We know that something went horribly wrong on both the Lion Air flight, and the Ethiopian one.

We know that whatever went wrong, went wrong in the very same phase of flight.

We now that in both cases the pilots were unable to cope with whatever went wrong.


Now without indulging in the sophistry of whether or not that makes the aircraft unsafe, or makes the operation of the aircraft safe only by crew with a very specific skill set ..... it seems prudent to avoid flying the machines until there is clarity.

Yesterday i was flying Malindo, an airline owned by Lion Air group. i checked the aircraft type and I'd have had no problem switching carriers if it had been a MAX.

I'm not sure I follow this at all.

I avoid getting involved in technical discussions, but my clear understanding of cockpit protocol is that only one pilot is in command. Both pilots are well-trained, and at least one, designated the captain, will have significant numbers of hours' experience. The captain will allocate phases of the flight to him/herself or to his/her copilot, but will be ready to take back command where appropriate and if required.

The phrase "at least one being very inexperienced" implies that there could be two very inexperienced pilots in the cockpit. I'd hope that in all regulatory jurisdictions a captain's stripes are earned through training and experience. First officers have to gain experience and they do so on active duty in both legacy carrier and others.

Note the circumstances of the Air France AF447 disaster, a disaster in one of your cited legacy, first-world carriers, carrying three pilots to boot. In this case two relatively inexperienced co-pilots were in the cockpit and their behaviour, in turn as pilot flying the aircraft, exacerbated the effects of instrument malfunction : the vastly more experienced captain was resting during the period during which recovery of safe flight was likely possible.

Silkair now suspending...

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapo...airlines-crash

Anyway, with major airlines now beginning to ground them it wouldn't surprise me if the whole fleet is taken out of service by the end of the week.

I believe it's CAAS (Singapore CAA) rather than Silkair's decision and they are not allowing any Max (not just max 8) to come into SIN either.

According to Reuters CASA (Australia) have chosen to ban Max (not sure if it's just 8 or all series) to/from Australia. I do not believe there is one on the Australian register yet, although I think VA has some on order.

I flew on the ZS-ZCA on 6 March (CPT-JNB). The captain delighted in telling the passengers how exciting he was to be flying such a new aircraft. Indeed it did look very shiny and new, particularly compared to the out going flight.

I imagine some passenger confusion at the gate when they are directed to an orange aircraft. There are those in SA who fly BA and Kulula to avoid the state-owned SAA and its subsidiaries.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...225f2821c3.jpg

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9039113

And now Australia, per ABC News:

I appear to have been politely ignored, but at least my post wasn't deleted [yet!]/

Can i ask a stupid question? whats the difference between the 787-800 and the 787 800 Max or are they the same plane?

The 737 MAX 8 is the latest iteration of the original 737. The 737-800 was part of the previous iteration. It goes:

737 Original (100, 200)
737 Classic (300, 400, 500)
737 Next Generation (600, 700, 800, 900)
737 MAX (7, 8, 9, 10)

The increasing counts are not newer versions within a generation, but different sizes within the same generation.


The major difference from the Next Generation to the MAX is a completely new engine. There are also some aerodynamic tweaks and other bits and pieces, including a piece of software designed to make it handle like the previous Next Generation aircraft. It's this that the focus is on in this accident.

I don't think there is any aircraft type I regularly fly on which you couldn't say those things about though. Take-off (and landing) is inherently one of those phases of flight where things can go wrong - there are fewer fatal accidents when planes are in the cruise.

I think you're being deliberately obtuse here. The 737 MAX has had the worst entry into service of any major new aircraft in decades, and everything centres around something very specific going wrong, in a very specific stage of flight. For whatever reason, in both crashes it has had issues maintaining a stable altitude around 5-10 minutes after takeoff.

If it really were nothing to worry about, half of them wouldn't be grounded by now with more being announced every day.

Apologies, I am not trying to be obtuse. Just giving my opinion as I guess we all are on here. My own feeling is that if I had a flight on a MAX coming up I wouldn't seek to change it, but I respect others think differently which is of course perfectly fine :)

I think when we get some information on the latest incident that will serve to provide a clearer picture of whether there is a problem, or whether this is just an unlucky coincidence.