The Economics That Made Boeing Build the 737 Max

  • Published on Apr 30, 2019
  • Create your own website easily at
    Subscribe to Half as Interesting (The other channel from Wendover Productions):
    Get the Wendover Productions t-shirt:
    Support Wendover Productions on Patreon:
    Instagram: sam.from.wendover
    Twitter: WendoverPro
    Animation by Josh Sherrington
    Sound by Graham Haerther (
    Thumbnail by Simon Buckmaster
    Special thanks to Patreon supporters Adam Chelminski, Arkadiy Kulev, Charles Zilinski, Chris Allen, Connor J Smith, Daddy Donald, Etienne Dechamps, Eyal Matsliah, Hank Green, John & Becki Johnston, Kyle, MyNameIsKir, Plinio Correa, Qui Le, Remi_Scarlet, Tom Dooner, Tyler Hamm, and Vaughn Mudrick
    Music by
    Select footage courtesy the AP Archive
    Select footage courtesy Bigstock:
    Southwest 737 MAX landing and takeoff shots, Spirit a320 taxi shot courtesy PDX aviation

Comments • 3 881

  • Wendover Productions
    Wendover Productions  6 months ago +1889

    Hey all,
    I hope you find this video interesting. It is meant to provide an overview of what led to Boeing creating the 737 MAX rather than giving a comprehensive overview of the factors leading to the two crashes and the issues with MCAS so the explanation on that is quick. If you want to learn more about that, I would suggest starting with this article:
    Also, for the first time ever, we're taking topic suggestions for future Wendover videos. If we end up using your topic, we'll send you a free Wendover t-shirt in gratitude. Submit your ideas here:

    • Bob Daye
      Bob Daye 11 days ago

      @jec6613 On one plane that crashed the co-pilot had only 200 hours.

    • FooBar Maximus
      FooBar Maximus 13 days ago

      I found it interesting that someone with so little knowledge of commercial aircraft and aviation would have the balls to post a video about a commercial aircraft, posing as some type of "expert". And I emphasize the word "posing".

    • William & Fannie
      William & Fannie Month ago

      I love Boeing.The question we must ask..why didn't any Us carriers ( B737-max) crashed.
      Is it the mandated rest periods for the pilots?
      Is it the training ?
      Or is it Lion air and Ethiopian airlines flight Safety record.
      Is it cost cutting ?
      What is safety..An uncompromising approach to standard operating procedures.
      Another question to add to the list..Is it climate change?
      Is the weather affecting aircraft performance?

    • prajwal vaidya
      prajwal vaidya Month ago

      nice review .......Boeing should .....see this

  • Olivia Anna
    Olivia Anna 15 hours ago

    As much as I doubted it, I must say, the 737 max was the smoothest flight I ever had from the Midwest to California. I would still like to fly through all sorts of planes to see how they each perform.

  • Hussain Altajer
    Hussain Altajer 2 days ago

    7:10 Bahrain

  • Kolerick Bloodmoon
    Kolerick Bloodmoon 3 days ago

    hmmm, btw, if a plane that has more takeoff per day has a security problem precisely at the takeoff sequence, is it criminal to ignore said security problem?

  • John Jan Popovic
    John Jan Popovic 3 days ago

    Frankenstein sloppy aerodynamics created by accountants and NOT by engineers

  • Anton Metrinskiy
    Anton Metrinskiy 4 days ago

    You claim the greedy managers decided to upgrade old plane since its cheap and fast approach is the reason of failure? If yes, i disagree. This would be also the safest approach given the fact that the most of the plane systems are already flight proven. The problem is they did a new system MCAS and did poor risk management therefore spend not enough efforts to verify it works in all the circumstances i.e. failure cases. IMHO they could do pretty much the same with the completelly new plane with even higher probability.

  • DDS Software
    DDS Software 4 days ago +1

    if I wanted to know this I'd ask Boeing themselves.

  • tbwpiper
    tbwpiper 5 days ago

    Thanks Airbus employee for the most biased representation of the largest selling aircraft in the world. Perhaps there's a reason for that.

  • metromoppet
    metromoppet 6 days ago

    Hey! reign in the rhetoric! Don't for a second assume that you know what Any company assumed or not. State the facts or assume the liability of being sued for incorrectly dis informing the public at large. Get youre facts straight!!!

