This thread is getting ridiculous. Posting that officials are influenced by money over safety is completely unsupported by fact. FAA grounds on fact not hysteria. There are no facts showing that the MAX is dangerous. There indeed have been two serious crashes with large loss of life, but there are no facts yet from the second crash. Let's get some preliminary data prior to condemning government authorities, leaders, corporations, etc. If this is a configuration error on takeoff made by a very junior FO, this grounding and hysteria are moot.
A grounding is never meant to be a sanction towards a manufacturer, just a precautionnary measure to ensure no one gets hurt until we can know for sure that there is nothing wrong with the design. So sometimes, the grounding may be overzealous, but it's better to be safe than sorry.
The second crash may well be totally unrelated to the MCAS or AOA probes, the whitness report even seems to support this theory, but let's be honnest, the FAA put itself in a terrible position.
First, they accepted to certify the current MCAS system, but finally admitted that some welcome improvements would make it "even safer" ... Then they let the planes still fly "unpatched" for a few months (by the way according to the original schedule published in the aftermath of the Lionair crash, the fix is already overdue).
If the FAA was to ground the planes now, that means implicitely admitting that they were wrong when they certified the planes and if the second crash is MCAS related, that were wrong once again when they didn't ground the fleets until the MCAS fix was implemented on each plane.
So what did they choose: prentend that everything is right, that no grounding is necessary and pray that no other accident happens before the MCAS fix is implemented, because you know, it's never bad to install upgrades and updates even if the plane was perfectly safe without them.
To tell that the FAA or authorities can never be influenced by money in the US is laughable. I'm not talking about bribes here, but a company like Boeing working on defense contracts does know how to put some pressure on the politicians (local jobs, meaning for the economy,...). Just remember the tanker deal, won by Airbus, but then finally not...
Let's put indonesia appart for obvious reasons, but UK, Australia, Singapore ... what exactly do they win when they ground 737 MAXs? Hint: I can see the conflict of interest of the FAA regarding Boeing, but none of those other countries have a national company trying to compete with Boeing products.
Last edited by seb76
on Tue Mar 12, 2019 3:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.