Live data from Hacker News

FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

cnbc.com

161–170 of 884 posts

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#161
post #96

At what point does Boeing just scrap the 9s? Completely, for good? It’s all starting to feel like the galaxy note, where you pass a tipping point of no return with public perception.

Because some guy at the factory forgot to lock the door? Isn't that a little melodramatic?

The 346 people who died in 2018/2019 because of the 737 Max's incompetent safety standards and engineering beg to differ.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Famous last words.

It's like sneaking a bomb on board for safety purposes. "I mean, what are the odds that there are TWO bombs on this plane?"

I wish we had an updated remake of Airplane! that uses this line. THere's so much room for good political satire but it seems like it's not being made.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#163

A bit off-topic, but I found it curious that Ryanair refuses to call their Max fleet "737 Max-8", instead they go for "737-8200" in both their safety cards and cabin briefings. I wonder if this is common and if other airlines do the same after the reputational damage from the crashes and groundings.

ryanair using misleading advertising? say it's not so!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryanair#Misleading_advertising

o'leary bought them as he got them cheap, exactly the same as ryanair's fleet in the 90s

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#164
post #3

>The FAA said the inspections will take between four and eight hours per plane. Seems reasonable. I was wondering if a single event should really be enough to "ground" all similar planes, but seems like they just want to do a quick inspection.

It was only dumb luck that no one got killed because the adjacent seats were empty. To give you some idea, a teenager seated across the aisle had his shirt completely torn off.

His mother held on to him to keep him from getting suck out too.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#165

I certainly know nothing about planes yet from the reading I've done on the 737 Max I'm a bit uneasy that these planes are still flying. I usually subscribe to the mentality that something that had a significant issue that was fixed is overly scrutinized and thus becomes safe but in this case it seems like the decision-making involved in the making of this plane from the start was flawed, such that I'm not sure patch…

The FAA will never ban it because politically its untenable in the US, the only thing that could kill the Max off would be if another big regulator such as EASA refused to let the Max into their airspace.

Need a pilot strike until it's banned

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#166
post #124

How even does a "plug" door blow out like that? That's a seemingly very robust design where cabin pressure holds the door in place passively, in addition to the latches holding it in place.

It is not a plug door in this case. There was no door - this was a kind of blanker for a space where there could have been a door.

A bit like when you buy a car model that doesn’t have all the options installed, there’s a space for the button or switch for the option in the dashboard or whatever but it’s filled in with a fixed bit of plastic - it saves them from having to produce multiple different versions of dashboard, or in this case plane fuselages.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#167

Boeing is what happens when an engineering focused company gets taken over by MBAs. When it happens to a webtech company we call it enshitification. When it happens to a transportation company lives are actually at risk. Sadly Boeing is important enough to DC that they seem to be allowed to casually risk American lives.

There really needs to be a federally protected “no” from engineering to keep the MBAs from “optimizing” away things they don’t understand.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to keep the management from the company you've bought.

Well clearly the McD people were more skilled politicians.

This can't be emphasized enough. Businesses (and most organizations) are not meritocracies.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#169
post #5

I’d at first read the plane was without passengers and just being flown somewhere… and I thought, great. Today I read that it was full of passengers, and the two people supposed to be in the two seats in the row the panel blew out happened to miss their flight. If that’s true… what an interesting set of statistics coming together. Amount of people that sleep through flights Amount of panels that blow out of passenger…

The seat is still there, firmly attached to the plane. In all likelihood a passenger in that seat, if they were wearing their seat belt (as they should have, it wasn't at cruising altitude, and you should wear your seat belt anyway when seated), would have been severely frightened and annoyed, but probably uninjured. Maybe some hearing loss.

The seat is at the very least missing some fabric and cushioning. Winds that can do that to an airplane seat probably wouldn’t leave a human uninjured.

Re: FAA orders grounding of more than 170 Boeing 737 Max 9s

#170
post #91

Ways in which you can experience an unexpected cabin decompression to the next world...Or join the mile-high never-come-back club, on a Boeing 737 MAX... 1- Loose bolts: "Boeing Urges Airlines to Check for Loose Bolt in newer 737 MAX Aircraft" - https://www.european-views.com/2023/12/boeing-urges-airlines... 2- Leave the anti-icing system on for more than 5 min after non-icing conditions: "Boeing still hasn't fixed t…

Two of those are manufacturing mistakes, and it seems likely the door one is as well. Not that that helps the passengers, but they're not systemic design flaws. That anti-icing system is deranged, though. They effectively installed a timed detonator on the engines and want a safety exemption for it.

Separating “manufacturing mistakes” only makes sense if someone else is responsible for manufacturing. As far as I know, Boeing is responsible for both the design and the manufacturing of these aircraft so the difference is purely informational, but in terms of criticizing Boeing mostly irrelevant.
Post reply on HN