holeh moleh

I edited this whole thing in like 5 hours LOL

Even tho the mds are old, they’re still better than the 737Max. I’d take an md any day over the death trap Max

@@Jsharvey900 I mean yes and no.. Dc-9-80 frame and the 737 frame themselves are old...both competition to each other... The 737 frame is largely unchanged from its creating decades ago..thats why the max 8 had issues... They put larger engines on causing them to tweak how the engines sat under the wing changing the flight dynamics of the wing and not properly programming or informing the autopilot for the change Instead of simply changing the frame itself... Like making the landing gear higher... MD was already preparing a brand new airframe to replace the 80's Similar but different Thats what the 717 was originally. A change of the frame to accommodate for new tech... While yes boeing is at fault its not entirely unexpected when they are to reuse an ancient airframe Its like taking the original VW beetle and putting an electric motor in it... Its doable but would have some issues

@@protector22222 I completely agree with what your saying. The 737 airframe got much of its characteristics from the 727 and 707 which are even older than the md’s. And the engines on the 707 were jt3d’s while the 727 and the first generation 737-100’s & 200’s had the jt8d’s. I think what Boeing should have done is end the production & design of the 737 max concept & just have gone with the nma airframe. But due to Boeings shitty profits over safety corporate culture they went with the flawed 737max to compete with airbus. IMHO I think the unbuilt 787-3 would have been a great middle of the market aircraft but that’s not what happened

@@Jsharvey900 agreed its sad what Boeing became..i always liked md and airbus better but but i cant help but feel sorry

@@protector22222 my thoughts exactly

The technicians have found the fault and fixed it. No need to make it more complicated.

You're absolutely right, any component change that is in "the electronic or mechanical circuit" of gear stow/deploy requires a "gear swing", otherwise how would they know the gear will stow (original problem) after take-off ? they made it an illegal "in-flight ops check ".... ops check is specified in the maintenance manual and was not followed here. This is from a 29 year A&P Tech with 22 of those in line inspection, I would have filed an FAA whistle blower report for this ...