Your persecution complex is showing again and deflection attempt is facile. Any additional review activity should be welcomed due to the clear loss of confidence and to provide re-assurance to the crews and passengers.
Persecution complex? If you don't see the glee from some posters whenever something is seen as bad news for Boeing then you are not very perceptive.
There are lots of emotions in this thread; but main takehome message is that Boeing, in the endeavor to minimize compensation payments, created optics of a company which doesn't learn from their mistakes and doesn't care. How much they believe in their denial messages themselves is a different question.
People also blame FAA and Boeing for being too friendly. While that may be true, a significant portion of current worldwide safety record can be attributed to this duo, so that is not something unconditionally bad. Unlike individuals, however, organizations can turn on the spot in terms of their moral character.
That brings us to MAX, where Boeing is publicly denying most blame, and so does FAA. It doesn't mean they were sitting on their hands for 2 months since MAX got grounded - but doesn't mean otherwise as well. Moreover, Boeing keeping their mouth shut doesn't really mean they learned their lessons, and that the rest of design is up to standard. To make things worse, one may question Boeing's ability to do an internal review as they seem to lose control over design progression at some point - too many issues already found in a small AoA domain.
And now a multi-billion dollar question: how much are you willing to trust Boeing on the issue? For me, the answer is very uncertain....
I basically agree with this post - Boeing really screwed up. However I think it much more likely that whoever was in charge of MCAS design and sign off maybe really wasn't that bright - it sounds like the design met the technical specs but they missed the second order impacts. Maybe there wasn't Pilots or experienced Engineers involved in the design of MCAS who could have said "Stop - what happens if..."
That is the tribal knowledge that is lost when you have a revolving door for engineers. The design's meet the specs as laid out - but the wisdom isn't there to know when something isn't as safe as it could be for minimal more effort. To be clear MCAS was software - it shouldn't have added much cost at all to make it a lot more robust.
We have heard how much inexperience the Person at the FAA who was responsible for this had - however she was a Pilot so you think she could have thought it through(if that was her Job to do so vs just managing the team). However if she was a product of today's training system with it's emphasis on Automated flight and not thinking through the implications of MCAS failure as the computers never fail...and the pilot's might have to control the plane manually then that's an issue as well.
It's a Catch 22. The Auto-pilots and nannies have led to lower crash rates as arguably they are better at flying and more precise - however by relying on them too much Pilots never get the hand flying experience they need to stay sharp and have the confidence in there skills when the nannies go bad.
Big Airlines used to have fleets of Trainers for Pilots to use so they could keep there skills sharp.
A lot better solution would be to have fleets of Simulators installed and mandate that Pilots spend more time than they are currently spending on practising Manual flight and non-normal procedures in a no-fail environment so they can stay sharp for that 1 in a Million flight when the nannies fail.
One thing we can probably reasonably assume is that Boeing's next design (Probably NMA/MOM/797) will be the most tested, scrutinized design ever and cross our fingers should set new standards for safety and reliability.
Yes - this should be the last design evolution of the 737 - newer aircraft architectures can be made safer.
The one thing that really concerns me is that with with MTOW's of Single Aisle aircraft being constantly pushed without an increase in Wing area it's leading to higher and higher landing speeds and more runway excursions.
That seems to be a big issue with the 737 not so much the A320/A321 but that could change as it's weights are increased way beyond it's initial design spec's.