Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system • Hacker News Board

Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

#91

Post by mrtksn » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 1:05 PM UTC

rimliu wrote: post #83

mrtksn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, there as an argument that it is not good for Airbus at all because it will risk the stability of duopoly between Boing and Airbus. The idea is that now Boing will be forced to actually invest tens of billions in new aircraft design, forcing Airbus to do the same instead of milking the current designs for as long as possible. Also, apparently the aircraft manufacturing is not a very flexible business and Air…

Was not the problem with MAX in part due to Boeing trying to milk the old design?

Yes, the Airbus did the same but in their case the a320 did not have a problem fitting larger engines under the wings. The problem is, if Boeing decides to make a brand new design that is more efficient than a320, Airbus will have to match it instead of milking the a320 despite not having its planes falling of the skies.

Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

#92

Post by iamtheworstdev » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 1:14 PM UTC

iagovar wrote: post #58

torgian wrote: post #28

"""On the matter of parts being lost, in early 2017 a review by the Federal Aviation Administration upheld Mr Barnett's concerns, establishing that the location of at least 53 "non-conforming" parts was unknown, and that they were considered lost. Boeing was ordered to take remedial action""" That's not just bad; this is really, _really_ bad. In my eight years of the Navy, working on aircraft, parts and tool accounta…

I would say, as european, that all this storm of shit is good news for Airbus, but I hop on Boeing planes too, and I think competition is good news. Boeing is maybe too big to fail, but the reputation hit they are taking may lead to companies not buying their planes, thus pushing for least competition, which is bad news for everyone. Airbus being the kind of behemoth company it is, I am convinced that without Boeing'…

You shouldn't have anymore confidence in them then Boeing.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2923861/Airbus-whistlebl...

Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

#93

Post by mehrdadn » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 1:16 PM UTC

jajag wrote: post #57

LegitShady wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All Jazeera is garbage. If it's legitimate find a real source for it. I don't need the government of Qatar's propaganda and you shouldn't trust some of it because it co firms your biases. Treat bar actors as bad actors even if what they're saying this moment is something that interests you.

Judge the content not the source.

We live in a strange world if reputation now means nothing. The whole point of judging by the source's reputation is that the content itself simply can't carry all the information necessary for it to be judged in isolation.

Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

#94

Post by Nasrudith » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 1:17 PM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #48

jMyles wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly they can be held civilly liable if defamation can be proved. If actual spite and malice can be shown, or if the suspect intends to profit from the action, it's possible that there may be criminal laws that apply, depending on the state.

Are there any studies or reports of typical repercussions faced by whistle blowers for false reports? I'd guess both false and true reports suffer approximately the same repercussions...

False whistleblowers can suffer less repurcussions if you include "made up out of whole cloth" because it is impossible to ruin a career that they never had. They tend to be easier to discredit at least in a "the Pizza restuarant doesn't even have a basement it is built in swampland and would flood way too easily" way.

Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

#95

Post by dannyw » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 1:19 PM UTC

madaxe_again wrote: post #81

vintagedave wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which contained levels of lead exceeding allowed levels... many of them targeted at children You know the catchphrase, "think of the children", often used to justify some kind of overreach? In this case, please, _think of the children_ and for the sake of us all, even anonymously, get that info to the media.

I’m sitting on the fence. In this case, they were very, very marginally over the allowed levels, and it was essentially down to a bug in the standard , which when implemented in software allowed a product to qualify for an exemption when it shouldn’t have. In this particular case the lead is all pretty well away from where the device comes in contact with the body, so the health risk is pretty minimal. It’s still in…

If something actually poses limited to no risk (e.g. marginally over a limit, which should have a level of tolerance built into it anyway); then it doesn't sound like that big of a deal.

Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

#96

Post by FabHK » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 1:23 PM UTC

coredog64 wrote: post #78

rorykoehler wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A380 is an amazing business case. Ask anyone who has flown on one what their favourite commercial plane is and I would bet the majority will say it's the A380. Despite that it was still a commercial failure.

My wife surely wouldn’t. The upper deck lav leaked on our heads for half the flight from Sydney to LA. What’s worse than a 16 hour flight? A 16 hour flight where you have to stand in the aisles.

I've frequently seen condensed water from the air conditioner leak in an A380 (sometimes quite voluminously during take-off), are you positive it was the lavatory?

(FWIW, I think the A380 has superb pax comfort.)

Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

#97

Post by 52-6F-62 » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 1:26 PM UTC

iamtheworstdev wrote: post #92

iagovar wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say, as european, that all this storm of shit is good news for Airbus, but I hop on Boeing planes too, and I think competition is good news. Boeing is maybe too big to fail, but the reputation hit they are taking may lead to companies not buying their planes, thus pushing for least competition, which is bad news for everyone. Airbus being the kind of behemoth company it is, I am convinced that without Boeing'…

You shouldn't have anymore confidence in them then Boeing. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2923861/Airbus-whistlebl...

Everything’s coming up Bombardier?

Haha.. oh...

Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

#98

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 1:32 PM UTC

rethab wrote: post #40

altacc wrote: post #38

In the past, I've known people who refused to fly on McDonnell Douglas planes as their record was so bad. I wonder if the same has started, or will start happening, with Boeing.

Would you fly with a 787 now?

[deleted]

Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

#99

Post by FabHK » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 1:34 PM UTC

service_bus wrote: post #67

xwvvvvwx wrote: post #42

How can I tell when I’m booking a flight if that plane will be boeing? I would like to avoid them (for the time being at least).

Most airlines typically try to purchase their fleet all from the same manufacturer if they can. There's a lot of additional cost that goes into maintenance, pilot training, pilot availability, etc. that has to be accounted for if you're mixing aircraft from different manufacturers. You can just look up the aircraft owned by an airline and it will give you a pretty good idea what to expect. You can also go on flight t…

> Most airlines typically try to purchase their fleet all from the same manufacturer

Emirates: A & B

Lufthansa: A & B

Cathay Pacific: A & B

American Airlines: A & B

Delta: A & B (& M)

Air France: A & B

KLM: A & B

China Southern: A & B (& Embraer)

ANA: A & B

Aeroflot: A & B (& Sukhoi)

Air China: A & B

Ethiopian Air: A & B (& De Havilland)

etc.

Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

#100

Post by hourislate » Wed, Nov 06, 2019, 1:34 PM UTC

iagovar wrote: post #58

torgian wrote: post #28

"""On the matter of parts being lost, in early 2017 a review by the Federal Aviation Administration upheld Mr Barnett's concerns, establishing that the location of at least 53 "non-conforming" parts was unknown, and that they were considered lost. Boeing was ordered to take remedial action""" That's not just bad; this is really, _really_ bad. In my eight years of the Navy, working on aircraft, parts and tool accounta…

I would say, as european, that all this storm of shit is good news for Airbus, but I hop on Boeing planes too, and I think competition is good news. Boeing is maybe too big to fail, but the reputation hit they are taking may lead to companies not buying their planes, thus pushing for least competition, which is bad news for everyone. Airbus being the kind of behemoth company it is, I am convinced that without Boeing'…

It is worthwhile mentioning that the Airbus A320 wing was designed 35 years ago for a 70t platform, and has remained the same on all versions, from the A318 through to the A321.

While unchanged, the wing has seen a steady loading increase: to 83t on the first A321, then 89t and 93.5t, and is finally expected to go up to 101t on the A321XLR. This increased wing loading has meant higher take-off speeds, reaching close to the maximum tire speed limits, and a lower safety margin at altitude – in other words, a tighter “coffin corner”, and lower stability protection.

Airbus just hasn't had it's day yet.