Live data from Hacker News

Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

wsj.com

271–280 of 494 posts

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#271
Boeing today is so obviously a different organisation to the one that built their rapidly dwindling reputation.

The 747 was an amazing engineering marvel. They started designing it in '65, the first one rolled off the production line in '68, and they were still making and selling them right up to 2023.

I have a book here somewhere that talks about how so many of the design decisions were based on cold hard physics facts combined with engineering pragmatism. They needed to run the engine at peak efficiency, and the tradeoff between air density and air temperature set the cruising altitude to ~35,000 feet. They knew they didn't know enough to be able to build a supersonic plane, so that set the top speed at just under mach 1 at 35,000 feet. They wanted to carry 2-3 times as many passengers as the 707 which set the payload and the all up weight. It needed to go slow enough to land safely at typical airport altitudes, which set the wing loading and given the weight the wing area. It needed to be as efficient as possible which meant a high aspect ratio, but given the required wing area and the available engineering capability for wing spars and aluminum construction that set the wing span.

It was hard engineering tradeoffs like that which then set a whole bunch of aviation standards. Runway lengths, terminal and jetway heights, landing approach speeds - all those types of "standards" which still exist today in airports around the globe, are heavily influenced by the 747 and it's design parameters. Cessna 172s flying into international airports have to fly their landing approach way faster than usual for that type of plane because _everybody_ flies approaches at 747 speeds.

That is not today's Boeing.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#272
Semi-unrelated, but that photo is taken from the Hyatt Regency Lake Washington, which looks over Boeing's Renton facility from many of the rooms.

Nice hotel on its own (though a bit out of the way from most Seattle tourist stuff), but extra-nice if you're an aviation geek.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#273
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> with large organizations where once their markets mature, everybody who can build a product end-to-end leaves or gets forced out, leaving only people with highly specialized maintenance skillsets It's not just building a product end-to-end. Tim Cook is a supply-chain guy. He knows how to build a product. What he doesn't know how is how to design a new one. This is the reason that all of the "new" stuff that has com…

My work laptop (Mac) needed an OS upgrade recently, top of the release notes was "added 8 emojis" - what? Why is this an OS level feature worth calling out

Apple is rumored to have a strategic emoji reserve. The more they want people to install an update, the more emojis from the reserve they release as part of it. Because this is basically the only thing that drives OS updates among average people.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#274
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Has a degree that’s basically informatics management. My coworker took a class with case studies and the theory presented by that class was that all successful projects have at least one person who has fit the entire system into their head. They can tell you what happens if you pull on this thread. What the consequences are of trying to remove this feature. Lose them and you are fucke…

For software, the easiest way to design for this is to keep systems small enough that fitting it in your head is relatively feasible in a reasonable time for a competent engineer. Connect them with clear APIs that don't have to change all that often, and you can build pretty big things. I imagine this is doable with hardware too

In my experience (and I generally have found myself in the position of 'person that has the system in their head'), it's not necessarily about size but about being able to sit down and work with the system. It's not just about having the theory but also having the time actually working with the system and learning how things act in practice, which is a kinda weird mix between being a senior role with a high-level view of the system and a theoretically quite junior role of more or less technician.

(It also usually involves some quite proactive learning of the form of finding the specialist in some part of the system and sitting next to them and going "explain to me how this part works", and then repeating more or less indefinitely)

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#275
post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does a moon base get us, though? It was cool to get bragging rights by being the first to land and come back - in the ultimate show of “soft power” against the Soviet Union. But a permanent moon base? We can’t even fund the ISS.

A moon base gets us a platform to test what long term low gravity does to a human body, and an environment to test ISRU for various materials like water, oxygen, iron, titanium, etc... Being able to prove that people can live in an environment like the moon long term and develop materials that can make their stay there sustainable by reducing consumables and developing replacement parts from lunar material is a great…

Stepping stone to… what exactly?

We couldn’t even handle a closed source experiment on earth (see biosphere 2), why would one on another celestial body fare any better?

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We'd pay $xxx billion to have a permanent moon base, something Apollo never had. If that can't efforts excite people enough to keep funding flowing I doubt a space station in lunar orbit will move the needle To add another data point: the Chinese lunar program also plans to land humans on the moon and later establish a manned research outpost on the surface. But there don't seem to be any plans for an orbital station…

What does a moon base get us, though? It was cool to get bragging rights by being the first to land and come back - in the ultimate show of “soft power” against the Soviet Union. But a permanent moon base? We can’t even fund the ISS.

Can you see a future for humanity where the moon isn’t colonised?

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read "Airframe" by Michael Crichton probably twenty years ago, and it was around ten years old at that time. I remember that that book talked about how the planes were unstable by design and required software to maintain proper flight characteristics, and that this was so because it was more efficient. The book is fiction, but I doubt it was far off the mark at the time. I suspect that there is no going back from t…

The 737-MAX is not "unstable by design". It has the exact same positive stability as other planes in 99% of it's flight envelope. The remaining exception is that, at a certain AoA, speed, thrust, etc, there is a case where adding thrust pushes the nose up more than it does for the normal 737 The nose push is not abnormal, it is not unsafe, it is not unexpected. All planes with engines below the inertial "center" of t…

And boeing's whole philosophy is that they should make a passenger jet feel like Cessna, which is an increasingly tenuous fiction.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People blame Boeing for the 737 MAX. They were elbows deep in a clean sheet design. Yeah, they shouldn’t have built the plane but the demand was made by Southwest and American who both said straight up if you don’t make a new 737, we’re switching to Airbus.

My understand is that the 737 Max was fine if they treated it as a new airplane. The problem was the put gizmos on it to make it behave like a regular 737 so pilots didn't need to get retrained on it. Those gizmos are what crashed it when you didn't know how they behaved when they failed.

The problem is that the whole point of the 737 Max was that airlines didn't have to treat it as a new airplane. If they did, it would have lost a lot of the value proposition and there would have been more support for an entirely new replacement instead. It would be a fascinating case study in perverse incentives and unintended consequences if it wasn't for the loss of life that resulted.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#280
post #41

It'll be interesting to see if they still can design and build a new ground-up airplane design. The last all-new design was the 787, initiated in 2003 and launched in 2009, and its design was fraught with problems. Before then was the 777 in the early 90s (pre-McDonnell takeover), and the 757/767 in the early 80s. There's a phenomena that ofter occurs with large organizations where once their markets mature, everybod…

To add to this & the Jobs interview - an oil industry proverb: a healthy oil company has a geologist in charge, a mature one has an engineer in charge, a declining one has an accountant in charge, and a dying one has a lawyer in charge.

Dennis Muilenberg has a BS in Aerospace Engineering and a MS in Aeronautics and Astronautics. He was Boeing’s CEO during and after the MAX disaster. He cannot be blamed for the first crash, but he absolutely bears a direct responsibility for every person who died in the second crash, as by that point he knew that he had delivered a product that had not been correctly and fully certified by the regulatory authority.

An ethical person with that knowledge, whether they be an engineer, lawyer, or a circus clown, would have fought tooth and nail to ensure the aircraft was grounded.

I am much more interested in the ethics of any particular leader, than their credentials.

Post reply on HN