  95. @Matthew O'Brien I wonder how he feels knowing he is directly responsible for the deaths of all those Ethiopian Air passengers... and he or whoever made the decision not to ground these aircraft and/or rush out a fix should go to jail. They won't because corporations are never held accountable but in a just world they would be in prison.

  96. This is the future; mega corporations that just factor in pay outs for wrongfully death as “the cost of doing business” what was paramount in Boeing’s mind was rushing to market to compete against Airbus’ advantage. “Sell! Sell! Sell! We can iron out the kinks later” so what if a few hundred people die during our experimental phase. It’s built into the spread sheet calculus.

  97. The 737Max8 is an unstable airframe, because it's a 1968 design, made "close to the ground" so the original rear descending staircase could be used (this was before all airports had "jetways"). When Boeing refused to update the airframe, and modified the plane, converting to more fuel-efficient, but heavier engines, they still had to account for the close ground proximity, resulting in the inherent instability we now see: the plane does "wheelies" on takeoff, which is WHY the MCAS "system" was installed. After the Lion Air crash, Boeing had a software "fix" in JANUARY, ready for FDA review, certification and implementation. But guess what? The "president" called a SHUTDOWN, so no requisite FDA personnel were on the job. The Ethiopian crash should never have happened! Please see this history of the root cause:

  98. @Slann Thanks for the link to this very informative article.

  99. Isn't it time for a "regime change" at Boeing?

  100. Another American icon imperiled by American capitalism's laser-beam focus on short-term shareholder value. It doesn't have to be this way; the Germans have maintained their stellar manufacturing reputation along with their prosperity, and if Boeing is a shining example of the future of American capitalism, their long-term future looks far brighter than ours.

  101. @Alexander well, the Volkswagen emissions cheating suggests German manufacturers are not always averse to putting short term profit ahead of long term reputation.

  102. Volkswagen? strong oversight is needed to keep greedy people from behaving unethically.

  103. @Alexander um...Volkswagen?

  104. This is a good time to take a look at our individual carbon footprints. Because this is a big country and because, thanks to the Koch Bros. we have rotten rails and worse trains, many of us are forced to fly against ourwills. Throw this irresponsible Boeing company with blood on its hands into the mix and the writing on the wall says "if you don't like it, change." I personally have decided not to fly any more except in cases of utter and pressing necessity. Telephones, Skype, email, local driving can do the traveling for me. Boeing makes saying "NO" easy.

  105. @dressmaker Yes! Highspeed rail, please, center city - to - center city, stops along the way as appropriate. If nothing else, that will slow hypercontentration of population & investment in central cities & give a boost to the lagging economics of the communities in-between.

  106. @nicolo You see the light. Take a page from Europe's book where train travel is fast, dependable, inexpensive and pleasant. Train envy!

  107. No one in their right mind would ever risk taking a flight in a Boeing 737 Max. Sorry, Boeing. You made a big mistake with this one. Go back to the drawing board, gentlemen, because this plane is finished.

  108. @Mike I will certainly not fly a 737 Max for a year at least, but I bet you they lower prices on routes served by the max and there will be more than enough fools willing to take a chance.

  109. @Mike This egregiously designed and poorly tested plane is indeed "finished", and because so much hinged on its sales success, that probably finishes Boeing's civilian plane business,another old success story ending in utter failure to maintain credibility and any humane interest in public responsibility. Lock 'em up.

  110. Criminal,sad...

  111. Welcome to aviation. This garbage is part of the game. From my experience, management always wins until public perception and out-cry overwhelmingly forces the management to give up. It’s a tug of war between pilots, maintenance and money. Money wins. As usual.

  112. So who is going to be the first to fly the patched 737 Max? Will air travelers trust assurances from Boeing and the FAA given everything we have learned about their modus in the last few months?

  113. A recent satire in The Onion put it perfectly: "Did Boeing overlook safety risks? Yes, but you have to understand, it was for money."

  114. @FilmMD The United States in a nutshell!

  115. @FilmMD Why do you call it satire?

