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

Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 76 posts

Re: Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

#61

Post by ralph84 »

nostromo wrote: post #48
ralph84 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The pilots of both Air France 447 and Colgan Air 3407 managed to stall perfectly serviceable aircraft in 2009, killing 277 combined.

Exactly my point -- we've just seen 346 people killed by (presumably) an anti-stall system -- when it's been a decade since we've had the problem this system is meant to prevent.

If the 737 MAX anti-stall system has a flaw of course it should be fixed. That's hardly an argument against anti-stall systems in general. The accidents prevented by anti-stall systems don't make the news.

Re: Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

#62

Post by speedplane »

manicdee wrote: post #51
liability wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have the wrong standard of proof. Boeing and the FAA should be erroring on the side of caution, not hiding behind innocent until proven guilty . And in case it's not totally clear, the caution should be for the passengers, not shareholders. > "its AOA sensor was known to be faulty." The plane was what, two months old? It should have been non-lethal even if a troop of rabid baboons was hired to maintain it.

If my routine maintenance breaks the steering wheel linkage in my car, does the resultant crash mean that the manufacturer did not build enough safety into the vehicle to protect it from steering errors induced by negligent mechanics?

> If my routine maintenance breaks the steering wheel linkage in my car, does the resultant crash mean that the manufacturer did not build enough safety into the vehicle to protect it from steering errors induced by negligent mechanics?

If it happens repeatedly, then probably yes.

Re: Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

#63

Post by speedplane »

jimmy_ruska wrote: post #59

Some statistically significant percentage of xbox 360s are starting to red light for customers running a certain model number. Microsoft assures customers that there's no need to panic as this particular model has been reliable for a long time, and it could just be a statistical anomaly. Microsoft is currently investigating the issue but consumers are weary about paying full price for a product that might break. Subs…

> xbox 360s are starting to red light ... substitute "weary about paying full price" with "dying in a horrible fiery death" ... wait for the investigation to complete

Paying full price and dying a fiery death don't exactly seem like comparable substitutions.

Re: Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

#64

Post by 4BxHkLgUVBG »

geofft wrote: post #46
liability wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have the wrong standard of proof. Boeing and the FAA should be erroring on the side of caution, not hiding behind innocent until proven guilty . And in case it's not totally clear, the caution should be for the passengers, not shareholders. > "its AOA sensor was known to be faulty." The plane was what, two months old? It should have been non-lethal even if a troop of rabid baboons was hired to maintain it.

I don't think that's actually rational, in the sense of minimizing loss of life. If you ground all these planes worldwide, what's going to happen? Either people will take older planes, which are in worse condition, or they'll take smaller planes / alternative routes, which are more dangerous, or they'll take cars, which are much more deadly. Grounding the planes only guarantees saving lives if people stay at home ins…

Risk on taking “alternative old plane” is super low and “Boeing 737 max” is super high, so who are you trying to lie to?

Re: Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

#65

Post by jimmy_ruska »

speedplane wrote: post #63
jimmy_ruska wrote: post #59

Some statistically significant percentage of xbox 360s are starting to red light for customers running a certain model number. Microsoft assures customers that there's no need to panic as this particular model has been reliable for a long time, and it could just be a statistical anomaly. Microsoft is currently investigating the issue but consumers are weary about paying full price for a product that might break. Subs…

> xbox 360s are starting to red light ... substitute "weary about paying full price" with "dying in a horrible fiery death" ... wait for the investigation to complete Paying full price and dying a fiery death don't exactly seem like comparable substitutions.

Planes don't just fall out of the sky. Having 2 major crashed on the same model could indicate mechanical defects.

When microsoft faced an issue with statistically increased failure rates they initially played the plausible deniability game ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_technical_problems#Re... ). In fact this is the only response you will ever get from a public company with short term looking stockholders.

I definitely wouldn't buy that xbox for $300 if I heard similar news reports, but I sure as hell wouldn't buy that $300 plane ticket and bet my life on boeing's words.

