Would you fly on a 737 MAX plane?

We don’t “breeze over” them…I think there’s often a bit of reflection but simply doing that doesn’t improve anything or add to flight safety.

As @backinthebox said upthread we tend, either in formal sessions or in our own time, to consider the accident reports (especially if it involves a type we fly) and try and learn lessons so there’s less chance of it happening to a flight we are on some time in the future.

Thank you! Tbh the type of plane doesn't make that much difference to me as in my head I am instantly stepping into danger by getting on one anyway 😂

I'm asking that of all the pilots who seem to breeze over those occurrences. I wondered how they viewed those deaths. They must know the horror the pilots experienced.

@Username12284949 @rathertimely Jet2 doesn't use Max's so you are fine. Boring 737s are absolutely safe and have been flying for decades, it's only the Max I would worry about

www.alternativeairlines.com/airlines-not-flying-boeing-737-max

I'm scared of flying too and also flying with Jet2 soon. I actually looked up the flight on flight radar a couple of weeks ago to see if it would be a 737 and it was, I can't lie my heart sunk. I'm trying to be rational though I know it's safe but I wish I could just get over my fear and enjoy it. The posts on here from @backinthebox are reassuring. I second the other poster who requested an AMA I would love to read more stuff like this from a pilot's perspective.

Where has anyone said that?

It was appalling and should never have happened.

It doesn't change the fact that now, in 2024, the aircraft safely operates thousands of flights per day. The causes have been thoroughly examined and addressed.

You are more likely to be hit by lightning than to be involved in a plane crash.

So the pilots and those on board the 737 MAX aircraft that crashed in 2018 and 2019 because of software they were unaware of - were just... guinea pigs? A learning opportunity? Collateral damage?

I second this. It's a really informative thread.

Regarding the death of the whistle-blower John Barnett. At the time of his death he wasn't actually bringing any new claims of negligence against Boeing, I believe. Rather, the litigation had been altered to argue against his treatment as a whistle-blower.

All his claims he had talked about through various mediums in previous years. They had been investigated (how thoroughly or truthfully is another matter) and at least 1 was upheld.

So at this point I don't really see what Boeing had to gain by killing him. Even if he'd won, I don't believe the payout would be a big deal for Boeing. If anything, his death attracts yet more attention.

Added to this, his family state he was suffering from PTSD and anxiety attacks as a result of his treatment by Boeing and they believe this led to his death.

Yes, there was the self-identified 'friend' who claims Barnett stated that if he died it wouldn't be suicide but who knows if this friend was genuine or if he did make this statement, when it was made.

I'm not completely adverse to the idea of massive corporations carrying out terrible acts to further their interests but in this case I don't really see what Boeing would have to gain by killing a man (in a public space in the daytime?) who'd already very publicly whistle-blown about their manufacturing processes.

Aaaaaaargh! What car are you driving to the airport in? I hear from my mate in the pub that Fords are the most likely car to crash, so make sure it’s not one of those. It was in the Sun too so it must be true. Seriously though, what aircraft would you rather fly in, and what is the basis that decision? I can find you a crash or other catastrophic situation on any type, if that helps!

OK. So instead of Googling, go back through this thread and read what the pilots have to say.

oh great, flying with Jet 2 in august and scared of flying. Just googled and they use mostly Boeing 😩

I don't know how you have the patience @backinthebox

Appreciate you and @notimagain posting in here. Hopefully OP and anyone else who is worried will listen to the experts rather than the uninformed reactionaries and the conspiracy theorists.

If they don't, ultimately they're the ones missing out on some wonderful travel experiences.

Once again, Wikipedia gives the layperson knowledge us mere pilots just cannot hope to compete with. 🙄 As pilots, we scrutinise every single major incident on our aircraft type (and often other types too.) We have regular formal education in ‘this is what went wrong here, this is how to avoid it.’ We are pretty familiar with the accidents that occur, and usually become very familiar with the circumstances surrounding hull losses especially on our own type. From the wiki-list quoted above, there are all manner of reasons for accidents, crashes and hull losses, including such things as hijacks, being shot down by Russian military and terrorists, weather related events such as windshear, aquaplaning off the runway in heavy rain or snow, bird strikes, poor maintenance by the airline, pilot error, and numerous other situations where the actual model of the aircraft is irrelevant. The reason the B737 seems to have such a large number of incidents is because it is by far the most common narrow body passenger jet of all time. There are more of them - so these things happen more. The 737 MAX has experienced 2 of those hundreds of hull losses, both of them over 5 years ago, and none since. Yes, the management at Boeing is dodgy as hell, and is certainly guilty of immoral practices, but to write off travelling on an entire aircraft type is certainly an overreaction.

