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

More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 454 posts

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#121

Post by ibejoeb »

CGamesPlay wrote: post #57
defenestration wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For distance traveled flying is safer than any other form of transportation (maybe except trains?). I wonder however, what the stats are for time spent. How much safer is time spent flying, compared to other forms of transportation? Is it about equal, a bit safer or an order of magnitude safer?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_safety By hours, flying is substantially safer than car or foot, on par with trains. By quantity of trips, substantially less safe than walking.

Like anything else, not all operators are equal. I probably wouldn't want to try my luck as an Amtrak frequent traveler.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#122

Post by wongarsu »

armchairdweller wrote: post #48

I've read in a different place that the many problems could be a result of uncareful and miscoordinated outsourcing, particularly in the software domain. Is there any good information / insight on this?

Both this issue and issue with the door bolts were caused by Spirit, who Boeing outsourced the production of fuselages to. There's lots of info on the quality troubles with them going back years.

For example here is an article from May of last year [1] about a quality issue with Spirit that had been going on for 4 years. Here [2] is one from last October which says "The goal of the agreement is to stabilize Spirit’s production system, by stemming the flow of quality defects that have afflicted the 737 MAX and the 787 Dreamliner jet programs this year and positioning Spirit to ramp up to Boeing’s planned rate increases." The agreement was Spirit running out of cash and Boeing swooping in to save them despite their poor quality, because they were the only supplier for these fuselages. The financial times wrote a good article about it [3].

This is absolutely a story of outsourcing gone wrong. But they didn't outsource it to China or Mexico, they outsourced it to Kansas, USA.

1: https://theaircurrent.com/industry-strategy/boeing-spirit-re...

2: https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boein...

3: https://archive.is/prHOK

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#123

Post by missedthecue »

rossdavidh wrote: post #3

I do get the impression that the current Boeing CEO is attempting to turn the culture around, to a more "admit the problem and fix it" kind of attitude. The problem is that, if you are doing this after many years of "deny the problem and ship it", the number of apparent problems is actually going to go up for a while. I wonder if Boeing's customers and shareholders will have enough patience for him to complete the tr…

Muilenburg was an engineer who worked his way up to CEO at Boeing. He totally mishandled the 737 Max crisis.

Meanwhile, Airbus had an engineer CEO who nearly bankrupted the firm with the A380 project.

I think trying to put management into buckets doesn't work very well. Some engineer CEOs have bad product sense and some sales CEOs have great product sense. I mean, Steve Jobs for crying out loud.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#124

Post by epcoa »

gruez wrote: post #99
TylerE wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a hell of a lot of goal post moving. Comair is (and was at the time) a wholly-owned subsidiary of Delta. It counts.

It's not "goal post moving" when his original post says "major airline".

You’re right, the goals were in a stupid place to begin with. I see no honest reason in the scope of this discussion to make this distinction. The regionals expand the network of the majors, it’s not like they overlap. People buy and use these services just like the major airlines. The distinction is interesting in the context of comparing the relative safety of the regionals but in a discussion about general airline passenger safety it is disingenuous.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#125

Post by stouset »

m_a_g wrote: post #38
stouset wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is irrational. Since November 2001, there has been one death aboard a major airline operating in the U.S.[1]. That was a Southwest flight where an entire engine self-destructed. It was an issue with the CFM engine, Not with anything Boeing did. You might choose to include one more. An Asiana flight tumbled end over end after arriving short at SFO. Everyone survived the crash, but a passenger was killed when an eme…

Why are you including only US airlines for comparing a plane model's safety? That seems very convenient. And even worse you are using other planes data as well.

Because airlines and pilots operating within the U.S. are subject to significantly more safety restrictions and regulations than much of the rest of the world.

Put simply, pilots are required to undergo more training, observe best practices in CRM, and have strict requirements on how much rest is required between flights. Planes are better maintained and inspected.

I’m sure there are other countries that do a good job here, but in general America is significantly more strict about these things than much of the rest of the world.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#126

Post by taylortbb »

m_a_g wrote: post #38
stouset wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is irrational. Since November 2001, there has been one death aboard a major airline operating in the U.S.[1]. That was a Southwest flight where an entire engine self-destructed. It was an issue with the CFM engine, Not with anything Boeing did. You might choose to include one more. An Asiana flight tumbled end over end after arriving short at SFO. Everyone survived the crash, but a passenger was killed when an eme…

Why are you including only US airlines for comparing a plane model's safety? That seems very convenient. And even worse you are using other planes data as well.

> Why are you including only US airlines for comparing a plane model's safety? That seems very convenient

737 MAXs are not identical worldwide. There's a number of optional add-ons, which even discount US airlines will pay for, but emerging market discount airlines will not.

Specifically for the 737 MAX crashes, it was from a faulty AoA sensor. Neither of the crashed planes had the AoA disagree alert option, but all US airlines paid extra for it. It's not something you're supposed to need, hence being an optional extra, but for obvious reasons budgets aren't as tight at North American airlines as discount airlines in emerging markets.

This isn't to say we're guaranteed that an AoA disagree alert would have avoided the problem, it was undeniably a faulty design, but it probably provides an additional layer of safety. There's a reason that when the MAX returned to service it became standard equipment for all MAXs sold.

So, it's not entirely correct to totally exclude planes from other countries. But there is a fair point in putting more weight on similarly configured planes.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#127

Post by ibejoeb »

ramesh31 wrote: post #73

Break. Them. Up. This is a concern of national security at the highest level. Boeing needs the Standard Oil treatment, which was a net positive for everyone involved.

Is that going to directly address this particular problem? This mfg defect by a third party. They're already broken up in the context of this problem.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#128

Post by flaminHotSpeedo »

ramesh31 wrote: post #73

Break. Them. Up. This is a concern of national security at the highest level. Boeing needs the Standard Oil treatment, which was a net positive for everyone involved.

That's actually exactly the wrong thing to do.

The problem, at least in this case, is that Boeing chose to break off what is now known as Spirit Aerosystems into a separate entity, and now Spirit has Boeing by the balls because Boeing can't replace them and has to deal with the consequences of their shitty manufacturing and QC.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#129

Post by hef19898 »

roody15 wrote: post #93

I cannot help but get the feeling that Boeing woes are like a canary in a coal mine for larger structural issues in the US government as a whole. Too much effort is put into spin, public relations and propaganda instead of actual just getting things done.

Boeing is about as representative of the US government, or country, as German soccer is for our government.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#130

Post by stouset »

stephenr wrote: post #107
gruez wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because most readers of this site are American, and fly on airlines from the US. When assessing their risk, it makes sense to use US statistics.

Hi non American here, I have never and likely will never fly on an American airline, but I'd very much like to not die because some dickhead cut costs and another dickhead drilled the wrong holes in a part. The implicit assumption that all readers are Americans is ridiculous enough, making it an explicit reason for fudging the numbers to make a tire fire of public safety seem like it's just a dumpster fire is absurd.

You’ll be happy to learn that Boeing and Airbus have roughly equivalent safety records.

If you wish to fly safely, fly in countries and on airlines that observe stricter requirements on pilot training, rest, and CRM, and which are rigorous about maintaining their planes.

Post reply on HN