Of course the media and general public will only focus on the fact that
it is a Boeing and a 737, and not MX practices with the airline.
Boeing has been heavily criticised because they keep on adding things to the 737-concept to increase payload and range but there is a limit, and they have been pushing that limit for a while rather than diving into a broad new design on a white sheet of paper.
That may be the case, but the issue itself may not be Boeings responsibility. The 739-ER entered service in 2007. Depending on when Delta took possesion the aircract may have already been through 1 D
check.
How was it maintained the airlines from delivery to issue?
Though the MAX and the issue with the door plug have tainted the entire
737 line. Simmilar to the American DC10 crash in Chicago. The issue stemmed from impropper MX procedures that MD had on record of
discouraging.
As for the DC10, I've flown several DC10's ever since the very early 70-ties and never felt unsafe in them. Though here it's not just the Chicago crash of 1979. There had already been the Turkish Airlines DC10 in Ermenonville which preceded it and then followed the same year by the Air New Zealand crash at Mt. Erebus and the WesternAirlines crash at Mexico City landing at a closed runway. Bad luck because the Erebus and Mexico City crashes also were not technical but happened too close to eachother prompting the flight ban.
I think it was a reliable aircraft.
\%/@rd
Erebus and the WesternAirlines crash at Mexico City landing at a closedunway
Bad luck because the Erebus and Mexico City crashes also were nottechnical
Sysop: | Coz |
---|---|
Location: | Anoka, MN |
Users: | 2 |
Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
Uptime: | 41:04:45 |
Calls: | 346 |
Files: | 6,009 |
Messages: | 232,029 |