Selling my F to step up

[gsxrpilot]

I would think if there was nothing wrong with the planes and the problem was just a couple of pilots who crashed it, they would be back in the air by now.

[DXB]

5 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

First, the 737 MAX crashed because the pilots couldn’t handle a software problem. You can argue that Boeing didn’t provide information or they weren’t trained properly, but the airplane was just fine until the pilots crashed it.
While Experimental doesn’t mean poor quality, there is no history of planes that you can look at and judge the quality. You buy an experimental, you are assuming the risk that the person(s) who built it and designed it was competent. With certified planes, they have gone through tests to insure some level of quality.


Tom

There's lots of detailed info out there now on the nature of the 737Max issue, and it's hard to look at the picture without concluding that it was a truly awful design of aircraft systems, irrespective of the compounding failures to inform pilots about those systems and train them to handle potential malfunctions in them.  

[MBDiagMan]

Has I been tied down or hangared?

[cujet]

On 10/20/2019 at 11:24 AM, Andy95W said:

I don't have the exact information, but I have definitely heard the airplanes weren't "just fine" before they crashed.  Hopefully Byron @jetdriven can chime in, he seemed to have good information regarding the Max.

Professional pilots are trained every 6 months to handle equipment failures. It's a sad situation all around that these pilots could not handle this particular failure. As with any failure, knowing how to deal with it is extremely important. Grabbing the trim wheel when you have a runaway trim is a great example. 

[Guest]

On 10/20/2019 at 8:22 AM, ArtVandelay said:

First, the 737 MAX crashed because the pilots couldn’t handle a software problem. You can argue that Boeing didn’t provide information or they weren’t trained properly, but the airplane was just fine until the pilots crashed it.
While Experimental doesn’t mean poor quality, there is no history of planes that you can look at and judge the quality. You buy an experimental, you are assuming the risk that the person(s) who built it and designed it was competent. With certified planes, they have gone through tests to insure some level of quality.


Tom

The volumes of AD’s and manufacturer S/B’s on so many airframes throws cold water on the assertion of quality and testing before release and sale to the public.

Clarence

[ArtVandelay]

1 hour ago, M20Doc said:

The volumes of AD’s and manufacturer S/B’s on so many airframes throws cold water on the assertion of quality and testing before release and sale to the public.

Clarence

Note, I said “With certified planes, they have gone through tests to insure some level of quality.”

I never said they were perfect. Also those ADs and SBs are on planes designed long before we could do computer simulations, at least in the small GA plane world. It’s hard to fault manufacturers for problems showing up in planes designed decades ago. 

Not sure if it’s true, but been told Cessna thought planes only had to last 15 years, like automobiles.

[Stephen]

On 10/21/2019 at 9:49 PM, MBDiagMan said:

Has I been tied down or hangared?

Yes, it has been almost exclusively hangared. When I have it on the ramp I have a cover on it. 

[Stephen]

For sale add with videos, picks and more detail: 

 

 

[Stephen]

 

@ziggy122

 

Hi Ziggly, (and any interested) cruise performance is answered in the for-sale thread linked above.