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

Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 290 posts

Re: Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

#211

Post by tluyben2 »

ipnon wrote: post #154
Havoc wrote: post #87

Don’t care. Show me real movement on the corporate mindset. The plane is a STEM engineer fixable issue. The corporate mess that pushed this across flying clearance is not. I’ll aim to fly airbus until Boeing understands that difference and fixes the root cause.

Airbus aircraft are generally smoother and quieter rides in my experience.

Same experience. When I was flying bi-weekly, I made sure most international flights were with Finnair because no Boeings there, for that reason. Mostly everything was worse on Boeings (most experience is with BA; 100s of flights). But the sound was the worst. Maybe this is how the planes are kitted out by the carrier and I had bad luck in that regard?

Re: Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

#212

Post by ChrisRR »

WrtCdEvrydy wrote: post #155
pengaru wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

COVID has been a godsend to many struggling or otherwise unstable businesses. Recent example I've had to deal with: Morgan Stanley's acquisition of E-Trade has completely wrecked their customer service experience. Live chat wait times are 2+ hours, getting a secure message response takes 5 days now. Their web site is covered with COVID-19 disclaimers for all the trouble, with a minor blurb about "operational shift".…

COVID is the new 9/11. You could blame anything on 9/11... "Wifi is down, due to 9/11"

I've seen people blame practically everything about the PS5 launch on covid

"No stock? Must be covid causing manufacturing issues." What? You don't know the sales figures at all and you're making wild assumptions

Re: Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

#213

Post by alkonaut »

WalterBright wrote: post #139
p1mrx wrote: post #88

Why do these articles say so little about how Boeing fixed the problem? People are more likely to fly on these if they know what's different from the ones that crashed.

> Why do these articles say so little about how Boeing fixed the problem? Because they are journalists and have no idea how airplanes work or how engineering is done.

This is Reuters. It's for consumption by the general public. Even if the journalist did know, whould they really go into any detail in a short reuters piece?

I'm sure there are better sources for details, and in the end FAA.

Re: Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

#214

Post by adwww »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #208
jacobush wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'm not sure what can be done to fix it. Regulations which require engineers or their union representatives to sit on the corporate board of directors. (Such as in the deplorable communist countries Germany, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Ireland, France and Denmark.)

Not sure why this is being downvoted, it doesn't seem that outrageous. There's even precedence in the US for this approach: in the legal profession, only lawyers are permitted to own or to manage a law firm.

> Not sure why this is being downvoted

Because it mentioned unions is my guess.

Re: Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

#215

Post by alkonaut »

cjbprime wrote: post #130
0xy wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems utterly counter-productive, considering the Max is now the most scrutinized plane in history. It's probably far safer now than other models.

FWIW, I don't see any pilots or aviation experts saying this. I think it's actually still poorly designed -- I don't think they added a third AoA sensor and used a quorum on them, as Airbus does given their own link of AoA to an automatic flight control.

Do you see lots of pilots or aviation experts saying the opposite? Are there Max pilots that have come out and said "I'm done flying that thing"?

Re: Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

#216

Post by _ph_ »

brianwawok wrote: post #123
_ph_ wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering that a new design would take like 10 years to get into production, how would that have been an immediate solution for Boeing? They need to be able to sell more 737 until a new design is ready, and no one wants that to be rushed. While I didn't hear anyting about a new design, I sincerely hope they are at it already though.

Can they not make more of the previous design? Or is 100% of production capacity 737 max

I don't think previous iterations of the 737 were fundamentally safer. As there were probably other changes done to the 737 Max beyond the different engines, like improving the overall build, I do think that the fixed 737 Max should be safer than any other 737.

The issue with the Max was, that a software, which should improve the handling in extreme situations, kicked in in normal conditions and the pilots failed to handle this (runaway stabilizer procedure). And indeed, the software for the MCAS was really badly designed, which has been fixed now and by now every 737 pilot should be aware how the two crashes could have been prevented by the right crew reaction. Both of this should mean that these accidents won't happen again.

Re: Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

#217

Post by WalterBright »

alkonaut wrote: post #213
WalterBright wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do these articles say so little about how Boeing fixed the problem? Because they are journalists and have no idea how airplanes work or how engineering is done.

This is Reuters. It's for consumption by the general public. Even if the journalist did know, whould they really go into any detail in a short reuters piece? I'm sure there are better sources for details, and in the end FAA.

Aviation Week tends to have much more accurate aviation articles. I haven't seen much to gripe about with their coverage of the 737MAX issue, but the mainstream media articles have all been pretty much trash.

Re: Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

#218

Post by alkonaut »

kerng wrote: post #119

Curious, I never want to fly in one of these. How can one achieve that in a realistic way? Let's say airline changes plane after I booked, then I wouldnt get a refund. Is there a solution to this?

Fly Airbus-only airlines (Which can mean having to drive or take the train if you are at an airport where only one or two airlines operate such as for example most domestic airports in Norway).

You will never be able to get a refund for plane changes. Even airlines with no MAX aircraft of their own could operate your flight with a MAX if they use code share or wet lease.

So while you can make your risk small, you can never be sure, without accepting that you may need to turn back at the gate. But on the other hand I assume you'll be OK with flying it once it has flown for a number of million miles in a few years from now. After all, the airlines that operate non-MAX 737's for the equivalent flights will be flying older and older craft.

Re: Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

#219

Post by redis_mlc »

pdonis wrote: post #164
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The alternative is obvious - corporate manslaughter charges, aimed at management that knew plane was unsafe and pushed on regardless. > " collateral damage so cost of that outweighs the benefits" Do we have a system a justice or do we not? You seem to suggest some people are above the law. Let's see, could that possibly lead to corruption and abuse of power?

> The alternative is obvious - corporate manslaughter charges, aimed at management that knew plane was unsafe and pushed on regardless. And the obvious defense to that is that the FAA certified the plane. Then what?

> the FAA certified the plane.

That's not how it works:

- the mfg. and ODM FAA reps submit certification paperwork to the FAA. The FAA doesn't employ an airline design team to review the schematics, etc.

- if the paperwork matches FAA regulations, then it's certified. They don't open inspection plates or walk around with a flash light and verify anything unless they have a particular reason to do so.

The FAA regulates the airline industry by receiving, storing and reviewing paperwork.

However, the submitted paperwork misrepresented how MCAS worked, stating that it met FAA requirements when the nose-down rate was actually about 4x what was documented, and was continuous rather than occurring once or twice.

Re: Boeing's upgraded 737 Max completes first flight with media onboard

#220

Post by corty »

FeistyOtter wrote: post #197
frogblast wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Covid’s timing was devastating for Boeing and the 737 Max. When the planes were grounded, Boeing kept producing them assuming the issue would be resolved quickly. As of January 2020, slightly before Covid, they had 400 planes built, but not delivered to customers (and so customers haven’t paid for them). Boeing was funding these aircraft with debt. All of a sudden, demand for air travel drops off a cliff. All those a…

Can an airline really refuse an aircraft without wasting some significant amount of money? I assume the airline or leasing company start paying from the moment they place an order all the way through construction, finished by a final payment at the moment of acceptance? When one orders a building company to build a house, you are given a payment schedule, I assume it is the same with airplanes.

Airlines on the brink of bancruptcy have to refuse such orders, even if it only saves small amounts of money. And due to Corona, virtually every airline is in financially troubled waters.
Post reply on HN