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

371–380 of 494 posts

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#371

Post by Denvercoder9 »

WalterBright wrote: post #217
Denvercoder9 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no incentive. Passengers rarely know what type they'll be flying on when they book, and prioritize it over price even less. For airlines, a bigger airplane is a distinct disadvantage though, as it's operationally more expensive (increased cross section equals increased drag equals increased fuel burn).

A fully loaded 747 is extremely profitable, the large size has economies of scale. That's why the 747 was very very popular with the airlines. So, yes, a 747 burns more fuel. But the fuel burn per paying passenger is less .

That only works if you make the airplane enough bigger so that you can fit more seats and thus paying passengers. The parent comment was arguing to make the plane only a little bigger so that each passenger has more space, but not enough so that extra seats can be fitted.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#372

Post by tsimionescu »

parineum wrote: post #319
cgio wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A phrase does not mean anything by itself. People mean something when they use it. You could argue that expressions carry some meaning, by virtue of shared use. But your definition does not align with the meaning most people make of this specific expression as you can witness above.

The way most people use it is wrong though and not in the normal "language evolves" way. The exception of a lawyer being a good CEO does not, in any way, prove that lawyers are not good CEOs .

The phrase "most people mean the wrong thing by this phrase" makes no sense. A phrase means what most people mean by saying it, or understand by hearing it. So, "the exception that proves the rule" is, as its main modern meaning, a joking way of admitting that a rule (especially one that the speaker had argued for) is not actually a universal rule, while maintaining that it generally holds true.

The examples of legal signs and so on are a more specific, technical, meaning that is only used in certain contexts, such as actual legal proceedings or at least informal discussions about laws or contract terms.

When /u/flkiwi above said this phrase, they obviously meant it in the joking sense I gave, and which they had actually explained above. They agree that, in general, lawyers make bad CEOs, but they also personally know of exceptions. This is not "wrong usage", as proven by the fact that everyone who read the comment understood exactly what they meant.

This whole thing reminds me of the people who complain about the use of literally as an amplifier instead of for its primary meaning as "wrong", with seemingly no understanding of how flourishes and rhetoric work (nor even of the history of words like "very", which used to be quite similar to "literally" a long time ago).

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#373

Post by mrmlz »

noosphr wrote: post #234
davidkwast wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nokia is the best case study of what not to do. In 2005 Nokia launched the 770 Internet Tablet. It was the groundwork for the modern smartphone. But the management did not allow it to have a GSM modem. So it was not a smartphone. Only after the iPhone Nokia launched the N900 but it was too late. Nokia did not believe in touch screen too.

I have an n9 that I turn on once in a blue moon. Even today it looks better than any of the major mobile OSs, is more responsive and just _feels_ better to hold and use. The road not taken.

I loved my N9, truly one of the best experiences i've had with a mobile phone. I've watched Sailfish from a distance but their very limited choice of phones have always been off-putting.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#374

Post by RA2lover »

actionfromafar wrote: post #229
mschuster91 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Elon. Snark aside: the goal is Mars because it might be possible to colonize the planet and to have a place that acts as a reserve for humanity should shit really hit the fan (i.e. WW3). The moon isn't suitable as much for that purpose due to a complete lack of any atmosphere and because it's too close to Earth.

If any faction is on Mars during WW3, there’s a nuke landing there 6 months after the show is over here.

Only if WW3 happens during a transfer window.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#375

Post by raverbashing »

wyldberry wrote: post #135

This has been a long time coming. The big buyer for 737 consistently has been Southwest. Before a recent ownership shakeup, Southwest wanted to only operate the 737 airframe, and avoid as many new features as possible to keep training costs low, and maintenance costs low. New activist ownership has pushed to diversify frames and phase out reliance on the 737 frame which is significantly more inefficient than modern f…

> New activist ownership has pushed to diversify frames and phase out reliance on the 737 frame which is significantly more inefficient than modern frames.

Looks like a case of "broken clock is right twice per day"

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#376

Post by petre »

chatmasta wrote: post #107
petre wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The basic Airpods are crap, noise cancellation is useless, they fall off the ear. You're better off with Sony or JBL at half the price. The Pro ones are good.

I don’t have AirPods basic but I’ve got 2nd gen AirPods Pro and they’re one of the best products I’ve bought in a long time. I’d put them up there with my 2011 kindle I still use every day.

Yup, that version is the good one. My wife had the Pro 2s and was super happy with them until they died after two years. I got her a pair of AirPods 4 with ANC and we had to return them because they were subpar compared to the AirPods Pro 2. The price difference between 4 ANC and the Pro 3s is like $60 and you get an actual useful product if you're willing to spend that amount.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#377

Post by raxxorraxor »

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…

> why should the company keep them around?

Smart companies should know that a large chunk of their value chain is knowledge work. For airplanes the danger of suddenly seeing a Boink 212 appearing on the market is probably quite low, but there certainly is engineering work to be done on planes, even if some of it won't see implementation for a long time.

But long time strategy is probably not even a term in some companies.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#378

Post by KeplerBoy »

bapak wrote: post #177
Esophagus4 wrote: post #40

I hope they design and build the airframe properly this time. A plane that needs [cheaply outsourced] software (that relies on one sensor) to correct bad behavior at the flight envelope is just not acceptable. I still refuse to fly on the 737 MAX. I know it’s probably fine given what pilots now know about the how to control the thing, but I just refuse to support Boeing’s malicious negligence or any carrier that enab…

> I just refuse to support Boeing’s malicious negligence I get, but if everyone does that, Boeing does and we're left with a monopoly. Is that better? Will you feel safer flying on a COMAC?

Boeing would get a bailout and hopefully do better next time. No way, they are ever going under unless there is a superior domestic alternative.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#379

Post by rkomorn »

throw0101c wrote: post #210
rkomorn wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scenario that comes to my mind is: these chips had a lot of potential customers 30 years ago, and now may be down to just one or two customers left buying too few units to make it worthwhile. Presumably, they have "guaranteed" buyers but also, if so, why would Airbus have issues sourcing CPUs, for example?

> […] too few units to make it worthwhile. Not if the price of those units are really high.

Yeah, maybe the difficulty for the buyers is not getting price-gouged by a sole remaining supplier.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#380

Post by JumpCrisscross »

ipython wrote: post #341
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Who will design and execute this “seriously”? Given the current state of our government (shutting down as I type), I don’t foresee any “serious” projects from the feds any time soon. Even when there are serious people - everything will get politicized. So nasa is out. Ok so maybe a multibillionaire. Perhaps Elon musk? Yikes. Or Bezos? Maybe. The EU is kinda busy increasing their defense spend, preparing to engage in…

> Who will design and execute this “seriously”?

NASA.

> why shouldn’t it be completely closed loop?

Because it doesn’t need to be. Engineering an ecological carbon cycle is hard. Putting in long-lived CO2 scrubbers is not.

Post reply on HN