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

241–250 of 454 posts

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#241

Post by jillesvangurp »

abtinf wrote: post #105

I happen to have quite a bit of first-hand knowledge about aerospace rivets. AMA.

Is this as much of a non issue as I think it is? I'm thinking non structural bits of aluminum fuselage having a few extra holes is embarrassing but probably easily fixed/painted over and not that critical. Not generally a reason to get all upset and replace the part. But kind of embarrassing to have on a new part (i.e. get a discount).

I've been watching a lot of rebuild rescue on Youtube lately where a bunch of mechanics are trying to rebuild a decades old plane nicknamed the bird house (because birds were nesting in it for well over a decade and they got absolutely everywhere). That seems to involve a lot of rivets, usage of all sorts of power tools, cleaning up old lots of parts, and generally not being too delicate banging things back into shape. Massive project and makes you realize just how complicated even a relatively small plane is.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#242

Post by TylerE »

stouset wrote: post #187
epcoa wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Still, it doesn’t really change the upshot Indeed it does not, which made the omission more strange or innocent. What was ridiculous was the apologia subthread. > small tourism operators who are often far less rigorous in their safety practices, with relatively low-hour pilots. There have been some improvements (in part due to these accidents) but this isn’t so far off from the regionals which was definitely a fact…

It was not my intent to exclude regionals operating regularly-scheduled white-label service for the majors. It was my intent to exclude microscopic commercial operators doing charter flights, tourism, and other similar activities. I sincerely apologize for the omission, I did not recognize that that Comair flight was operating under the United banner.

Then you also have to count https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chalk%27s_Ocean_Airways_Flight... and it's 20 fatalities. That was a regularly scheduled flight by a US carrier.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#243

Post by luuurker »

stouset wrote: post #174
luuurker wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One needs to ignore a lot of stuff to believe these newer planes are very safe, so I'm not sure if it's completely irrational. You have a long list of fairly recent problems... the stuff around MCAS that killed people, misdrilled holes, loose or missing bolts, debris inside fuel tanks, etc. And the reason why no one died on the Alaska flight was more luck than anything. I'm not sure if everyone would be alive today h…

One needs to look at the data to believe these planes are very safe. Even if one or two people had died on the Alaska incident (which—to be clear—would have been an avoidable tragedy for which Boeing would be responsible), flying on a major airline in the U.S. is still safer than any other form of transportation. You don’t think twice about hopping into a passenger vehicle. You don’t follow the latest NHTSA crash tes…

Planes in general are very safe compared to other forms of transportation, but we're not comparing the Boeing 737 Max to some Tesla or Ford. We are comparing it to other planes.

While I'm likely to fly on a 737 in the future, it's perfectly fine to say "well, since there's an Airbus A320 Neo available, I'll fly on that instead". Why? Because while data doesn't show it, there's a list of fairly recent Boeing screw ups and there are even better alternatives not affected by said screw ups.

The Alaska incident didn't kill someone because of luck... a different day or a few minutes later and it's likely someone would have been ejected from the plane. The problem with the plane/manufacturing/Boeing is there, even if no one died and that's why looking at numbers alone without context is as bad as refusing to fly just because of the panic caused by "news". There's a middle ground between these two extremes...

Regarding cars, you probably wouldn't have to refuse to go on a car known for coming out of the factory with loose wheel nuts because if the problem was known there would be a recall and Uber itself would ban the car, something they already do in some places for even less important reasons (space, comfort, etc). I also find it hard to blame the customer for not wanting to go on a car model that has a new major problem every 1 or 2 years.

By the way, I understand the point you're making, but keep in mind that the level of risk people are willing to take is different for different things. To you it might make no sense to avoid the Max if also you take a car to the airport, but that's not how most people work.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#244

Post by dang »

flaminHotSpeedo wrote: post #56

This title is extremely misleading, to the point of being factually incorrect. Boeing didn't find the fault, Spirit did and notified Boeing, and the problem only affects undelivered fuselages.

