Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part • Hacker News Board

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#101

Post by gmueckl » Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 5:45 AM UTC

desc wrote: post #70

gmueckl wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact, finding and correcting faults in airplanes happens constantly. Up until the Boeing debacle this was just something that happend while nobody was looking. Now journalists are riding the scare wave generated by the relevations following the 737 max crashes and dragging all these fairly routine happenings out into the open with disproportionate coverage.

The primary reason why air travel is so safe is that each and every failure in production becomes a major news item for days. So the system broke somehow, and the news will keep hammering it until someone somewhere learns their lesson. We hope. Yes, they will go after a bunch of false positives too in the process, but the thing with weeding out the true negatives reliably is that you have to be paranoid about the fal…

The media is ignoring 80 to 90 percent of incidents that happen in aviation that lead to investigations. A fair bunch results in technical changes to aircraft, but it is mostly too boring for a layperson.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#102

Post by simion314 » Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 5:51 AM UTC

txcwpalpha wrote: post #32

heavyset_go wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worst part of these revelations is that the aviation industry is exalted as the standard other industries should look up to when it comes to safety. If Boeing can't escape the perverse incentives that tempt every company, then what company can and why are we relying on this economic model to drive such a high stakes industry?

>The worst part of these revelations is that the aviation industry is exalted as the standard other industries should look up to when it comes to safety. I don't see why that's "the worst part". Flying is the safest mode of travel, and among airliners the 737NG is one of the safest planes in aviation history. The fact that cracks have been discovered doesn't change that, and the routine inspections which have discove…

>and the routine inspections which have discovered these cracks

Unfortunately this was not a routine check, it seems that routine checks did not found this issue and only after checks were done specifically to look for this issue more cracks were found.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#103

Post by simion314 » Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 5:57 AM UTC

m0zg wrote: post #67

kube-system wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another source tells us Boeing quickly reported the issue with the single plane to the FAA last week, and now more planes with similar cracking have been found.

How many? Could be as few as 2. Out of thousands.

It is clearly not all planes were disassembled and checked, from what I read it is not a routine check so it will take a while until all planes are checked. So yeah they may have found only 2 more planes with cracks because they only checked 2 more planes that were already disassembled.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#104

Post by azernik » Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 6:13 AM UTC

samstave wrote: post #96

azernik wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and the plane is almost double mine I assume you're talking about lifespan? The B-52 may have been in the air for a long time (though only 15 years longer than the 737), but it has also been flying in much smaller quantities; there have only ever been ~750 B-52s built, while there have been over 10K 737s built. And in addition, a commercial airliner is usually in the air for a much higher percentage of its lifespan…

Thank you for a thoughtful response. I come to HN to share ideas and thoughts, but typically just get a bunch of self righteous assholes... and ive been here for quite a while. Youre not allowed to be wrong on HN and it makes me resent the community. I love to admit if i am wrong, as it means i am learning something. So i appreciate you fixing my perspective. My perspective came feome the fact that a single plane cou…

HN doesn't appreciate confident arguments that are based on zero or anecdotal evidence.

It also doesn't appreciate goalpost-shifting (from safety record in terms of crashes, to in terms of nukes going off (???)).

More generally, fanboyish rants about how $FOO is the best $BAR ever made tend to draw particular attention.

And lastly, complaining about downvotes is in the actual guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> that they have been carrying nukes about for the past 50 years and that we havent seen a singular nuclear accident with them.

As other commenters have noted, this is more a testament to the phenomenal safety of nuclear weapons; they've been blown off the top of exploding ICBMs, hit the ground and the water at high speeds in crashing bombers, and generally gone through a LOT of abuse without going off.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#105

Post by 9935c101ab17a66 » Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 6:27 AM UTC

burnte wrote: post #41

brians wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not subjective; you just made it up. For one thing, B-52s seem to have substantial safety externalities for nearby cities.

>That’s not subjective; you just made it up. That's the definition of subjective. You're thinking objective.

But you don't have to say: "I'm subjectively of the opinion..."