  116. @Ernesto Very good point

  117. "The Boeing executives, Mr. Sinnett and Mr. Bomben, explained that the company did not believe that pilots needed to know about the software, because they were already trained to deal with scenarios like the one on the doomed Lion Air flight. All pilots are expected to know how to take control of an aircraft when the plane’s tail begins moving in an uncontrolled way because of a malfunction, nudging the aircraft toward the ground." The core of this is who controls the aircraft; the Pilots or Boeing's Computer? Most in the general public do not realize that modern, fly-by-wire, commercial transports, Airbus included, place a computer between the pilot and the control surfaces. If the computer starts acting up - tough luck. There is no other way to move the control surfaces. The pilot points the plane and the computer moves the ailerons, rudder, all flying tail and throttles. The GPS needs a standard rate turn to roll out on heading 255 and tells the computer to do it. Once pilots are reduced to uniformed figure heads, you do not have to pay them as much or spend much on their training.

  118. May Sinnett and all Boeing's top executives be held criminally responsible for the deaths of those people aboard their planes. The complicity of the FAA renders them liable too. I'm dreaming of course; in cases like this you get the justice you can buy and Boeing will buy a lot. Like the leaders of our giant financial firms in 2008, the real criminals will walk away. The victims are just collateral damage to ignore for a bad quarter or two.

  119. Spare some wrath for Gerard Arpey, the American CEO who Trumped them into building it. And then sent American itself on a controlled flight into terrain. What we know as American today is really America West writ large.

  120. I might consider flying on a 737 MAX again if Sinnet and all other top Boeing executives and their families were forced to fly them every week for 6 months in Africa and Southeast Asia. That's the only way I'd know real safety reforms and fixes were put in place.

  121. @Al Sun That would be a fair request if you were prepared to volunteer to fly with your family on Airbus or Chinese aircraft every week for 6 months in Africa and Southeast Asia. Read the maintenance history in the Lion Air Preliminary Report and tell me you would ever in a million years put your family on any airplane that airline operated. Think about the 350 hour Ethiopian FO. And nobody is talking about it, but it looks to me like the Ethiopian accident airplane was heavy for the density altitude (looks like they were ferrying fuel) and was in trouble before MCAS ever activated (again, look at the data and graphs in the preliminary report). No way I'm getting on one of their planes, regardless of who made it.

  122. While the article reports on the lack of action by Boeing executives Sinnett, Bomben, and Moloney, we should not forget that these men were speaking for Boeing’s top management. These 3 men were not some renegades straying from company policy. Outrage at their disregard for safety should also be directed to the top managers whose orders they were carrying out.

  123. I've been flying regularly for 45 years. I have legacy elite status with two different airlines, I sincerely believe the old line about air travel being the safest way to go. But I will never, ever, if I have anything to say about it, ever fly in a Boeing 737 Max.

  124. @Andy Same. When the first crash happened, I diligent checked each aircraft I was boarding to ensure it wasn’t the max. And I’m an auditor (for food safety) and after reading Boeing’s justification for not letting pilots know about the existence of the system, am definitely not boarding any new aircraft designed by anyone until the certification and auditing systems are revamped to actually do their jobs, too, of identifying problems like this.

  125. Boeing's behavior reminds me of the BP oil spill and their executives who tried to put a similar spin on an absolutely profound tragedy the effects of which are still being felt today.

  126. There was a time when Boeing represented the best of engineering business practices. Then McDonnell Douglas was assimilated, and the corruption was internalized.

  127. Sorry Boeing but I, and everyone I speak with about the Max issues, is in agreement that we’ve lost trust and confidence in you to do the right thing. It seems to be a clear cut case of negligence, pure and simple. How such a critical addition to the flight control system is not even documented in the manuals, no one is trained on the system, and even worse the entire system is dependent on a single point of failure - input from only one sensor, which has been know to have a fairly high failure rate. What kind of engineers do you employ that would design such a fragile system? Not one person I know has any confidence in Boeing to to the right thing. I don’t see how Boeing ever resurrects their reputation after this fiasco.

  128. @A. Axelrod I would agree with negligence but would add arrogance (We Are Boeing) and corporate greed to the sins of this company. It will take a very long time until the flying public and more importantly the airlines to be comfortable with them.

