Originally Posted by flensr

Someone in another forum posted up something about a little snippet of legislation that changes the certification criteria starting in 2023, requiring a completely new alerting system. So if the FAA can manage to drag their feet on the max7 (and max10) certification until past the end of the year (Fiscal year if I recall correctly, so October), Boeing has to certify it as a new aircraft under new rules due to retrofitting them with the new alerting system.

Here's a little article discussing some of the problem: https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/...erting-system/

My bet is that someone is trying to kill SWA and/or force Boeing to get rid of the max. Like the rest of our government, there is probably someone with a huge pile of money behind all this pushing to require the MAX cockpit and workflow to be completely redesigned.

While I'm 100% in favor of killing off the 737, this is not the right way to do it. My preference would be to do it through airspace management efficiency/modernization requirements that can't be complied with using obsolete aircraft, or through market forces. Not by moving the goalposts in this way right at the end of the re-certification process of an existing aircraft that has had a pretty darn good safety record in the US for the last couple of decades, but which suffered a huge political hit due to crashes by barely qualified crews and slipshod maintenance outside the US.

Originally Posted by symbian simian

Agree about congress.

However, EICAS should have been on the NG never mind the max. The moving goalposts was Boeing not putting it in the 737 in the NG 20 years ago when every single other similar sized airplane (redesign) had that. Accusing the FAA of dragging their feet is laughable after B building the same cockpit for 42 years.

Originally Posted by flensr

Market forces should dictate products on the market. Exactly how many 737s have crashed in the last 30 years due to not having EICAS? In the last 20? Last 10? What's the compelling reason to kill off a profitable product line for an American company? I agree that Boeing had a lot to answer for and to correct with the MAX certification, but requiring a new feature to be added in the absence of a compelling safety vulnerability is a violent shift away from our free market economic practices that could have economic costs in in the Billions. You just can't do that without a compelling reason, unless you're a greedy congresscritter stuffing your pockets full because we're all too collectively stupid to demand term limits.

Originally Posted by flensr

Market forces should dictate products on the market. Exactly how many 737s have crashed in the last 30 years due to not having EICAS? In the last 20? Last 10?

Originally Posted by EWRflyr

For engine start and After Start Checklist, usually I have the FO display the engines on his side since he’s starting with the Hydraulic and Flight Control displayed on my side. After that, I prefer the engines on my side for takeoff even when I’m the PM since it’s my decision to reject or not. Once airborne, the FO as the PF can have the engines back on his side while I get the big map display back. Talking with my FOs it seems this is the way many captains do it.

Originally Posted by flyprdu

Libertarianism and Aviation Safety do not mix. I can think of 2 crashes in recent history that an EICAS would have come in handy.

Originally Posted by 9mikemike

EICAS/ECAM require that a pilot display basic airmanship and that the cockpit crew display basic CRM for a minute or two to put the aircraft on a safe/stable trajectory. Neither crew were able to do that. Had they been able to do that then EICAS/ECAM would have been a tremendous tool to help sort out the issue and accomplish a safe return. The 737 needs at least one experienced pilot with strong hand flying/raw data pilot skills and a thorough systems knowledge to be a safe airplane.

Originally Posted by flyprdu

Part of the mishandling of the aircraft was due to confusion and lack of information. They simply did not know that the aircraft was trying to kill them.
Clacker and stick shaker at the same time. And nothing to indicate that anything was wrong with the aircraft.

Imagine how valuable an AOA FAULT caution message would be. Or a MCAS ACTIVE advisory message. Instead they were trying to read the 737 tea leaves while the aircraft hurled itself into the ground.

EICAS would have given those crews a chance. The 737 MAX has the largest screens of any narrowbody, and no room for EICAS. The airplane is a joke.