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

Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 304 posts

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#41

Post by komali2 »

isostatic wrote: post #27
smaili wrote: post #6

It's very possible the "new information" may be what WSJ just reported: https://www.wsj.com/articles/pilot-of-crashed-ethiopian-airl... tldr - The pilot had reported flight-control problems and wanted to return to the airport

Non-paywall: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/13/ethiopian-airl... > The airline is planning to send the 737 Max 8 plane’s flight data recorder to Europe rather than the US for analysis, he said. That seems to be shocking news. Is it that they don't trust the FAA?

Also, why not both? Is the data in some... Non-copyable format? Is the physical device needed for some reason?

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#42

Post by mcv »

ncr100 wrote: post #29
jdsully wrote: post #19

This goes beyond aircraft at the moment. The NTSB and America in general used to lead. Now it seems the world is going to get on without them.

The US Government is sadly conflicted. FAA claiming there is "no evidence" of this aircraft having a systemic flaw. Meanwhile: Boeing brought $70B into Washington State's economy in one year. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeingrsquos-economic-... Boeing is a major defense contractor, providing transportation, weapons, and other supplies to the US Military.

From what I understand about the issue so far, the systemic flaw is not in the aircraft, but in the training of the pilots. Or the lack thereof. Boeing wanted the 737 MAX to be considered just another 737 that didn't require any new training, but there are apparently significant changes compared to other 737 models that leave pilots feeling ill-prepared.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#43

Post by dokein »

js2 wrote: post #20

Having read many commments on HN and elsewhere since the crash, I know I’m in the minority here when I say this but to me it seems like the US airlines and FAA are following their procedures, the same procedures that make the US airlines the safest in the world, while the rest of the world is, I don’t quite want to use the word panicking, but at least giving into pressure from people who aren’t aviation safety expert…

The level of certainty required for an action changes depending on the downside risk of action vs inaction. For example, if I am 20% certain that you have a pulmonary embolism, the correct action is to start treatment immediately; the risks of treatment are low relative the harm of waiting for further testing.

The FAA and NTSB are rightly very conservative and cautious with respect to approving new designs, since the risk of premature approval is high and the harm of waiting a bit longer for more information is low. But this is the opposite scenario - the risk of grounding planes is operational inconvenience, versus the harm of another plane crash.

The correct move here is to act even if they think the certainty is low.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#44

Post by dubbel »

matz1 wrote: post #35

By now its safe to assume that most pilot will know about this specific issue and know how to handle it. Well, except those Ethiopian pilot. I don't see reason to ban.

That feels like average software development mindset applied to airplanes to be honest.

An airplane nosediving on sensor malfunction from time to time is not acceptable behavior that could be considered fixed by telling the pilots to disable the autopilot.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#45

Post by vb6lives »

js2 wrote: post #20

Having read many commments on HN and elsewhere since the crash, I know I’m in the minority here when I say this but to me it seems like the US airlines and FAA are following their procedures, the same procedures that make the US airlines the safest in the world, while the rest of the world is, I don’t quite want to use the word panicking, but at least giving into pressure from people who aren’t aviation safety expert…

They have more than 5000 orders for this model of aircraft. Each one costs approx 120million. Which means there are approx $640 billion dollars on the line. It is imperative that Boeing keeps it's reputation and grounding flights would destroy it.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#46

Post by seren »

leesec wrote: post #30
seren wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I quickly skimmed online, 5000 737 Max have been ordered at about $100 millions a piece, so loss of revenue around $500 billions.

Well, unless they can fix the problem and prove they're viable again.

It is more a fantasy back of the envelope calculation than a real number, I can't imagine that Boeing won't be able to fix the issue.

In the end, it might be some penalty paid to some companies, and a slightly tarnished image, but people will keep buying and flying Boeings.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#47

Post by ww520 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #22

Let’s say these planes should have never been certified. What’s the financial damage to Boeing?

737 Max is their biggest order backlog. However, there's a lack of competition to Boeing (Airbus bowed out) so its stock has gone up and up. Not sure what will happen if 737 Max is sent back to the drawing board.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#48

Post by tapland »

skookum wrote: post #34
r-s wrote: post #9

Since its a ban on all Canadian airspace, will this effect American flights which pass over Canada? I imagine quite a few flights cross over the southern part of Ontario.

If it were just southern Ontario that would be one thing. Every flight from the US west coast to Europe spends half (from SEA) to a third (from SFO or LAX) of its flight time in Canadian airspace. However all such flights would likely already be affected due to the widespread European bans. I have no idea if any of those routes were served by 737 Max 8s.

2/3 of the fleet was reported grounded before Canada joined. I doubt many 737s pass Canada on their way to Europe but I found this:

> When it comes to riskier transatlantic and trans-continental routes, Boeing's new narrowbody 737-Max and Airbus's A320neo family can now be employed due to tremendous leaps in engine reliability and fuel efficiency. That has resulted in a considerable expansion of long-haul routes utilizing narrowbody airliners.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2018/08/16/transa...

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#49

Post by throwaway427 »

js2 wrote: post #20

Having read many commments on HN and elsewhere since the crash, I know I’m in the minority here when I say this but to me it seems like the US airlines and FAA are following their procedures, the same procedures that make the US airlines the safest in the world, while the rest of the world is, I don’t quite want to use the word panicking, but at least giving into pressure from people who aren’t aviation safety expert…

I agree and I don't think you deserve the downvotes. The FAA is an institution with a deep sense of safety first and independence from (and even dominion over) private industry.

They are also a body of experts, with more collective knowledge than any other similar body of domain experts in world.

If we believe in institutions of experts who study and make recommendations regarding complex systems, we owe it to the FAA to trust they are charting a prudent course based on the evidence they are gathering and analysis they are doing.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#50

Post by DoofusOfDeath »

mcv wrote: post #42
ncr100 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US Government is sadly conflicted. FAA claiming there is "no evidence" of this aircraft having a systemic flaw. Meanwhile: Boeing brought $70B into Washington State's economy in one year. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeingrsquos-economic-... Boeing is a major defense contractor, providing transportation, weapons, and other supplies to the US Military.

From what I understand about the issue so far, the systemic flaw is not in the aircraft, but in the training of the pilots. Or the lack thereof. Boeing wanted the 737 MAX to be considered just another 737 that didn't require any new training, but there are apparently significant changes compared to other 737 models that leave pilots feeling ill-prepared.

Perhaps I haven't followed the news closely enough, but wasn't the Ethiopian plane also spewing excess smoke at the time of the crash?

If so, wouldn't that suggest a failure mode other than the one that's viewed as a training issue?

Post reply on HN