  129. @A. Axelrod At least negligence -- more likely reckless indifference

  130. Many comments are about the manufacturer. The US government shares blame. Didn't the FAA commit nonfeasance by allowing the manufacturer to "self-certify? There is no technical justification for allowing a major change without redesign of the aircraft, which made it inherently unstable. It was all to save money. And there is no way to be 100% sure there are no remaining bugs in complex software. It appears reliability of sensors was not given a lot of thought. Accepting this plane in the future will be a faith-based initiative.

  131. Fly hundreds of Touch and Goes with the 737 Max with multiple aircraft. Prove the new software and training are correct and safe. Boeing first, but the FAA too, are going to eat this one Big Time !!

  132. "Less than four months later, an Ethiopian Airlines flight crashed, killing all 157 people on board." I believe that sentence needs a second half that reads: "...after which Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg placed a personal call to Donald Trump to ask that the Max 8 not be grounded in the U.S., even though two thirds of the fleet had already been grounded in other nations." Let's be frank. At every step along the way, Boeing has done the wrong thing in the interest of self-preservation. And from the sound of the company's most recent conversations, nothing has changed.

  133. “Do you feel comfortable that the situation is under control today, before any software fix is implemented?” Absolutely not. And with the Federal Regulatory Agencies guarded by the foxes in their hen houses, I am NOT bullish. (See "Americans Need Generic Drugs. But Can They Trust Them?" Opinion piece, out today just for timely starters......) Life is

  134. The Times needs to do a detailed report on what happened to Boeing after it merged with McDonnel Douglas. The traditional Boeing company people think they know no longer exists. And they need that inquiry to run all the way up to our President's current top choice for Secretary of Defense...

  135. Years ago, Ford decided to keep selling the Ford Pinto, which had a gas tank behind the rear axle, and which had a tendency to erupt in fire when rear-ended. Ford ended up paying millions after losing suits by victims of those fires (and the victims' survivors) for that dumb decision. Boeing is going to end up paying BILLIONS for this idiotic string of decisions: building a plane that is fundamentally flawed, providing an ineffective "fix", and deciding not to do a proper review which might have grounded the planes before the second disaster. That does not include the incalculable cost to Boeing's reputation, and the loss of a large number of sales, which one would expect will follow. The management of Boeing (including everyone who had a finger in this disaster) should get fired, and personally made to disgorge all the "bonuses" and other benefits that the company has given them. Jail terms would also be appropriate.

  136. The gasoline, in a crash, was thrown into the car's cabin and burned people, not always killing them. There was a consideration made at Ford, as to whether it was cheaper to settle lawsuits or to have a recall and fix the defect. I saw a documentary with a young woman who had been horribly burned in one of those minor crashes. there was a weak panel between the tank and the cabin.

  137. It seems that Boeing executives knew there was a major design flaw in the Max8 and purposely kept their own pilots out of major meetings to discuss the issue. The three individuals who met with the AA Pilots should be fired along with the CEO. Profit over Safety what a serious error in judgement. And Lastly destroy almost 100 years of Corporate goodwill. “If I’m going it’s Boeing”

  138. if I'm going it's Airbus

  139. The 737 MAX is a flawed airframe design that Boeing tried to 'fix' with a software system unknown to even pilots. This is the epitome of hubris and I seriously doubt the flying public will ever trust this plane. No amount of software updates, or re-branding, will change this. Boeing should scrap the plane and start from scratch (which is what Boeing should have done in the first place...)

  140. Corporations fought to be treated as people when it came to giving money to politicians. Fine, so now charge them with murder for the deaths on the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines crashes.

  141. @Craig Excellent point.

  142. @Craig Bravo! Maybe this is how we fight back.

  143. @Craig And just how do you mete out the punishment to a corporation?

  144. It is criminal. Pure and simple.

  145. This is what you get when you allow a company to get too big, too powerful and too arrogant. There will be no true accountability.

  146. Planes don't kill. Executives without oversight do.

  147. “The assumption is that the flight crews have been trained,” Mr. Sinnett said in the meeting. That's interesting, because a design priority -- and selling point -- of the MAX was that the thing flies just like a NG and pilots only needed minimal training, none of which included the different pitch characteristics, MCAS, or the reliance on a single sensor for AOA data. Surely Mr Sinnett was aware of that.

  148. @TDK Surely you are aware that the training he was talking about was the runaway pitch trim procedure, which is the same on NG and Max.

