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

241–250 of 407 posts

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

#241

Post by paganel »

alistairSH wrote: post #200
bilbo0s wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flying is safe. No question. And you can make it that much more safe by doing yourself a favor and avoiding the 737 MAX.

What is statistically more dangerous... 1. Flying a 737 Max on a major carrier 2. Flying a commuter plane with a regional carrier 3. Flying an Airbus with a 2nd tier international carrier I have no idea, but I suspect they're all still orders of magnitude safer than driving.

This is a non-sequitur, we were not comparing the 737 MAX with driving but with other planes. It looks like other planes are an order of magnitude safer than the 737 MAX and as such potential airplane clients should avoid the 737 MAX as much as possible

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

#242

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...

And two can play at that game:

https://www.quora.com/How-long-do-you-think-it-will-be-befor...

https://www.quora.com/Should-divergent-instability-be-allowe...

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

#243

Post by ArcanianArcher »

yodsanklai wrote: post #238
CaptainZapp wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Therein lies a problem that many people don't want to address

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

#244

Post by Obi_Juan_Kenobi »

ummonk wrote: post #209
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.

Don't mind any of the planes that aren't 737-Max or 787. Definitely reluctant to fly 737-Max anytime soon even after it has been approved. As for the 787, while I have a little bit of hesitancy, I figure it's been around long enough that we at least know it is safer than driving a car, so probably okay to ride in it, although it might not be as safe as other planes.

I'll roll the dice to get that sweet, sweet 6000 ft. cabin pressure on the 787.

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

#245

Post by ulfw »

magduf wrote: post #230
ulfw wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish Boeing would rather FINALLY do the right thing, take their billion dollar earnings and putting it into R&D to build a new, modern 2020s design aircraft into the sky for the next decades rather than it's umpteenth warm-up of their 1960s design.

Boeing is an American corporation, so they're not going to do that. That kind of strategy doesn't yield maximum next-quarter profits.

Very very true. No one builds long term value anymore. All chase the mighty 3 month cycle of doom!

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

#246

Post by ddingus »

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.

Maybe. Not right now as we've grounded the problem child. There are lots of great airplanes doing their job right now.

I'm reluctant to continue the self regulation. The EU is doing it's own design review.

Awesome. They will find a lot of ugly, and some of that will be debatable.

Have those debates.

All companies involved will see some costs. But, they will also see opportunity as they work through this stuff.

We benefit.

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

#247

Post by [deleted] »

foldr wrote: post #64
wycy wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be extremely hesitant to ever fly on a 737 MAX again because, even when MCAS is fixed, software is being used to fix a fundamental physics problem. I'd fly on other Boeing planes without worry, though.

This is not the case. The 737 MAX has different handling characteristics to a regular 737, but there is nothing inherently unsafe about those handling characteristics. The purpose of MCAS was just to prevent the need for pilots to recertify by masking the difference.

[deleted]

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

#248

Post by Waterluvian »

rbanffy wrote: post #232
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.

I hear you and I'm mostly just using your comment to share my thoughts. I've learned not to treat the statistics because that doesn't work at the human level.

Fear, anxiety, apprehension, are legitimate human conditions regardless of how irrational they are. And regardless of what the numbers say, there's an effective treatment available: filter flights by plane type.

I personally don't care. But my wife does, and therefore I do care after all.

Took me too many years to learn this fact about coexisting with others: addressing how they feel is almost always easier than trying to convince them not to feel that way.

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

#249

Post by cjbprime »

alistairSH wrote: post #200
bilbo0s wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flying is safe. No question. And you can make it that much more safe by doing yourself a favor and avoiding the 737 MAX.

What is statistically more dangerous... 1. Flying a 737 Max on a major carrier 2. Flying a commuter plane with a regional carrier 3. Flying an Airbus with a 2nd tier international carrier I have no idea, but I suspect they're all still orders of magnitude safer than driving.

Ethiopian is a major carrier with a previously stellar safety record.

The MAX has suffered hull losses at around 100x the rate per flight of baseline airline travel, so I suppose it's the most dangerous in your list.

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

#250

Post by guitarbill »

rossdavidh wrote: post #173
nocturnial wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how are they going to be held accountable? They already have several contracts which states victims can't sue the company. Maybe not everyone signed, but then it's about how much they can pay their lawyers.

Really, all you need is for the CEO and perhaps the board of directors to lose their jobs. Sure, they'd get golden parachutes and it wouldn't seem sufficient, but people in positions of power don't like losing their position. If you did that, it would be sufficient to make the next CEO (and board) think twice about doing something similar. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be happening.

We like imagine a big conspiracy, or pressure from the top because of corporate greed. And sure, CEOs and the board called leaders for a reason, and ultimately they're responsible, not just for culture, but the whole operation.

While I can't speak for the aviation industry, in my experience lower and middle management is just as much at fault, if not more. That's often where the real cowards sit, tyrannizing downwards and lying upwards. I'm not saying upper management is faultless, but presumably they aren't the only ones.

Post reply on HN