The Crash of United Flight 232 (2017)

Post by ineedasername » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 7:20 PM UTC

yostrovs wrote: post #45

ineedasername wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you replace "capitalism" with "competition for low prices" then I think the comment is a little less inflammatory while still making a similar point. The fact that a capitalistic system is what gives rise to macro economics that facilitate building planes like this doesn't mean it's perfect and can't be improved upon, say with regulation that doesn't outsource the checks to the company making the planes. Capitalis…

Can you point to safer commercial airplanes built by non-capitalist enterprises?

Post by dclowd9901 » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 8:02 PM UTC

pdonis wrote: post #31

dclowd9901 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That plane crashed because of an unpredictable freak event. The Max planes crashed because of budgets and sidestepping a poorly run regulatory body. I’m sorry, but when capitalism starts crashing planes, I tend to forget about “advances we’ve made.”

> That plane crashed because of an unpredictable freak event. No, it crashed because of a predictable event that a number of engineers had already warned could happen, based on an obvious design flaw that was not fixed.

Post by DataJunkie » Thu, Sep 12, 2019, 3:08 AM UTC

klausa wrote: post #56

DataJunkie wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, especially in the US. I think the only crash of a large commercial airliner since 9/11 was AA 587. In the 80s/90s it seemed to happen once a year.

Asiana 214 was arguably a "crash of a large commercial airliners", though thankfully only 3 people died.