Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it's ok to have water dripping on your head as long as it's vapour condensation?
Certainly better than hot piss.
Is that what happens on the lower decks? :-)
Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system
121–130 of 223 posts
Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t quite follow your train of thought. Isn’t it normal for companies to compete and evolve their designs? I am sure Airbus is capable of doing that.
Why would Airbus spend 10 Billion on RD for a new plane if they can only spend 1.5 Billion on RD to modify an existing design? In their current form, Airbus and Boing don't really compete, which is bad for the customers but good for the shareholders of these companies. They already produce almost all of the passenger aircrafts and they would love this to continue. The 737 MAX fiasco threatens this arrangement.
> Why would Airbus spend 10 Billion on RD for a new plane if they can only spend 1.5 Billion on RD to modify an existing design?
Because that's what manufacturers always did? If you only do iterative changes then eventually you run into a wall. Boeing engineers also knew that. The disagreement between what engineers wanted and what management wanted has been a point of contention for many years.
Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
After years of sinking quality, newspapers downsizing, and what passes for "modern" journalism, there are few reputable sources left.
We have to make do with what we've got, which is easy access to original sources and independently verifiable information thanks to the internet and electronics.
Newspapers nowadays are great pointers for topics to look into independently, but one piece of bad information is damaging enough to offset a hundred accurate facts. So considering the quality of modern journalism, it's better to just focus on the source material and ignore what the middle man has to say.
There is still people I trust to provide accurate information, because I trust in both their integrity and expertise in their fields, but there is certainly no news organization that I trust to that degree as a whole.
Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system
#124There is at least one big airline that denies to accept airliners built in Charleston. Don't remember which. So quality problems are not invented by a single disgruntled employee. There have been news articles before https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/business/boeing-dreamline... says that Qatar Airways "stopped" accepting planes fron Charleston. Not sure whether that means indefinitely or until the planes in questio…
Al Jazeera has a long report on YouTube [0] covering the allegations around Charleston, I know that they can be biased against the US but this report is quite eye opening. Even more given the interview with a VP (or director, can't remember exactly the position) being cut short by the PR person involved, the reports from workers inside the factory stating they wouldn't fly a plane built there, etc. [0] https://www.yo…
Hmm, seeing the documentary, what would you do if you're working in Alenia? Do you deliver the parts anyway and hope FAA? Do you stop production and lose the contract?
From a Supplier perspective it's an interesting discussion.
Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
After years of sinking quality, newspapers downsizing, and what passes for "modern" journalism, there are few reputable sources left. We have to make do with what we've got, which is easy access to original sources and independently verifiable information thanks to the internet and electronics. Newspapers nowadays are great pointers for topics to look into independently, but one piece of bad information is damaging e…
> it's better to just focus on the source material and ignore what the middle man has to say.
When you can go to the primary source, by all means, be my guest and go for it. Nobody's arguing against that. The trouble is you're not going to get very far with this approach unless you somehow have independent access to all the primary sources and also the time and resources to sift through them. If you do -- fantastic. If you're like the vast majority of people, though, this is frequently not the case for you. And whenever it's not, ignoring every middleman altogether is the equivalent of putting your head in the sand and declaring everyone is wrong.
Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 if they can. Most of the big ones have a mix of Boeing and Airbus (plus smaller Canadair/Embraer etc. ones for their regionals). Some of the budget airlines are notable for having a single aircrat or single manufacturer fleet - Ryan Air, Southwest, Jet Blue.
I believe Southwest's entire fleet is 737 in various versions.
Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just last week i heard a story from an older friend about a fighter jet crash investigation he was involved in, where the cause basically was that an engineer wired down some bolts (as required) but trimmed the ends of the wires without recovering the trimmed part. That little piece eventually found its way into the main stick mechanics, causing enough resistance at the wrong moment, preventing the pilot from recover…
Do you think the pilot had any idea what happened or did he simply die never knowing?
Its lack of relevance to the matter at hand not withstanding, I admit to be a bit bewildered by your question and thus feel the need to ask: what makes you think the pilot could possibly have any idea that trimmed parts from a bolt is what caused the stick resistance, or that he would spend the time thinking about that instead of recovering the aircraft in the few minutes he had at the most ...
Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Most airlines typically try to purchase their fleet all from the same manufacturer if they can. Most of the big ones have a mix of Boeing and Airbus (plus smaller Canadair/Embraer etc. ones for their regionals). Some of the budget airlines are notable for having a single aircrat or single manufacturer fleet - Ryan Air, Southwest, Jet Blue.
I believe Southwest's entire fleet is 737 in various versions.
Yes, they're one of the budget airlines I mentioned. There are some signs they're regretting that now.
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/south...
Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system
#129Coming from another highly regulated industry: Medical Devices, I think it is not uncommon that Bosses ignore processes and for the sake of numbers (cash & career) would just override them. As long as they are protegee of any higher up on the ladder people generally don’t care and as long no serious lawsuit would put people into jail I am wondering if this is ever going to change. Anyone has made other experiences?
Yes. Spent some years working on an a class 2b diagnostic device. Potential for harm not that high, but the lack of rigour in testing leaves me wondering to this day whether it worked at all as advertised. If medical devices are ever open sourced, millions of critical bugs are going to fall out.
http://www.opensourcediabetes.org/
Already happening with Diabetics. I know a girl that has cracked her pump for closed loop performance and she says the results are mostly better, but take close monitoring and an active hand.
It's a tricky thing still. Yes, the devices are buggy (all things are), but half of medical devices are used by people with below average intelligence (by definition). It's still a balancing act and is likely to be for a long time.
Re: Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system
#130Earlier 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'…
Airbus is no better. Investigation report about an incident in 2018 was just released: https://avherald.com/h?article=4b57c3dd/0000&opt=0 What happened there: wrong kind of oil was used in elevator and it went unnoticed because maintenance guides did not require any inspections of affected parts. Wrong oil caused delays in sensor triggering, which led to primary computers shutting down, believing that there was a pro…
Shit is always going to happen, there is no magic trick.
However what these companies can do, is being extremely diligent about implementing fixes as soon as an issue is reported and not cutting corners on the certification processes and safety features.
What has surfaced in the last few months, is that Boeing is willing to cut corners, and is not being diligent. It's completly possible that the same thing is happening at Airbus, but I have not personnally seen or heard evidences of that. At the very least, Airbus is not certifying it's own planes.
For example, for the crash you mentionned, was Airbus aware of that potential issue sooner but didn't update the maintenance guide for some ulterior motives?