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

501–510 of 579 posts

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#501

Post by alkonaut »

dylan604 wrote: post #500
alkonaut wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can board with some crutches and they probably shift you away from the emergency exit seat right away. They tend to be sold at a premium these days due to slightly more legroom.

yeah, cause with all of the fun that traveling through random airports is to the average traveler, adding crutches just to avoid sitting at the door of a MAX is exactly what we would prefer to do!

It’s easier to just say you had some surgery. Or just not pay the $20 extra for the seat at the exit…

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#502

Post by spacemark »

bjtitus wrote: post #492
miketery wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the critical thing to think about is the derivative of risk. How is risk changing over time. We are in a trend where risk is increasing. Boeing is a major institution responsible for building critical defense and civil technology. With many jobs on the line as well. People need to be held accountable, and we need a culture that allows people to speak up earlier and more often. Otherwise this will continue to…

> We are in a trend where risk is increasing Is there any data supporting this? From what I can tell, the trend from both IATA [0] and ASN [1][2] data appears to be down. Any small YoY increase [3] in 2020 being attributable to PS752 shot down by Iran and an Embraer EMB-120RT shot down over Somalia. This downward trend seems to go for fatal and non-fatal accidents. I completely agree with the need for oversight in th…

Agreed! You don't see the data because it's not there. That was my point in response to the original comment - even with these dramatic high-profile examples, not only is commercial aviation orders of magnitude safer vs traveling by car, but it continues to improve. Meanwhile traffic safety has stagnated and by some metrics is getting worse.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#503

Post by chrisbolt »

alistairSH wrote: post #318

Where is the data sourced for this checker? I just tested two upcoming flights (UA2021 and UA2022), both of which are currently (as in, today) flown on 737-900. UA2021 shows as "Not a Max" and UA2022 shows as "Is a Max". Yes, I fully realize Unided will swap these around as needed. Just curious where one would even find the "scheduled" airframe?

> Just curious where one would even find the "scheduled" airframe?

The aircraft column:

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL2021

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL2022

B39M is a 737 MAX 9, B38M is a 737 MAX 8, B739 is a 737-900, etc.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#504

Post by spacemark »

calf wrote: post #461
spacemark wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Other people don't just care about themselves, they care that 400 people might randomly die in the future for no valid reason. It's a sophisticated form of empathy, not everyone growing up learns it.

Not sure what your comment really adds except a thinly veiled attack on my ability to empathize. Of course reasonable people desire increased safety all around. My point is that even with this disaster (in which nobody was harmed), aviation safety is the best it's ever been and is continuing to improve.

Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't be concerned about ways to improve or hold Boeing accountable. But it's not a rational reaction to stop flying due to this incident.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#505

Post by consumer451 »

consumer451 wrote: post #271
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.

The 737 fuselage is shipped from Spirit to Boeing without an interior. The door plugs are removed by Boeing during the interior installation. It is up to Boeing to reinstall them properly. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38920716

New update from the same 777 pilot and A&P mechanic as previous video, posted 1hr ago.

> "Yes, We Have No Bolts" 9 Jan 737 Max-9 Update

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubCQZtLTAug

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#506

Post by contravariant »

weaksauce wrote: post #438
Fischgericht wrote: post #410

I find it puzzling that airlines are still ordering this plane. It's not just us, the customers, who should "vote with their feet", but the airlines, too. I would not buy from a vendor that is not able to have a QA process that makes sure all screws and bolts are in place, fastened and secured. Even if it would not be an airplane where this is critical for safety, even if it would just be a toaster, I would stop buyi…

> And finally: It goes beyond my comprehension that someone would decide to build a version of the voice recorder specifically for the US that only stores 2 hours of voice, while the international version of the same plane stores 25. What kind of cost reduction per unit is that, $1 per airplane? Having two different models to "certify", produce and warehouse just to save a dollar or something per unit does not sound…

Normally I would agree with them that making the recording much longer than it plausibly needs to be is not a good idea. Preventing life-or-death situations is about the only reason I'm in favour of recording anything at all.

However evidently 2 hours of sound isn't long enough. Just because a plane keeps going for more a few hours doesn't mean the incident wasn't serious enough to warrant recording.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#507

Post by mulmen »

93po wrote: post #498
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.

What do you call giving government officials lots of money to take anticompetitive actions that personally benefit you that they would otherwise never do and also have a clear conflict of interest with the purpose of their elected position?

I call it representative democracy.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#508

Post by mulmen »

crazytony wrote: post #464
dawnerd wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What choice do they have? If they switch to Airbus they’re going to be waiting until at least 2030. They could buy used but that’s goes against why airlines are ordering new planes to begin with. And that’s not factoring in the maintenance cost in switching manufacturers. Thats why you’ll see airlines be a Boeing or Airbus only fleet.

The counter point to operating one type is on display here: if the regulator grounds the type, your whole airline is stuck. The only thing that eliminates/highlights issues is time. The 320 and 220 are faced with major engine issues and groundings due to looks at notes not QAing the metal powder used in the sintering process for over 8 years.

Except Alaska is an all Boeing 737 airline and they are still operating. Only some of the planes are grounded.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#509

Post by mulmen »

contravariant wrote: post #506
weaksauce wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And finally: It goes beyond my comprehension that someone would decide to build a version of the voice recorder specifically for the US that only stores 2 hours of voice, while the international version of the same plane stores 25. What kind of cost reduction per unit is that, $1 per airplane? Having two different models to "certify", produce and warehouse just to save a dollar or something per unit does not sound…

Normally I would agree with them that making the recording much longer than it plausibly needs to be is not a good idea. Preventing life-or-death situations is about the only reason I'm in favour of recording anything at all. However evidently 2 hours of sound isn't long enough. Just because a plane keeps going for more a few hours doesn't mean the incident wasn't serious enough to warrant recording.

Sure, more time would be good for investigators. But pilots have legitimate concerns about these recordings. Those concerns need to be heard and addressed so this change can be made safely.

Re: Is my plane a 737 MAX?

#510

Post by gruez »

ssijak wrote: post #431
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…

statistic should be per hour spent in the transport, not per mile

1. That doesn't make any sense. You're not flying as some sort of recreational activity to pass the time. You're flying because you want to get from point a to point b. If you're making that journey, it makes sense to compare which method is the safest for the entire journey, not for 1 hour of it.

2. Even if we ignored the above, applying this adjustment doesn't change the conclusion that planes are safer than driving by a fair margin. The 737 MAX cruise at 521 mph. Cars top out at around 60mph. If we round that off to planes being 10x faster and normalize for that (ie. 10x the death rate), you still get 0.57 for a car vs <0.01 for a plane.

Post reply on HN