  149. Not entirely true, the undisclosed MCAS operated even when the autopilot was switched off. No such issue on NG or earlier 737s. The MCAS continued to override the pitch button on the yoke.

  150. @GW 1) MCAS operated ONLY when the autopilot was off. But so what? It's still runaway (i.e., uncommanded) trim, which can happen in an NG with or without the autopilot on. And the procedure is the same. Particularly after the Emergency AD, but also before. 2) MCAS does not override the pitch button on the yoke. The pitch button on the yoke overrides MCAS (which you can see for yourself by examining the graphs of the DFDR data in the Preliminary Reports). And MCAS does not activate right away after the pilot releases the MET switch (which you can also see for yourself by looking at the Preliminary Reports). The Emergency AD told the Ethiopian Airlines pilots what to do and they didn't do it.

  151. Bad call Boeing. In the South, when you make a stupid mistake while trying to save money, we call it "throwing dollars at dimes." As for the loss of life, I hope you lose billions.

  152. billions won't even be a dent and that pitiful organization

  153. Unfortunately, because Boeing was forced to ground the planes, the full scope of the problem is being suppressed Without more data on the day to day operation of the plane, yes, including malfunctiong pitot tubes so that a correct fix may be unknowable. Clearly, the major malfunctions were with discount foreign airlines, what can't be known is how domestic airlines would be handling it.

  154. Additional factors, rarely mentioned, are the crowded, noisy, distracting offices in which many Boeing engineers and software developers work. In such workplaces, the risk of making careless mistakes or overlooking critical details increases. While of course, when working on something as complex as a commercial airplane, collaboration is very important, so is the ability to concentrate.

  155. I hope that all the conservatives who think that corporations can 'regulate themselves' or that government regulations are 'unnecessary' are forced to fly MAXs without any improvements on them. This is what you get when you try to cut corners and trust companies who have a profit motive to cut corners to do the right thing. Of course they will not. They will only do what they have to do as this and countless similar issues have shown us over and over again.

  156. They don’t care.

  157. @Chris Jones They should also be made to drink the water that poor people in Detroit drank and breathe the air in south L.A. and enjoy the great medical care available in Texas ...

  158. @Chris Jones Put ALEC the Heritage Foundation the Club For Growth and lawmakers from Alabama on the plane. And for good measure can they fly through turbulence made worse by climate change?

  159. Absent effective regulation, we're all at the mercy of the Mr. Sinnetts of the world - corporate yes-men whose only concern is the next quarterly report. With the feckless Elaine Chao running the Transportation Department, we are, for all intents and purposes, left to our own devices. Flyers need to let American Airlines and Southwest know what they think of the 737 Max.

  160. Boeing executives' stubborn determination to ignore pilots' recommendations to ground the 737-300 fleet until the faulty anti-stall system could be fixed is sadly reminiscent of NASA executives' overriding Thiokol engineers, who recommended against a launch of the Challenger shuttle in cold weather. In both cases, executives sought to push ahead despite the warnings of subject matter experts who knew far more than they did. It is unfortunate that executive authority leads to arrogance and arrogance leads to the loss of innocent lives. When will American executives learn that "confidence" cannot overcome the laws of the physical universe?

  161. @OldProf It’s the arrogance that allows these individuals to rise up in the organization, and it’s a rare person who can rein in their own character.

  162. "Absolutely," said Mr. Sinnet, who it turns out, was absolutely wrong about the situation being under control.

  163. Most giant corporations are like huge, spoiled, over-privileged, entitled, narcissistic bullies. Above all, they're greedy. Profits are their only measure. They ruthlessly push people, governments, other corporations, and the planet to get every dollar they can suck out of the world. They think they're the center of the universe and others exist to serve them. They lie and plunder and pollute and destroy in pursuit of profits and power. They care nothing about ordinary people. They deny that their profits are due to the work of ordinary people -- employees, customers, shareholders, or the taxpayers forced to subsidize them. To them, the deaths of ordinary people mean nothing at all -- except as expense items, costs of settling lawsuits built into their massive budget. As part of the military industrial complex, Boeing is one of the soulless, malignant corporate behemoths that snuffs out lives while sucking the life out of our world.

