Originally Posted by
compressor stall
DO you have any idea of how much of the 737 does not meet the modern day safety standards and is grandfathered? That's probably worthy of a thread of its own.
Nearly 25 years ago Airbus complained to JAA about Boeing's grandfather rights that were letting the 737 get away with nearly half a dozen more seats than a comparable newly certified airliner could, all being equal.
You are of course right. My suggestion would be: Every freshly build plane must comply with the same rules, regardless being a new design or not. Improving a plane shouldn't imply regulatory disadvantages, that's having a rule that discourages improvement. If we all agreeded to let 737 fly all these years is because we think it is safe: then maybe some non-compliances of the 737 are too strict.
Or maybe that decision was a bad one all along. I'm not familiar with the safety record of the 737 vs other "compliant" airframes, the data must be there.
We must focus in safety, not focus in complying with safety related rules. Some of them are not ok, like grandfather rights. If some rules makes building planes objectively too expensive for what users are willing to pay for a ticket, corners will be cut and safety will diminish.