FYI: 737 NGs were also manufactured shoddily says whistleblowers from 20 years ago. Bear straps and other falsely approved, deficient structural components were beaten into place with hammers on the assembly line ("preloaded"). There have been 3 737 NG accidents where people died because the fuselage broke up when 737 Classic fuselages would've survived similar scenarios.
Japan ANA Boeing 737-800 flight turns back due to cockpit window crack
61–70 of 126 posts
Re: Japan ANA Boeing 737-800 flight turns back due to cockpit window crack
#62We've now reached the stage where every non-story is interesting because it has "Boeing" in the headline. While you think this hurts Boeing's reputation, I'm not at all sure that's how it plays out. It desensitizes people and reminds them that the news is just about clicks and outrage. Then they'll not be paying much attention if there is real newsworthy revelations. The fact that it's getting so many upvotes on HN i…
Are you a Boeing stock owner? The buzz is deserved because 20 documented, serious deficiencies in the 737 MAX have escaped widespread press. Furthermore, few people are aware of the 737 NG Ducommun scandal. The rot at Boeing stretches back to the 90's.
Re: Japan ANA Boeing 737-800 flight turns back due to cockpit window crack
#63This is one of those stories that wouldn't be noticed if not for the attention on anything Boeing related right now. Instead it's near the top of the front-page. This hyper selective attention is very bad. It leads to all kinds of wrong inference about the background frequency of events, because suddenly when under the microscope we notice all kinds of things that would have previously gone unnoticed.
Every single Boeing story here is filled with comments from Seattle tech people thinking they know something special about Seattle aerospace, but they don’t, and they’re completely unaware of this.
Mostly it’s people repeating their parents stories and they’ve never bothered to fact check them, or it’s people who have never like Boeing doing military aircraft and simply shit on them for that.
It has zero impact though outside of extending the ignorance of HN readers and promoting fear, uncertainty, and doubt. No one doing aerospace cares what HN thinks or even knows about HN for that matter.
Re: Japan ANA Boeing 737-800 flight turns back due to cockpit window crack
#64The plane in question was JA56AN [0], which according to PlaneSpotters.net was delivered in June 2009 [1]. Forbes [2] indicates that the service life of a fight deck window is ten years (it's not clear if that applies to the windshield as well as passenger windows)—if that's accurate, it's likely that this is completely unrelated to Boeing's significant manufacturing problems lately. Unfortunately for Boeing it doesn…
I don't understand why the service life is relevant here, unless ANA wasn't maintaining their planes properly which I doubt is the case given the reputation of this airline.
Re: Japan ANA Boeing 737-800 flight turns back due to cockpit window crack
#65The plane in question was JA56AN [0], which according to PlaneSpotters.net was delivered in June 2009 [1]. Forbes [2] indicates that the service life of a fight deck window is ten years (it's not clear if that applies to the windshield as well as passenger windows)—if that's accurate, it's likely that this is completely unrelated to Boeing's significant manufacturing problems lately. Unfortunately for Boeing it doesn…
Boeing made a business decision to brand a new model as a "737". They wanted to trade of the reputation of the 737. Instead they tarnished it.
True. I augmented the 737-800 with MAX in my head incorrectly reading the title first, corrected later on reading the article, will need to work on erasing this story from the MAX list in my head.
They wanted to trade on the wake of the 737 so badly they ruined it big for the generic audience (those paying for it by buying tickets).
I almost said they wish they did not use 737 and make a new aircraft instead but of course they give no f, not at all, top managers care about the coming year or two only, the top salary and bonuses, thats it, the rest could sink or die for them. They will go on elsewhere ruining something completely else for the rest of us. Prosper and thrive regardless of the wreck caused and others will let it without comparable consequences.
Re: Japan ANA Boeing 737-800 flight turns back due to cockpit window crack
#66The plane in question was JA56AN [0], which according to PlaneSpotters.net was delivered in June 2009 [1]. Forbes [2] indicates that the service life of a fight deck window is ten years (it's not clear if that applies to the windshield as well as passenger windows)—if that's accurate, it's likely that this is completely unrelated to Boeing's significant manufacturing problems lately. Unfortunately for Boeing it doesn…
I don't understand why the service life is relevant here, unless ANA wasn't maintaining their planes properly which I doubt is the case given the reputation of this airline.
I included it because in theory it shows that the windshield was either overdue for replacement or it wasn't an original windshield, so it's not evidence of failure on Boeing's part in the initial manufacture of the plane.
Admittedly, I don't know much about how maintenance works for these planes, so there could be something I'm missing.
Re: Japan ANA Boeing 737-800 flight turns back due to cockpit window crack
#67This is one of those stories that wouldn't be noticed if not for the attention on anything Boeing related right now. Instead it's near the top of the front-page. This hyper selective attention is very bad. It leads to all kinds of wrong inference about the background frequency of events, because suddenly when under the microscope we notice all kinds of things that would have previously gone unnoticed.
They wanted to trade on the hyper selective attention and binding new and old very tightly together, but this thing has double edge, everyone knows it, they must eat what they cooked! They wanted the good ignoring the bad in their deliberate half blindness.
Re: Japan ANA Boeing 737-800 flight turns back due to cockpit window crack
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re fighting human nature if you think people aren’t going to be hyper attentive to things like this after the (latest) Max 9 incident. Also, it is not in any way “very bad.” In fact, it’s very good. Plane makers should believe one faulty decision could completely ruin them, that’s how they should be attacking any engineering problems related to putting people in the air. Clearly Boeing’s leadership is ok with put…
>Plane makers should believe one faulty decision could completely ruin them In that case nothing will ever be done, improved or innovated. The optimal is close, but greater than zero on faulty decisions.
Inaction/no decision is a decision too, although that idea is often a surprisingly hard sell in the media.
Re: Japan ANA Boeing 737-800 flight turns back due to cockpit window crack
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://avherald.com/h?search_term=cracked+windshield&opt=1&... Most of them are Boeing it seems: 14x Airbus 35x Boeing 5x Bombardier 3x Embraer
For a fair comparison, this should be measured against flight hours per manufacturer
Takeoff/landing cycles, actually. Cruising at high altitude is much less rough on the airframe (including windows) than the strains that happen when changing altitude.
Re: Japan ANA Boeing 737-800 flight turns back due to cockpit window crack
#70This made the news only because of Boeing's current troubles with the MAX9. They richly deserve the scrutiny for that blunder, but cracked windshields on aircraft are not all that uncommon. A step above anecdotal, but if you go to the Aviation Herald and search for "cracked windshield"[1], the first page of results covers about a year and has sixty-something entries. About half are Boeing aircraft, but again, this is not rigorous, because Avherald doesn't cover everything (but please, support them if you can; they are a great resource.)
[1] https://avherald.com/h?search_term=cracked+windshield&opt=0&...