Live data from Hacker News

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

cnbc.com

781–790 of 884 posts

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

#781

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your car won't fall out of the sky in the event of a malfunction so I guess cars are safer "when something goes wrong"? Then again cars travel with less margin of error to other cars and objects than airplanes.

An airplane falling out the sky is something like the equivalent of the wheels falling off of a car traveling at speed. It's not that it can't happen, but it's hardly the only possible result of a malfunction.

There's also a giant speed difference plus the fact that a car will decelerate even if uncontrollably for basically any mechanical failure. Even at speed vehicle accidents are quite safe comparatively to a plane that has lost its ability to fly. A plane tends to have all or nothing incidents while vehicles have lots of accidents with a wide variety of severity.

Naturally that tends to push aviation towards avoidance of mechanical issues and on cars we are much more tolerant. I've seen people driving cars with their door duck taped on!

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

#782
post #753

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Airplanes are inherently much, much less reliable than cars and only reach reliability through however many millions or billions of dollars worth of redundant systems and maintenance intervals and however many man-hours. That means that when you get on an airplane, you are extremely reliant on those systems and processes having been followed. We are seeing more and more that these systems and processes have been brea…

And that is why I think it is absolutely, mind bogglingly bonkers that Tesla is currently using "drive by wire" in a mass production car when this technology is not common in aviation at all. Only the huge airliners that benefit from extremely expensive maintenance schedules use full "fly by wire".

Every Airbus built in the last 40 years is fly by wire.

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

#783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Europe that's what seems to be a standard announcement. "The captain has switched off the fasten seatbelt sign, but we recommend you keep your seatbelt fastened at all times when seated, in case of sudden turbulence."

It’s the same with canadian and asian airlines. Is it not the case in the US? I just assumed all airlines did it.

I didn't want to claim it was universal when I've mostly flown within Europe.

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

#784
post #768
post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And even so, sucked the shirt right off the boy in the middle seat! I shudder to imagine how things would have gone 20 minutes further in to the flight.

Almost certainly a fatal crash if they were a few minutes later into the flight

No it's not. Crews are trained for decompression events and they've happened at higher altitudes than 26,000 feet before with no airframe loss at all (for example, the Southwest 737-700 where a fan blade ruptured the window happened at 33,000 feet). It may likely have been a fatal incident but definitely not likely a crash.

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

#785

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You wouldn’t build a website with a single point of failure, yet the argument here is it’s okay to engineer things badly because of the success rate of requests is high. For air travel impacting human lives. I think it speaks to current generation of leaders avoiding thought, consideration, foresight, insight, and just using any statistic that can justify a decision. It’s a decline and one that also explains the exci…

This statement makes no sense. It has never been safer to fly, precisely because aviation is so dedicated to root cause analysis. A whole door exploded out of a plane and 1. The plane did not suffer structural damage and could land safely 2. Nobody died because seat belts are mandatory 3. The crew is drilled over and over on what to do 4. The plane has extensive monitoring and logging so RCA is easier 5. The US funds…

[deleted]

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

#786
post #671
post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like to consider what is safer when something goes wromg . Are there statistics that track this across different modes of travel?

Yes. Airplanes are literally hundreds of times less likely to kill you per mile than cars. There has not been a single US airline fatality since 2009.

Airplanes are literally hundreds of times less likely to kill you per mile than cars

A weird metric. I'd prefer travel time, not per mile.

Still far safer.

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

#787
post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vertical integration is not competition. A decision maker at any level within the vertical of power is facing internal competition from political rivals, but no results-based competition from his peers in other companies. So this promotes political shenanigans, and applies negative selection pressure on the actual product quality.

This is some kind of vertical dis–integration. They literally sold their factories and tools to their contractors because owning land and buildings and machinery was dragging down their metrics! (Specifically assets to earnings or something along those lines.) But regardless of that, breaking up a large company because it has some problem doesn’t fix the problem. It just makes all the smaller companies you created ea…

Interested in the Nortel acquisitions, do you have a reference? I don’t see that in the Wikipedia narrative, but maybe I’m misunderstanding.

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

#788

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, spending was cut in an absolute sense as well, especially if you factor in inflation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_... But it is - obviously - on the rise right now.

With relation to inflation?

In part, but not all of it.

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

#789

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've sold nearly 6000 Max's. Seems like the market accepts that behaviour.

It's a sticky product. There isn't an alternative from Boeing in this market segment that's viable in a modern fleet from what I understand, and airlines tend to be either Boeing or Airbus, so it would take a huge push to get an airline to migrate from one to the other – possibly multiple failed models and significant compensation to fund building up the maintenance infrastructure for the other manufacturer and pilot…

Then it's not wrong.

PS: I realize you're not the person responding previously.

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

#790

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's safer to have a new airplane design behave like the old one. There have been many crashes due a pilot being stressed and automatically doing something that would have been right on a previous airplane he was familiar with, but which was wrong for the current airplane he is flying. All jet airliners are aerodynamically unstable and use active controls to "paper over" that. There is nothing inherently wrong with d…

It literally killed hundreds of people by pretending to be the same plane.

This is a good tabloid take but I don't believe it's accurate. It wasn't pretending to be the same plane - it was pretending to be any aircraft with certifiable flight characteristics, particularly control forces on approach to the stall.

Indeed there is no requirement for aircraft with the same training / type certificate to handle identically. For example the whole CitationJet class from the Mustang to the CJ4.

Post reply on HN