As a semi-recovered aerophobe, 737 Max saga is quite disturbing. The key seems to me, from a legal & moral pov, the failure to require training on a very new feature of the plane. Technologies can have unexpected, tragic results. Failure to tell pilots abt it? V hard to explain.
A redundant reading would be a good but sensor failures occur and are routinely recovered from. Airbus is more automated. Also, remember AF 447? Anti-stall technology has generally made planes safer. This is a confluence of events which should be studied—but include the airline.
-
-
I think there's a bunch of decisions by Boeing here that are very wrong, but there is a reason this happened where it happened, and that should be a huge part of the story.
-
This seems to ignore the multiple FAA complaints by U.S. pilots who said they hadn’t been adequately informed and used words like “criminally insufficient” to describe the situation before the second crash.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
On the contrary, I am not blaming Airbus. Just that anti-stall features aren't a bad idea. The pilots could have easily disabled the trim system—that happens for other reasons as well. The Lion Air flight before the one that crashed had a pilot in jump seat who pointed it out+
- Show replies
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.