Live data from Hacker News

FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

cnbc.com

61–70 of 884 posts

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#61
post #3

>The FAA said the inspections will take between four and eight hours per plane. Seems reasonable. I was wondering if a single event should really be enough to "ground" all similar planes, but seems like they just want to do a quick inspection.

> We can do it in two!

Boeing probably.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#62
post #5

I’d at first read the plane was without passengers and just being flown somewhere… and I thought, great. Today I read that it was full of passengers, and the two people supposed to be in the two seats in the row the panel blew out happened to miss their flight. If that’s true… what an interesting set of statistics coming together. Amount of people that sleep through flights Amount of panels that blow out of passenger…

I'm just going to leave you with this frightening quote: "They said there was a kid in that row who had his shirt was sucked off him and out of the plane and his mother was holding onto him to make sure he didn't go with it."

Shirt sucked off him. Mother was holding onto him. Oh hello, a thousand nightmares of my youth.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#64

Good book describing the cultural change from engineering-focus to business-focus of Boeing: * https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/55994102-flying-blind * https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/646497/flying-blind...

I watched a documentary on Netflix recently that alleged that a lot of this change came from importing McDonnell Douglas management into Boeing after the acquisition. I wonder if the book concurs on that, I don't have time to read it right now. If this is the case I wonder if it could be reversible.

Yes: the running joke is/was that McD bought Boeing with Boeing's money.

* https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/how-boeing...

* https://archive.is/q5pQV

* https://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merg...

* https://simpleflying.com/mcdonnel-douglas-boeing-merger/

B was pressured to buy McD for 'national security' reasons. What would have been a better idea would have been, instead of doing an 'total' acquisition, is to wait for McD to go bankrupt, and then buy the parts that didn't suck.

When they did the acquisition, they also got the management folks… who ran McD into the ground in the first place.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#66
post #59
post #54

[flagged]

Who else, from what other discipline would the shareholders want in charge? Genuinely asking. I'd take a calculator nerd over a tech bro almost any (business) day.

The public wants it to be an aerospace engineer.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#67
post #3

>The FAA said the inspections will take between four and eight hours per plane. Seems reasonable. I was wondering if a single event should really be enough to "ground" all similar planes, but seems like they just want to do a quick inspection.

A single explosive decompression event, comprising the spontaneous loss of an assembly the size of an entire exit door, two months off the factory floor?

I should certainly hope they’d take a gander at the others before I’d sit next to one.

Especially with the memory of the last time they chose to keep flying 737 MAXes instead of fixing the defect in the rest of the fleet, at the cost of 157 lives, not even 5 years ago.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#68

[flagged]

Don't forget that f-er Harry Stonecipher, a man who gave "don't give a shit" a bad name.

The way you phrased it, I figured that "don't give a shit" was a Stonecipher catch phrase or something. Sort of like Zuckerberg's "move fast and break things".

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#70
post #3

>The FAA said the inspections will take between four and eight hours per plane. Seems reasonable. I was wondering if a single event should really be enough to "ground" all similar planes, but seems like they just want to do a quick inspection.

Of course it should. This is a manufacturing defect that could easily have sucked someone out the plane or dropped debris on someone’s head. Should it happen during cruise over water the consequences could be much worse.

It seems to have ripped the shirt off the person in the middle seat.
Post reply on HN