Re: One question
why did the FAA resist grounding the plane after the second fatal crash
Because the FAA was taking their "cue" from Boeing. Boeing instructed recommended to the FAA that the MAX was still safe to fly (after the 2nd crash), however, all-bets-are-off and the-fat-lady-has-sung when China immediate suspended all MAX operation from it's airspace and Japan followed a few hours later.
FAA had a tough choice to make: Cut your loses or be the world's laughing stock
Let's put it in a different perspective: IF the FAA didn't ground the MAX, the only place where the MAX would still be flying would be in America.
And in Rockhound's famous quote: You know we're sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon and a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder. Makes you feel good, doesn't it?
And if that doesn't give anyone a "warm fuzzy feeling", how about this: KC-46 delivery to Seymour Johnson delayed after debris found in fuel tank
My point is this: Boeing can't even do a simple quality control on a FUEL TANK of a single airframe. What are the chances they've "fully tested" the software?
My confidence level on the MAX will improve if the entire Boeing Board, President and VPs, including the upper echelon of the FAA are on a test flight of a MAX flying from the east coast to the west coast and back -- y'know, just to be sure.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
