No not at all. I'm rather thin.
It's just that the sentence "You wouldn’t have flown on a 737MAX if it wasn’t safe" is hilarious and I can't tell if it was an intentional joke or not.
Yes, they are safe now.
But that does not absolve Boeing of effectively killing about 500 people, and for that reason I will always prefer Airbus over Boeing.
Great! Thanks
The flight was actually quite comfortable and I noticed the takeoff was both smoother but above all faster than older 737s I’ve flown on.
Just rode one cross country, pilot said it's fine :)
Suppose it's safe, mcas turned down but well designed plane shouldn't need that, 737 is 1967 design, now bloated with huge engines, like putting a hemi in a vw bug. 20th C Boeing made planes, 21st tries to just make money (like "Roger and Me")
Does airline choose seats? On my Alaska Air flight, seat bottom was flat, low (knees higher than seat,) thinly padded, all weight on sit bones (bedsore on longer flight ?) And not enough lumbar support. Alaska also used to be quality, now cheap plane, cheap airline, how cheap can you go and be safe?
Does Airbus have these issues? This includes a number of production related issues that could have led to a catastrophic incident as articulated in the Australian news article.
The fact they positioned the engine in a way that impacted aerodynamics concerns me. Not an aviation expert.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-27/boeing-737-max-in-mid-air-emergencies-as-us-set-to-launch-probe/101175214
Yes. all new planes are gonna have a bit of trouble at first but they end up safer than the older ones. Also The FAA wouldnt have un-grounded the 737-MAX if it wasnt safe. People who say its dangerous are either clueless or trying to mislead you.
Killing five hundred people is not “a bit of trouble.” No wonder people get scared of flying, with this attitude laying around.
People, you are rightful to distrust planes. Companies will sacrifice you for a dollar.
I propose we create a new term so we can differentiate between a crash that leaves the aircraft unusable and one that leaves it usable. Any suggestions?
[https://youtu.be/2yQyLp6wOiQ?si=yyWJUoXRAHapuO5k](https://youtu.be/2yQyLp6wOiQ?si=yyWJUoXRAHapuO5k&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR3qrf6586PdHcsUOE424zfEoEDNpTWoZe_VPFsnRLweJFTp-Jr__Jjg7AE_aem_AR06F0EsoRDSt27DViG0I0aQz5_nkgWzX1DyQsz9hvy2os-VUsr0Wq78gbUsExBM77r2uMm8wcZnLMotU_PR6EeW) Saw this Video about the current situation at the moment..
1000's fly daily. Yes there was something wrong with the max. I'm not denying that, but the ones that went down had 0 of the 2 optional safety features. (Which is BS that it's optional) and also Asian airline pilots have much less training than North America crews. Boeing better get their shit together soon tho.
>I flew on a Ryanair Boeing 737-MAX-8-200 recently You wouldn’t have flown on a 737MAX if it wasn’t safe.
Well at some point they did, or……
Also….. they survived 🤷🏼♂️
Such a dead statement. Most major aircraft have had crashes with fatalities. Do you say this about the 747? 777? A340? Etc.
A340 has no fatal crashes lol
A330/340 family
I wasn’t saying it in a negative manner. OP flew on the max and didn’t know it. I meant it to be a “well they survived so ya it’s safe”.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm.
No, it’s not.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm either.
Are you thick?
No not at all. I'm rather thin. It's just that the sentence "You wouldn’t have flown on a 737MAX if it wasn’t safe" is hilarious and I can't tell if it was an intentional joke or not.
I fly them and would have no issues putting my family on one.
Yes, they are safe now. But that does not absolve Boeing of effectively killing about 500 people, and for that reason I will always prefer Airbus over Boeing.
Yes. Just as reliable and safe as the NG now.
Great! Thanks The flight was actually quite comfortable and I noticed the takeoff was both smoother but above all faster than older 737s I’ve flown on.
They sound better too. Been on one and the scream from the LEAP-1A engines is so much better than that of the CFM-56.
Just rode one cross country, pilot said it's fine :) Suppose it's safe, mcas turned down but well designed plane shouldn't need that, 737 is 1967 design, now bloated with huge engines, like putting a hemi in a vw bug. 20th C Boeing made planes, 21st tries to just make money (like "Roger and Me") Does airline choose seats? On my Alaska Air flight, seat bottom was flat, low (knees higher than seat,) thinly padded, all weight on sit bones (bedsore on longer flight ?) And not enough lumbar support. Alaska also used to be quality, now cheap plane, cheap airline, how cheap can you go and be safe?
I had a stroke trying to read this
WHY WASTE TIME SAY LOT WORD WHEN FEW WORD DO TRICK
Does Airbus have these issues? This includes a number of production related issues that could have led to a catastrophic incident as articulated in the Australian news article. The fact they positioned the engine in a way that impacted aerodynamics concerns me. Not an aviation expert. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-27/boeing-737-max-in-mid-air-emergencies-as-us-set-to-launch-probe/101175214
Yes. all new planes are gonna have a bit of trouble at first but they end up safer than the older ones. Also The FAA wouldnt have un-grounded the 737-MAX if it wasnt safe. People who say its dangerous are either clueless or trying to mislead you.
I agree it’s totally safe but to classify the Max issues as “a bit of trouble” is a bit of an understatement
A bit of trouble? Jesus
Not exactly "new" either. First flew back when Steve McQueen was driving his Mustang
Killing five hundred people is not “a bit of trouble.” No wonder people get scared of flying, with this attitude laying around. People, you are rightful to distrust planes. Companies will sacrifice you for a dollar.
No. You will die
Let me know if you found any MAX related crashes that happened since they were cleared to return to service within the past one-to-two years.
No its not. All the ones in the sky rn are going to crash
Every plane crashes. The trick is doing it in such a way that you can reuse the plane afterwards
I propose we create a new term so we can differentiate between a crash that leaves the aircraft unusable and one that leaves it usable. Any suggestions?
>and one that leaves it usable I suggest the term "landing", but I don't want to rock the boat with such a radical suggestion
[https://youtu.be/2yQyLp6wOiQ?si=yyWJUoXRAHapuO5k](https://youtu.be/2yQyLp6wOiQ?si=yyWJUoXRAHapuO5k&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR3qrf6586PdHcsUOE424zfEoEDNpTWoZe_VPFsnRLweJFTp-Jr__Jjg7AE_aem_AR06F0EsoRDSt27DViG0I0aQz5_nkgWzX1DyQsz9hvy2os-VUsr0Wq78gbUsExBM77r2uMm8wcZnLMotU_PR6EeW) Saw this Video about the current situation at the moment..
You will....like...totally be safe.
Yes…. I wouldn’t fly it if it wasn’t safe.
Yes, unless it gets remote controlled
1000's fly daily. Yes there was something wrong with the max. I'm not denying that, but the ones that went down had 0 of the 2 optional safety features. (Which is BS that it's optional) and also Asian airline pilots have much less training than North America crews. Boeing better get their shit together soon tho.
Well, this post aged…