Seems small but something like this could kill this plane as a passenger jet if enough people are avoiding em.
this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
630 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
60071 readers
3589 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm all for it to be honest. The 737 Max sounds like a death trap, and until Boeing is banned from certifying their own planes nobody should be flying in these IMO.
The FAA needs to start certifying these themselves again, and remove the existing loopholes/exemptions that allow some design changes to avoid recertification
Sounds like capitalism in its best form.
Like clockwork
Hardly likely. If enough people start doing it, either airlines will start hiding the plane model, or boeing will rename it after some marketing to show things have changed, and the world will move on.
If this was the first incident with the Max, I'd agree with you.
But repeated issues close together have caused regulators amd the general public to look closer at Boeing as a whole; particularly their inspection, certification, and maintenance practices. I don't think this will go away easily.
I'm starting to see content like this often:
yes... this does not seem a problem with Max, but one with Boeing. The US passengers don't really have an option to choose Airbus when most of the airlines' fleet in the US is Boeing.
I don’t think this will go away easily.
We can hope so.
Multiple airlines in the US already have majority Airbus fleets. It’s not quite as hard to avoid as you might think
load more comments
(6 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I agree with you on this one. There's public sentiment and then there's market reality. The hard truth is that most people have a need for a practical flight route within a certain window and there's limited choices. Delta, United, etc. only have so many aircraft servicing so many routes and they already bought the aircraft and have to use them. While I'd personally like to avoid the 737 MAX, if it's the only feasible choice, then that's the one I gotta roll the dice on. I guess I'll avoid window seats if possible.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Too bad if you're already booked and the airline company changes the plane on you...
Genuine question. Could somebody legally demand a refund at that point the flight was different than sold as?
No. The "Contract of Carriage" that airlines create between you and them when you buy a ticket explicitly disclaims any liability for stuff like that. Delta's for domestic flights has, under "Rule 2", the following:
Delta will exercise reasonable efforts to transport you and your baggage from your origin to your destination with reasonable dispatch, but published schedules, flight times, aircraft types, seat assignments, and similar details reflected in the ticket or Delta’s published schedules are not guaranteed and form no part of this contract. Delta may substitute alternate Carriers or aircraft, change its schedules, delay or cancel flights, change seat assignments, and alter or omit stopping places shown on the ticket as required by its operations in Delta’s sole discretion. Delta’s sole liability in the event of such changes is set forth in Rule 22. Delta is not responsible or liable for making connections, failing to operate any flight according to schedule, changing the schedule or any flight, changing seat assignments or aircraft types, or revising the routings by which Delta carries the passenger from the ticketed origin to destination.
Source: https://www.delta.com/us/en/legal/contract-of-carriage-dgr (click the "plain language PDF" version)
Every airline has basically the same contract. They can do whatever the fuck they want as long as they get you from A to B. They don't even have to use a plane, or get you there on time.
load more comments
(2 replies)
My guess is most airlines have clauses in their terms and conditions that allow them to change the aircraft type without prior notice. Pretty sure their lawyers would argue that this is considered a management right for operational reasons.
But I'm no expert 🙃
A bit of clickbait. Yes they've added the option to filter out 737 Max 9, but also a bunch of older Boeing and Airbus planes
I just checked this myself:
The last few incidents with the MAX series has me on edge with them. I fly planes myself (GA) and am an aviation geek. It's only 3 incidents but it seems like they rushed the MAX out too quickly to compete with Airbus. I could be really wrong.
The MAX 8 series was the one where they had additional software to correct the climb and this caused two accidents of total loss in passenger planes Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopians Flight 302.
Between March 2017 and March 2019, the global fleet of 387 aircraft operated 500,000 flights and experienced two fatal crashes, having a fatal accident rate of four accidents per million flights, whereas the previous Boeing 737 generations averaged 0.2 fatal accidents per million flights.
Then we have the MAX 9 that had a door blow off because of a missing door plug. Thankfully, no deaths and only minor injuries.
If Boeing were extremely smart, they would replace the 737 with a net new design serving the same market segment. The 737 just sits too low to the ground. The giant LEAP engines were shoehorned on where they shouldn't have been and two planes full of people are dead because of it. With the open rotor engines likely to be the next evolution, I'm not even sure they couldn't put those on the 737.
Add in that the 737-900ER has the same door plug design, it makes me wonder if it is rational to fear the Max 9 specifically. I would actually prefer to fly a max 9 that was forced to have a recent inspection instead of the older 737-900ER that recently had scrutiny for the same door if my fear was the door plug itself.
