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

United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

theaircurrent.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 773 posts

Re: United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

#451

Post by arrakeenrevived »

intunderflow wrote: post #6

At what point do consumers en-masse refuse to fly on these aircraft, if ever? When there's a few more fatal crashes?

I think HN really overestimates the impact of events like this with the general public.

The very first A320 demonstration flight crashed, killing 3 people, allegedly due to software issues in the new fly-by-wire system, and then involved allegations that Airbus had tampered with the investigation. The demonstration flight was mostly journalists on the plane. [0]

The A330 crashed on one of its certification flights due to an issue with the autopilot, killing all 7 onboard. [1]

Both went on to be some of the all-time best selling aircraft, and meanwhile today in this thread you have people touting Airbus as a paragon of safety. Humans have a short memory.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296Q

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_Industrie_Flight_129

I mention these two specifically because they're examples of high-profile failures attributed due to issues with the aircraft early in their lifecycle, but basically every single popular aircraft type (except the B777 and A350) have had serious issues and loss of life due to manufacturing defects, but still went on to be overall successes. Hell, people still flew on the DC-10 even after its _numerous_ issues like AA 191..

Re: United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

#452

Post by booleandilemma »

echohack5 wrote: post #396
ethbr1 wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect even at its worst, software development could learn a lot from aircraft QA. Especially since most shops have pretty much tossed professional career QA out the window.

QA was literally invented for the airline industry. Software QA when actually practiced is more advanced now than airline QA.

Nah, in the software world, the truth is QA is where the people who can't get jobs as programmers end up. I've seen testers go on to become programmers, but I've never seen a programmer become a tester. Maybe it's different for real-time or life-critical systems, sure, but I can confidently say this is how it is in web development.

Re: United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

#453

Post by unyttigfjelltol »

actionfromafar wrote: post #412
ShadowBanThis01 wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except, of course, from Boeing's aircraft-software QA... which killed hundreds of people already.

The problem was not really the software in isolation, but that pilots expected the 737 NG to behave exactly like the old version - because Boeing decided it was too expensive to retrain pilots.

The problem was software that prioritized input from a fauly external sensor, over pilot control, and literally crashed planes directly into the ground. At a certain step in the sequence it was not physically possible for a pilot to pull hard enough on the control element to counteract the software. Could they have disabled the system? Only if they could figure out the specific software trying to crash the plane.

Is that what you meant by "the problem wasn't the software?" Because the pilots should have been trained to unplug the computer to stop it from crashing the plane?

Re: United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

#454

Post by throwup238 »

rectang wrote: post #425
ethbr1 wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect even at its worst, software development could learn a lot from aircraft QA. Especially since most shops have pretty much tossed professional career QA out the window.

Is it plausible that Boeing has "learned" from software/startup/venture-capital culture with regards to tolerating higher risk to minimize costs? I suspect it's rather a case of parallel evolution between McDonnell Douglas brass and software startup culture, since cost-cutting culture goes back many decades (remember "Chainsaw" Al Dunlap[1] ?) — but I wonder if there's a more direct influence. [1] https://en.wikipedi…

"Better to ask for forgiveness than for permission"

Ironically, I believe it was Grace Hopper who said it... Whoops.

Re: United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

#455

Post by aaronmdjones »

outside1234 wrote: post #255
oooyay wrote: post #249

Kind of non-sequitur, but am I disconnected from reality if at this point I do not want to fly on a Boeing aircraft?

It is really the 737 - not sure what is going on with the MAX design team - but it ain't good The 787 and 757 seem to have been stable platforms.

I'm a firm believer that the 777 is the last Good Aircraft that Boeing made.

Re: United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

#456

Post by vegetablepotpie »

ethbr1 wrote: post #420
vegetablepotpie wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in the defense industry, it’s very much like the aerospace industry in that we deal with human life as a consequence of our work. We have software QA departments that operate very much like manufacturing or aerospace QA. Software QA provides nothing of value to software development; having it as a dedicated function works against the overtly stated goals of the function and counterintuitively acts to degrade q…

> Good software teams build quality into projects by introducing continuous integration, unit testing, creating feedback, and tightening these feedback loops. Agreed, for good software teams. I would content that most software teams at most companies are not good. Which is to ask, with an average to bad software team is it better to have integrated or separate QA?

Does it make sense to degrade the performance of good software teams because bad software teams exist?

Ideally we’d always have good software teams, but in the real world sometimes you have to build software with bad teams.

Leaders have options, they can do things like reduce scope, increase budget, increase schedule, or full on abandon or cancel the project. These are all options available to leaders, but they require tradeoffs and decisions to be made on a project by project basis.

It is scalable to have a strict process that everyone has to follow, then impose a watchdog to enforce it on a wide scale. It may not be better to have separate QA, but it is easier for those in charge.

Re: United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

#457

Post by 9659 »

vegetablepotpie wrote: post #405
ethbr1 wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect even at its worst, software development could learn a lot from aircraft QA. Especially since most shops have pretty much tossed professional career QA out the window.

I work in the defense industry, it’s very much like the aerospace industry in that we deal with human life as a consequence of our work. We have software QA departments that operate very much like manufacturing or aerospace QA. Software QA provides nothing of value to software development; having it as a dedicated function works against the overtly stated goals of the function and counterintuitively acts to degrade q…

About 2000, Software QA (and almost all traditional QA activities) were changed. The focus was on process over inspection. "Design in quality, do not inspect it into the product"

Suppliers (to include software) were expected to manage the quality of the product they provided; the purchaser would focus on how they managed the process, not in the compliance of every part.

This had a chance until software process was tossed in the name of "agile".

Re: United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

#458

Post by nyokodo »

sp332 wrote: post #433
nyokodo wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Evidently not though Bolts can be loosened by the physical and thermal stresses of use if there is a design flaw. So it’s not evidently an assembly QA problem.

The plane that lost a plug mid-flight was only two months old though. A design problem probably would have shown up in an older one.

> A design problem probably would have shown up in an older one.

Maybe, unless it required really specific conditions that have only occurred for this one or also required some maintenance snafu that also had nothing to do with Boeing assembly QA. We don’t have enough data to establish anything as the most probable explanation yet.

Re: United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

#459

Post by eYrKEC2 »

mikewarot wrote: post #447

At this point, I believe Boeing needs to suffer the corporate death penalty, because it no longer operates as a net benefit to the public. It needs to be dissolved, and its assets sold off. Criminal charges should be pursued to the maximum support of the law against all of the corporate officers. Those in the FAA and other oversight agencies who failed to properly oversee them should also be prosecuted. Failing the a…

I agree with Boeing board members flying Boeing, and likely they already do, but have you ever floated beings above the aether in metal machines? Do we not live in the age of magic?

Re: United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections

#460

Post by boringg »

Groxx wrote: post #428
rectang wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it plausible that Boeing has "learned" from software/startup/venture-capital culture with regards to tolerating higher risk to minimize costs? I suspect it's rather a case of parallel evolution between McDonnell Douglas brass and software startup culture, since cost-cutting culture goes back many decades (remember "Chainsaw" Al Dunlap[1] ?) — but I wonder if there's a more direct influence. [1] https://en.wikipedi…

In lots of ways, the "learning" there would just be "capitalism". It's inherently short-sighted unless forced to do otherwise by legislation. Cutting small corners pays off A LOT until the hammer falls, so there's a massive advantage to doing it / you need to do it if competition is doing it, or you eventually shut down as they take all your business. It's inherently a race to the bottom. Sometimes that's a net gain,…

But all those communist airlines had no problems at all - exceptional build quality and operational efficiency! /S
Post reply on HN