You can find out pretty easily on the day by looking at Flight Radar, where you will see the exact aircraft operating your flight.

Most of the time simply looking out the window at the gate will suffice, as the model is usually visible on the aircraft. The registration number certainly will be (and is very easy to see) and you can look up the model from that.

If you're that concerned you can also ask the crew when boarding.

An aircraft engineer would know all this. Unless the person in this story is an engineer in a completely different field, in which case he has no right to claim any sort of expertise.

It would be with some irrational passenger waving a piece of paper around and demanding to get off.
It of course just wouldn't happen.

The most interesting thing from this thread is risk perception and how that influences choices and how perception is formed. We have posters doubling down with their limited knowledge against pilot's with 25 years experience, we have comments informed by Google in one of the most complex areas of safety management and one of the most regulated activities on the planet and we seem to accept that a multi national company just kills whistleblowers, without any proof. Unless you are an expert you can not understand aviation safety. Everything is what you selectively hear or are told. So we have no choice but to trust our regulators. We can make choices, but they are not really rational, just instinctive.

I flew the 747 and the 777 and I’m struggling with “ 30 777 crashes.”

Haven’t got time to run off and check, certainly not for the 747 (but from top of head a few freighters have been lost.)

Thinking in terms of complete hull losses and/or fatalities for the 777

• Korean at SFO, the two MH aircraft (at least one down to hostile act), and BA at Heathrow…

What are the one’s I’m missing?

Be wary with broad brush analysis.

The 737 has been around a heck of a lot longer than the A320 family, it goes way back to the 60s so over it’s life as a family it has been exposed to a much less forgiving aviation environment than, say the A320…frankly over 60 ish years you’d expect the generic 737 family to have suffered quite a few hull losses.

That’s not been helped by the fact that over the years the early 737s migrated to multiple operators with differing standards (engineering and operating) all over the world…the A320 so far at least not so much though.

That's for all 737s, which have been in existence since the late 1960s. That figure of 5,779 fatalities is across almost 60 years. Come on.

The 737 Max 8 is a newer model and has not had any crashes since the two in 2018 that caused the grounding.

Do you think Airbus have never had fatal crashes?

If you treated travelling in a car in this way you'd never be able to go anywhere.

I think if you’re worried about the risk of a plane crashing it’s best not to fly on any plane, the risk is minuscule but it’s always there are you never know if you will be that one in a million. I don’t think flying on a 737 Max makes the risk significantly greater than flying on any other plane, either you’re willing to risk flying or you’re not really. Imagine purposefully trying to avoid the 737 Max, consciously choosing another plane and how it will feel in those last seconds before impact if the plane you chose to be safer ended up being the one that crashed with you on it.

Agreed.

> " Yes. There's been 69 Boeing 747 crashes. 30 x 777 crashes. "

Also, yes the 747 has had accidents, but this is for all 747 models.

Yet we are really discussing the 737 Max which is the one with a poor record.

This is sobering:

" In 2021, Boeing paid US$2.5 billion in penalties and compensation to settle the DOJ's fraud conspiracy case against the company.[10][11]Further investigations revealed the FAA and Boeing had colluded on recertification test flights and attempted to cover up important information, and that the FAA had retaliated against whistleblowers"

source https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX

I think it's more about the recent crashes where pilots were dealing with unknown issues caused by software.

Plus that door flying off midflight...

Accidents may happen, but this goes beyond that.

Please can you provide the source for your claim?

What a self centred little princess

Yes. There's been 69 Boeing 747 crashes. 30 777 crashes.

I've flown on both countless times and I wouldn't give it a second thought.

You may as well ask whether you'd travel in a Land Rover given there's been several thousand crashes in them.