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

Italy moves to Airbus A330 tankers

euronews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 137 posts

Re: Italy moves to Airbus A330 tankers

#41

Post by shevy-java »

dylan604 wrote: post #12
tcgv wrote: post #4

> Several defence analysts point out that although the KC-46 is the standard tanker of the USAF, it has suffered technical problems and delays that have slowed its competitiveness abroad, to the benefit of the A330 MRTT, which has already been adopted by many NATO and non-NATO allies. In this sense, the Italian choice is seen more as an industrial victory for Airbus than as an American “political defeat”. The politic…

Having doors flying off one of your planes and engine failure causing part of the cowling to bust a window and sucking a passenger out of another is definitely not a bit of politics. Nevermind the bullshit 737Max nonsense. At this point, I'd imagine any Boeing orders left are only in place because Airbus can't keep up. Politics didn't need to come within 10 miles of this decision. It's just the free cherry on top.

Yeah - the mass casualties with regards to Max, changed things a lot. Boeing used to be about enginering; that quality dropped indeed decades ago. Not sure why or how.

Re: Italy moves to Airbus A330 tankers

#42

Post by celsoazevedo »

866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #31
dylan604 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having doors flying off one of your planes and engine failure causing part of the cowling to bust a window and sucking a passenger out of another is definitely not a bit of politics. Nevermind the bullshit 737Max nonsense. At this point, I'd imagine any Boeing orders left are only in place because Airbus can't keep up. Politics didn't need to come within 10 miles of this decision. It's just the free cherry on top.

If we're stringing random facts together to try and make a point, Airbus was found guilty two days ago of manslaughter in the 2009 Air France crash that fell into the ocean. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czd2qmdvmq6o It's the same airplane as the MRTT, A330.

I think it's fair to call out the parent comment for things that are not exactly caused by Boeing (eg: the engine failure), but I also think it's important to look at the why.

In the case you're referring too, the focus was on poor training and failure to follow up on earlier incidents. It's not the same as designing a system based around a single sensor that is known to fail or forgetting to bolt a door.

Re: Italy moves to Airbus A330 tankers

#43

Post by oscillonoscope »

ericmay wrote: post #34
newtonianrules wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to understand that the smartest people in the US didn’t vote for this administration and are just as horrified as everyone else with how inept and pathetic this administration is. Unfortunately we’re a minority, the senate’s design (Wyoming has the same number of senators as California even though a small city in CA may have more people than the whole state) and the US is so ridiculously gerrymandered. Sorry…

There are a lot of issues in the American political system but the structure of the Senate is not one of those. It was explicitly created as a way to balance sovereignty of the states against populism, such as that enacted by MAGA or leftists. If you are a small state like Vermont, you don’t want to just have California, New York, and Texas dictating all rules and laws for the country by sheer weight of their populat…

This might have made sense for the original 13 colonies but after westward expansion, it clearly does not. Most of the western state borders were formed for administrative reasons

Re: Italy moves to Airbus A330 tankers

#44

Post by krior »

newtonianrules wrote: post #30
tokai wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why US weapons manufactures are not lobbying harder. They are losing the European market just as the largest rearmament since ww2 happens. Maybe they are and its just a lost cause with the US administration.

You have to understand that the smartest people in the US didn’t vote for this administration and are just as horrified as everyone else with how inept and pathetic this administration is. Unfortunately we’re a minority, the senate’s design (Wyoming has the same number of senators as California even though a small city in CA may have more people than the whole state) and the US is so ridiculously gerrymandered. Sorry…

> Sorry everybody but we just have to wait this stupidity out.

And the rest of the world has to suffer the consequences. It has been incredible watching americans shrugging off any responsibility.

Insufferable hypocrites.

Re: Italy moves to Airbus A330 tankers

#45

Post by tremon »

shevy-java wrote: post #41
dylan604 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having doors flying off one of your planes and engine failure causing part of the cowling to bust a window and sucking a passenger out of another is definitely not a bit of politics. Nevermind the bullshit 737Max nonsense. At this point, I'd imagine any Boeing orders left are only in place because Airbus can't keep up. Politics didn't need to come within 10 miles of this decision. It's just the free cherry on top.

