Your Next Holiday......

[ToraToraTora]

You arrive at the airport and get checked in and are about to board when you look out of the window and see the plane is a 737 MAX. Would you get on it?
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/boeing-737-max-software-mcas-ethiopian-airlines-crash-a8891686.html
I don't care what assurances the CEO gives I want the pilot to be able to turn the software off if he needs to. 300+ people are dead because of poor software and an increasing arrogant belief that software is fool proof. I've worked all my life in software and there is no way I'd get on one of these.

[spathiphyllum]

Yes because i don't read a lot about flights and plane numbers so it'd mean nothing to me. I see a plane, i board it and away we go. I rarely discuss the specific model of the plane, cus i have no clue about em.

[bednobs]

in all honesty, I wouldn't know what one looked like, where to even look and I wouldn't have associated that name with the things that happened anyway so my answer would be yes

[Rockrose]

I wouldn’t know so it wouldn’t bother me

[ToraToraTora]

ok bednobs what if you knew it was a 737 max and prone to crashing?

[ToraToraTora]

for the purpose of this post, assume you know it's the 737 max, the one that has recently crashed twice.

[spathiphyllum]

Then no, i wouldn't want to get on it. However, i may not have a financial option, so would probably still get on it.

[Calicogirl]

I wouldn't know so ditto it wouldn't bother me, if I did know I might reconsider, but can't you experience malfunction in almost anything electrical and mechanical? I imagine each and every plane, car, train, boat etc has the capacity to kill under the right circumstances and you can get too wrapped up in alarmist reports about all sorts of things. That being said I'm not a software engineer and I'll happily bow to your superior knowledge in that regard TTT.

[spathiphyllum]

Assuming i could afford a fresh flight, i would wail my arms in the air, scream how unsafe it was that they were using this aircraft, then exit the plane with my chin held high assuming i was legally allowed to exit the plane onto the runway.

[spathiphyllum]

Fact is, like the consumption of cigarettes and meat, it's generally down to the suppler to stop making these things available. Airlines should not fly the 737 max but it's not up to me, a consumer, to tell them that.

[Bazile]

Just like driverless cars tora ?

Are you talking about all software and can the software be turned off in other planes ?

[Calicogirl]

Well if enough people vote with their feet they'll stop flying them. I would though, personally imagine that the pilots and crew would have to be happy in themselves that they were not jeopardising their own lives, I mean would a pilot really fly a plane he thought likely to crash?

[ToraToraTora]

calicogirl:"but can't you experience malfunction in almost anything electrical and mechanical?"
- yes but this was working as programmed, the software knew best it continually overrode the pilots and forced the plane down. This is not a malfunction in the normal sense, the plane was working as designed, the design and implementation was flawed.
" I imagine each and every plane, car, train, boat etc has the capacity to kill under the right circumstances and you can get too wrapped up in alarmist reports about all sorts of things. "
- I don't think the families of the 300+ dead in 2 crashes would consider this "alarmist".
This is a worrying shift in confidence in software and it's becoming more prevalent.

[youngmafbog]

I too have worked in Software all my life like TTT and I can confirm it is usually full of holes and never perfect.

The argument you wouldn't recognize a 737 Max is rather mute because people like me who can would talk about it so you would soon hear.

I already am aware of the major operators of these death traps so I wont be booking on them, if I saw one had been set for me I would not get on it. I have a fear of flying anyway after being hit by lightening years ago. (Yes I know it's ok had it all from my dear departed father who designed the things).

[youngmafbog]

And also being applied in the same vein to cars TTT. Worrying.

[237SJ]

Nearly did a while ago Silk Air from Singapore to Koh Samui. Went Bangkok Airways instead (on an A320 - mind you, I remember when pilots said they would never fly one of those)

[spathiphyllum]

I agree with TTT... A pilot (or cloud pilot? ayy thats a good un ay) has to be tested and examined to such scrutinising lengths because they are soly responsible for hundreds of lives at a time. Now the software has proven to be unreliable, why not examine the *** out of it? And whilst doing that, seez the flights of the same aircrafts software.

[ludwig]

I'm not nervous about flying at all, but I wouldn't be happy about getting on one of these at the moment.

[Calicogirl]

Who are the major operators out of interest YMB, we flay a lot so I'll avoid where possible since it's obviously something which bother you and TTT so much, and I know sod all about it x

[youngmafbog]

It's called testing Spath, and it will have undergone a lot of it. But as we have pointed out you can test software until you are blue in the face and still not iron all the bugs out of it. Going down every route of every program with all the different values of variables is impossible.

[youngmafbog]

I'm not going to write names Cal (in case it comes back on AB) but take a look at this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47523468