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

“I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 313 posts

Re: “I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

#81

Post by phkahler »

Scarblac wrote: post #75
aivisol wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was wondering the same. What is the logic behind this setup? That basically means that it is no better than having one sensor. Because if any one of them breaks, you have broken sensor active on next or following flight. Also I recall there was something said about Lion Air crash that the crew on the day before experienced some flight control problems which was not communicated to the crew involved in crash? Did th…

It's worse than having one sensor, the chance that one of two breaks is larger than that just a single one breaks. And by alternating you ensure that the broken sensor will be used.

Was talking to my flight instructor about twin engine planes. He was adamant that they were LESS safe than single engines because 1) you are twice as likely to have an engine failure and 2) the statistics indicate (non-intuitively) that an engine-out in a twin is more likely to lead to fatalities. He said the insurance companies used to think twins were safer but they have adjusted their rates after looking at actual data. I was fully on-board with point #1, but #2 was a surprise to me. I suppose that's what Burt Rutan tried to address with the Boomerang design.

Re: “I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

#82

Post by avip »

noncoml wrote: post #10
ptidhomme wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder how we, humans, collectively build extraordinary monuments while we individually rest on stilts My take is that we used to have brilliant engineers in the time where computational ressources were scarce (60s, 70 , 80s...), and they thought out their design thoroughly starting with a fucking paper and pencil. Aerospace indutries still rely on the designs from these times. But now engineering seems to be : l…

Brilliant engineers are still there. We haven’t gotten stupider as a species in 30 years. It’s the economics that changed. As people say “They don’t build stuff like they used too anymore”. First we started going cheap on the materials. Now we are going cheap on the engineers too. Why pay a senior “brilliant” engineer $$$$ when a fresh out of college “average” engineer can write the “same piece of code” for $$

>We haven’t gotten stupider as a species in 30 years

I'm honestly not sure that's true. On top of anecdotes (in my grandfather's generation, the norm was to fluently speak 3-4 languages), go ask any STEM prof. with 20+ mileage about the general math, science and logic literacy of students nowadays.

Re: “I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

#83

Post by [deleted] »

Nokinside wrote: post #43

Neither safety critical software nor critical aircraft engineering relies on the personal quality of people involved. The safety is build into the process and the organizational structure. Usually involving multiple organizations that check each other's work. What can happen is collapse of the process and regulatory capture. Boeing is able to cut corners because FAA is cutting corners. FAA whistleblowers have demonst…

[deleted]

Re: “I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

#84

Post by matt4077 »

llcoolv wrote: post #30

Well a decades-long oligopoly of two companies is similar to central planning in many aspects and his story indeed rings a lot of bells.

In the last 50 years, fatalities per miles travelled have been reduced by a factor of 100.

If that’s an oligopoly at work, I want to try a monopoly and see if it’s even better.

Re: “I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

#85

Post by matt4077 »

atemerev wrote: post #19
curiousDog wrote: post #7

Unpopular opinion, but had this happened at a company that hired H1-Bs, people would’ve jumped on the incompetent immigrants band-wagon immediately. This here is a fine example of the classic American work ethic devolving into sheer laziness. FWIW, I saw this happen at another Military contractor (Northrop Grumman) too!

There definitely are, or at least were, H-1Bs at Boeing. In the beginning of my career, I nearly became one myself (this was at the time when Russia and the US were on much friendlier terms), but I decided to steer into computational finance instead. Not all H-1Bs are incompetent or lazy. I still have good memories of my team back in Russia — some people there did contractor work for Boeing (documentation management…

“Not all H-1Bs are incompetent or lazy.”

You don’t say!

Re: “I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

#86

Post by navigatesol »

chippy wrote: post #33

"I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period and I can absolutely guarantee this happened." was in response to this comment: "I would be very surprised if in a few years from today a bunch of engineers don't testify that ample of warning was given to management about this. " Reddit doesn't make it easy to find what they replied to.

>"I would be very surprised if in a few years from today a bunch of engineers don't testify that ample of warning was given to management about this. "

I love this mentality that "managers" are the only people responsible, and that the people actually putting the thing together are not. It's the same with the bank scandals, or the VW scandal, or the Facebook scams; it's all the executive team! We were just peons following orders! We aren't responsible!

If you see a major safety issue or other concern, and report it to your superior, who does nothing, you're pretty weak if you shrug your shoulders and say, "I did my job!"

Re: “I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

#87

Post by foldr »

cjrp wrote: post #80
tus87 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. Use inputs from both AOA sensors, if they disagree by 5.5 degrees, disable MCAS. Great, and now you have the other problem the MCAS was supposed to mitigate (the tendency of the MAX to do backflips).

Although at least now you're trying to solve a more logical problem. Increasing angle of attack => counter with elevator, if not sufficient reduce thrust

Reducing thrust will increase angle of attack. The angle of attack is the angle of the wing relative to the airflow, not the angle of the plane relative to the horizon.

Re: “I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

#88

Post by craydandy »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #60
noncoml wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brilliant engineers are still there. We haven’t gotten stupider as a species in 30 years. It’s the economics that changed. As people say “They don’t build stuff like they used too anymore”. First we started going cheap on the materials. Now we are going cheap on the engineers too. Why pay a senior “brilliant” engineer $$$$ when a fresh out of college “average” engineer can write the “same piece of code” for $$

I think it may be that brilliant engineers still exist somewhere, but I suspect they're less likely to go into aerospace than in the 50s, 60s or 70s. Heck or even the 40s. Immediately after the war aerospace was red hot - there were countless countries and companies putting out new jet designs - both commercial and military. The competition and pace was intense and there was quite some cachet and public interest in a…

Best minds of our generation are trying to get more ads in front of people and trying to get more people to click on them.

Re: “I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

#89

Post by matt4077 »

curiousDog wrote: post #27
masonic wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

had this happened at a company that hired H1-Bs But they do, so I don't understand what point you seek to make. https://h1bdata.info/index.php?em=THE+BOEING+COMPANY

Usually, H1-Bs aren’t supposed to work on core pieces like aircraft design software and such. This stuff is sensitive and subject to US laws. I know this because I interned at a similar defense company and most H1-Bs were limited to back-office IT apps and such.

This doesn’t even begin to make sense. First of all, everything a US company works on is “subject to US laws”. Second, where clearance is required, there is a bright line defining the rules, no “isn’t supposed to...”. Third, security clearances are available for foreigners as well.

Re: “I worked at Boeing for about 1.5 years in the 2008-9 time period”

#90

Post by mannykannot »

aivisol wrote: post #69
ilogik wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Original MCAS system used only 1 AOA sensor and switched back and forth between the two after every flight. Who the fuck thought that was a good idea??? Let's make it 10x more difficult to detect that there is a problem.

I was wondering the same. What is the logic behind this setup? That basically means that it is no better than having one sensor. Because if any one of them breaks, you have broken sensor active on next or following flight. Also I recall there was something said about Lion Air crash that the crew on the day before experienced some flight control problems which was not communicated to the crew involved in crash? Did th…

This came up in an earlier discussion. Someone suggested that, in attempting to fix the problem reported from the previous flight, the relevant systems were shut down, and this reset the AofA sensor selection mechanism.
Post reply on HN