Hacker News Reader

No, there was no technical reason to design 737 MAX as it was designed, only regulatory reason. Regulations should help safety, not hinder it.

View on HN

Boeing was trying to build a new plane to fit the technical specs of a previously approved plane to save some cash.

Boeing's practice of cutting corners is why 300+ people are dead

The regulatory framework created the incentives and design constraints that led them to cut the corners, and also (partially) tied the FAA’s hands.

At least part of the blame lands on the authors of the regulations that led to this.

Clearly Boeing gets lots of blame too. As with most engineering screwups of this magnitude, multiple organizational failures contributed.

I agree, I was trying to write the same thing. The body should be redesigned for the bigger engine.

The regulatory failure was that the FAA let them get away with it, rather than the regulations themselves.

It's an interesting conundrum, because ultimately the FAA doesn't have more engineering expertise than Boeing so all they can do is force Boeing to prove that they have done their due diligence in confirming that the 737MAX can be operated under the same type rating as the 737NG.

I'm guessing the next step for FAA and EASA will be to revise the process under which this approval was granted to Boeing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com