Re: Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

#66

Post by speedplane »

jimmy_ruska wrote: post #65
speedplane wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> xbox 360s are starting to red light ... substitute "weary about paying full price" with "dying in a horrible fiery death" ... wait for the investigation to complete Paying full price and dying a fiery death don't exactly seem like comparable substitutions.

Planes don't just fall out of the sky. Having 2 major crashed on the same model could indicate mechanical defects. When microsoft faced an issue with statistically increased failure rates they initially played the plausible deniability game ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_technical_problems#Re... ). In fact this is the only response you will ever get from a public company with short term looking stockholders…

> I definitely wouldn't buy that xbox for $300 if I heard similar news reports, but I sure as hell wouldn't buy that $300 plane ticket and bet my life on boeing's words.

I suppose we agree, but just to a different extent. I could conceivably buy an Xbox knowing that it might crash at some point. But I wouldn't buy an airline ticket knowing it might crash at some point.

Re: Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

#67

Post by sk5t »

gojomo wrote: post #36
freddie_mercury wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are some other recent NY Times headlines that use the word fallout Trauma May Have Fallout Over Generations Cambridge Analytica and Facebook: The Scandal and the Fallout So Far As Trump Struggles With Helsinki’s Fallout, Congress Faces a New Charge: Complicity Inside Uber’s $100,000 Payment to a Hacker, and the Fallout Nissan and Renault Wrestle With the Fallout From Carlos Ghosn’s Arrest Fallout is widely used…

All your examples use 'fallout' about abstract occurrences – not situations where an actual plane-and-jet-fuel crashed-and-exploded from the sky, throwing some actual 'fallout' across a debris field. As far as I can tell, clean-up crews are having no notable problems with the fallout from the crash. Boeing is scrambling to contain the damage to its business.

Nobody with a full command of the language uses "fallout" to refer to a debris field. It is most commonly used in the abstract sense, to refer to negative after-effects, or else in the technical sense, for radioactive pollution.

Re: Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

#68

Post by xbmcuser »

Axsuul wrote: post #35

On people eschewing their 737 MAX flights, I would argue it's probably even safer to be on a 737 MAX these next few days since every airline and their pilots will be on edge with that particular model.

No the Indonesian plane that crashed first the pilot had similar problems on a previous flight with the plane before the crash so he was aware of something being wrong but he still crashed. So pilot being aware of it won't make it safer.

Re: Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

#69

Post by gojomo »

sk5t wrote: post #67
gojomo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All your examples use 'fallout' about abstract occurrences – not situations where an actual plane-and-jet-fuel crashed-and-exploded from the sky, throwing some actual 'fallout' across a debris field. As far as I can tell, clean-up crews are having no notable problems with the fallout from the crash. Boeing is scrambling to contain the damage to its business.

Nobody with a full command of the language uses "fallout" to refer to a debris field. It is most commonly used in the abstract sense, to refer to negative after-effects, or else in the technical sense, for radioactive pollution.

The 'fallout' isn't the field itself, but toxic stuff that falls from the sky after an explosion.

No competent headline writer would use that figurative language around an explosive incident where there might be literal 'fallout'.

(The NYT uses 'fallout' to refer to the literal toxic materials thrown off from a non-nuclear explosion, as in stories like https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/21/world/asia/cyanide-levels.... And also to refer to toxic off-gassing from other processes, as in the headline at https://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/23/us/home-drug-making-labor...)

Re: Boeing scrambles to contain fallout from deadly crash

#70

Post by gojomo »

7e wrote: post #56
gojomo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All your examples use 'fallout' about abstract occurrences – not situations where an actual plane-and-jet-fuel crashed-and-exploded from the sky, throwing some actual 'fallout' across a debris field. As far as I can tell, clean-up crews are having no notable problems with the fallout from the crash. Boeing is scrambling to contain the damage to its business.

I can't believe you stole 30 seconds of my life on this "topic."

As a common consumer of news on sites like HN, headline practices are very interesting to me.
Post reply on HN