Yeah - the mass casualties with regards to Max, changed things a lot. Boeing used to be about enginering; that quality dropped indeed decades ago. Not sure why or how.

Not sure why or how

There's plenty of documentation to be found on the why and how, especially following the 737Max issues: https://team-fsa.com/insights/what-happened-to-boeings-cultu...

> Following the 1997 merger with McDonnell Douglas, Boeing’s robust culture eroded. Subsequent safety issues with the Boeing 737 have put the company under international scrutiny and underscored the profound impact of a weakened corporate culture. As Forbes aptly put it, “Boeing’s current travails about safety issues with the 737 MAX 9 can arguably be traced to the company’s weak corporate culture.”

Or read https://www.library.hbs.edu/working-knowledge/why-boeings-pr... for Harvard's take on the same situation.

Re: Italy moves to Airbus A330 tankers

#46

Post by eastbound »

dylan604 wrote: post #12
tcgv wrote: post #4

> Several defence analysts point out that although the KC-46 is the standard tanker of the USAF, it has suffered technical problems and delays that have slowed its competitiveness abroad, to the benefit of the A330 MRTT, which has already been adopted by many NATO and non-NATO allies. In this sense, the Italian choice is seen more as an industrial victory for Airbus than as an American “political defeat”. The politic…

Having doors flying off one of your planes and engine failure causing part of the cowling to bust a window and sucking a passenger out of another is definitely not a bit of politics. Nevermind the bullshit 737Max nonsense. At this point, I'd imagine any Boeing orders left are only in place because Airbus can't keep up. Politics didn't need to come within 10 miles of this decision. It's just the free cherry on top.

> Having doors flying off one of your planes (…) definitely not a bit of politics.

It’s a checkmate of the American system. Boeing delegated construction in parts of the country that needed jobs (=politics), who then botched the job and didn’t get sanctioned because it was bad optics to accuse those providers (2013 airframes). More recent events are also a checkmate of the ultrafinanciarization practices, a checkmate of the consultancy / provider / controller model, and a failure of corruption (the FAA/Boeing dinners inherited from the Macdonnell management) in a context where USA rips at the seams (industrial failure, no-one can be trusted as trustworthy) and tries to renew its ideology (apogee with the Trump elections).

That is a fair bit of politics that made Boeing fail.

Re: Italy moves to Airbus A330 tankers

#47

Post by ksec »

This is a noob question but wondering if anyone here could answer.

There are plenty of choices for Small and Medium size plane as well as private jet. Why are most commercial airline only buying Boeing and Airbus? And why others aren't making bigger planes to compete?

Re: Italy moves to Airbus A330 tankers

#49

Post by mmooss »

newtonianrules wrote: post #30
tokai wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why US weapons manufactures are not lobbying harder. They are losing the European market just as the largest rearmament since ww2 happens. Maybe they are and its just a lost cause with the US administration.

You have to understand that the smartest people in the US didn’t vote for this administration and are just as horrified as everyone else with how inept and pathetic this administration is. Unfortunately we’re a minority, the senate’s design (Wyoming has the same number of senators as California even though a small city in CA may have more people than the whole state) and the US is so ridiculously gerrymandered. Sorry…

> the smartest people in the US didn’t vote for this administration

Trump has support from SV and Wall Street leaders, and the whole Republican Party.

> gerrymandered

Trump won the popular vote, and iirc the GOP got more total votes for the House of Representatives. What about for the Senate? Sure NY and CA are big, but so are FL and TX.

Re: Italy moves to Airbus A330 tankers

#50

Post by ericmay »

boustrophedon wrote: post #35
ericmay wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of issues in the American political system but the structure of the Senate is not one of those. It was explicitly created as a way to balance sovereignty of the states against populism, such as that enacted by MAGA or leftists. If you are a small state like Vermont, you don’t want to just have California, New York, and Texas dictating all rules and laws for the country by sheer weight of their populat…

Yes, if anything the issue is that the House was capped in seats in 1929 and the population has tripled. Smaller states have an outsized representation in Congress currently.

I'm strongly in favor of expanding the House. I failed to mention that in my original post.
Post reply on HN