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

Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 494 posts

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#91

Post by rkomorn »

mrweasel wrote: post #77
rkomorn wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more you change, the more you need to recertify, the more it costs, the more time it takes, the less your shareholders profit.

Make you wonder how long management figured they can keep using ancient technology, just to avoid updating certifications.

At a dinner with a team of Airbus folks we were working with at a previous job, they talked about how difficult it was getting to source CPUs for the A320 after 30 years.

It's definitely a "if it ain't broke don't fix it" thing, but I ask myself a similar question: at some point whoever is producing these chips is going to stop finding it worthwhile and end production, no?

But then I also assume the people who work on these things know arguably infinitely more than I do.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#92

Post by hinkley »

unreal6 wrote: post #70
procaryote wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For software, the easiest way to design for this is to keep systems small enough that fitting it in your head is relatively feasible in a reasonable time for a competent engineer. Connect them with clear APIs that don't have to change all that often, and you can build pretty big things. I imagine this is doable with hardware too

> Connect them with clear APIs that don't have to change all that often, and you can build pretty big things. Emphasis on clear . It's a challenging endeavor to properly draw and enforce these service boundaries.

Occasionally I make an analogy to stage acting or opera. In order for the people in the medium priced seats to see the action on the stage, all the actors have to over-emote to make everything that is happening dreadfully obvious.

In a system that is the composition of 30-300 different functional units, nobody will be close to any one part unless they’re the bus number for it. So each piece needs to be dead obvious so you can worry about the consequences of composing them. At the end of the day it’s Kernighan’s Law but rephrased so as not to ignore Conway or Brooks.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#93

Post by ViewTrick1002 »

imoverclocked wrote: post #59
nostrademons wrote: post #21

It'll be interesting to see if they still can design and build a new ground-up airplane design. The last all-new design was the 787, initiated in 2003 and launched in 2009, and its design was fraught with problems. Before then was the 777 in the early 90s (pre-McDonnell takeover), and the 757/767 in the early 80s. There's a phenomena that ofter occurs with large organizations where once their markets mature, everybod…

The biggest tell will be just how over budget the development process becomes. Another issue in large companies trying to build something new is the scope creep which leads to committees and then decision by committee. If the folks leading this effort in Boeing are smart, they will keep the size of the team as small as possible. Maybe they will even hire some people back to lead this effort... assuming they can find…

> Given that outcome, I (from the peanuts gallery) would design the aircraft to handle in some ideal way using MCAS-like automation to fix any deviation from that ideal, from the beginning. Of course, that's starting to head down the road of a more-Airbus-like design.

The 787 and 777 are already purely fly by wire. Their entire feel is made up.

Boeing simply has a different design philosophy on how much a pilot should feel like they are in command vs steering a system.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#94

Post by petre »

garyrob wrote: post #67
lisper wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> with large organizations where once their markets mature, everybody who can build a product end-to-end leaves or gets forced out, leaving only people with highly specialized maintenance skillsets It's not just building a product end-to-end. Tim Cook is a supply-chain guy. He knows how to build a product. What he doesn't know how is how to design a new one. This is the reason that all of the "new" stuff that has com…

> There is no hint that Apple intends to do anything with the Vision Pro, and they've already been scooped by Meta. I expect that's exactly what they have in mind. If they're successful, Meta's project will be to Apple's what early MP3 players were to the original iPod. The jury is out on whether Cook can pull it off.

That's why they bought up Luxotica shares. Because scuba gear is for scuba diving. Even if it's white, it's still scuba gear. Remember the PDAs with resitive screens and styluses? They were a lot more convenient than scuba gear.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#95

Post by Night_Thastus »

jeffhwang wrote: post #72
imoverclocked wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest tell will be just how over budget the development process becomes. Another issue in large companies trying to build something new is the scope creep which leads to committees and then decision by committee. If the folks leading this effort in Boeing are smart, they will keep the size of the team as small as possible. Maybe they will even hire some people back to lead this effort... assuming they can find…

> Also, passengers are probably going to start waking up to the realities of just how bad the air-travel experience in the US has become compared to so many foreign counterparts. If you want passengers to want your plane, design it without sardines in mind; People don't like being sardines. I hope this is true. However, my sense is that the value chain is so elongated from aircraft designer/engineer/marketing/sales t…

With rare exception, people just buy the cheapest ticket. They moan and complain about this or that, but they still do the same thing.

