Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 344 posts

Re: US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

#131

Post by poof131 »

av_throwaway_19 wrote: post #68
stirlo wrote: post #15

It’s scary to think how complicit the FAA was in granting Boeing’s wish that this 30 year newer plane with substantially larger engines only required 2-3 hours of new training and said training was able to miss covering entire systems like MCAS. Now 350 people are dead, all the FAA can be thankful of is the dead are foreigners so it’s unlikely they’ll be held properly accountable.

It isn't just the FAA and Boeing. Where I work many of us have a "common type rating" between the A330 and A350 (-900 and -1000). While I commend Airbus for making them similar they are in no way common enough to justify the minuscule training course. Flying the A350 you get lots of brilliant features like brake-to-vacate, auto wing leveling during a crosswind landing (when you de-crab), differential flap setting in…

> My company's error rates have increased on the "common fleet" by almost triple.

That is Terrifying. It seems like the FAA has optimized for allowing the Manufacturers and Airlines to streamline changes and operations while slowly letting safety deteriorate. Perhaps these accidents will force what seems like a needed change in type ratings.

Re: US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

#132

Post by argd678 »

chopin wrote: post #130
argd678 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well they’re saying there is no data to indicate a systemic problem at this point, which at face value seems fair since very little is known. They tend to not jump to conclusions since they’ve had some pretty bad experiences in the past doing that.

So you are saying they don't have data to rely on, then? Finally it's the same information US and EU authorities rely on: Two incidents with planes in short order where the manufacturer withheld crucial information. I think it's fair to say that either the EASA or the FAA decision was politically motivated.

You can’t have a systemic problem based on withheld information after that information has been disclosed. It’s known at this point, so that means they don’t know what the issue is.

Re: US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

#133

Post by adwww »

adsadadsad wrote: post #42
curiousgal wrote: post #27

You are not allowed to bring more than 100ml of water because of safety concerns but we will fly you on on airplane model that has failed twice in 2 years of service.

I curse America everytime this inconveniences me, damn globalization of your silly rules..

I think this was actually a British rule, after MI5 disrupted a plot to bring down a transatlantic airliner with a peroxide bomb.

Re: US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

#134

Post by agumonkey »

_lbaq wrote: post #77
_cerv wrote: post #45

Some points from personal experience from working at Boeing, family working at Boeing, and a close friend on the flight line for the 737-8; - not everything is back from the Lion Air incident, but internally there was strong confidence that a lack of pilot familiarity with the adjusted mechanics of MCAS contributed to the disaster - reproducing these failures has been extremely hard and has required a lot of cooperat…

>Ethiopian Air are near the bottom This is ignorance, Ethiopian have been flying for 70 years and have an excellent safety record on par with most western airlines.

Could there be more non fatal incidents that only manufacturers and safety regulators are aware of ?

Re: US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

#135

Post by GreeningRun »

cmurf wrote: post #72
prostoalex wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While you may end up being entirely correct, it is too early to start finger-pointing before the investigations are finished. Neither Lion nor Ethiopian had stellar safety records, e.g. * https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/22/world/asia/lion-air-crash... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_accidents_a... The training hours should also be looked in the context of the total hours flown on that specific mode…

Rather important is that it was in fact considered to have substantially different enough behavior to warrant a required type rating for pilots, obviated due to the software abstraction provided by MCAS. However, this abstraction is effectively disabled when setting stabilizer trim to cutoff which is one of the later steps in the normal troubleshooting sequence. OK? So the airplane is in an emergency situation, with…

And the relevant HN link https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19373216

Re: US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

#136

Post by anoncoward111 »

FartyMcFarter wrote: post #123
briandear wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good grief, when was the last time Airbus grounded anything?

When was the last time that two brand new Airbus planes of the same new model crashed in similar ways?

Within 6 months of each other, out of only 400,000 flights!

The fact that Americans and other Westerners died onboard and US Govt is like "lalalalalalala keep flying" shows how little they care

Re: US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

#137

Post by bencoder »

Axsuul wrote: post #57

Quite frankly I think it’s a bit sensationalist for people and the media to point fingers at the FAA for making “irresponsible decisions” and being beholden to lobbyists while conveniently ignoring their track record. The FAA is notorious for their draconian ways which has become the impetus behind why air travel is now the safest mode of transportation today. In fact, there hasn't been a hull loss on US soil since 2…

> there hasn't been a hull loss on US soil since 2009

Until 3 weeks ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Air_Flight_3591

Re: US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

#138

Post by anoncoward111 »

briandear wrote: post #103
anoncoward111 wrote: post #17

"Profits over people! Go on then, we've got a plane to fly. We've put too many hours into this plane to turn back now! Don't show weakness!" - Boeing

Good grief, when was the last time Airbus grounded anything?

The French govt threw a pretty big fit about the Concorde, unwilling to admit it was "unsafe", but eventually gave up on the plane for "commercial" reasons. Aerospatiale was literally state-owned by the French.

Re: US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

#139

Post by askmike »

isostatic wrote: post #74
Svip wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Lion and Ethiopian Air are near the bottom when it comes to maintenance and follow up with Boeing Another commenter mentioned that Ethiopian Airline is considered Category 1 by the FAA, and is a member of the Star Alliance. Surely that indicates a decent track record? I'm not saying it _is_ the plane, but as the EASA Emergency Airworthiness Directive points out, while a connection between the two incidents cannot…

Quite. That doesn’t pass the sniff test. If it turns out this is Boeing’s fault, for the reasons suspected, and the FAA have staked their reputation on it - I fear for the future of airline safety.

It seems to be that the crash situations are way too complex to blame a single party. Since a chain of events (automatic systems, pilot actions) seems the be responsible for the crashes.

I imagine that besides what is being done to make sure this doesn't happen again, a lot of time is being spent on making sure that whatever changes, the crashes cannot be blamed on them.

Re: US refuses to ground Boeing 737 Max

#140

Post by Grue3 »

How improbable was two Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777-200ER flights crashing within five months? Should all Boeing 777-200ER airplanes be grounded? Or all Malaysian Airlines flights?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_370

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17

By the way it took years to figure out how exactly these crashed.

Post reply on HN