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

481–490 of 579 posts

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#481

Post by jessriedel »

StreetChief wrote: post #419
jessriedel wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sort of. It averages over them. If you want to dig up some data and make a more detailed estimate, please do so.

Nope I was hoping to point out what is to me a failure of logic, that since previous versions of the plane flew safely, newly manufactured max 8 and 9s somehow have trillions of miles of safe flight. Should we combine all ford mustang car miles driven since the 80s to calculate the safety of the newest version?! Obviously the analogy doesn't hold completely, but the versions of the 737 are different. If I put a jet e…

Oh mean, should we look at the 2021 model year Ford Mustang to estimate the risk of 2024 model? What about different 2024 cars that were manufactured in winter vs summer? I'd say yes, but you're welcome to do what you want.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#482

Post by i_am_jl »

i_am_jl wrote: post #169
dingnuts wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is a 737 MAX even a sufficiently specific identifier? I thought this issue was specifically to do with the 737 MAX 8

MAX 8 had the MCAS problems. The recent plug door issues are affecting MAX 9s.

Damn. Too late to edit this comment.

The MAX 8 had the crashes due to MCAS problems. The underlying MCAS issue affected all 737 MAX variants.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#483

Post by deelowe »

tadfisher wrote: post #167
deelowe wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would I care about per mile stats? What matters to me is the safety of the contraption and crew I'm putting my faith in each time I step foot into the machine. Airplanes shouldn't get a higher safety rating simply because the trips are 100x longer on average.

You would care because, presumably, you're deciding on a mode of transport to travel those miles. Otherwise, the measure is deaths per trip, which would prompt the conclusion that cars are thousands of times safer than air travel.

It doesn't work that way. When I fly, it's typically the only feasible option. I've never in my life sat down and calculated flying vs driving. It's more something like >400 miles, then fly, otherwise drive.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#484

Post by JumpCrisscross »

barryrandall wrote: post #479
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #301

If you are outraged and want to be more than performative about it, check if your electeds are on the Senate Aviation Safety, Operations, and Innovation [1] and/or House Aviation Subcommittees [2]. If not, the broader Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation [3] and/or House Transportation & Infrastructure Committees [4]. Call their office (D.C., preferably) or submit a comment noting the issue and your concerns a…

But cross-reference that with OpenSecrets to see if it's even worth pursuing. If they're in office, they're probably taking bribes from Boeing.

> cross-reference that with OpenSecrets to see if it's even worth pursuing

I'm sympathetic to civic disengagement from nihilism, apathy, laziness or even ignorance. What I don't understand is proselytising it.

> in office, they're probably taking bribes from Boeing

This is bunk, even if we forget that campaign donations aren't bribes.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#485

Post by chrisbolt »

jmward01 wrote: post #112
xahrepap wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard a lot of people say this in these comment threads, and I think this glosses over the actual issue: safety is getting worse, not better or even staying the same. So it's MORE statistically significant than it was. The trend is heading the wrong way. Air safety going down is a trend you want to stop ASAP. Not wait around until it's just as dangerous as something else like driving your car.

That is a big statement. Since 2019 there have been 32 fatalities connected to commercial aircraft. Most of those were iv very small aircraft like seaplanes and helicopters. 32 deaths in 4 years compared to ~40k/year in cars. We need to keep things in perspective.

Though I agree flying is extremely safe, keep in mind that of those 4 years, two of them were while the 737 MAX was grounded, and much of it was while air travel was much lower due to COVID.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#486

Post by StreetChief »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #444
StreetChief wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess if you think all miles of flight are the same, then sure, the 737 max 8 and 9 have trillion of miles.

> if you think all miles of flight are the same OP said air safety is going down broadly [1]. So yes, considering all air transport miles is valid given the context . [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38929237

more accidents is less safe, anyway you cut it. I really can't understand how you can view flying as not being less safe in this moment. If you want to do integration over huge time spans to make your point, lets start at zero and go to infinity... human lifespan is 0 years long average over history, seeing as we didn't exist for some period of time. So any changes to human life in shorter time spans is completely meaningless to an average. Is this 0 year lifespan a useful statistic?

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#487

Post by rthkljlkrj »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #484
barryrandall wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But cross-reference that with OpenSecrets to see if it's even worth pursuing. If they're in office, they're probably taking bribes from Boeing.

> cross-reference that with OpenSecrets to see if it's even worth pursuing I'm sympathetic to civic disengagement from nihilism, apathy, laziness or even ignorance. What I don't understand is proselytising it. > in office, they're probably taking bribes from Boeing This is bunk, even if we forget that campaign donations aren't bribes.

[dead]

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#488

Post by doetoe »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #484
barryrandall wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But cross-reference that with OpenSecrets to see if it's even worth pursuing. If they're in office, they're probably taking bribes from Boeing.

> cross-reference that with OpenSecrets to see if it's even worth pursuing I'm sympathetic to civic disengagement from nihilism, apathy, laziness or even ignorance. What I don't understand is proselytising it. > in office, they're probably taking bribes from Boeing This is bunk, even if we forget that campaign donations aren't bribes.

> This is bunk, even if we forget that campaign donations aren't bribes

Are you sure? A quick search seems to indicate that Boeing certainly makes campaign donations

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#489

Post by JumpCrisscross »

doetoe wrote: post #488
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cross-reference that with OpenSecrets to see if it's even worth pursuing I'm sympathetic to civic disengagement from nihilism, apathy, laziness or even ignorance. What I don't understand is proselytising it. > in office, they're probably taking bribes from Boeing This is bunk, even if we forget that campaign donations aren't bribes.

> This is bunk, even if we forget that campaign donations aren't bribes Are you sure? A quick search seems to indicate that Boeing certainly makes campaign donations

> quick search seems to indicate that Boeing certainly makes campaign donations

Of course they do [1]. They're a defence contractor. They give to a lot of electeds. But far from every elected. (I'd be shocked if they weren't giving to everyone on those subcommittees.)

What's bunk is believing someone receving $5k from Boeing is in their pocket. They're not. They've likely never spoken. This is all nonsense used to justify inactivity. Which is baffling, since it seems to require as much effort as (albeit less social interaction than) engagmeent.

[1] https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/boeing-co/recipients?id=d00...

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#490

Post by StreetChief »

stouset wrote: post #357
not-my-account wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But, we're seeing fatal issues with one specific company over and over again. Knowing that there is some systemic failure within Boeing must change your priors, no? What's wrong with pointing that out and being concerned?

> But, we're seeing fatal issues with one specific company over and over again. We aren't . There were fatal issues with one system (MCAS) on one line of planes. This was addressed, and since then there have been zero fatalities (or injuries) caused by design and/or engineering issues by this manufacturer. Their safety record is not substantially different from that of Airbus (who have their own design issues, IMO, s…

Why should you expect every moment to be a learning moment? Is that true in any circumstance you've ever seen? Is it ok to learn with the blood of others?
Post reply on HN