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

Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 494 posts

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#331

Post by black_13 »

scrlk wrote: post #41
nostrademons wrote: post #21

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.

[dead]

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#332

Post by [deleted] »

selectodude wrote: post #151
charcircuit wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When they say run like a business that doesn't mean that it should be done like a reckless business. Plenty of businesses invest into things like disaster recovery or insurance which they may never need.

Running like a business means providing services to profitable customers. This is, surprisingly, the exact opposite of what government is supposed to be doing. The USPS would be plenty profitable if it didn’t have to maintain the infrastructure to deliver a letter from Honolulu to Barrow for 50 cents. Medicare? Not the best business model. Roads? Forget it.

[deleted]

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#333

Post by tw04 »

lisper wrote: post #47
nostrademons wrote: post #21

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…

> 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…

I dunno, Johnny Ive had the MacBook on a trajectory to disaster trying to make it thinner for the sake of being thin. Under Cook’s leadership they actually listened to users and redesigned it to be something people actually wanted.

Beyond that, I’m not sure what you think is going to be the visionary product. AR/VR still feels like 3D tv to me - a solution looking for a problem. The best use case I’ve seen was HoloLens and the military, but even that has had limited scope.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#334

Post by rendaw »

parineum wrote: post #308
flkiwi wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the most exceptional CEOs I've worked with was a lawyer. I still think the proverb is largely correct, along with the other proverb about the exception proving the rule.

That's not what "the exception proves the rule" means. It means, when you see a sign that says an exception, "no parking Wednesdays between 8 and 12", it proves the rule that parking is allowed otherwise.

GP's use is listed here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule... under "Proving the validity of a rule of thumb"

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#335

Post by JumpCrisscross »

rcxdude wrote: post #277
mrguyorama wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> boeing's whole philosophy is that they should make a passenger jet feel like Cessna

Where did you get this?

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#336

Post by JumpCrisscross »

ipython wrote: post #275
Teever wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

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

Because (1) the project would be designed seriously and (2) you don't need a completely closed loop. Just one that's mostly closed.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#337

Post by JumpCrisscross »

stickfigure wrote: post #282
hdgvhicv wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yes? Why do we need to colonize the moon with squishy meatbags with billions of years of evolutionary optimization for life on Earth? All these dreams of star-trek like interstellar travel (or even interplanetary travel beyond taking a selfie and going home) require major advances in the physics tech tree. Might come, might not.

> Why do we need to colonize the moon with squishy meatbags with billions of years of evolutionary optimization for life on Earth?

Given current American politics, I'm honestly divided on whether we should colonise the Moon. That someone will do it seems pretty obvious.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#338

Post by AtlasBarfed »

stickfigure wrote: post #310
nothercastle wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of manufacturing processes are easier without an atmosphere. Also low gravity makes it easy to launch completed product out to space for future space missions

Maybe, but the shipping costs are killer and physics puts a hard minimum on the price. We have plenty of earthbound motivation to solve the "energy too cheap to meter" problem. We're nowhere near that. Adding one more big energy consumer (moving cargo to/from orbit) does not make a material difference.

What's your hard minimum on price?

Starship is supposed (Musk hype warning!) to be 1/10th to 1/100th the cost.

We haven't done skyhooks or launch loops or launch cannons, which are large upfront projects but once built are semi-permanent economic gamechangers.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#339

Post by ulfw »

nostrademons wrote: post #21

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…

Also people retire out. A new product every 15-20 years leads to a lot of aging out

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#340

Post by bilbo0s »

djmips wrote: post #326
lisper wrote: 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…

I feel like moving in the direction of their own silicon and getting M1 out and to massive success was under Tim Cook's watch. You might not consider this 'designing a new product' but I do.

Yeah.

I kind of feel like people gloss over the seismic shift in computing power Apple silicon designs have ushered in. It seems like a lot of people on HN think of building these chips as almost an afterthought if they think of building them at all. Which is ludicrous.

It's the chips that make the new innovative products possible, not vice versa. You literally can't innovate, until you have the compute working at the power profile that you need. Only then can you build anything groundbreaking.

Post reply on HN