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

EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

simpleflying.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 122 posts

Re: EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

#81

Post by magduf »

vinay427 wrote: post #58
neuronic wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The era of American exceptionalism is coming to an end and Americans are screeching from the pain. As technology leader and economic powerhouse, the US has left its cultural, political and financial footprint in Europe in the past decades but the extent of that influence is now downgraded. And the reason is inner decay. When the wall came down in Eastern Germany, we tuned into Knight Rider and MacGyver. The A-Team an…

> In the US, I was billed $800 for 3 stitches when I cut my thumb (deeply) and I got lucky because university ambulance transported me. I was billed about that much, also in "Europe", when an ambulance was called, no treatment was performed on me, and I wasn't even transported by the ambulance. This was in Switzerland despite having health insurance. There's no general European health insurance system.

I'm an American who's never been to Switzerland (I've come close), and even I know full well that Switzerland isn't part of the EU, and is completely different from all the countries that surround it.

This is like traveling to Belize and complaining that they don't speak Spanish.

Re: EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

#82

Post by magduf »

jacquesm wrote: post #9
broAhmed wrote: post #3

Good. The FAA should have realized their insistence that the 737 Max was safe to fly despite evidence otherwise was likely to shake both confidence and respect for them as a regulatory body. It shouldn't have taken the intervention of the President for them to do their job. Time for them to reap what they've sown.

> It shouldn't have taken the intervention of the President for them to do their job. That's your takeaway of what happened? My takeaway is that the president 'intervened' only after it was clear that the combined Boeing/FAA/US position became untenable after other regions local air authorities and airlines declared the plane unfit to fly. Trump threw the FAA under the bus to make himself look good, but the weeks bef…

Yep, this is exactly the way it looked to me too. He was good buddies with the Boeing CEO and supporting them up until he reversed course and threw them under the bus.

I guess that's one good thing about having a narcissistic President who only cares about his own ego: he'll happily change course if it suits him and makes him look good, instead of digging his heels in.

Re: EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

#83

Post by ddalex »

vinay427 wrote: post #56
nolok wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well when they made that decision every country in the top 10 by air traffic volume had banned the plane except for the USA and Japan (who basically does what the FAA says on such issues), and the FAA and Boeing were still saying it was pilot error and basically blaming the dead people. I don’t see how any self respecting country could have trusted them with the black box in those conditions

> basically blaming the dead people This is strange wording to me. There's nothing inherently wrong with blaming "dead people" for something, because many accidents caused by user error result in death of the user. However, in this situation, it certainly seems rather hasty and inappropriate.

blaming dead people may be a misnomer for a common cover-up technique in communist-countries investigations: the dead people are at fault, because then you don't have to punish anybody living, and the dead people are already dead, what you gonna do to them ?

Re: EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

#84

Post by mchristen »

jayess wrote: post #76
cadence- wrote: post #27

Americans have been dismantling and weakening their regulatory bodies for quite a while now. The idea is that this will unshackle big corporations and allow them to innovate faster. This sounds like a great idea, until you realize that this “innovation” is most often about increasing profits. And the quality of the product is often sacrificed to increase profits. Just look at what is happening to telecommunication se…

> Just look at what is happening to telecommunication services, with big corporations growing their profits while Americans get stuck with slow and expensive service that becomes relatively worse comparing to other western countries. I get 1 gig internet service for $80 a month in a mid-sized American city in the midwest. No complaints here. The offerings just keep getting better and cheaper.

You must realize that is not the norm though, right?

It wasn't until Google Fiber came into my area that everyone else starting offering competitive pricing, but the vast majority of land in the US is a high speed broadband wasteland.

Re: EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

#85

Post by throwing_shade »

pjkundert wrote: post #80
tyri_kai_psomi wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common misunderstanding I see repeated a lot. The idea isn't unshackling big corporations, it's about unshackling small to medium sized businesses and entrepreneurs. Big corps actually love regulations for the barriers to entry they create, and most of them already have a whole host of regulatory compliance teams armed and ready to dissect the next big regulation that comes. > Americans get stuck with slow…

It astonishes me that so few HNers have (evidently) tried to start businesses. The staggering regulatory, tax and accounting burden that small business are groaning under is incomprehensible , unless you've experienced it. I'm a Canadian, in a super-simple business (no payroll, no significant hardward stock) and we are forced to spend double-digit percentages of our gross income just to stay "compliant" with regulati…

It astonishes me the amount of HNers that think their _personal anecdote_ is worth anything. Here is mine:

Big corporations fear regulation. I work at a small company and I am very certain I am compliant. I used to work at big company.

