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

101–110 of 304 posts

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#101

Post by peteradio »

ineedasername wrote: post #87

Can someone chime in on the following-- One possible lead in cause has to do with either software or sensors related to Angle of Attack (AOT). For such an intermittent bug in a safety-critical application, how do you even begin fixing it when reproducibility might be a 1 in 500,000 likelihood? (Obviously I'm not in software testing, but I'm curious how one approaches this problem.)

Get somebody who isn't a shit head to review the design. I bet it sucks the big one in ways that would be apparent to a real professional.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#102

Post by jonstewart »

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?

Europe is also a lot closer to Addis Ababa than the US. Shouldn't the decision process be to send the black boxes to the closest facility that can process them?

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#103

Post by odorousrex »

tobinfricke wrote: post #90
odorousrex wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

KAYAK has reported that people in the USA are filtering out 737 MAX8/9 flights now in ever increasing numbers. (Orbitz and Expedia have followed KAYAK's lead and added filters to filter out this plane.) IMO, It's only a matter of time before public pressure forces either the government, or the carriers themselves to ground the planes.

> people in the USA are filtering out 737 MAX8/9 flights now Is that actually an option for Kayak? The usual sites I use to search for flights do not allow filtering on airplane type (except maybe "exclude prop planes").

After researching further, it appears they are adding it in response to this incident [1]

I had heard on my local NPR this morning that they had already done so, apparently they have just been receiving ever increasing requests for this feature.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-booking-hldg-kayak/kayak-...

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#104

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

Waterluvian wrote: post #77
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can an argument not be made for EU and China grounding the aircraft as well? The EU produces the only real competitor (Airbus A320), and China is in the middle of a 'Trade War' with the U.S and is trying to create a serious airplane manufacturer of their own. >Boeing is a major defense contractor, providing transportation, weapons, and other supplies to the US Military. I don't even know what that has to do with it,…

My feeling is that if there is irrational decisionmaking by the FAA in Boeing's favour, it's not because of some grand strategy but more because FAA people are friends with Boeing people and don't want to upset them before their next golf game or fundraising event or whatnot. Friends of friends and a few phone calls... Maybe I'm very wrong. I hope I am. But it's the sense I've gotten about American politics and regul…

>My feeling is that if there is irrational decisionmaking by the FAA in Boeing's favour

There seems to be a lot of feelings going around. I just don't get why they're only going against the U.S and Boeing, who obviously don't want another 737 Max crash if only because that would definitely call the entire program (and $500 billion) into question, when the EU hosts literally the only competitor to Boeing.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#105

Post by planteen »

jostmey wrote: post #62
mcv wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

My understanding is that the Boeing 737 max jet is unstable. Instead of redesigning a new plane from the ground up, Boeing placed the larger engines forward and upward on the wings. Boeing then tried to issue a "software patch" on a bad hardware design. Boeing came up with an automated system to seize control of the aircraft in the event that the flight became unstable and neglected to inform pilots of this new autom…

You are discounting the possibility of software controlling an aerodynamically unstable airplane safely. This has been happening for decades (see X-29, B-2, etc)

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#106

Post by magduf »

ww520 wrote: post #47
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.

Can they just get customers to shift over to a different model plane?

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#107

Post by ishan1121 »

jostmey wrote: post #62
mcv wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

My understanding is that the Boeing 737 max jet is unstable. Instead of redesigning a new plane from the ground up, Boeing placed the larger engines forward and upward on the wings. Boeing then tried to issue a "software patch" on a bad hardware design. Boeing came up with an automated system to seize control of the aircraft in the event that the flight became unstable and neglected to inform pilots of this new autom…

This is the conclusion I too could come up with. But whatever, I think these 2 737 crashes have pushed fully automatic flights a bit further.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#108

Post by shanth »

jostmey wrote: post #62
mcv wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

My understanding is that the Boeing 737 max jet is unstable. Instead of redesigning a new plane from the ground up, Boeing placed the larger engines forward and upward on the wings. Boeing then tried to issue a "software patch" on a bad hardware design. Boeing came up with an automated system to seize control of the aircraft in the event that the flight became unstable and neglected to inform pilots of this new autom…

If this turns out to be a software bug of dangling pointer... oh imagine that poor developer has to take all the karma of lost lives...

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#109

Post by tapland »

notJim wrote: post #100

Is it normal for there to be this kind of obsession about a particular plane following a crash? I feel like I've never seen this before. I literally saw someone on Twitter suggesting that you print out a page of the manual and hand it to your pilot…

No. It's because lack of pilot training for this new airplane has been suggested as a cause.

Re: Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8

#110

Post by mikeash »

peteradio wrote: post #91
throwaway427 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 FA…

Regulatory capture happens. Top level leadership starts overruling career professionals and then that dominion gets reversed. Not saying that's what has happened hear but boy did Boeing pull one over on the Faa with this planes release. And Faa leadership has incentive to hold the line. Faa fucked this up long ago.

An attitude of “damn the regulations, we need to help business” flows from the very top of this administration, too. That, and blatant corruption. How much has Boeing spent at Trump properties in the last few years?

The FAA should be independent but it doesn’t always work that way, and this sort of thing can tip the balance.

Post reply on HN