So, airlines structure and furnish accordingly.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#96

Post by jeffbee »

speed_spread wrote: post #68
jacquesm wrote: post #31

This will be Boeings answer to the Bombardier C Series, aka the Airbus A220 series. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A220 , which is one of the nicest planes for short haul in service at the moment. Edit: indeed, not the 'Neo', I got the name wrong but the link right.

Boeing's only answer to the A220 was to get the US administration to impose a 220% import tarif on it. It didn't even compete with Boeing models. Fuck Boeing.

How does such a tariff even work? Can't an airline finance all of its aircraft through an entity in the Maldives or whatever?

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#97

Post by pixl97 »

mrweasel wrote: post #77
rkomorn wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more you change, the more you need to recertify, the more it costs, the more time it takes, the less your shareholders profit.

Make you wonder how long management figured they can keep using ancient technology, just to avoid updating certifications.

Forever if someone keeps making new chips.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#98

Post by UtopiaPunk »

China recently started building and delivering airplanes. It will be interesting to see if Boeing can actually compete with what is coming out of China over the next few years: https://www.voanews.com/a/7528331.html

In the short-term, I imagine USA-based airlines will not be allowed to buy any airplanes from China: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-comac-military-... And perhaps they would not even be allowed to fly in our airspace. But if China decides that it wants to build planes at lower prices than Boeing (or Airbus), then I imagine they will. Their marketshare would grow elsewhere in the globe, reducing Boeing's sales. Can Boeing deal with that? Would the USA borrow China's playbook, and nationalize (or something similar) Boeing to keep it solvent?

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#99

Post by masklinn »

hinkley wrote: post #51
nostrademons wrote: post #21

It'll be interesting to see if they still can design and build a new ground-up airplane design. The last all-new design was the 787, initiated in 2003 and launched in 2009, and its design was fraught with problems. Before then was the 777 in the early 90s (pre-McDonnell takeover), and the 757/767 in the early 80s. There's a phenomena that ofter occurs with large organizations where once their markets mature, everybod…

I worked on the 787 but far from the engineering team. Boeing vowed to never build a plane like that again. They gave the wing design away to Mitsubishi for fucks sake. You never do that. They were neck deep in the McDonnell Douglas metastasis at the time, and doing an impression of Captain Ahab in trying to union bust in Seattle by fucking off to South Carolina. Boeing customers would figure out which plane numbers…

> They gave the wing design away to Mitsubishi for fucks sake. You never do that. They were neck deep in the McDonnell Douglas metastasis at the time

The 787 was a straight up MDD pants-on-head plan (pushed by Stonecipher and McDonnel themselves), the entire point was to shift the costs of design and development to suppliers, with the idea that they'd fund the aircraft you could sell.

Re: Boeing has started working on a 737 MAX replacement

#100

Post by Night_Thastus »

imoverclocked wrote: post #59
nostrademons wrote: post #21

It'll be interesting to see if they still can design and build a new ground-up airplane design. The last all-new design was the 787, initiated in 2003 and launched in 2009, and its design was fraught with problems. Before then was the 777 in the early 90s (pre-McDonnell takeover), and the 757/767 in the early 80s. There's a phenomena that ofter occurs with large organizations where once their markets mature, everybod…

The biggest tell will be just how over budget the development process becomes. Another issue in large companies trying to build something new is the scope creep which leads to committees and then decision by committee. If the folks leading this effort in Boeing are smart, they will keep the size of the team as small as possible. Maybe they will even hire some people back to lead this effort... assuming they can find…

>If you want passengers to want your plane, design it without sardines in mind; People don't like being sardines.

The manufacturers don't actually have a ton of say over this. At the end of the day, it's the airlines who decide how many seats in what configuration the aircraft will use - not the manufacturer of the plane.

And airlines only pack so tightly because competition is fierce and flyers almost exclusively only purchase based on price.

Post reply on HN