<story><title>Boeing proposal to avoid 737-MAX wiring shift does not win U.S. support</title><url>https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-737max/boeing-proposal-to-avoid-max-wiring-shift-does-not-win-u-s-support-idUSKBN20W018</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jlawer</author><text>Not an aircraft safety expert but I am curious if shifting the wires may not introduce more potential issues in existing planes, as the existing risk factor seems to be proven low (i.e. they are not requiring all 737-NG airframes to have the work)&lt;p&gt;I would imagine there is a non-trivial risk of a worker introducing a higher risk factor (drilling a little too far, creating metal shavings, putting too much weight on a support).&lt;p&gt;The rules were made for a reason, and Boeing should follow them. However I wonder if it would be safer to simply fine Boeing a similar cost to what the rectification would cost and grandfather it in for existing airframes.&lt;p&gt;I am just glad there are people more qualified to make this decision.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>rbanffy</author><text>Boeing wants to have a quick and cheap fix (no fix) and get a pass on international aviation norms based on the argument it&amp;#x27;s not &amp;quot;too unsafe&amp;quot; and that fixing it would risk making the 737 MAX fleet non-flightworthy.&lt;p&gt;Well... It&amp;#x27;s not like it&amp;#x27;s flightworthy right now. If Boeing can&amp;#x27;t offer a fix that makes the plane flightworthy, then the airplanes should be scrapped. Remember we only are experiencing this because Boeing wanted a plane of the same type rating as the 737 NG and opted for that instead of a new design (that would be in accordance to all current safety norms, unlike the MAX) because it&amp;#x27;d increase their profit.&lt;p&gt;Two planes fell from the sky, killing everyone on board, for no other reason than Boeing wanting to increase its profits.</text></comment>
<story><title>Boeing proposal to avoid 737-MAX wiring shift does not win U.S. support</title><url>https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-737max/boeing-proposal-to-avoid-max-wiring-shift-does-not-win-u-s-support-idUSKBN20W018</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jlawer</author><text>Not an aircraft safety expert but I am curious if shifting the wires may not introduce more potential issues in existing planes, as the existing risk factor seems to be proven low (i.e. they are not requiring all 737-NG airframes to have the work)&lt;p&gt;I would imagine there is a non-trivial risk of a worker introducing a higher risk factor (drilling a little too far, creating metal shavings, putting too much weight on a support).&lt;p&gt;The rules were made for a reason, and Boeing should follow them. However I wonder if it would be safer to simply fine Boeing a similar cost to what the rectification would cost and grandfather it in for existing airframes.&lt;p&gt;I am just glad there are people more qualified to make this decision.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>melq</author><text>I am also a non-expert, and am sympathetic to your argument, but I don’t think there’s any reason to believe that whatever fix is proposed wouldn’t account for the type of risks you are concerned about. All of the risks&amp;#x2F;concerns you mention would be relevant to any sort of mechanical work on an aircraft, and that is a field of engineering that on the whole has an impeccable record of safety and rigor. Again, not an expert, but from what I understand the issues with the 737 max were software&amp;#x2F;design related.</text></comment>