  • metromoppet
    metromoppet 6 days ago

    I was an apprentice when the airbus a320 launched, and when Boeing launched it's 737-300 . they are almost the same age! Incidentally, would you rather entrust your life to an electrical wire , or a mechanical connection physically uniting you and the control surface??? get an engineering degree before you start to elaborate on the merits of one system over another. Get your facts straight

  • Marcos Torrani
    Marcos Torrani 6 days ago

    I hope Muilenburg , Curly and Moe aviation die in hell!

  • Nicolas Zart
    Nicolas Zart 7 days ago

    Wow, I didn't know Boeing had raised its landing gear for the 737 MAX. And it still wasn't enough. Yikes, this gets worse as time goes by. Good point highlighting AA and airlines' negative roles in pressuring airframe makers into bad decisions. Ultimately, they do decide and investors have their share of the blame as well. It might take two to tango, in this case, it takes five, including the FGAA and Congress pushing for the ODA. The global geopolitical consequences are far greater than the tip of the iceberg.

  • Jarek Jellison
    Jarek Jellison 7 days ago

    That’s not a 777, that’s a 767

  • Marczyk15
    Marczyk15 8 days ago

    I think after all the shit that has happened this year with Boeing, I believe that they will loose some business for some time. Not to the point of near bankruptcy, but just reduced business.

  • Russ Gallagher
    Russ Gallagher 8 days ago

    What airline is going to market this PoS ever again? The lawsuits being drafted right now against Boeing will cumulatively be in the billions. Every airliner that bought or leased this PoS has lost money on it. Those are customers that are going to Airbus for their next fleet acquisitions. As I understand the situation from a layman's viewpoint, the plane would have been safe IF it had a new type certification and pilots were trained [and certified] on the new handling characteristics. But, instead Boeing kept the pilots completely in the dark about what the unseen 3rd pilot - "Otto" - would do when a faulty sensor signal occurred. Dumbasses! The CEO just got shitcanned and while he'll never go hungry, it's the least the worthless BoD could do.

  • Nolan Schmidt
    Nolan Schmidt 8 days ago

    Floppy diskskskskks how he say lah

  • barrie Williams
    barrie Williams 9 days ago

    All about money, money, money!!

  • Joe Elkerovic
    Joe Elkerovic 9 days ago

    airbus really played Boeing very well, they tricked them. Boeing was about to design a new aircraft with new modern characteristics that can outshine A320. The thing that can cost airbus a lot to create new plane. They knew that A320 is modern and can carry more upgrades and B737 not. So they pushed Boeing to decide on a hurry to catch up with them. Boeing could focused on making new model that can beat Airbus as they did for the A350 (airbus launched A350 years after B787 debut, this strategy gave airbus the opportunity improve more A350. Conclusion, airbus played mindgame with Boeing. They lose aircraft, money, marketshare and the most important TRUST. Boeing will never recover EVER (BTW i like Boeing)

  • Martin Korkos
    Martin Korkos 9 days ago

    Best thing is that the same people who do these decisions then they go on the stage and talk about innovations.I bet they use 50 years old cars,and at home they have 50 years old "mobile phones".

  • Martin Korkos
    Martin Korkos 9 days ago

    Result of not giving flying fuck is not having flying plane in the air.

  • Don Hawley
    Don Hawley 9 days ago

    Best aircraft ever built DC3 737 and 747 man will never reach perfection though except for the armchair criticize or’s that missed their calling to design aircraft!

  • fruit
    fruit 9 days ago

    Scrap the planes. Keep the engines

  • F R
    F R 9 days ago

    I do not really get the training argument. You believe that AA wanted Boeing to create another improved 737 to reduce training cost but at the same time they order Airbus planes for the first time ever?! I think its a lot more likely that Boeing just wanted to safe money by improving on an existing model rather than designing an entirely new airplane.
    Still really like your videos tho :D

  • God's Love
    God's Love 9 days ago +1

    Boeing knew what they did to these 737-800 MAX jets And murdered 346 passengers and crew members.

  • Genda Minoru
    Genda Minoru 9 days ago

    I am only :57 into this video and already there are too many false statements being told to bother to continue. I don't want to spend the rest of my night going over each one to prove point after point with references. I would just suggest that the author of the video do a significant amount of additional homework before putting such a video together. -- I came here thinking I would learn something. wrong place...

  • mzamroni
    mzamroni 10 days ago

    a380 was airbus' vietnam. 737 max is boeing's afghanistan

  • Tom Meyers
    Tom Meyers 10 days ago

    Boeing assumed no one would use an Uber driver to fly it.
    They learned from this.

