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

Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

komonews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 127 posts

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#91

Post by cloudwalking »

kzrdude wrote: post #89
peteretep wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m never flying Boeing again I suspect you were intending this to be obvious hyperbole, but also this will be very difficult if you’re flying at all regularly. While you can have a look at the equipment the airline thinks it’ll be flying at booking time, there’s no guarantees about which plane will actually show up, and the airline isn’t going to refund your ticket because they decided to swap out their A350 for t…

All this plane talk makes me curious, if there are any airlines that tell you ahead of time what planes they are using for a route? I guess they'd now be even less inclined to tell.

I'm usually flying Alaska or United or Southwest, but yes, they do tell you which plane.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#92

Post by jadell »

kzrdude wrote: post #89
peteretep wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m never flying Boeing again I suspect you were intending this to be obvious hyperbole, but also this will be very difficult if you’re flying at all regularly. While you can have a look at the equipment the airline thinks it’ll be flying at booking time, there’s no guarantees about which plane will actually show up, and the airline isn’t going to refund your ticket because they decided to swap out their A350 for t…

All this plane talk makes me curious, if there are any airlines that tell you ahead of time what planes they are using for a route? I guess they'd now be even less inclined to tell.

The information is almost certainly available on the page where you see the search results and choose your flights. Probably right next to or near the flight numbers. It is on every major US carrier's search results. I don't know about any of the OTAs: Expedia, Kayak, etc.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#93

Post by nwallin »

PavlikPaja wrote: post #25
moandcompany wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LAX-LAS, LAX-SJC, LAX-OAK for example. Not quite 30minute flights but approaching there at ~40min and ~50min. Southwest airlines for example exclusively flies a fleet of 737-type variants. Cadence for some of these flights can be over 10x daily, in each direction. The total fleet can see 4k+ flights per day.

https://www.distance.to/ says all around one hour. Why don't you build railroads in America? Such short flights should not exist.

We have railroads. The three trips listed by the previous poster all include LAX. LA is surrounded by mountains. The train from LA to SF takes ten hours. The flight is one. California has been trying to build a high speed rail to connect LA to the Bay Area for a long time now, but it's projected to cost 30 billion dollars and the timeline is ridiculous. Last I understood, the project has been shelved indefinitely.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#94

Post by osamagirl69 »

kzrdude wrote: post #90
arkitaip wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's crazy how much the flight experience varies between countries. I recently traveled between Sweden and Germany and the entire experience from online check-in to reaching my destination was painless and very convenient. There was very little queuing and the longest one was on the tax free when I bought water... Didn't even have to show my passport during the flights and I was never checked by security.

There must have been some security checkpoint when you entered the departure area of the airport. But the rest I agree with. I'm used to the european airports - they are unfortunately like shopping malls, and totally in your face about it. Enter through security right into a big display of perfumes and other overpriced goods, that's the standard thing. What surprised me when I was over in Newark airport (and in NY JF…

I flew from finland to germany yesterday and had the same experience. Checked in online, didn't wait in any lines, and never had to show an ID in the process. I am american, and did not even have to enter my passport details into the online checkin.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#95

Post by tzs »

acjohnson55 wrote: post #13
phire wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes they fly routes that are only 30min long. With a 30min turnaround, that could mean a flight every hour. If they kept one plane flying round trips all day, they might fit 16 flights into a day and theoretically burn through the 90,000 cycles in under 16 years.

Are there examples of routes like this you know of where a 737 is used?

Here was one that reached almost 90k cycles in 20 years due to a lot of short flights [1]. Total flight hours were 35k, so an average flight was under 25 minutes.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Airlines_Flight_243

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#96

Post by samstave »

azernik wrote: post #80
samstave wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely disagree with this. I subjectively make my statement based on that data I have available to ME * Objective would be I have failure data in front of me. Now, I personally have heard of far fewer B-52 accidents in my lifetime, and the plane is almost double mine, and as such, I deem it safe as heck. Also, guess what - B-52s carry nukes not passengers. How many nukes have gone off for a B-52 crash vs how ma…

> and the plane is almost double mine I assume you're talking about lifespan? The B-52 may have been in the air for a long time (though only 15 years longer than the 737), but it has also been flying in much smaller quantities; there have only ever been ~750 B-52s built, while there have been over 10K 737s built. And in addition, a commercial airliner is usually in the air for a much higher percentage of its lifespan…

Thank you for a thoughtful response.

I come to HN to share ideas and thoughts, but typically just get a bunch of self righteous assholes... and ive been here for quite a while.

Youre not allowed to be wrong on HN and it makes me resent the community.

I love to admit if i am wrong, as it means i am learning something.

So i appreciate you fixing my perspective.

My perspective came feome the fact that a single plane could have been flown by three separate generatjons of pilots (which i have seen happen with the B-52) and that they have been carrying nukes about for the past 50 years and that we havent seen a singular nuclear accident with them.

Not so much that we havent lost any aircraft themselves.

But HN is the most pedantic community ive ever encountered in all my years.

But at least it keeps things honest.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#97

Post by anon91831837 »

Unsurprising given the 2010 Al Jazeera revelations of the Boeing-Ducommun conspiracy and cover-up: critical structural elements that were supposed to be CNC machined by Ducommun were crudely made by hand and Boeing managers ordered them installed into 737 NG (-600, -700, -800, -900) anyhow. And then when a blue-ribbon panel of Boeing employees went to find out what happened, their findings were buried and no corrective action was taken. 737 NG's are flying around with substandard critical structural components like spars and the areas around doors, leading to several fuselage breakups on hard landings and runway overruns, which has killed at least several passengers to date. In past similar incidents, aircraft fuselages survived intact. There's a very real possibility that one or more 737 NG's may breakup in heavy turbulence, hard landings and runway overruns at any time, and Boeing knows about it, but has done nothing to remedy it.

https://youtu.be/IaWdEtANi-0

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#98

Post by cryptonector »

PavlikPaja wrote: post #25
moandcompany wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LAX-LAS, LAX-SJC, LAX-OAK for example. Not quite 30minute flights but approaching there at ~40min and ~50min. Southwest airlines for example exclusively flies a fleet of 737-type variants. Cadence for some of these flights can be over 10x daily, in each direction. The total fleet can see 4k+ flights per day.

https://www.distance.to/ says all around one hour. Why don't you build railroads in America? Such short flights should not exist.

Because the U.S. is a) much less densely populated, b) is very spread out, c) leading to very long distances between cities (which makes rail expensive), but d) very homogeneous in culture and language, so e) families and companies spread out a lot, f) which means train travel is not really practical, but also g) many of these short-haul flights are connections to/from long-haul flights and there's no way we'd take a several hour train ride to then go to an airport, to then take a long-haul flight to then do the whole thing again.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#99

Post by SomeOldThrow »

inimino wrote: post #61
SomeOldThrow wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relying on profit-motivated companies to consistently provide value at safety critical levels seems short sighted.

That's why we rely on regulation and oversight for safety, and profit motive and competition to provide value.

Sure, it definitely works great.

Re: Unexpected cracking found on critical Boeing 737 Next Generation part

#100

Post by ComputerGuru »

jadell wrote: post #92
kzrdude wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All this plane talk makes me curious, if there are any airlines that tell you ahead of time what planes they are using for a route? I guess they'd now be even less inclined to tell.

The information is almost certainly available on the page where you see the search results and choose your flights. Probably right next to or near the flight numbers. It is on every major US carrier's search results. I don't know about any of the OTAs: Expedia, Kayak, etc.

It’s there but it isn’t guaranteed nor part of the sales contract.
Post reply on HN