Skip to content

Comment on Internal FAA Review Saw High Risk of 737 Max Crashesparent

Comments

Right but plane is not the only thing that matters. For instance Allegiant has no 737s (only Airbus equipment) but one of America’s worst safety records. Take care you’re not cutting off your nose to spite your face. Policy, training, hub locations, safety culture all matter too.

Your approach also fails to take into account the non-uniform distribution of accidents at take off and landing vs at cruise, so if you take a 3 stop itinerary on an Airbus-only airline with a worse safety track record, you may be at more risk than a nonstop on an even unpatched MAX.

[1] https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mcall.com/business/transpor...

When punishing an unrepentant company, you don’t look at statistics.

Yes, although my question remains: is it worth putting yourself at more risk than flying a MAX just to protest the risk of flying the MAX? I understand these things are irrational, however humans are notoriously bad at managing the incredibly low risk of something very bad happening. There's practically no chance of anything happening to you one way or the other and I think it's easy to forget that.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.