Replies

[Funny that of all the 737 MAX aircraft that were being flown worldwide the only two that crashed were being operated by Third World airlines. Coincidence?]

No question that the maintenance and training standards at the airlines involved in the crashes weren’t wonderful. The problem is that they had flown other 737’s without a problem before, and expected to have no flyability problems with the MAX. And Boeing obviously marketed the plane to them as flyable without any changes in maintenance and training standards from regular 737’s. Now, if Boeing had said that the plane was only suitable for First World pilots, then they would have bought the Airbus neos. And as it turns out, that’s what many of them will end up doing.

All products involve some degree of compromise between ship date and perfection. Whether due to bad luck or incompetence, this CEO chose wrong and should probably be replaced, in order to reassure regulators and customers that this won’t happen again.

The third-world aircrew had no skills or air sense— incompetent.
Same issue affected a couple US jets.
No big deal, the pilots just toggled off the auto-trim and wrote it up after landing.
Not a safety of flight issue unless you are incompetent.
“Runaway” trim is in the books and something we practiced on various occasions and we did it in-flight.
If you have no skills and no air sense and blindly sit and ride and not fly you are a fool.
Harsh but true.