  • William Dowda
    William Dowda 10 days ago

    The Wendover Productions video makes some observations about modern technology and implying that if modern technology is added to a new design then it is better. Fly by wire is good so far only time will tell it's safety. Check list is electronic trumps paper? What if a glitch wipes out part of the list? The 737 Max 8 bases off from a fifty year old design so what. The dynamics built into it are very much on par with Airbus. Safety is tilted in favor of the Max due to redundancy that can be applied by human power. Moving the engines did change the aerodynamics but within the margins of safety and maintaining stability. Bottom line is that you don't have to reinvent the wheel in order to make an efficient aircraft.

  • Pierre Bierre
    Pierre Bierre 11 days ago

    Worse than the 2 crashes, Boeing attempted to cover up the problem and keep the MAXes flying. It took the airlines and the FAA to counter Boeing's deceitful ploy.

    MISC BITS 11 days ago

    important to note: The 737MAX wouldn't be flying if Boeing hadn't already achieved regulatory capture of the FAA.
    Being able to mark your own homework leads to temptations to fudge things. Boeing and the FAA's reaction to whistleblowers calling out serious 737NG assembly malpractice (and paperwork falsification) issues showed it had already happened by 2004-2005.
    More worrying: This regulatory capture problem isn't isolated to one US sector. It's across the board and been getting worse since the mid 1980s - telcos being a blindingly obvious example.

  • Bob Daye
    Bob Daye 11 days ago

    Boeing built the 737 Max at the request and insistence of it's customers.
    The MCAS system was used previously & successfully but they removed the redundancy in the 737 Max & an easy override.

  • polygamous1 Sozou
    polygamous1 Sozou 12 days ago

    Toyota is the biggest cause their reliability record is second to non Boeing was one such company Not any more they may now spend 10X as much as they saved but their good name is now gone too big to fail? haven't we all heard this B4?

  • Innocent O.
    Innocent O. 12 days ago +1

    Truth is by the time the 737 maxes get flying again, they would be the safest planes ever. I'm looking forward to that time, to fly in one.

  • randy white
    randy white 12 days ago

    You dont fix an aerodynamic problem with software. You absolutely must start with an aerodynamically sound air frame and engine combination. Otherwise its going to bite you in the ass every time..... Its different in the case of a fighter, where you depend on that instability in order for the plane to maneuver quickly. There flight envelope is fairly narrow. But in the case of an airliner with a vastly wider envelope of operation, it damn well better start out stable. If it does not, and you use something like MCAS to fix the issue, any engineer will tell you that not only is the fight characteristics completely compromised in the case of failure of the augmentation system. But the air-frame and control surfaces are being subjected to constant loading...........It was a poor way, lazy, cheap way to try and fix the problem created by moving the engines. As it turned out it was not near as cheap as they thought it would be.......

  • Jonathan Luu
    Jonathan Luu 13 days ago

    I remember when I was little and it was really exciting to watch all the 737MAX promo videos because my dad works at Boeing and I thought it was really cool. Now it’s really sad to see the plane not flying. I remember being so excited for the first flight of it.

  • John Werner
    John Werner 13 days ago

    Beyond re-engineering a dated fuselage to modern larger higher by-pass engines the video mentioned one critical flaw that should have been obvious. That would be the attitude sensor, no redundant sensors. The industry already knew the problems associated with single, and even multiple, air speed sensors in relation to automation. How then did such a hidden robust automated flight correction system come to rely on a sole sensor? Cost? Hubris? Automation engineering euphoria? Apparently a tragic combination of all this intersecting with an original design poorly suited yet economically driven. Makes one wonder if any re-engineered fix is viable from a safety standpoint. The future of Boeing and the credibility of The FAA, as well as untold lives, hang in the balance. This brings the hovering cloud of transparency up. The public has not been allowed much information as to how the proposed safe re-introduction fo the 737-Max is progressing. Scant details of either good or bad save for the claim that the aircraft will not be allowed back in the air until all issues are addressed. The problem with this is the public believed that this kind of scrutiny was routinely addressed prior to any modern aircraft taking to the sky in the first place as far as commercial service goes. So, if and when, The FAA approves the plane to fly again will the paying public believe the plane is truly safe?

  • FooBar Maximus
    FooBar Maximus 13 days ago

    Obviously an Airbus shill. Fail.

  • FooBar Maximus
    FooBar Maximus 13 days ago

    Starts out by saying the Max was a brand new plane. 2 minutes later he's talking about it being a 40 year old design. Pick one dude. Did you not re-read your script after the first pass or ask someone to review it for you? The sad part is that some of the 1.8 million "viewers" are going to believe you.

