Originally Posted by
tdracer
Facts:
Hull loss rate (through 2019) for the 737NG series: 0.18/million departures. For the A320 series: 0.18/million departures.
Fatal hull loss rate (again through 2019) for the 737NG series: 0.08/million departures. For the A320 series: 0.08/million departures.
Now explain to me how the 737 is an unsafe design compared to the A320 series...
I didn’t say that it was less safe, just less refined. Perhaps if it had been a 737 in the Hudson things wouldn’t have gone quite so well. I was almost going to write “quite so swimmingly”, but you get the gist. Your stats also don’t reflect the body of incidents complicated by pilots trying to nut out non-normals using a six-pack, oddly written QRH and sometimes ambiguous dial design on the overhead.
How about the continued use of one horn for both take-off configuration warning and high cabin altitude? That one feature alone caused the loss of at least one aircraft.
Anyway, I think most of us are comparing the 737 that currently exists to the hypothetical aircraft that Boeing
could have built if it hadn’t messed up every recent program to the point of being unable to launch a new plane. Since that ship has sailed the reality is that the only choice for the market is the 320-321 NEO and the MAX. Airlines will weigh a myriad of factors in choosing, and none of them will be what the pilots think.