  164. Don’t know if I’d include Boeing shareholders in your list of aggrieved bystanders...

  165. @Cece Thank you and I actually agree. I had second thoughts about including shareholders there but couldn't edit my comment after submitting it.

  166. Another instance of corporate profits taking precedence over human lives. Greed kills.

  167. all the Max's belong in the scrap Heap. and also lock Em up

  168. Some people at Boeing should face criminal indictments.

  169. “The worst thing that can ever happen is a tragedy like this, and the even worse thing would be another one.” Mr. Sinnett's wishes have been answered. Now what Mr. Sinnette?

  170. Profits before lives.

  171. Boeing is not responsible. Individuals at Boeing who have made certain decisions are responsible and should be treated accordingly. If there are criminal acts, levying a fine against Boeing is absolutely meaningless, just a cost of doing business no different from the cost of the toilet paper in the C.E.O.'s bathroom. Unless those who make criminal decisions at corporations are personally held accountable with jail time, not only will nothing improve but, to the contrary, such will encourage others to do likewise, as it effectively says, "Don't worry about doing the crime 'cause you aint gonna do the time." I don't know all the facts regarding this particular case and whether there were criminal actions, but it seems clear that there is sufficient evidence to justify a criminal investigation to see if individual criminal prosecutions are warranted. Of course none of the tobacco C.E.O.s who lied to Congress nor any of the Wells Fargo people who signed off on setting up phony accounts in many of our names have done time, so why should Boeing's top management expect any different? The function of criminal penalties is not merely to punish wrongdoing but to deter it. Citizens United notwithstanding, corporations don't make decisions, people do.

  172. @Steve Fankuchen Here, here! I'd love to see the NYT address this in an op-ed on this subject in excruciating detail. Bonus points if you write it. The legislation around corporate entities which shields individual from consequences must be change and it starts with speaking the truth.

  173. @Steve Fankuchen Agreed!

  174. This gets to the root of the problem. The bottom line issue: Is Boeing corporate leadership guilty of criminal negligence? By all means fix the problem but if there has been criminal behavior then 5hose perpetrating it must be held accountable.

  175. Arrogance kills. This sounds eerily like Dick Cheney insisting that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction. How many killed and injured for nothing because of that arrogance? This is criminal negligence. People like Sinnett are dangerous.

  176. @Gerry no, nothing like that at all. Cheney knew there were no WMD's and just wanted oil profits from regional domination..This Boeing thing is more a private branding protection..It is just not a good comparison..It is more like Bayer insisting that Monsanto's roundup is safe..In fact, it is exactlyl like Monsanto insisting that roundup is safe for the world.. And the weird thing is, this Boeing thing, at least the US delay in grounding the planes, can be tied directly to Trump and Trump capitalists. One expects evil to cloak itself...But it does seem so often it is right there, before one, proclaiming itself as a proponent of the dark side..Hard for me, a student of sociology, Tom Morrione at Colby College in the seventies, to reconcile this with our need to see truth as relative, such an influential paradigm of the era..

  177. What role did Acting Secretary of Defense Shanahan play either in the sordid take of corporate greed at Boeing described here or in creating and nurturing the corporate culture that led to such decision making? And where were Americans pilots in challenging American to act if Boeing would not, and going public if American similarly put profits before human lives?

  178. I'm sure the engineers wanted to design the best airplane possible and advocated for the safest design, but management and executives contradicted their recommendations and forced them to put a compromised product out there. Sadly I'm sure the engineers are blaming themselves and the managers are oblivious to their responsibility in all this.

  179. @Stephen oh come on..Engineers were asked how to value engineer the design, i.e., make it cheaper, and THEY came up with the parameters of what could be cut, left untold, etc..Engineers are no more saints than the rest of us..We need government regulations and regulatory departments with NO ties to industry and that are paid enough to keep them as regulators..You don't know any engineers if you think they wouldn't compromise a design..They do it all the time, every day, for money or for nothing..

  180. @grace thorsen Yes, you just described the nature of both obtaining and holding onto a job in these modern day times.

  181. @Stephen If Im not mistaken, the 737 was a revised version of an earlier model, built to carry more passengers. Cut costs and get the plane into production quicker. Probably sounded like a good idea ...

