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

Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 72 posts

Re: Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

#21

Post by im_down_w_otp »

Sometimes I think we're in some weird version of a neo-Dark-Age where the ways to do everything amazing that we figured out how to do start to atrophy along the same path as those things being taken for granted. Because they're no longer considered amazing, so they're reprioritized as such, and we forget how hard they actually are to do as well as they need to be done.

We sort of seem to end up with a built-in assumption that absolutely everything can be commoditized just because we're used to having it around, not because it is actually able to be commoditized effectively.

Re: Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

#22

Post by GuardLlama »

thisisnico wrote: post #10
blackrock wrote: post #8

Perhaps this is just a growing pain, and they’ll eventually figure it all out. And it’s a good thing they did extensive testing and caught this now, while it was still in development. This is where you are supposed to catch these errors. Maybe this article was purposefully released to spread lies and defame COMAC’s reputation? Because that is what western journalism is pushing out these days about China. But the bott…

I agree with you, I've seen articles like this on hacker news for the past 5 years about how China is failing and China is unable to produce what North America is capable of. And the interesting thing is yes, at first they fail. Why should we expect them to get it right the first time? You learn with practice, and mistakes, and testing. I guarantee eventually they will have a functioning aircraft. This is normal proc…

> You learn with practice, and mistakes, and testing.

The C919 isn't a juicer. I don't want the company manufacturing the airplane my family is flying in to learn from practice and mistakes.

Re: Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

#23

Post by proc0 »

JackFr wrote: post #11

The recent failures of Boeing and this story underscore how very, very, very, very difficult it is to build a modern airliner. I'm hard pressed to come up with any other product which has as many complex interacting systems, requiring expertise in aerodynamics, materials science, mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, software, UX design among other things, with very little margin for error. Honestly they're…

Indeed, one of the few exceptions is basically a faster version of the product that goes to space.

Re: Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

#24

Post by QUFB »

blackrock wrote: post #8

Perhaps this is just a growing pain, and they’ll eventually figure it all out. And it’s a good thing they did extensive testing and caught this now, while it was still in development. This is where you are supposed to catch these errors. Maybe this article was purposefully released to spread lies and defame COMAC’s reputation? Because that is what western journalism is pushing out these days about China. But the bott…

> But the bottom line, is that COMAC didn’t have 2 of their planes fall out of the sky, like Boeing did.

Customers are not flying the COMAC C919 - it is not in passenger service.

Re: Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

#25

Post by StreamBright »

tus88 wrote: post #13
wereHamster wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally the first paragraph of the article: > BEIJING/PARIS (Reuters) - Development of China’s C919 single-aisle plane, already at least five years behind schedule, is going slower than expected, a dozen people familiar with the program told Reuters, as the state-owned Commercial Aircraft Corporation (COMAC) struggles with a range of technical issues that have severely restricted test flights.

I don't bother reading things unless I can confirm my interest in the article. I can't do that with unknown acronyms.

I guess you never read any article about any startup then.

Re: Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

#26

Post by blackrock »

starpilot wrote: post #17
blackrock wrote: post #8

Perhaps this is just a growing pain, and they’ll eventually figure it all out. And it’s a good thing they did extensive testing and caught this now, while it was still in development. This is where you are supposed to catch these errors. Maybe this article was purposefully released to spread lies and defame COMAC’s reputation? Because that is what western journalism is pushing out these days about China. But the bott…

Yeah but COMAC has maybe 2 commercial jets that have entered service, Boeing has shuttled millions of people around the world safely for decades. We're riding an aviation news scare wave right now, so every burp and fart from the industry is getting reported. That said, there's no question that COMAC doesn't have the experience of Boeing or Airbus in designing production airliners. It's like trying to throw a bunch o…

This is exactly why it’s an embarrassment for Boeing.

The fact that they have over 100 years of experience doing this, but yet, they made an elementary mistake. Two of their planes fell out of the sky!

And at first, they blamed it on mediocre 3rd world country pilots.

Then, the truth finally came out. Their design for the 737 MAX was junk. It was fatally flawed. It’s a flying death trap!

They put on a larger sized engine to get more fuel efficiency. But moved the nacelle forward, which changed the flight characteristics, causing the plane to pitch its nose up. Which they tried to fix, by having 1 faulty sensor detect the balance, and to correct it with software to automatically adjust the flaps. But the sensor was wrong, and it wasn’t redundant, and the software over-corrected. And what’s the result? The planes fall out of the sky.

They paper-bagged one problem with another, and another. Then they lied and sold it to the public, like it was the safest plane ever made.

Re: Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

#27

Post by StreamBright »

starpilot wrote: post #17
blackrock wrote: post #8

Perhaps this is just a growing pain, and they’ll eventually figure it all out. And it’s a good thing they did extensive testing and caught this now, while it was still in development. This is where you are supposed to catch these errors. Maybe this article was purposefully released to spread lies and defame COMAC’s reputation? Because that is what western journalism is pushing out these days about China. But the bott…

Yeah but COMAC has maybe 2 commercial jets that have entered service, Boeing has shuttled millions of people around the world safely for decades. We're riding an aviation news scare wave right now, so every burp and fart from the industry is getting reported. That said, there's no question that COMAC doesn't have the experience of Boeing or Airbus in designing production airliners. It's like trying to throw a bunch o…

I think the problems from Boeing mark a new era when you cannot rely anymore on a previous good record. The new structure how FAA approves airliners proven to be insufficient, for both the Dreamliner & MCAS with 737. If Boeing continues going down this path than it won't matter how long and how many passengers they shuttled.

Re: Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

#28

Post by texasbigdata »

JackFr wrote: post #11

The recent failures of Boeing and this story underscore how very, very, very, very difficult it is to build a modern airliner. I'm hard pressed to come up with any other product which has as many complex interacting systems, requiring expertise in aerodynamics, materials science, mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, software, UX design among other things, with very little margin for error. Honestly they're…

Space shuttle? :)

Re: Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

#29

Post by yummypaint »

im_down_w_otp wrote: post #21

Sometimes I think we're in some weird version of a neo-Dark-Age where the ways to do everything amazing that we figured out how to do start to atrophy along the same path as those things being taken for granted. Because they're no longer considered amazing, so they're reprioritized as such, and we forget how hard they actually are to do as well as they need to be done. We sort of seem to end up with a built-in assump…

I think this ties into the importance of living knowledge. Even the most meticulous notes must be interpreted and executed by someone, and there is no substitute for an experienced person. This has already happened with technologies like vacuum tubes. It isnt a simple matter of economics to restart production because much of the know-how must be rediscovered. In the absence of the original volume of demand that led to the first generation of tube engineers, it may be lost forever. There are some niche high power RF devices still using tubes from decades ago.

Re: Comac engineers miscalculated the forces that would be placed on the engines

#30

Post by Skunkleton »

dmitrygr wrote: post #12
NextHendrix wrote: post #5

Very annoying when you choose to reject cookies in the optional cookie consent menu and the page refreshes to ask you again

well, if they cannot store a cookie, how would they remember that you said "no cookies" ?

There should be an option to only reject some cookies. No to tracking, yes to chocolate chip.
Post reply on HN