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

Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg Addresses the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Report

boeing.mediaroom.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 347 posts

Re: Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg Addresses the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Report

#161

Post by burfog »

supernova87a wrote: post #139
eruci wrote: post #117

The root problem seems to be FAA not having qualified engineers to thoroughly test the planes Boeing makes. Boeing pays better, so it hires the best engineers. FAA pays less so it gets second-grade engineers. And we all pay by flying in unsafe planes.

This has been a 50 year problem in the making, and whether it's for better or worse should be more carefully studied. Through WW2 and the proliferating age of defense contractors, the government (mostly defense department, but also civilian agencies) stood almost on equal footing with contractors in their ability to design, scope, and evaluate big projects. You would see scientists and in-house advisers at these depa…

Most government agencies are incapable of having a good workforce. There are strict rules for hiring, paying, and firing. These rules involve all sorts of political nonsense unrelated to job performance, such as veteran status and seniority. The high-performing workers will go where they will be appreciated and rewarded, and where they won't be surrounded by useless and awful people.

Absent a politically impossible change to the way the government handles employment, trimming the ranks is the only way to get rid of the harmful parasites that infest the typical government agency.

Re: Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg Addresses the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Report

#162

Post by sslayer »

jeemusu wrote: post #150
xiphias2 wrote: post #2

,,We remain confident in the fundamental safety of the 737 MAX.'' Am I irrational for not wanting to be on the first 1-2 years of flights on 737 MAX after it gets its software update?

After the problems with the 737 MAX and the 787 before that. I would avoid flying any Boeing aircraft in the first few years after it's deployed.

By that same logic, I take it you don't ride in cars or leave the house.

Re: Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg Addresses the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Report

#163

Post by cjbprime »

gpm wrote: post #99
cjbprime wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every MAX already had two AoA vanes, MCAS just wasn't hooked up to both in software.

Yes, two. The standard for critical systems is 3. Two isn't good for much, if they give different readings you don't know which to believe. Either that kills you like in real life, or it kills you because of the stall problem it was invented to fix. Edit: And yes, you could do something more sensible than what they did, but that doesn't "fix" the issue, it merely mitigates it to some extent.

This seems a little overstated. As I understand it the plane isn't actually aerodynamically unstable and isn't going to stall itself without the pilot pulling into it. The main issue seems to have been software to me.

I'm not saying they should avoid using a third sensor. It sounds like a good idea. But I'm not sure it's required for airworthiness, after you move from one to two.

Re: Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg Addresses the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Report

#164

Post by cm2187 »

munk-a wrote: post #60
cm2187 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually very rational. No one can declare something complex like a plane or a version of Windows to be "safe" or "secure". Only the absence of incident for a long period of time is an indication that it is.

You, as a non-expert, can absolutely take that stance - but when it comes to planes I am comfortable demanding that mechanical units can be provably safe and secure and that there is a reasonably exhaustive understanding of those unit interactions that assures safety at some point. There has been the mention that the customization of planes in a certain way exposed this error - that's the bullshit part. Planes are co…

I don't know. A lot of the problems that occured on planes were hard to predict even though they go through the rigorous process you mention. Battery fire on B787. Cargo door on DC10. Engine leaks on A380, etc. These are all quality/design issues that were not predicted.

Re: Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg Addresses the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Report

#165

Post by inferiorhuman »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #122
foobar1962 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it’s not as safe as previous 737s. The new engine and its position on the wing has changed the whole balance of the aircraft. Like putting a very big engine in a small car: it’s a different car.

It's a different car, but still arguably a safer one. Every part in the 737 MAX is either the same or newer and improved over the previous 737 series. While they should have gone through far more scrutiny in the certification process, the 737 MAX, viewed holistically, is a newer, more modern aircraft that will be safer than older aircraft once the kinks are fixed.

The parts that are the same can easily be a problem. Take, for instance, the emergency exits (this was about getting the NG certified in Japan almost 25 years ago BTW):

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/boeing-wins-first...

Re: Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg Addresses the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Report

#167

Post by potiuper »

ndespres wrote: post #55

I know better than to read between the lines on a press release like this, but can't help but notice that it falls far short of accepting responsibility for the problem. He admits that MCAS "activated in response to erroneous angle of attack information" but doesn't admit that this alone directly resulted in the crashes. Rather, he implies that this sets off a chain of events which the pilots are unable to deal with…

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

Re: Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg Addresses the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Report

#168

Post by objektif »

nikofeyn wrote: post #145
objektif wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you arrive at such a conclusion? Have you researched regulatory agencies in EU? For example they just blocked a meeger between two massive train manufacturer. Your argument sounds like a weak libertarian talking point.

regulatory capture is an event, threshold, inflection point, or whatever else you want to call it. it isn’t something that just poofs into existence as soon as a regulatory body is created. however, it does seem to be an end state or at least an evolutionary state of many agencies. for example, the faa in this case or the fcc. just because a regulatory agency did its job by protecting the pulic’s interest doesn’t mea…

My point is reverse also holds true just because some regulatory agencies was taken over or was allowed to be taken over corporations doe not mean that it is the end state of some sorts. Whe it becomes political propoganda is when you accept that it is the inevitable end state.

Re: Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg Addresses the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Report

#169

Post by objektif »

testpostpls wrote: post #140
objektif wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you arrive at such a conclusion? Have you researched regulatory agencies in EU? For example they just blocked a meeger between two massive train manufacturer. Your argument sounds like a weak libertarian talking point.

I owned a Volkswagen. Why wouldn’t regulatory capture be a thing everywhere?

Why is corruption in some countries is more than others? I dont know the answer but it is.

Re: Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg Addresses the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Report

#170

Post by GuiA »

AuthorizedCust wrote: post #149
supernova87a wrote: post #143

This has been a 50 year problem in the making, and whether it's for better or worse should be more carefully studied. Because here's my understanding of the history: Through WW2 and the proliferating age of defense contractors, the government (mostly defense department, but also civilian agencies) stood almost on equal footing with contractors in their ability to design, scope, and evaluate big projects. You would se…

Can you provide evidence the FAA lacks sufficient expertise?

It is unclear if they are lacking technical expertise, but they are certainly being significantly more lax than one would want a regulatory body to be.

https://www.npr.org/2019/04/04/709431845/faa-is-not-alone-in...

Post reply on HN