The real reason Boeing's new plane crashed twice

  • Loading...
  • Published on:  Monday, April 15, 2019
  • This isn’t just a computer bug. It’s a scandal.

    Join the Video Lab!

    Two Boeing airplanes have fallen out of the air and crashed in the past six months. On the surface, this is a technical failure. But the real story is about a company's desire to beat their rival.

    Read about Boeing's efforts to get the 737 Max reinstated for flight here: is a news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Check out

    Watch our full video catalog:
    Follow Vox on Facebook:
    Or Twitter:


  • Josh Ye  (Apr 15, 2019))

    And as usual, they'll get away with it.

  • +Guybrush Threepwood so its normal if hundreds died like that? if ur family in one of the victim, can stil vocal like that?

  • +monolyth421 br carefull what u said, my brothers are pilot in indonesian and they know this boeing type is different and have something hide on its manual. they are not stupid like think moron

  • Ram Kumar  (May 5, 2019))

    Fixing a hardware problem with a software fix 🤔

  • Kristen Nerison  (19 hours ago))

    +abhishek gourav Do you know what RAM is? LOL

  • Kristen Nerison  (19 hours ago))

    Too much room for error and they didn't bother to provide the information needed to train the pilots properly.

  • binlee68  (May 3, 2019))

    Whoever designed this and kept quiet, needs to be put in jail.It's only fair to the dead... It's a crime

  • Breeze Thompson  (2 hours ago))

    Looks at all of y'all let's not forget that the FAA approved this aircraft....hell in a hand basket

  • Prometheus Venom  (4 hours ago))

    Gopr311 It was two crashes.

  • DP ie  (May 12, 2019))

    Boeing logic:1. Lets reuse an aircraft design from 1967 to save cost, put 2 huge new engines that does not really fit and thereby make the whole aircraft unstable. 2. Then we create a secret software MCAS to stabilize the aircraft. 3. To save even more cost we make the extremely critical MCAS system only rely on a single sensor. (Industry standard is normally 2 or as Airbus does, 3). 4. To make even more money, lets sell the sensor malfunction warning system as an option, but still not tell about ...

  • That looks like McDonnell Douglas logic back in the days when they were competing with Boeing (and even Lockheed Martin with their L-1011s) before the Boeing takeover. Such logic has led to the reason why their DC-10s keep on crashing - and they crashed more than the Boeing 737-MAX did.

  • MrHeesbeen  (13 hours ago))

    Nicely said DP. Very nice indeed - and probably 100% true as well !

  • Muhammad Rizki  (May 13, 2019))

    imagine when you buy a car, then suddenly your car crashes into a wall beyond your control. You ask the car manufacturer, then they say there is an auto driving system that they never told you that it exists. and here are still many people who defend Boeing's mistakes? good job

  • Tariq Usher  (16 hours ago))

    Yo that's what the American Airlines pilot said to that reporter on 60 mins.

  • Mohd Zul haimi Osman  (2 days ago))

    yeah i heard this somewhere in youtube

  • Daniel Jakes  (Apr 15, 2019))

    Oh look. People died because someone else wanted more money.

  • Yijing Shi  (1 hour ago))

    Imagine if we held governments to that standard. Hundreds of million dead in my parents generation alone.

  • martin joseph  (11 hours ago))

    the muricun dream is a failure.

  • Val Alonzo  (May 12, 2019))

    Vox left out the detail that the MCAS software that would apply the 'nose down' correction was dependent on a single sensor because having to build it to rely on 2 or more sensors (which would be safer) would require a re-certification program for all currently certified 737 pilots. Boeing decided to forego the safety feature of dual or redundant sensors as a marketing point to its customers. All critical systems in aircraft have redundant fail-safe features but this MCAS did not; when the single sen...

  • Prometheus Venom  (4 hours ago))

    I don’t trust Boeing

  • Michael O'Keefe  (1 day ago))

    Even worse than hiding the suicide software from the pilots was making its operation relentless. MCAS would dial in nose-down trim and the plane would dive. Then the pilots would bring the plane level and think they had countered the unexplained problem. So MCAS would trim the nose down again, and the pilots would have to correct. The pilots' fight against the suicide software would continue until MCAS had driven the nose-down attitude so far out of normal that the plane was unrecoverable.

  • TheOlJWShow  (May 6, 2019))

    "You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality" - Ayn Rand

  • C N  (1 day ago))

    Seems like Boeing didn't get that memo

  • chris webb  (May 19, 2019))

    +Noe Berengena from my understanding,ayn rand was a rothschild mistress who wrote an occultic vision of what the rothschild illuminati planned for the future,it was the rothschilds and the elitist cabal who together with the jesuits brought the curse of communism on the world, anyway thank you for putting me right!

  • Jessica Read  (May 15, 2019))

    Corporate murder/manslaughter is a capital offence.

  • Yijing Shi  (1 hour ago))

    Imagine if we held governments to that standard. Hundreds of million dead in my parents generation alone.

  • M Alom  (May 3, 2019))

    Wow, so a design error is being patched by a software. Even if the mcas system is less aggressive (the fix) , now the initial problem of stalling will come into play. This is even more scary then I thought.

  • Cilla Pemberton  (1 day ago))

    +C N Ethiopian pilot was not green by any means and their pilots are well trained. If American Southwest and United had a problem with extra training including simulator training, Ethiopian did not. They actually purchased a simulator.

  • Cilla Pemberton  (1 day ago))

    +S C You should let Boeing know this and that a fix is not necessary.