https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXMO0bhPhCw

I said this was a MCAS problem over a year ago & some clown on here told me "NO you're wrong" THe FAA knew it was an issue YET approvedthecertification of the Max anyway!

Kinda like Sikorsky's reported dry transmission run times. 
Cougar flight 91 accident. 

Prior to the initial certification tests, Sikorsky advertising material indicated that the S-92A had a 30-minute run dry capability. This advertising information was picked up by prospective operators, various trade journals, and internet sources. After failing to demonstrate that the MGB was capable of successfully completing the loss of lubricant test, Sikorsky changed its material to indicate that the S-92A had a "thirty minute safe operation following an oil leak" capability. The wording of this statement was close enough to the original wording, which specifically mentioned a run dry capability, to potentially lead some to believe that the S-92A had a 30-minute run dry capability. In addition, instances such as the 2007 marketing comparison of the EC225 and the S-92A identifying that both helicopters have a 30-minute run dry capability indicates that at least some Sikorsky marketing personnel were unaware that this capability had not been achieved during certification or that some older marketing material had not been updated following the loss of lubricant test. Even with limited distribution, this type of marketing information would serve to reinforce any perception that the S-92A had a 30-minute run dry MGB.

The broken stud was the cause. Did the FM tell you you could keep flying for 30 minutes after loss of MGB pressure? No. Who cares what some advertising said at one time. The max was delivered with known problems. Sikorsky did not know there was a problem with the studs until a failure occurred. It was not willful negligence, as was the case with max.

Exactly! How does what happened W/Igor have any comparision to the Max  W/Known problem?? The airlines that had fatal's also had lack of training too.

the FAA doesn't have the expertise to certify aircraft.  They depend on manufacturers empoyees to certify or at the very least explain the engineering and features of a new aircraft.  The agency is stuffed with bureaucrats with little or no experience in the areas that they oversee.

just talking out yourass

Never fly the first "new" series of aircraft, never take an untested drug.  Let others prove it first/

never fly the A model is urban myth oft repeated by amateurs.