I have a flight in a MAX 7 in a couple of weeks. 🙃
That plane hasn't even been certified. I guess Aeromexico got a good deal on planes that were supposed to be delivered to Southwest
For what it's worth... Neither the FAA nor ICAO certify Boeing... Boeing certifies themselves!
In all honesty, you should be good to go. FAA and aviation companies have made the required changes and updates.
But is the option to filter by plane model itself new?
If you're adding a filter so people can avoid a certain plane, it makes sense to add more than one model of plane.
You're asking a good question, but I don't have the answer. I don't usually use Kayak.
There's more than just safety reasons to avoid specific model of plane. While both are Boeing, a First Class seat on a United 737 (of any variety) is a subpar experience compared to a First Class seat on a United 787. If you're making a long trip and paying the top dollar for that, filtering out the 737s and A320 planes makes a lot of sense.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Seems like a smart function. I would not feel safe in a Boeing at the moment.
I don't want to filter out the max8/max8 planes because of bad pitot tubes or blowouts or nosedives.
I want to filter them out because even on a good day they're horribly appointed terrible airplanes with absolutely nothing redeeming about them.
And I fly the fancy seats.
The fact they even HAVE a configuration where the back loo is right next to the galley with an open-air American-style bathroom partition separating the two, that should get someone arrested.
I thought generally the configuration of seats and galleys and toilets was up to the airline and they were pretty much modular?
I will just drive my Tesla instead. So much safer.
thought you were serious for a second, for those who aren't getting the joke, driving your car is thousands of times more dangerous than taking a plane flight
But all those articles about Boeing issues will get more people to drive. It's ironic how fighting for higher flying safety standards can kill people. The surplus in car crash fatalities in the months after 9/11 was higher than the number of passengers on all the planes involved.
We need more trains in North America. From my experience between planes, trains, and automobiles (and boats) trains have been the best experience.
load more comments
(3 replies)
It really is insane how many people’s perception of safety is so completely opposite to reality.
load more comments
(24 replies)
When being ironic, don't forget of Poe's Law
People on lemmy are smart, they will get it. Right?
Some people on lemmy are smart, likely a higher ratio than many other sites, but there's still a ridiculous surplus of fools
And all those smart people still have incredibly stupid opinions outside their areas of expertise. Everyone is a moron in the wrong context.
I'd posit a well rounded education doesn't necessarily agree with that. You don't need a professional education in a topic to be able to provide a decent opinion, it's just that many people opt not to work on their own educations and prefer to be spoon fed materials, and it's this behaviour that produces morons in almost every context, rather than individuals that have problematic views in a few topics.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I was just thinking about this lastnight; I don't fly often, but next time I do, I'll be paying attention to which plane is actually used and avoiding the max.
I've never paid any attention to the plane model before.
Boeing fucked up pretty big with this plane if even those that pretty much never fly are thinking this way.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I don't see the 737 Max being taken off the market even with these options and rebranding wont help as airlines will still list the new model which will be publicly announced by Boeing. So what's the market adjustment going to be? Cheaper fare? I can honestly see people surging to buy a seat on this deathcraft if prices fall enough. It'll be like choosing between organic and pesticide-riddled.
My first thought after the door incident was that I hope this brings the price down of air travel, looks like that's happening
I dunno I would still fly on a Boeing for a discount
load more comments
(1 replies)
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A leading online travel agent has added filters to let users exclude flights that use Boeing’s troubled 737 Max planes, after a piece of fuselage falling off an Alaska Airlines flight led to a surge of user interest in avoiding the airliners.
Following the Alaska Airlines incident, it says there was a 15-fold increase in use of the original filter, prompting it to rework the setting, making it more prominent on the search page and adding the ability to distinguish between 737 Max 8 and Max 9 planes, since only the latter has been grounded by America’s Federal Aviation Administration.
The surge of interest in the new feature demonstrates the unusual extent to which typical travellers are actively avoiding the 737 Max planes.
Such filters are more commonly used by regular travellers with esoteric preferences around particular seat locations on various planes, rather than a broad-brush fear of an entire family of jets.
On Sunday, the FAA expanded its scrutiny of Boeing jets to another, older model of 737, the 737-900ER, which it says uses a similar door design.
“The safety of the flying public, not speed, will determine the timeline for returning these aircraft to service,” it said.
The original article contains 349 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 43%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
view more: next ›