Wow! That disproves everything you just said, doesn't it?

Re: EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

#86

Post by wlesieutre »

magduf wrote: post #79
jayess wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just look at what is happening to telecommunication services, with big corporations growing their profits while Americans get stuck with slow and expensive service that becomes relatively worse comparing to other western countries. I get 1 gig internet service for $80 a month in a mid-sized American city in the midwest. No complaints here. The offerings just keep getting better and cheaper.

In places like Romania, you can get internet service for a fraction of that price.

I was curious how that compared with prices of other goods/services so I found this: https://checkinprice.com/cost-of-living-in-bucharest-romania...

    Monthly public transport ticket 14.55 USD
    1 ticket to the movies (adult price) 5.70 USD
    High speed internet per month 9.50 USD
    1 month gym subscription 41.30 USD
Assuming that's accurate, other stuff is cheaper than US cities but not by nearly as much as internet service. I could go for a $10/month high speed connection.

Re: EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

#87

Post by jquery »

icebraining wrote: post #46
AmVess wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not recent years. Decades. FAA has been under regulatory capture by Boeing for decades. The world ignoring anything the FAA has to say about anything is a stance that's long overdue.

So the safest mode of travel is the one without real regulation for decades?

I really think HNers in this thread are overselling the so-called "lack of regulation" that airlines and jet makers operate under. My father worked in the industry for decades, it is highly regulated to the extent few industries are more regulated (medicine, perhaps?)

Re: EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

#88

Post by throwaway5752 »

Retric wrote: post #59
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boeing I guess, maybe FAA. Why would ESA loose people from this?

EASA rubber stamping the FAA’s rubber stamping of Boeing is still EASA making a mistake just as much as it’s the FAA’s mistake. This has become a major public issue, bet the problems started when the aircraft entered service.

It's nowhere near as big of a mistake on the EASA's part. You don't understand how international regulatory and standards bodies interact with each other.

There are explicit agreements between the EASA and FAA in order to reduce duplicated work (https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=88965)

This is extremely bad. It it will be bad for any US regulated product used in EU markets like food, medical devices and equipment, pharmaceuticals, among others.

Re: EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

#89

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #9
broAhmed wrote: post #3

Good. The FAA should have realized their insistence that the 737 Max was safe to fly despite evidence otherwise was likely to shake both confidence and respect for them as a regulatory body. It shouldn't have taken the intervention of the President for them to do their job. Time for them to reap what they've sown.

> It shouldn't have taken the intervention of the President for them to do their job. That's your takeaway of what happened? My takeaway is that the president 'intervened' only after it was clear that the combined Boeing/FAA/US position became untenable after other regions local air authorities and airlines declared the plane unfit to fly. Trump threw the FAA under the bus to make himself look good, but the weeks bef…

[deleted]

Re: EASA Insists on Testing Boeing 737 Max Itself Before Lifting Ban

#90

Post by tpm »

jayess wrote: post #76
cadence- wrote: post #27

Americans have been dismantling and weakening their regulatory bodies for quite a while now. The idea is that this will unshackle big corporations and allow them to innovate faster. This sounds like a great idea, until you realize that this “innovation” is most often about increasing profits. And the quality of the product is often sacrificed to increase profits. Just look at what is happening to telecommunication se…

> Just look at what is happening to telecommunication services, with big corporations growing their profits while Americans get stuck with slow and expensive service that becomes relatively worse comparing to other western countries. I get 1 gig internet service for $80 a month in a mid-sized American city in the midwest. No complaints here. The offerings just keep getting better and cheaper.

From an EU country with 1 gig for about $30 a month (city with about 500k people) that doesn't look very cheap.
Post reply on HN