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

Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 247 posts

Re: Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

#101

Post by lotsofpulp »

vinay427 wrote: post #82
beefield wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, flying in MAX was/would still be orders of magnitude safer than pretty much any other transportation method outside flying. (No, I don't think I still want to fly that, either)

Sure, though many people aren't deciding between flying a 737 MAX and driving or taking a bus. They're often deciding between flying on a specific flight that uses a 737 MAX and flying at a different time and/or on a different airline that doesn't use a 737 MAX.

Most people are just choosing the cheapest flight that fits their schedule, which is usually 1.

Re: Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

#102

Post by morsch »

beefield wrote: post #76
tigershark wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here on hn, on the other hand, there are plenty of people that say that they don’t see any problem in flying on the max once it is again in service. From my point of view I’ll happily let them be the guinea pigs while I’ll avoid at all costs to fly on that death machine.

To be fair, flying in MAX was/would still be orders of magnitude safer than pretty much any other transportation method outside flying. (No, I don't think I still want to fly that, either)

Only per mile. Per journey it's the most dangerous transport typically used. Per hour it's about average.

This doesn't matter if you have to make a specific trip (the number of miles is fixed), but that's not always the case. Whatever you do, don't walk, that seems to be the most dangerous common mode of transportation (unless motorcycles are common).

"Aviation industry insurers base their calculations on the deaths per journey statistic while the aviation industry itself generally uses the deaths per kilometre statistic in press releases."

Source: Transport comparisons in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_safety

Re: Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

#103

Post by dawnerd »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #100
markdown wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Boeing’s 737 chief technical pilot He's one who really needs to go to jail. Why didn't they name him?

Because Boeing is a company of national importance and also a monopoly on home turf, vital to the US security and economy so they're untouchable in the US. Just like how no VW employee went to jail in Germany for emissions cheating.

Also a good way to turn an employee willing to do terrible things into a whistle blower.

Re: Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

#104

Post by swebs »

ejolto wrote: post #71
swebs wrote: post #62

Does anyone know where we can read the actual documents? This article is missing a lot of information.

The Washington Post has them https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/boeing-documents-reve...

Wow, that email at the bottom of page 109 sounds particularly bad.

Re: Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

#105

Post by jannes »

ejolto wrote: post #71
swebs wrote: post #62

Does anyone know where we can read the actual documents? This article is missing a lot of information.

The Washington Post has them https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/boeing-documents-reve...

Direct link to PDF: https://context-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/do...

Re: Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

#106

Post by cm2187 »

I must say that seeing the SEC’s handling of internal emails in the Tourre affair taught me a lesson about internal corporate communications. Some personal emails which were unrelated to the affair were published in the SEC report (clearly for the benefit of the front page of newspapers). The extract contained jokes where the sentence had been edited to alter the meaning of the sentence.

The published extract was “whole building is about to collapse anytime now. Only potential survivor, the fabulous Fab […] standing in the middle of all these complex, highly leveraged, exotic trades he created without necessarily understanding all of the implications”

Out of memory the […] that was left out by the SEC said something like “as kindly calls me xxx, but there is nothing fabulous about me, just a tender... etc”. And that was an email to his girlfriend, nothing to do with any transaction.

Morale of the story: no jokes, even innocuous, they will be weaponised against you in bad faith. Stick to boring, neutral language. And no personal communications on corporate systems. Write everything on the assumption it will be published with bad intent.

Re: Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

#107

Post by jplayer01 »

jacquesm wrote: post #58
blululu wrote: post #42

Someone once gave the sage advice of never using the word 'kill' in your code base. 'm_Object.KillListeners();' can sound pretty bad in court. A lawyer can try to make your source code a legal matter, and a jury is free to interpret 'm_Object.KillChildren();' as being proof of willful negligence. Of course, this doesn't really matter when you're actually exposing willful negligence over your internal communication ch…

> man kill KILL(1) User Commands KILL(1) NAME kill - send a signal to a process SYNOPSIS kill [options] [...] Probably not a unix user then?

Opposing counsel doesn't care and nobody on the jury will be a Unix user. So ...

Re: Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

#108

Post by AmericanChopper »

netsharc wrote: post #94
AmericanChopper wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vague remarks about the design of the plane being unsound at any point in time prior to it being approved to fly passengers, doesn’t reveal any information at all about the soundness of the design of the plane that was eventually approved to fly passengers.

Your statements broke my brain... "The plane got approved, it must have been good enough, however grueling it got during the design process". But all evidence shows it wasn't good enough (the design killed some 300 people!), but it got rubber stamp approval.

> But all evidence shows it wasn't good enough

Sure, but without additional context we can’t know what they were talking about, or whether those remarks were relevant to the final product.

Re: Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

#109

Post by jpmoral »

fingerlocks wrote: post #95
ReptileMan wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In pilot lingo there are four levels of trust in a pilot (ascending order): 1. I won't fly with you 2. I will fly with you 3. I will fly with you and take my shoes off during take off 4. I will let my family fly with you. This phrase used verbatim means quite a lot.

If what you’re saying is true, this is a full reversal in the meaning of the leaked conversation. You’re implying the employees not only trust the MAX, their trust is such that they are comfortable kicking back with their shoes off on a flight.

How'd you get there?

>"Would you put your family on a Max simulator trained aircraft? I wouldn't," says one employee to another, who responds, "No."

Re: Boeing employees mocked FAA in internal messages before 737 Max disasters

#110

Post by cedivad »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #100
markdown wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Boeing’s 737 chief technical pilot He's one who really needs to go to jail. Why didn't they name him?

Because Boeing is a company of national importance and also a monopoly on home turf, vital to the US security and economy so they're untouchable in the US. Just like how no VW employee went to jail in Germany for emissions cheating.

VW wasn't nearly as bad. People need to go to jail over those deaths and their legacy used as a reminder for those that come next.

Here is another damning Boeing message, follow the source for more:

https://twitter.com/cedivad/status/1215558552229683200

Post reply on HN