  182. My wife and I fly back and forth from the States to South America once or twice a year and WILL not be taking this plane again, I don't care what they do or say. I do not trust Boeing anymore and especially do not trust the 737 MAX, this company will be lucky to not go bankrupt. Profits over safety and a callous disregard for human life is not an attribute we want to see in an airplane manufacturer.

  183. I've asked around: "Would you accept a trip schedule that used a 737 Max?" I can find nobody answering "Yes." Most were incredulous that I even suggested they'd do so.

  184. just TRY finding a cross country flight that didn't use the 737 Max in 2018. last August, I flew from San Francisco to Houston, then on to San Jose, Costa Rica. I checked more than a dozen airlines for pricing and every single one employed the 737 Max. Most cross country flights are not don't stop, and those that aren't often employ the 737 Max (some airlines fly Airbus).

  185. Don't worry, market forces will magically protect us! Unfortunately the market may allow for a third crash before Boeing thinks the cost of a true fix is justified.

  186. All plausibly deniable until a pilot union member records the conversation. Now, it sounds a lot more like criminal negligence on Boeing's part. They have lost my trust forever. And that's saying something, because I earn my living flying their airplanes. This isn't going to end well for Boeing.

  187. @Dan Not in a fair and just world anyways.

  188. I wonder if the Boeing VPs let their families fly the Max after the first crash.

  189. This seems to be another sad example of rot at the top bringing a great company down.

  190. If these planes had been designed overseas but American passengers killed in the US there would be a tremendous uproar and demands that the foreign executives face trial in a US court. Perhaps these executives need to face trial in Indonesia and Ethiopia, and answer to the families of their victims.

  191. Jail these criminals! What else could work on these ethically devoid executives?!

  192. Engineered at Yale and Harvard Business School and a protege of Jack Welch. McNerney brought the GE culture to Boeing. If there ever was a case for punitive damages this is it and this made me sell my stock. I could not stomach being part of what this organization has become.

  193. Criminal charges are rarely brought in these situations. Typically it's a slap on the wrist fine. However foreign countries need to look at bringing their own criminal charges if the department of Justice passes on pressing charges.

  194. if the executives and managers finally go to jail, then this story would be an epic legal/aviation world movie

  195. @Theresia It will never happen, sadly.

  196. Greed rules the day at Boeing.... it makes me sick. Good people will lose their jobs because or boardroom greed

  197. @Franco 300+ people have already lost their lives because of this.

  198. The entire nation is run on corporate greed and boardroom excess. Pilots, workers, and customers are easily replaceable, expendable. That's the nature of unregulated Capitalism, and what we've decided is our highest ideal and priority.

  199. This should finally put to rest the question on whether "3rd world" pilots are competent (never mind the fact that many airlines in these countries employ pilots from all over the world). Even US pilots were alarmed about the Max. It's just bad luck for the pilots who first encountered runaway MCAS.

  200. @Bala Incompetent pilots and faulty equipment are not mutually exclusive.

  201. As more true information becomes available one certainly needs to ask where was the FAA. And why is it that Boeing continuously shows up to meetings at all levels with its lobbyists. Ahhh, the lobbyists. A bonafide investigation would include the money trail from Boeing to and through its lobbyists to all US congressional and regulatory agencies. Get right down to the granular level with local politicians who accepted lobbyists money. Corporations are far too powerful in America. Corporate money handed out by lobbyists is a hidden tax on everything Americans buy, and in this case it killed people. America generally functions well in a true market economy. Corporate millions being paid out have taken the consumer out of the equation. Follow the money!

  202. Boeing resisted fixing their planes after pilots pointed out the safety hazard? Boeing must be called upon to answer for this extreme offense. I will try my best to never fly on a Boeing aircraft from now on regardless of what Boeing does going forward.

  203. This and previous articles are a stinging indictment of Boeing’s quality management system. Change management, risk assessment, root cause analysis all rode roughshod over by a management seriously out of touch.

  204. I wonder if any of the leader at Boeing have added up the costs in human lives and costs to Boeing of the lawsuits from passengers and airlines and determined the actual costs of NOT issuing an emergency airworthiness directive. Basically, a whole bunch of execs should be fired and this should become a lesson to future execs of what happens when you cut corners on safety. Actually the costs to Boeing’s reputation is difficult to calculate, but they lost a decade of positive view by hedging on something that could have been remedied quickly if they have moved on it.

