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

131–140 of 454 posts

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#131

Post by roody15 »

hef19898 wrote: post #129
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.

Hmm, is it? Boeing is in the category of too big to fail. I agree its not government per say.. but it is really not a private business either.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#134

Post by [deleted] »

TylerE wrote: post #53
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…

Your own link doesn't back that up. A Delta Connections commuter flight killed 49 in Lexington, KY in 2013.

[deleted]

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#135

Post by hef19898 »

epcoa wrote: post #101
hef19898 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends in the misdrills. Can be as easy as redrilling with a larger diameter to fix. Not every Boeing issue is a clusterfuck.

Admittedly not that hilarious, but whoosh.

This whole comment thread kind of flew over my head.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#136

Post by gruez »

TylerE wrote: post #111
gruez wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The flight was operated under Delta by a subsidiary of Delta wholy owned by Delta. This would be like saying if all of the Youtube database was hacked, Google wasn't hacked. Google owns Youtube. Delta owns Comair.

Subsidiary or not, at least one source (wikipedia) thinks the distinction exists. You might argue that the distinction doesn't matter when it comes to assessing airline safety, but that's hardly grounds to accuse someone of "moving the goalposts". The goalposts might be arbitrary, but they weren't moved.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#137

Post by selimthegrim »

coredog64 wrote: post #70
a321neo wrote: post #50

[flagged]

This is a masterful troll. University of Kansas is extremely well known in aviation. Boeing Wichita has been around forever and now that it’s Spirit, it’s an Airbus supplier.

There's also lot of private aviation manufacturing there.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#138

Post by brewdad »

Rantenki wrote: post #86
TylerE wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the choice though. It's choosing one new car that doesn't have a bunch of safety recalls over one that does.

New car reliability measured in warranty returns per vehicle is much WORSE over the last few years than 15 years ago. Turning your nose up at the 15 year old Toyota is probably making a choice to be _less_safe, since at least the old Toyota's recalls are known, and likely fixed. The new vehicle doesn't have enough time on the roads for all the dangerous defects to be identified and recalled yet.

The 15 year old Toyota has fewer safety features than the modern one. Side impact airbags, collision monitoring systems etc. Additionally, the 15 year old Toyota will only be as safe as the maintenance that has been done to keep it operating properly. Do you trust a random Uber driver to have kept up with everything?

Back to safety systems, the 15 year old Toyota almost certainly had faulty airbags that were recalled many years ago. Something like 56,000 of those recalls still haven't been done. Which pool of vehicles does this Toyota belong to?

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#139

Post by TylerE »

stouset wrote: post #130
stephenr wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Which can basically be translated as avoid (especially) Africa, South East Asia (that isn't Japan or South Korea), and most of South America. Eastern Europe is a dodgy but no on the same level.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#140

Post by Arnt »

Closi wrote: post #90
iudqnolq wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

346 people died in two similar crashes of two Boeing 747 Max planes. Boing and the FAA initially cast the blame on supposedly lower standards at the Indonesian and Ethiopian airlines operating the planes, but this was completely unsupported and incorrect speculation. Poor processes at Boeing and the FAA were in fact responsible. Unfortunately the incorrect narrative has persisted.

Agree! By the time there were c380 Max's built, two of them had already fallen out of the sky (despite operating for only a year). That's c0.5% of the fleet falling out of the sky every 12 months! Still not too risky on an individual flight, but if you were a pilot across a 40 year flying career those odds start to stack up across your cohort! Plus it's a bizzare safety stance to try and sell "So what their planes fa…

Isn't it 1%? If the oldest of the 380 has been operating for a year and they were produced at an even rate, their average age should be six months.

I don't know much about car accidents, but 1%/year sounds like a lot. Can one even legally sell a car model if 1% of the cars are going to crash lethally in the first year? Or evne 0.5, or 0.2%?

Post reply on HN