The 737 itself is a good aircraft. The 800 MAX is not only a 'stretched' version to accommodate more seating, but also modified to conform to wishes of airlines and passengers regarding fuel economy and environmental concerns. The big problem is that software is now used to tweak or tune these aircraft to perform to these criteria either by compensating for stretched airframes and possible extra instability or aerodynamic issues, but also how the engines perform under certain conditions.

Boeing has been painfully slow in reacting in a transparent manner, and of course the FAA will support an American product as far as they see fit. I think the bans are a positive move and show that manufacturers/ airlines need to react much more quickly in these days of social media.

Once upon a time Pilots used to use physical effort to fly a plane..those days are long gone...

Reluctant though I might be to suggest that electing a ****ing moron (pay attention Ford voters) has far reaching consequences beyond the obvious, thread readers might want to consider that, at that this time, no one is in charge of the FAA. There was a nominee:

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...pticism-366199

one Congress rejected. We might be a long time waiting for regulatory action from the US authorities.

Seems the job of the acting administrator is in part running the show while a permanent administrator is found.

https://www.faa.gov/about/key_officials/elwell/

Did you not see the ****ing moron's tweets on the subject?

His barrel is bottomless.

I did see those but found no great insight there.

Similar in the US with flight attendant unions.

Some of the pilot unions appear to be on the opposite page as the flight attendants.

Sunwing has grounded their fleet of Max. First Canadian airline to do so.

The FAA is gambling on the on the unlikelyhood of another incident, prior to the imminent implementation of the software patch. Statistically this gamble is likely to pay off (although one might reasonably argue that the bet was first placed last October and has already been lost). Is this an acceptable way for an "impartial" regulator to behave? I think not.

"Good morning, Mr B
Good morning, Mr Regulator
I see you have a new aircraft for me, looks good ...


... will you call it the 797?

No Sir, its not a new aircraft at all, its actually one of these, a 737, so we will call it a 737...



I see, so what do you want me to do?
Just certify the changes, no need to certify the whole aircraft because it's still a 737.

Excellent, saves me a bundle of work!"


Allegedly!
​​​​​​

Im guessing those who might have booked Spring Break in several sun destinations won't be happy about this. Nothing on their website at the moment.

Good point. I guess the 737 branding is very strong though, and perhaps some commonality of parts.

oops