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

Is my plane a 737 MAX?

ismyplanea737max.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 579 posts

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#381

Post by r00fus »

spacemark wrote: post #374
miketery wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I spoke to someone who works there about a year ago. I was trying to gauge how an insider viewed the Max problem related to the auto trim issue which caused two airplanes [1][2] to crash, killing 346 people. This was shortly after watching the documentary Downfall: The Case Against Boeing [3]. The ignorance and non acceptance of fault made me cringe. I won't go into the details, but this wasn't a freak accident this…

All valid points, but I wonder if you've overshot your response to this (very slight) increase of risk to your personal safety. The statistical safety of aviation is the best it has ever been - 2023 set yet another record low for commercial aviation deaths and injuries. Your automobile trip to the grocery store is far riskier.

Current stats do not predict future outcomes.

Especially since the FAA and transport dept are getting more corrupt/captured as time progresses.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#382

Post by andy_ppp »

diggan wrote: post #108
gruez wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>those use actual flight plan data, so will take into account any last minute aircraft changes. But at that point it's too late. I doubt people are that afraid of 737 Max that they'll cancel a flight (and forfeit their ticket) over it.

> But at that point it's too late. I doubt people are that afraid of 737 Max that they'll cancel a flight (and forfeit their ticket) over it. Luckily the airlines I travel with only use Airbus, but if they were using 737 Max, I'd definitely book tickets that I can change at the last minute, and refuse to board if it turns out to be a 737 Max. Yes, that's probably illogical. And probably much of life is illogical. But…

And driving home is still more dangerous than getting on the flight.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#383

Post by bitcharmer »

daedalus_j wrote: post #208
ibejoeb wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, a MAX, crashed in 2019, killing 157 people.

There's a big difference between an unsafe airframe and pilot error/poor-training though. For example the recent crash in Japan. Airbus isn't getting railed for that one. I know several 737 pilots on US flag carriers. Even at the time they were saying that neither crash would be possible for their fleet as they had done simulator training of exactly those sorts of scenarios. From wikipedia: While defending the pilots…

> For example the recent crash in Japan. Airbus isn't getting railed for that.

What a bizarre comment to make. Why on earth would Airbus get railed for what happened in Japan?

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#384

Post by stouset »

alpaca128 wrote: post #333
stouset wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The MAX is far safer than driving at this point.

When issues are repeatedly found for years the question is not whether a few planes with loose bolts are still safe in theory, but how many other issues weren't discovered yet that may be far worse. This isn't just a single mistake that could happen to anyone and it's clearly not limited to a single category of flaws - if they messed up with tightening bolts, messed up the software and also forgot tools in fuel tanks…

> in what areas can Boeing still be trusted

Look at the data. Over more than 22 years of flying in the U.S. we've seen one fatality aboard a major carrier. That one, single fatality was caused by an entire engine rapidly disassembling itself mid-flight. The engine mostly—but sadly not entirely—contained this failure. That engine was not designed or built by Boeing, but by CFM.

The next prior fatality aboard a major carrier was when an Airbus A300 crashed on takeoff in Nov 2001, killing on on board. The pilot overreacted on the controls, causing catastrophic failure of the vertical stabilizer.

The last time we saw a fatality in the U.S. due to a design and/or engineering error of a Boeing plane was in 1996 when a 747's center tank exploded due to a short circuit. Globally, Boeing and Airbus don't have meaningful differences in their track record of safety. Both have had experinced design and engineering flaws. Both have worked to fix those flaws.

Should we accept the ongoing regulatory capture in the U.S.? Of course not. Should we continue to hold these companies accountable for improving their designs every time an incident like this happens? Of course, and we do.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#385

Post by kube-system »

wasmitnetzen wrote: post #376
kube-system wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This submission isn't on the front page because of incidents 4-5 years ago. It is on the front page because of the news this week.

A singular incident where nobody died would also not be on the front page. It's the combination of this one and the MCAS crashes.

> A singular incident where nobody died would also not be on the front page.

Sure it would be. Commercial jetliner incidents are so rare that incidents with zero fatalities are routinely headline stories.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#386

Post by ghaff »

jessriedel wrote: post #346
ghaff wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An airline is responsible more for safely operating the aircraft (including most maintenance). An airline really isn't in a position to verify every design detail of an aircraft any more than you're responsible for verifying there are no potential design flaws in your (much simpler) car that could potentially cause someone injury.

I think airlines are a lot more responsible for verifying design flaws in their airplane than I am in my car. First, they are a giant business which has way more resources to do this. Second, they are selling a service. If I was running a US taxi service and bought a fleet of flawed Indian cars that caused crashes, I think I would be partially responsible.

They're responsible for using street legal cars, yes. But I don't see any taxi company being responsible if they used GM cars that turned out to have a defective ignition switch back in the day for example.

I assume airlines do some degree of due diligence and, I believe they choose the engine type if there are options available but you probably overestimate the ability of a business whose primary job is to ferry passengers from point A to point B to do a serious design verification of every tiny detail of an aircraft. And those details can be tiny; take the case of the Airbus engine disassembly mentioned elsewhere on this thread.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#387

Post by gruez »

soraminazuki wrote: post #360
gruez wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38918665 I didn't bother calculating the rate for driving to the airport, but eyeballing the figures for cars, it's probably as about as dangerous if you assume that the 737 Max were 10x more dangerous than average flying. Cars are still more dangerous than planes on a per-mile basis, but at the same time you're also traveling less miles on the car trip compared to the flight…

Per mile is a ridiculous metric when comparing two totally different modes of transportation. Think about how many car trips a single flight represents.

I explicitly addressed this in my last comment:

>Cars are still more dangerous than planes on a per-mile basis, but at the same time you're also traveling less miles on the car trip compared to the flight.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#388

Post by SoftTalker »

WalterBright wrote: post #310
jerf wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be illogical from a strictly individual point of view. But from a broader societal view we'd all be better off if we did it and it is pro-social and pro-civic to be willing to sacrifice a little of your personal convenience to make a point like this. Nothing but nothing will get Boeing's attention like what is essentially an end-customer strike. In general quite a lot of the chains wrapped around us that drive…

Boeing stock is down substantially. That will get their attention.

And moreso than passenger complaints. Passengers don't buy airplanes.

Boeing will listen to the airlines and the markets.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#389

Post by stevehawk »

jjav wrote: post #362
gruez wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>those use actual flight plan data, so will take into account any last minute aircraft changes. But at that point it's too late. I doubt people are that afraid of 737 Max that they'll cancel a flight (and forfeit their ticket) over it.

The planes only start transmitting when they are ready to go (not sure if they do it after pulling out of the gate or when doors close or thereabouts). So by the time you see the flight data you're most likely boarded already. So yes, too late.

The planes are all flying IFR flight plans which are submitted in advance and include airplane type. How far in advance is a little bit random but still in advance of leaving the gate.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#390

Post by t8sr »

kube-system wrote: post #77

A lot of people don't realize that the fuselage of this plane isn't even made by Boeing, it's made by Spirit AeroSystems which also makes components for Airbus. We don't really know who to blame here until the investigation concludes.

According to their wikipedia page, at least, Spirit AeroSystems are a Boeing spinoff in any case, and something like 85% of their sales is only to Boeing. It seems like corporate budget maneuver, and a distinction I, a member of the flying public, don't really care about.
Post reply on HN