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

111–120 of 122 posts

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

#111

Post by jussij »

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.

There nothing wrong with blaming the "dead people".

The problem is to put out an accident incident report blaming the "dead people" to only then find out the report was 100% wrong.

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

#112

Post by Haga »

Proper regulations will just be declared acts of trade war and parts of the world will have a american plane blacklist for airports. Then the empire will bully those one by one to accept the airducttapeworm back into service. And America will continue to shout that their tech is the greatest while it's actually falling further behind.

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

#113

Post by rswail »

theYipster wrote: post #102
everybodyknows wrote: post #69

EASA budget for 2018 was only 161 million Euros: https://www.easa.europa.eu/the-agency/the-agency OP offers no hint just how such great additional effort is to be paid for.

The FAA and EASA have very different operating models, so budgets are not comparable. FAA certification efforts are tax-payer funded, whereas EASA’s efforts are funded by industry in a pay-for-service model.

Regulators paid by the industry they regulate is the most obvious of perverted incentives that I can think of.

Air transport safety supervision and regulation should be paid for by those using it, ie by taxes on the end user.

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

#114

Post by vinay427 »

missjellyfish wrote: post #75
vinay427 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Switzerland is not part of the EU, so different rules apply. As far as I know, a EU health insurance would have covered you (retroactively; as in: pay $800 and send the invoice + proof of payment to your insurance and you'd get reimbursed), but when traveling outside the EU it is always a good Idea to carry a travel health insurance with you that covers these.

I think you may have misunderstood. I'm talking about having Swiss health insurance in Switzerland. The standards for health insurance and cost for treatment in "Europe" are not always lower than in the US as the parent commenter implied.

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

#115

Post by vinay427 »

magduf wrote: post #81
vinay427 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I was referring to Swiss health insurance in Switzerland and the cost of an ambulance call here. This has little to do with the EU. I live in Switzerland so I'm quite aware it's not in the EU.

EDIT: Also, for the record Switzerland does observe the EHIC system so health insurances from EU/EEA countries are valid here and vice versa, so your example of Belize isn't even accurate. Switzerland isn't in the EU/EEA but has a series of bilateral treaties which harmonize many things such as this, research funding for EU projects, freedom of movement of people, etc.

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

#116

Post by vinay427 »

kungito wrote: post #78
vinay427 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Ummm I have a European health card and I was stitched in France and Austria for free when I got my injuries. I don't know about Switzerland since it's got special snowflake status

Yes, it should work here as well because Switzerland uses the EHIC system. My experience is with Swiss health insurance, and how an ambulance call can cost more than it does in the US even in a place in Europe.

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

#117

Post by landryraccoon »

Angostura wrote: post #50

As a matter of interest, does the FAA accept EASA's certification of Airbus planes? I foresee a possible tit for tat.

This is a matter of public trust. As an American I might trust the EASA’s certification more than the FAA, and that’s a really bad spot for the FAA to be in. International drama about who accepts who is just a side effect of lack of trust in the FAA.

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

#118

Post by o-__-o »

mchristen wrote: post #84
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.

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.

Google fiber never came here. It was Verizon 5g that made Comcast and at&t offer gigabit internet in my neighborhood. I was even ready to shell out the $2k setup fee and Comcast was like mmm no gigabit for you.

So I don’t believe it is subsidy I fully believe it is competition. Google realized that it’s incredibly difficult and expensive to lay fiber and stopped. 5G realized they don’t need fiber to be competitive.

Competition always ends in a win for the customer

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

#119

Post by o-__-o »

rconti wrote: post #91
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.

Not only is it EXTREMELY rare to get 1 gig internet anywhere in the US (I just got it in Silicon Valley, 3 months ago) (btw, hopefully this is symmetric FTTH), but that price is extremely far from impressive in the places that get similar speeds.

I’ve got 3x1gigabit connections for a total of $160/mo and I live in the us of a!

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

#120

Post by o-__-o »

sbalea wrote: post #108
wlesieutre wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It's accurate. Just got back from spending a few weeks at my dad's country house that's wired with 940/450mbps fiber. No problems remote working from there, except, of course, time zone differences. Here's the ISP link, in Romanian unfortunately: https://www.digiromania.ro/servicii/internet/internet-fix/fi... . The price is 40 Lei / month, which is approximately $9.5 at current exchange rates.

What kind of speeds do you get to non aws, gcp, and azure sites? I’ve found in my travels that you get ridiculous speeds to “net neutral” sites but once you go off the grid you’re back down to T1 speeds.

Like good luck seeing 10mbps+ to a server in the US. In the us I know my transfer speed is limited by the router I’m hitting. So I can go to .jp sites and still pull 30mbit

Post reply on HN