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

Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 407 posts

Re: Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

#231

Post by foldr »

computerex wrote: post #215
foldr wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not dynamic instability.

Yes it is: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/is-the-boeing-737-max... There are many sources that reach the same conclusion.

No, dynamic instability refers to planes that require constant control inputs to avoid departure from unstable flight.

There are no expert sources that describe the 737 MAX as dynamically unstable.

Not many people would be in a position to know this. Random aviation "experts" certainly aren't going to know the detailed flight envelope characteristics of a particular aircraft model.

Re: Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

#232

Post by rbanffy »

radcon wrote: post #40

Is anyone else extremely reluctant to fly on a Boeing plane after this? A lot of people say "It's no big deal, they just need to update the MCAS software" , but I see this entire situation as a sign of much deeper issues at Boeing, issues that can't be fixed with a simple software update and could affect every plane they make.

I'm not really worried. I prefer the A320 Neo because it's quieter and more comfortable, but the odds of dying due to an airplane accident are vanishingly small.

Even if my chances of dying on a 737 MAX are much higher than dying on a tried and true A340, they are probably around the same as me dying from pancreatic cancer and I don't get my pancreas checked regularly.

Re: Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

#233

Post by bdamm »

simongr3dal wrote: post #182
ReptileMan wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boing executives and their friends and families also fly on their planes.

Or maybe they just fly Learjet.

GP has a point. Flying on Boeing airplanes is something basically everyone does. Even if the executives themselves don't, they have parents, children, aunts, uncles, best men, grand-children, friends, children of friends, lawyers, and government contacts who do.

It's not like they're sitting by the gate sucking the blood of passengers. They're still delivering the safest method of transportation around, not only by distance, but also by time. I know some Boeing employees, they want to deliver great airplanes.

Re: Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

#234

Post by foldr »

computerex wrote: post #216
foldr wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not dynamic instability.

Are you going to provide any source for that? http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/is-the-boeing-737-max...

If (as appears to be the case) you regard any random person on the internet as a source, then sure:

https://www.quora.com/Are-any-commercial-airliners-other-tha...

Re: Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

#235

Post by computerex »

foldr wrote: post #231
computerex wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it is: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/is-the-boeing-737-max... There are many sources that reach the same conclusion.

No, dynamic instability refers to planes that require constant control inputs to avoid departure from unstable flight. There are no expert sources that describe the 737 MAX as dynamically unstable. Not many people would be in a position to know this. Random aviation "experts" certainly aren't going to know the detailed flight envelope characteristics of a particular aircraft model.

I literally linked 2 articles with expert opinion describing 737 Max airframe experiencing dynamic instability. You have not provided a single source and appears didn't even bother to look at my sources.

Hacker News is a place of discourse. If you think I'm wrong and my sources are wrong, point out specifically where and provide counter sources to validate and support your position.

No one is going to take your word for it.

Re: Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

#236

Post by foldr »

computerex wrote: post #235
foldr wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, dynamic instability refers to planes that require constant control inputs to avoid departure from unstable flight. There are no expert sources that describe the 737 MAX as dynamically unstable. Not many people would be in a position to know this. Random aviation "experts" certainly aren't going to know the detailed flight envelope characteristics of a particular aircraft model.

I literally linked 2 articles with expert opinion describing 737 Max airframe experiencing dynamic instability. You have not provided a single source and appears didn't even bother to look at my sources. Hacker News is a place of discourse. If you think I'm wrong and my sources are wrong, point out specifically where and provide counter sources to validate and support your position. No one is going to take your word…

The article you link in this thread reports comments from this person:

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

How would this person know in detail the aerodynamic characteristics of the 737 MAX?

The other article you link gives no source for its claim, expert or otherwise. You should also check the comment by Jake Brodsky on that one.

Re: Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

#237

Post by computerex »

foldr wrote: post #234
computerex wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you going to provide any source for that? http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/is-the-boeing-737-max...

If (as appears to be the case) you regard any random person on the internet as a source, then sure: https://www.quora.com/Are-any-commercial-airliners-other-tha...

The sources I linked to:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/is-the-boeing-737-max...

https://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/aviation/how-the-boeing-...

These are international, reputable organizations unlike a Quora thread. That would be like me using reddit as a primary source. Get real. I am going to believe the reputable news sources, over random people on the Internet.

Re: Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

#238

Post by yodsanklai »

CaptainZapp wrote: post #139
retSava wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The MCAS will likely be fixed in a way that makes it reliable and dependable. Boeing wouldn't dare anything else since there are a lot of eyes on them and how they handle this now. What worries me is not the MCAS (now), but what else might be lurking under the surface that Boeing pretends is not a problem. I don't feel confident that Boeing would accept the cost of grounding the fleet the next time something serious-…

I don't feel confident that Boeing would accept the cost of grounding the fleet the next time something serious-but-not-yet-crashing shows up. They wouldn't even ground the fleet if death and destruction occurs. Like they didn't do after the Lion Air crash. Even after the Ethiopian plane they tried hell and high water, including a call to the president, to not have the plane grounded. It's clear that to Boeing, their…

> It's clear that to Boeing, their numbers are more important than lives.

Isn't it the case by design for any corporation?

Re: Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

#239

Post by bdamm »

randolando wrote: post #164
radcon wrote: post #40

Is anyone else extremely reluctant to fly on a Boeing plane after this? A lot of people say "It's no big deal, they just need to update the MCAS software" , but I see this entire situation as a sign of much deeper issues at Boeing, issues that can't be fixed with a simple software update and could affect every plane they make.

Yes, and not just a Boeing plane. The happenings around the MAX make me reluctant to fly on new aircraft in general. As I understand, parts of the certification process had been outsourced by the FAA to 3rd parties with monetary incentive to accelerate approvals and downplay safety critical issues. That just seems to be asking for trouble and a step backwards in vetting the safety of new aircraft designs.

There's a movement towards industry building standards around how to meet the general requirements that aircraft need to meet.

However, that's a step back from the previous approach, where fundamental architecture concepts are needlessly cooked into the airframe regulations. As a simple example, under the previous approach, the law stated that light sport aircraft needed a reciprocating engine, and that reciprocating engine must meet XYZ standards. However that means you couldn't certify and sell an electric LSA in the United States. To certify such an aircraft would have required literally an act of congress.

Overall, this was generally holding back the industry a great deal. The new rules have been in place for a couple of years now (they came into effect just at the end of the Obama administration) and the result has been an enormous improvement in technology available to certified aircraft owners and designers.

So personally I don't think it is a step backwards. The MCAS/CG issue is unfortunate, but it's also part of an industry-wide adjustment that is in general leading to better airplanes.

Re: Europe says 737 Max won't fly until it completes it own design review

#240

Post by computerex »

foldr wrote: post #236
computerex wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally linked 2 articles with expert opinion describing 737 Max airframe experiencing dynamic instability. You have not provided a single source and appears didn't even bother to look at my sources. Hacker News is a place of discourse. If you think I'm wrong and my sources are wrong, point out specifically where and provide counter sources to validate and support your position. No one is going to take your word…

The article you link in this thread reports comments from this person: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Garrison How would this person know in detail the aerodynamic characteristics of the 737 MAX? The other article you link gives no source for its claim, expert or otherwise. You should also check the comment by Jake Brodsky on that one.

Ad hominem. Both articles were posted under the banner of internationally known and recognized news sources. Whereas in stark contrast you posted a quora thread with 3 replies.
Post reply on HN