How can safety be an “option “ on a plane worth tens of millions. Welcome to todays World where the pursuit of profit turns normal people into cretins. Then people preach about not needing regulations. The only people who need regulations are humans, because, given the opportunity, they will lie, cheat and steal to get ahead. Not all, but enough to really count.

Boeing will raise the price a few thousand and install these two things as standard from now on. Seems clear to me that pilot training needs to be improved to move from the 737NG to any MAX version.

The real crime is that the anomaly caused by the bad sensor was noted on the Lion Air and they kept it in service, only to crash the next day.

Pilots Fly! They just don’t just push buttons and turn nobs. Hands on, remember it’s “ Maned Flight”, back to the basics boys and girls. These's strikes where “Pilot Error”.

MCAS operates only during manual ("hand flying") flight. There are three ways to keep MCAS from being active. Using the yolk mounted trim switches de-activates MCAS for five seconds, engaging the autopilot (which uses information provided by both AOA's) or using the stabilizer trim cutout switches to remove electric power to the stabilizer drive motors (as the pilots would do in a runaway stabilizer non-normal). Boeing's main fault in this is to not be emphatic with airlines to incorporate MCAS into their training curricula.

So they cheaped out and didn’t buy the options. Blame the airline “if” they spec’d out the aircraft like most inadequately trained/knowledgeable carriers do? Probably would have located MH370 within hours if the airline had subscribed to ACARS monitoring or had real time Flight dispatch tracking/following? Some other poster asked the question whether the stick shaker activated as well as MCAS, haven’t seen a reply yet?

MACAS should be an option, and those two options should be mandatory Prerequisite before MACAS option.

Some of you guys who are hammering Boeing might want to take a closer read of the article.

Yes - sadly the 2 safety features are optional. They are not required by the FAA on any aircraft right now. Consequently - many do not even have it - even aside from the 737. Obviously there is a problem with these sensors - and that's a whole 'nother issue - as seeing they aren't failing on other aircraft with MCAS. The manufacturer of those sensors is about to have a very bad day if that's ere this all RCAs back to.

However -

The two airlines with crashed planes did not buy these safety options. Lion Air is very much a budget airline - so that's not completely surprising.

However - in the US - Southwest - another budget airline - DID buy the option. So did American.
United however - did not.

Think about this for a moment.

Shareholder profits and senior officer stock options relying on increased profits

Ok, I'm not a pilot or an aircraft engineer expert,but I have a good deal of self-learned knowledge of aircraft systems and how to correct a stall or unknown angle of attack, but can somebody answer this question for me? Why can't a pilot just immediately flip a switch to turn off the automatic stall protection software to (hopefully) avoid a computer commanded stall avert nosedive? Don't pilots have an option to immediately switch to manual flight operation? Do budget airlines, and many foreign airlines teach, and insist that pilots be certified to manually FLY the aircraft, instead of being trained only to operate the computer software? THAT is scary!

You get what you pay for. Don't blame Boeing, blame Ryan Air and Ethiopian Air management.

there is no comparison between purchasing a car with "options",and purchasing a large aircraft with "options"..options are leather versus cloth seats,a 4 cylinder versus a 6 cylinder engine,or an automatic or a stick shift..safety features on vehicles are mandated such as air bags..an aircraft that carries hundreds of passengers daily,should not be sold with "options" except maybe the interior decorations and seating..as far as the instrumentation ,radar,computer programs, and whatever else makes for safe flying ,its a given those should not be an "extra",and would be updated in a new model aircraft..its also a given that pilots should have simulator training on newer and updated aircraft,and not just a few hours on an i pad, as it is said was done with the boeing 737 max..boeing as the manufacturer should be held responsible for not explaining fully and totally how the upgrades,including computer programs,in this aircraft,are operated,and not emphasizing the importance of training on the specifics..

Does anyone remember when rear seats and bumpers were options on cars? Later on seat belts were options. It is just taking time for aviation to catch up.

As someone who is looking for a replacement car on line. I see the options air bags are listed as "up grades". Does any car maker has any option has an air bag option. I suspect NO. I'm no expert.

I don't believe ehat I am reading, to make this plane a SAFE plane to fly BOEING has it as an OPTION? Give me a break. It will be on future plabes as STANDARD, are you kidding me? How stupid does BOEING and the FAA think we are to accept BS as this, clearing BOEING as neglegence, and we have STUPID readers going along with this BS brcsuse it didn't happen to a plane load of AMERICANS, as if others lives diesn't matter.

Way to go Boeing. Making safety features optional and charging for them? Please. There are human beings flying on these machines you know. In response to a silly comment here regarding automobiles, even the cheapest cars include safety features like airbags, anti-lock brakes, etc. I have always praised Boeing and believed that it was the best aircraft manufacturer in the world, but now I'm having doubts. The incompetent executives at Boeing had better wise up and fast.

the airline is paying roll royce prices , so trick it out with everything necessary to potential flight hazards. This is silly thinking- "extras???"

The NY Times' headline could just as correctly read "Doomed Boeing Jets Lacked 2 Safety Features Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines Refused To Pay For". Or if space is tight, "...Features Airlines Refused To Pay For."

But no. Blame America First is the NY Times' MO.

!) The FAA should be renamed the AAA. The Airline Aviation Administration. They seem to work more closely with the airlines and manufacturers than for the the flying public. They work more closely with them to increase the profitability of the industry. Congress does nothing stop the AAA because of the "kick backs" that they receive for elections. The AAA approved the MCAS and the design changes by granting Boeing the authority to make the changes according to another article that I read. It is right for the DOJ and the IG for the FAA to investigate the short comings of the FAA. President Trump has named another insider to head the FAA which is bad for the public.
2) I was a failure analysis for a well known company and the data for the AOA on the first crash indicate that there was excessive ESD entering the left side AOA data to the computer. The computer interpreted the data as a high angle of the nose and naturally tried to prevent a stall. The records show that the AOA vane was replaced before the crash and the static test was good. The computer did show that there was a problem during taxi to take off that ESD was present in the readings. Boeing should request all data from the grounded airplanes to look for ESD signals of the left side data. There is a mechanical flaw that allows ESD to enter the vane system wiring. This flaw may only be on a few planes but the process would clear the airplanes. The problem may be a hardware intrusion into the left vane cabling.