Originally Posted by
edmundronald
It could be argued that the whole point of certification is to allow safety standards to be racheted up and lessons learnt to be shared.
However as long as certification is used as a non-tariff barrier to competition on both sides of the Atlantic, the lessons won't be shared. The 737 couldn't be certified today - that's the whole point - so a competitor couldn't bring in a plane as cheap to fly as the 737 and comply with current rules - someone on the thread has remarked on that. And in Europe any FBW plane will be held to a higher standard today than Airbus when they started out.
Paradoxically this situation may make the industry safer beccause the new entrant is always held to a higher standard than the incumbent.
Political favoritism and corruption isn't going away soon. But managers at the FAA certifying the Max in a hurry without input from their own techs and Boeing delegates - that may be a step too far even for the FAA's brief to favor the domestic incumbencies, and on the far side of the line of personal criminal liability.
Edmund
1) 737 Max is not FBW.
2) Cite your source for "FAA certifying Max in a hurry". That's utter BS. EASA ceritified it also. Were they also in a hurry?
3) It does no airline any good that flys both types. Regardless of the the certification process, an AB or B going down is not only reflective of the manufacturer but also of the airline. It impacts both manufacturers.
What a crock.