21–30 of 63 posts
Not trying to defend boeing but please be aware that these incidents are somewhat common and are currently being disproportionally reported due their relevance of past events.
Another Boeing incidence. There should be a statistics page somewhere where incidences are marked on some graph or chart showing engine manufacturers airplane manufacturers airlines etc. if any exist would like to see such a page.
This is not related to Boeing at all. Engine covers not being closed properly is a relatively common (still rare in the grand scheme of things) incident and happens a lot more frequently on Airbus models to the point that Airbus modified the door latch.
So you’re saying Airbus resolved this issue? Why hasn’t Boeing?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This incident isn't related to Boeing .. at all ... but when Airbus do it (which you assure it happens more frequently) it's related to whom exactly, and why did Airbus fix it if it wasn't related to them (modified the door latch)?
Whoever did not latch the door properly after doing maintenance checks. Which is either a mechanic at the airline itself or someone at a maintenance hub that is contracted by the airline. Not the job of the manufacturer whatsoever.
Comment which I Favorited: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39964702
> We all know the Baader–Meinhof / frequency illusion, which is where something becomes interesting to an observer so suddenly they notice things that were always there, but because they suddenly notice it seems there has been some massive increase in frequency.
> What is it when something gets into the zeitgeist narrative so every possible instance is widely reported on in a way that it wasn't before? Parts have always been flying off planes, and there have always been maintenance issues, but suddenly every single one is reported making it feel like it's some sudden outbreak. In the same way we're hearing about every boat hitting something when boats have always been hitting things, it just didn't have a context under which it was newsworthy.
Internalize this, I am trying to as well. This is one of the points of HN-worthy discussion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope this is sarcasm cause in no way Boeing is ‘poor’. There is a duopoly of aircraft and doesn’t matter what reputation Boeing gets, the orders will keep coming in. If your airline cancels an order 5 others are waiting to take your spot.
I would be surprised if Boeing isn't seeing or going to see reduced orders because of this endless barrage of bad news.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not related to Boeing at all. Engine covers not being closed properly is a relatively common (still rare in the grand scheme of things) incident and happens a lot more frequently on Airbus models to the point that Airbus modified the door latch.
> and happens a lot more frequently on Airbus models to the point that Airbus modified the door latch. So you’re saying Airbus resolved this issue? Why hasn’t Boeing?
Another Boeing incidence. There should be a statistics page somewhere where incidences are marked on some graph or chart showing engine manufacturers airplane manufacturers airlines etc. if any exist would like to see such a page.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn’t relevant - the final assembler is responsible for QC. If I build something, and I buy something from a third party to be part of it, I make sure that A) it isn’t defective B) it integrates robustly You can wave your hand at the supply chain all you want, but if you’re sticking your name on it, it’s yours.
Is this a brand new airplane or caused by some design flaw? Because if not everyone should probably be blaming the airline/maintenance company. Certainly not downplaying Boeing’s massive screwups but it just seems that every single incident that everyone just used ignore in past is now an international news story (but only if a Boeing plane is involved)