  • FooBar Maximus
    FooBar Maximus 13 days ago

    The 737 - any version - is not a cheap, small plane. LOL I stopped after 3 minutes because this video is 99% bullshit. I don't know if it's wrong on purpose, or out of ignorance and stupidity. Doesn't matter, because it's just wrong. lol Dude, stop talking out your ass and stay with something you understand. How To Build a Dog House, perhaps? Shit like that. You are WAY out of your league here.

  • Schawn Lee
    Schawn Lee 16 days ago

    Geld frisst Hirn

  • nealenrick
    nealenrick 16 days ago

    Doom and gloom. Skip this claptrap.

  • Ian Wheeler
    Ian Wheeler 16 days ago

    Great analysis. Thanks for taking the time to put this out.

  • paul durao
    paul durao 17 days ago

    They outsourced engineering jobs to India for nine dollars an hour and fired the American engineers so the problem could not be reported

  • Paul Fernando
    Paul Fernando 17 days ago

    In my opinion the B737/MAX should never fly again period. It’s a flying coffin with a terrible design flaw. Whatever software updates they implement it will not cure the problems this aircraft has.
    I personally would not set foot on this aircraft if they paid me

  • Clinton Andersen
    Clinton Andersen 18 days ago +1

    The MAX is a modern plane? It is 80% the same as previous models to maintain its type certificate. It needs to be completely redesigned from the ground up.

  • Zubair Monzur
    Zubair Monzur 18 days ago

    boeing makes money and fu....ksss. the safety of passengers all around the world....

  • didier denis
    didier denis 19 days ago


  • Tango Zulu
    Tango Zulu 19 days ago

    737 Max-casualties
    737 No Go

    ISLIPPEDONMYBEANS ! 20 days ago +1

    You don't need to be an aerospace engineer to realise relying on a single sensor for such a critical system was and is a tremendously bad idea with potentially devastating consequences.

  • Abcd Efgh
    Abcd Efgh 20 days ago +1

    Damn watching this for the 2nd time, Boeing should have just fitted some turboprop engines, if they are reaalllyy crazy into fuel effeciency

    • Abcd Efgh
      Abcd Efgh 15 days ago

      @the protobe At the speeds they are travelling, i know jets are more efficient. But hey they can always slow it down...

    • the protobe
      the protobe 15 days ago

      jet engines are far more efficient?

  • HostilePancakes, the One and Only

    Guys, guys -- not to defend Boeing, they deserve every scorning they receive -- but the Airbus A330 had a similar issue. Look up Qantas Flight 72.

    • the protobe
      the protobe 15 days ago

      However, it did not result in 346 deaths, and Airbus was quick to fix this issue.

  • Smith Js
    Smith Js 21 day ago

    And that’s why planes from the 80s don’t look much different to today’s planes. Aviation industry sucks!

  • Joe Craven
    Joe Craven 23 days ago

    Nonsense. Don't waste your time.

  • Peter Mokry
    Peter Mokry 24 days ago

    If Boeing's investors had "not been happy" with the company embarking on a "long and expensive new aircraft design process", then Boeing had no business doing so in the first place. So now it's the not the fault of Boeing for cutting corners at the expense of lives, but rather the fault of Boeing's investors. This video reeks of damage control and redirecting blame to others. God forbid I ever have to invest in a company like Boeing. Aside from financially supporting a unscrupulous business company, I might even end up getting blamed for it.

  • An-T M
    An-T M 24 days ago +1

    Thank you for good information that I did not know about the cost decisions & AA pressure on BA.

  • An-T M
    An-T M 24 days ago

    Airbus subsidized by euro govts. BA must make it alone, therefore compromized. Playing field not level. Life/business isn't fair, so execs compromised & lost on this one.

  • 9876karthi
    9876karthi 24 days ago

    US fined VW $4.5 billion for malpractice no one died. Let see what the US govt does for Boeing...that killed so many people.

  • The secular humanist
    The secular humanist 25 days ago

    You traitor to square space!!

  • Sam Lutfi
    Sam Lutfi 25 days ago

    they should have rewinged the 737 to allow it to fit larger engines

    • the protobe
      the protobe 15 days ago

      you'd effectively change the aero of the plane and must take into account that the 737 has very minimal ground clearance

  • Sam Lutfi
    Sam Lutfi 25 days ago

    Ok everyone in the world now knows how to shut down the MCAS if it engages over a false reading. Let's get these birds back in the air

    • the protobe
      the protobe 15 days ago

      Not yet. Software errors and more faults are being found now that the 737max is being thoroughly searched. There is still politics and most importantly, safety regulations and clearances in aviation.