Well, since I mentioned Cessna and Lockheed as well as Boeing, and since all
the manufacturer does is supply data and the other guys do the
certification, which yahoos do you THINK I'm talking about.

No, nobody in their right senses puts a defective product on the market for
several reasons, ethics and lawsuits are two of them.

BTW, did you READ the letter the retired Boeing engineer wrote? Did you
understand what he was getting at?

Jim

--
"If you think you can, or think you can't, you're right."
--Henry Ford


wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 19, 12:15 pm, "RST Engineering"
wrote:
Certified? You mean by the same folks that certified the Cessnas with
fuel
caps that ingested water, the 737 with a goosey rudder, the 747 with
exploding fuel tanks, the Electras that shed wings every now and again,
the
727s that hit a critical angle of attack and started digging giant gopher
holes...

You've got more faith in those yahoos than I do. So far as I'm
concerned,
they couldn't find their hineys with both hands in a phone booth with a
GPS.

Jim

--
"If you think you can, or think you can't, you're right."
--Henry Ford





Which yahoo's are you referring to? If its the FAA, I can kind of see
your point, but if you mean Boeing, I have to say that knowing a lot
of the people working in the 787 personally, and from my past
association with the company, I don't believe that Boeing is going to
push a design into the field that is as unsafe as this guy is
claiming. Boeing typically designs with wider margins than Airbus
from what I have seen.

As for throwing rocks at the FAA, that is an easy target...

Dean