Why Boeing's 737 MAX 10 May Never Fly Commercially | WSJ

Boeing’s new 737 MAX 10 is facing a regulatory deadline that could force the planemaker to upgrade the jet’s cockpit, or consider scrapping its production—a possibility CEO David Calhoun floated recently. WSJ’s Andrew Tangel explains.

Photo: Leora Bermeister for The Wall Street Journal

More from the Wall Street Journal:

#Boeing #Farnborough #WSJ

[madaemon]

"Boeing opened the doors to its new 737 Max 10."

The problem's that it was in the air at the time.

[rshvkkt]

The 777 was probably the last decision made by Boeing prior to the MDC merger. That was the Boeing the world was proud of.

[publicpersona]

This is absurd. The regulations that Boeing says it can't meet were designed _specifically_ to prevent pilot confusion. Pilot confusion with this non-compliant system has been the primary or contributing cause of SEVEN accidents and 823 deaths on Boeing 757 and 737 airplanes, including the two 737Max crashes. The regulations were put in in 2011. Eleven years should be long enough to expect Boeing to figure out a way to comply with the law and not keep asking for special exemptions.

[dontcare]

The B737 has required cockpit updates, including EICAS, since the FAA gave Boeing a deadline for its implementation almost 30 years ago this year! Boeing have done absolutely nothing in those 30 years to address this massive safety omission and now they seek a further exemption. Unbelievable!

[dnyalslg]

Well, I’m sorry, Boeing. Your business decisions cost lives, and you gotta deal with the consequences of your actions. Airbus made better decisions, and they deserve to be rewarded for their safety focus. You shouldn’t depend on government cutting you slack, just pull yourself up by your bootstraps and move on.

[aerobobby]

Boeing deserve everything they get. It’s a disgrace that they killed nearly 350 people and not a single Boeing employee went to prison for it.

[todortodorov]

Boeing management answering if the MAX 10 can accommodate EICAS: "Look, everything is technically possible, the question is [ *how much is this going to cost us and should we spend / invest money in the MAX 10* .... ] what is the safest alternative given the family".

This company never learns from its mistakes and still the only concern is the bottom line.

[birgirkarl]

This video is about what happens when a real estate photographer enters a cockpit.

[chrisgermann]

I find it astonishing any self respecting operator would be placing orders with a company that flat out committed fraud and lied so they could cut costs at the expense of human lives.

[Major_Tom]

Embrace the 757 while it’s still around. Arguably the best twin engine jet Boeing has ever produced.

[juanlopez-qdyh]

Let me guess, it doesn’t need pilot training?

[helmutzollner]

Why is Boeing constantly using Airbus to justify shortcuts around safety regulations?
Airbus has a normal R&D department that is developing new planes. They have regulations, design rules and basic engineering principles for their work. The result are reasobably well engineered planes which are popular with the Airlinea and pilots.
Airbus just chugged on and talked to airlines and pilots and developed a superior product, even in the face of a dominating competitor like Boeing.
Boeing on the other hand invests as little as possible in R&D. They designed a great series of planes in the 60s with a state of the art user interface of the time.
So, instead of developing new planes for consecutive models or variants, they kept bolting one kludge after another kludge.
After all they know all there is to know about jets and customers bl00dy well should buy those old planes. They were Boeing quality after all!
That seemed to.be very prifitable until it killed hundreds of people.
Congress and the FAA are justifiably wary of Boeing's certification behaviour and understandvthatbthey need to protect the flying public of Boeing's shoddy practuces.
Now once again the competitor argument is being made to justify another shortcut!
How about doing the engineering right for once and not just politic around! Another shortcut may kill more people.
But then, the US Congress finds it acceptable to hace schoolkids shot at school in the hundreds every year.
If a government is not able to protect vulnerable kids, can it really be expected to give a flying fμ©k about a few hundred dead every few years?
Probably not.

[too-da-loo]

Rushing through aircraft to try and avoid retraining pilots is exactly the reason the 2 Max 8 crashes happened.

[teekaa]

I still can't believe that nobody went to prison for the MAX crisis.

[Nbolanos]

Lets be honest here, Boeing will lobby its way out of regulation it is all about who they pay in congress and how much. Just keep close attention to how things unwind.

[alawrence]

I’m glad Boeing has kept the Max name. Makes it easier to avoid flying on it.

[ctixbwi]

Boeing doesn’t have an engineering department . Only accountants looking for shortcuts to cut cost, killing Boeing to oblivion. Bean accountants don’t have mathematical skills measuring up to engineering requirements. But engineers can easily count beans. Boeing, cut accountants and hire engineers! Bring corporate management back to Seattle closer to engineering.

[antonyh]

Boeing won't cancel. They will update the cockpit. Too much money and company is invested in the aircraft. 750 orders for the max 10 is worth billions. Do the math, it would cost Boeing way more money to cancel the type than to bite the bullet and make the required changes. In reality the MAX should have already had the system installed.

[STiGuy]

It’s arguably safer to certify the -10 as is with the same cockpit architecture as the -8 & -9 already in service so that commonality is retained across the platform. That way in unexpected/hazardous events, the pilots are more likely to be familiar with what best to do. Changing this 1 single model to new system could very well be argued to cause more issues in the sense that pilots might be confused as they now must memorize 2 completely different systems day to day. Let the -10 be certified as is. THEN mandate the new system be applied to all future models. Even the man who helped put the rule through congress argued this as the case. Is the safer route

[donarrivas]

Well, the Qatar airlines has signed $3.3 billion USD contract with BA for its 737 Max 10 fleet. But, the contract also has a long list of stipulations to prevent BA from a free ride like the Indonesia or Ethiopia cases, in which, many options may require to fly the BA crafts. The BA future is not good so it moves its general headquarters to near Pentagon for miracles.