Alaska Airlines 737 Max makes emergency landing due to depressurization

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 6:55 PM UTC

nonfamous wrote: post #321

toomuchtodo wrote: post #7

Lost a window and an unoccupied seat per https://old.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/18znz5p/as_1282_k... > According to FAA record posted online, the Boeing 737-9 MAX rolled off the assembly line just two months ago, receiving its certification in November 2023. Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38882358 (“HN: Boeing wants FAA to exempt MAX 7 from safety rules to get it in the air“)

According to the NYT report, there was no one seated in the seat by the window (which is still there in pictures). That is very lucky. The child seated in the aisle of that row had his shirt ripped off by the depressurization.

Post by bitwidget » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 7:05 PM UTC

bormaj wrote: post #334

bitwidget wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're spending an extra 8 hours to marginally (at best) improve safety? I'd be willing to bet good money that you partake in wildly more risky activity (such as driving or even walking down the street). This feels almost like virtue signaling without it being virtue signaling.

Statistically it might be safe, but the vast majority of people are still going to make decisions based on perceived risk. As a customer, how else can you send your feedback to Boeing (and the airlines) that this level of perceived risk is unacceptable? It's clear there are issues at the company and Boeing is unlikely to respond unless there are financial consequences.

Post by cf1241290841 » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 8:03 PM UTC

foverzar wrote: post #344

cf1241290841 wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If one door falls of the aircraft, it's most likely a service tech didn't do the job properly More or less what both Boeings predecessor and the FAA took away last time such a thing occurred. Crew didnt close the door properly and a warning sign was installed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_96 >Injuries 11 (2 crew, 9 passengers)[1] >That'd require much more fallen doors. That happened last ti…

> We tried the approach you proposed in the past and it didnt work. You work at Boeing or aircraft safety regulator or something? Can you elaborate on what exactly you've done?

Post by mikem69 » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 8:14 PM UTC

jbm wrote: post #315

mikem69 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What modern car calls for oil changes more than once a year, assuming you’re not exceeding the mileage?

My 2016 Toyota Sienna for one.

Post by bormaj » Sat, Jan 06, 2024, 8:54 PM UTC

bitwidget wrote: post #343

bormaj wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statistically it might be safe, but the vast majority of people are still going to make decisions based on perceived risk. As a customer, how else can you send your feedback to Boeing (and the airlines) that this level of perceived risk is unacceptable? It's clear there are issues at the company and Boeing is unlikely to respond unless there are financial consequences.

Call me a betting man, but I'd be willing to bet yet even more money that at least 95% of people don't even know what plane they're getting on during their trip. And of that 5% left, only a handful people would rebook their flights at an increased expense of money/time to signal to Boeing that 737 max is unsafe. The handful of people doing it are bordering on virtue signaling. With that said, however, I really dislik…