  205. One of Boeing’s major 787 customers will not buy that plane if it’s manufactured in South Carolina. It only buys 787s built in the Seattle area. Why? Better quality from the WA plant. (See NY Times article) Think the 737Max is Boeing’s only major challenge?

  206. @Bascom Hill Boeing's desire to have a factory in a right to work state has come back to bite them. When it comes to aviation, unions are important to protect whistleblowers - and there are many of them in the South Carolina operation.

  207. All these lives to catch Airbus and save a few mpg.

  208. Why does this aircraft need the system that caused the crashes? Stick shakers are sufficent on other aircraft. Is this aircraft so unstable that a pilot can not respond to a stick shaker fast enough to prevent a stall.

  209. @Rae: I understand that the reason was that the move of the engine placement meant that the handling would change and that normally that would require retraining. Boeing did not want to do that since it would affect sales, so they tried to “fix” it in software.

  210. @Rae Stiening Simple answer. Yes! Boeing could not install the more efficient, larger diameter high bypass engines necessary to try and compete with the Airbus 320 NEO as there was insufficient clearnce between the engine and the ground. So, they mounted them further forward and higher, shifting weight forward and the thrust line higher. This results in a more critical weight and balance and quicker rotation about the center of mass when the throttles are advanced or retarded. Then, to keep the price competitive with Airbus they tried to eliminate the cost of retaining pilots as well as pricing some safety features as optional. Executives at Boeing should be tried for negligence and corruption. The senior engineers on the 737 MAX should be tried for negligence too.

  211. @Rae Stiening Exactly!!!!

  212. It used to be "if it ain't Boeing I ain't going" well, if it is Boeing, I am thinking twice about buying my ticket.

  213. @KHW Simple fix. If it's Boeing, I'm not going. See. Fixed.

  214. No worries. Boeing will get a pass. How so? Whatever Boeing pays in compensation to victims and their lawyers the DOD will make-up the costs in future grossly over-priced airplanes that recover much more than the 'cost of doing business'. Now, with an ex-officio executive from Boeing running the DOD, is there any doubt that BOEING will be designated Too Big To Fail?

  215. @Bob Aceti You have hit the nail on the head. Instead of getting barred from future Department of Defense contracts, Boeing will get richly rewarded with new over-priced ones. This should more than take care of any costs related to "that MAX nuisance".

  216. It is instructive that China was the first nation to call Boeing's bluff on this. If China had not acted - and forced the issue - would Europe or the US have done anything other than form a committee to study the issue at the FAA and at Boeing? I sincerely doubt it. Maybe the answer is market forces - maybe the answer is Airbus A320 NEO or the Comac C919. Maybe Boeing will understand loss of sales outside the US for poor management and poor engineering. It appears that market share loss will be the only thing that will stop Boeing's "crocodile tears" over this disaster.

  217. Profit over safety and human lives. What kind of men are these?

  218. "Who woulda thunk it?" If the pilots concerns were properly voiced and Boeing resisted any investigation into these problems I think that's called homicidal negligence.

  219. It won’t bring anyone back, but I hope these families that lost loved ones sue Boeing and win.

  220. We now know that Boeing executives made bad safety decisions, poorly executed the upgrades to the software and training, and mishandled the responses to the first AND second 737 Max crashes. Please tell me why are top executives such as Mr. Sinnett still in charge at Boeing?

  221. Because they are waiting for that golden parachute. The one that doesn't crash.

  222. I am pleased that the Southwest Pilots Association (SWAPA) and the American Airlines pilots union, Allied Pilots Association (APA) had the integrity to stand up to Boeing. I am unaware of any efforts by ALPA, of which I am a former member. The public should realize that, especially in aviation, unions put safety first. The pilots and mechanics lives and certificates are always at stake. When something goes wrong, they are the first to be blamed. Unfortunately, this is not always the case with management, which often puts profits first. Boeing should have started over with a clean sheet design. The FAA is sclerotic at best. Continental Airlines, Retired. 7,000 hours in the 737-300 and -500.

  223. This is how to lose to Airbus.

  224. @Sherry That mentality is exactly what got Boeing into trouble in the first place. Apparently nobody is accountable today.