I also do find the original commenter's use of 'subjective' at the very least, odd, and the thrust of their remark is, subjectively, quite strange.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#106

Post by 9935c101ab17a66 » Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 6:35 AM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #86

samstave wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. This is going to come across a subjectively offensive to people on HN, aside from the old timers, as I am such, stop trying to prove how smart you are. Listen more. Engage rather than flex your ego. Discuss rather than downvote. I almost never vote on anything, @dang may likely be able to look at my click record. I don’t click on votes too often, I engage in discussion as often as possible. (Constantly hit…

Ok, I'll bite: your original comment wasn't useful at all, and didn't push the conversation forward. Making a baseless suggestion that the B-52 is the "safest machine in history" is not useful. You presented no evidence for this claim, and used "subjective" as a weasel word to avoid responsibility for what you were saying. And then, incredibly, you make a -- reasonable -- assertion as to how you would determine a pla…

I agree. Samstave's original comment was... befuddling. And the more recent reaction stranger still.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#107

Post by jonny_eh » Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 6:59 AM UTC

txcwpalpha wrote: post #32

heavyset_go wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worst part of these revelations is that the aviation industry is exalted as the standard other industries should look up to when it comes to safety. If Boeing can't escape the perverse incentives that tempt every company, then what company can and why are we relying on this economic model to drive such a high stakes industry?

>The worst part of these revelations is that the aviation industry is exalted as the standard other industries should look up to when it comes to safety. I don't see why that's "the worst part". Flying is the safest mode of travel, and among airliners the 737NG is one of the safest planes in aviation history. The fact that cracks have been discovered doesn't change that, and the routine inspections which have discove…

> Flying is the safest mode of travel

By mile or by minute? It might seem pedantic, but it just means you're better off flying from New York to LA than driving. It doesn't mean you're better off than staying put.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#108

Post by tempguy9999 » Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 7:00 AM UTC

azernik wrote: post #104

samstave wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for a thoughtful response. I come to HN to share ideas and thoughts, but typically just get a bunch of self righteous assholes... and ive been here for quite a while. Youre not allowed to be wrong on HN and it makes me resent the community. I love to admit if i am wrong, as it means i am learning something. So i appreciate you fixing my perspective. My perspective came feome the fact that a single plane cou…

HN doesn't appreciate confident arguments that are based on zero or anecdotal evidence. It also doesn't appreciate goalpost-shifting (from safety record in terms of crashes, to in terms of nukes going off (???)). More generally, fanboyish rants about how $FOO is the best $BAR ever made tend to draw particular attention. And lastly, complaining about downvotes is in the actual guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/…

IIRC atomic explosions are intrinsically difficult things to set off. I suppose the lensing explosive might go off and blow around nasty chunks, particulates, metal vapour perhaps, without actually producing a nuclear explosion of any sort.

(IANA nuke engineer)

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#109

Post by Marsymars » Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 7:30 AM UTC

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #56

gmueckl wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they exist in Europe, they ban be dirt cheap, executed by companies run by penny pinchers and mostly superfluous. Going by train is in many cases faster because it gets you from city center toncity center without any airport overhead. But it also costs a multiple of a plane ticket, which should not be the case.

Yes but the cases when taking such short flights instead of trains make sense is when you commute form a small city airport to an international hub for a layover to an international flight and that saves you lots of time as you've already been through security once and you're already inside the airport fairly close to your departure gate so you can arrive pretty close time wise to your next flight as opposed to havin…

To note - very small city airports don't have security to pass through. Of course, at those population densities, trains don't make sense anyway.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#110

Post by toast0 » Sun, Sep 29, 2019, 7:34 AM UTC

kzrdude wrote: post #89

peteretep wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m never flying Boeing again I suspect you were intending this to be obvious hyperbole, but also this will be very difficult if you’re flying at all regularly. While you can have a look at the equipment the airline thinks it’ll be flying at booking time, there’s no guarantees about which plane will actually show up, and the airline isn’t going to refund your ticket because they decided to swap out their A350 for t…

All this plane talk makes me curious, if there are any airlines that tell you ahead of time what planes they are using for a route? I guess they'd now be even less inclined to tell.

If you have airplane preferences, it's best to fly on airlines that only use planes you like, or never use planes you dislike. That means avoiding the largest airlines, as they are most likely to mix and match.