Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part • Hacker News Board

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#41

Post by burnte » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 10:10 PM UTC

brians wrote: post #39

samstave wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the actual safety record of the B-52, which i subjectively consider to be the safest machine in history. How would the B-52 match up against modern commercial airliners? (Does anyone, other than boeing, even track this stat?) The calc would be something along the lines of; Date-of-design -> completion, testing, commissioning, hours in flight - accidents, crashes,pilot error, time in service, fuselage age, etc…

That’s not subjective; you just made it up. For one thing, B-52s seem to have substantial safety externalities for nearby cities.

>That’s not subjective; you just made it up.

That's the definition of subjective. You're thinking objective.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#42

Post by marcus0x62 » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 10:11 PM UTC

acjohnson55 wrote: post #13

phire wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes they fly routes that are only 30min long. With a 30min turnaround, that could mean a flight every hour. If they kept one plane flying round trips all day, they might fit 16 flights into a day and theoretically burn through the 90,000 cycles in under 16 years.

Are there examples of routes like this you know of where a 737 is used?

Atlanta to Nashville on Southwest. That route usually has a flight time of around 35 minutes.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#43

Post by r00fus » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 10:14 PM UTC

Xcelerate wrote: post #35

kjar wrote: post #10

I’m not flying anymore. Between the GHG annual personal emissions and the stunning staggering massively deadly failures of rushed Boeing product launches. Finally I will note the whole damn process is dehumanizing and terrible.

It's weird. I never used to be afraid of flying at all, but the 737 MAX crashes sort of "triggered" the fear for me. I still fly frequently but I find the experience terrifying now. As a data scientist, I know the odds of something going wrong are extremely low, but unfortunately I'm not able to rationally control my emotions during flight; the fear is involuntary and difficult to suppress. It also doesn't help that…

Maybe if you watch more terrifying accidents involving other modes of travel? Car travel is statistically much more dangerous.

Seriously I see the 737 Max debacle as an exception that proves the rule.

But the dehumanizing part can be fixed. We may in the future look on the TSA security theatre as an era of incredible FUD.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#44

Post by hef19898 » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 10:18 PM UTC

heavyset_go wrote: post #18

kjar wrote: post #10

I’m not flying anymore. Between the GHG annual personal emissions and the stunning staggering massively deadly failures of rushed Boeing product launches. Finally I will note the whole damn process is dehumanizing and terrible.

The worst part of these revelations is that the aviation industry is exalted as the standard other industries should look up to when it comes to safety. If Boeing can't escape the perverse incentives that tempt every company, then what company can and why are we relying on this economic model to drive such a high stakes industry?

Cracks are not necessarily something critical. As long as they are identified early enough the affected parts are simply added to the relevant checks (C, D, whatever) and after a predefined number of cycles or hours. Also ad-hoc checks might be required.

Aviation is the standard exactly because defects are identified and handled the way they are, they also tend to be remedied quickly. If not all affected aircraft are grounded, like the 737MAX.

These 737NG cracks can by no means be compared to the 737MAX clusterfuck. The former is pretty normal while the latter is a safety and certification issue of enormous dimensions.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#45

Post by arkitaip » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 10:18 PM UTC

tfha wrote: post #21

kjar wrote: post #10

I’m not flying anymore. Between the GHG annual personal emissions and the stunning staggering massively deadly failures of rushed Boeing product launches. Finally I will note the whole damn process is dehumanizing and terrible.

I don't think anyone needs to be concerned about the safety of flying, even with all the news flying is still statistically extremely safe. I will agree though that the TSA has made things pretty dehumanizing.

It's crazy how much the flight experience varies between countries. I recently traveled between Sweden and Germany and the entire experience from online check-in to reaching my destination was painless and very convenient. There was very little queuing and the longest one was on the tax free when I bought water... Didn't even have to show my passport during the flights and I was never checked by security.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#46

Post by elif » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 10:19 PM UTC

kjar wrote: post #10

I’m not flying anymore. Between the GHG annual personal emissions and the stunning staggering massively deadly failures of rushed Boeing product launches. Finally I will note the whole damn process is dehumanizing and terrible.

As for direct GHG emissions, the most efficient mode of travel depends on many factors involving the models, occupancy, and route, but generally speaking, planes can become more efficient than trains for distances >= 700 miles.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#47

Post by samstave » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 10:20 PM UTC

burnte wrote: post #41

brians wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not subjective; you just made it up. For one thing, B-52s seem to have substantial safety externalities for nearby cities.

>That’s not subjective; you just made it up. That's the definition of subjective. You're thinking objective.

Thank you.

This is going to come across a subjectively offensive to people on HN, aside from the old timers, as I am such, stop trying to prove how smart you are. Listen more.

Engage rather than flex your ego. Discuss rather than downvote.

I almost never vote on anything, @dang may likely be able to look at my click record. I don’t click on votes too often, I engage in discussion as often as possible.

(Constantly hit with “you’re posting too fast”)

So don’t downvote me. Talk to me please.

EDIT; cowards

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#48

Post by samstave » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 10:24 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #23

samstave wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the actual safety record of the B-52, which i subjectively consider to be the safest machine in history. How would the B-52 match up against modern commercial airliners? (Does anyone, other than boeing, even track this stat?) The calc would be something along the lines of; Date-of-design -> completion, testing, commissioning, hours in flight - accidents, crashes,pilot error, time in service, fuselage age, etc…

http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/rate_mod.htm indicates 79 fatal 737 incidents with about a quarter billion flights under their belt. https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/b-52-safety.htm indicates 76 B-52s destroyed in accidents across 7.5 million flight hours. They're not perfectly comparable sets of numbers, but the B-52s look substantially riskier on a per-hour basis.

Thank you for this!

76 machines destroyed, carrying (obstensibly) nukes.. from 7.5mm flight miles == .00001% risk of failure.

Did I do the math correctly?

With ZERO nuke detonations...

And a flight carcass of nearly 70 years old now???

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#49

Post by alexis_fr » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 10:29 PM UTC

hansthehorse wrote: post #12

There is a 9 year old documentary on two Boing whistleblowers describing cracking probability on the 737ng. It's an hour long: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaWdEtANi-0

Extremely interesting. Especially, around 19-21 minutes, we find the same problem as on 737 Max: Boeing has the delegated authority from the FAA to certify their own processes and parts.

I’m never flying Boeing again. They were hammering crucial parts to fit, provoking crackling; redrilling holes when the hole was 3 inches apart, endangering the whole structural integrity; painting it all green and sending that to production.

The documentary is about the circles of the airframe structure, not about the wing forks of today’s article, so that makes one new type of botched work from Boeing.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#50

Post by amelius » Sat, Sep 28, 2019, 10:29 PM UTC

heavyset_go wrote: post #18

kjar wrote: post #10

I’m not flying anymore. Between the GHG annual personal emissions and the stunning staggering massively deadly failures of rushed Boeing product launches. Finally I will note the whole damn process is dehumanizing and terrible.

The worst part of these revelations is that the aviation industry is exalted as the standard other industries should look up to when it comes to safety. If Boeing can't escape the perverse incentives that tempt every company, then what company can and why are we relying on this economic model to drive such a high stakes industry?

> The worst part of these revelations is that the aviation industry is exalted as the standard other industries should look up to when it comes to safety.

If airplanes were like computers ...