IT wasn't inevitable. There's nothing that's found to be unsafe about the aircraft. If anything it shows that airlines in other countries don't train their pilots properly. MCAS can be disabled by an easily visible switch directly in the cockpit and you can override it with manual trim control as well. The Lion aircraft that crashed before was having MCAS problems _FOUR_ flights repeatedly before the one that crashed. Third world aircraft maintenance combined with poor pilot training and non-idiot proof software made these disasters happen. It's not something that would happen in the US or any other first world country.
American pilots made complaints about MCAS as well.
> [It is] unconscionable that a manufacturer, the FAA, and the airlines would have pilots flying an airplane without adequately training, or even providing available resources and sufficient documentation to understand the highly complex systems that differentiate this aircraft from prior models
> The Flight Manual is inadequate and almost criminally insufficient
But we hear your "third world" and "idiot" dog whistles loud and clear.
I’m sure you’re willing to hop on a flight with one of these planes, but I’m not and I doubt the majority of people who’ve heard about it are. Canada saw the same sort of flight pattern dip in the new crash that happened to the old one. It’s only that the FAA administrator is a lobbyist of the air manufacturing industry that they didn’t follow suit.
> Third world aircraft maintenance combined with poor pilot training and non-idiot proof software made these disasters happen. It's not something that would happen in the US or any other first world country.
We're nowhere near having gathered enough facts to put forward claims like that.
Boeing said no training was required to save on money. If that was the point of this 737 revision, it stands to believe that the airlines would believe them.
