AA only have 24 B737MAX-8, but over 200 B737NG-800....
I've had a few flights rescheduled over the years, most of the time it's down to some minor change in ground handleing times or some change in permitted routing (unless it's PaddyAir, then it's them having run out of crew again).

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

This time Charleston built Dreamliner. From NYT Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

Interesting report. Numerous issues but the 2 that really stand out are:

While inspecting a plane being prepared for delivery, Mr. Clayton, the technician currently at the plant, recently found chewing gum holding together part of a door’s trim. “It was not a safety issue, but it’s not what you want to present to a customer,” he said.

At the same time, Boeing said it was eliminating about a hundred quality control positions in North Charleston.

Those responsible in Boeing should face criminal consequences.

Money talks, safety walks.

South Carolina doled out nearly $1 billion in tax incentives, including $33 million to train local workers. Boeing pledged to create 3,800 jobs.

A pledge is one thing, did they actually provide that number of jobs?

The 'Money" would best be utilized in Defense Lawyers.

Much better spent on "retaining" those 100's of Quality Control jobs don't you think?

Much better if, considering the actual industry being discussed, those from the top to the bottom did their jobs efficiently & professionally rather than "chase" the almighty $.
Had they done so, many would still be alive today & no need for defence lawyers don't you think?

Much better if, considering the actual industry being discussed, those from the top to the bottom did their jobs efficiently & professionally rather than "chase" the almighty $.
Had they done so, many would still be alive today & no need for defence lawyers don't you think?

Question just answered in Message 1990952 and awaiting your response.

By quoting my post, one would actually see that your question was answered then followed by a further question. In your "need" for constant repetition, you failed to comprehend yet again.
Answer highlighted just in case you fail to see it. :-)
BTW, cannot see where a disagreement with your post was mentioned, in fact those 3 highlighted words actually agree with you. :-)

Your need to personally insult another poster is well known.

Insult
speak to or treat with disrespect or scornful abuse.

None seen in posts on this thread. What is seen is senseless repetition.

But did not both Boeing and the airline companies who bought the 737 Max 8 deliberaly chosed to neglect the new optional anti-stall system in order to save some bucks?
Many pilots was not even aware of the system and certainly have not tried it in a flight simulator

"chase" the almighty $.

The fiduciary duty to the shareholder.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a6700/top-automotive-engineering-failures-ford-pinto-fuel-tanks/

It appears that the resulting investigation(s)

Mueller report v 2.0 another complete and total vindication.

U.S. names experts to Boeing certification review panel

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao said on Monday she named four experts to a blue-ribbon committee to review the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) aircraft certification process after two deadly Boeing 737 MAX crashes killed nearly 350 people.

Chao said she was naming NASA’s former aviation safety program director Amy Pritchett and Gretchen Haskins, chief executive of HeliOffshore Ltd, an international expert in aviation safety and a former U.S. Air Force officer.

She also named Kenneth Hylander, chief safety officer at Amtrak and a former senior safety executive at Delta and Northwest airlines, and J. David Grizzle, chairman of the board of Republic Airways and a former FAA chief counsel.

The committee is “specifically tasked to review the 737 MAX 800 certification process from 2012 to 2017, and recommend improvements to the certification process.”

U.S. lawmakers have criticized the FAA’s program that allows Boeing Co and other manufacturers to oversee the process that ensures air worthiness and other vital safety aspects of new aircraft.

Chao said last month the panel would be co-chaired by retired Air Force General Darren McDew, the former head of the U.S. Transportation Command, and Lee Moak, a former president of the Air Line Pilots Association.

Federal prosecutors, the Transportation Department’s inspector general and lawmakers are investigating the FAA’s certification of the 737 MAX 8 aircraft. A joint review by 10 governmental air regulators is also set to start April 29.

I'm not quite sure what they expect to find. In the process of designing the airplane, only the manufacturer is flying it. While it is only on computers, these days - in the past they built models for wind tunnels or even full size for test pilots, at least on computer they aren't bending sheet metal. But once the design seems correct, a test airplane has to be made and flown to be sure the computer model is correct. (And all the jigs needed to build it must be designed and manufactured.) Once the bugs are out a couple more test air-frames are built. At least one is destructively tested to rate maximum G-loads and turbulence. Another will get flown behind another plane spraying water to test the ability to withstand weather including icing. The issue is at this point only the manufacturer can actually test because only they know what to test for, they know what bugs the computer models said might be there or were possible issues. The best that can be done is have an FAA guy on site to see that they aren't cheating, but in reality no manufacturer would dare because there would be no limit to the damages they would face after an accident. About the only thing the FAA could do is make sure that there is a test run for every system and make sure there is a paragraph in the flight manual from every system.

This time Charleston built Dreamliner. From NYT Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

Rather a damning article, and very scarily all too believable...

One killer from the culture reported there is the danger from metal shavings causing random damage/shorts to the electrical wiring for the flight systems...


The killer summary is:

... In North Charleston, the pace of production has quickened. Starting this year, Boeing is producing 14 Dreamliners a month, split between North Charleston and Everett, up from the previous 12. At the same time, Boeing said it was eliminating about a hundred quality control positions in North Charleston.

“They’re trying to shorten the time of manufacturing,” said Mr. Mester, the former mechanic. “But are you willing to sacrifice the safety of our product to maximize profit?”



We really do need to make people personally responsible, rather than allowing employees, managers, execs, hide behind a company name and company lawyers...

All in our only one world,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

We really do need to make people personally responsible, rather than allowing employees, managers, execs, hide behind a company name and company lawyers...

That would be nice, but the thread title tells one why it won't happen. :-(

We really do need to make people personally responsible, rather than allowing employees, managers, execs, hide behind a company name and company lawyers...

That would be nice, but the thread title tells one why it won't happen. :-(

Goes back much farther. A corporation is a grant from a king to be a little king. King's can do no wrong ergo corporations can do no wrong. Fiduciary duty to the shareholder. Absolute limitation on liability. These concepts are rooted in the antiquity of our legal systems. They are not going to change any time soon, no matter the supposed need.

Goes back much farther. A corporation is a grant from a king to be a little king. King's can do no wrong ergo corporations can do no wrong. Fiduciary duty to the shareholder. Absolute limitation on liability. These concepts are rooted in the antiquity of our legal systems

Gary these charters were limited. Hudson's Bay company could not go to India that was reserve for the East India company. Today corporations do whatever they feel like.

---

Goes back much farther. A corporation is a grant from a king to be a little king. King's can do no wrong ergo corporations can do no wrong. Fiduciary duty to the shareholder. Absolute limitation on liability. These concepts are rooted in the antiquity of our legal systems

Gary these charters were limited. Hudson's Bay company could not go to India that was reserve for the East India company. Today corporations do whatever they feel like.

Why, yes, much like a trademark today is limited in a specific product area. So if you grow Apples, Macintosh is yours to use. If you make computers Macintosh is yours to use. But and Apple farmer can't make computers.

We really do need to make people personally responsible, rather than allowing employees, managers, execs, hide behind a company name and company lawyers...

Won't work.
As an employee you are not the juridical person when being trialed.
And the employee has to been proved having an intent to not follow the companies rules and policies and therefore guilty of something, that is gaining something as a legal person.

Ah, the poor little darlings, moaning...
...about a 9% drop in revenues