Ok we've popped "Boeing" and "finds" off the head of the title above.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#245

Post by bmurphy1976 »

SirMaster wrote: post #177
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

well technically. We didn't find out about these things because of increased inspections. We found out because it was in the news when there was videos of a door blown off, then a few days later an engine fire. THEN, they started more inspections. So, it seems more like a trend, where there were more and more problems until they piled up far enough to breach the surface. So how many haven't been found, the ice-burg b…

My only point was that hearing about the issues found by more inspections shouldn't change your mind about the safety because performing more inspections and reporting on the findings doesn't reduce the safety of what it already was (what you were presumably already OK with before simply hearing about the new inspections and issues found).

Your logic is absurd. We shouldn't worry because we weren't worrying before we knew the problem existed? Now we are educated about the problem what are we supposed to do? Put our heads in the sand and pretend the problem doesn't exist??

We weren't OK before, we were ignorant.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#246

Post by strangattractor »

BoxFour wrote: post #13
Workaccount2 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boeing needs to dump the CEO and install someone from an engineering lineage if they want to build their reputation back. An engineering company run by a longtime manager with a background in accounting is in large part how Boeing got here. Fire the guy and get someone with a technical background in there.

Like this guy? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Muilenburg

More like this guy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk

Someone with an engineering background and a pinch of Vlad the Impaler;)

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#247

Post by renewiltord »

gruez wrote: post #49
m_a_g wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 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.

This is kind of why I don't mind playing Russian Roulette. I mean, think about the chances! Despite all the times people have played the game, how many have died in San Francisco, between 3rd Street and New Montgomery Street, while it's been raining on a Monday when Lionel Messi didn't play in Hong Kong because of injury. The chances are minuscule.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#248

Post by AaronM »

Syonyk wrote: post #211
lrem wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? The CEO of a company this big, no matter their background, has no business building an intimate understanding of the tech. They’re there to set up an incentive system to further the goals of their choosing. Neither seems to call for deep understanding of neither. And no background absolves a CEO from building a surface understanding of all aspects of running the business. TBF, from my experience with VPs, techni…

> Why? The CEO of a company this big, no matter their background, has no business building an intimate understanding of the tech. This is certainly a point of contention in modern schools of business thought, but the concept of a CEO who doesn't understand what the company builds is bizarre to me. The CEO of Boeing, IMO, should probably have aircraft engineering experience, and, ideally, also be a pilot with the suit…

Does the CEO need to know these things? I would argue no. What needs to happen is the CEO needs to listen and trust the technical people that report to him.

There is a misalignment of priorities that will never be fixed as long as the primary incentive for the CEO is to maximize shareholder value. If you remove that, and force the primary incentiven to be safety over profits, the rest of the business will follow.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#249

Post by AaronM »

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #106
Workaccount2 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boeing needs to dump the CEO and install someone from an engineering lineage if they want to build their reputation back. An engineering company run by a longtime manager with a background in accounting is in large part how Boeing got here. Fire the guy and get someone with a technical background in there.

> Boeing needs to dump the CEO and install someone from an engineering lineage if they want to build their reputation back. I'd argue they need an effective engineering culture , and leadership that enables and values and fights for it, not a former-engineer figurehead. Good engineers within Boeing need to be enabled to do their job properly, within normal business constraints, and bad engineers need to be removed. T…

I think the MD merge gets the blame by many, however, it seems as though the shift in the market that started around the same time to optimize shareholder value at all costs is really to blame.

Re: More misdrilled holes on 737 MAX in latest setback

#250

Post by CodeWriter23 »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #217
CodeWriter23 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any of that happens at the supervisor or mid-level manager level and should be taken to HR. By complying with bullying, the employees are not only committing a federal crime, they also risk being debarred by the FAA. That means they no longer work in the Aviation Industry.

HR retaliates frequently

Then you man up and do the whistleblower thing. And you do it having established a written record with HR. The choice between keeping my job vs maiming / killing strangers due to my own negligence is a no-brainer for me.
Post reply on HN