this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
103 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59287 readers
4196 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
103
Boeing 737 Max planes are grounded after a hole blew in one mid-flight (www.theverge.com)
submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Boeing 737 Max planes are grounded after a hole blew in one mid-flight::The FAA ordered that 171 Boeing 737 Max 9 planes be inspected before they can return to service following the explosive decompression of an Alaska Airlines flight.

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 37 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Their fixes don't seem to have altered the fundamental problems with the Boeing 737 Max:

  • the new engines are too big for the frame, so they've had to move them up and forward, which makes the plane pitch up at high thrust (which is what the now infamous MCAS attempted to mask with software)
  • Boeing self-certified it as safe, claiming that it was a small, incremental change and so didn't need testing or additional pilot training
  • Boeing rushed out an unsafe design because they were scared of losing money to Airbus's A320neo

I have to fly several times a year and try to choose Airbus over Boeing whenever possible, and I flat out refuse to fly on the 737 Max. This news certainly doesn't make me feel like I was overreacting.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I find it difficult to know if my flight will avoid 737 Max, so I've been avoiding airlines that have them in their fleet. Unfortunately, British Airways recently rebooked me onto an Alaska Airlines, and sure enough, it was a Max 8. Sometimes you just can't win.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Well, lucky for you, Alaska grounded their 737 MAX fleet a few days ago, so you won’t be flying on them if your trip is anytime soon.

Edit: I didn’t realize they were getting them back into service so quickly… oops 😬

Edit 2: bon chance mon ami

[–] [email protected] 18 points 10 months ago (2 children)

They really screwed the pooch with the 737 max9.. it's like the gift that keeps on giving.

I think internal documents and communication should be seized and a federal criminal investigation is in order.. someone must have actively fucked with this.

Embrear and Airbus are uncorking the champagne now probably.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago (2 children)

someone must have actively fucked with this.

Hanlon's Razor says otherwise. I'm going to guess this was because of cut corners. Not someone trying to sabotage an entire line of aircraft.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think he means an executive was actively cutting corners.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

This is indeed what I meant. I don't think that someone was actively trying to make the plane unsafe, but in the eternal quest for more profit engineers, best practices and safety reports where ignored to make the plane as cheap as possible, resulting in the current ~~flying~~ grounded deathtrap.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

Okay yeah. In that case I agree. I think that still falls more on the side of stupidity than malice, but the line between the two gets blurry when greed is involved

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If being stupid means killing almost 400 people and endangering thousands, I think it is fair to say that it is not any better than being malicious, also it would be stupid if they didn’t realize the potential flaws, but the fact is they overlooked it, which is not malice, fair enough, but it is definitely a terrible thing to do, far worse than being ‘stupid’

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

Absolutely. Hence my original call for a criminal investigation to see if they indeed accepted the risks knowingly as then they should be held accountable.

Like I think all upper management of big oil that knew what they where doing to the planet should be tried in the Hague for Crimes against humanity. I don't care if they are old and long retired, concentration camp guards are also still tried after all these years.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Hot take: if cutting corners to an entire line of aircraft and sabotaging an entire line of aircraft produce the same results then they deserve the same punishment.

The world would be a lot better place if we let the penny pinchers be at fault for the dangerous situations they keep causing.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

Man, imagine how much better the world would be if accountants would face consequences when their decision was to blame?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I’m not sure the queue for the 319, 320 and 321 can get any longer. Airbus simply can’t ramp production and it’s not like the C919 is ready for prime time (yet).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Maybe they can rent some production space in seattle :P

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

It would be Alabama actually, since you know, labor protections are weak there...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Airbus is ramping up. They have had issues with the supply chain, but they should massively increase their production this year. They are opening assembly lines everywhere.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago

Time to buy some Boeing stock, cause the US govt won't let their defense dept darling fail

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Can someone explain to me why they just give up on this frankenjet and build off the safer (at the moment) 777?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

Talk out my ass here, but I thought it was due to the economics. Companies only want to buy the 737s because it's a fairly known factor. Pilots don't need to be retrained and, at this point, can be produced cheaper and/or faster.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

I'm interested to learn what changes were made to the 737 max fuselage compared to earlier versions of the 737.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has ordered the “temporary grounding” of 171 Boeing 737 Max 9 airplanes this morning after a section of fuselage separated from the side of an Alaska Airlines flight on Friday, leaving a gaping hole in the plane.

The agency said in its announcement that it will send an Emergency Airworthiness Directive out soon to require an inspection of all of the grounded planes that “will take around four to eight hours per aircraft.”

Prior to the FAA’s decision, Alaska Airlines grounded its own fleet of 65 Boeing 737 Max 9 planes for inspection.

In a 2020 Senate report, the FAA was accused of helping Boeing manipulate recertification tests to get the planes back in service.

Yesterday, The Seattle Times reported that Boeing had petitioned the FAA for a safety exemption for the 737 Max 7, a smaller plane the agency hasn’t certified yet.

Update January 6th, 2024, 3:10PM ET: Added detail from a Seattle Times article about Boeing’s recent petition for a safety exemption.

The original article contains 398 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 58%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!